Treatment of hepatocarcinoma beyond the milan criteria. A weighted comparative study of surgical resection versus chemoembolization

Background: Optimal treatment of hepatocarcinoma (HCC) beyond the Milan criteria (MC) is debated. The aim of the study was to assess overall-survival (OS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) for HCC beyond MC when treated by trans-arterial-chemoembolization (TACE) or surgical resection (SR). Method: between 2005 and 2015, all patients with a first diagnosis of HCC beyond MC(1 nodule>5 cm, or 3 nodules>3 cm without macrovascular invasion) were evaluated. Analyses were carried out through Kaplan–Meier, Cox models and the inverse probability weighting (IPW) method to reduce allocation bias. Sub-analyses have been performed for multinodular and single large tumors compared with a MC-IN cohort. Results: 226 consecutive patients were evaluated: 118 in SR group and 108 in TACE group. After IPW, the two pseudo-populations were comparable for tumor burden and liver function. In the SR group, 1–5 years OS rates were 72.3% and 35% respectively and 92.7% and 39.3% for TACE (p = 0.500). The median DFS was 8 months (95%CI:8–9) for TACE, and 11 months (95%CI:9–12) for SR (p < 0.001). TACE was an independent predictor for recurrence (HR 1.5; 95%CI: 1.1–2.1; p = 0.015). Solitary tumors > 5 cm and multinodular disease had comparable OS and DFS as Milan-IN group (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Surgery allowed a better control than TACE in patient bearing HCC beyond MC. This translated into a significant benefit in terms of DFS but not OS.