Search

To compare the safety and effectiveness of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) and transarterial chemoembolization with drug-eluting embolic agents combined with percutaneous ablation (transarterial chemoembolization [TACE] + ablation) in the treatment of treatment-naïve, unresectable, solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of ≥3 cm.Twenty-nine patients with treatment-naïve, unresectable, solitary HCC of ≥3 cm received combined TACE + ablation, and 40 patients received TARE at a single institution. Local tumor response, tumor progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, need for reintervention, bridge to transplant, and major complications were compared. Clinical variables and outcomes were compared before and after propensity score matching (PSM).Before PSM, patients who underwent TARE had a larger tumor size (3.7 vs 5.5 cm; P = .0005) and were older (61.5 vs 69.3 years; P = .0014). After PSM, there was no difference in baseline characteristics between the 2 groups, with the mean tumor sizes measuring 3.9 and 4.1 cm in the TACE + ablation and TARE cohorts, respectively. After PSM (n = 19 in each group), no statistically significant difference was observed in local radiological response (disease control rates, 100% vs 94.7%; P = .31), survival (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-1.80; P = .469), PFS (SHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.21-1.71; P = .342), bridge to transplant (21.1% vs 31.6%, P = .46), and major adverse event rates (15.8% vs 10.5%, P = .63) between the 2 groups. The mean total number of locoregional interventions was higher in the TACE + ablation cohort (1.9 vs 1.3 sessions, P = .02), with an earlier median reintervention trend (SHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.20-1.32; P = .167).The present study showed that TARE and the combination of TACE and ablation are comparable in safety and effectiveness for treating treatment-naïve, unresectable, solitary HCC of ≥3 cm.