Abstract 1481P
Background
Reportedly up to 30% of lung cancer patients will develop hemoptysis and 10% will experience massive hemoptysis. Bronchial artery embolization (BAE) is routinely performed in patients with hemoptysis secondary to neoplasm, while associated with a high failure rate and increased mortality. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of drug-eluting microspheres BAE (DEM-BAE) with blank microspheres BAE (BM-BAE) for hemoptysis in NSCLC patients.
Methods
DEM-BAE was performed in 25 patients with hemoptysis with one vial of 300-500μm Callispheres drug-eluting beads (Gemcitabine 100mg). The BM-BAE group consisted of 25 patients who were treated with blank microspheres of 300-500μm. We categorized the results as technical and clinical success, and also included the mid-term results. Technical success was defined as the complete cessation of the target artery as confirmed by digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Clinical success was defined as the cessation of hemoptysis within 24 h of BAE. Technical success was compared immediately after the procedure. The clinical success and mid-term results (percentage of patients who were free of hemoptysis) were compared at 1 and 6 months after the procedure, respectively.
Results
There was no significant difference for technical success rates (DEM-BAE group: 90%, BM-BAE group: 85%, P>0.05). However, the clinical success rates (DEM-BAE group: 83.3%, BM-BAE group: 68%, P<0.01) and the mid-term results (DEM-BAE group: 71.4%, BM-BAE group: 64%, P<0.01) showed a significant difference. Moreover, Disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) was higher in DEM-BAE group than control group (DEM-BAE group: 78.5%, BM-BAE group: 48%, P<0.01). The procedure-related complications included mild cough and mild chest pain. There was no special management required for these complications.
Conclusions
DEM-BAE appeared to be the more optimal modality to improve the mid-term clinical efficacy compared to blank microspheres BAE for hemoptysis in NSCLC patients. Further studies were warranted.
Clinical trial identification
ChiCTR2300071106.
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1564P - Limited participation in breast cancer screening among low-SES women: A matter of engagement or of health literacy?
Presenter: Allegra Ferrari
Session: Poster session 10
1566P - Optimizing participation in lung cancer screening program: Results from the first round in ILYAD study in Lyon University Hospital
Presenter: Emmanuel Grolleau
Session: Poster session 10
1567P - Physicians' adenoma detection rate and the risk of colorectal cancer in sequential screening programs: An observational cohort study
Presenter: Li Xie
Session: Poster session 10
1568P - Challenges in pilot lung cancer screening in Vojvodina, Serbia
Presenter: Jelena Djekic Malbasa
Session: Poster session 10
1569P - Secondary delay in breast cancer diagnosis and role of rural medical practitioners: A cause and cure finding study
Presenter: Rahul Agarwal
Session: Poster session 10
1570P - Factors and impacts of delayed presentation for county-level patients with breast cancer in a real-life setting in China
Presenter: Yinghua Ji
Session: Poster session 10
1571P - The reasons that motivate a change of specialties among oncology residents
Presenter: Christophe Ducrocq
Session: Poster session 10
1572P - Factors associated with career choice in oncology among medical students
Presenter: Nicolas Penel
Session: Poster session 10
1573P - Global cancer statistics for adolescents and young adults: New estimates from GLOBOCAN 2022
Presenter: Wang-Zhong Li
Session: Poster session 10
Resources:
Abstract