Carvedilol versus Propranolol in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Liver Cancer Pub Date : 2026-06-29 DOI:10.1159/000553325
Byeong Geun Song, Myeongcheol Lee, Juhee Cho, Geum-Youn Gwak, Danbee Kang, Dong Hyun Sinn
{"title":"Carvedilol versus Propranolol in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Nationwide Cohort Study.","authors":"Byeong Geun Song, Myeongcheol Lee, Juhee Cho, Geum-Youn Gwak, Danbee Kang, Dong Hyun Sinn","doi":"10.1159/000553325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Beta-blockers reduce portal hypertension; however, evidence comparing carvedilol and propranolol in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is lacking. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of carvedilol versus propranolol in patients with HCC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database (2009-2023), we identified 11,124 patients with newly diagnosed HCC who were prescribed either carvedilol (<i>n</i> = 2,457) or propranolol (<i>n</i> = 8,667) within 180 days of diagnosis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcome was hepatic decompensation. Multivariable Cox regression and 1:2 PS matching were used as primary analytical approaches, with sensitivity analyses restricted to 6-month survivors and a new-user design.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During a median follow-up of 1.5 years, carvedilol use was associated with a significantly lower risk of hepatic decompensation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.72) and all-cause mortality (aHR 0.84; 95% CI 0.79-0.90) compared to propranolol. In the 1:2 PS-matched cohort (<i>n</i> = 5,922), these associations remained consistent for both decompensation (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.74) and mortality (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.90). These benefits were consistent across various subgroups, and in sensitivity analysis excluding early death within 6 months from diagnosis and using a new-user design.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with HCC, carvedilol was associated with better survival and lower risk of hepatic decompensation than propranolol. Carvedilol may be the preferred beta-blocker over propranolol in the setting of HCC.</p>","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13456687/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liver Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000553325","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Beta-blockers reduce portal hypertension; however, evidence comparing carvedilol and propranolol in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is lacking. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of carvedilol versus propranolol in patients with HCC.

Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database (2009-2023), we identified 11,124 patients with newly diagnosed HCC who were prescribed either carvedilol (n = 2,457) or propranolol (n = 8,667) within 180 days of diagnosis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcome was hepatic decompensation. Multivariable Cox regression and 1:2 PS matching were used as primary analytical approaches, with sensitivity analyses restricted to 6-month survivors and a new-user design.

Results: During a median follow-up of 1.5 years, carvedilol use was associated with a significantly lower risk of hepatic decompensation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.72) and all-cause mortality (aHR 0.84; 95% CI 0.79-0.90) compared to propranolol. In the 1:2 PS-matched cohort (n = 5,922), these associations remained consistent for both decompensation (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.74) and mortality (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.90). These benefits were consistent across various subgroups, and in sensitivity analysis excluding early death within 6 months from diagnosis and using a new-user design.

Conclusion: In patients with HCC, carvedilol was associated with better survival and lower risk of hepatic decompensation than propranolol. Carvedilol may be the preferred beta-blocker over propranolol in the setting of HCC.

卡维地洛与心得安在肝细胞癌患者中的应用:一项全国性队列研究。
导读:受体阻滞剂降低门静脉高压;然而,比较卡维地洛和心得安在肝细胞癌(HCC)患者中的疗效尚无证据。我们的目的是比较卡维地洛和心得安在HCC患者中的临床结果。方法:使用韩国国民健康保险服务数据库(2009-2023),我们确定了11124例新诊断的HCC患者,这些患者在诊断后180天内服用卡维地洛(n = 2457)或心得安(n = 8667)。主要结局是全因死亡率,次要结局是肝功能失代偿。多变量Cox回归和1:2 PS匹配作为主要分析方法,敏感性分析仅限于6个月幸存者和新用户设计。结果:在中位随访1.5年期间,与心得安相比,卡维地洛的使用与肝失代偿的风险(校正风险比[aHR] 0.67; 95%可信区间[CI] 0.62-0.72)和全因死亡率(aHR 0.84; 95% CI 0.79-0.90)显著降低相关。在1:2 ps匹配的队列中(n = 5,922),这些关联在失代偿(HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.74)和死亡率(HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.90)保持一致。这些益处在不同的亚组中是一致的,在敏感性分析中排除了诊断后6个月内的早期死亡和使用新用户设计。结论:在HCC患者中,卡维地洛比心得安有更好的生存率和更低的肝功能失代偿风险。卡维地洛可能是HCC患者首选的β受体阻滞剂,而不是心得安。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Liver Cancer
Liver Cancer Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
20.80
自引率
7.20%
发文量
53
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Liver Cancer is a journal that serves the international community of researchers and clinicians by providing a platform for research results related to the causes, mechanisms, and therapy of liver cancer. It focuses on molecular carcinogenesis, prevention, surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment, including molecular targeted therapy. The journal publishes clinical and translational research in the field of liver cancer in both humans and experimental models. It publishes original and review articles and has an Impact Factor of 13.8. The journal is indexed and abstracted in various platforms including PubMed, PubMed Central, Web of Science, Science Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, Google Scholar, DOAJ, Chemical Abstracts Service, Scopus, Embase, Pathway Studio, and WorldCat.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书