已发表论文

经导管肝动脉灌注化疗与索拉非尼联合治疗巴塞罗那 C 期肝细胞癌患者:对亚洲人口的荟萃分析

 

Authors Ni JY, Liu SS, Sun HL, Wang WD, Zhong ZL, Hou SN, Chen YT, Xu LF

Received 12 November 2017

Accepted for publication 6 July 2018

Published 6 November 2018 Volume 2018:11 Pages 7883—7894

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S156844

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Amy Norman

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Samir Farghaly

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of transcatheter hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) with those of sorafenib in the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C.
Methods: Potentially relevant studies comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of HAIC with those of sorafenib were searched using Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases (Wanfang Data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure). Overall survival rate (OSR), tumor response rate, disease control rate (DCR), and serious adverse events (SAEs) were compared and analyzed. Pooled ORs with 95% CIs were calculated using either the fixed-effects model or the random-effects model. All statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager (version 5.3) from the Cochrane Collaboration.
Results: A total of 1,264 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results of this study showed that HAIC was associated with significantly higher 1-, 2-, and 3-year OSRs than sorafenib (OR 1.88, 95% CI1-year: [1.27–2.78], 1-year=0.002; OR 2.15, 95% CI2-year: [1.06–4.37], 2-year=0.03; OR 7.90, 95% CI3-year: [2.12–29.42], 3-year=0.002). Compared to sorafenib, HAIC was associated with superior complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and objective response rate (ORR) (OR 3.90, 95% CICR: [1.89–8.03], CR =0.0002; OR 3.47, 95% CIPR: [2.31–5.24], PR <0.00001; OR 3.02, 95% CIOR: [2.05–4.45], OR <0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between HAIC and sorafenib in stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), DCR, and SAEs (OR 0.86, 95% CISD: [0.51–1.45], SD =0.56; OR 0.62, 95% CIPD: [0.35–1.11], PD =0.11; OR 0.53, 95% CISAE: [0.14–1.92], SAE =0.33).
Conclusion: This study showed that HAIC was associated with better efficacy than sorafenib in terms of OSR and tumor response. Therefore, HAIC can be considered as an alternative treatment option for patients with HCCs of BCLC stage C.
Keywords: HCC, HAIC, targeted therapy, BCLC, prognosis, meta-analysis




Figure 6 Funnel plots in the analysis of the effects of OSR and tumor response rate.