Average treatment effect of hepatic resection versus locoregional therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma.
Published: 26th July 2017
Authors: A. Cucchetti, V. Mazzaferro, A. D. Pinna, C. Sposito, R. Golfieri, C. Serra et al.
When comparing the efficacy of surgical and non‐surgical therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a major limitation is the causal inference problem. This concerns the impossibility of seeing both outcomes of two different treatments for the same individual at the same time because one is inevitably missing. This aspect can be addressed methodologically by estimating the so‐called average treatment effect (ATE).
To estimate the ATE of hepatic resection over locoregional therapies for HCC, data from patients treated in two tertiary care settings between August 2000 and December 2014 were used to obtain counterfactual outcomes using an inverse probability weight survival adjustment.
A total of 1585 patients were enrolled: 815 underwent hepatic resection, 337 radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and 433 transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). The option of operating on all patients who had tumour ablation returned an ATE of +9·8 months for resection (effect size 0·111; adjusted
ATE estimation suggests that hepatic resection is a better treatment option than ablation and TACE in patients with HCC.Read more
You may also be interested in
Randomized clinical trial
Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic ultrasonography before laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. BJS 2017; 104: 1462-1469.
Authors: S. B. Ellebæk, C. W. Fristrup, C. Hovendal, N. Qvist, L. Bundgaard, S. Salomon et al.
Notes: No additional benefit
Randomized clinical trial
Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for periampullary tumours. BJS 2017; 104: 1443-1450.
Authors: C. Palanivelu, P. Senthilnathan, S. C. Sabnis, N. S. Babu, S. Srivatsan Gurumurthy, N. Anand Vijai et al.
Notes: Shorter stay
Authors: K. J. Roberts
Authors: B. Le Roy, M. Gelli, G. Pittau, M.‐A. Allard, B. Pereira, B. Serji et al.
Notes: Option to increase resectability
Authors: A. J. Klompenhouwer, M. E. E. Bröker, M. G. J. Thomeer, M. P. Gaspersz, R. A. de Man, J. N. M. IJzermans et al.
Notes: Wait and see policy justified
Nationwide outcomes in patients undergoing surgical exploration without resection for pancreatic cancer. BJS 2017; 104: 1568-1577.
Authors: L. G. M. van der Geest, V. E. P. P. Lemmens, I. H. J. T. de Hingh, C. J. H. M. van Laarhoven, T. L. Bollen, C. Y. Nio et al.
Notes: Negative impacts
Impact of portal vein infiltration and type of venous reconstruction in surgery for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. BJS 2017; 104: 1539-1548.
Authors: R. Ravikumar, C. Sabin, M. Abu Hilal, A. Al‐Hilli, S. Aroori, G. Bond‐Smith et al.
Notes: No difference between type of reconstruction
Trends in indications, complications and outcomes for venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy. BJS 2017; 104: 1558-1567.
Authors: D. Kleive, M. A. Sahakyan, A. E. Berstad, C. S. Verbeke, I. P. Gladhaug, B. Edwin et al.
Notes: Severe complications, more reoperations
Authors: R. Green, S. C. Charman, T. Palser
Notes: Variation in compliance related to outcomes
Pancreatoduodenectomy with portal vein resection for distal cholangiocarcinoma. BJS 2017; 104: 1549-1557.
Authors: T. Maeta, T. Ebata, E. Hayashi, T. Kawahara, S. Mizuno, N. Matsumoto et al.
Notes: Poor survival despite portal vein resection
Meta‐analysis of determinants of survival following treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma. BJS 2017; 104: 1433-1442.
Authors: S. Erridge, P. H. Pucher, S. R. Markar, G. Malietzis, T. Athanasiou, A. Darzi et al.
Notes: No evidence for best treatment