Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2017 Jan 10;8(2):2960-2970.
doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.13813.

Meta-analysis of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization plus radiofrequency ablation versus transcatheter arterial chemoembolization alone for hepatocellular carcinoma

De-Jun Yang  1 , Kun-Lun Luo  2 , Hong Liu  2 , Bing Cai  3 , Guo-Qing Tao  3 , Xiao-Fang Su  2 , Xiao-Juan Hou  4 , Fei Ye  4 , Xiang-Yong Li  2 , Zhi-Qiang Tian  3   2   4
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Meta-analysis of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization plus radiofrequency ablation versus transcatheter arterial chemoembolization alone for hepatocellular carcinoma

De-Jun Yang et al. Oncotarget. .

Abstract

This meta-analysis was conducted to compare transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with TACE alone for hepatocellular carcinoma. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL for all relative randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies until October 31 2016. Tumor response, recurrence-free survival, overall survival and postoperative complications were the major evaluation indices. Review Manager (version 5.3) was used to analyze the data. Dichotomous data was calculated by odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). There were 1 RCT and 10 retrospective studies with 928 patients in this meta-analysis: 412 patients with TACE plus RFA and 516 patients with TACE alone. Compared with TACE alone group, TACE plus RFA group attained higher tumor response rates (OR = 6.08, 95% CI = 4.00 to 9.26, P < 0.00001), achieved longer recurrence-free survival rates (ORRFS = 3.78, 95% CI: 2.38 to 6.02, P < 0.00001) and overall survival rates (OR1-year = 3.92, 95% CI = 2.41-6.39, P < 0.00001; OR3-year = 2.56; 95% CI = 1.81-3.60; P < 0.00001; OR5-year = 2.78; 95% CI = 1.77-4.38; P < 0.0001). Serious postoperative complications were not observed, although complications were higher in TACE plus RFA group than that in TACE alone group (OR = 2.74, 95% CI = 1.07 to 7.07, P = 0.04). In conclusion, the use of TACE plus RFA for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma can attain higher tumor response rates and improve survival rates than TACE alone.

Keywords: hepatocellular carcinoma; meta-analysis; radiofrequency ablation; transcatheter arterial chemoembolization.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow diagram showing the detailed selection process of this meta-analysis
Figure 2
Figure 2. The summary of risk of bias for each study
Figure 3
Figure 3. The bar charts as percentages showing the risk of bias of each item in all included studies.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Tumor response rate of comparison TACE plus RFA with TACE alone intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma
Figure 5
Figure 5. 1-year overall survival rate of comparison TACE plus RFA with TACE alone intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma
Figure 6
Figure 6. 3-year overall survival rate of comparison TACE plus RFA with TACE alone intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma
Figure 7
Figure 7. 5-year overall survival rate of comparison TACE plus RFA with TACE alone intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma
Figure 8
Figure 8. Recurrence-free survival rate of comparison TACE plus RFA with TACE alone intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma
Figure 9
Figure 9. Postoperative complications of comparison TACE plus RFA with TACE alone intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma
Figure 10
Figure 10. The funnel plots of TACE plus RFA versus TACE alone for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma
(A) Tumor response rate; (B) 1-year overall survival rate; (C) 3-year overall survival rate; (D) 5-year overall survival rate; (E) Recurrence-free survival rate; (F) Postoperative complications.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:87–108. - PubMed
    1. Forner A, Llovet JM, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet. 2012;379:1245–1255. - PubMed
    1. Jing YY, Liu WT, Guo SW, Ye F, Fan QM, Yu GF, Yu DD, Gao L, Sun K, Han ZP, Li R, Yang Y, Zhao QD, et al. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) receptors: Deficiency in tumor results in scant HBV infection and overexpression in peritumor leads to higher recurrence risk. Oncotarget. 2015;6:42952–42962. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.5518. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lafaro KJ, Demirjian AN, Pawlik TM. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2015;24:1–17. - PubMed
    1. Bruix J, Sherman M. Practice Guidelines Committee AAftSoLD. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2005;42:1208–1236. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms