Skip to main content
. 2023 Oct 9;31(1):115–124. doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-14409-z

Table 2.

Other locoregional and systemic treatments

Characteristics Gemcitabine/Cisplatin (n = 76) HAIP, MSKCC (n = 192) P-value
N (%) N (%)
Prior systemic chemotherapy 58 (30.2)
 Gemcitabine 2 (1.0)
 Gemcitabine/oxaliplatin 12 (6.3)
 Gemcitabine/cisplatin 29 (15.1)
 Gemcitabine/capecitabine 3 (1.6)
 Carboplatin/taxol 3 (1.6)
 FOLFIRINOX 5 (2.6)
 Other 4 (2.1)
Concurrent systemic chemotherapy 76 (100) 138 (71.9)
 Gemcitabine 25 (13.0)
 Gemcitabine/oxaliplatin 57 (29.7)
 Gemcitabine/cisplatin 76 (100) 0 (0.0)
 Irinotecan 39 (20.3)
 Bevacizumab 11 (5.7)
 Other 6 (3.1)
Locoregional treatmenta 3 (3.9)b 18 (9.4)c 0.14
 Conversion to resection 1 (1.3) 13 (6.8) 0.07
 Ablation (RFA, MWA, IRE) 1 (1.3) 2 (1.0) 0.85
 TACE 2 (2.6) 3 (1.6) 0.56
 External radiation 1 (0.5) 0.53

HAIP hepatic arterial infusion pump, Y90 yttrium-90, RFA radiofrequency ablation, MWA microwave ablation, IRE irreversible electroporation, TACE transarterial chemoembolization.

aLocoregional treatment after gem-cis or HAIP.

bOne patient was treated with both ablation and TACE.

cOne patient was treated with both ablation and resection.