Table II.
Comparisons of efficacy in terms of OS and severe adverse events in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.
| A, OS [HR (95% CI)] | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Author, year | Treatment group | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | Sorafenib + TACE | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | SorCDDP | (Refs.) |
| Zheng, 2022; He, 2019 | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | - | - | - | - | (21,22) |
| Park, 2018; Lee, 2020 | Sorafenib + TACE | 0.42 (0.29-0.62) | - | - | - | (26,27) |
| Kudo, 2018 | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | 0.33 (0.22-0.50) | 0.78 (0.52-1.17) | - | - | (24) |
| Kondo, 2018; Ikeda, 2016 | SorCDDP | 0.27 (0.18-0.42) | 0.64 (0.42-0.97) | 0.83 (0.52-1.30) | - | (23,25) |
| All of the above | Sorafenib (Control) | 0.33 (0.25-0.44) | 0.79 (0.62-1.01) | 1.01 (0.74-1.38) | 1.22 (0.88-1.71) | (21–27) |
|
| ||||||
| B, Overall response rate [OR (95% CI)] | ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Author, year | Treatment group | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | Sorafenib + TACE | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | SorCDDP | (Refs.) |
|
| ||||||
| Zheng, 2022; He, 2019 | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | - | - | - | - | (21,22) |
| Park, 2018; Lee, 2020 | Sorafenib + TACE | 9.26 (3.03-29.26) | - | - | - | (26,27) |
| Kudo, 2018 | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | 8.16 (3.01-23.79) | 0.88 (0.32-2.54) | - | - | (24) |
| Kondo, 2018; Ikeda, 2016 | SorCDDP | 7.73 (2.05-27.81) | 0.83 (0.22-2.96) | 0.95 (0.27-3.03) | - | (23,25) |
| All of the above | Sorafenib (Control) | 22.18 (10.69-52.56) | 2.4 (1.10-5.58) | 2.72 (1.43-5.36) | 2.88 (1.12-8.58) | (21–27) |
|
| ||||||
| C, Liver injury [OR (95% CI)] | ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Author, year | Treatment group | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | Sorafenib + TACE | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | SorCDDP | (Refs.) |
|
| ||||||
| Zheng, 2022; He, 2019 | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | - | - | - | - | (21,22) |
| Park, 2018; Lee, 2020 | Sorafenib + TACE | 0.22 (0.07-0.68) | - | - | - | (26,27) |
| Kudo, 2018 | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | 1.34 (0.49-3.81) | 5.98 (2.07-19.30) | - | - | (24) |
| Kondo, 2018; Ikeda, 2016 | SorCDDP | 1.35 (0.51-3.62) | 6.02 (2.17,18.53) | 1.01 (0.39-2.55) | - | (23,25) |
| All of the above | Sorafenib (Control) | 1.34 (0.64-2.90) | 5.93 (2.70-15.41) | 1.00 (0.49-2.00) | 0.99 (0.54-1.86) | (21–27) |
|
| ||||||
| D, Constitutional symptoms [OR (95% CI)] | ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Author, year | Treatment group | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | Sorafenib + TACE | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | SorCDDP | (Refs.) |
|
| ||||||
| Zheng, 2022; He, 2019 | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | - | - | - | - | (21,22) |
| Park, 2018; Lee, 2020 | Sorafenib + TACE | 1.47 (0.35-6.59) | - | - | - | (26,27) |
| Kudo, 2018 | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | 1.39 (0.33-6.23) | 0.94 (0.25-3.65) | - | - | (24) |
| Kondo, 2018; Ikeda, 2016 | SorCDDP | 0.53 (0.06-3.41) | 0.36 (0.04-2.07) | 0.38 (0.04-2.15) | - | (23,25) |
| All of the above | Sorafenib (Control) | 1.81 (0.63-5.92) | 1.24 (0.48-3.28) | 1.31 (0.52-3.40) | 3.36 (0.83-25.50) | (21–27) |
|
| ||||||
| E, Gastrointestinal reactions [OR (95% CI)] | ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Author, year | Treatment group | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | Sorafenib + TACE | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | SorCDDP | (Refs.) |
|
| ||||||
| Zheng, 2022; He, 2019 | Sorafenib + HAIC-oxaliplatin | - | - | - | - | (21,22) |
| Park, 2018; Lee, 2020 | Sorafenib + TACE | 0.72 (0.22-2.35) | - | - | - | (26,27) |
| Kudo, 2018 | Sorafenib + PF-HAIC | 2.05 (0.59-8.51) | 2.86 (0.63,14.83) | - | - | (24) |
| Kondo, 2018; Ikeda, 2016 | SorCDDP | 0.57 (0.07-3.35) | 0.78 (0.08-5.63) | 0.27 (0.03-2.05) | - | (23,25) |
| All of the above | Sorafenib (Control) | 0.9 (0.49-1.63) | 1.24 (0.45-3.53) | 0.44 (0.12-1.30) | 1.57 (0.30-12.06) | (21–27) |
The HR values in the table are the treatment modality in the horizontal coordinate compared to the treatment modality in the vertical coordinate. HR, hazard ratio; CI, credible interval; OR, odds ratio; HAIC, hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy; TACE, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization; PF-HAIC, 5-fluorouracil-based HAIC; SorCDDP, sorafenib with cisplatin-HAIC; OS, overall survival.