Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein thrombosis: a case-control study

Optimal candidates and surrogate endpoints for HAIC versus Sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) has been a long-standing intervention for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Despite positive clinical outcomes, its inclusion in guidelines remains limited due to a lack of evidence-based support. This study aims to identify optimal target populations for HAIC and validate associations between intermediate endpoints with overall survival (OS).

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary search strategy was based on medical subject headings terms (MeSH) using 'Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy', 'HAIC', 'Sorafenib', 'Nexavar', 'hepatocellular carcinoma', 'HCC', 'Liver cancer', combined with free text words. Data extraction, quality assessment, and analysis were performed according to preregistered protocol.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies, 6456 HCC patients were included for analysis (HAIC, n =2648; Sorafenib, n =3808). Pooled outcomes revealed that Sorafenib demonstrated better OS only in patients who were refractory to trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) (HR=1.32, 95% CI [1.01-1.73]), in other subgroups or overall HCC population HAIC consistently outperformed Sorafenib in patients' survival. Radiologically, higher response rates in the HAIC group does not necessarily translate into survival improvement, but the hazard ratios (HRs) of 1-year-OS (R 2 =0.41, P =0.0044) and 1-year-progression free survival (1y-PFS) (R 2 =0.77, P =0.0002) strongly correlated with the patients OS. Meanwhile, larger tumour size (HR=1.86, 95% CI [1.12-3.1, 95%), heavier tumour burden (HR=2.32, 95% CI [1.33-4.02), existence of MVI or EHS (HR=1.65, 95% CI [1.36-2]; HR=1.60, 95% CI [1.19-2.14]), and AFP >400 ng/ml (HR=1.52, 95% CI [1.20-1.92]) were identified as independent risk factors for OS, while HAIC treatment (HR=0.54, 95% CI [0.35-0.82]) and lower BCLC stage (HR=0.44, 95% CI [0.28-0.69]) were potential protective factors for HCC patients.

CONCLUSION

HAIC monotherapy appears noninferior to Sorafenib in HCC treatment, with potential benefits in specific subgroups. The robust correlation between 1y-OS/1y-PFS and OS, alongside identified risk and protective factors from the present study, offers valuable insights for designing future large prospective studies in this field.

Hepatic Artery Infusion Chemotherapy for Primary and Secondary Malignancies of the Liver: State of the Art and Current High-Level Evidence

BACKGROUND

Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAI) has been proposed as a valuable adjunct for multimodal therapy of primary and secondary liver malignancies. This review provides an overview of the currently available evidence of HAI, taking into account tumor response and long-term oncologic outcome.

SUMMARY

In colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), HAI in combination with systemic therapy leads to high response rates (85-90%) and conversion to resectablity in primary unresectable disease in up to 50%. HAI in combination with systemic therapy in CRLM in the adjuvant setting shows promising long-term outcomes with up to 50% 10-year survival in a large, non-randomized single-center cohort. For hepatocellular carcinoma patients, response rates as high as 20-40% have been reported for HAI and long-term outcomes compare well to other therapies. Similarly, survival for patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma 3 years after treatment with HAI is reported as high as 34%, which compares well to trials of systemic therapy where 3-year survival is usually below 5%. However, evidence is mainly limited by highly selected, heterogenous patient groups, and outdated chemotherapy regimens. The largest body of evidence stems from small, often non-randomized cohorts, predominantly from highly specialized single centers.

KEY MESSAGE

In well-selected patients with primary and secondary liver malignancies, HAI might improve response rates and, possibly, long-term survival. Results of ongoing randomized trials will show whether a wider adoption of HAI is justified, particularly to increase rates of resectability in advanced malignant diseases confined to the liver.

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.

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus: An updated meta-analysis and systematic review

Background

Sorafenib was the first drug approved for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, it is limited by poor efficacy for HCC with portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Some studies suggested that hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) could provide survival benefits to patients with advanced HCC with PVTT.

Aim

The study aimed to compare the efficacy of HAIC versus sorafenib in patients with HCC accompanied by PVTT.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies published until September 2022. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata SE 15 software.

Results

Eight studies with 672 patients, 403 in the HAIC group and 269 in the sorafenib group, were included in the meta-analysis. The rates of complete response (RR=3.88, 95%CI:1.35-11.16, P=0.01), partial response (RR=3.46, 95%CI:1.94-6.18, P<0.0001), objective response rate (RR=4.21, 95%CI:2.44-7.28, P<0.00001) and disease control rate (RR=1.73, 95%CI:1.28-2.35, P=0.0004) were significantly higher in the HAIC group compared to the sorafenib group, whereas the progressive disease rate (RR=0.57, 95%CI:0.40-0.80, P=0.02) was significantly lower in the former. In contrast, the stable disease rate (RR=1.10, 95%CI (0.69-1.76), P=0.68) was similar in both groups. The overall survival (HR=0.50, 95%CI:0.40-0.63, P<0.05) and progression-free survival (HR=0.49, 95%CI:0.35-0.67, P<0.05) rates were significantly higher in the HAIC group compared to the sorafenib group.

Conclusion

HAIC has better efficacy against HCC with PVTT than sorafenib and may be considered an alternative to the latter. However, more high-quality randomized control trials and longer follow-ups are needed to verify our findings.