RESUMEN
AIM: Multiple molecular agents have been developed for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. This study aimed to elucidate the clinical efficacy of sequential treatment with lenvatinib after regorafenib failure. METHODS: From June 2017 to October 2020, 63 patients with Child-Pugh A and treated with regorafenib followed by sorafenib were enrolled (median age 71 years, 52 men, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer B:C = 23:40). They were divided into two groups, those treated with lenvatinib after regorafenib treatment (R-L group, n = 47) and those who did not receive lenvatinib after regorafenib (non-R-L group, n = 16). Prognostic factors were retrospectively analyzed after adjustment with inverse probability weighting. RESULTS: Serum albumin level at the start of regorafenib and reasons for discontinuation of regorafenib were significantly different between the R-L and non-R-L groups, whereas the albumin-bilirubin score, Child-Pugh class, and tumor burden were not. Progression-free survival was also not significantly different (median 4.1 vs. 3.8 months, p = 0.586). As for overall survival, the R-L group showed better prognosis after introducing regorafenib and after introducing sorafenib, following inverse probability weighting adjustment (MST 19.7 vs. 10.3 months, 33.8 vs. 15.3 months, p < 0.001 and p = 0.022, respectively). Modified albumin-bilirubin grade 2b (score >-2.27) at the start of regorafenib (HR 2.074, p = 0.041) and the presence of lenvatinib treatment after regorafenib failure (HR 0.355, p = 0.004) were found to be significant prognostic factors in Cox proportional hazards multivariate analysis, after inverse probability weighting adjustment. CONCLUSION: These results show that lenvatinib is a good sequential treatment option after progression under regorafenib therapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients with better hepatic reserve function.
RESUMEN
The first edition of the guidelines for the use of ultrasound contrast agents was published in 2004, dealing with liver applications. The second edition of the guidelines in 2008 reflected changes in the available contrast agents and updated the guidelines for the liver, as well as implementing some nonliver applications. The third edition of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) guidelines was the joint World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology-European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB-EFSUMB) venture in conjunction with other regional US societies such as Asian Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, resulting in a simultaneous duplicate on liver CEUS in the official journals of both WFUMB and EFSUMB in 2013. However, no guidelines were described mainly for Sonazoid due to limited clinical experience only in Japan and Korea. The new proposed consensus statements and recommendations provide general advice on the use of Sonazoid and are intended to create standard protocols for the use and administration of Sonazoid in hepatic and pancreatobiliary applications in Asian patients and to improve patient management.