Background <p>The combination of regorafenib and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) has been the most popular second-line systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, considering the good anti-tumor performance of lenvatinib, combined immunotherapy on the basis of lenvatinib after first-line lenvatinib failure is also popular in clinical practice. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of regorafenib plus ICI (TACE-R-I) versus lenvatinib plus ICI (TACE-L-I) in patients with advanced HCC after lenvatinib failure.</p> Methods <p>In this single-center retrospective study, 164 patients with advanced HCC were enrolled from January 2019 to March 2024 in China. All patients were aged ≥&#xa0;18 years, clinically or pathologically diagnosed with HCC. All patients received trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) as local treatment. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were compared between groups. The Cox regression model was used to analyze the factors associated with OS and PFS.</p> Results <p>We compared 77 patients from each group after propensity score matching (PSM). There was no significant difference in the OS (<i>p</i>&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.255) or PFS (<i>p</i>&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.387) between groups. However, in the subgroup (distant metastases, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C or tumor thrombus), the TACE-R-I group showed better survival benefit than the TACE-L-I group. The multivariable Cox regression model suggested that BCLC stage and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) were independently associated with OS. Distant metastases, tumor thrombus and Child-Pugh were independent associated factors for PFS (<i>p&#xa0;&lt;</i>&#xa0;0.05). The frequency of grade ≥&#xa0;3 TRAEs was not significantly different between groups (<i>p&#xa0;≥</i>&#xa0;0.05).</p> Conclusion <p>Our study demonstrated that in patients with greater tumor burden, the TACE-R-I group showed better OS and PFS benefits than the TACE-L-I group. However, in the overall population of HCC patients, there was no significant difference in efficacy and safety between the groups.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Comparative Efficacy of Lenvatinib Plus Immunotherapy and Regorafenib Plus Immunotherapy After Lenvatinib Failure for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study

  • Zeyu Yu,
  • Bin Leng,
  • Ran You,
  • Lingfeng Diao,
  • Qingyu Xu,
  • Guowen Yin

摘要

Background

The combination of regorafenib and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) has been the most popular second-line systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, considering the good anti-tumor performance of lenvatinib, combined immunotherapy on the basis of lenvatinib after first-line lenvatinib failure is also popular in clinical practice. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of regorafenib plus ICI (TACE-R-I) versus lenvatinib plus ICI (TACE-L-I) in patients with advanced HCC after lenvatinib failure.

Methods

In this single-center retrospective study, 164 patients with advanced HCC were enrolled from January 2019 to March 2024 in China. All patients were aged ≥ 18 years, clinically or pathologically diagnosed with HCC. All patients received trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) as local treatment. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were compared between groups. The Cox regression model was used to analyze the factors associated with OS and PFS.

Results

We compared 77 patients from each group after propensity score matching (PSM). There was no significant difference in the OS (p = 0.255) or PFS (p = 0.387) between groups. However, in the subgroup (distant metastases, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C or tumor thrombus), the TACE-R-I group showed better survival benefit than the TACE-L-I group. The multivariable Cox regression model suggested that BCLC stage and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) were independently associated with OS. Distant metastases, tumor thrombus and Child-Pugh were independent associated factors for PFS (p < 0.05). The frequency of grade ≥ 3 TRAEs was not significantly different between groups (p ≥ 0.05).

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that in patients with greater tumor burden, the TACE-R-I group showed better OS and PFS benefits than the TACE-L-I group. However, in the overall population of HCC patients, there was no significant difference in efficacy and safety between the groups.