In an interview with Targeted Oncology™, Ming Zhao, MD, discusses the results of the FOHAIC-1 clinical trial and how it compares to HAIC-FO for the treatment of HCC.
Though previous findings have determined that it is common to find advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with mega liver masses and macrovascular invasion with the first diagnosis, the best way to treat these patients has not been determined.
Because of this, FOHAIC-1 trial (NCT03164382) was created to look at the hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFOX; HAIC-FO) versus sorafenib (Nexavar). The primary endpoint was overall survival with secondary endpoints including time to progression and time to intrahepatic tumor progression.
In an interview with Targeted Oncology™, Ming Zhao, MD, professor of oncology in the Department of Minimally Invasive Interventional Radiology at Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, discusses the results of the FOHAIC-1 clinical trial and how it compares to HAIC-FO for the treatment of HCC.
0:09 | In this study, the hepatic arterial infusion showed a greater response rate compared with sorafenib. The OS is also much longer in the hepatic arterial infusion group compared to sorafenib. We also conclude the statistical significance in the overall survival and in progression-free survival. In terms of safety, the grade 3/4 AEs were recorded more frequently with sorafenib than with hepatic arterial infusion. Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in only 20.3% of patients in the hepatic arterial infusion arm. The most frequent complication in the hepatic arterial infusion groups is abdominal pain. This occurred in about 14% of patients in our study. This is a main concern. But we used some drugs to alleviate pain.