4.5 Article

Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in Child-Pugh B patients

Journal

DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE
Volume 45, Issue 10, Pages 852-858

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2013.03.002

Keywords

Hepatocellular carcinoma; Liver function; Transarterial chemoembolisation; Tumour staging systems

Funding

  1. Bayer
  2. Bristol-Myers Squibb

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The frequency with which patients in Child-Pugh B having hepatocellular carcinoma are treated following the international guidelines according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stages is unknown. Aims: To investigate treatment allocation for Child-Pugh B patients in different tumour stages, with particular interest in the intermediate stage. Methods: Patients were retrospectively identified from a consecutively collected series. Treatment was carried out primarily according to the guidelines. Results: Of 86 Child-Pugh B patients, 45 were Barcelona early stage, of which the Child-Pugh scores were 46.7% B7, 33.3% B8, 20.0% B9; 27 patients were intermediate stage (B7 59.3%, B8 37.0% and B9 3.7% respectively), 12 were advanced (41.7% B7, 25.0% B8 and 33.3% B9) and 2 were terminal (both B9). In the intermediate stage, transarterial chemoembolization (or ablation) was performed in 68.8% of the Child-Pugh B7 patients, 50% of the B8 patients and 0% of the B9 patients. Median survival of the intermediate patients was 8.0 months (9.0 in B7 vs. 6.0 in -B8/B9, P = 0.048). Survival of the intermediate stage patients undergoing chemoembolisation was 22.0 months in Child-Pugh B7 and 6.0 in B8. Conclusions: Approximately half of the intermediate stage patients can undergo locoregional treatment with good survival when in the Child-Pugh B7. The Child-Pugh numeric score impacts survival, suggesting that this tumour stage be refined. (C) 2013 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available