Arterial infusion of 5-fluorouracil combined with subcutaneous injection of pegylated interferon alpha-2b in treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy with a Port System Proposed by the Japanese Society of Interventional Radiology and Japanese Society of Implantable Port Assisted Treatment

Hepatocellular carcinoma is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death both in Japan and globally. In the advanced stage, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) is one of the most commonly used treatment options for liver cancer in Japan, and implantation of a catheter system (called a port system) in the body is a treatment method that has evolved mainly in Japan. The Guideline Committee of the Japanese Society of Interventional Radiology and the Japanese Society of Implantable Port Assisted Treatment jointly published clinical practice guidelines for HAIC with a port system to ensure its appropriate and safe performance in Japanese in 2018. We have written an updated English version of the guidelines with the aim of making this treatment widely known to experts globally. In this article, the evidence, method, indication, treatment regimen, and maintenance of the system are summarized.

Transcatheter hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy vs sorafenib in the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C: a meta-analysis of Asian population

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% CI_CR: [1.89-8.03], P _CR =0.0002; OR 3.47, 95% CI_PR: [2.31-5.24], P _PR <0.00001; OR 3.02, 95% CI_OR: [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% CI_SD: [0.51-1.45], P _SD =0.56; OR 0.62, 95% CI_PD: [0.35-1.11], P _PD =0.11; OR 0.53, 95% CI_SAE: [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.