Effectiveness of adjuvant traditional Chinese medicine on macrovascular invasion in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a real-world propensity score-matched study
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10923102 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSeveral randomized controlled trials have shown that adjuvant immunotherapy with autologous cytokine-induced killer (CIK) cells prolongs recurrence-free survival (RFS) after curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We investigated the efficacy of adjuvant immunotherapy with activated CIK cells in real-world clinical practice.MethodsA total of 59 patients who had undergone curative surgical resection or radiofrequency ablation for stage I or II HCC, and subsequently received adjuvant CIK cell immunotherapy at two large-volume centers in Korea were retrospectively included. Propensity score matching with a 1:1 ratio was conducted to avoid possible bias, and 59 pairs of matched control subjects were also generated. The primary endpoint was RFS and the secondary endpoints were overall survival and safety.ResultsThe median follow-up duration was 28.0 months (interquartile range, 22.9-42.3 months). In a univariable analysis, the immunotherapy group showed significantly longer RFS than the control group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.80; log-rank P = 0.006). The median RFS in the control group was 29.8 months, and the immunotherapy group did not reach a median RFS. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis showed that immunotherapy was an independent predictor for HCC recurrence (adjusted HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.20-0.73; P = 0.004). The overall incidence of adverse events in the immunotherapy group was 16/59 (27.1%) and no patient experienced a grade 3 or 4 adverse event.ConclusionsThe adjuvant immunotherapy with autologous CIK cells after curative treatment safely prolonged the RFS of HCC patients in a real-world setting.
| S-EPMC6543598 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Macroscopic vascular invasion (MVI) commonly occurs in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for which resection and sorafenib are the common therapies prescribed. Here, we aimed to compare the survival outcomes of these two therapies in HCC patients with MVI. Methods: In total, 496 patients diagnosed with HCC and MVI without extrahepatic metastasis, treated with resection (resection-based group, n = 388) and sorafenib (sorafenib-based group, n = 108) were included in this study. A one-to-one propensity score-matching analysis (PSM) was performed to minimize the effect of potential confounders. Results: The median OS in the resection- and sorafenib-based group was 20.7 months (95% CI: 16.9-24.5) and 11.6 months (95% CI: 8.4-14.9) (p < 0.001), respectively. The median PFS was 4.7 months (95% CI: 3.8-5.5) in the resection-based group and 4.4 months (95% CI: 3.6-5.2) in the sorafenib-based group (p < 0.001). After PSM, 72 patients from each group were matched. The median OS was 27.2 months (95% CI: 16.4-38.0) in the resection-based group and 13.0 months (95% CI: 9.6-16.3) in the sorafenib-based group (p < 0.001). The median PFS was 5.3 months (95% CI: 3.2-7.4) in the resection-based group and 4.8 months (95% CI: 3.6-6.0) in the sorafenib-based group (p = 0.061). Conclusion: Findings from this study showed that, compared with sorafenib-based treatment, surgical resection might be associated with better survival benefits to HCC patients with MVI.
| S-EPMC7214621 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality in Taiwan. Some patients with HCC are diagnosed with macrovascular invasion (MVI), which is associated with a poorer prognosis. In Taiwan, sorafenib is the first-line therapy for patients with advanced HCC. However, the efficacy of adjuvant sorafenib therapy remains unclear for the subset of patients with HCC and MVI who are eligible for surgery. Therefore, we investigated the potential benefit of adjuvant sorafenib therapy for patients with HCC and MVI after surgery. Our study showed that the lack of improved PFS or OS of adjuvant sorafenib challenged the therapeutic benefit of postoperative sorafenib. Alcohol consumption and an α-fetoprotein level of ≥400 ng/mL were independent predictors of overall survival (OS); however, adjuvant sorafenib therapy was not a predictor of progression-free survival (PFS) or OS. In conclusion, our study indicated that adjuvant sorafenib therapy did not provide PFS or OS benefits in patients with HCC and MVI.
| S-EPMC10742418 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPostoperative adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization (PA-TACE) is proposed as a potentially effective treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but its benefits may be limited according to recent evidence.MethodsWe analyzed clinicopathologic data from HCC patients who underwent hepatectomy between 2014 and 2019, categorizing them into two groups: surgery alone (non-PA-TACE) and PA-TACE. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for selection bias. Cox proportional hazard models identified independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to compare RFS and OS rates between groups.ResultPA-TACE was not an independent prognostic factor for RFS (entire cohort: hazard ratio [HR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-1.50, p = 0.206; matched cohort: HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.79-1.54, p = 0.560) or OS (entire cohort: HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.87-1.52, p = 0.317; matched cohort: HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68-1.36, p = 0.823). In the matched cohort, independent Predictors of worse OS included tumor diameter ≥ 5 cm, positive microvascular invasion (MVI), Edmondson-Steiner grade III-IV, pathological cirrhosis, and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) B/C stage. Predictors of worse RFS included tumor diameter ≥ 5 cm and Edmondson-Steiner grade III-IV. Only in the BCLC B/C stage subgroup, PA-TACE may improve OS compared to non-PA-TACE (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.85, p = 0.011).ConclusionPA-TACE may not extend OS or RFS in HCC patients with BCLC 0/A stage, tumor diameter ≥ 5 cm, or MVI. PA-TACE should be administered with caution, even in HCC patients with BCLC B/C stage.
| S-EPMC11889010 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10839729 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe association between obesity and rising incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the USA has been documented; however, the role of bariatric surgery remains less clear.AimTo evaluate the cross-sectional association of prior-bariatric surgery and HCC.MethodsThe United States Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was queried from 2004 to 2014 for discharges with a diagnosis of morbid obesity. Primary outcomes of interest were HCC and in-hospital mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were length of stay and cost. Baseline characteristics were balanced using propensity score matching (PSM). Using Poisson and logistic regressions, adjusted HCC prevalence ratio (PR) and mortality odds ratio (OR) were derived in patients with prior-bariatric surgery compared to those without bariatric surgery.ResultsOf the 2,881,414 patients included in our study, 267,082 (9.3%) underwent bariatric surgery. From 2004 to 2014, there was a threefold increase in age-adjusted prevalence of HCC from 27 per 100,000 to 72 per 100,000 (PTrend < 0.001). After PSM, 230,956 patients with prior-bariatric surgery were matched with 230,956 patients without bariatric surgery. Prior-bariatric surgery was associated with lower prevalence of HCC (PR 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03-0.48; P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was also lower for patients with surgery (OR 0.22; 95% CI, 0.20-0.26; P < 0.001). The occurrence of HCC added $18,840 extra cost, increased mean length of stay by 2 (95% CI; 1-3) days, and increased risk of death by 65% (aOR 1.65; 95% CI 1.18-2.29).ConclusionIn this nationwide study of morbidly obese patients, prior-bariatric surgery was associated with a lower prevalence of HCC and lower in-patient mortality.
| S-EPMC6219901 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo examine National Cancer Database (NCDB) data to comparatively evaluate overall survival (OS) between patients undergoing transarterial radioembolization (TARE) and those undergoing systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with major vascular invasion (HCC-MVI).MethodsOne thousand five hundred fourteen patients with HCC-MVI undergoing first-line TARE or systemic therapy were identified from the NCDB. OS was compared using propensity score-matched Cox regression and landmark analysis. Efficacy was also compared within a target trial framework.ResultsTARE usage doubled between 2010 and 2015. Intervals before treatment were longer for TARE than for systemic therapy (mean [median], 66.5 [60] days vs 46.8 (35) days, respectively, P < .0001). In propensity-score-matched and landmark-time-adjusted analyses, TARE was found to be associated with a hazard ratio of 0.74 (95 % CI, 0.60-0.91; P = .005) and median OS of 7.1 months (95 % CI, 5.0-10.5) versus 4.9 months (95 % CI, 3.9-6.5) for systemically treated patients. In an emulated target trial involving 236 patients with unilobular HCC-MVI, a low number of comorbidities, creatinine levels <2.0 mg/dL, bilirubin levels <2.0 mg/dL, and international normalized ratio <1.7, TARE was found to be associated with a hazard ratio of 0.57 (95 % CI, 0.39-0.83; P = .004) and a median OS of 12.9 months (95 % CI, 7.6-19.2) versus 6.5 months (95 % CI, 3.6-11.1) for the systemic therapy arm.ConclusionsIn propensity-score-matched analyses involving pragmatic and target trial HCC-MVI cohorts, TARE was found to be associated with significant survival benefits compared with systemic therapy. Although not a substitute for prospective trials, these findings suggest that the increasing use of TARE for HCC-MVI is accompanied by improved OS. Further trials of TARE in patients with HCC-MVI are needed, especially to compare with newer systemic therapies.
| S-EPMC8410665 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundViral- and host-targeted traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) formulae NRICM101 and NRICM102 were administered to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the mid-2021 outbreak in Taiwan. We report the outcomes by measuring the risks of intubation or admission to intensive care unit (ICU) for patients requiring no oxygen support, and death for those requiring oxygen therapy.MethodsThis multicenter retrospective study retrieved data of 840 patients admitted to 9 hospitals between May 1 and July 26, 2021. After propensity score matching, 302 patients (151 received NRICM101 and 151 did not) and 246 patients (123 received NRICM102 and 123 did not) were included in the analysis to assess relative risks.ResultsDuring the 30-day observation period, no endpoint occurred in the patients receiving NRICM101 plus usual care while 14 (9.27%) in the group receiving only usual care were intubated or admitted to ICU. The numbers of deceased patients were 7 (5.69%) in the group receiving NRICM102 plus usual care and 27 (21.95%) in the usual care group. No patients receiving NRICM101 transitioned to a more severe status; NRICM102 users were 74.07% less likely to die than non-users (relative risk= 25.93%, 95% confidence interval 11.73%-57.29%).ConclusionNRICM101 and NRICM102 were significantly associated with a lower risk of intubation/ICU admission or death among patients with mild-to-severe COVID-19. This study provides real-world evidence of adopting broad-spectrum oral therapeutics and shortening the gap between outbreak and effective response. It offers a new vision in our preparation for future pandemics.
| S-EPMC9395232 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCommunity-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide despite correct antibiotic use. Corticosteroids have long been evaluated as a treatment option, but heterogeneous effects on survival have precluded their widespread implementation. We aimed to evaluate whether corticosteroids might improve clinical outcomes in patients with severe CAP and high inflammatory responses.Study design and methodsWe analyzed two prospective observational cohorts of patients with CAP in Barcelona and Rome who were admitted to intensive care with a high inflammatory response. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to obtain balance among the baseline variables in both groups, and we excluded patients with viral pneumonia or who received hydrocortisone.ResultsOf the 610 patients admitted with severe CAP, 198 (32%) received corticosteroids and 387 had major criteria for severe CAP. All patients had a baseline serum C-reactive protein above 15 mg/dL. Patients who received corticosteroids were more commonly male, had more comorbidities (e.g., cancer or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), and presented with significantly higher sequential organ failure assessment scores. Eighty-nine patients met major severity criteria (invasive mechanical ventilation and/or septic shock) and were matched per group. Twenty-eight-day mortality was lower among patients receiving corticosteroids (16 patients, 18%) than among those not receiving them (28 patients, 31%; p = 0.037). After PS matching, corticosteroid therapy reduced the 28-day mortality risk in patients who met major severity criteria (hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.98) (p = 0.043). In patients who did not meet major severity criteria, no benefits were observed with corticosteroid use (HR 0.88 (95%CI 0.32-2.36).ConclusionsCorticosteroid treatment may be of benefit for patients with CAP who have septic shock and/or a high inflammatory response and requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation. Corticosteroids appear to have no impact on mortality when these features are not present.
| S-EPMC8674860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines recommend adjuvant chemoradiation (ACR) for margin-positive (R1) and/or node-positive (N+) pancreatic cancers. Our goal was to investigate if there is evidence of superiority of adjuvant chemoradiation (ACR) over adjuvant chemotherapy (AC).MethodsWe utilized data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for N+ and/or R1 pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients diagnosed from 2004 to 2012 who underwent ACR or AC. Patients who received neoadjuvant radiation, no adjuvant treatment, or adjuvant radiation alone were excluded. Propensity score nearest-neighbor 1:1 matching (PSM) was performed between ACR and AC groups based on age, sex, race, insurance, year of diagnosis, comorbidities, tumor site and size, T-stage, nodal status, margin status, grade, and treatment facility. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS).ResultsA total of 8297 patients were eligible. After PSM, two well-balanced groups of 3244 patients each were analyzed. ACR resulted in superior OS compared with AC alone (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.87; median OS 22 vs 19 months, P < .0001). Subset analyses demonstrated OS benefit of ACR compared with AC in N+, R0 patients (HR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.77-0.88; Median OS 24 vs 20 months, P < .001) as well as N+, R1 patients (HR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.87; Median OS 17 vs 15 months, P < .001); but not in node-negative, R1 patients (HR: 1.12, 95% CI 0.84-1.48; Median OS 18 vs 22 months, P = .63).ConclusionThe addition of radiation to AC was associated with a clinically small but meaningful increase in survival of patients undergoing curative-intent pancreatic resections. This association was not evident in patients with microscopically positive margins but node-negative disease and larger studies will be needed.
| S-EPMC6792522 | biostudies-literature