SNFGE SNFGE
 
Thématique :
- Carcinome hépatocellulaire (CHC)
Originalité :
Intermédiaire
Solidité :
Intermédiaire
Doit faire évoluer notre pratique :
Dans certains cas
 
 
Nom du veilleur :
Professeur Astrid LIÈVRE
Coup de coeur :
 
 
Journal of clinical oncology (JCO)
  2016/06  
 
  2016 Jun 10;34(17):2046-53  
  doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.64.0821  
 
  Randomized Trial of Hepatic Artery Embolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Doxorubicin-Eluting Microspheres Compared With Embolization With Microspheres Alone  
 
  Brown KT, Do RK, Gonen M, Covey AM, Getrajdman GI, Sofocleous CT, Jarnagin WR, D'Angelica MI, Allen PJ, Erinjeri JP, Brody LA, O'Neill GP, Johnson KN, Garcia AR, Beattie C, Zhao B, Solomon SB, Schwartz LH, DeMatteo R, Abou-Alfa GK  
  http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/early/2016/02/05/JCO.2015.64.0821.abstract  
 
 

Purpose
Transarterial chemoembolization is accepted therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). No randomized trial has demonstrated superiority of chemoembolization compared with embolization, and the role of chemotherapy remains unclear. This randomized trial compares the outcome of embolization using microspheres alone with chemoembolization using doxorubicin-eluting microspheres.

Materials and Methods
At a single tertiary referral center, patients with HCC were randomly assigned to embolization with microspheres alone (Bead Block [BB]) or loaded with doxorubicin 150 mg (LC Bead [LCB]). Random assignment was stratified by number of embolizations to complete treatment, and assignments were generated by permuted blocks in the institutional database. The primary end point was response according to RECIST 1.0 (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) using multiphase computed tomography 2 to 3 weeks post-treatment and then at quarterly intervals, with the reviewer blinded to treatment allocation. Secondary objectives included safety and tolerability, time to progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival. This trial is currently closed to accrual.

Results
Between December 2007 and April 2012, 101 patients were randomly assigned: 51 to BB and 50 to LCB. Demographics were comparable: median age, 67 years; 77% male; and 22% Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage A and 78% stage B or C. Adverse events occurred with similar frequency in both groups: BB, 19 of 51 patients (38%); LCB, 20 of 50 patients (40%; P = .48), with no difference in RECIST response: BB, 5.9% versus LCB, 6.0% (difference, −0.1%; 95% CI, −9% to 9%). Median PFS was 6.2 versus 2.8 months (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.91 to 2.05; P = .11), and overall survival, 19.6 versus 20.8 months (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.76; P = .64) for BB and LCB, respectively.

Conclusion
There was no apparent difference between the treatment arms. These results challenge the use of doxorubicin-eluting beads for chemoembolization of HCC.

 
Question posée
 
Phase II randomisée comparant la chimiothérapie intra-artérielle hépatique (CIAH) avec microsphères chargées à la doxorubicine à l’embolisation avec billes non chargées de chimiothérapie dans les CHC inopérables.
 
Question posée
 
La CIAH ne fait pas mieux que l’embolisation seule en termes de réponse tumorale, de survie sans progression et de survie globale et la tolérance est similaire dans les 2 groupes.
 
Commentaires

Cette étude vient renforcer les doutes quant à l’apport réel de la chimiothérapie dans la CIAH des CHC dont l’efficacité ne pourrait être portée que par une embolisation de qualité.

 
www.snfge.org