Effectiveness of combined therapy radiofrequency ablation/transarterial chemoembolization versus transarterial chemoembolization/radiofrequency ablation on management of hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: One of the most widespread cancer-associated death worldwide is Hepatocellular carcinoma. Concerning hepatic malignant tumor staging system known as Barcelona clinic of liver cancer, a superior curative response could be carried out by combined techniques [radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE)] for stage B comparing with TACE alone as palliative monotherapy. OBJECTIVES: To discuss the merging effect of RFA followed by TACE and vice versa on objective response, overall survival, local recurrence and tumor-free survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-eight cases included with hepatic tumor on top of chronic liver disease post-viral infection and divided into two groups according to different combined treatment modality; first cohort included 34 patients treated with TACE followed by RFA, while the second one included 34 patients treated with RFA followed by TACE for two lesions or single medium-sized lesion stage. RESULTS: Complete response and objective response rates were 91% and 82% after TACE/RFA and 100% and 91% after RFA/TACE, respectively. Regarding Milan criteria, there was significant downstaging after RFA/TACE (P < 0.05). First and second overall survival rates were 85% and 65% after TACE/RFA versus 100% and 74%, respectively, after RFA/TACE (P > 0.05). Kaplan-Meier curve as regards disease-free survival rate, median time were 17.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.2-22.0] in TACE/RFA and 23.2 (95% CI 18.1-28.2) months in RFA/TACE (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: RFA/TACE showed effective complete response, downstaging, disease-free survival and overall survival for the treatment of hepatic malignant tumors.

High SVR rate following retreatment of non-sustained virological responders to sofosbuvir based anti-HCV therapies regardless of RAS testing: A real-life multicenter study.

Aim: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir/daclatasvir/ribavirin (SOF/DCV/RBV) in treating non-sustained virological responders (non-SVR12) to prior sofosbuvir-based therapy, in absence of RAS testing in mass treatment, and determination of the optimal timing to start re-treatment. Methods: Real-life prospective observational study included prior non-responders to 24-weeks SOF-RBV (n = 679, 67%) or 12-weeks SOF- RBV- PEG (n = 335, 33%). Patients were re-treated with daily SOF/DCV/RBV for 12 (n = 270) or 24 weeks (n = 744). The primary efficacy endpoint was SVR12. The primary safety endpoints were reported adverse events (AEs) from baseline to SVR12 time point. Results: We included 1,014 patients [age 52 ± 9 years, 58.48% men]. Cirrhosis was documented in 46.98% and 27.5% of SOF-RBV and SOF-RBV-PEG non-responders respectively. Overall, SVR12 was 90.6% [92.2% for 12 weeks therapy and 90.05% for 24 weeks therapy]. Mild AEs occurred in 5.13% (n=52) and 3.1% (n=32) discontinued treatment including eight on-treatment mortalities. Higher baseline FIB-4 and shorter interval before starting retreatment (<6 months) were independent predictors of non-SVR12 on multivariate regression analysis. Conclusion: SOF/DCV/RBV is an effective and safe treatment option for non-responders to prior sofosbuvir-based therapy. Six months interval before retreatment is optimal for achieving favorable SVR.