Abstract
Background The selection criterion for hepatic resection(HR) in intermediate-stage(IM) hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) is still controversial. This study aims to compare transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) and HR in the range of predicted overall mortality(OM).
Methods In all, 946 consecutive patients with IM-HCC were categorised in HR and TACE group. We performed multivariable Cox regression model to predict OM in HR patients. To evaluate the HR impact on OM concerning baseline characteristics, we test the interaction between predicted OM risk and HR status. The cut-off values were determined by two-piece-wise linear regression model and decision curve analysis. Also, the inverse probability of treatment weight was performed to minimise potential bias as a sensitivity analysis.
Findings Totally, 23.0% (n=225) of patients received HR. The 5-yr overall survival rate was higher in the HR group versus the TACE group (52.3% vs 22.8%; p<0.0001). In the HR group, five predictors (all<0.05) were selected to calculate the 5-yr OM risk. This model also used to predict the 5-yr OM-free survival rate. The line of HR and TACE was crossing with predicted OM risk at 100%. The benefit of HR versus TACE decreased progressively as predicted OM risk>55%. When OM risk >80%, HR was not significantly superior to TACE (HR:0.61;95%CI:0.31,1.21), and both HR and TACE did not increase net benefit.
Interpretation Hepatic resection was superior to transarterial chemoembolisation for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma at the 5-yr OM risk<80%. And TACE was suitable for the patients with OM risk>80%.
Funding none.
Synopsis
The line of HR and TACE was crossing with predicted OM risk at 100%
The benefit of HR versus TACE decreased progressively as predicted OM risk>55%
When OM risk >80%, HR was not significantly superior to TACE
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
none
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study protocol (2017-FXY-129) was approved by the Ethics Committee of SYSUCC
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The raw data were freely obtained from the Dryad Digital Repository database (www.Datadryad.org;https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.pd44k8r).
