TACE联合射频消融治疗超米兰标准原发性肝癌疗效评价的比较研究

摘要

目的 对比分析mRECIST标准与RECIST标准评价TACE联合射频消融(RFA)治疗超米兰标准原发性肝癌疗效的一致性,确定哪种标准可以更好地评价疗效.方法 应用两种标准分别评价78例TACE联合RFA治疗超米兰标准原发性肝癌疗效,计算KAPPA系数确定两种标准的一致性.运用Kaplan-Mier法计算不同缓解程度的中位生存时间,通过log-rank检验绘制生存曲线,比较不同缓解程度的中位生存时间及生存曲线的差异是否有统计学意义.结果 应用SPSS19.0计算两种标准评价结果的KAPPA系数为0.243(x2=5.250,P＜0.01),通过运用Kaplan-Mier法计算不同缓解程度的中位生存时间,通过log-rank检验绘制生存曲线显示RECIST标准评价出的SD与PR的曲线有多处交叉重合的部分,两者的P值大于0.05差异无统计学意义,而mRECIST标准的不同缓解情况的生存曲线相对较平衡没有重合部分,P值均小于0.01差异有统计学意义.结论 ①mRECIST标准并不适合所有超米兰标准原发性肝癌的治疗后评估,病灶边缘不清和强化不明显的将导致无法应用mRECIST标准.②mRECIST标准更准确地评估了TACE联合PRA治疗超米兰标准肝癌的疗效.%Objective To investigate the consistency of mRECIST criterion and RECIST criterion in evaluating the curative effect of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for primary hepatocellular carcinoma (PHC) which condition exceeds Milan liver transplantation standard in order to determine which criterion can evaluate the curative effect better.Methods A total of 78 PHC patients,whose lesion's extent exceeded Milan standard and who had received TACE combined with RFA therapy,were included in this study.The curative effect was separately evaluated by mRECIST criterion and RECIST criterion.KAPPA coefficient was calculated to determine the consistency of the evaluation results by the two criteria.By using Kaplan-Mier method,the median survival time (MST) of patients achieving different remission degree was calculated.Log-rank test was used to draw survival curve.The MST and the survival curve of patients with different remission degree were statistically compared between the two criteria.Results By using SPSS19.0 software,the KAPPA coefficient of the evaluation results of the two criteria was 0.243 (x2=5.250,P＜0.01).The MST of patients,which was calculated by Kaplan-Mier method,had multiple overlapping parts with SD and PR curves that were drawn by log-rank test based on RECIST criterion,the difference between the two was not statistically significant (P＞0.05).When mRECIST criterion was based on,the survival curve of patients with different remission degree was relatively balanced and showed no overlapping parts,the difference between the two was statistically significant (P＜0.01).Conclusion (1) The mRECIST criterion is not suitable for the evaluation of the curative effect of PHC patients whose lesion's extent exceeds Milan standard,and mRECIST criterion can not apply to make evaluation of the curative effect for PHC when the lesion's border is unclear and its enhancement is not obvious.(2) mRECIST criterion can more accurately evaluate the curative effect of TACE combined with PRA in treating PHC which extent exceeds Milan liver transplantation standard.