Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2019 Mar;49(5):482-491. doi: 10.1111/apt.15088. Epub 2019 Jan 29.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: the critical role of dermatological events in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib.

Author information

1
Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) Group, Liver Unit, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, IDIBAPS, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
2
Medical Statistics Core Facility, IDIBAPS, Hospital Clinic Barcelona & Biostatistics Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
3
Medical Statistics Core Facility, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS) and Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain.
4
Biostatistics Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The positive results of the REFLECT trial in terms of survival (sorafenib vs lenvatinib) offer a new first-line option for hepatocellular carcinoma. Additionally, the expected results of immunotherapy could change the first-line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma or the clinical trial design in first and second-line.

AIMS:

To evaluate the impact of dermatologic adverse events under sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma patients as a clinical marker to predict prognosis and critically evaluate outcomes within trials.

METHODS:

A systematic search of original articles published until October 2018 was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE and a meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.

RESULTS:

A total of 393 studies were identified and 13 articles with 2035 patients (79.5% Child-Pugh-A, 73.2% BCLC-C) were selected for qualitative and quantitative analysis. The main type of dermatologic adverse events was hand-foot skin reaction (47.7%) but other dermatologic adverse events were reported in 31.7% of the cases. Presence of dermatologic adverse events was associated with a lower mortality when compared with those patients without them (pooled Hazard Ratio for the univariate analysis 0.45 (95% CI: 0.38-0.53) and there was no heterogeneity for the analysis (P = 0.511; I2  = 0.0%). Refuting this association would require the future report of 1370 negative studies.

CONCLUSIONS:

This meta-analysis shows a clinically meaningful association between dermatologic adverse events and a higher probability of longer survival. These data support the use of dermatologic adverse events in the clinical decision-making when informing the prognosis and when systemic treatment is decided.

PMID:
30695819
DOI:
10.1111/apt.15088

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center