Subscribe to RSS
Please copy the URL and add it into your RSS Feed Reader.
https://www.thieme-connect.de/rss/thieme/en/10.1055-s-00000068.xml
Download PDF
Semin intervent Radiol 2024; 41(01): 048-055
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1779714
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1779714
Review Article
Practical Considerations When Choosing Chemoembolization versus Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Abstract
Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) are common liver-directed therapies (LDTs) for unresectable HCC. While both deliver intra-arterial treatment directly to the site of the tumor, they differ in mechanisms of action and side effects. Several studies have compared their side effect profile, time to progression, and overall survival data, but often these lack practical considerations when choosing which treatment modality to use. Many factors can impact operator's choice for treatment, and the choice depends on treatment availability, cost, insurance coverage, operator's comfort level, patient-specific factors, tumor location, tumor biology, and disease stage. This review discusses survival data, time to progression data, as well as more practical patient and tumor characteristics for personalized LDT with TACE or TARE.
Keywords
hepatocellular carcinoma - liver-directed therapy - chemoembolization - radioembolization - interventional radiologyPublication History
Article published online:
14 March 2024
© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
References
- 1 Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL. et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71 (03) 209-249
- 2 Lewandowski RJ, Kulik LM, Riaz A. et al. A comparative analysis of transarterial downstaging for hepatocellular carcinoma: chemoembolization versus radioembolization. Am J Transplant 2009; 9 (08) 1920-1928
- 3 Kwon JH, Kim GM, Han K. et al. Safety and efficacy of transarterial radioembolization combined with chemoembolization for bilobar hepatocellular carcinoma: a single-center retrospective study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2018; 41 (03) 459-465
- 4 Reig M, Forner A, Rimola J. et al. BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: the 2022 update. J Hepatol 2022; 76 (03) 681-693
- 5 Ghanaati H, Mohammadifard M, Mohammadifard M. A review of applying transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) method for management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Family Med Prim Care 2021; 10 (10) 3553-3560
- 6 Feng R, Cheng DX, Song T, Chen L, Lu KP. Efficacy and safety analysis of transarterial chemoembolization and transarterial radioembolization in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma descending hepatectomy. World J Gastrointest Surg 2023; 15 (04) 687-697
- 7 Guo JH, Zhu X, Li XT, Yang RJ. Impact of serum vascular endothelial growth factor on prognosis in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma after transarterial chemoembolization. Chin J Cancer Res 2012; 24 (01) 36-43
- 8 Pourbaghi M, Haghani L, Zhao K. et al. Anti-glycolytic drugs in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: systemic and locoregional options. Curr Oncol 2023; 30 (07) 6609-6622
- 9 Kim DY, Han KH. Transarterial chemoembolization versus transarterial radioembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma: optimization of selecting treatment modality. Hepatol Int 2016; 10 (06) 883-892
- 10 Masthoff M, Schindler P, Harders F. et al. Repeated radioembolization in advanced liver cancer. Ann Transl Med 2020; 8 (17) 1055
- 11 Yang HY, Jin B, Xu G, Sun LJ, Du SD, Mao YL. Transarterial radioembolization with yttrium-90: current status and future prospects. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf) 2020; 8 (02) 164-165
- 12 Mascarenhas N, Ryu RK, Salem R. Hepatic radioembolization complicated by abscess. Semin Intervent Radiol 2011; 28 (02) 222-225
- 13 Dhondt E, Lambert B, Hermie L. et al. 90Y radioembolization versus drug-eluting bead chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: results from the TRACE Phase II randomized controlled trial. Radiology 2022; 303 (03) 699-710
- 14 Salem R, Gordon AC, Mouli S. et al. Y90 radioembolization significantly prolongs time to progression compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2016; 151 (06) 1155-1163.e2
- 15 Kim MA, Jang H, Choi NR. et al. Yttrium-90 radioembolization is associated with better clinical outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma compared with conventional chemoembolization: a propensity score-matched study. J Hepatocell Carcinoma 2021; 8: 1565-1577
- 16 Ren N, Qin S, Ding L, Jia E, Xue J. Comparison of transarterial Y90 radioembolization and conventional transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocarcinoma patients: a meta-analysis. Indian J Pharm Sci 2020; 82 (2; Spl issue 3): 76-81
- 17 Zhang Y, Li Y, Ji H, Zhao X, Lu H. Transarterial Y90 radioembolization versus chemoembolization for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Biosci Trends 2015; 9 (05) 289-298
- 18 Yang Y, Si T. Yttrium-90 transarterial radioembolization versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Biol Med 2018; 15 (03) 299-310
- 19 Kolligs FT, Bilbao JI, Jakobs T. et al. Pilot randomized trial of selective internal radiation therapy vs. chemoembolization in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Int 2015; 35 (06) 1715-1721
- 20 El Fouly A, Ertle J, El Dorry A. et al. In intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma: radioembolization with yttrium 90 or chemoembolization?. Liver Int 2015; 35 (02) 627-635
- 21 Gabr A, Abouchaleh N, Ali R. et al. Comparative study of post-transplant outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with chemoembolization or radioembolization. Eur J Radiol 2017; 93: 100-106
- 22 Kwan J, Pua U. Review of intra-arterial therapies for colorectal cancer liver metastasis. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13 (06) 1371
- 23 Benkö T, König J, Theysohn JM. et al. Bridging treatment prior to liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: radioembolization or transarterial chemoembolization?. Eur J Med Res 2022; 27 (01) 74
- 24 Yang B, Liang J, Qu Z, Yang F, Liao Z, Gou H. Transarterial strategies for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review. PLoS One 2020; 15 (02) e0227475
- 25 Raoul JL, Sangro B, Forner A. et al. Evolving strategies for the management of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: available evidence and expert opinion on the use of transarterial chemoembolization. Cancer Treat Rev 2011; 37 (03) 212-220
- 26 Riaz A, Awais R, Salem R. Side effects of yttrium-90 radioembolization. Front Oncol 2014; 4: 198
- 27 Brown D, Krebs H, Brower J. et al. Incidence and risk factors for sustained hepatic function toxicity 6 months after radioembolization: analysis of the radiation-emitting sir-spheres in non-resectable liver tumor (RESIN) registry. J Gastrointest Oncol 2021; 12 (02) 639-657
- 28 Lee HN, Hyun D. Complications related to transarterial treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: a comprehensive review. Korean J Radiol 2023; 24 (03) 204-223
- 29 Kappadath SC, Lopez BP, Salem R, Lam MGEH. Reassessment of the lung dose limits for radioembolization. Nucl Med Commun 2021; 42 (10) 1064-1075
- 30 Mahnken AH. Current status of transarterial radioembolization. World J Radiol 2016; 8 (05) 449-459
- 31 Yang J, Liang H, Hu K. et al. The effects of several postoperative adjuvant therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma patients with microvascular invasion after curative resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Cell Int 2021; 21 (01) 92
- 32 Kooby DA, Egnatashvili V, Srinivasan S. et al. Comparison of yttrium-90 radioembolization and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2010; 21 (02) 224-230
- 33 Golfieri R, Bilbao JI, Carpanese L. et al; European Network on Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 Microspheres (ENRY) study collaborators. Comparison of the survival and tolerability of radioembolization in elderly vs. younger patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2013; 59 (04) 753-761
- 34 Mathur AK, Schaubel DE, Gong Q, Guidinger MK, Merion RM. Sex-based disparities in liver transplant rates in the United States. Am J Transplant 2011; 11 (07) 1435-1443
- 35 Moylan CA, Brady CW, Johnson JL, Smith AD, Tuttle-Newhall JE, Muir AJ. Disparities in liver transplantation before and after introduction of the MELD score. JAMA 2008; 300 (20) 2371-2378
- 36 Lai JC, Terrault NA, Vittinghoff E, Biggins SW. Height contributes to the gender difference in wait-list mortality under the MELD-based liver allocation system. Am J Transplant 2010; 10 (12) 2658-2664
- 37 Shi HY, Wang SN, Wang SC, Chuang SC, Chen CM, Lee KT. Preoperative transarterial chemoembolization and resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a nationwide Taiwan database analysis of long-term outcome predictors. J Surg Oncol 2014; 109 (05) 487-493
- 38 Soydal C, Arslan MF, Kucuk ON, Idilman R, Bilgic S. Comparison of survival, safety, and efficacy after transarterial chemoembolization and radioembolization of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B-C hepatocellular cancer patients. Nucl Med Commun 2016; 37 (06) 646-649
- 39 Kim NJ, Cravero A, VoPham T. et al. Addressing racial and ethnic disparities in US liver cancer care. Hepatol Commun 2023; 7 (07) e00190
- 40 Soulen MC, van Houten D, Teitelbaum UR, Damjanov N, Cengel KA, Metz DC. Safety and feasibility of integrating yttrium-90 radioembolization with capecitabine-temozolomide for grade 2 liver-dominant metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. Pancreas 2018; 47 (08) 980-984
- 41 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Electronic address: easloffice@easloffice.eu, European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2018; 69 (01) 182-236
- 42 Lescure C, Estrade F, Pedrono M. et al. ALBI score is a strong predictor of toxicity following SIRT for hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13 (15) 3794
- 43 Kim Y, Lee JS, Lee HW. et al. Predictors of complete response in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with trans-arterial radioembolization. Curr Oncol 2021; 28 (01) 965-977
- 44 Liu S, Li H, Guo L. et al. Tumor size affects efficacy of adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and microvascular invasion. Oncologist 2019; 24 (04) 513-520
- 45 Zane KE, Makary MS. Locoregional therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13 (21) 5430
- 46 Pinter M, Hucke F, Graziadei I. et al. Advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: transarterial chemoembolization versus sorafenib. Radiology 2012; 263 (02) 590-599
- 47 Gorodetski B, Chapiro J, Schernthaner R. et al. Advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein thrombosis: conventional versus drug-eluting beads transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. Eur Radiol 2017; 27 (02) 526-535
- 48 Chung GE, Lee JH, Kim HY. et al. Transarterial chemoembolization can be safely performed in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma invading the main portal vein and may improve the overall survival. Radiology 2011; 258 (02) 627-634
- 49 Benson AB, D'Angelica MI, Abbott DE. et al. Hepatobiliary cancers, version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19 (05) 541-565
- 50 Rostambeigi N, Dekarske AS, Austin EE, Golzarian J, Cressman EN. Cost effectiveness of radioembolization compared with conventional transarterial chemoembolization for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (07) 1075-1084
- 51 Desai A, McCabe B, Natarajan B. Abstract No. 517 Cheaper isn't always cheapest: cost analysis of Y-90 vs transarterial chemoembolization for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2019; 30 (03) S224
- 52 Lobo L, Yakoub D, Picado O. et al. Unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: radioembolization versus chemoembolization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2016; 39 (11) 1580-1588
- 53 Kappadath SC, Henry EC, Lopez B. et al. Radioembolization for HCC patients with personalized yttrium-90 dosimetry for curative intent (RAPY90D): an interim analysis. J Nucl Med 2022; 63 (Suppl. 02) 2375-2375
- 54 Xia Z, Zhao W, Liu J. et al. A three-gene signature for predicting the prognosis of patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and identification of PD-184352 as a potential drug to reverse nonresponse to TACE. J Oncol 2022; 2022: 2704862
- 55 Tang Y, Wu Y, Xue M, Zhu B, Fan W, Li J. A 10-gene signature identified by machine learning for predicting the response to transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Oncol 2022; 2022: 3822773
- 56 Carpizo DR, Gensure RH, Yu X. et al. Pilot study of angiogenic response to yttrium-90 radioembolization with resin microspheres. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (02) 297-306.e1
- 57 Lencioni R, Petruzzi P, Crocetti L. Chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Intervent Radiol 2013; 30 (01) 3-11