Supplementary Sorafenib Therapies for Hepatocellular Carcinoma-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Supplementary Sorafenib for Liver Cancer

HIF-1α and VEGF as prognostic biomarkers in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization

BACKGROUND

Neoangiogenesis plays a crucial role in the progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and concerns have been raised about the role of neoangiogenesis on the effectiveness of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).

AIM

In this study, we aimed to evaluate Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) and Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-1α (HIF-1α) as circulating prognostic biomarkers in HCC patients treated with TACE.

METHODS

Blood samples were collected from 163 patients before (t0) and four weeks after TACE (t1).

RESULTS

Higher levels of VEGF after TACE were demonstrated (264.0 [78.7-450.8] vs. 278.6 [95.0-576.6] pg/mL; p < 0.0001). Responders to TACE had lower levels of VEGF than non-responders both at t0 (200.0 [58.9-415.8] vs. 406.6 [181.4-558.6] pg/mL; p = 0.006) and at t1 (257.3 [68.5-528.6] vs. 425.9 [245.2-808.3] pg/mL; p = 0.003), and in both groups there was an increase in VEGF compared to measurements before treatment (p = 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). VEGF was not associated with overall survival (OS), while patients with HIF-1α ≤ 0.49 ng/mL showed better prognosis (median OS 28.0 months [95% CI 19.7-36.3] vs. 17.0 months [95% CI 11.1-22.9]; p = 0.01). Moreover, HIF-1α was identified as an independent prognostic parameter.

CONCLUSIONS

VEGF and HIF-1α can be considered useful prognostic biomarkers in HCC patients treated with TACE.

Anticancer Drugs Compared to No Anticancer Drugs in Patients with Advanced Hepatobiliary Cancer: A Mapping Review and Evidence Gap Map

Introduction

Despite being commonly recommended, the impact of anticancer drugs (ACDs) on patient-important outcomes beyond survival for advanced hepatobiliary cancers (HBCs) may not have been sufficiently assessed. We aim to identify and map the evidence regarding ACDs versus best supportive care (BSC) for advanced HBCs, considering patient-centered outcomes.

Methods

In this mapping review, we included systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and observational studies comparing ACDs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, biological/targeted therapy) versus BSC for advanced HBCs. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible studies. Two reviewers performed the screening and data extraction processes. We developed evidence maps for each type of cancer.

Results

We included 87 studies (60 for advanced liver cancer and 27 for gallbladder or bile duct cancers). Most of the evidence favored ACDs for survival outcomes, and BSC for toxicity. We identified several evidence gaps for non-survival outcomes, including quality of life or quality of end-of-life care.

Discussion

Patient-important outcomes beyond survival in advanced HBCs are insufficiently assessed by the available evidence. Future studies need to address these gaps to better inform decision-making processes.

Systemic Oncological Treatments versus Supportive Care for Patients with Advanced Hepatobiliary Cancers: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

The trade-off between systemic oncological treatments (SOTs) and UPSC in patients with primary advanced hepatobiliary cancers (HBCs) is not clear in terms of patient-centred outcomes beyond survival. This overview aims to assess the effectiveness of SOTs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted/biological therapies) versus UPSC in advanced HBCs.

METHODS

We searched for systematic reviews (SRs) in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos and PROSPERO. Two authors assessed eligibility independently and performed data extraction. We estimated the quality of SRs and the overlap of primary studies, performed de novo meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

RESULTS

We included 18 SRs, most of which were of low quality and highly overlapped. For advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, SOTs showed better overall survival (HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.55-0.77, high certainty for first-line therapy; HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.92, moderate certainty for second-line therapy) with higher toxicity (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 0.87-1.60, very low certainty for first-line therapy; RR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.28-1.96, low certainty for second-line therapy). Survival was also better for SOTs in advanced gallbladder cancer. No outcomes beyond survival and toxicity could be meta-analysed.

CONCLUSION

SOTs in advanced HBCs tend to improve survival at the expense of greater toxicity. Future research should inform other patient-important outcomes to guide clinical decision making.

Systemic Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Chinese Consensus-Based Interdisciplinary Expert Statements

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of liver cancer and causes many cancer-related deaths worldwide; in China, it is the second most prevalent cause of cancer deaths. Most patients are diagnosed clinically with advanced stage disease.

SUMMARY

For more than a decade, sorafenib, a small-molecular-weight tyrosine kinase inhibitor (SMW-TKI) was the only molecular targeted drug available with a survival benefit for the treatment of advanced HCC. With the development of novel TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced HCC, the management of patients has been greatly improved. However, though angiogenic-based targeted therapy remains the backbone for the systemic treatment of HCC, to date, no Chinese guidelines for novel molecular targeted therapies to treat advanced HCC have been established. Our interdisciplinary panel on the treatment of advanced HCC comprising hepatologists, hepatobiliary surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, pathologists, orthopedic surgeons, traditional Chinese medicine physicians, and interventional radiologists has reviewed the literature in order to develop updated treatment regimens.

KEY MESSAGES

Panel consensus statements for the appropriate use of new molecular -targeted drugs including doses, combination therapies, adverse reaction management as well as efficacy evaluation, and predictions for treatment of advanced HCC with evidence levels based on published data are presented, thereby providing an overview of molecular targeted therapies for healthcare professionals.