切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志 ›› 2023, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (01): 55 -60. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3232.2023.01.011

临床研究

仑伐替尼、PD-1抑制剂联合肝动脉栓塞灌注化疗治疗不可切除肝癌疗效
杨宇光1, 唐辉1, 谭志明2, 麦聪1, 陈铁军1, 唐云强1,()   
  1. 1. 510095 广州医科大学附属肿瘤医院肝胆外科
    2. 510095 广州医科大学附属肿瘤医院质控科
  • 收稿日期:2022-09-01 出版日期:2023-02-10
  • 通信作者: 唐云强
  • 基金资助:
    广州市卫生局一般引导项目(20171A011317); 湖北陈孝平发展科技发展基金会(CXPJJH1200008-12)

Efficacy of lenvatinib, PD-1 inhibitor combined with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Yuguang Yang1, Hui Tang1, Zhiming Tan2, Cong Mai1, Tiejun Chen1, Yunqiang Tang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Cancer Hospital and Institute of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510095, China
    2. Department of Quality Control, Affiliated Cancer Hospital and Institute of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510095, China
  • Received:2022-09-01 Published:2023-02-10
  • Corresponding author: Yunqiang Tang
目的

探讨仑伐替尼、PD-1抑制剂联合肝动脉栓塞灌注化疗(TACE-HAIC)治疗不可切除肝细胞癌(肝癌)的临床疗效。

方法

回顾性分析2019年9月1日至2021年2月1日在广州医科大学附属肿瘤医院诊治的69例肝癌患者临床资料。其中男64例,女5例;平均年龄(51±12)岁。37例患者接受仑伐替尼、PD-1抑制剂联合TACE-HAIC治疗(TAHPLa组),32例患者接受索拉非尼联合TACE治疗(SoraTACE组)。患者均签署知情同意书,符合医学伦理学规定。观察两组手术转化率、肿瘤反应情况、治疗相关不良反应情况、生存情况等。生存分析采用Kaplan-Meier法和Log-rank检验。生存影响因素分析采用Cox回归模型。

结果

TAHPLa组手术转化率为30%(11/37),明显高于SoraTACE组的3%(1/32) (χ2=8.454,P<0.05)。根据实体肿瘤临床疗效评价标准修订版(mRECIST),TAHPLa组客观缓解率为70% (26/37),明显高于SoraTACE组的31%(10/32) (χ2=10.470,P<0.05)。总体不良反应事件中,TAHPLa组疲劳、恶心、感觉神经性病变、血小板减少症发生率分别为46%(17/37)、54%(20/37)、27%(10/37)、41%(15/37),明显高于SoraTACE组的19%(6/32)、16%(5/32)、0、9%(3/32) (χ2=5.711,10.968,8.051,8.644;P<0.05);TAHPLa组手足综合征发生率为8%(3/37),明显低于SoraTACE组的28%(9/32) (χ2=4.786,P<0.05)。3~4级不良反应事件中,TAHPLa组血小板减少症发生率为24%(9/37),明显高于SoraTACE组的3%(1/32) (χ2=4.630,P<0.05)。两组均未出现治疗相关死亡。TAHPLa组中位无进展生存期(PFS)、总体生存期(OS)分别为10.3、27.8个月,SoraTACE组相应为5.1、10.7个月,差异有统计学意义(χ2=10.871,27.539;P<0.05)。Cox多因素分析显示,TAHPLa治疗是患者PFS和OS的独立影响因素(HR=0.053,0.179;P<0.05)。

结论

对于不可切除肝癌,与索拉非尼联合TACE治疗相比,仑伐替尼、PD-1抑制剂联合TACE-HAIC治疗安全性良好,可提高手术转化率,延长患者生存时间。

Objective

To evaluate the clinical efficacy of the combination of lenvatinib, PD-1 inhibitor and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (TACE-HAIC) in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

Clinical data of69 HCC patients admitted to the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from September 1, 2019 to February 1, 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 64 patients were male and 5 female,aged (51±12) years on average. 37 patients were treated with lenvatinib, PD-1 inhibitor combined with TACE-HAIC (TAHPLa group), and 32 patients received sorafenib combined with TACE (SoraTACE group). The informed consents of all patients were obtained and the local ethical committee approval was received. The surgical conversion rate, tumor response, treatment-associated adverse reactions, and survival were observed between two groups. Survival analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test. The influencing factors of survival were identified by Cox's regression model.

Results

In the TAHPLa group,surgical conversion rate was 30%(11/37), significantly higher than 3%(1/32) in the SoraTACE group (χ2=8.454, P<0.05). According to the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (mRECIST), the objective remission rate in the TAHPLa group was 70%(26/37), significantly higher than 31%(10/32) in the SoraTACE group (χ2=10.470, P<0.05). Regarding the overall adverse events, the incidence of fatigue, nausea, sensory neuropathy and thrombocytopenia in the TAHPLa group was 46%(17/37), 54%(20/37), 27%(10/37) and 41%(15/37), significantly higher than 19%(6/32), 16%(5/32), 0 and 9%(3/32) in the SoraTACE group (χ2=5.711, 10.968, 8.051, 8.644; P<0.05); The hand-foot syndrome in the TAHPLa group was 8%(3/37), significantly lower than 28%(9/32) in the SoraTACE group (χ2=4.786, P<0.05). In terms of grade 3-4 adverse reactions, the incidence of thrombocytopenia in the TAHPLa group was 24%(9/37), significantly higher than 3%(1/32) in the SoraTACE group (χ2=4.630, P<0.05). No treatment-associated death occurred in both groups. In theTAHPLa group, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 10.3 and 27.8 months, compared with 5.1 and 10.7 months in the SoraTACE group, where significant differences were observed (χ2=10.871, 27.539; P<0.05). Cox's multivariate analysis showed that TAHPLa treatment was an independent influencing factor for the PFS and OS of patients (HR=0.053, 0.179; P<0.05).

Conclusions

Compared with sorafenib combined with TACE, combined treatment of lenvatinib, PD-1 inhibitor and TACE-HAIC is a safer therapy for unresectable HCC, which can enhance the surgical conversion rate and prolong the survival.

表1 TAHPLa组和SoraTACE组肝癌患者一般资料比较(例)
表2 TAHPLa组和SoraTACE组肝癌患者肿瘤反应情况比较[例(%)]
表3 TAHPLa组和SoraTACE组肝癌患者治疗不良反应情况比较[例(%)]
图1 TAHPLa组和SoraTACE组肝癌患者Kaplan-Meier生存曲线 注:TAHPLa组采用仑伐替尼、PD-1抑制剂联合肝动脉栓塞灌注化疗治疗,SoraTACE组采用索拉非尼联合TACE治疗
[1]
Ding X, Sun W, Li W, et al. Transarterial chemoembolization plus lenvatinib versus transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib as first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus: a prospective randomized study[J]. Cancer, 2021, 127(20):3782-3793.
[2]
Kudo M, Imanaka K, Chida N, et al. PhaseⅢ study of sorafenib after transarterial chemoembolisation in Japanese and Korean patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2011, 47(14):2117-2127.
[3]
Gourd K, Lai C, Reeves C. ESMO Virtual Congress 2020[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2020, 21(11):1403-1404.
[4]
高嵩, 朱旭, 杨仁杰, 等. TACE联合奥沙利铂、氟尿嘧啶、亚叶酸钙肝动脉化疗治疗中晚期原发性肝癌[J]. 介入放射学杂志, 2012, 21(5):377-383.
[5]
陈敏山, 胡自力. 肝动脉灌注化疗在肝癌转化治疗中的研究进展[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2021, 20(2):171-177.
[6]
Li B, Qiu J, Zheng Y, et al. Conversion to resectability using transarterialchemoembolization combined with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for initially unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Ann Surg, 2021, 2(2):e057.
[7]
Yap TA, Parkes EE, Peng W, et al. Development of immunotherapy combination strategies in cancer[J]. Cancer Discov, 2021, 11(6):1368-1397.
[8]
Vogel A, Qin S, Kudo M, et al. Lenvatinib versus sorafenib for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: patient-reported outcomes from a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021, 6(8):649-658.
[9]
Finn RS, Ryoo BY, Merle P, et al. Pembrolizumab as second-line therapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in KEYNOTE-240: a randomized, double-blind, phaseⅢ trial[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38(3):193-202.
[10]
Zhu XD, Sun HC. Emerging agents and regimens for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hematol Oncol, 2019, 12(1):110.
[11]
Kudo M. Scientific rationale for combined immunotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies and VEGF inhibitors in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Cancers, 2020, 12(5):1089.
[12]
滕颖, 丁晓燕, 李文东, 等. 程序性细胞死亡受体1抑制剂联合仑伐替尼治疗晚期原发性肝癌的效果及不良反应[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2021, 37(3):606-610.
[13]
Eisenhauer E, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumors: revised RECIST guideline version 1.1[J]. EJC Suppl, 2008, 6(12):13.
[14]
Kudo M, Finn RS, Qin S, et al. Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial[J]. Lancet, 2018, 391(10126):1163-1173.
[15]
Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Semin Liver Dis, 2010, 30(1):52-60.
[16]
Gauci ML, Lanoy E, Champiat S, et al. Long-term survival in patients responding to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and disease outcome upon treatment discontinuation[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2019, 25(3):946-956.
[17]
He MK, Liang RB, Zhao Y, et al. Lenvatinib, toripalimab, plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus lenvatinib alone for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Ther Adv Med Oncol, 2021(13):17588359211002720.
[18]
Fu Z, Li X, Zhong J, et al. Lenvatinib in combination with transarterial chemoembolization for treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC): aretrospective controlled study[J]. Hepatol Int, 2021, 15(3):663-675.
[19]
Liao J, Xiao J, Zhou Y, et al. Effect of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization on cellular immune function and regulatory T cells in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Mol Med Rep, 2015, 12(4):6065-6071.
[20]
Kudo M. A new treatment option for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma with high tumor burden: initial lenvatinib therapy with subsequent selective TACE[J]. Liver Cancer, 2019, 8(5):299-311.
[1] 杨星飞, 张鹏, 李兰军, 马光辉, 胡培良, 杜同海, 孙振卿. 两种不同取栓方法在肝细胞癌伴胆管癌栓中的对比研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(01): 36-39.
[2] 刘红枝, 刘景丰. 大数据和人工智能在原发性肝癌筛查与诊断中的应用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 1-5.
[3] 元云飞. 肝癌转化治疗后外科切除的必要性和手术时机[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 11-15.
[4] 丁成明, 侯嘉丰, 陶光伟, 齐硕, 谢翼, 冯灿, 陈振坤, 蒋心渺, 邓鑫, 彭健. 肝细胞癌早期诊断和筛查[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 22-28.
[5] 王小兵, 邓卓凡, 龚建平. 肝细胞癌自发性破裂出血危险因素及预测模型研究现状[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(01): 29-33.
[6] 陈家豪, 邝小红, 廖媛, 刘志欢, 陈忠城, 周文营. 血清学多参数Logistic回归模型对肝细胞癌的诊断价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 615-618.
[7] 何泰霖, 王峻峰, 晋云, 杨超, 胡苹苹. 基于影像组学模型预测肝癌微血管侵犯的研究进展[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 649-652.
[8] 周辉年, 李玉民. 肝癌转化治疗[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 542-547.
[9] 傅仰楷, 严茂林. 靶向和免疫治疗在肝细胞癌新辅助治疗中的应用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 559-562.
[10] 雷光林, 胡雄伟, 王森, 宋彪, 洪智贤. 头背侧入路腹腔镜解剖性左半肝切除术治疗肝癌的安全性及有效性[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 563-568.
[11] 潘欣婷, 蔡志雄, 陈耕, 董秀清, 刘小龙. 循环肿瘤DNA对中国肝癌诊断价值的Meta分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 607-614.
[12] 朱任飞, 冯秋琪, 肖锋, 邱烽, 吴建军, 杨帆. 血清肌酸激酶对肝癌肝切除患者缺血-再灌注损伤的预测价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(05): 482-486.
[13] 王鹏, 荣维淇, 张建, 潘国政, 吴凡, 王黎明, 吴健雄, 王宏光. A-P-R三角解剖联合ICG荧光染色腹腔镜解剖性肝S5段切除术[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(05): 498-502.
[14] 江哲龙, 陈小雨, 祖晓婷, 潘凡, 杜俊杰, 杨芳, 江艺, 吕立志. CDT1在肝细胞癌中的表达及其预后预测价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(05): 513-518.
[15] 陈保荣, 李玺, 王佳妮, 潘宇航. INHBA在肝细胞癌中的表达及临床意义[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(05): 519-523.
阅读次数
全文


摘要