Sorafenib versus Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy as Initial Treatment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Advanced Portal Vein Tumor Thrombosis.

Objective To investigate the validity of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with low-dose 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (LFP) versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumor thrombosis (Vp3, Vp4). Patients and Methods We retrospectively reviewed the cases of Child-Pugh A advanced HCC with Vp3 or Vp4 treated with LFP or sorafenib between October 2002 and December 2013. Results There were 32 patients in the LFP group and 14 patients in the sorafenib group. The objective response rate/disease control rate was 31.3/56.3% in the LFP group and 0/28.6% in the sorafenib group. The median survival time (MST) (309 vs. 120 days; p = 0.009) and the median time to treatment failure (109 vs. 37 days; p = 0.022) were significantly longer in the LFP group than in the sorafenib group. In the LFP group, a relatively favorable outcome (MST, 622 days) was obtained among the response cases. Among the nonresponse cases in the LFP group, at the time of cessation of LFP, 70.4% of cases were Child-Pugh A and 88.9% of cases maintained a score of ≤7 points; of the cases in whom Child-Pugh A was maintained, the survival period from the time of LFP discontinuation was significantly longer in the cases in whom sorafenib was introduced as a secondary treatment after LFP than in the cases treated with best supportive care (220 vs. 89 days; p = 0.002). The main adverse event with LFP was grade 3 or higher cytopenia, which was manageable, and adverse event-induced discontinuation was significantly lower as compared with sorafenib (p = 0.002). Conclusion For the treatment of HCC with Vp3/Vp4, it is desirable to initially use LFP and then immediately change to sorafenib if no response is obtained.