RESUMEN
Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of interventional therapy (iodine-125[125I] seed strand and portal vein stent [PVS] implantation plus transarterial chemoembolization [TACE]) combined with systemic therapy (lenvatinib plus anti-PD-1 antibody) as first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with Vp4 portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Patients and methods: From December 2018 to October 2021, 87 HCC patients with Vp4 PVTT were included in this single-center retrospective study. Forty-seven patients underwent interventional therapy combined with lenvatinib and anti-PD-1 antibody (group A), while 40 cases underwent interventional therapy combined with lenvatinib only (group B). Overall response rate (ORR), stent occlusion rates (SOR), median overall survival (OS), median progression-free survival (PFS) and median stent patency time (SPT) were compared between the 2 groups. Results: The mean intended dose (r = 10 mm; z = 0; 240 days) was 64.9 ± 1.0 Gy and 64.5 ± 1.1 Gy in group A and B, respectively (p = 0.133). ORR and SOR were significantly different between group A and B (ORR, 55.3% vs 17.5%, p < 0.001; SOR, 12.8% vs 35.0%, p = 0.014). In the propensity-score matching (PSM) cohort, the median OS, median PFS and median SPT were significantly longer in group A compared with group B (32 PSM pairs; OS, 17.7 ± 1.7 vs 12.0 ± 0.8 months, p = 0.010; PFS, 17.0 ± 4.3 vs 8.0 ± 0.7 months, p < 0.001; SPT, not-reached vs 12.5 ± 1.1 months, p = 0.028). Conclusion: This interventional therapy combined with lenvatinib and anti-PD-1 antibody is safe and effective for HCC patients with Vp4 PVTT.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of transcatheter hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) with those of sorafenib in the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C. METHODS: Potentially relevant studies comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of HAIC with those of sorafenib were searched using Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases (Wanfang Data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure). Overall survival rate (OSR), tumor response rate, disease control rate (DCR), and serious adverse events (SAEs) were compared and analyzed. Pooled ORs with 95% CIs were calculated using either the fixed-effects model or the random-effects model. All statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager (version 5.3) from the Cochrane Collaboration. RESULTS: A total of 1,264 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results of this study showed that HAIC was associated with significantly higher 1-, 2-, and 3-year OSRs than sorafenib (OR 1.88, 95% CI1-year: [1.27-2.78], P1-year=0.002; OR 2.15, 95% CI2-year: [1.06-4.37], P2-year=0.03; OR 7.90, 95% CI3-year: [2.12-29.42], P3-year=0.002). Compared to sorafenib, HAIC was associated with superior complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and objective response rate (ORR) (OR 3.90, 95% CICR: [1.89-8.03], P CR =0.0002; OR 3.47, 95% CIPR: [2.31-5.24], P PR <0.00001; OR 3.02, 95% CIOR: [2.05-4.45], P OR <0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between HAIC and sorafenib in stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), DCR, and SAEs (OR 0.86, 95% CISD: [0.51-1.45], P SD =0.56; OR 0.62, 95% CIPD: [0.35-1.11], P PD =0.11; OR 0.53, 95% CISAE: [0.14-1.92], P SAE =0.33). CONCLUSION: This study showed that HAIC was associated with better efficacy than sorafenib in terms of OSR and tumor response. Therefore, HAIC can be considered as an alternative treatment option for patients with HCCs of BCLC stage C.
