Liu L.,Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases |
Wang W.,Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases |
Chen H.,Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases |
Zhao Y.,Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases |
And 7 more authors.
Clinical Cancer Research | Year: 2014
Purpose: Published studies have not investigated the suitability of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) criteria, and modified RECIST (mRECIST) for assessing the response of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma to treatment with sorafenib combined with transarterial chemoembolization. Here, we aimed to define the earliest time at which the response to combination therapy could be accurately assessed and validate the prognostic value of these criteria at this early posttherapy time point. Experimental Design: A total of 114 consecutive patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving combination therapy were retrospectively enrolled. The therapy response at different time points was assessed using RECIST, EASL, and mRECIST. Cox regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to assess overall survival (OS) in the responders and nonresponders. Results: At the third follow-up (median, 94 days; range, 89-102 days) after therapy, the response rates obtained using EASL (50.6%) and mRECIST (51.6%) were greater than that obtained using RECIST (16.5%). The agreement was strong between the mRECIST and EASL results (k 1/4 0.9) but weak between mRECIST and RECIST (k 1/4 0.3). The EASL and mRECIST responses significantly correlated with survival. Risk reductions of 52% and 50% were observed for EASL and mRECIST responders, respectively, compared with nonresponders. However, no significant association between the treatment response and survival was observed using RECIST. Conclusions: The earliest time to evaluate the response to combination therapy is 3 months (median, 94 days) after therapy. EASL and mRECIST responses are independent predictors for OS at this early time point. © 2014 American Association for Cancer Research. Source
Bai M.,PLA Fourth Military Medical University |
He C.-Y.,PLA Fourth Military Medical University |
Qi X.-S.,PLA Fourth Military Medical University |
Yin Z.-X.,PLA Fourth Military Medical University |
And 11 more authors.
World Journal of Gastroenterology | Year: 2014
Aim: To evaluate the effect of the shunting branch of the portal vein (PV) (left or right) and the initial stent position (optimal or suboptimal) of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 307 consecutive cirrhotic patients who underwent TIPS placement for variceal bleeding from March 2001 to July 2010 at our center. The left PV was used in 221 patients and the right PV in the remaining 86 patients. And, 224 and 83 patients have optimal stent position and sub-optimal stent positions, respectively. The patients were followed until October 2011 or their death. Hepatic encephalopathy, shunt dysfunction, and survival were evaluated as outcomes. The difference between the groups was compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis. A Cox regression model was employed to evaluate the predictors. Results: Among the patients who underwent TIPS to the left PV, the risk of hepatic encephalopathy (P = 0.002) and mortality were lower (P < 0.001) compared to those to the right PV. Patients who underwent TIPS with optimal initial stent position had a higher primary patency (P < 0.001) and better survival (P = 0.006) than those with suboptimal initial stent position. The shunting branch of the portal vein and the initial stent position were independent predictors of hepatic encephalopathy and shunt dysfunction after TIPS, respectively. And, both were independent predictors of survival. Conclusion: TIPS placed to the left portal vein with optimal stent position may reduce the risk of hepatic encephalopathy and improve the primary patency rates, thereby prolonging survival. © 2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved. Source