scholarly journals Survival analysis of patients with medium and advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated by TACE combined with Endostar

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 205873922096055
Author(s):  
Xiu-Heng Qi ◽  
Zhen-Ming Wu ◽  
Qi Liu ◽  
Qian Guo ◽  
Ling-Ling Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Infusion Therapy ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
The Difference

To explore the effects of two different administration routes of Endostar on the survival of patients with medium and advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and underwent trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE). Seventy-two patients with medium and advanced HCC were enrolled. Among them, 42 patients underwent the hepatic arterial infusion of Endostar combined with TACE (infusion therapy group); and the remaining 30 patients underwent the hepatic treatment of TACE combined with the intravenous application of Endostar (intravenous therapy group). All patients underwent regular examinations of CT (or MRI) and DSA to observe the conditions of tumor recurrence or metastasis, and to determine the existence of tumor angiogenesis. The response rate of treatment in the Endostar hepatic arterial infusion group was higher than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (31/42:14/30, X2 = 5.501, p < 0.05). In addition, median progression free-survival time of the two groups were 8.67 months and 6.67 months, respectively ( p = 0.046); and the difference was statistically significant. The hepatic arterial infusion of Endostar combined with TACE can significantly improve recent clinical efficacy and mPFS in the treatment of medium and advanced HCC. However, improvement on the overall survival of long-term efficacy is not significant.

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma by placing a temporary catheter via the subclavian route

2007 ◽  
Vol 48 (7) ◽  
pp. 734-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huei-Lung Liang ◽  
Jer-Shyung Huang ◽  
Yi-Huei Lin ◽  
Kwok-Hung Lai ◽  
Chien-Fang Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Catheter Placement ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy

Background: A permanent reservoir implantation is considered mandatory for hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Since treatment sessions of HAIC may be limited for these end-staged patients, a simple alternative technique for this treatment is desirable. Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility of placing a temporary catheter for HAIC in advanced HCC patients. Material and Methods: 25 advanced HCC patients underwent HAIC with drugs delivered from a temporary catheter which was placed percutaneously by puncturing the left subclavian artery under ultrasound guidance. A course of chemotherapy consisted of five consecutive daily infusions of 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin, mitomycin C, and leucovorin. The catheter was removed on the 6th day. Therapy was repeated every 4–6 weeks with maximal number of courses of up to six. The total courses of HAIC in each patient, the catheter-placed-related complications, tumor response rate, and median survival of the patients were registered. Results: A total of 77 courses of HAIC were performed with 100% technical success of catheter placement (1–6 courses in each patient, average 3.1 courses). The overall response rate was 20%, with complete response in two patients and partial response in three patients. Eleven (55%) of the 20 non-responders died within 5 months (mean HAIC, two courses). None of the patients experienced complications such as catheter occlusion, hepatic arterial thrombosis, cerebral infarction, or local infection. Conclusion: With fewer catheter-related complications, HAIC by temporary catheter placement via subclavian puncture could be a treatment option.

scholarly journals Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy Combined With PD-1 Inhibitors Plus Lenvatinib Versus PD-1 Inhibitors Plus Lenvatinib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie Mei ◽  
Yu-Hao Tang ◽  
Wei Wei ◽  
Ming Shi ◽  
Lie Zheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Good Survival ◽  
Hepatic Artery Infusion ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Hepatic Artery Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Cell Death Protein

BackgroundLenvatinib combined with programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors has resulted in good survival outcomes in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) has also attracted attention due to its high response rates and favorable survival for advanced HCC patients. The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of HAIC combined with PD-1 inhibitors plus lenvatinib (HPL) and PD-1 inhibitors plus lenvatinib (PL) in patients with advanced HCC.MethodsBetween July 2018 and December 2019, patients diagnosed with advanced HCC who initially received HPL or PL treatment were reviewed for eligibility. Efficacy was evaluated according to tumor response and survival.ResultsIn total, 70 patients met the criteria and were included in the present study, and they were divided into the HPL group (n = 45) and PL group (n = 25). The overall response rate (40.0 vs. 16.0%, respectively; p = 0.038) and disease control rate (77.6 vs. 44.0%, respectively; p &lt; 0.001) were higher in the HPL group than in the PL group. The median overall survival was 15.9 months in the HPL group and 8.6 months in the PL group (p = 0.0015; HR = 0.6; 95% CI 0.43–0.83). The median progression-free survival was 8.8 months in the HPL group and 5.4 months in the PL group (p = 0.0320; HR = 0.74; 95% CI 0.55–0.98).ConclusionCompared to PL, HPL was associated with a significantly better treatment response and survival benefits for patients with advanced HCC.

Sorafenib versus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A Japanese multi-center large cohort study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 323-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sadahisa Ogasawara ◽  
Kazuomi Ueshima ◽  
Masafumi Ikeda ◽  
Yutaka Yasui ◽  
Takeshi Terashima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Propensity Score Matching ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Sorafenib Group

323 Background: Sorafenib, approved in Japan in 2009, is the first systemic therapy demonstrated to significantly improve overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In Japan, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), which directly delivers high concentrations of cytotoxic agents to liver tumors, has been offered to patients with advanced HCC since before sorafenib was approved. HAIC is particularly used in patients without extrahepatic metastases (EHM). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients with advanced HCC who received HAIC and sorafenib. Methods: Consecutive patients with advanced HCC who received sorafenib or HAIC as the first-line systemic therapy were enrolled from 10 Japanese centers. The statistical analysis plan included pre-defined propensity score matching method and risk factors. All statistical analyses were performed by an independent biostatistician. Results: Between June 2009 and May 2016, 2006 patients were enrolled (sorafenib: 1465 patients, HAIC: 541 patients). The mean OS of patients with macrovascular invasion (MVI) and without EHM was significant longer in the HAIC group compared with the sorafenib group. After propensity score matching, there were 172 patients in each cohort. The OS was 9.1 months for the sorafenib group and 10.1 months for the HAIC group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.668 [95% CI: 0.475–0.935], P = 0.018). There was no significant difference in OS between patients without both MVI and EHM. After propensity score matching, there were 76 patients in each cohort. The OS was 15.4 months for the sorafenib group and 12.2 months for the HAIC group (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.227 [95% CI: 0.699–2.155], P = 0.475). Conclusions: HAIC might be a potential initial treatment for patients with advanced HCC with MVI (without EHM). Currently, several new drugs appear clinically beneficial for patients with advanced HCC. Although this study only focused on sorafenib as the chemo-agent, additional studies should be conducted to confirm the benefits associated with HAIC in a limited population of patients with advanced HCC.

scholarly journals Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy versus Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 583-595
Author(s):  
Kazuomi Ueshima ◽  
Sadahisa Ogasawara ◽  
Masafumi Ikeda ◽  
Yutaka Yasui ◽  
Takeshi Terashima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Propensity Score Matching ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy

Background: Prior to the approval of sorafenib, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) was offered to patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in East Asia, particularly Japan. According to the Japanese guidelines, HAIC is recommended as one of the treatment options in patients without extrahepatic metastasis (EHM). Methods: The present cohort study compared the use of HAIC and sorafenib on outcomes of patients with advanced HCC. Consecutive patients with advanced HCC who received HAIC or sorafenib as a first-line systemic therapy were enrolled from 10 Japanese institutions. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) in patients with macrovascular invasion (MVI), but without EHM, and OS in patients without both MVI and EHM. Results: Between 2009 and 2016, 2,006 patients were enrolled (541 HAIC patients, 1,465 sorafenib patients). After propensity score matching, the OS of patients with MVI but without EHM was significantly longer in the HAIC group compared with the sorafenib group (10.1 vs. 9.1 months for the HAIC and sorafenib groups, respectively; n = 170 for each group; hazard ratio [HR] 0.668; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.475–0.935; p = 0.018). There was no significant difference in OS between patients without both MVI and EHM (12.2 vs. 15.4 months for the HAIC and sorafenib groups, respectively; n = 76 in each cohort after propensity score matching; HR 1.227; 95% CI 0.699–2.155; p = 0.475). Conclusion: HAIC is a potential front-line treatment choice in a subpopulation of patients with advanced HCC with MVI but without EHM.

scholarly journals Camrelizumab Plus Sorafenib Versus Sorafenib Monotherapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Retrospective Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qinqin Liu ◽  
Nan You ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
Ke Wu ◽  
Xuehui Peng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Combined Therapy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Clinical Benefits

BackgroundHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a highly aggressive malignancy with poor prognosis. Immunotherapy has gained great interest for various solid tumors due to its promising clinical efficacy. Targeted therapy also plays a crucial role in anticancer treatment. However, studies on the combination of immunotherapy and targeted therapy for advanced HCC are limited. Thus, the objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of camrelizumab combined with sorafenib in the treatment of advanced HCC.MethodsFrom January 2019 to January 2021, 100 consecutive patients with advanced HCC in our hospital were enrolled for this study. Patients were assigned into two groups: a combined-therapy group (camrelizumab + sorafenib) and a sorafenib-only group. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), treatment response, and relevant adverse effects (AEs) were evaluated and recorded.ResultsOf a total of 100 patients, 35 received a combination of camrelizumab and sorafenib, and 65 were treated with sorafenib alone. After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), each group had 34 patients. The overall response rate (ORR) of the combined-therapy group was statistically significantly higher than that of the sorafenib-only group (before PSM, p = 0.037; after PSM, p = 0.010). However, there was no significant difference in disease control rate (DCR) between the two groups (before PSM, p = 0.695; after PSM, p = 1.000). Patients who received the combination therapy had significantly longer PFS than those who received the sorafenib monotherapy (before PSM, p = 0.041; after PSM, p = 0.043). However, the two groups exhibited comparable median OS (before PSM, p = 0.135; after PSM, p = 0.105). Although the combined-therapy group showed a higher incidence of AEs such as thrombocytopenia than the sorafenib-only group after PSM, most of these AEs were easily controlled after treatment.ConclusionCamrelizumab plus sorafenib showed favorable efficacy and manageable toxicity for patients with advanced HCC. However, more prospective randomized trials are necessary to further verify the potential clinical benefits of this combination therapy.

scholarly journals Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy with Cisplatin Versus Sorafenib for Intrahepatic Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuki Zaizen ◽  
Masahito Nakano ◽  
Kazuta Fukumori ◽  
Yoichi Yano ◽  
Kota Takaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Significant Difference

Given that the outcome of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) with cisplatin for intrahepatic advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is unclear, we aimed to compare prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) following HAIC with cisplatin versus sorafenib for intrahepatic advanced HCC using propensity score-matched analysis. We enrolled 348 patients with intrahepatic advanced HCC who received HAIC with cisplatin (n = 97) or sorafenib (n = 251) between June 2006 and March 2020. No significant difference was observed in OS between HAIC with cisplatin and sorafenib cohorts (median survival time [MST]: 13.9 vs. 12.7 months; p = 0.0989). To reduce confounding effects, 176 patients were selected using propensity score-matched analysis (n = 88 for each treatment). HAIC with cisplatin significantly prolonged OS compared with sorafenib (MST: 16.2 vs. 12.2 months; p = 0.0060). Following stratification according to the Child–Pugh classification, for both patients with class A (MST: 24.0 vs. 15.6 months; p = 0.0097) and class B (MST: 8.5 vs. 6.9 months; p = 0.0391), HAIC with cisplatin rather than sorafenib significantly prolonged OS. Our findings suggest that HAIC with cisplatin demonstrates longer prognostic effects than sorafenib in intrahepatic advanced HCC, regardless of the hepatic reserve.

Lenvatinib plus hepatic arterial infusion of modified FOLFOX regime in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16603-e16603
Author(s):  
Qicong Mai ◽  
Zhiqiang Mo ◽  
Feng Shi ◽  
Xiaoming Chen
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Vascular Invasion ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Best Response

e16603 Background: Recently, Sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) of modified FOLFOX regime has shown promising results for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Lenvatinib is also the first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, it has shown the better objective response rate (ORR) and longer progression free survival (PFS) than sorafenib. This retrospective study evaluated the combination of lenvatinib plus HAIC of modified FOLFOX regime in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: This study retrospectively enrolled and analyzed 24 patients from Nov 2018 to May 2019 from Guangdong provincial people’s hospital. Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma were treated with 8 mg(≤60kg) or 12mg( > 60kg) lenvatinib once daily plus HAIC of modified FOLFOX regime (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 on day 1, and fluorouracil infusion 2400 mg/m2 for 46 hours, every 3 weeks). Best response according to the RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST criteria. PFS, overall survival (OS) and treatment-related adverse events(TRAE) were also evaluated. Results: 24 patients(median age: 49.2 years) underwent a total of 91 cycles of HAIC therapy (mean: 3.79; range: 2-8). 22 (91.7%) patients had cirrhosis caused by HBV infection.17(70.8%) patients were diagnosed with vascular invasion and 7 (29.2%) were both vascular invasion and extrahepatic spread. 20 (83.3%) patients were classified as Child-pugh A class and 4 (16.7%) patients were Child-pugh B class. The ORR were 58.3% (RECIST) and 66.7% (mRECIST), the disease control rate (DCR) was 79.2% (RECIST/mRECIST). With a median follow-up period of 11.3 months, the median PFS was 8.1 months. 6-, 9-, and 12-months OS rates were 91.7, 83.3%, and 75%, respectively. TRAE occurred in 20 of 24 patients (83.3%), most common TRAE were hypertension (41.7%) and hand-foot skin reaction(25%). No grade 3/4 TRAE was observed. Conclusions: Lenvatinib plus HAIC of modified FOLFOX regime was well tolerated and had shown promising ORR, PFS and 6-, 9-, and 12-months OS rates in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. A prospective large-scale trial is needed to justify these results. [Table: see text]

Effectiveness and Safety of Combination Therapy of Transarterial Chemoembolization and Apatinib for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Chinese Population: A Meta-Analysis

Chemotherapy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 94-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Wei ◽  
Jianjun Liu ◽  
Min Yan ◽  
Shuguang Zhao ◽  
Yong Long ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Transarterial Chemoembolization ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Combination Therapy Group ◽  
Advanced Hcc

Background: The combination of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and apatinib has been used in the treatment of intermediate or advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, its effectiveness and safety are also argued. Methods: Eligible studies were collected from a computer search of literatures published from the database establishment to May 2019 in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Ovid, the Cochrane Library, Wanfang Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and China Biology Medicine Disc. The objective response rate (ORR), the disease control rate (DCR), survival rate (SR), and the incidences of treatment-related adverse effects (AEs) were collected as the relevant outcomes. Data were analyzed through fixed/random effects of meta-analysis models with RevMan 5.3 software. Results: Eight randomized controlled clinical trials comprising 528 patients and 4 cohort studies comprising 226 patients were eventually included. Compared to the control group treated with TACE solely, combination therapy group, in which intermediate or advanced HCC patients were treated with TACE and apatinib, significantly enhanced ORR (relative risk [RR] 2.06, 95% CI 1.63–2.61, p < 0.001), DCR (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.24–2.20, p < 0.001), and whole SRs of 6-month (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.08–2.14, p = 0.02), 1-year (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.25–1.84, p < 0.001), and 2-year (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.34–2.54, p < 0.001). The incidence of hand foot syndrome, proteinuria, hypertension, and diarrhea was significantly increased in the combination therapy group compared with the control group (p < 0.05), and the incidence of nausea and vomiting, fever, and myelosuppression, respectively, was similar in 2 groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The combination therapy of TACE and apatinib can enhance the clinical effectiveness better than TACE solely in patients with intermediate or advanced HCC, while increase in the AEs is usually tolerable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document