4.3 Article

Assessment of treatment outcomes based on tumor marker trends in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing trans-catheter arterial chemo-embolization

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 19, 期 5, 页码 871-879

出版社

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s10147-013-0634-6

关键词

Hepatocellular carcinoma; Trans-catheter arterial chemo-embolization; Alpha-fetoprotein; Des-gamma-carboxy prothrombin; Modified RECIST

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and des-gamma-carboxy prothrombin (DCP) trends might be correlated with overall survival rates in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing trans-catheter arterial chemo-embolization (TACE). We performed a retrospective cohort study of 142 patients with recurrent HCC who were treated by TACE at our hospital from April 1990 to December 2011. Patients were divided into three groups, as follows, according to the trends of the two tumor markers AFP and DCP: the low group, comprising patients with tumor marker levels below the cutoff values (AFP 100 ng/mL and DCP 100 mAU/mL) both pre- and post-TACE; the decreased group, comprising patients with elevated tumor marker levels pre-TACE in whom the levels decreased post-TACE; and the elevated group, comprising patients with elevated tumor marker levels post-TACE. Analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model identified the DCP trend (elevated group vs. low group, hazard ratio 8.47, 95 % confidence interval 4.53-15.84, p < 0.0001), but not the AFP trend, as an independent prognostic factor for survival. While the AFP trend was correlated only with the overall response rate assessed using the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST; p = 0.041), the DCP trend was strongly associated with both the overall response rate (p = 0.009) and the disease control rate (p = 0.004). The DCP trend might be useful for assessing treatment outcomes after TACE in patients with recurrent HCC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据