BACKGROUND Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy(HAIC)has been proven to be an ideal choice for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma(uHCC).HAIC-based treatment showed great potential for treating uHCC.Howev...BACKGROUND Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy(HAIC)has been proven to be an ideal choice for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma(uHCC).HAIC-based treatment showed great potential for treating uHCC.However,large-scale studies on HAIC-based treatments and meta-analyses of first-line treatments for uHCC are lacking.AIM To investigate better first-line treatment options for uHCC and to assess the safety and efficacy of HAIC combined with angiogenesis inhibitors,programmed cell death of protein 1(PD-1)and its ligand(PD-L1)blockers(triple therapy)under real-world conditions.METHODS Several electronic databases were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials for this meta-analysis.Study-level pooled analyses of hazard ratios(HRs)and odds ratios(ORs)were performed.This was a retrospective single-center study involving 442 patients with uHCC who received triple therapy or angiogenesis inhibitors plus PD-1/PD-L1 blockades(AIPB)at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from January 2018 to April 2023.Propensity score matching(PSM)was performed to balance the bias between the groups.The Kaplan-Meier method and cox regression were used to analyse the survival data,and the log-rank test was used to compare the suvival time between the groups.RESULTS A total of 13 randomized controlled trials were included.HAIC alone and in combination with sorafenib were found to be effective treatments(P values for ORs:HAIC,0.95;for HRs:HAIC+sorafenib,0.04).After PSM,176 HCC patients were included in the analysis.The triple therapy group(n=88)had a longer median overall survival than the AIPB group(n=88)(31.6 months vs 14.6 months,P<0.001)and a greater incidence of adverse events(94.3%vs 75.4%,P<0.001).CONCLUSION This meta-analysis suggests that HAIC-based treatments are likely to be the best choice for uHCC.Our findings confirm that triple therapy is more effective for uHCC patients than AIPB.展开更多
BACKGROUND Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and camrelizumab plus apatinib(TRIPLET protocol)is promising for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma(Ad-HCC).However,the usefulness of microwave ablation(MWA)after TRIPL...BACKGROUND Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and camrelizumab plus apatinib(TRIPLET protocol)is promising for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma(Ad-HCC).However,the usefulness of microwave ablation(MWA)after TRIPLET is still controversial.AIM To compare the efficacy and safety of TRIPLET alone(T-A)vs TRIPLET-MWA(TM)for Ad-HCC.METHODS From January 2018 to March 2022,217 Ad-HCC patients were retrospectively enrolled.Among them,122 were included in the T-A group,and 95 were included in the T-M group.A propensity score matching(PSM)was applied to balance bias.Overall survival(OS)was compared using the Kaplan-Meier curve with the log-rank test.The overall objective response rate(ORR)and major complications were also assessed.RESULTS After PSM,82 patients were included both the T-A group and the T-M group.The ORR(85.4%)in the T-M group was significantly higher than that(65.9%)in the T-A group(P<0.001).The cumulative 1-,2-,and 3-year OS rates were 98.7%,93.4%,and 82.0%in the T-M group and 85.1%,63.1%,and 55.0%in the T-A group(hazard ratio=0.22;95%confidence interval:0.10-0.49;P<0.001).The incidence of major complications was 4.9%(6/122)in the T-A group and 5.3%(5/95)in the T-M group,which were not significantly different(P=1.000).CONCLUSION T-M can provide better survival outcomes and comparable safety for Ad-HCC than T-A.展开更多
基金Supported by Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province,No.2020A1515011539.
文摘BACKGROUND Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy(HAIC)has been proven to be an ideal choice for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma(uHCC).HAIC-based treatment showed great potential for treating uHCC.However,large-scale studies on HAIC-based treatments and meta-analyses of first-line treatments for uHCC are lacking.AIM To investigate better first-line treatment options for uHCC and to assess the safety and efficacy of HAIC combined with angiogenesis inhibitors,programmed cell death of protein 1(PD-1)and its ligand(PD-L1)blockers(triple therapy)under real-world conditions.METHODS Several electronic databases were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials for this meta-analysis.Study-level pooled analyses of hazard ratios(HRs)and odds ratios(ORs)were performed.This was a retrospective single-center study involving 442 patients with uHCC who received triple therapy or angiogenesis inhibitors plus PD-1/PD-L1 blockades(AIPB)at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from January 2018 to April 2023.Propensity score matching(PSM)was performed to balance the bias between the groups.The Kaplan-Meier method and cox regression were used to analyse the survival data,and the log-rank test was used to compare the suvival time between the groups.RESULTS A total of 13 randomized controlled trials were included.HAIC alone and in combination with sorafenib were found to be effective treatments(P values for ORs:HAIC,0.95;for HRs:HAIC+sorafenib,0.04).After PSM,176 HCC patients were included in the analysis.The triple therapy group(n=88)had a longer median overall survival than the AIPB group(n=88)(31.6 months vs 14.6 months,P<0.001)and a greater incidence of adverse events(94.3%vs 75.4%,P<0.001).CONCLUSION This meta-analysis suggests that HAIC-based treatments are likely to be the best choice for uHCC.Our findings confirm that triple therapy is more effective for uHCC patients than AIPB.
文摘BACKGROUND Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and camrelizumab plus apatinib(TRIPLET protocol)is promising for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma(Ad-HCC).However,the usefulness of microwave ablation(MWA)after TRIPLET is still controversial.AIM To compare the efficacy and safety of TRIPLET alone(T-A)vs TRIPLET-MWA(TM)for Ad-HCC.METHODS From January 2018 to March 2022,217 Ad-HCC patients were retrospectively enrolled.Among them,122 were included in the T-A group,and 95 were included in the T-M group.A propensity score matching(PSM)was applied to balance bias.Overall survival(OS)was compared using the Kaplan-Meier curve with the log-rank test.The overall objective response rate(ORR)and major complications were also assessed.RESULTS After PSM,82 patients were included both the T-A group and the T-M group.The ORR(85.4%)in the T-M group was significantly higher than that(65.9%)in the T-A group(P<0.001).The cumulative 1-,2-,and 3-year OS rates were 98.7%,93.4%,and 82.0%in the T-M group and 85.1%,63.1%,and 55.0%in the T-A group(hazard ratio=0.22;95%confidence interval:0.10-0.49;P<0.001).The incidence of major complications was 4.9%(6/122)in the T-A group and 5.3%(5/95)in the T-M group,which were not significantly different(P=1.000).CONCLUSION T-M can provide better survival outcomes and comparable safety for Ad-HCC than T-A.