Comparison of liver resection and radiofrequency ablation in long-term survival among patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized trials and high-quality propensity score-matched studies.

BACKGROUND: Whether radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and liver resection (LR) are comparable treatments for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial. We conducted this study to provide ample clinical evidence for the argument. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity score-matched (PSM) studies that compared long-term outcomes of both RFA and LR for patients with early-stage HCC. The hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies consisting of six RCTs and 30 PSM studies were included in this study, and a total of 7384 patients were involved, with 3694 patients being treated with LR and 3690 patients with RFA. Meta-analysis showed that LR provided better OS and DFS than RFA (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.13-1.31; HR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.39-1.74, respectively). A sensitivity analysis indicated that the results were stable. For the subgroup of patients with BCLC 0 stage, RFA and LR resulted in similar OS and DFS. For the subgroup of patients with single tumor sizes less than 3 cm, RFA reached similar OS (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.90-1.58) but worse DFS compared with LR (HR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.11-1.90). For the subgroup of ablation margin larger than 0.5 cm, LR still resulted in better OS than RFA (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.09-1.53); while the ablation margin was larger than 1 cm, both RFA and LR resulted in similar OS. The modality of RFA was also a factor that affected results. Subgroup analysis showed that patients receiving ultrasound-guided RFA had worse OS and DFS than LR (HR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.14-1.36; HR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.25-1.66, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis showed that LR provided better OS and DFS for patients with early-stage HCC. However, RFA and LR had similar effects on long-term survival in patients with BCLC 0 stage HCC. RFA and LR probably had similar effects on OS in patients with solitary HCC less than 3 cm or when the ablation margin was larger than 1 cm which need more studies to confirm. The effects of different modalities of RFA on long-term survival are needed for further assessment.

Efficacy of transarterial therapy combined with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Transarterial therapies, including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), and selective internal radiation therapy, combined with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are considered the standard therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. However, inconsistent results have been reported in various studies assessing different combinations of targeted agents. METHODS: A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed by including 23 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 6175 patients to investigate the efficiency of transarterial therapies in combination with different TKIs. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and tumor objective response rate (ORR). A random-effects consistency model was used in this Bayesian NMA. Hazard ratio and odd risks with a 95% credible interval were calculated and agents were ranked based on ranking probability. RESULTS: HAIC showed maximal OS and TTP and TACE plus lenvatinib showed maximal PFS, ORR, and disease control rate (DCR). HAIC and TACE plus lenvatinib were ranked highest based on their respective parameters, which were OS for HAIC and PFS, ORR, and DCR for TACE plus lenvatinib. CONCLUSION: HAIC and TACE plus lenvatinib were relatively better choice for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. However, owing to the lack of statistically significant OS benefits among most agents, other agents should be considered as potential alternatives for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.