Quality of life indicators of liver-directed interventions for hepatic tumours - preliminary data.

Congress:

2019 ASM

Poster Number:

R-0120

Type:

Scientific Exhibit

Keywords:

Liver, Oncology, Nuclear medicine, Fluoroscopy, CT, Chemoembolisation, Radioembolisation, Cancer, Metastases

Authors:

S. Y. Ooi, A. Gogna, H. H. Win, Y. Wang, S. Chandramohan, N. Venkatanarasimha, C. W. Too, H. G. R. Lo, F. G. Irani, A. Patel, S. Leong, K. D. Zhuang, J. M. S. Chan, M. E. J. Chua, D. Karthikeyan; Bukit Merah/SG

DOI:

10.26044/ranzcr2019/R-0120

DOI-Link:

https://dx.doi.org/10.26044/ranzcr2019/R-0120

Fig. 1: Figure 1

Fig. 2: Figure 2

Fig. 3: Figure 3

Fig. 4: Figure 4

Fig. 5: Figure 5

Fig. 6: Figure 6

Fig. 7: Figure 7

Fig. 8: Figure 8

Fig. 9: Figure 9

Purpose

This study presents a preliminary 2 and 4 week data comparing quality of life between trans-arterial chemoembolisation (TACE) and trans-arterial radioembolisation with Yttrium-90 using Functional Assessment Cancer-Hepatobiliary (FACT-Hep) questionnaire. Quality of life is as important as survival when assessing palliative treatments for patients with liver cancer. Palliative treatments aim to alleviate symptoms, improve quality of life and extend survival. With this study we are trying to assess how well these interventions palliate our patients.

Methods and materials

This prospective study was conducted in Vascular and Interventional Radiology Department, Singapore General Hospital from September 2018 till February 2019 with institutional ethics approval. Inclusion Criteria Patients who were diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma and metastatic liver cancer based on American Association for The Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) imaging criteria and histology were included. Of these patients, only patients who underwent TACE and radioembolisation were included in the analysis of quality of life. Exclusion Criteria We excluded patients that were unable to complete questionnaire...

Results

Patient Demography Figure 1 provides a summary of the patient data from TACE and radioembolisation groups. There is no difference between TACE and radioembolisation group in terms of age, gender and ethnicity. Figure 2 shows the past medical history of our study population from TACE and radioembolisaton group. There is no significant difference in the underlying medical illness between both TACE and radioembolisation groups. Figure 3 shows the underlying comorbity status which will affect the QOL scores. There is significant difference in the primary hepatocellular...

Conclusion

Conclusions 1. Both TACE and radioembolisation groups did not demonstrate significant difference in terms of absolute QOL at 2 and 4 week post treatment, except hepatobiliary cancer subscale at 4 week post treatment with p-value of 0.046 (

Personal information

Ooi Shin Yin (MBBS) email: [email protected]

References

1. Salem et al. Increased quality of life among hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with radioembolisation, compared to chemoembolisation: Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2013;11:1358-1365. 2. Adriana Toro et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatic resection, transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation, radiofrequency ablation or no treatment: Surgical Oncology 21 (2012) e23-e30. 3. Nancy Hefferman et al. Measuring health-related quality of life in patients with hepatobiliary cancer: The functional assessment of cancer therapy - hepatobiliary questionnaire: J Clin Oncol 20:2229-2239. @ 2002 by American...