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

乐伐替尼联合免疫疗法与瑞戈非尼联合免疫疗法治疗乐伐替尼治疗失败的晚期肝细胞癌的疗效比较:一项回顾性研究

阅读:1

Abstract

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.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。