肝细胞癌动脉内治疗的研究进展

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2022.03.012

中华介入放射学电子杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (03) : 283 -295. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2022.03.012

综述

肝细胞癌动脉内治疗的研究进展

李铜强¹, 石钦², 熊斌³^,^†(

)

^1. 430022　湖北武汉，华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院放射科；湖北省影像重点实验室
^2. 200032　上海，复旦大学附属中山医院介入科
^3. 430022　湖北武汉，华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院放射科；510120　广东广州，广州医科大学附属第一医院介入科

收稿日期:2022-05-19 出版日期:2022-08-25
通信作者: 熊斌
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金面上项目(81873917); 湖北陈孝平科技发展基金会临床研究创新基金项目(CXPJJH12000001-2020223)

Recent updates in intra-arterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

Tongqiang Li¹, Qin Shi², Bin Xiong³^,^†()

^1. Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology,; Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Hubei Wuhan 430022
^2. Department of Interventional Radiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032
^3. Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology,; Department of Interventional Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangdong Guangzhou 510120, China

Received:2022-05-19 Published:2022-08-25
Corresponding author: Bin Xiong

全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用

引用本文：

李铜强, 石钦, 熊斌. 肝细胞癌动脉内治疗的研究进展[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2022, 10(03): 283-295.

Tongqiang Li, Qin Shi, Bin Xiong. Recent updates in intra-arterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Chinese Journal of Interventional Radiology(Electronic Edition), 2022, 10(03): 283-295.

动脉内治疗是治疗不可切除肝细胞癌（HCC）的重要手段，其中经动脉化疗栓塞（TACE）是目前最被认可且最常用的方式。近年来，肝动脉灌注化疗（HAIC）与经动脉放射栓塞（TARE）逐渐被关注，并在中晚期HCC的治疗中取得令人欣喜的疗效。同时，随着越来越多靶向和免疫治疗药物的涌现，HCC的治疗已进入系统治疗时代，极大地改变了HCC的治疗方式。动脉内治疗联合系统治疗的临床获益和方案探索也正在被持续关注。文章就动脉内治疗中常用的TACE、HAIC以及TARE的研究进展进行了综述。

关键词: 肝细胞癌, 动脉内治疗, 经动脉化疗栓塞, 肝动脉灌注化疗, 经动脉放射栓塞

Intra-arterial therapy is crucial for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the most widely used method currently. In recent years, both hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) have gradually attracted attention, and have achieved gratifying curative effects in the treatment of advanced HCC. At the same time, with the emergence of more and more targeted and immunotherapy drugs, the treatment of HCC has entered the era of systemic therapy, which has greatly changed the treatment of HCC. The survival benefit and scheme exploration of intra-arterial therapy combined with systemic therapy are also being continuously paid attention by clinicians. This article aims to review the latest research progress of TACE, HAIC and TARE, which are commonly used in intra-arterial therapy.

Key words: Hepatocellular carcinoma, Intra-arterial therapy, Transarterial chemoembolization, Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy, Transarterial radioembolization

表1 动脉内治疗联合系统治疗临床试验

研究者	时间	研究设计	队列	生存获益
Chao et al^[50]	2015	前瞻性、单臂、多中心研究	索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 192）	PFS：384 d
Lencioni et al^[32]	2016	随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、Ⅱ期研究	索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 154） vs安慰剂+ TACE（n = 154）	TTP：169 vs 166 d，P = 0.072
Meyer et al^[33]	2017	随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、Ⅲ期研究	索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 157） vs安慰剂+ TACE（n = 156）	PFS：120 vs 162d，P = 0.94
Kudo et al^[34]	2014	随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、Ⅲ期研究	布立尼布+ TACE（n = 249） vs安慰剂+ TACE（n = 253）	OS：26.4 vs 26.1个月，P = 0.528
Kudo et al^[35]	2017	随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、Ⅲ期研究	奥兰替尼+ TACE（n = 444） vs安慰剂+ TACE（n = 444）	OS：31.1 vs 32.3个月，P = 0.435
Kudo et al^[37]	2020	随机、多中心，Ⅱ期	索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 80） vs TACE（n = 76）	PFS：25.2 vs 13.5个月，P = 0.006
Ding et al^[51]	2021	随机、单中心、开放标签、对照研究	仑伐替尼+ TACE（n = 32） vs索拉非尼+TACE（n = 32）	ORR：53.1% vs 25.0%，P = 0.039 TTP：4.7 vs 3.1个月，P = 0.029
Chen et al^[44]	2021	多中心、回顾性研究	派姆单抗+仑伐替尼+ TACE（n = 70） vs仑伐替尼+ TACE（n = 72）	OS：18.1 vs 14.1个月，P = 0.004 PFS：9.2 vs 5.5个月，P = 0.006 ORR：47.1% vs 27.8%，P = 0.017 DCR：70.0% vs 52.8%，P = 0.036
Zheng et al^[45]	2021	回顾性研究	索拉非尼+ ICI + TACE（n = 22） vs索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 29）	OS：23.3 vs 13.8个月，P = 0.012 PFS：16.3 vs 7.3个月，P < 0.001 DCR：81.82% vs 55.17%，P = 0.046
Ju et al^[42]	2022	回顾性研究	阿帕替尼+卡瑞利珠单抗+ TACE（n = 56） vs阿帕替尼+卡瑞利珠单抗（n = 52）	OS：24.8 vs 13.1个月，P = 0.005 ORR：42.9% vs 17.3%，P = 0.004 DCR：85.7% vs 57.7%，P = 0.001
Cai et al^[43]	2022	回顾性研究	仑伐替尼+ ICI + TACE（n = 41） vs仑伐替尼+ TACE（n = 40）	OS：16.9 vs 12.1个月，P = 0.009 PFS：7.3 vs 4.0个月，P = 0.002 ORR：56.1% vs 32.5%，P = 0.033 DCR：85.4% vs 62.5%，P = 0.019
Facciorusso et al^[52]	2020	回顾性研究	TARE +索拉非尼（n = 45） vs索拉非尼（n = 90）	OS：10.0 vs 10.0个月，P = 0.711 PFS：6.0 vs 7.0个月，P = 0.992 ORR：45.5% vs 42.8%，P = 1
Ricke et al^[53]	2019	随机、对照研究	TARE +索拉非尼（n = 216） vs索拉非尼（n = 208）	OS：12.1 vs 11.4个月，P = 0.953

表1 动脉内治疗联合系统治疗临床试验

研究者	时间	研究设计	队列	生存获益
Chao et al^[50]	2015	前瞻性、单臂、多中心研究	索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 192）	PFS：384 d
Lencioni et al^[32]	2016	随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、Ⅱ期研究	索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 154） vs安慰剂+ TACE（n = 154）	TTP：169 vs 166 d，P = 0.072
Meyer et al^[33]	2017	随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、Ⅲ期研究	索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 157） vs安慰剂+ TACE（n = 156）	PFS：120 vs 162d，P = 0.94
Kudo et al^[34]	2014	随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、Ⅲ期研究	布立尼布+ TACE（n = 249） vs安慰剂+ TACE（n = 253）	OS：26.4 vs 26.1个月，P = 0.528
Kudo et al^[35]	2017	随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、Ⅲ期研究	奥兰替尼+ TACE（n = 444） vs安慰剂+ TACE（n = 444）	OS：31.1 vs 32.3个月，P = 0.435
Kudo et al^[37]	2020	随机、多中心，Ⅱ期	索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 80） vs TACE（n = 76）	PFS：25.2 vs 13.5个月，P = 0.006
Ding et al^[51]	2021	随机、单中心、开放标签、对照研究	仑伐替尼+ TACE（n = 32） vs索拉非尼+TACE（n = 32）	ORR：53.1% vs 25.0%，P = 0.039 TTP：4.7 vs 3.1个月，P = 0.029
Chen et al^[44]	2021	多中心、回顾性研究	派姆单抗+仑伐替尼+ TACE（n = 70） vs仑伐替尼+ TACE（n = 72）	OS：18.1 vs 14.1个月，P = 0.004 PFS：9.2 vs 5.5个月，P = 0.006 ORR：47.1% vs 27.8%，P = 0.017 DCR：70.0% vs 52.8%，P = 0.036
Zheng et al^[45]	2021	回顾性研究	索拉非尼+ ICI + TACE（n = 22） vs索拉非尼+ TACE（n = 29）	OS：23.3 vs 13.8个月，P = 0.012 PFS：16.3 vs 7.3个月，P < 0.001 DCR：81.82% vs 55.17%，P = 0.046
Ju et al^[42]	2022	回顾性研究	阿帕替尼+卡瑞利珠单抗+ TACE（n = 56） vs阿帕替尼+卡瑞利珠单抗（n = 52）	OS：24.8 vs 13.1个月，P = 0.005 ORR：42.9% vs 17.3%，P = 0.004 DCR：85.7% vs 57.7%，P = 0.001
Cai et al^[43]	2022	回顾性研究	仑伐替尼+ ICI + TACE（n = 41） vs仑伐替尼+ TACE（n = 40）	OS：16.9 vs 12.1个月，P = 0.009 PFS：7.3 vs 4.0个月，P = 0.002 ORR：56.1% vs 32.5%，P = 0.033 DCR：85.4% vs 62.5%，P = 0.019
Facciorusso et al^[52]	2020	回顾性研究	TARE +索拉非尼（n = 45） vs索拉非尼（n = 90）	OS：10.0 vs 10.0个月，P = 0.711 PFS：6.0 vs 7.0个月，P = 0.992 ORR：45.5% vs 42.8%，P = 1
Ricke et al^[53]	2019	随机、对照研究	TARE +索拉非尼（n = 216） vs索拉非尼（n = 208）	OS：12.1 vs 11.4个月，P = 0.953

表2 TACE作为术后辅助治疗临床试验

研究者	时间	研究人群	研究设计	生存获益
Tong Y et al^[56]	2017	术后辅助治疗	手术+ TACE（n = 83） vs单纯手术（n = 83）	1/3/5年OS：100%、91.5%、83.3% vs 97.6%、84.8%、78.2%，P = 0.995； 1/3/5年RFS：87.5%、56.4%、50.0% vs 90.4%、64.3%、51.6%, P = 0.297
Jiang et al^[60]	2015	术后辅助化疗	手术+ TACE（n = 91） vs单纯手术（n = 138）	1/2/3年OS：95.1%、86.7%、76.4% vs 86.9%、78.5%、73.2%, P = 0.543； 1/3/5年RFS：86.6%、69.4%、59.9% vs 75.2%、67.9%、66.0%, P = 0.425
Xie et al^[61]	2019	术后辅助治疗	手术+ TACE（n = 102） vs单纯手术（n = 78）	PFS：52.0 vs 11.1个月，P< 0.001； OS：90.7 vs 54.4个月，P< 0.001
Sun et al^[57]	2016	伴MVI肝癌术后辅助治疗	手术+ TACE（n = 137） vs单纯手术（n = 185）	1/3/5年OS：94.2%、71.5%、54.0 %，vs 78.9%、54.1%、43.2%，P = 0.012; 1/3/5年RFS：69.3%、46.7%、35.0% vs 47.0%、34.1%、30.3%，P = 0.006;
Wang et al^[55]	2018	HBV相关肝癌术后辅助化疗	手术+ TACE（n = 140） vs单纯手术（n = 140）	RFS：49.5 vs 23.8个月，P = 0.01； 3年OS：85.2% vs 77.4%，P = 0.04
Ye et al^[58]	2017	伴或不伴MVI术后辅助治疗	手术+ TACE（n = 158） vs单纯手术（n = 361）	伴MVI： 1/2/3/4年OS：92.7%、86.5%、73.1%、67.5% vs 81.3%、65.7%、58.8%、53.9%，P = 0.019；不伴MVI： 1/2/3/4年OS：94.2%、91.9%、87.6%、87.6% vs 98.8%、91.5%、82.8%、82.8%，P = 0.872； 1/2/3/4年RFS：83.0%、71.8%、61.9%、不可用vs 80.7%、70.1%、61.2%、55.9%，P = 0.974

表2 TACE作为术后辅助治疗临床试验

研究者	时间	研究人群	研究设计	生存获益
Tong Y et al^[56]	2017	术后辅助治疗	手术+ TACE（n = 83） vs单纯手术（n = 83）	1/3/5年OS：100%、91.5%、83.3% vs 97.6%、84.8%、78.2%，P = 0.995； 1/3/5年RFS：87.5%、56.4%、50.0% vs 90.4%、64.3%、51.6%, P = 0.297
Jiang et al^[60]	2015	术后辅助化疗	手术+ TACE（n = 91） vs单纯手术（n = 138）	1/2/3年OS：95.1%、86.7%、76.4% vs 86.9%、78.5%、73.2%, P = 0.543； 1/3/5年RFS：86.6%、69.4%、59.9% vs 75.2%、67.9%、66.0%, P = 0.425
Xie et al^[61]	2019	术后辅助治疗	手术+ TACE（n = 102） vs单纯手术（n = 78）	PFS：52.0 vs 11.1个月，P< 0.001； OS：90.7 vs 54.4个月，P< 0.001
Sun et al^[57]	2016	伴MVI肝癌术后辅助治疗	手术+ TACE（n = 137） vs单纯手术（n = 185）	1/3/5年OS：94.2%、71.5%、54.0 %，vs 78.9%、54.1%、43.2%，P = 0.012; 1/3/5年RFS：69.3%、46.7%、35.0% vs 47.0%、34.1%、30.3%，P = 0.006;
Wang et al^[55]	2018	HBV相关肝癌术后辅助化疗	手术+ TACE（n = 140） vs单纯手术（n = 140）	RFS：49.5 vs 23.8个月，P = 0.01； 3年OS：85.2% vs 77.4%，P = 0.04
Ye et al^[58]	2017	伴或不伴MVI术后辅助治疗	手术+ TACE（n = 158） vs单纯手术（n = 361）	伴MVI： 1/2/3/4年OS：92.7%、86.5%、73.1%、67.5% vs 81.3%、65.7%、58.8%、53.9%，P = 0.019；不伴MVI： 1/2/3/4年OS：94.2%、91.9%、87.6%、87.6% vs 98.8%、91.5%、82.8%、82.8%，P = 0.872； 1/2/3/4年RFS：83.0%、71.8%、61.9%、不可用vs 80.7%、70.1%、61.2%、55.9%，P = 0.974

表3 HAIC采用不同药物、不同灌药方式的临床研究

研究者	时间	研究设计	药物方案	研究人群	疗效评价
Ikeda et al^[79]	2013	单臂、多中心、Ⅱ期研究	顺铂（65 mg/m²），团注；	伴PVT患者（n = 25）	ORR：28.0% PFS：3.6个月 OS：7.6个月
Chen et al^[88]	2020	前瞻性、单臂、Ⅱ期研究	奥沙利铂（100 mg/m²，连续输注4 h）和雷替曲塞（3 mg/m²，连续输注1 h）	伴有PVT的TACE难治性患者（n = 39）	ORR：46.2%
Kawaoka et al^[80]	2018	回顾性研究	5-FU：低剂量顺铂（6 mg/d）+5-氟尿嘧啶（300 mg/d），连续输注；顺铂：65 mg/m²，团注	5-FU（n = 102） vs顺铂（n = 51）	ORR：32.4% vs 15.7%，P = 0.033 OS：9.1 vs 8.7个月，P = 0.4917 PFS：3.9 vs 4.9个月，P = 0.4
Song et al^[89]	2015	多中心回顾性研究	HAIC：5-氟尿嘧啶（第1~3天500 mg/m²，5 h）+顺铂（第2天60 mg/m²，2 h），加或不加表柔比星（第1天35 mg/m²）；索拉非尼：400 mg/d；伴PVT患者	HAIC（n = 50） vs索拉非尼（n = 60）	OS：7.1 vs 5.1个月，P = 0.011 TTP：3.3 vs 2.1个月，P = 0.034 DCR：90% vs 45%，P < 0.001 ORR：24.0% vs 13.3%，P = 0.214
Choi et al^[90]	2018	随机、对照、多中心、前瞻性研究	HAIC：5-氟尿嘧啶（第1~3天500 mg/m²，5 h）+顺铂（第2天60 mg/m²，2 h）；索拉非尼：800 mg/d；伴PVT患者	HAIC（n = 29） vs索拉非尼（n = 29）	OS：14.9 vs 7.2个月，P = 0.012 TTP：4.4 vs 2.7个月，P = 0.010 ORR：27.6% vs 3.4%，P < 0.001
Lyu et al^[84]	2018	回顾性研究	FOLFOX-HAIC：奥沙利铂，130 mg/m²，3 h；亚叶酸：200 mg/m²，2 h；氟尿嘧啶：400 mg/m²团注，后2 400 mg/m²连续输注46 h；索拉非尼：400 mg/d	HAIC（n = 180） vs索拉非尼（n = 232）	OS：14.5 vs 7.0个月，P < 0.001 PFS：7.1 vs 3.3个月，P < 0.001 ORR：47.8% vs 9.1%，P < 0.001 DCR：79.4% vs 51.7%，P < 0.001
Lyu et al^[91]	2022	前瞻性、随机、Ⅲ期研究	FOLFOX-HAIC：同上；索拉非尼：400 mg/d	HAIC（n = 130） vs索拉非尼（n = 132）	OS：13.9 vs 8.2个月，P < 0.001 ORR：31.5% vs 1.5%，P < 0.001
Kudo et al^[86]	2018	随机、开放标签、多中心研究	HAIC：顺铂：20 mg/m²，第1与第8天5-氟尿嘧啶：330 mg/m²，第1~5天与第8~12天，连续输注；索拉非尼：400 mg/d；	索拉非尼+HAIC（n = 103） vs索拉非尼（n = 103）	OS：11.8 vs 11.5个月，P = 0.955
Ikeda et al^[92]	2016	随机、开放标签、多中心、Ⅱ期试验	HAIC：顺铂（65 mg/m²），团注；索拉非尼：400 mg/d	索拉非尼+HAIC（n = 66） vs索拉非尼（n = 42）	OS：10.6 vs 8.7个月，P = 0.031
He et al^[93]	2019	随机、开放标签、多中心研究	mFOLFOX-HAIC：奥沙利铂，85 mg/m²，2 h；亚叶酸，400 mg/m²，1 h；氟尿嘧啶，400 mg/m²团注，后2 400 mg/m²超过46 h；索拉非尼：400 mg/d；伴PVT患者	索拉非尼+HAIC（n = 125） vs索拉非尼（n = 122）	OS：13.4 vs 7.1个月，P < 0.001 PFS：7.0 vs 2.6个月，P < 0.001 ORR：40.8% vs 2.46%，P < 0.001
Liang et al^[94]	2021	回顾性研究	mFOLFOX-HAIC：同上；索拉非尼：400 mg/d	索拉非尼+HAIC（n = 99） vs HAIC（n = 126）	OS：12.9 vs 10.5个月，P = 0.025 PFS：7.0 vs 5.3个月，P = 0.046 DCR：74.8% vs 61.1%，P = 0.030
He et al^[85]	2017	前瞻性、非随机、Ⅱ期研究	mFOLFOX-HAIC：同上；cTACE：50 mg表柔比星+ 50 mg洛铂+6 mg丝裂霉素C+碘油	HAIC（n = 38） vs cTACE（n = 41）	ORR：52.6% vs 9.8%，P < 0.001 DCR：83.8% vs 52.5%，P = 0.004 TTP：5.87 vs 3.6个月，P = 0.015
Li et al^[95]	2022	前瞻性、随机、多中心、开放标签、Ⅲ期研究	FOLFOX-HAIC：同上；cTACE：50 mg表柔比星+ 50 mg洛铂+碘油，肿瘤> 7 cm；	HAIC（n = 159） vs cTACE（n = 156）	OS：23.1 vs 16.1个月，P < 0.001 PFS：9.6 vs 5.4个月，P < 0.001 ORR：46.0% vs 18.0%，P < 0.001

表3 HAIC采用不同药物、不同灌药方式的临床研究

研究者	时间	研究设计	药物方案	研究人群	疗效评价
Ikeda et al^[79]	2013	单臂、多中心、Ⅱ期研究	顺铂（65 mg/m²），团注；	伴PVT患者（n = 25）	ORR：28.0% PFS：3.6个月 OS：7.6个月
Chen et al^[88]	2020	前瞻性、单臂、Ⅱ期研究	奥沙利铂（100 mg/m²，连续输注4 h）和雷替曲塞（3 mg/m²，连续输注1 h）	伴有PVT的TACE难治性患者（n = 39）	ORR：46.2%
Kawaoka et al^[80]	2018	回顾性研究	5-FU：低剂量顺铂（6 mg/d）+5-氟尿嘧啶（300 mg/d），连续输注；顺铂：65 mg/m²，团注	5-FU（n = 102） vs顺铂（n = 51）	ORR：32.4% vs 15.7%，P = 0.033 OS：9.1 vs 8.7个月，P = 0.4917 PFS：3.9 vs 4.9个月，P = 0.4
Song et al^[89]	2015	多中心回顾性研究	HAIC：5-氟尿嘧啶（第1~3天500 mg/m²，5 h）+顺铂（第2天60 mg/m²，2 h），加或不加表柔比星（第1天35 mg/m²）；索拉非尼：400 mg/d；伴PVT患者	HAIC（n = 50） vs索拉非尼（n = 60）	OS：7.1 vs 5.1个月，P = 0.011 TTP：3.3 vs 2.1个月，P = 0.034 DCR：90% vs 45%，P < 0.001 ORR：24.0% vs 13.3%，P = 0.214
Choi et al^[90]	2018	随机、对照、多中心、前瞻性研究	HAIC：5-氟尿嘧啶（第1~3天500 mg/m²，5 h）+顺铂（第2天60 mg/m²，2 h）；索拉非尼：800 mg/d；伴PVT患者	HAIC（n = 29） vs索拉非尼（n = 29）	OS：14.9 vs 7.2个月，P = 0.012 TTP：4.4 vs 2.7个月，P = 0.010 ORR：27.6% vs 3.4%，P < 0.001
Lyu et al^[84]	2018	回顾性研究	FOLFOX-HAIC：奥沙利铂，130 mg/m²，3 h；亚叶酸：200 mg/m²，2 h；氟尿嘧啶：400 mg/m²团注，后2 400 mg/m²连续输注46 h；索拉非尼：400 mg/d	HAIC（n = 180） vs索拉非尼（n = 232）	OS：14.5 vs 7.0个月，P < 0.001 PFS：7.1 vs 3.3个月，P < 0.001 ORR：47.8% vs 9.1%，P < 0.001 DCR：79.4% vs 51.7%，P < 0.001
Lyu et al^[91]	2022	前瞻性、随机、Ⅲ期研究	FOLFOX-HAIC：同上；索拉非尼：400 mg/d	HAIC（n = 130） vs索拉非尼（n = 132）	OS：13.9 vs 8.2个月，P < 0.001 ORR：31.5% vs 1.5%，P < 0.001
Kudo et al^[86]	2018	随机、开放标签、多中心研究	HAIC：顺铂：20 mg/m²，第1与第8天5-氟尿嘧啶：330 mg/m²，第1~5天与第8~12天，连续输注；索拉非尼：400 mg/d；	索拉非尼+HAIC（n = 103） vs索拉非尼（n = 103）	OS：11.8 vs 11.5个月，P = 0.955
Ikeda et al^[92]	2016	随机、开放标签、多中心、Ⅱ期试验	HAIC：顺铂（65 mg/m²），团注；索拉非尼：400 mg/d	索拉非尼+HAIC（n = 66） vs索拉非尼（n = 42）	OS：10.6 vs 8.7个月，P = 0.031
He et al^[93]	2019	随机、开放标签、多中心研究	mFOLFOX-HAIC：奥沙利铂，85 mg/m²，2 h；亚叶酸，400 mg/m²，1 h；氟尿嘧啶，400 mg/m²团注，后2 400 mg/m²超过46 h；索拉非尼：400 mg/d；伴PVT患者	索拉非尼+HAIC（n = 125） vs索拉非尼（n = 122）	OS：13.4 vs 7.1个月，P < 0.001 PFS：7.0 vs 2.6个月，P < 0.001 ORR：40.8% vs 2.46%，P < 0.001
Liang et al^[94]	2021	回顾性研究	mFOLFOX-HAIC：同上；索拉非尼：400 mg/d	索拉非尼+HAIC（n = 99） vs HAIC（n = 126）	OS：12.9 vs 10.5个月，P = 0.025 PFS：7.0 vs 5.3个月，P = 0.046 DCR：74.8% vs 61.1%，P = 0.030
He et al^[85]	2017	前瞻性、非随机、Ⅱ期研究	mFOLFOX-HAIC：同上；cTACE：50 mg表柔比星+ 50 mg洛铂+6 mg丝裂霉素C+碘油	HAIC（n = 38） vs cTACE（n = 41）	ORR：52.6% vs 9.8%，P < 0.001 DCR：83.8% vs 52.5%，P = 0.004 TTP：5.87 vs 3.6个月，P = 0.015
Li et al^[95]	2022	前瞻性、随机、多中心、开放标签、Ⅲ期研究	FOLFOX-HAIC：同上；cTACE：50 mg表柔比星+ 50 mg洛铂+碘油，肿瘤> 7 cm；	HAIC（n = 159） vs cTACE（n = 156）	OS：23.1 vs 16.1个月，P < 0.001 PFS：9.6 vs 5.4个月，P < 0.001 ORR：46.0% vs 18.0%，P < 0.001

[1]	Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: Globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71(3):209-249.
[2]	Lurje I, Czigany Z, Bednarsch J, et al. Treatment strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma-a multidisciplinary approach[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2019 Mar 22, 20(6): 1465.
[3]	Forner A, Reig M, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Lancet, 2018 Mar 31, 391(10127): 1301-1314.
[4]	Reig M, Forner A, Rimola J, et al. BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: the 2022 update[J].J Hepatol, 2022, 76(3): 681-693.
[5]	European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL clinical practice guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2018, 69(1): 182-236.
[6]	Marrero JA, Kulik LM, Sirlin CB, et al. Diagnosis, staging, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2018 practice guidance by the American association for the study of liver diseases[J]. Hepatology, 2018, 68(2): 723-750.
[7]	Liapi E, Geschwind JF. Intra-arterial therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma: where do we stand?[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2010, 17(5): 1234-1246.
[8]	Llovet JM, De Baere T, Kulik L, et al. Locoregional therapies in the era of molecular and immune treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021, 18(5): 293-313.
[9]	Chen CT, Liu TH, Shao YY, et al. Revisiting hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2021, 22(23): 12880.
[10]	Cheng Z, Wei-Qi J, Jin D. New insights on sorafenib resistance in liver cancer with correlation of individualized therapy[J]. Biochim Biophys Acta Rev Cancer, 2020, 1874(1): 188382.
[11]	Lu J, Zhao M, Arai Y, et al. Clinical practice of transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: consensus statement from an international expert panel of international society of multidisciplinary interventional oncology (ISMIO)[J]. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr, 2021, 10(5): 661-671.
[12]	Park JW, Chen M, Colombo M, et al. Global patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma management from diagnosis to death: the BRIDGE study[J]. Liver Int, 2015, 35(9): 2155-2166.
[13]	Facciorusso A. Drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: current state of the art[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2018, 24(2): 161-169.
[14]	Cheng AL, Amarapurkar D, Chao Y, et al. Re-evaluating transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: consensus recommendations and review by an international expert panel[J]. Liver Int, 2014, 34(2): 174-183.
[15]	Marelli L, Stigliano R, Triantos C, et al. Transarterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: Which technique is more effective? A systematic review of cohort and randomized studies[J]. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2007, 30(1): 6-25.
[16]	石钦, 周晨, 刘家成, 等. 载药栓塞材料在肝癌治疗中的应用[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2020, 8(4): 364-369.
[17]	Lammer J, Malagari K, Vogl T, et al. Prospective randomized study of doxorubicin-eluting-bead embolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the precision v study[J]. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2010, 33(1): 41-52.
[18]	Song MJ, Chun HJ, Song DS, et al. Comparative study between doxorubicin-eluting beads and conventional transarterial chemoembolization for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2012, 57(6): 1244-1250.
[19]	Kang YJ, Lee BC, Kim JK, et al. Conventional versus small doxorubicin-eluting bead transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for treating barcelona clinic liver cancer stage 0/a hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2020, 43(1): 55-64.
[20]	Shi Q, Liu J, Li T, et al. Comparison of DEB-TACE and cTACE for the initial treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma beyond up-to-seven criteria: a single-center propensity score matching analysis[J]. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol, 2022, 46(2210-741X (Electronic)): 101893.
[21]	Shi Q, Chen D, Zhou C, et al. Drug-eluting beads versus lipiodol transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of hypovascular hepatocellular carcinoma: a single-center retrospective study[J]. Cancer Manag Res, 2020, 12(1179-1322 (Print)): 5461-5468.
[22]	Golfieri R, Giampalma E, Renzulli M, et al. Randomised controlled trial of doxorubicin-eluting beads vs conventional chemoembolisation for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Br J Cancer, 2014, 111(2): 255-264.
[23]	Zhang ZS, Li HZ, Ma C, et al. Conventional versus drug-eluting beads chemoembolization for infiltrative hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparison of efficacy and safety[J]. BMC Cancer, 2019, 19(1): 1162.
[24]	Zhang L, Sun JH, Ji JS, et al. Imaging changes and clinical complications after drug-eluting bead versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: Multicenter study[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2021, 217(4): 933-943.
[25]	Kloeckner R, Weinmann A, Prinz F, et al. Conventional transarterial chemoembolization versus drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. BMC Cancer, 2015, 15(1471-2407 (Electronic)): 465.
[26]	Bargellini I, Lorenzoni V, Lorenzoni G, et al. Duration of response after DEB-TACE compared to lipiodol-TACE in HCC-naive patients: a propensity score matching analysis[J]. Eur Radiol, 2021, 31(10): 7512-7522.
[27]	Brown KT, Do RK, Gonen M, et al. Randomized trial of hepatic artery embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using doxorubicin-eluting microspheres compared with embolization with microspheres alone[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2016, 34(1527-7755 (Electronic)): 2046.
[28]	Pleguezuelo M, Marelli L, Misseri M, et al. TACE versus TAE as therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Expert Rev Anticanc, 2008, 8(1744-8328 (Electronic)): 1623-1641.
[29]	赵东旭, 张磊, 姜小庆, 等. HAIC是老技术还是新方法——理性看待肝动脉灌注化疗[J]. 介入放射学杂志, 2022, 31: 2-8.
[30]	黄鹏, 王万胜, 张磊, 等. 经动脉放射栓塞治疗肝细胞癌的研究进展[J]. 中华放射学杂志, 2021, 55: 773-777.
[31]	Sergio A, Cristofori C, Cardin R, et al. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): the role of angiogenesis and invasiveness[J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2008, 103(1572-0241 (Electronic)): 914-921.
[32]	Lencioni R, Llovet JM, Han G, et al. Sorafenib or placebo plus TACE with doxorubicin-eluting beads for intermediate stage HCC: the SPACE trial[J]. J Hepatol, 2016, 64(5): 1090-1098.
[33]	Meyer T, Fox R, Ma YT, et al. Sorafenib in combination with transarterial chemoembolisation in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (TACE 2): a randomised placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2017, 2(8): 565-575.
[34]	Kudo M, Han G, Finn RS, et al. Brivanib as adjuvant therapy to transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized phase iii trial[J]. Hepatology, 2014, 60(5): 1697-1707.
[35]	Kudo M, Cheng AL, Park JW, et al. Orantinib versus placebo combined with transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (ORIENTAL): A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study[J]. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2018, 3(1): 37-46.
[36]	Kudo M, Arizumi T. Transarterial chemoembolization in combination with a molecular targeted agent: Lessons learned from negative trials (Post-TACE, BRISK-TA, SPACE, ORIENTAL, and TACE-2)[J]. Oncology, 2017, 93 Suppl 1(1423-0232 (Electronic)): 127-134.
[37]	Kudo M, Ueshima K, Ikeda M, et al. Randomised, multicentre prospective trial of transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) plus sorafenib as compared with TACE alone in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: TACTICS trial[J]. Gut, 2020, 69(8): 1492-1501.
[38]	Wang Z, Wang E, Bai W, et al. Exploratory analysis to identify candidates benefitting from combination therapy of transarterial chemoembolization and sorafenib for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective observational study[J]. Liver Cancer, 2020, 9(3): 308-325.
[39]	El-Khoueiry AB, Sangro B, Yau T, et al. Nivolumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (Checkmate 040): an open-label, non-comparative, phase 1/2 dose escalation and expansion trial[J]. Lancet, 2017, 389(10088): 2492-2502.
[40]	Zhu AX, Finn RS, Edeline J, et al. Pembrolizumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma previously treated with sorafenib (KEYNOTE-224): a non-randomised, open-label phase 2 trial[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2018, 19(7): 940-952.
[41]	Galle PR, Finn RS, Qin S, et al. Patient-reported outcomes with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (IMbrave150): An open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2021, 22(7): 991-1001.
[42]	Ju S, Zhou C, Yang C, et al. Apatinib plus camrelizumab with/without chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma:a real-world experience of a single center[J]. Front Oncol, 2021, 11(2234-943X (Print)): 835889.
[43]	Cai M, Huang W, Huang J, et al. Transarterial chemoembolization combined with lenvatinib plus PD-1 inhibitor for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study[J]. Front Immunol, 2022, 13(1664-3224 (Electronic)): 848387.
[44]	Chen S, Wu Z, Shi F, et al. Lenvatinib plus TACE with or without pembrolizumab for the treatment of initially unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma harbouring PD-L1 expression:a retrospective study[J]. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2022,148(8): 2115-2125.
[45]	Zheng L, Fang S, Wu F, et al. Efficacy and safety of TACE combined with sorafenib plus immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of intermediate and advanced TACE-refractory hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study[J]. Front Mol Biosci, 2020, 7(2296-889X (Print)): 609322.
[46]	Shi Q, Li T, Huang S, et al. Transcatheter arterial embolization containing donafenib induces anti-angiogenesis and tumoricidal CD8(+) T-cell infiltration in rabbit VX2 liver tumor[J]. Cancer Manag Res, 2021, 13(1179-1322 (Print)): 6943-6952.
[47]	Zhou C, Shi Q, Liu J, et al. Effect of inhibiting tumor angiogenesis after embolization in the treatment of HCC with apatinib-loaded p(n-isopropyl-acrylamide-co-butyl methyl acrylate) temperature-sensitive nanogel[J]. J Hepatocell Carcinoma, 2020, 7(2253-5969 (Print)): 447-456.
[48]	Shi Q, Lu Y, Huang S, et al. Apatinib-loaded callispheres beads for embolization in a rabbit VX2 liver tumor: characterization in vitro, pharmacokinetics and tumor response in vivo[J]. Drug Deliv, 2020, 27(1): 1301-1307.
[49]	Zhou C, Yao Q, Zhang H, et al. Combining transcatheter arterial embolization with iodized oil containing apatinib inhibits HCC growth and metastasis[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 2964.
[50]	Chao Y, Chung YH, Han GH, et al. The combination of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and sorafenib is well tolerated and effective in Asian patients with hepatocellular carcinoma:final results of the START trial[J]. Int J Cancer, 2015, 136(6): 1458-1467.
[51]	Ding X, Sun W, Li W, et al. Transarterial chemoembolization plus lenvatinib versus transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib as first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus:a prospective randomized study[J]. Cancer-Am Cancer Soc, 2021, 127(20): 3782-3793.
[52]	Facciorusso A, Bargellini I, Cela M, et al. Comparison between Y90 radioembolization plus sorafenib and Y90 radioembolization alone in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score analysis[J]. Cancers, 2020, 12(4): 897.
[53]	Ricke J, Klumpen HJ, Amthauer H, et al. Impact of combined selective internal radiation therapy and sorafenib on survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2019, 71(6): 1164-1174.
[54]	Labadie K, Sham JG. Adjuvant transcatheter arterial infusion therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: Not yet for everybody[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2020, 27(11): 4070-4072.
[55]	Wang Z, Ren Z, Chen Y, et al. Adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization for HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma after resection: a randomized controlled study[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2018, 24(9): 2074-2081.
[56]	Tong Y, Li Z, Liang Y, et al. Postoperative adjuvant TACE for patients of hepatocellular carcinoma in AJCC stageⅠ: friend or foe? A propensity score analysis[J]. Oncotarget, 2017, 8(16): 26671-26678.
[57]	Sun JJ, Wang K, Zhang CZ, et al. Postoperative adjuvant transcatheter arterial chemoembolization after R0 hepatectomy improves outcomes of patients who have hepatocellular carcinoma with microvascular invasion[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2016, 23(4): 1344-1351.
[58]	Ye JZ, Chen JZ, Li ZH, et al. Efficacy of postoperative adjuvant transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with microvascular invasion[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2017, 23(41): 7415-7424.
[59]	Chen W, Ma T, Zhang J, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization after curative resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. HPB (Oxford), 2020, 22(6): 795-808.
[60]	Jiang JH, Guo Z, Lu HF, et al. Adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization after curative resection of hepatocellular carcinoma:propensity score analysis[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2015, 21(15): 4627-4634.
[61]	Xie H, Tian S, Cui L, et al. Adjuvant trans-arterial chemoembolization after hepatectomy significantly improves the prognosis of low-risk patients with R0-stage hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Cancer Manag Res, 2019, 11(1179-1322 (Print)): 4065-4073.
[62]	Piscaglia F, Ogasawara S. Patient selection for transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma: Importance of benefit/risk assessment[J]. Liver Cancer, 2018, 7(1): 104-119.
[63]	Kadalayil L, Benini R, Pallan L, et al. A simple prognostic scoring system for patients receiving transarterial embolisation for hepatocellular cancer[J]. Ann Oncol, 2013, 24(10): 2565-2570.
[64]	Hucke F, Pinter M, Graziadei I, et al. How to state suitability and start transarterial chemoembolization in patients with intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2014, 61(6): 1287-1296.
[65]	Pinato DJ, Arizumi T, Allara E, et al. Validation of the hepatoma arterial embolization prognostic score in European and Asian populations and proposed modification[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2015, 13(6): 1204-1208, e1202.
[66]	Park Y, Kim SU, Kim BK, et al. Addition of tumor multiplicity improves the prognostic performance of the hepatoma arterial-embolization prognostic score[J]. Liver Int, 2016, 36(1): 100-107.
[67]	Kim BK, Shim JH, Kim SU, et al. Risk prediction for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing chemoembolization: development of a prediction model[J]. Liver Int, 2016, 36(1): 92-99.
[68]	Xu L, Peng ZW, Chen MS, et al. Prognostic nomogram for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization[J]. J Hepatol, 2015, 63(1): 122-130.
[69]	Cappelli A, Cucchetti A, Cabibbo G, et al. Refining prognosis after trans-arterial chemo-embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Liver Int, 2016, 36(5): 729-736.
[70]	Lee IC, Hung YW, Liu CA, et al. A new ALBI-based model to predict survival after transarterial chemoembolization for bclc stage b hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Liver Int, 2019, 39(9): 1704-1712.
[71]	Wang Q, Xia D, Bai W, et al. Development of a prognostic score for recommended TACE candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicentre observational study[J]. J Hepatol, 2019, 70(5): 893-903.
[72]	Lanza Ea-O, Masetti C, Messana G, et al. Sarcopenia as a predictorof survival in patients undergoing bland transarterial embolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. PLoS One, 2020, 15(6): e0232371.
[73]	Loosen SH, Schulze-Hagen M, Bruners P, et al. Sarcopenia isa negative prognostic factor in patients undergoing transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatic malignancies[J]. Cancers (Basel), 2019, 11(10): 1503.
[74]	He C, Zhang Y, Cai Z, et al. The prognostic and predictive value of the combination of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who receive transarterial chemoembolization therapy[J]. Cancer Manag Res, 2019, 11(1179-1322 (Print)): 1391-1400.
[75]	Kim J, Choi SJ, Lee SH, et al. Predicting survival using pretreatment ct for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with transarterial chemoembolization: comparison of models using radiomics[J]. Am J Roentgenol, 2018, 211(5): 1026-1034.
[76]	Meng XP, Wang YC, Ju S, et al. Radiomics analysis on multiphase contrast-enhanced ct: a survival prediction tool in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing transarterial chemoembolization[J]. Front Oncol, 2020, 10(2234-943X (Print)): 1196.
[77]	Obi S, Sato S, Kawai T. Current status of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy[J]. Liver Cancer, 2015, 4(3): 188-199.
[78]	文良志, 肖潇, 颜綦先, 等. 肝细胞癌血管介入治疗临床研究新认知[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2021, 37: 1761-1764.
[79]	Ikeda M, Okusaka T, Furuse J, et al. A multi-institutional phase Ⅱtrial of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with cisplatin for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis[J]. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol, 2013, 72(2): 463-470.
[80]	Kawaoka T, Aikata H, Kobayashi T, et al. Comparison of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy between 5-fluorouracil-based continuous infusion chemotherapy and low-dose cisplatin monotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Hepatol Res, 2018, 48(13): 1118-1130.
[81]	Chung YH, Song IH, Song BC, et al. Combined therapy consisting of intraarterial cisplatin infusion and systemic interferon-alpha for hepatocellular carcinoma patients with major portal vein thrombosis or distant metastasis[J]. Cancer-Am Cancer Soc, 2000, 88(9): 1986-1991.
[82]	石明, 何敏柯, 陈敏山. 肝动脉灌注化疗的现状与前景[J].外科理论与实践, 2020, 25: 10-14.
[83]	Qin S, Bai Y, Lim HY, et al. Randomized, multicenter, open-label study of oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil/leucovorin versus doxorubicin as palliative chemotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma from asia[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2013, 31(28): 3501-3508.
[84]	Lyu N, Kong Y, Mu L, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil/leucovorin vs. Sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2018, 69(1): 60-69.
[85]	He MK, Le Y, Li QJ, et al. Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy using mfolfox versus transarterial chemoembolization for massive unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective non-randomized study[J]. Chin J Cancer, 2017, 36(1): 83.
[86]	Kudo M, Ueshima K, Yokosuka O, et al. Sorafenib plus low-dose cisplatin and fluorouracil hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus sorafenib alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (SILIUS): a randomised, open label, phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2018, 3(6): 424-432.
[87]	刘晓侃, 张超杰, 赵辉. 肝动脉灌注化疗及其联合治疗在中晚期肝细胞癌中的应用进展[J]. 肝脏, 2021, 26: 1411-1414.
[88]	Chen S, Zhang K, Liu W, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin plus raltitrexed in patients with intermediate and advanced stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a phaseⅡ, single-arm, prospective study[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2020, 134 (1879-0852 (Electronic)): 90-98.
[89]	Song DS, Song MJ, Bae SH, et al. A comparative study between sorafenib and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis[J].J Gastroenterol, 2015, 50(4): 445-454.
[90]	Choi JH, Chung WJ, Bae SH, et al. Randomized, prospective, comparative study on the effects and safety of sorafenib vs. hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis[J]. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol, 2018, 82(3): 469-478.
[91]	Lyu N, Wang X, Li JB, et al. Arterial chemotherapy of oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a biomolecular exploratory, randomized, phase Ⅲ trial (FOHAIC-1)[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2022, 40(5): 468-480.
[92]	Ikeda M, Shimizu S, Sato T, et al. Sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with cisplatin versus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Randomized phase Ⅱ trial[J]. Ann Oncol, 2016, 27(11): 2090-2096.
[93]	He M, Li Q, Zou R, et al. Sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin vs sorafenib alone for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein invasion: a randomized clinical trial[J]. JAMA Oncol, 2019, 5(7): 953-960.
[94]	Liang RB, Zhao Y, He MK, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin with or without sorafenib as initial treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Front Oncol, 2021, 11 (2234-943X (Print)): 619461.
[95]	Li QJ, He MK, Chen HW, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus transarterial chemoembolization for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized phase iii trial[J].J Clin Oncol, 2022, 40(2): 150-160.
[96]	Terashima T, Yamashita T, Arai K, et al. Beneficial effect of maintaining hepatic reserve during chemotherapy on the outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Liver Cancer, 2017, 6(2235-1795 (Print)): 236-249.
[97]	Kim HY, Kim JD, Bae SH, et al. A comparative study of high-dose hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and transarterial chemoembolization using doxorubicin for intractable, advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Korean J Hepatol, 2010, 16(4): 355-361.
[98]	Sumie S, Yamashita F, Ando E, et al. Interventional radiology for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparison of hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy and transcatheter arterial lipiodol chemoembolization[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2003, 181(5): 1327-1334.
[99]	Li S, Lyu N, Han X, et al. Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy using fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin versus transarterial chemoembolization as initial treatment for locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-matching analysis[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2021, 32(9): 1267-1276, e1261.
[100]	Hu J, Bao Q, Cao G, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy using oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil versus transarterial chemoembolization/embolization for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with major portal vein tumor thrombosis[J]. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2020, 43(7): 996-1005.
[101]	Kim JH, Yoon HK, Kim SY, et al. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization vs. chemoinfusion for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with major portal vein thrombosis[J]. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2009, 29(12): 1291-1298.
[102]	Kudo M, Matsui O, Izumi N, et al. JSH consensus-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2014 update by the liver cancer study group of Japan[J]. Liver Cancer, 2014, 3(3-4): 458-468.
[103]	Hatooka M, Kawaoka T, Aikata H, et al. Comparison of outcome of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma refractory to transcatheter arterial chemoembolization[J]. Anticancer Res, 2016, 36(7): 3523-3529.
[104]	Ikeda M, Mitsunaga S, Shimizu S, et al. Efficacy of sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma refractory to transcatheter arterial chemoembolization[J]. J Gastroenterol, 2014, 49(5): 932-940.
[105]	Salem R. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for large hepatocellular carcinoma: Ready for prime time?[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2022, 40(2): 118-119.
[106]	Paul SB, Sharma H. Role of transcatheter intra-arterial therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Clin Exp Hepatol, 2014, 4(Suppl 3): S112-121.
[107]	Sacco R, Conte C, Tumino E, et al. Transarterial radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: A review[J]. J Hepatocell Carcinoma, 2016, 3: 25-29.
[108]	Lambert B, Mertens J, Sturm EJ, et al. 99mTc-labelled macroaggregated albumin (MAA) scintigraphy for planning treatment with 90Y microspheres[J]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2010, 37(12): 2328-2333.
[109]	Garin E, Lenoir L, Rolland Y, et al. Dosimetry based on 99mTc-macroaggregated albumin SPECT/CT accurately predicts tumor response and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with 90Y-loaded glass microspheres: preliminary results[J]. J Nucl Med, 2012, 53(2): 255-263.
[110]	Ilhan H, Goritschan A, Paprottka P, et al. Systematic evaluation of tumoral 99mTc-MAA uptake using SPECT and SPECT/CT in 502 patients before 90Y radioembolization[J]. Nucl Med, 2015, 56(3): 333-338.
[111]	Dancey JE, Shepherd FA, Paul K, et al. Treatment of nonresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with intrahepatic 90Y-microspheres[J]. J Nucl Med, 2000, 41(10): 1673-1681.
[112]	Strigari L, Sciuto R, Rea S, et al. Efficacy and toxicity related to treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with 90Y-sir spheres: radiobiologic considerations[J]. J Nucl Med, 2010, 51(9):1377-1385.
[113]	Jakobs TF, Saleem S, Atassi B, et al. Fibrosis, portal hypertension, and hepatic volume changes induced by intra-arterial radiotherapy with 90-yttrium microspheres[J]. Dig Dis Sci, 2008, 53(9): 2556-2563.
[114]	Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Kulik L, et al. Radioembolization results in longer time-to-progression and reduced toxicity compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Gastroenterology, 2011, 140(2): 497-507, e492.
[115]	Salem R, Gordon AC, Mouli S, et al. Y90 radioembolization significantly prolongs time to progression compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Gastroenterology, 2016, 151(6): 1155-1163.
[116]	Kooby DA, Egnatashvili V, Srinivasan S, et al. Comparison of yttrium-90 radioembolization and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2010, 21(2): 224-230.
[117]	Carr BI, Kondragunta V, Buch SC, et al. Therapeutic equivalence in survival for hepatic arterial chemoembolization and yttrium 90 microsphere treatments in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A two-cohort study[J]. Cancer-Am Cancer Soc, 2010, 116(5): 1305-1314.
[118]	Moreno LE, Yang JD, Sanchez W, et al. Efficacy and safety of transarterial radioembolization versus chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2013, 36(3): 714-723.
[119]	Dhondt E, Lambert B, Hermie L, et al. 90Y radioembolization versus drug-eluting bead chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: results from the trace phaseⅡ randomized controlled trial[J]. Radiology, 2022, 303(3): 699-710.
[120]	El FA, Ertle J, El DA, et al. In intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma: radioembolization with yttrium 90 or chemoembolization?[J]. Liver Int, 2015, 35(2): 627-635.
[121]	Salem R, Gilbertsen M, Butt Z, et al. Increased quality of life among hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with radioembolization, compared with chemoembolization[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2013, 11(10): 1358-1365,e1351.
[122]	Kulik LM, Carr BI, Mulcahy MF, et al. Safety and efficacy of 90Y radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with and without portal vein thrombosis[J]. Hepatology, 2008, 47(1): 71-81.
[123]	Vilgrain V, Pereira H, Assenat E, et al. Efficacy and safety of selective internal radiotherapy with yttrium-90 resin microspheres compared with sorafenib in locally advanced and inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (SARAH): an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2017, 18(12): 1624-1636.
[124]	Chow PKH, Gandhi M, Tan SB, et al. Sirvenib: Selective internal radiation therapy versus sorafenib in Asia-pacific patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2018, 36(19): 1913-1921.
[125]	Ricke J, Bulla K, Kolligs F, et al. Safety and toxicity of radioembolization plus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: analysis of the European multicentre trial soramic[J]. Liver Int, 2015, 35(2): 620-626.
[126]	Senan S, Smit EF. Design of clinical trials of radiation combined with antiangiogenic therapy[J]. Oncologist, 2007, 12(4): 465-477.

[1]	丁建民, 秦正义, 张翔, 周燕, 周洪雨, 王彦冬, 经翔. 超声造影与普美显磁共振成像对具有高危因素的≤3 cm肝结节进行LI-RADS分类诊断的前瞻性研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2023, 20(09): 930-938.
[2]	李淼, 朱连华, 韩鹏, 姜波, 费翔. 高帧频超声造影评价肝细胞癌血管形态与风险因素的研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2023, 20(09): 911-915.
[3]	董杰, 杨松, 杨浩, 陈翔, 张万里. 乙酰辅酶A羧化酶2基因高甲基化与肝细胞癌临床病理因素和生存期的关系[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 433-437.
[4]	黄威, 刘启, 陈流华, 滕茶香, 区喆建, 刘韩笑, 陈健聪, 张昆松. 新定义的可预测肝癌预后的焦亡相关lncRNA模型[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 357-365.
[5]	王荣昌, 欧奇峰, 黄晋杰, 王彩琴, 汪谦, 黄晓卉. miR-145-5p在肝细胞癌中的表达及其临床意义[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 197-202.
[6]	郑希彦, 周正, 何方平, 林志群, 杜飞, 谢琴, 王少平, 史宪杰. 代谢综合征与乙型肝炎病毒相关性肝细胞癌预后的危险因素分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 104-109.
[7]	马铭秀, 徐锋, 谢铠岭, 郭亚明, 卢潼辉, 戴朝六. 术前碱性磷酸酶-前白蛋白比值对肝细胞癌切除术预后的评估价值[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 99-103.
[8]	尹宏祥, 段家康, 江博文, 谈燚. 全身免疫炎症指数联合预后营养指数对接受根治性切除术的肝细胞癌的预后价值研究[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 93-98.
[9]	曹亚娟, 黎兵华, 余德才. 转化治疗联合Laennec入路机器人右半肝切除治疗进展期肝癌[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(02): 116-119.
[10]	吴晨瑞, 廖锐, 贺强, 潘龙, 黄平, 曹洪祥, 赵益, 王永琛, 黄俊杰, 孙睿锐. MDT模式下肝动脉灌注化疗联合免疫靶向治疗肝细胞癌多处转移一例[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 713-716.
[11]	李斌奎. 不可切除肝内胆管细胞癌的转化治疗[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 511-516.
[12]	吴凤芸, 滕鑫, 刘连娟. 高帧频超声造影与增强磁共振对不同直径原发性高分化肝细胞癌的诊断价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 404-408.
[13]	胡宝茹, 尚乃舰, 高迪. 中晚期肝细胞癌的DCE-MRI及DWI表现与免疫治疗预后的相关性分析[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 399-403.
[14]	刘中百, 任勇军. 肝细胞癌的介入治疗现状及进展[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(02): 111-115.
[15]	梁伟, 王晓彬, 洪笑阳, 蔡明岳, 梁礼聪, 陈烨, 黄培凯, 刘铭宇, 林立腾, 朱康顺. 原位肝癌小鼠微波消融术后复发模型的构建[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 133-139.

阅读次数

全文

摘要

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

Recent updates in intra-arterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

Recent updates in intra-arterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma