Percutaneous microwave ablation and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for serum tumor markers and prognostics of middle-late primary hepatic carcinoma

Table 1 Comparison of baseline data between the single and combined groups

Group	Gender		Age (yr)	Tumor number (cases)		Tumor diameter (cm)
	Male	Female		Single	Multiple
Combined group (n = 75)	41 (54.67)	34 (45.33)	53.05 ± 13.43	47 (62.67)	28 (37.33)	5.11 ± 1.27
Single group (n = 75)	43 (57.33)	32 (42.67)	52.51 ± 12.06	49 (65.33)	26 (34.67)	5.49 ± 1.23
χ2/t value	0.108		-0.558	0.262		-1.900
P value	0.742		0.580	0.793		0.059

Table 2 Comparison of clinical efficacy between the single and combined groups

Group	CR	PR	SD	PD	ORR (%)
Combined group (n = 75)	21 (28.00)	35 (46.67)	15 (20.00)	4 (5.33)	56 (74.67)1
Single group (n = 75)	13 (17.33)	24 (32.00)	28 (37.33)	10 (13.33)	38 (49.33)
χ2 value					9.233
P value					0.002

¹P < 0.01 vs single group.

CR: Complete remission; PR: Partial remission; SD: Stable; PD: Disease progression; ORR: Objective response rate.

Table 3 Comparison of serum tumor marker levels between the two groups before treatment and 4 wk after treatment

Group	AFP (g/L)		CEA (g/mg)		CA19-9 (U/mL)
	Pre-treatment	After 4 wk of treatment	Pre-treatment	After 4 wk of treatment	Pre-treatment	After 4 wk of treatment
Combined group (n = 75)	364.17 ± 50.46	212.52 ± 39.522	19.44 ± 2.05	11.02 ± 2.182	239.87 ± 40.16	170.25 ± 28.281
Single group (n = 75)	361.74 ± 51.78	256.23 ± 42.11	19.32 ± 2.11	13.56 ± 2.40	240.56 ± 40.22	189.54 ± 38.84
t value	-0.290	-6.553	0.325	-6.770	-0.105	-3.477
P value	0.772	< 0.001	0.746	< 0.001	0.916	0.001

¹P < 0.01 vs single group.

²P < 0.001 vs single group.

AFP: Alpha-fetoprotein; CEA: Carcinoembryonic antigen; CA19-9: Carbohydrate antigen 19-9.

Table 4 Comparison of survival after 1 year between the single and combined groups

Group	Recrudescence	Transfer	Death
Combined group (n = 75)	22 (29.33)	5 (6.67)	16 (21.33)1
Single group (n = 75)	32 (42.67)	10 (13.33)	30 (40.00)
χ2 value	2.894	1.852	6.145
P value	0.089	0.174	0.013

¹P < 0.05 vs single group.

Table 5 Univariate analysis affecting the prognosis of patients with mid-late PHC

Item	Death group (n = 46)	Survival group (n = 104)	χ2	P value
Gender (male/female)	21/25	63/41	2.883	0.090
Age (yr)			0.403	0.836
≥ 60	16 (34.78)	38 (36.54)
< 60	30 (65.22)	66 (63.46)
Tumor diameter (cm)			17.559	< 0.0012
≥ 6	31 (67.39)	32 (30.77)
< 6	15 (32.61)	72 (69.23)
Tumor number (cases)			23.588	< 0.0012
Single	17 (36.96)	81 (77.88)
Multiple	29 (63.04)	23 (22.12)
Treatment method (cases)			6.145	0.0131
Single TACE	30 (65.22)	45 (43.27)
TACE + PMCT	16 (34.78)	59 (56.73)

¹P < 0.05.

²P < 0.0001.

TACE: Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization; PMCT: Percutaneous microwave coagulation therapy.

Table 6 Specific values

Variable
Gender	Male = 1, female = 0
Age	≥ 60 yr = 1, < 60 yr = 0
Tumor diameter	≥ 6 cm =1, < 6 cm = 0
Tumor number	Single = 1, Multiple = 0
Treatment method	Single TACE = 1, TACE + PMCT = 0

TACE: Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization; PMCT: Percutaneous microwave coagulation therapy.

Table 7 Cox analysis of effects of various factors on the prognosis of patients with mid-late primary hepatic carcinoma

Item	B	SE	Wald	P value	OR	95%CI
Tumor diameter	0.989	0.339	8.495	0.004	2.689	1.383-5.230
Tumor number	1.076	0.330	10.659	0.001	2.934	1.537-5.598
Treatment method	1.006	0.329	9.336	0.002	1.735	1.434-5.215

95%CI: 95% confidence interval; OR: Odds ratio.