4.4 Article

Efficacy of Sorafenib in Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Refractory to Transarterial Chemoembolization

Journal

ONCOLOGY
Volume 87, Issue 6, Pages 330-341

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000365993

Keywords

Hepatocellular carcinoma; Sorafenib; Intermediate stage patients; Transarterial chemoembolization; Refractoriness

Categories

Funding

  1. Bayer Yakuhin (Osaka, Japan)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: We compared the benefits of sorafenib therapy with continued transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in TACE-refractory patients with intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: This retrospective study reviewed intermediate-stage HCC patients who underwent the first TACE. Patients were defined as TACE-refractory and divided into two cohorts: (1) patients who switched from TACE to sorafenib and (2) those who continued TACE. We evaluated the patient overall survival (OS) and time to disease progression (TTDP; the time patients reached Child-Pugh C or developed advanced-stage HCC). Results: A total of 509 patients with HCC underwent TACE. Of 249 intermediate-stage HCC patients undergoing the first TACE, 122 were deemed refractory. At the time they were identified as refractory, 20 patients converted to sorafenib, whereas 36 patients continued TACE. We excluded patients with Child-Pugh scores of >= 8, those with advanced-stage HCC, those who had undergone hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy or other systemic therapy, and those treated with best supportive care alone. The median TTDP and OS were 22.3 and 25.4 months, respectively, in the conversion group, and 7.7 and 11.5 months, respectively, in the continued group (p = 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively). Conclusions: It is possible that sorafenib conversion might prolong OS and TTDP in TACE-refractory patients with intermediate-stage HCC. (C) 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available