4.6 Article

A randomized phase II study of autologous cytokine-induced killer cells in treatment of hepatocelluar carcinoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY
卷 34, 期 2, 页码 194-203

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10875-013-9976-0

关键词

Cytokine-induced killer cells; hepatocellular carcinoma; immunotherapy; trans-arterial chemoembolization

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China (973 program) [2012CB9333004]
  2. National Natural Science Funds [81171983, 30901754]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose This prospective study aims to explore the benefit of cytokine-induced killer cell (CIK) treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma patients, which has not yet been thoroughly studied before. Methods From January 2004 to May 2009, 132 patients who were initially diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage A, B or C, Child-Pugh scores of A or B and without prior treatment were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to either arm 1 (n=66) to receive CIK treatment plus standard treatment, or arm 2 (n=66) to receive standard treatment only. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) and the secondary endpoint was progression-free survival as evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analyses and treatment hazard ratios with the Cox proportional hazards model. Results The 1-year (OS: 74.2 % vs. 50.0 %, 95 % CI: 63.6-84.8 % vs. 37.8-62.2, p=0.002), 2-year (OS: 53.0 % vs. 30.3 %, 95 % CI: 40.8-65.2 % vs. 19.1-41.5 %, p=0.002), 3-year ( OS: 42.4 % vs. 24.2 %, 95 % CI: 30.4-54.4 % vs. 13.8-34.6 %, p=0.005) and median overall and progression-free survivals of arm 1 patients were significantly higher than those of arm 2. Therefore, in patients who are not suitable for surgery, significant benefit is obtained from CIK treatment. The main adverse effects of CIK included fever, allergy and headache pain. Conclusions Hepatocellular carcinoma patients who were not suitable for surgery demonstrate prolonged overall and progression-free survival from CIK treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据