We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
Meta-analysis: adjusted indirect comparison of drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization versus 90 Y-radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma.
European Radiology 2017 May
OBJECTIVE: To investigate comparative effectiveness of drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) versus Yttrium-90 (90 Y)-radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
METHODS: Studies comparing conventional (c)TACE versus 90 Y-radioembolization or DEB-TACE for HCC treatment were identified using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The adjusted indirect meta-analytic method for effectiveness comparison of DEB-TACE versus 90 Y-radioembolization was used. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare baseline characteristics. A priori defined sensitivity analysis of stratified study subgroups was performed for primary outcome analyses. Publication bias was tested by Egger's and Begg's tests.
RESULTS: Fourteen studies comparing DEB-TACE or 90 Y-radioembolization with cTACE were included. Analysis revealed a 1-year overall survival benefit for DEB-TACE over 90 Y-radioembolization (79 % vs. 54.8 %; OR: 0.57; 95 %CI: 0.355-0.915; p = 0.02; I-squared: 0 %; p > 0.5), but not for the 2-year (61 % vs. 34 %; OR: 0.65; 95%CI: 0.294-1.437; p = 0.29) and 3-year survival (56.4 % vs. 20.9 %; OR: 0.713; 95 % CI: 0.21-2.548; p = 0.62). There was significant heterogeneity in the 2- and 3-year survival analyses. The pooled median overall survival was longer for DEB-TACE (22.6 vs. 14.7 months). There was no significant difference in tumour response rate.
CONCLUSION: DEB-TACE and 90 Y-radioembolization are efficacious treatments for patients suffering from HCC; DEB-TACE demonstrated survival benefit at 1-year compared to 90 Y-radioembolization but direct comparison is warranted for further evaluation.
KEY POINTS: • This meta-analysis shows greater 1-year survival benefit for DEB-TACE over 90 Y-radioembolization. • DEB-TACE has a favourable 2- & 3-year survival benefit trend over 90 Y-radioembolization. • No significant difference for tumour response was detected. • Direct comparison of these methods for a more robust evaluation is warranted.
METHODS: Studies comparing conventional (c)TACE versus 90 Y-radioembolization or DEB-TACE for HCC treatment were identified using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The adjusted indirect meta-analytic method for effectiveness comparison of DEB-TACE versus 90 Y-radioembolization was used. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare baseline characteristics. A priori defined sensitivity analysis of stratified study subgroups was performed for primary outcome analyses. Publication bias was tested by Egger's and Begg's tests.
RESULTS: Fourteen studies comparing DEB-TACE or 90 Y-radioembolization with cTACE were included. Analysis revealed a 1-year overall survival benefit for DEB-TACE over 90 Y-radioembolization (79 % vs. 54.8 %; OR: 0.57; 95 %CI: 0.355-0.915; p = 0.02; I-squared: 0 %; p > 0.5), but not for the 2-year (61 % vs. 34 %; OR: 0.65; 95%CI: 0.294-1.437; p = 0.29) and 3-year survival (56.4 % vs. 20.9 %; OR: 0.713; 95 % CI: 0.21-2.548; p = 0.62). There was significant heterogeneity in the 2- and 3-year survival analyses. The pooled median overall survival was longer for DEB-TACE (22.6 vs. 14.7 months). There was no significant difference in tumour response rate.
CONCLUSION: DEB-TACE and 90 Y-radioembolization are efficacious treatments for patients suffering from HCC; DEB-TACE demonstrated survival benefit at 1-year compared to 90 Y-radioembolization but direct comparison is warranted for further evaluation.
KEY POINTS: • This meta-analysis shows greater 1-year survival benefit for DEB-TACE over 90 Y-radioembolization. • DEB-TACE has a favourable 2- & 3-year survival benefit trend over 90 Y-radioembolization. • No significant difference for tumour response was detected. • Direct comparison of these methods for a more robust evaluation is warranted.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app