切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华介入放射学电子杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (02) : 177 -183. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2026.02.008

论著

动脉化疗栓塞与灌注化疗分别联合靶免治疗肝细胞癌伴门静脉癌栓的对照研究
董振楠1, 管恒星1, 丁伟2, 王卫东2, 张金星3,(), 周春高3, 祖庆泉3, 施海彬3   
  1. 1 223800 江苏宿迁,南京医科大学附属宿迁第一人民医院介入放射科
    2 214023 江苏无锡,南京医科大学附属无锡第一人民医院介入放射科
    3 210029 江苏南京,南京医科大学第一附属医院介入放射科
  • 收稿日期:2025-12-04 出版日期:2026-05-25
  • 通信作者: 张金星
  • 基金资助:
    江苏省高水平医院结对帮扶建设专项(JDBFSQ202507)

A Comparative Study of TACE versus HAIC Combined with Targeted and Immunotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Portal Vein Tumor Thrombus

Zhennan Dong1, Hengxing Guan1, Wei Ding2, Weidong Wang2, Jinxing Zhang3,(), Chungao Zhou3, Qingquan Zu3, Haibin Shi3   

  1. 1 Department of Interventional Radiology, The Affiliated Suqian First People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suqian 223800, China
    2 Department of Interventional Radiology, The Affiliated Wuxi People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi 214023, China
    3 Department of Interventional Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, China
  • Received:2025-12-04 Published:2026-05-25
  • Corresponding author: Jinxing Zhang
引用本文:

董振楠, 管恒星, 丁伟, 王卫东, 张金星, 周春高, 祖庆泉, 施海彬. 动脉化疗栓塞与灌注化疗分别联合靶免治疗肝细胞癌伴门静脉癌栓的对照研究[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(02): 177-183.

Zhennan Dong, Hengxing Guan, Wei Ding, Weidong Wang, Jinxing Zhang, Chungao Zhou, Qingquan Zu, Haibin Shi. A Comparative Study of TACE versus HAIC Combined with Targeted and Immunotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Portal Vein Tumor Thrombus[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Interventional Radiology(Electronic Edition), 2026, 14(02): 177-183.

目的

探讨经动脉化疗栓塞术(transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, TACE)与经动脉灌注化疗(hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy, HAIC)分别联合靶向及免疫治疗在肝细胞癌(hepatocellular carcinoma, HCC)伴门静脉癌栓(portal vein tumor thrombus, PVTT)患者中的疗效。

方法

回顾性纳入2020年1月至2025年1月三家医疗中心收治的HCC伴PVTT患者,分为TACE联合组与HAIC联合组。经倾向评分匹配后,比较2组客观缓解率(objective response rate, ORR)、无进展生存期(progression-free survival, PFS)、总生存期(overall survival, OS)及不良反应。

结果

匹配后每组纳入患者54例。HAIC联合组和TACE联合组ORR为55.5%和44.4%(P=0.248)。HAIC联合组中位PFS(12.2 vs. 7.8个月,P=0.042)和OS(24.9 vs. 18.1个月,P=0.035)优于TACE联合组。2组Ⅲ/Ⅳ级不良反应发生率为44.4%和37.0%(P=0.555)。

结论

对于HCC伴PVTT患者,HAIC联合靶向及免疫治疗方案相比TACE联合方案显示出更优的生存获益。

Objective

To compare the efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) versus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), each combined with targeted therapy and immunotherapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) complicated by portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT).

Methods

This retrospective multicenter study included patients with HCC and PVTT treated at three centers between January 2020 and January 2025. The study population was grouped into a TACE combination group and an HAIC combination group. After propensity score matching, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events were compared between the two groups.

Results

After matching, 54 patients were included in each group. The ORR was 55.5% in the HAIC-combination group and 44.4% in the TACE-combination group (P=0.248). The HAIC-combination group had a longer median PFS (12.2 vs. 7.8 months, P=0.042) and OS (24.9 vs. 18.1 months, P=0.035) than the TACE-combination group. The incidence of grade Ⅲ/Ⅳ adverse events was 44.4% and 37.0% in the HAIC-and TACE-combination groups, respectively (P=0.555).

Conclusion

For patients with HCC and PVTT, the HAIC-based combination regimen showed better survival outcomes than the TACE-based combination regimen.

图1 患者入组流程图 TACE:经动脉化疗栓塞术;HAIC:肝动脉灌注化疗;HCC:肝细胞癌;ECOG:美国东部肿瘤协作组;PVTT:门静脉癌栓。
表1 使用倾向评分匹配处理前后2组患者基线资料比较[例(%)]
变量 原始数据 倾向评分匹配
TACE联合组(118例) HAIC联合组(67例) P TACE联合组(54例) HAIC联合组(54例) P
年龄 0.516 0.695
≤ 60岁 70(59.3) 40(59.7) 33(61.1) 31(57.4)
> 60岁 48(40.7) 27(40.3) 21(38.9) 23(42.6)
性别 0.529 0.792
男性 101(85.6) 55(82.1) 45(83.3) 46(85.2)
女性 17(14.4) 12(17.9) 9(16.7) 8(14.8)
病因 0.770 0.999
乙肝 104(88.1) 60(89.6) 48(88.9) 48(88.9)
其它原因 14(11.9) 7(10.4) 6(11.1) 6(11.1)
ECOG评分 0.152 0.820
0 76(64.4) 50(74.6) 41(75.9) 42(77.8)
1 42(35.6) 17(25.4) 13(24.1) 12(22.2)
Child Pugh评分 0.096 0.801
5 88(74.6) 57(85.1) 44(81.5) 45(83.3)
6 30(25.4) 10(14.9) 10(18.5) 9(16.7)
AFP 0.188 0.693
≤400 ng/mL 64(54.2) 43(64.2) 32(59.3) 34(63.0)
>400 ng/mL 54(45.8) 24(35.8) 22(40.7) 20(37.0)
肿瘤数目 0.161 0.700
单发 49(37.4) 32(47.8) 25(46.3) 27(50.0)
多发 82(62.6) 35(52.2) 29(53.7) 27(50.0)
肿瘤最大径 0.950 0.699
≤ 7 cm 47(39.8) 27(40.3) 25(46.3) 23(42.6)
> 7 cm 71(60.2) 40(59.7) 29(53.7) 31(57.4)
肝外转移 0.227 0.505
89(75.4) 45(67.2) 42(77.8) 39(72.2)
29(24.6) 22(32.8) 12(22.2) 15(27.8)
PVTT分型 0.045 0.641
Vp1 25(21.2) 9(13.4) 11(20.4) 7(13.0)
Vp2 50(42.4) 19(28.4) 18(33.3) 16(29.6)
Vp3 34(28.8) 26(38.8) 18(33.3) 23(42.6)
Vp4 9(7.6) 11(16.4) 7(13.0) 8(14.8)
靶免联合方案 0.661 0.807
阿替利珠单抗+贝伐珠单抗 67(56.8) 34(50.8) 32(59.3) 29(48.8)
信迪利单抗+贝伐珠单抗类似药 30(25.4) 21(31.3) 15(27.8) 16(31.5)
卡瑞利珠单抗+阿帕替尼 21(17.8) 12(17.9) 7(12.9) 9(20.4)
表2 倾向评分匹配处理前后2组患者肿瘤应答比较
图2 2组患者无进展生存期比较 图2A:匹配前HAIC联合组和TACE联合组中位无进展生存期分别为11.3个月和6.9个月(P=0.059);图2B:匹配后HAIC联合组和TACE联合组中位无进展生存期分别为12.2个月和7.8个月(P=0.042)。TACE:经动脉化疗栓塞术;HAIC:肝动脉灌注化疗。
图3 2组患者生存期比较 图3A:匹配前HAIC联合组和TACE联合组中位生存期分别为21.5个月和17.9个月(P=0.019);图3B:匹配后HAIC联合组和TACE联合组中位生存期分别为24.9个月和18.1个月(P=0.035)。TACE:经动脉化疗栓塞术;HAIC:肝动脉灌注化疗。
表3 2组患者不良事件发生率(Ⅲ/Ⅳ级)比较[例(%)]
[1]
彭淑牖, 王一航, 金赟, 等. 肝癌合并门静脉癌栓的诊疗新视角[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2025, 63(2): 102-106.
[2]
中华人民共和国国家卫生健康委员会医政医管局. 原发性肝癌诊疗指南(2024年版)[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2024, 62(6): 477-503.
[3]
陈荣晨, 柳宗翰, 程树群. 肝癌合并血管侵犯的治疗策略及研究进展[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2025, 34(7): 1331-1339.
[4]
Ren Z, Xu J, Bai Y, et al. Sintilimab plus a bevacizumab biosimilar (IBI305) versus sorafenib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (ORIENT-32): a randomised, open-label, phase 2-3 study[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2021, 22(7): 977-990.
[5]
Finn RS, Galle PR, Ducreux M, et al. Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma with main trunk and/or contralateral portal vein invasion in IMbrave150[J]. Liver Cancer, 2024, 13(6): 655-668.
[6]
Zhang JX, Cheng Y, Wei J, et al. Transarterial chemoembolization combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors plus immune checkpoint inhibitors versus tyrosine kinase inhibitors plus immune checkpoint inhibitors in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with first-or lower-order portal vein tumor thrombosis[J]. Cardiovasc Inter Rad, 2024, 47(6): 751-761.
[7]
中国抗癌协会肿瘤介入学专业委员会. 经动脉灌注化疗药物应用中国专家共识(2025年版)[J]. 介入放射学杂志, 2025, 34(11): 1151-1161.
[8]
Llovet JM, Lencioni R. mRECIST for HCC: performance and novel refinements[J]. J Hepatol, 2020, 72(2): 288-306.
[9]
US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. Common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) version 5[EB/OL]. (2017-11-27)[2026-01-15].
[10]
Zheng K, Zhu X, Fu S, et al. Sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma with major portal vein tumor thrombosis: a randomized trial[J]. Radiology, 2022, 303(2): 455-464.
[11]
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 Inter Rad, 2020, 43(7): 996-1005.
[12]
Cai M, Liang L, Zhang J, et al. Lenvatinib plus drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization with/without hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma larger than 7 cm with major portal vein tumor thrombosis: a multicenter retrospective cohort study[J]. Int J Surg, 2024, 110(12): 7860-7870.
[13]
段正新, 王俊超, 赵卫. 肝动脉灌注化疗治疗晚期肝细胞癌合并门静脉癌栓的研究进展[J]. 介入放射学杂志, 2025, 34(4): 341-346.
[14]
梁斌, 郑传胜. 肝动脉灌注化疗治疗肝细胞癌临床研究进展[J]. 中华放射学杂志, 2024, 58(9): 977-982.
[1] 卢瑞芳, 林欣欣, 王昱, 许芊芊, 吴少虹, 王伟, 陈立达, 程美清. 2023年美国肝病研究学会肝细胞癌筛查指南的验证研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2025, 22(11): 1046-1054.
[2] 杨秀玲, 王文辉, 杨婕, 卢强. 双表型肝细胞癌与经典型肝细胞癌超声造影特征及危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2025, 22(08): 761-767.
[3] 中华医学会器官移植学分会. 肝癌肝移植术后防治复发转移中国专家共识(2025版)[J/OL]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 385-397.
[4] 朱恒美, 董志涛, 房树恒, 贺丹丹, 张晓丽, 周静, 翟健, 耿利, 杨甲梅. 肝癌肝动脉持续灌注化疗患者卧床时限改变的前瞻性研究[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(06): 925-930.
[5] 张宇涵, 吴添庆, 高汶卿, 郑梽楷, 贺珉睿, 周仲国. 不可切除性肝内胆管癌不同治疗方式疗效和安全性的Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(06): 939-947.
[6] 陈小坤, 杜顺达. 影像组学在肝细胞癌中的应用进展及挑战[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(02): 97-100.
[7] 高增霞, 贺云飞, 赵娜. DCE-MRI联合Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI纹理特征对肝细胞癌经导管动脉化疗栓塞术后疗效的评估[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(02): 108-113.
[8] 王甜, 张勇, 李苗红, 刘佳玥. MRI动态增强扫描联合CT能谱成像对肝细胞癌微血管侵犯的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(01): 6-12.
[9] 袁慧, 周芦忠, 汤鹤年, 潘菊花. LMR与PHR对射频消融术后肝细胞癌患者预后的评估[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2025, 15(06): 635-641.
[10] 希龙夫, 李江涛. CXCL12及其受体CXCR4/CXCR7在肝脏相关疾病中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(09): 714-719.
[11] 印于, 俞斌, 冯文聪, 杨俊, 倪才方, 朱晓黎, 李智, 李明明. 动脉化疗栓塞联合锥形束断层扫描引导乙醇注射治疗危险部位小肝癌的疗效与安全性[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(02): 157-163.
[12] 阿旺晋美, 格桑罗布, 雷彦明, 次旦旺久. 高海拔地区肝癌栓塞化疗联合靶免短期疗效预测模型构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(02): 164-170.
[13] 孙敬文, 程晓霞, 张晶晶, 倪国庆, 王剑. 超前镇痛模式在肝动脉化疗栓塞术围手术期的应用[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(01): 55-59.
[14] 陆涛, 李毫, 朱帝文, 鲍应军, 李一帆, 顾俊鹏, 任伟新. 乳酸脱氢酶与C反应蛋白/白蛋白比值对肝细胞癌患者经动脉化疗栓塞术预后的评估价值[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(01): 66-71.
[15] 沈骁, 严海涛, 张金星, 祖庆泉, 刘圣, 施海彬. 基于MRI的影像组学预测TACE联合分子靶向药物及免疫检查点抑制剂治疗肝细胞癌疗效[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(01): 72-80.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?