Julien Edeline1,2, Laurence Crouzet3, Boris Campillo-Gimenez4, Yan Rolland5, Marc Pracht3, Anne Guillygomarc'h6, Karim Boudjema7, Laurence Lenoir8, Xavier Adhoute9, Tanguy Rohou5, Eveline Boucher3, Bruno Clément10, Jean-Frédéric Blanc11, Etienne Garin10,8. 1. Medical Oncology Department, Centre Eugene Marquis, av Bataille Flandres-Dunkerque, 35043, Rennes, France. j.edeline@rennes.unicancer.fr. 2. Inserm UMR991, Rennes, France. j.edeline@rennes.unicancer.fr. 3. Medical Oncology Department, Centre Eugene Marquis, av Bataille Flandres-Dunkerque, 35043, Rennes, France. 4. Clinical Research Department, Centre Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France. 5. Imaging Department, Centre Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France. 6. Hepatology Department, CHU Pontchaillou, Rennes, France. 7. Hepatobiliary Surgery, CHU Pontchaillou, Rennes, France. 8. Nuclear Medicine Department, Centre Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France. 9. Hepato-Gastroenterology Department, Hôpital Saint-Joseph, Marseille, France. 10. Inserm UMR991, Rennes, France. 11. Hepato-Gastroenterology Department, Hôpital Saint-André, CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Tumoural portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a major prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The efficacy of sorafenib, the only treatment approved at an advanced stage, is limited. Based on previous data, selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT), or (90)Y radioembolization, seems an interesting option. We aimed to compare both treatments in this population. METHODS: We retrospectively compared patients treated in two centres for HCC with tumoural PVT. We compared overall survival (OS) between patients treated with SIRT and patients treated with sorafenib. Analyses were performed before and after 1:1 matching with a propensity score for controlling indication bias, using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients were analysed, 34 patients treated with SIRT and 117 patients treated with sorafenib only. In the whole population, SIRT was associated with a higher median OS as compared with sorafenib: 18.8 vs 6.5 months (log-rank p < 0.001). There was an imbalance of baseline characteristics between patients treated by SIRT and sorafenib, which justified patient matching with use of a propensity score: 24 patients treated with SIRT could be matched with 24 patients treated with sorafenib. OS was estimated with a median of 26.2 vs 8.7 months in patients treated with SIRT vs sorafenib, respectively (log-rank p = 0.054). Before and after patient matching, the adjusted hazard ratio related to treatment by SIRT was estimated at 0.62 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.97] (p = 0.037) and 0.40 (95 % CI 0.19-0.82) (p = 0.013), respectively. CONCLUSION: SIRT seems more effective than sorafenib in patients presenting with HCC and tumoural PVT. This hypothesis is being tested in prospective randomized trials.
PURPOSE: Tumoural portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a major prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The efficacy of sorafenib, the only treatment approved at an advanced stage, is limited. Based on previous data, selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT), or (90)Y radioembolization, seems an interesting option. We aimed to compare both treatments in this population. METHODS: We retrospectively compared patients treated in two centres for HCC with tumoural PVT. We compared overall survival (OS) between patients treated with SIRT and patients treated with sorafenib. Analyses were performed before and after 1:1 matching with a propensity score for controlling indication bias, using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients were analysed, 34 patients treated with SIRT and 117 patients treated with sorafenib only. In the whole population, SIRT was associated with a higher median OS as compared with sorafenib: 18.8 vs 6.5 months (log-rank p < 0.001). There was an imbalance of baseline characteristics between patients treated by SIRT and sorafenib, which justified patient matching with use of a propensity score: 24 patients treated with SIRT could be matched with 24 patients treated with sorafenib. OS was estimated with a median of 26.2 vs 8.7 months in patients treated with SIRT vs sorafenib, respectively (log-rank p = 0.054). Before and after patient matching, the adjusted hazard ratio related to treatment by SIRT was estimated at 0.62 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.97] (p = 0.037) and 0.40 (95 % CI 0.19-0.82) (p = 0.013), respectively. CONCLUSION: SIRT seems more effective than sorafenib in patients presenting with HCC and tumoural PVT. This hypothesis is being tested in prospective randomized trials.
Authors: Philip Hilgard; Monia Hamami; Amr El Fouly; André Scherag; Stefan Müller; Judith Ertle; Till Heusner; Vito R Cicinnati; Andreas Paul; Andreas Bockisch; Guido Gerken; Gerald Antoch Journal: Hepatology Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: J M Llovet; J Bustamante; A Castells; R Vilana; M del C Ayuso; M Sala; C Brú; J Rodés; J Bruix Journal: Hepatology Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Mercedes Iñarrairaegui; Kenneth G Thurston; Jose I Bilbao; Delia D'Avola; Macarena Rodriguez; Javier Arbizu; Antonio Martinez-Cuesta; Bruno Sangro Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2010-07-03 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Bruno Sangro; Livio Carpanese; Roberto Cianni; Rita Golfieri; Daniele Gasparini; Samer Ezziddin; Philipp M Paprottka; Francesco Fiore; Mark Van Buskirk; Jose Ignacio Bilbao; Giuseppe Maria Ettorre; Rita Salvatori; Emanuela Giampalma; Onelio Geatti; Kai Wilhelm; Ralf Thorsten Hoffmann; Francesco Izzo; Mercedes Iñarrairaegui; Carlo Ludovico Maini; Carlo Urigo; Alberta Cappelli; Alessandro Vit; Hojjat Ahmadzadehfar; Tobias Franz Jakobs; Secondo Lastoria Journal: Hepatology Date: 2011-06-30 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Laura M Kulik; Brian I Carr; Mary F Mulcahy; Robert J Lewandowski; Bassel Atassi; Robert K Ryu; Kent T Sato; Al Benson; Albert A Nemcek; Vanessa L Gates; Michael Abecassis; Reed A Omary; Riad Salem Journal: Hepatology Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Charles E Woodall; Charles R Scoggins; Susan F Ellis; Clifton M Tatum; Michael J Hahl; Kadiyala V Ravindra; Kelly M McMasters; Robert C G Martin Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Scott M Wilhelm; Christopher Carter; Liya Tang; Dean Wilkie; Angela McNabola; Hong Rong; Charles Chen; Xiaomei Zhang; Patrick Vincent; Mark McHugh; Yichen Cao; Jaleel Shujath; Susan Gawlak; Deepa Eveleigh; Bruce Rowley; Li Liu; Lila Adnane; Mark Lynch; Daniel Auclair; Ian Taylor; Rich Gedrich; Andrei Voznesensky; Bernd Riedl; Leonard E Post; Gideon Bollag; Pamela A Trail Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-10-01 Impact factor: 13.312
Authors: Boris Gorodetski; Julius Chapiro; Ruediger Schernthaner; Rafael Duran; MingDe Lin; Howard Lee; David Lenis; Elizabeth A Stuart; Bareng Aletta Sanny Nonyane; Vasily Pekurovsky; Anobel Tamrazi; Bernhard Gebauer; Todd Schlachter; Timothy M Pawlik; Jean-Francois Geschwind Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-06-08 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Stephen L Chan; Charing C N Chong; Anthony W H Chan; Darren M C Poon; Kenneth S H Chok Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-08-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Charlotte E Costentin; Cristina R Ferrone; Ronald S Arellano; Suvranu Ganguli; Theodore S Hong; Andrew X Zhu Journal: Liver Cancer Date: 2017-10-19 Impact factor: 11.740
Authors: Joseph C Ahn; Marie Lauzon; Michael Luu; Marc L Friedman; Kambiz Kosari; Nicholas Nissen; Shelly C Lu; Lewis R Roberts; Amit G Singal; Ju Dong Yang Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-04-09 Impact factor: 11.082
Authors: R Gallicchio; A Nardelli; P Mainenti; A Nappi; D Capacchione; V Simeon; C Sirignano; F Abbruzzi; F Barbato; M Landriscina; G Storto Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2016-08-03 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Stefano Colagrande; Andrea L Inghilesi; Sami Aburas; Gian G Taliani; Cosimo Nardi; Fabio Marra Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-09-14 Impact factor: 5.742