Zhenwei Peng, Shuling Chen, Han Xiao, Yuanqi Wang, M. Kuang
{"title":"微血管侵袭指导选择索拉非尼和TACE联合治疗中复发性肝细胞癌的候选药物。","authors":"Zhenwei Peng, Shuling Chen, Han Xiao, Yuanqi Wang, M. Kuang","doi":"10.1200/jgo.2019.5.suppl.105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"105 Background: To investigate the role of sorafenib combined with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for the treatment of intermediate recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after initial hepatectomy and whether the status of microvascular invasion (MVI) could help screen out the appropriate candidates for the combination treatment. Methods: The study was approved by the ethics committee of two tertiary medical centers in China. From Jan 2010 to Dec 2016, 260 consecutive patients with intermediate rHCC after initial hepatectomy who underwent combination treatment or TACE were enrolled. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between these two treatments according to MVI status. Results: The 1-, 3-, 5-year OS (77.1% vs. 62.0%, 49.3% vs. 35.2%, 38.9% vs. 20.5%, P = 0.011) and PFS (74.2% vs. 56.5%, 37.5% vs. 18.7%, 37.5% vs. 18.7%, P = 0.003) rates were significantly higher in the combination group than those in the TACE group for intermediate rHCC. For MVI-positive patients, the median OS (17.2 months vs. 12.1 months, P = 0.024) and PFS (17.0 months vs. 11.0 months, P = 0.022) after combination treatment (n = 55) were significantly longer than those after TACE alone (n = 72). For MVI-negative patients, the median OS (42.7 months vs. 32.6 months, P = 0.247) and PFS (24.6 months vs. 17.2 months, P = 0.113) were comparable between combination therapy (n = 73) and TACE alone (n = 60). Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor number, MVI status and treatment allocation were significant predictors of OS and PFS, while the tumor size was another prognostic factor for PFS. Conclusions: Patients with intermediate rHCC can benefit from sorafenib plus TACE treatment, while MVI-positive patients were good candidates for combination treatment.","PeriodicalId":15862,"journal":{"name":"Journal of global oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Microvascular invasion guiding selection of candidates for combination treatment with sorafenib and TACE for intermediate recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.\",\"authors\":\"Zhenwei Peng, Shuling Chen, Han Xiao, Yuanqi Wang, M. Kuang\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/jgo.2019.5.suppl.105\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"105 Background: To investigate the role of sorafenib combined with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for the treatment of intermediate recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after initial hepatectomy and whether the status of microvascular invasion (MVI) could help screen out the appropriate candidates for the combination treatment. Methods: The study was approved by the ethics committee of two tertiary medical centers in China. From Jan 2010 to Dec 2016, 260 consecutive patients with intermediate rHCC after initial hepatectomy who underwent combination treatment or TACE were enrolled. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between these two treatments according to MVI status. Results: The 1-, 3-, 5-year OS (77.1% vs. 62.0%, 49.3% vs. 35.2%, 38.9% vs. 20.5%, P = 0.011) and PFS (74.2% vs. 56.5%, 37.5% vs. 18.7%, 37.5% vs. 18.7%, P = 0.003) rates were significantly higher in the combination group than those in the TACE group for intermediate rHCC. For MVI-positive patients, the median OS (17.2 months vs. 12.1 months, P = 0.024) and PFS (17.0 months vs. 11.0 months, P = 0.022) after combination treatment (n = 55) were significantly longer than those after TACE alone (n = 72). For MVI-negative patients, the median OS (42.7 months vs. 32.6 months, P = 0.247) and PFS (24.6 months vs. 17.2 months, P = 0.113) were comparable between combination therapy (n = 73) and TACE alone (n = 60). Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor number, MVI status and treatment allocation were significant predictors of OS and PFS, while the tumor size was another prognostic factor for PFS. Conclusions: Patients with intermediate rHCC can benefit from sorafenib plus TACE treatment, while MVI-positive patients were good candidates for combination treatment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of global oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of global oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/jgo.2019.5.suppl.105\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of global oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/jgo.2019.5.suppl.105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
105背景:探讨索拉非尼联合经动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)治疗原发性肝切除术后中期复发性肝细胞癌(rHCC)的作用,以及微血管侵犯(MVI)状况是否有助于筛选合适的联合治疗候选者。方法:本研究经国内两家三级医疗中心伦理委员会批准。2010年1月至2016年12月,连续纳入260例首次肝切除术后接受联合治疗或TACE的中度rHCC患者。根据MVI状态比较两种治疗的总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)。结果:中期rHCC联合组的1、3、5年OS (77.1% vs. 62.0%, 49.3% vs. 35.2%, 38.9% vs. 20.5%, P = 0.011)和PFS (74.2% vs. 56.5%, 37.5% vs. 18.7%, 37.5% vs. 18.7%, P = 0.003)率显著高于TACE组。对于mvi阳性患者,联合治疗(n = 55)后的中位OS(17.2个月vs 12.1个月,P = 0.024)和PFS(17.0个月vs 11.0个月,P = 0.022)明显长于单独接受TACE治疗(n = 72)的患者。对于mvi阴性患者,联合治疗(n = 73)和单独TACE (n = 60)的中位OS(42.7个月vs. 32.6个月,P = 0.247)和PFS(24.6个月vs. 17.2个月,P = 0.113)具有可比性。多因素分析显示,肿瘤数量、MVI状态和治疗分配是OS和PFS的重要预测因素,肿瘤大小是PFS的另一个预后因素。结论:中度rHCC患者可以从索拉非尼联合TACE治疗中获益,而mvi阳性患者是联合治疗的良好候选者。
Microvascular invasion guiding selection of candidates for combination treatment with sorafenib and TACE for intermediate recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.
105 Background: To investigate the role of sorafenib combined with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for the treatment of intermediate recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after initial hepatectomy and whether the status of microvascular invasion (MVI) could help screen out the appropriate candidates for the combination treatment. Methods: The study was approved by the ethics committee of two tertiary medical centers in China. From Jan 2010 to Dec 2016, 260 consecutive patients with intermediate rHCC after initial hepatectomy who underwent combination treatment or TACE were enrolled. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between these two treatments according to MVI status. Results: The 1-, 3-, 5-year OS (77.1% vs. 62.0%, 49.3% vs. 35.2%, 38.9% vs. 20.5%, P = 0.011) and PFS (74.2% vs. 56.5%, 37.5% vs. 18.7%, 37.5% vs. 18.7%, P = 0.003) rates were significantly higher in the combination group than those in the TACE group for intermediate rHCC. For MVI-positive patients, the median OS (17.2 months vs. 12.1 months, P = 0.024) and PFS (17.0 months vs. 11.0 months, P = 0.022) after combination treatment (n = 55) were significantly longer than those after TACE alone (n = 72). For MVI-negative patients, the median OS (42.7 months vs. 32.6 months, P = 0.247) and PFS (24.6 months vs. 17.2 months, P = 0.113) were comparable between combination therapy (n = 73) and TACE alone (n = 60). Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor number, MVI status and treatment allocation were significant predictors of OS and PFS, while the tumor size was another prognostic factor for PFS. Conclusions: Patients with intermediate rHCC can benefit from sorafenib plus TACE treatment, while MVI-positive patients were good candidates for combination treatment.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Global Oncology (JGO) is an online only, open access journal focused on cancer care, research and care delivery issues unique to countries and settings with limited healthcare resources. JGO aims to provide a home for high-quality literature that fulfills a growing need for content describing the array of challenges health care professionals in resource-constrained settings face. Article types include original reports, review articles, commentaries, correspondence/replies, special articles and editorials.