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 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.

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 Toripalimab Combined With Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy Versus Lenvatinib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 153303382110638
Author(s):  
Yu-Jie Xu ◽  
Zhi-Cheng Lai ◽  
Min-Ke He ◽  
Xiao-Yun Bu ◽  
Huan-Wei Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Disease Control Rate ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Recist 1.1

Purpose: Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy have synergistic effects in multiple malignancies. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of toripalimab plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus lenvatinib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods: We conducted this retrospective study at 3 hospitals in China and eligible patients were 18 years or older and had a primary diagnosis of unresectable HCC with macroscopic vascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread. These patients were treated with toripalimab plus HAIC or lenvatinib monotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease control rate per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) 1.1, and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1. The results were compared by Student's test or the chi-square test, and the survival curves were calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method, and propensity-score matching (PSM) was used to reduce bias. Results: A total of 118 patients were recruited for this study: 53 in the TorHAIC group and 65 in the lenvatinib group. We found that the TorHAIC group showed a longer PFS (9.3 [95% CI, 7.81-10.8] vs 4.8 months [95% CI, 3.31−6.29]; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.57, 95% CI, 0.38-0.85; p = .006), a longer OS (17.13 [95% CI, 13.99−20.27] vs 10.1 months [95% CI, 8.14−12.06]; HR = 0.5, 95% CI, 0.31 − 0.81; p = .005), a higher disease control rate (86.8% vs 69.2%, p = .002) and a higher ORR (47.2% vs 9.2%, p < .001) by RECIST criteria than the lenvatinib group. Both toripalimab plus HAIC and lenvatinib had acceptable safety profiles. No treatment-related deaths occurred in this study. In the propensity score-matched cohorts (47 pairs), the outcomes in the TorHAIC group were also better than those in the lenvatinib group ( p < .05). Conclusion: Toripalimab plus HAIC was tolerable and effective in advanced HCC and the result needs to be confirmed in the phase III trial.

scholarly journals Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy Combined with Radiation Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Tumor Thrombosis of the Main Trunk or Bilobar of the Portal Vein

Liver Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-160
Author(s):  
Yumi Kosaka ◽  
Tomoki Kimura ◽  
Tomokazu Kawaoka ◽  
Yutaro Ogawa ◽  
Kei Amioka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Portal Vein ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Main Trunk ◽  
Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Tumor Thrombosis

Background: Overall survival of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with Vp4 (tumor thrombosis of the main trunk or bilobar of the portal vein) is extremely poor. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to clarify the prognosis of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) combined with radiation therapy (RT) for advanced HCC with Vp4 and to analyze the factors that contribute to the prognosis. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, 51 HCC patients who were treated with HAIC and RT for portal vein tumor thrombosis and met the following criteria were enrolled: (i) with Vp4; (ii) Child-Pugh score of 5–7; (iii) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1; (iv) no history of systemic therapy; and (v) from September 2004 to April 2019. Results: Median overall survival and median progression-free survival were 12.1 and 4.2 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed >50% of relative tumor volume in the liver (HR, 3.027; p = 0.008) and extrahepatic spread with (HR, 3.773; p = 0.040) as significant and independent factors of OS. The total overall response rate (ORR) was 19.6%; ORR in main tumor was 13.7%; and ORR in Vp4 was 51.0%. None of the patients who received HAIC combined with RT for advanced HCC with Vp4 developed hepatic failure. This combination therapy of HAIC with RT was safe and well tolerated in all cases. Conclusion: Combination therapies of HAIC and RT might be good therapy for advanced HCC with Vp4.

scholarly journals Clinical Benefits of Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1882
Author(s):  
Takahiro Yamasaki ◽  
Issei Saeki ◽  
Yurika Kotoh-Yamauchi ◽  
Ryo Sasaki ◽  
Norikazu Tanabe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Vascular Invasion ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Arterial Infusion ◽  
Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy ◽  
Recent Success ◽  
Clinical Benefits

Recent success of systemic therapeutic agents, including combination immunotherapy, could promote a change in the treatment strategy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) is a treatment option for advanced HCC in Japan, it is not recommended by other guidelines. We discuss the clinical benefits of HAIC compared to sorafenib. The clinical benefits of HAIC are as follows: (1) even a patient with Child–Pugh B HCC (7 or 8 points) is a candidate for HAIC (2) Child–Pugh scores barely decline with the use of HAIC compared with sorafenib (3) HAIC is highly effective in patients with vascular invasion compared with sorafenib; and (4) survival in patients receiving HAIC may not be associated with skeletal muscle volume. In contrast, the disadvantages are problems related with the reservoir system. HAIC has clinical benefits in a subpopulation of patients without extrahepatic metastasis with Child–Pugh A HCC and vascular invasion (especially primary branch invasion or main portal vein invasion) or with Child–Pugh B HCC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document