Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for the treatment of high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (hHCC) patients. METHODS: Between January 2014 and August 2022, a total of 1765 consecutive patients with hHCC who underwent initial intra-arterial therapies were reviewed and divided into a TACE group (n, 507) and a HAIC group (n, 426). The study used propensity score matching (PSM) to reduce selectivity bias. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared using Kaplan‒Meier curves with the Log rank test. The objective response rate (ORR), conversion surgery rate (CSR) adverse event (AE) comparison and subgroup analysis were performed between the two groups. RESULTS: After PSM 1:1, 444 patients were divided into two groups. The patients with hHCC who received HAIC had higher median PFS (6.1 vs 3.3 months, P < 0.001) and OS (10.3 vs 8.2 months, P=0.303) than TACE. Higher ORR (24.8% vs 11.7%) and CSR (15.5% vs 8.9%) were found in the HAIC group than in the TACE group (both P < 0.05). The incidence of grade 3/4 AE was 23.9% and 8.1% in the TACE and HAIC groups, respectively. The subgroup analysis suggest that HAIC appeared to particularly benefit patients with tumor diameter of more than 10 centimeters (hazard ratio [HR], 0.6; 95% CI, 0.47-0.77; p, 0.00) and PVTT Vp4 (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.8; P, 0.01) for PFS outperforming TACE. CONCLUSION: HAIC can provide better disease control for hHCC than cTACE, with a comparable long-term OS and safety.