调强放疗治疗TACE后复发或残留PHC的疗效评价
Efficacy of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Recurrent or Residual PHC after Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization
摘要: 目的:评价经肝动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)联合调强放疗(IMRT)治疗复发性或残留性原发性肝癌(PHC)的临床疗效和毒性反应。方法:39例接受两次及以上TACE治疗复发或残留的PHC患者,19例进行调强放疗(IMRT),放疗剂量50~60 Gy/25~30F;20例TACE维持治疗。比较两组治疗前后肿瘤大小和甲胎蛋白(AFP)水平变化、毒副反应及生存期。结果:至随访时IMRT组和TACE组的有效率(CR + PR)和中位生存时间分别为63.2% vs 25.0%和20.2个月vs 13.7个月,差异有统计学意义(P = 0.016和P = 0.021),IMRT组AFP下降水平明显优于TACE组,不良反应I、II级肝功能损伤高于TACE组。结论:IMRT对TACE治疗后局部复发或残留的PHC患者具有良好的临床疗效,毒性反应可以耐受。
Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and toxicity of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in recurrent or residual primary hepatocellular carcinoma (PHC). Methods: Thirty-nine PHC patients with recurrence or residual PHC underwent no less than TACE 2 fractions. The nineteen were treated with intensive radiotherapy (IMRT) at a dose of 50 - 60 Gy/25 - 30F and twenty continued TACE therapy. The size of tumor, alpha fetoprotein (AFP) level, toxicities and survival times were assessed after treatment in two groups. Results: Objective response rate (CR + PR) and median survival time of IMRT and TACE group were 63.2% vs 25.0% and 20.2 months vs 13.7 months respectively. The difference was significant (P = 0.016 and P = 0.021). The decrease of AFP was better in the IMRT and adverse reactions of grade I and II liver injury were higher than the TACE. Conclusion: IMRT has a good clinical effect on PHC patients with partial recurrence or residual after TACE, and has acceptable toxicity.
文章引用:田浩, 姜兆祥, 王忠超, 翟韦玉, 孟俏. 调强放疗治疗TACE后复发或残留PHC的疗效评价[J]. 世界肿瘤研究, 2019, 9(4): 105-109. https://doi.org/10.12677/WJCR.2019.94015

参考文献

[1] 刘合代, 丁罡, 张明, 等. 肝动脉栓塞化疗联合放疗治疗原发性肝癌的疗效分析[J]. 现代肿瘤医学, 2015, 23(9): 1258-1261.
[2] 吕江, 陈茂恩, 李冲. 原发性肝癌肝外侧支血供动脉的特点和介入治疗分析[J]. 癌症进展, 2016, 14(7): 703-705.
[3] Marrero, J.A., Kulik, L.M., Sirlin, C., Zhu, A.X., et al. (2018) Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 2018 Practice Guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology, 68, 723-750.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Watanabe, H., Okada, M., Kaji, Y., Satouchi, M., et al. (2009) New Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours Revised RECIST Guideline (Version 1.1). Japanese Journal of Cancer and Chemotherapy, 36, 2495-2501.
[5] Llovet, J.M., et al. (2012) EASL-EORTC Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Journal of Hepatology, 56, 908-943.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Shiina, S., Tateishi, R., Arano, T., et al. (2012) Radiofrequency Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 10-Year Outcome and Prognostic Factors. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 107, 569-577.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Rahimi, R.S. and Trotter, J.F. (2015) Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Outcomes and Treatment Options for Recurrence. Annals of Gastroenterology, 28, 323-330.
[8] Honda, Y., Kimura, T., et al. (2013) Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Combined with Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization for Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 28, 530-536.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] Su, T.-S., Lu, H.-Z., et al. (2016) Long-Term Survival Analysis in Combined Transarterial Embolization and Stereotactic Bodyradiation Therapy versus Stereotactic Body Radiation Monotherapy for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma >5cm. BMC Cancer, 16, Article No. 834.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Takeda, A., Sanuki, N., et al. (2016) Phase 2 Study of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy and Optional Transarterial Chemoembolization for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma Not Amenable to Resection and Radiofrequency Ablation. Cancer, 122, 2041-2049.
[Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] 芦东徽, 唐隽, 周俊平, 等. 三维适形放射治疗联合经皮肝动脉化疗栓塞不同序贯顺序治疗原发性肝癌伴门静脉癌栓的临床对照[J]. 中华肝脏病杂志, 2015, 23(3): 184-188.
[12] 徐海杰, 刘天壤. 原发性肝癌三维适形放射治疗和介入治疗加放疗的疗效比较[J]. 系统医学, 2017, 2(3): 124-126.