• Norihiro Imai, Kenji Ikeda, Yusuke Kawamura, Hitomi Sezaki, Tetsuya Hosaka, Norio Akuta, Masahiro Kobayashi, Satoshi Saitoh, Fumitaka Suzuki, Yoshiyuki Suzuki, Yasuji Arase, and Hiromitsu Kumada.
• Department of Hepatology, Toranomon Hospital, Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan. norihiro.imai@gmail.com
• Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 2012 Mar 1; 42 (3): 175-82.

ObjectiveThe purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the anti-tumor and adverse effects of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and transcatheter arterial infusion chemotherapy using miriplatin-lipiodol suspension in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.MethodsFrom 2007 to 2010, 162 consecutive patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma were treated using miriplatin. Of these, 122 patients were treated by transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and 40 were treated by transcatheter arterial infusion chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups, except for prothrombin activity. Assessments were performed 1-3 months after treatment.ResultsObjective responses were achieved in 13 patients undergoing transcatheter arterial infusion chemotherapy and 70 patients undergoing transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (33 versus 57%, P = 0.003). By multivariate logistic regression analysis, objective response was significantly associated with (i) a Lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive fraction of α-fetoprotein ≤10% (P = 0.004; risk ratio = 3.09; 95% confidence interval = 1.42-6.70), (ii) no previous transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (P = 0.007; risk ratio = 4.41; 95% confidence interval = 1.49-13.07) and (iii) transcatheter arterial chemoembolization using gelatin sponge 1 mm particles (P = 0.021; risk ratio = 2.97; 95% confidence interval = 1.17-7.49). Fever, anorexia and elevated serum transaminase levels were observed in most patients after miriplatin administration; there were no significant differences in the number of adverse effects between the two groups.ConclusionsThese results suggest that the addition of embolizing agents to a treatment regimen using miriplatin-lipiodol suspension can be safely used for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Objective response was achieved in a significantly higher number of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization patients than transcatheter arterial infusion chemotherapy patients.

27 keywords...

hide…