ÌÇÐÄvlog

Object moved to here.

Survival in Patients With Recurrent Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Sorafenib Plus TACE vs TACE Alone Randomized Clinical Trial | Targeted and Immune Therapy | JAMA Oncology | ÌÇÐÄvlog

ÌÇÐÄvlog

[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
1.
Sung ÌýH, Ferlay ÌýJ, Siegel ÌýRL, Ìýet al. ÌýGlobal cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.Ìý ÌýCA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-249. doi:
2.
Park ÌýJW, Chen ÌýM, Colombo ÌýM, Ìýet al. ÌýGlobal patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma management from diagnosis to death: the BRIDGE Study.Ìý ÌýLiver Int. 2015;35(9):2155-2166. doi:
3.
Imamura ÌýH, Matsuyama ÌýY, Tanaka ÌýE, Ìýet al. ÌýRisk factors contributing to early and late phase intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy.Ìý ÌýJ Hepatol. 2003;38(2):200-207. doi:
4.
European Association for the Study of the Liver. ÌýEASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý ÌýJ Hepatol. 2018;69(1):182-236. doi:
5.
Heimbach ÌýJK, Kulik ÌýLM, Finn ÌýRS, Ìýet al. ÌýAASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý Ìý±á±ð±è²¹³Ù´Ç±ô´Ç²µ²â. 2018;67(1):358-380. doi:
6.
Benson ÌýAB, D’Angelica ÌýMI, Abbott ÌýDE, Ìýet al. ÌýHepatobiliary cancers, version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.Ìý ÌýJ Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2021;19(5):541-565. doi:
7.
Choi ÌýJW, Park ÌýJY, Ahn ÌýSH, Ìýet al. ÌýEfficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization in recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after curative surgical resection.Ìý ÌýAm J Clin Oncol. 2009;32(6):564-569. doi:
8.
Ho ÌýCM, Lee ÌýPH, Shau ÌýWY, Ho ÌýMC, Wu ÌýYM, Hu ÌýRH. ÌýSurvival in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after primary hepatectomy: comparative effectiveness of treatment modalities.Ìý Ìý³§³Ü°ù²µ±ð°ù²â. 2012;151(5):700-709. doi:
9.
Wang ÌýK, Liu ÌýG, Li ÌýJ, Ìýet al. ÌýEarly intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy treated with re-hepatectomy, ablation or chemoembolization: a prospective cohort study.Ìý ÌýEur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41(2):236-242. doi:
10.
Lencioni ÌýR, de Baere ÌýT, Soulen ÌýMC, Rilling ÌýWS, Geschwind ÌýJF. ÌýLipiodol transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of efficacy and safety data.Ìý Ìý±á±ð±è²¹³Ù´Ç±ô´Ç²µ²â. 2016;64(1):106-116. doi:
11.
Hou ÌýYF, Li ÌýB, Wei ÌýYG, Ìýet al. ÌýSecond hepatectomy improves survival in patients with microvascular invasive hepatocellular carcinoma meeting the Milan criteria.Ìý ÌýMedicine (Baltimore). 2015;94(48):e2070. doi:
12.
Meniconi ÌýRL, Komatsu ÌýS, Perdigao ÌýF, Boëlle ÌýPY, Soubrane ÌýO, Scatton ÌýO. ÌýRecurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a Western strategy that emphasizes the impact of pathologic profile of the first resection.Ìý Ìý³§³Ü°ù²µ±ð°ù²â. 2015;157(3):454-462. doi:
13.
Roayaie ÌýS, Blume ÌýIN, Thung ÌýSN, Ìýet al. ÌýA system of classifying microvascular invasion to predict outcome after resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý Ìý³Ò²¹²õ³Ù°ù´Ç±ð²Ô³Ù±ð°ù´Ç±ô´Ç²µ²â. 2009;137(3):850-855. doi:
14.
Lim ÌýKC, Chow ÌýPK, Allen ÌýJC, Ìýet al. ÌýMicrovascular invasion is a better predictor of tumor recurrence and overall survival following surgical resection for hepatocellular carcinoma compared to the Milan criteria.Ìý ÌýAnn Surg. 2011;254(1):108-113. doi:
15.
Jin ÌýYJ, Lee ÌýJW, Lee ÌýOH, Ìýet al. ÌýTransarterial chemoembolization versus surgery/radiofrequency ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma with or without microvascular invasion.Ìý ÌýJ Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;29(5):1056-1064. doi:
16.
Kudo ÌýM, Ueshima ÌýK, Ikeda ÌýM, Ìýet al. ÌýFinal results of TACTICS: a randomized, prospective trial comparing transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib to transarterial chemoembolization alone in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý ÌýLiver Cancer. 2022;11(4):354-367. doi:
17.
Wan ÌýX, Zhai ÌýX, Yan ÌýZ, Ìýet al. ÌýRetrospective analysis of transarterial chemoembolization and sorafenib in Chinese patients with unresectable and recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý Ìý°¿²Ô³¦´Ç³Ù²¹°ù²µ±ð³Ù. 2016;7(50):83806-83816. doi:
18.
Zhang ÌýX, Cai ÌýL, Fang ÌýJ, Ìýet al. ÌýEfficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation.Ìý ÌýFront Oncol. 2023;12:1101351. doi:
19.
Peng ÌýZ, Chen ÌýS, Xiao ÌýH, Ìýet al. ÌýMicrovascular invasion as a predictor of response to treatment with sorafenib and transarterial chemoembolization for recurrent intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý Ìý¸é²¹»å¾±´Ç±ô´Ç²µ²â. 2019;292(1):237-247. doi:
20.
Rodríguez-Perálvarez ÌýM, Luong ÌýTV, Andreana ÌýL, Meyer ÌýT, Dhillon ÌýAP, Burroughs ÌýAK. ÌýA systematic review of microvascular invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma: diagnostic and prognostic variability.Ìý ÌýAnn Surg Oncol. 2013;20(1):325-339. doi:
21.
Lencioni ÌýR, Llovet ÌýJM. ÌýModified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý ÌýSemin Liver Dis. 2010;30(1):52-60. doi:
22.
Eisenhauer ÌýEA, Therasse ÌýP, Bogaerts ÌýJ, Ìýet al. ÌýNew response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).Ìý ÌýEur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228-247. doi:
23.
National Cancer Institute. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) (version 4.0). Published May 28, 2009. Accessed March 16, 2015.
24.
Tezuka ÌýM, Hayashi ÌýK, Kubota ÌýK, Ìýet al. ÌýGrowth rate of locally recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization: comparing the growth rate of locally recurrent tumor with that of primary hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý ÌýDig Dis Sci. 2007;52(3):783-788. doi:
25.
Wang ÌýJ, He ÌýXD, Yao ÌýN, Liang ÌýWJ, Zhang ÌýYC. ÌýA meta-analysis of adjuvant therapy after potentially curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý ÌýCan J Gastroenterol. 2013;27(6):351-363. doi:
26.
Yao ÌýW, Xue ÌýM, Lu ÌýM, Ìýet al. ÌýDiffuse recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after liver resection: transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with sorafenib versus TACE monotherapy.Ìý ÌýFront Oncol. 2020;10:574668. doi:
27.
Lau ÌýWY, Lai ÌýEC, Lau ÌýSH. ÌýThe current role of neoadjuvant/adjuvant/chemoprevention therapy in partial hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review.Ìý ÌýHepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2009;8(2):124-133.
28.
Du ÌýM, Chen ÌýL, Zhao ÌýJ, Ìýet al. ÌýMicrovascular invasion (MVI) is a poorer prognostic predictor for small hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý ÌýBMC Cancer. 2014;14:38. doi:
29.
Wang ÌýZ, Hu ÌýJ, Qiu ÌýSJ, Ìýet al. ÌýAn investigation of the effect of sorafenib on tumour growth and recurrence after liver cancer resection in nude mice independent of phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinase levels.Ìý ÌýExpert Opin Investig Drugs. 2011;20(8):1039-1045. doi:
30.
Feng ÌýYX, Wang ÌýT, Deng ÌýYZ, Ìýet al. ÌýSorafenib suppresses postsurgical recurrence and metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma in an orthotopic mouse model.Ìý Ìý±á±ð±è²¹³Ù´Ç±ô´Ç²µ²â. 2011;53(2):483-492. doi:
31.
Jin ÌýYJ, Chung ÌýYH, Kim ÌýJA, Ìýet al. ÌýPredisposing factors of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following complete remission in response to transarterial chemoembolization.Ìý ÌýDig Dis Sci. 2013;58(6):1758-1765. doi:
32.
Chen ÌýL, Shi ÌýY, Jiang ÌýCY, Ìýet al. ÌýCoexpression of PDGFR-alpha, PDGFR-beta and VEGF as a prognostic factor in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.Ìý ÌýInt J Biol Markers. 2011;26(2):108-116. doi:
33.
Chao ÌýY, Li ÌýCP, Chau ÌýGY, Ìýet al. ÌýPrognostic significance of vascular endothelial growth factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, and angiogenin in patients with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma after surgery.Ìý ÌýAnn Surg Oncol. 2003;10(4):355-362. doi:
34.
Huang ÌýY, Zhang ÌýZ, Zhou ÌýY, Yang ÌýJ, Hu ÌýK, Wang ÌýZ. ÌýShould we apply sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with microvascular invasion after curative hepatectomy.Ìý ÌýOnco Targets Ther. 2019;12:541-548. doi:
35.
Zhang ÌýXP, Chai ÌýZT, Gao ÌýYZ, Ìýet al. ÌýPostoperative adjuvant sorafenib improves survival outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with microvascular invasion after R0 liver resection: a propensity score matching analysis.Ìý ÌýHPB (Oxford). 2019;21(12):1687-1696. doi:
36.
Gu ÌýW, Tong ÌýZ. ÌýSorafenib in the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and microvascular infiltration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Ìý ÌýJ Int Med Res. 2020;48(8):300060520946872. doi:
Views 2,973
Original Investigation
June 20, 2024

Survival in Patients With Recurrent Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Sorafenib Plus TACE vs TACE Alone Randomized Clinical Trial

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Interventional Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • 2Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • 3Cancer Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • 4Department of Interventional Oncology, Jinshazhou Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China
  • 5Department of Interventional Angiology, Huizhou First People’s Hospital, Huizhou, China
  • 6Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Hainan General Hospital, Haikou, China
  • 7Cancer Center, Guangzhou Twelfth People’s Hospital, Guangzhou, China
  • 8Faculty of Medicine, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wale Hospital, Shatin, New Territories, Hongkong, SAR, China
  • 9Department of Liver Surgery, Cancer Center of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
  • 10Center of Hepato-PancreatoBiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
JAMA Oncol. 2024;10(8):1047-1054. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.1831
Key Points

QuestionÌý Does combined transarterial chemoembolization and sorafenib (SOR-TACE) improve survival in patients with recurrent intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma after R0 hepatectomy with positive microvascular invasion compared with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) alone?

FindingsÌý In this randomized clinical trial of 162 patients, those treated with SOR-TACE had a significantly longer median overall survival than TACE alone (22.2 months vs 15.1 months) and median progression-free survival (16.2 months vs 11.8 months). The SOR-TACE safety profile was acceptable compared with TACE alone.

MeaningÌý SOR-TACE for patients with recurrent intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma with microvascular invasion improved survival compared with TACE alone.

Abstract

ImportanceÌý Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is commonly used to treat patients with recurrent intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and positive microvascular invasion (MVI); however, TACE alone has demonstrated unsatisfactory survival benefits. A previous retrospective study suggested that TACE plus sorafenib (SOR-TACE) may be a better therapeutic option compared with TACE alone.

ObjectiveÌý To investigate the clinical outcomes of SOR-TACE vs TACE alone for patients with recurrent intermediate-stage HCC after R0 hepatectomy with positive MVI.

Design, Setting, and ParticipantsÌý In this phase 3, open-label, multicenter randomized clinical trial, patients with recurrent intermediate-stage HCC and positive MVI were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio via a computerized minimization technique to either SOR-TACE treatment or TACE alone. This trial was conducted at 5 hospitals in China, and enrolled patients from October 2019 to December 2021, with a follow-up period of 24 months. Data were analyzed from June 2023 to September 2023.

InterventionsÌý Randomization to on-demand TACE (conventional TACE: doxorubicin, 50 mg, mixed with lipiodol and gelatin sponge particles [diameter: 150-350 μm]; drug-eluting bead TACE: doxorubicin, 75 mg, mixed with drug-eluting particles [diameter: 100-300 μm or 300-500 μm]) (TACE group) or sorafenib, 400 mg, twice daily plus on-demand TACE (SOR-TACE group) (conventional TACE: doxorubicin, 50 mg, mixed with lipiodol and gelatin sponge particles [diameter, 150-350 μm]; drug-eluting bead TACE: doxorubicin, 75 mg, mixed with drug-eluting particles [diameter: 100-300 μm or 300-500 μm]).

Main Outcomes and MeasuresÌý The primary end point was overall survival by intention-to-treat analysis. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.

ResultsÌý A total of 162 patients (median [range] age, 55 [28-75] years; 151 males [93.2%]), were randomly assigned to be treated with either SOR-TACE (n = 81) or TACE alone (n = 81). The median overall survival was significantly longer in the SOR-TACE group than in the TACE group (22.2 months vs 15.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.55; P < .001). SOR-TACE also prolonged progression-free survival (16.2 months vs 11.8 months; HR, 0.54; P < .001), and improved the objective response rate when compared with TACE alone based on the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria (80.2% vs 58.0%; P = .002). Any grade adverse events were more common in the SOR-TACE group, but all adverse events responded well to treatment. No unexpected adverse events or treatment-related deaths occurred in this study.

Conclusions and RelevanceÌý The results of this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that SOR-TACE achieved better clinical outcomes than TACE alone. These findings suggest that combined treatment should be used for patients with recurrent intermediate-stage HCC after R0 hepatectomy with positive MVI.

Trial RegistrationÌý ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:

×