Liver resection versus transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of intermediate‐stage hepatocellular carcinoma

Abstract Background The role of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) as the standard treatment for intermediate‐stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is being challenged by increasing studies supporting liver resection (LR); but evidence of survival benefits of LR is lacking. We aimed to compare the overall survival (OS) of LR with that of TACE for the treatment of intermediate‐stage HCC in cirrhotic patients. Methods A Markov model, comparing LR with TACE over 15 years, was developed based on the data from 31 literatures. Additionally, external validation of the model was performed using a data set (n = 1735; LR: 701; TACE: 1034) from a tertiary center with propensity score matching method. We conducted one‐way and two‐way sensitivity analyses, in addition to a Monte Carlo analysis with 10 000 patients allocated into each arm. Results The mean expected survival times and survival rates at 5 years were 77.8 months and 47.1% in LR group, and 48.6 months and 25.7% in TACE group, respectively. Sensitivity analyses found that initial LR was the most favorable treatment. The 95% CI for the difference in OS was 2.42‐2.46 years between the two groups (P < 0.001). In the validation set, the 5‐year survival rates after LR were significantly better than those after TACE before (40.2% vs. 25.9%, P < 0.001) and after matching (43.2% vs 30.9%, P < 0.001), which was comparable to the model results. Conclusions For cirrhotic patients with resectable intermediate‐stage HCC, LR may provide survival benefit over TACE, but large‐scale studies are required to further stratify patients at this stage for different optimal treatments