Prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein tumor thrombus treated with combination of transarterial chemoembolization and palliative thermal ablation

Efficacy of Lenvatinib Combined with PD-1 Inhibitor versus Sorafenib and PD-1 Inhibitor with or Without TACE for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Extrahepatic Metastasis

Background

Lenvatinib or Sorafenib combined with programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor as recommend treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with extrahepatic metastasis (EHM). We aimed to compared the prognosis of Lenvatinib plus PD-1 inhibitor (Len+PD-1) versus Sorafenib plus PD-1 (Sora+PD-1) as an initial therapy for HCC with EHM.

Methods

Incorporating a sum of 229 HCC patients with EHM were encompassed within this study, with 127 in the Sora+PD-1 group and 102 in the Len+PD-1 group. Through propensity score matching (PSM), we compared overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and patient safety between these two groups.

Results

The median OS were 13.0 months and 14.2 months in the Sora+PD-1 group and Len+PD-1 group. The 6-, 12-, and 24-month OS rates were 92.9%, 58.9% and 5.6% in Sora+PD-1 group and 93.1%, 61.8% and 22.6% in Len+PD-1 group, respectively. The Len+PD-1 group had obviously better OS than the Sora+PD-1 group (P = 0.002). The 3-, 6-, and 12-month PFS rates were 76.4%, 27.6% and 1.6% in Sora+PD-1 group and 86.2%, 50.5% and 12.2% in Len+PD-1 group, respectively. Compared with Sora+PD-1 group, the Len+PD-1 group had obviously better PFS (P < 0.001). Analysis within subgroups showed that OS was significant in patients receiving TACE in Len+PD-1 group than Sora+PD-1 group (p = 0.003).

Conclusion

Len+PD-1 group had longer OS and PFS than Sora+PD-1 group for patient with EHM. In addition, OS in patients received TACE was improved with Len+PD-1 treatment. For patients without TACE, there was no significance between Sora+PD-1 and Len+PD-1 groups.

Sorafenib as adjuvant therapy following radiofrequency ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma within Milan criteria: a multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered as a convenient treatment with mild damage in treating recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC). However, for patients with high risk of progression after RFA still needs new strategies to decrease the repeat recurrence.

METHODS

A total of 460 patients with RHCC within Milan criteria in four institutions were enrolled. 174 pairs were enrolled after propensity score matching (PSM). Overall survival (OS) and tumor-free survival (TFS) were compared between the two groups. A quantitative score system was established to screen out the beneficial population from RFA-sorafenib treatment.

RESULTS

The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 97.7%, 83.7%, 54.7% for RFA-sorafenib group, and 93.1%, 61.3%, 30.9% for RFA group after PSM, respectively. Compared with the RFA group, the RFA-sorafenib group had significantly better OS (P < 0.001). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year TFS rates were 90.8%, 49.0%, 20.4% for RFA-sorafenib group, and 67.8%, 28.0%, 14.5% for RFA group after PSM. The difference was observed significantly between RFA-sorafenib group and RFA group (P < 0.001). A quantitative risk score system was established to precisely screen out the beneficial population from RFA-sorafenib treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant sorafenib after RFA was superior to RFA alone in improving survival outcomes in patients with recurrent HCC within Milan criteria after initial hepatectomy. Subgroup analyses concluded that patients with high risk score had significantly longer survival from sorafenib administration.