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
. 2021 Apr 1:11:611118.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.611118. eCollection 2021.

Survival Comparisons of Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy With mFOLFOX and Transarterial Chemoembolization in Patients With Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

Zhiyuan Cai  1   2 , Chaobin He  1 , Chongyu Zhao  1 , Xiaojun Lin  1
Affiliations

Survival Comparisons of Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy With mFOLFOX and Transarterial Chemoembolization in Patients With Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

Zhiyuan Cai et al. Front Oncol. .

Abstract

Background: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) has a poor prognosis and 40%-60% of patients present with advanced disease at the time of diagnosis. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) have recently been used in unresectable ICC. The aim of this study was to compare the survival differences of unresectable ICC patients after TACE and HAIC treatment.

Methods: Between March 2011 and October 2019, a total of 126 patients with unresectable ICC, as evident from biopsies and imaging, and who had received TACE or HAIC were enrolled in this study. Baseline characteristics and survival differences were compared between the TACE and HAIC treatment groups.

Results: ICC Patients had significantly higher survival rates after the HAIC treatment, compared with those after TACE treatment [1-year overall survival (OS) rates: 60.2% vs. 42.9%, 2-year OS rates: 38.7% vs. 29.4%, P=0.028; 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates: 15.0% vs. 20.0%, 2-year PFS rates: 0% vs. 0%, P=0.641; 1-year only intrahepatic PFS (OIPFS) rates: 35.0% vs. 24.4%, 2-year OIPFS rates: 13.1% vs. 14.6%, P = 0.026]. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that HAIC was a significant and independent factor for OS and OIPFS in the study cohort.

Conclusions: HAIC is superior to TACE for treatment of unresectable ICC. A new tumor response evaluation procedure for HAIC treatment in unresectable ICC patients is needed to provide better therapeutic strategies. A randomized clinical trial comparing the survival benefits of HAIC and TACE is therefore being considered.

Keywords: hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy; intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; only intrahepatic progression-free survival; overall survival; transarterial chemoembolization.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The Kaplan-Meier survival curves of overall survival (A) progression free survival (B) and only intrahepatic progression free survival (C) stratified by treatment strategies for patients with unresectable ICC.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The Kaplan-Meier survival curves of overall survival (A, C) progression free survival (B, D) stratified by treatment strategies for ICC patients with and without metastasis, respectively.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The Kaplan-Meier survival curves of overall survival stratified by two subgroups (courses of treatment > 3 and courses of treatment ≤ 3) and TACE for patients with unresectable ICC.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Massarweh NN, El-Serag HB. Epidemiology of Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma. Cancer Control (2017) 24(3):1073274817729245. 10.1177/1073274817729245 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tyson GL, Ilyas JA, Duan Z, Green LK, Younes M, El-Serag HB, et al. . Secular trends in the incidence of cholangiocarcinoma in the USA and the impact of misclassification. Dig Dis Sci (2014) 59(12):3103–10. 10.1007/s10620-014-3276-2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nathan H, Aloia TA, Vauthey JN, Abdalla EK, Zhu AX, Schulick RD, et al. . A proposed staging system for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol (2009) 16(1):14–22. 10.1245/s10434-008-0180-z - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lieser MJ, Barry MK, Rowland C, Ilstrup DM, Nagorney DM. Surgical management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a 31-year experience. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg (1998) 5(1):41–7. 10.1007/PL00009949 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bridgewater J, Galle PR, Khan SA, Llovet JM, Park JW, Patel T, et al. . Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Hepatol (2014) 60(6):1268–89. 10.1016/j.jhep.2014.01.021 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources