Michihisa Moriguchi1,2, Takeshi Aramaki1, Hideyuki Nishiofuku3, Rui Sato1, Koiku Asakura4, Kanji Yamaguchi2, Toshihiro Tanaka3, Masahiro Endo4, Yoshito Itoh2. 1. Division of Interventional Radiology, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan. 2. Department of Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto, Japan. 3. Department of Radiology, Nara Medical University, Kashihara, Japan. 4. Division of Diagnostic Radiology, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the validity of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with low-dose 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (LFP) versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumor thrombosis (Vp3, Vp4). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the cases of Child-Pugh A advanced HCC with Vp3 or Vp4 treated with LFP or sorafenib between October 2002 and December 2013. RESULTS: There were 32 patients in the LFP group and 14 patients in the sorafenib group. The objective response rate/disease control rate was 31.3/56.3% in the LFP group and 0/28.6% in the sorafenib group. The median survival time (MST) (309 vs. 120 days; p = 0.009) and the median time to treatment failure (109 vs. 37 days; p = 0.022) were significantly longer in the LFP group than in the sorafenib group. In the LFP group, a relatively favorable outcome (MST, 622 days) was obtained among the response cases. Among the nonresponse cases in the LFP group, at the time of cessation of LFP, 70.4% of cases were Child-Pugh A and 88.9% of cases maintained a score of ≤7 points; of the cases in whom Child-Pugh A was maintained, the survival period from the time of LFP discontinuation was significantly longer in the cases in whom sorafenib was introduced as a secondary treatment after LFP than in the cases treated with best supportive care (220 vs. 89 days; p = 0.002). The main adverse event with LFP was grade 3 or higher cytopenia, which was manageable, and adverse event-induced discontinuation was significantly lower as compared with sorafenib (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: For the treatment of HCC with Vp3/Vp4, it is desirable to initially use LFP and then immediately change to sorafenib if no response is obtained.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the validity of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with low-dose 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (LFP) versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumor thrombosis (Vp3, Vp4). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the cases of Child-Pugh A advanced HCC with Vp3 or Vp4 treated with LFP or sorafenib between October 2002 and December 2013. RESULTS: There were 32 patients in the LFP group and 14 patients in the sorafenib group. The objective response rate/disease control rate was 31.3/56.3% in the LFP group and 0/28.6% in the sorafenib group. The median survival time (MST) (309 vs. 120 days; p = 0.009) and the median time to treatment failure (109 vs. 37 days; p = 0.022) were significantly longer in the LFP group than in the sorafenib group. In the LFP group, a relatively favorable outcome (MST, 622 days) was obtained among the response cases. Among the nonresponse cases in the LFP group, at the time of cessation of LFP, 70.4% of cases were Child-Pugh A and 88.9% of cases maintained a score of ≤7 points; of the cases in whom Child-Pugh A was maintained, the survival period from the time of LFP discontinuation was significantly longer in the cases in whom sorafenib was introduced as a secondary treatment after LFP than in the cases treated with best supportive care (220 vs. 89 days; p = 0.002). The main adverse event with LFP was grade 3 or higher cytopenia, which was manageable, and adverse event-induced discontinuation was significantly lower as compared with sorafenib (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: For the treatment of HCC with Vp3/Vp4, it is desirable to initially use LFP and then immediately change to sorafenib if no response is obtained.
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: E Villa; A Moles; I Ferretti; P Buttafoco; A Grottola; M Del Buono; M De Santis; F Manenti Journal: Hepatology Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Do Seon Song; Myeong Jun Song; Si Hyun Bae; Woo Jin Chung; Jae Young Jang; Young Seok Kim; Sae Hwan Lee; Jun Yong Park; Hyung Joon Yim; Sung Bum Cho; Soo Young Park; Jin Mo Yang Journal: J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-07-16 Impact factor: 6.772
Authors: Soung Won Jeong; Jae Young Jang; Kwang Yeun Shim; Sae Hwan Lee; Sang Gyune Kim; Sang-Woo Cha; Young Seok Kim; Young Deok Cho; Hong Soo Kim; Boo Sung Kim; Kyoung Ha Kim; Jung Hoon Kim Journal: Gut Liver Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 4.519
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