4.6 Article

Randomized, phase II trial of sequential hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and sorafenib versus sorafenib alone as initial therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: SCOOP-2 trial

Journal

BMC CANCER
Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-6198-8

Keywords

Hepatocellular carcinoma; Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy; Cisplatin; Sorafenib; Sequential treatment

Categories

Funding

  1. Waksman Foundation of Japan INC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The efficacy of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. We conducted a multi-center randomized phase II study comparing a sequential HAICsorafenib regimen versus sorafenib alone as an initial therapy for HCC. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned (ratio, 1:1) to receive sequential HAIC with cisplatin followed by sorafenib (HAIC group, n = 35) or sorafenib alone (sorafenib group, n = 33) as an initial therapy. The primary endpoint was the one-year survival rate. Secondary endpoint included overall survival (OS), the 2-year survival rate, the time-to- progression (TTP), the objective response rate (ORR), the disease control rate (DCR), and safety. Results: For the primary endpoint, the one-year survival rates were 46% in the HAIC group and 58% in the sorafenib group. The median OS period was 10.0 months (95% CI, 7.0-18.8) in the HAIC group and 15.2 months (95% CI, 8.2-19.7) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.86, P = 0.78). The median TTP, ORR and DCR in the HAIC group were 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.7-5.5), 14.3, and 45.7%, respectively, while those in the sorafenib group were 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.3-6.8), 9.1, and 45.5%, respectively. No unexpected adverse events related to HAIC or sorafenib were observed in either group. Conclusions: Sequential HAIC with cisplatin and sorafenib does not improve the survival benefit, compared with sorafenib alone, when used as an initial therapy for advanced HCC. However, this study was underpowered in regard to its primary and secondary endpoints, so the results should be interpreted with caution.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available