Keywords:
Not applicable, Retrospective, Cancer, Chemoembolisation, Fluoroscopy, Catheter arteriography, Oncology, Liver, Interventional non-vascular, Interventional Radiology, Performed at one institution
Authors:
A. Tan1, C. Stove1, M. Philippou2, R. S. Kasthuri1, I. Robertson1; 1GLASGOW/UK, 2PA1 3NQ/UK
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2020/C-09974
Conclusion
This study demonstrates a significant survival advantage in responders compared to non-responders following TACE for HCC. Findings in this study are similar to previous investigations that have shown an association between the radiologic evaluation of tumour necrosis and survival. (Figure 9) In an ideal setting, treatment goals should focus on tumour eradication but anatomical factors, residual liver function and performance status may limit this pursuit.
A conundrum that arises from this study was whether patients with stable disease should undergo additional treatment as only a modest increase was seen between the stable and partial response groups. Our learning point from this was that patients should be routinely followed up with imaging and not be rushed into re-treatment. Further TACE should be based upon factors such as if the tumour was technically re-treatable and if the patient was physically fit for it. We hope these findings inform future repeat TACE decisions and propose that a more realistic treatment approach of aiming for preventing progression to extra-hepatic disease rather than for complete eradication.