Regorafenib combined with transarterial chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a real-world study

The second-line treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with CalliSpheres drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization combined with regorafenib: A safety and efficacy analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of CalliSpheres drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) combined with regorafenib in the second-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was made of 34 patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that had progressed after first-line treatment in Linyi Tumor Hospital from October 2019 to June 2021. These patients were divided into observation group (n = 15) and control group (n = 19) based on their treatment plans, who were respectively treated with regorafenib alone and regorafenib combined with DEB-TACE. The objective response rate (ORR) and the disease control rate (DCR) were evaluated by the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST), and the progression-free survival (PFS) and the overall survival (OS) were calculated; the factors influencing PFS and OS of patients were analyzed by the Cox proportional hazards model; and the adverse reactions to the treatments were observed and recorded.

RESULTS

After 2 months of treatment, the ORR and the DCR of the observation group were 73.3% (11/15) and 86.7% (13/15) respectively, both higher than 10.5% (2/19) and 47.4% (9/19) of the control group. Their differences are statistically significant (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidences of regorafenib-related adverse reactions including hand-foot skin reactions, fatigue, hypertension, diarrhea, and proteinuria between the two groups (P > 0.05). In the observation group, the main adverse reactions to DEB-TACE such as fever, pain, nausea, and vomiting were relieved after symptomatic treatment, and no serious complications such as ectopic embolization of CalliSpheres drug-eluting beads occurred. As of July 31, 2022, the median follow-up time was 12.5 months, and the average was (14.00 ± 5.69) months. The median PFS was 9 months in the observation group, and 6 months in the control group, presenting a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05), and the median OS was 18 months in the observation group, and 12 months in the control group, also presenting a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). The results of monofactor prognostic analysis showed that Child grade, AFP level, and treatment method had an influence on the PFS and the OS of liver cancer patients receiving regorafenib second-line treatment (P < 0.05), and the results of multifactor prognostic analysis showed that child grade and treatment method independently influenced the PFS of patients, while treatment method independently influenced the OS of patients (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

DEB-TACE combined with regorafenib is safe and feasible in the treatment of unresectable HCC, with good efficacy and mild adverse reactions.

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib as second-line treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and macrovascular invasion and(or) extrahepatic metastasis

Background

Macrovascular invasion and(or) extrahepatic metastasis are the main clinical characteristics of Chinese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after entering the second-line treatment. The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of regorafenib as a second-line treatment for these patients with HCC.

Methods

We selected 253 patients with primary liver cancer who were treated in Henan Cancer Hospital from June 2017 to September 2020. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 63 patients with HCC with macrovascular invasion and/or extrahepatic metastasis were finally included. The clinical data of patients were obtained by consulting the electronic medical record system and through telephone follow-up. The median overall survival (mOS), duration of drug use, and disease control rate (DCR) of patients were evaluated, and the Cox regression model was used to analyze the risk factors of prognosis.

Results

The mOS of 63 patients with HCC administered regorafenib as second-line treatment was 9.6 months, the duration of drug use was 3.8 months, and the DCR was 59% (37/63). Cox multivariate analysis showed that overall survival (OS) was closely related to the level of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and treatment method but not to the type of first-line drug. The mOS of patients with AFP ≥400 ng/mL was 7.4 months, which was significantly lower than that of those with AFP <400 ng/mL (12.5 months) (P=0.0052). The mOS of patients treated with regorafenib alone was 6.8 months, which was significantly lower than that of those treated with regorafenib combined with immunotherapy (24.3 months) and intervention therapy (17.5 months) (P<0.0001). The mOS of patients using regorafenib as second-line treatment in the first-line sorafenib group and first-line nonsorafenib group were 9.5 and 9.6 months, respectively (P=0.9766). The grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) with an incidence of more than 10% included hand-foot syndrome, increased bilirubin, decreased albumin, and elevated transaminase, with incidences of 22%, 14%, 11%, and 10%, respectively.

Conclusions

As second-line treatment for patients with HCC with macrovascular invasion and(or) extrahepatic metastasis, regorafenib has definite efficacy and tolerable adverse reactions. It is the preferred drug for the second-line treatment of patients with advanced HCC.

Systemic Treatment in Intermediate Stage (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer-B) Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents an entity of poor prognosis, especially in cases of delayed diagnosis. According to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system, patients in BCLC-A are the most suitable for potentially curative treatments (surgery or radiofrequency ablation), whereas those in BCLC-C should be treated only with systemic treatment, as locoregional interventions are ineffective due to the tumor's extensiveness. For patients in the BCLC-B stage, trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the reference treatment, but the role of systemic treatment has been constantly increasing. As this group of patients is extremely heterogeneous, a case-by-case therapeutic strategy instead of a one-fits-all treatment is certainly required to achieve adequate results against HCC. The decision of selecting among immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), TACE, or a combination of them depends on the patient's tumor load, the severity of liver dysfunction, the general performance status, and the presence of concomitant extrahepatic diseases. The objective of this review is to critically appraise the recent data regarding the systemic treatment of BCLC-B HCCs, aiming to emphasize its potential role in the management of these difficult-to-treat patients.

Egyptian Society of Liver Cancer Recommendation Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Globally, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fourth most common cause of death from cancer. The prevalence of this pathology, which has been on the rise in the last 30 years, has been predicted to continue increasing. HCC is the most common cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in Egypt and is also the most common cancer in males. Chronic liver diseases, including chronic hepatitis C, which is a primary health concern in Egypt, are considered major risk factors for HCC. However, HCC surveillance is recommended for patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) and liver cirrhosis; those above 40 with HBV but without cirrhosis; individuals with hepatitis D co-infection or a family history of HCC; and Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) patients exhibiting significant fibrosis or cirrhosis. Several international guidelines aid physicians in the management of HCC. However, the availability and cost of diagnostic modalities and treatment options vary from one country to another. Therefore, the current guidelines aim to standardize the management of HCC in Egypt. The recommendations presented in this report represent the current management strategy at HCC treatment centers in Egypt. Recommendations were developed by an expert panel consisting of hepatologists, oncologists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, pathologists, and radiologists working under the umbrella of the Egyptian Society of Liver Cancer. The recommendations, which are based on the currently available local diagnostic aids and treatments in the country, include recommendations for future prospects.

Efficacy and Safety of TACE Combined with Regorafenib Plus PD-1 Inhibitor in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Sorafenib Resistance

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of TACE combined with regorafenib plus PD-1 inhibitor as a second-line therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma after sorafenib resistance.

Materials and Methods

The clinical data of 76 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who were drug-resistant to sorafenib from September 2018 to May 2022 in the tumor intervention department were collected. Among them, 35 patients used TACE combined with regorafenib plus PD-1 inhibitor (TACE-R-P) as second-line treatment, and the remaining 41 patients used TACE combined with regorafenib (TACE-R) as second-line treatment. The mRECIST (modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) standard was used to evaluate the therapeutic effect. The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of the two groups were compared. Blood samples were collected before and after treatment to detect the changes in biochemical indicators, and the adverse events (AEs) related to treatment were recorded.

Results

A total of 76 patients were included in the study, including 35 patients receiving TACE-R-P treatment and 41 patients receiving TACE-R treatment. Patients in the TACE-R-P group had longer median OS (19.7months vs 15.2months, HR:0.7716, 95% CI:0.4767-1.2490, P=0.03), longer median PFS (6.3months vs 3.8months, HR:0.6032, 95% CI:0.3727-0.9763, P=0.0029), higher objective response rate (37.14% vs 19.51%, P=0.001) and higher disease control rate (71.43% vs 48.78%, P=0.001) than those in the TACE-R group. Multivariate analysis showed that Child-Pugh grade (B/A; HR=1.283, 95% CI: 0.623-1.707, P=0.014), PVTT (Yes/No, HR=1.455, 95% CI: 0.977-2.038, P=0.018), extrahepatic metastasis (Yes/No, HR=1.766, 95% CI: 1.135-2.302, P=0.022) and treatment option (TACE-R/TACE-R-P, HR=1.930, 95% CI: 1.461-2.850, P=0.017) were independent prognostic factors for OS. There was no significant difference in the incidence and severity of AEs between the two groups.

Conclusion

TACE-R-P treatment can be more effective than TACE-R treatment for HCC after sorafenib resistance and can be given priority as a second-line treatment for HCC.

Efficacy and Prognostic Factors of Regorafenib in the Treatment of BCLC Stage C Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Failure of the First-Line Therapy

Purpose

Regorafenib is a standard second-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in the treatment of patients with Barcelona clinic liver cancer (BCLC) stage C HCC after failure of the first-line therapy and to analyze factors affecting the efficacy of regorafenib as the second-line treatment.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 103 BCLC stage C HCC patients who received regorafenib as the second-line treatment. Among them, 51 patients received regorafenib plus transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and 52 patients received regorafenib alone. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events were compared between the two groups, and factors influencing the efficacy of regorafenib were analyzed.

Results

In patients with BCLC stage C HCC after failure of the first-line therapy, there was no statistically significant difference in median PFS between regorafenib plus TACE group and regorafenib group (5.3 vs 4.0 months, P=0.432). The median OS was significantly longer in the regorafenib plus TACE group than that in the regorafenib group (11.3 vs 8.2 months, P=0.034). Patients in both groups experienced adverse events at rates of 78.43% and 75%, respectively. Rates of grade III-IV serious adverse events were 19.61% and 13.46%, respectively. Hand-foot skin reactions, fatigue, abdominal pain, and hypertension were common side effects of regorafenib. The number of tumors was noted as an independent prognostic factor for PFS in the univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, while Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (ECOG-PS) score, tumor size, the number of tumors, and combined local therapy were independent prognostic factors for OS. Regorafenib combined with TACE treatment improved OS for patients with ECOG-PS scores of 0-1, tumor size < 5 cm, and the number of tumors ≥ 3 compared with regorafenib alone.

Conclusion

Regorafenib exhibited to be a safe and effective sequential therapy for patients with BCLC stage C HCC after failure of the first-line treatment, and its combination with TACE could achieve a higher efficacy. ECOG-PS score, tumor size, the number of tumors, and combined local therapy were noted as prognostic factors affecting patients with BCLC stage C HCC who were treated with regorafenib.

Efficacy of Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients with Portal Vein Tumor Thrombus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) may enhance the efficacy of treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT); however, it remains unclear. We aim to evaluate the efficacy of TACE combined with TKIs. Methods: A thorough literature search was performed on major databases since their inception until October 2022. Based on the eligibility criteria, eight studies (2103 patients) were included. Results: Meta-analysis showed that TACE+sorafenib/apatinib had a better tumor response (objective response rate (ORR): RR = 4.85, 95% CI 2.68−8.75, disease control rate (DCR): RR = 3.23, 95% CI 1.88−5.56), and prolonged OS (HR = 0.50, 95%CI 0.42−0.60, p < 0.00001) than TACE alone. TACE+lenvatinib was stronger than TACE+sorafenib in ORR (60.7% vs. 38.9%) and TTP (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.43−0.86), whereas it was similar in DCR (96.4% vs. 96.3%) and OS (HR = 0.70 95% CI 0.46−1.05). Conclusions: TACE plus sorafenib or apatinib was superior to TACE alone for hepatocellular carcinoma with PVTT; no significant advantage was found between TACE+lenvatinib and TACE+sorafenib, although TACE+lenvatinib performed better in terms of ORR and TTP.

Efficacy and Safety of Regorafenib Plus Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors with or Without TACE as a Second-Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Purpose

We compare the efficacy and safety of regorafenib plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with transarterial chemoembolization (R+ICIs+TACE) versus regorafenib plus ICIs (R+ICIs) as the second-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

This retrospective study included patients with advanced HCC who received R+ICIs+TACE or R+ICIs as the second-line treatment from January 2019 to April 2022. Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were compared between the two groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the influence of confounding factors on the outcomes. Factors affecting PFS and OS were analyzed using a Cox proportional-hazards regression model.

Results

In total, 52 patients were included in this study, of whom 28 patients received R+ICIs+TACE and 24 patients received R+ICIs. After PSM (n=23 in each group), patients who received R+ICIs+TACE had a higher ORR (34.8% vs 4.3%, P=0.009), a longer PFS (5.8 vs 2.6 months, P<0.0001), and a longer OS (15.0 vs 7.5 months, P=0.014) than those who received R+ICIs. Age ≤ 50 years old, Child-Pugh class A6 and B7, and R+ICIs were found as independent prognostic factors for poor PFS. R+ICIs, α-fetoprotein >400 ng/mL, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio >133 were noted as independent prognostic factors for poor OS. The difference in the incidence of TRAEs between the two groups was not statistically significant (P> 0.05).

Conclusion

Compared to regorafenib plus ICIs, regorafenib plus ICIs with TACE was tolerated and improved survival as the second-line treatment for patients with advanced HCC.

Efficacy and Safety of TACE Combined with Regorafenib versus TACE in the Third-Line Treatment of Colorectal Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

The liver is the most common site of metastasis in colorectal cancer. In patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases, the 5-year survival rate is less than 5%. Many patients with colorectal liver metastases require effective subsequent therapy after the failure of standard first-line/second-line therapy. The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of TACE combined with Regorafenib versus TACE in the third-line treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases.

METHOD

The clinical data of 132 patients with colorectal liver metastases were collected. There were two groups: TACE + Regorafenib group (N = 63); TACE group (N = 69). TACE uses CalliSpheres® drug-loaded microspheres (loaded with irinotecan). Regorafenib is administered at a dose of 120 mg once daily. If the patient is severely intolerable, the regorafenib dose is adjusted to 80 mg once daily. Primary study endpoints were (1) to evaluate the tumor response, ORR, and DCR and (2) to evaluate OS and PFS in the two groups. Secondary study endpoints were (1) to compare the performance status, CEA, CA19-9 after treatment between the two groups and (2) to compare the incidence of adverse events between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in tumor response, ORR, DCR, OS, and PFS after treatment between the two groups. TACE combined with the Regorafenib group versus the TACE group: ORR (57.1% vs 33.3%), DCR (82.5% vs 68.1%), mOS (18.2 months vs 11.3 months), and mPFS (8.9 months vs 5.3 months). The performance status after treatment was better in the TACE + Regorafenib group than in the TACE group (P < 0.05). The CEA and CA19-9 negative rates after treatment were higher in the TACE + Regorafenib group than in the TACE group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

For the third-line treatment of colorectal liver metastases, the combination of TACE + Regorafenib had better tumor response, OS, and PFS than TACE TACE + Regorafenib combination could be considered as salvage therapy for colorectal liver metastases who failed the first- and second-line standard therapy.

Gelatin sponge microparticles for transarterial chemoembolization combined with regorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: a single-center retrospective study

Background

The treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is challenging. The positive effect of gelatin sponge microparticles for transarterial chemoembolization (GSMs-TACE) in the treatment of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C and large HCC has been confirmed by previous studies. This study initially explored the efficacy and safety of GSMs-TACE combined with regorafenib in patients with unresectable HCC who failed first-line sorafenib and/or lenvatinib therapy.

Methods

This retrospective study collated the data of patients who presented at the Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital of Dalian University between December 2018 and June 2021. Patients were treated with GSMs-TACE, followed by regorafenib 1 week later. Follow-up was conducted every 3 to 5 weeks after combination therapy. If the treatment was changed due to disease progression, the patients were followed up every 3 months to obtain overall survival (OS) time. The OS, progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) was used to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment, while adverse events (AEs) was used to assess its safety.

Results

A total of 47 patients were included in the study. The age of patients was 64.4±6.8 years; There were 43 (91.5%) males and 4 (8.5%) females; the number of Child-Pugh grade A was 22 (46.8%) and B was 25 (53.2%); the longest tumor diameter was 5.1 cm [interquartile range (IQR), 3.8, 8.9 cm]; the number of BCLC grade B was 14 (29.8%) and grade C was 33 (70.2%). The median follow-up time was 11.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 10.8 to 14.0 months]. The median number of GSMS-TACE sessions was 3. The initial doses of regorafenib were 80 mg/d (n=17, 36.2%), 120 mg/d (n=23, 48.9%), and 160 mg/d (n=7, 14.9%). The median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI: 4.5 to 7.5 months), and the median OS was 14.3 months (95% CI: 11.8 to 16.8 months). The ORR and DCR were 21.3% and 85.1%, respectively. The incidence of grade 3/4 AEs was 8 out of 47 patients (17.0%).

Conclusions

The study indicated that GSMs-TACE combined with regorafenib may be efficient and safe in patients with unresectable HCC. Future prospective large-scale studies should be conducted to verify these results.

Treatment options for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with hepatitis virus infection following sorafenib failure

Background

Currently, there are a few treatment options for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after progression following sorafenib (SOR) therapy, but with limited benefit. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as second-line treatment.

Methods

From May 2018 to May 2021, a total of 93 HCCs who failed SOR treatment were included in this study and divided into TKI group (n = 37) and TKI-ICI group (n = 56). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety were estimated among the two groups. In addition, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed for OS and PFS to identify possible prognostic factors.

Results

With a median follow-up time of 13.7 months, the median age of patients was 56 (range, 50–64) years and most were male. All of the patients were hepatitis virus-related HCC. Both median OS (7.63 months vs 19.23 months, P < 0.001) and median PFS (2.97 months vs 8.63 months, P < 0.001) were significantly improved in the TKI-ICI group compared to the TKI group. A significant increase in DCR was demonstrated in the TKI-ICI group compared to the TKI group (83.9% vs 45.9%, P = 0.0003), although no significant difference in ORR was reported (21.4% vs 8.1%, P = 0.1552). Multivariate Cox regression analysis of OS and PFS revealed that second-line regimen was an independent protective factor affecting death and progression in HCCs after SOR failure. In addition, Child–Pugh B7 was an independent risk factor of OS. Finally, there was no significant difference in the incidence of any grade or grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) between the two groups, and no treatment-related deaths were observed.

Conclusion

This real-world study suggests that the combination of TKIs and ICIs benefits more than mono-TKIs and is well tolerated in HCCs with hepatitis virus infection after SOR failure.

Real-World Study: A Powerful Tool for Malignant Tumor Research in General Surgery

Real-world study (RWS) is a method to draw conclusions by collecting and analyzing real-world data under a real clinical background. Compared with traditional randomized controlled trials (RCTs), RWSs are favored by clinicians because of their low cost and good extrapolation. In recent years, RWS has made remarkable achievements in the field of general surgery, especially in the drug treatment of advanced malignant tumors. Therefore, to further understand the main contents of the existing RWS and the application prospect of RWS in the future, this paper systematically reviews the clinical application of RWS in malignant tumors in general surgery in the past three years.

Efficacy of Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined with Molecular Targeted Agents for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Liver cancer is the second most common cause of cancer-related death, with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) being the most prevalent subtype. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in combination with different tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has recently been widely used for unresectable HCC (uHCC). However, studies investigating different combinations of agents have shown inconsistent results. Thus, we conducted a network meta-analysis to assess and compare the response of different agents in an uHCC setting. According to our results, TACE plus lenvatinib provides optimal treatment for uHCC, with the highest ranking based on OS, PFS, and DCR rates and the second-best ranking based on ORR rates.

Abstract

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is the mainstay treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, studies investigating different combinations of agents have shown inconsistent results. Here, we used network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare different agents across 41 studies (36 cohort studies and five RCTs) in 11,540 patients. Multiple RCTs and cohort studies were searched to evaluate TACE combined with different TKIs. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and tumor response. NMA used a random-effects consistency model to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. Hazard ratio (HR) and relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were analyzed. Further, heterogeneity and publication bias analyses were performed and agents were ranked. TACE plus lenvatinib provided the maximal OS (Rank probability: 0.7559), PFS (Rank probability: 0.8595), CR (Rank probability: 0.4179), and DCR (Rank probability: 0.3857). TACE plus anlotinib demonstrated the highest PR (p = 0.62649) and ORR (p = 0.51158). SD was more often associated with TACE plus sorafenib (Rank probability: 0.601685). TACE plus lenvatinib provides optimal treatment for uHCC based on the highest ranking of OS, PFS, and DCR rates. However, given the lack of statistically significant OS benefit, shared decision making should include other TKIs as acceptable alternatives.

SIB-IMRT combined with apatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with poor response to transarterial chemoembolization

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy combined with apatinib exhibits synergistic anti-tumor effect, while the application of simultaneous integrated boost intensity modulated radiotherapy (SIB-IMRT) combined with apatinib in HCC patients is scarce. Hence, this study aimed to explore the treatment response, survival, and safety profile of the SIB-IMRT combined with apatinib in unresectable HCC (uHCC) patients.

METHODS

A total of 19 uHCC patients with deficient response to transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), who scheduled for SIB-IMRT combined with apatinib treatment were enrolled. The SIB-IMRT was applied at the following dose: 95% planning target volume (PTV) at 30-50 Gy/2-2.5 Gy/15-20f and 90% Boost of 45-72 Gy/3-4.5 Gy/15-20f at 5 times per week with cone beam computerized tomography validation. During and after radiotherapy, the apatinib was administrated orally with the initial dose of 500 mg per day.

RESULTS

The complete response, partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease rates were 31.6%, 36.8%, 21.1% and 10.5%, respectively. Consequently, the objective response rate and disease control rate were 68.4% and 89.5%, respectively. During a median follow-up duration of 9.0 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.0 (95% confidential interval (CI): 4.9-7.1) months with 1-year PFS rate of 42.1%; the median overall survival (OS) was not reached with 1-year OS rate of 54.6%. The safety profile was acceptable with the most common adverse events including myelosuppression (42.1%), skin reaction (36.8%), and albuminuria (26.3%).

CONCLUSION

SIB-IMRT combined with apatinib exhibits a good efficacy and tolerable safety profile, which could be considered as a potential treatment choice for uHCC patients who have deficient response to TACE.

Comparison of the safety and prognosis of sequential regorafenib after sorafenib and lenvatinib treatment failure in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study

Background

There is lack of studies on sequential regorafenib after sorafenib and lenvatinib treatment failure in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study was to explore the safety and prognosis of sequential regorafenib after sorafenib and lenvatinib failure in HCC patients.

Methods

This study was a retrospective, real-world study that included 50 HCC patients who received sequential regrafinib after sorafenib and lenvatinib failure. The safety and prognosis of two groups were compared.

Results

The incidence of all grade and III/IV adverse events were 68% and 24%. According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) 1.1 and modified (m) RECIST standards, the objective response rates (ORRs) after receiving regorafenib were 14.0% and 22.0%, respectively. The disease control rates (DCRs) were 62.0% and 60.0%, respectively. Based on different first-line targeted drugs, 50 patients were divided into sorafenib (n=22) and lenvatinib group (n=28). There was no differences between two groups except age and bilirubin. And there was no differences in other treatments before or after regorafenib. The baseline between two groups was basically same and had good comparability. There was no difference in incidence of all grade and III/IV adverse events, ORR and DCR between two groups (P>0.05). On long-term prognosis, total overall survival (TOS) in sorafenib and lenvatinib group were 23.0 (95% CI: 15.1-30.9) vs. 29.7 (95% CI: 21.4-38.1) months. The difference was statistically significant (P=0.041). Besides, regorafenib overall survival (ROS) in sorafenib and lenvatinib group were 11.7 (95% CI: 7.1-16.3) vs. 15.9 (95% CI: 8.3-23.5) months. The difference was statistically significant ( P=0.045). The regorafenib progression-free survival (RPFS) was 5.6 (95% CI: 1.9-9.2) vs. 8.0 (95% CI: 5.1-10.9) months in sorafenib and lenvatinib group, respectively, and difference was not statistically significant (P=0.380).

Conclusions

Regorafenib is an effective drug for second-line treatment of HCC, with fewer severe adverse events, ORR and DCR was 14-22% and 62-60%, respectively. Both TOS and ROS in lenvatinib group were better than those in sorafenib group. For HCC patients whose first-line targeted drug is lenvatinib, it is safe and effective to accept regorafenib after disease progresses.

Efficacy and safety of sequential therapy with sorafenib and regorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a two-center study in China

BACKGROUND

Regorafenib is a standard 2nd-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the efficacy and safety of sequential therapy with sorafenib and regorafenib among advanced HCC patients in China is not clear.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, two-center, cohort study of advanced HCC patients who received sequential therapy of sorafenib and regorafenib from October 2018 to April 2020 at 2 Chinese institutions. The patients were converted directly to regorafenib after failing to respond to sorafenib monotherapy. The patients underwent evaluations every 4-6 weeks to determine the efficacy and safety of the treatment according to physiological, laboratory, and radiological results. A radiological evaluation using computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging scans was conducted. The outcomes included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients received regorafenib as a 2nd-line treatment after sorafenib progression. Of these patients, 26 (60.5%) and 17 (39.5%) were diagnosed with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages B and C, respectively. The median PFS was 11.0 [95% confidence interval (CI): 5.8-16.2] months, and the median OS was 17.0 (95% CI: 12.8-21.2) months. Conversely, the most common toxicities were hand-foot skin reaction (48.8%), diarrhea (32.6%), and hypertension (14%). The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were hypoalbuminemia (4.7%), anemia (4.7%), and thrombocytopenia (4.7%). Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400, alanine transaminase (ALT) ≥60 IU/L, and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) ≥60 IU/L before 2nd-line treatment were associated with PFS in the univariable analyses. The Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis showed that AFP [hazard ratio (HR) =0.225; 95% CI: 0.073-0.688; P=0.009], ALT (HR =0.195; 95% CI: 0.051-0.741; P=0.016), AST (HR =0.209; 95% CI: 0.063-0.697; P=0.011), and presence of extrahepatic metastasis (HR =0.074; 95% CI: 0.009-0.608; P=0.015) before 2nd-line treatment were independently associated with PFS.

CONCLUSIONS

The sequential therapy of sorafenib and regorafenib is well-tolerated and effective in advanced HCC patients after sorafenib progression based on our two-center real-world data. Patients with good liver function reserve and a high level of AFP before 2nd-line treatment may benefit from sequential treatment. These results still need further validation.