scholarly journals Author Correction: Epidemiological and Clinical Patterns of Newly Diagnosed Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Brazil: the Need for Liver Disease Screening Programs Based on Real-World Data

Author(s):  
Gustavo dos Santos Fernandes ◽  
Daniel Campos ◽  
Andre Ballalai ◽  
Rodrigo Palhares ◽  
Mario R. Alvares-da-Silva ◽  
...  
Liver Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Xin Hui Chew ◽  
Rehena Sultana ◽  
Eshani N. Mathew ◽  
David Chee Eng Ng ◽  
Richard H.G. Lo ◽  
...  

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Real-world management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is crucially challenging in the current rapidly evolving clinical environment which includes the need for respecting patient preferences and autonomy. In this context, regional/national treatment guidelines nuanced to local demographics have increasing importance in guiding disease management. We report here real-world data on clinical outcomes in HCC from a validation of the Consensus Guidelines for HCC at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS). <b><i>Method:</i></b> We evaluated the NCCS guidelines using prospectively collected real-world data, comparing the efficacy of treatment received using overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Treatment outcomes were also independently evaluated against 2 external sets of guidelines, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) and Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC). <b><i>Results:</i></b> Overall treatment compliance to the NCCS guidelines was 79.2%. Superior median OS was observed in patients receiving treatment compliant with NCCS guidelines for early (nonestimable vs. 23.5 months <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.0001), locally advanced (28.1 vs. 22.2 months <i>p</i> = 0.0216) and locally advanced with macrovascular invasion (10.3 vs. 3.3 months <i>p</i> = 0.0013) but not for metastatic HCC (8.1 vs. 6.8 months <i>p</i> = 0.6300), but PFS was similar. Better clinical outcomes were seen in BCLC C patients who received treatment compliant with NCCS guidelines than in patients with treatment only allowed by BCLC guidelines (median OS 14.2 vs. 7.4 months <i>p</i> = 0.0002; median PFS 6.1 vs. 4.0 months <i>p</i> = 0.0286). Clinical outcomes were, however, similar for patients across all HKLC stages receiving NCCS-recommended treatment regardless of whether their treatment was allowed by HKLC. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The high overall compliance rate and satisfactory clinical outcomes of patients managed according to the NCCS guidelines confirm its validity. This validation using real-world data considers patient and treating clinician preferences, thus providing a realistic analysis of the usefulness of the NCCS guidelines when applied in the clinics.


2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (11) ◽  
pp. 4627-4640
Author(s):  
Igor V. Maev ◽  
Alexey A. Samsonov ◽  
Leonid B. Lazebnik ◽  
Elena V. Golovanova ◽  
Chavdar S. Pavlov ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 73 ◽  
pp. S39
Author(s):  
Won-Mook Choi ◽  
Jonggi Choi ◽  
Ju Hyun Shim ◽  
Young-Suk Lim ◽  
Han Chu Lee ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 273-273
Author(s):  
Amit G. Singal ◽  
Saurabh P Nagar ◽  
Abigail Hitchens ◽  
Shrividya Iyer

273 Background: In the United States (U.S.), lenvatinib monotherapy was approved in August 2018 for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) based on the pivotal trial, REFLECT. Real-world data are essential to assess if this efficacy translates into effectiveness in clinical practice. The main objective of our real-world data (RWD) study was to assess clinical characteristics and effectiveness of lenvatinib among patients treated in U.S. clinical practices. Methods: A retrospective patient chart review study was conducted among adult patients (≥18 years) in the U.S. initiating lenvatinib monotherapy as first-line (1L) systemic therapy for uHCC between Aug 2018 and Sept 2019 and with ECOG status of 0 or 1. Data were extracted from individual patients’ electronic health records and captured in electronic case report forms. Clinical outcomes assessed include provider-reported best response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PFS and OS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. For PFS, patients were censored at end of treatment or end of follow-up in case of ongoing treatment, while censoring occurred at end of follow-up for OS. Results: Among 233 patients treated with 1L lenvatinib monotherapy, majority were male (68%) and most were Caucasian (52%) or African American (25%). Median age was 63 years and median body weight was 76 kg. The most common etiologies of liver disease were hepatitis C (36%), alcohol-related liver disease (28%), hepatitis B (16%) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (14%). Most patients had compensated cirrhosis, with 49% Child Pugh A and 43% Child Pugh B. All patients had uHCC, with most having Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B (29%) or C (44%) disease. Portal vein invasion was reported in 19%, of whom7% had main portal vein involvement. The median starting dose of lenvatinib was 12 mg daily. Over a median follow-up period of 9 months from HCC diagnosis, median PFS and OS were not reached. At 6 and 12 months landmark PFS was 85% and 65%, respectively and landmark OS was 92% and 73%, respectively. In the overall cohort, provider-reported best response was complete response (CR): 21%, partial response (PR):44% and stable disease (SD): 26%. Based on RECIST 1.1 (n = 125) CR:16%, PR:54%, SD:26% and mRECIST (n = 11) CR:73%, PR:0% and SD:18% were reported. Average duration of lenvatinib treatment was 7.4 months (median: 6.7 months) with 61% of patients remaining on lenvatinib at end of follow-up. Second-line (2L) treatment was initiated in 32 patients, with immunotherapy (50%), sorafenib (31%) and regorafenib (9%) being most common. Median time to 2L treatment from initiation of lenvatinib was about 8 months. Conclusions: Results from this retrospective real-world study in an U.S. population affirm the clinical effectiveness of 1L lenvatinib monotherapy among patients with uHCC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document