Arterial Chemotherapy of Oxaliplatin Plus Fluorouracil Versus Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Biomolecular Exploratory, Randomized, Phase III Trial (FOHAIC-1)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ning Lyu ◽  
Xun Wang ◽  
Ji-Bin Li ◽  
Jin-Fa Lai ◽  
Qi-Feng Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Curative Surgery ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy

PURPOSE Interventional hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy of infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (HAIC-FO) displayed an encouraging safety profile and antitumor activity in a previous phase II trial and a propensity-score-matching study involving patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS In this open-label, phase III trial, patients with advanced HCC, previously untreated with systemic therapy, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive HAIC-FO or sorafenib. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. An exploratory model for predicting the efficacy of HAIC-FO on the basis of genomic sequencing was developed. RESULTS Between May 2017 and May 2020, 262 patients were randomly assigned. The median tumor size was 11.2 cm (interquartile range, 8.5-13.7 cm). Macrovascular invasion was present in 65.6%, and the percentage of patients with > 50% tumor volume involvement of the liver and/or Vp-4 portal vein tumor thrombosis was 49.2%. At data cutoff (October 31, 2020), median OS was 13.9 months for HAIC-FO and 8.2 for sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.408; 95% CI, 0.301 to 0.552; P < .001). Tumor downstaging occurred in 16 (12.3% of 130) patients receiving HAIC-FO, including 15 receiving curative surgery or ablation, and finally achieving a median OS of 20.8 months, with a 1-year OS rate of 93.8%. In high-risk subpopulations, OS was significantly longer with HAIC-FO than with sorafenib (10.8 months v 5.7 months; HR 0.343; 95% CI, 0.219 to 0.538; P < .001). A newly developed 15-mutant-gene prediction model identified 83% of patients with response to HAIC-FO. HAIC-FO responders had longer OS than HAIC-FO nonresponders (19.3 months v 10.6 months; HR 0.323; 95% CI, 0.186 to 0.560; P = .002). CONCLUSION HAIC-FO achieved better survival outcomes than sorafenib in advanced HCC, even in association with a high intrahepatic disease burden.

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.

Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Study of Oxaliplatin Plus Fluorouracil/Leucovorin Versus Doxorubicin As Palliative Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma From Asia

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (28) ◽  
pp. 3501-3508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shukui Qin ◽  
Yuxian Bai ◽  
Ho Yeong Lim ◽  
Sumitra Thongprasert ◽  
Yee Chao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Palliative Chemotherapy ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Local Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Open Label ◽  
End Point

Purpose To determine whether FOLFOX4 (infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) administered as palliative chemotherapy to patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) provides a survival benefit and efficacy versus doxorubicin. Patients and Methods This multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase III study in mainland China, Taiwan, Korea, and Thailand involved 371 patients age 18 to 75 years who had locally advanced or metastatic HCC and were ineligible for curative resection or local treatment. They were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive either FOLFOX4 (n = 184) or doxorubicin (n = 187). The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR) by RECIST (version 1.0), and safety. Results At the prespecified final analysis, median OS was 6.40 months with FOLFOX4 (95% CI, 5.30 to 7.03) and 4.97 months with doxorubicin (95% CI, 4.23 to 6.03; P = .07; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.02). Median PFS was 2.93 months with FOLFOX4 (95% CI, 2.43 to 3.53), and 1.77 months with doxorubicin (95% CI, 1.63 to 2.30; P < .001; HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.79). RR was 8.15% with FOLFOX4 and 2.67% with doxorubicin (P = .02). On continued follow-up, the trend toward increased OS with FOLFOX4 was maintained (P = .04; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.99). Toxicity was consistent with previous experiences with FOLFOX4; proportions of grade 3 to 4 adverse events were similar between treatments. Conclusion Although the study did not meet its primary end point, the trend toward improved OS with FOLFOX4, along with increased PFS and RR, suggests that this regimen may confer some benefit to Asian patients, but an OS benefit cannot be concluded from these data.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document