Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology volume 11, pages 525–535 (2014)Cite this article

Subjects

Key Points

  • A number of treatments are available for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and their allocation—as well as disease prognosis—is influenced by tumour stage and the degree of liver-function impairment

  • The current definition of intermediate-stage HCC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC] stage B) is extensive multifocal disease confined to the liver, with preserved liver function and no cancer-related symptoms

  • Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is considered the standard treatment for intermediate-stage HCC in patients with preserved liver function and no cancer-related symptoms

  • Major efforts have been made to improve outcomes among patients treated with TACE; accurate technique together with appropriate patient selection is key to obtaining the best results

  • Sorafenib, the only systemic treatment associated with a survival benefit in HCC, should be considered for patients with BCLC stage B HCC who are not eligible for TACE

  • Radioembolization has antitumoural efficacy in patients with intermediate-stage HCC, but evidence of survival benefit has not been presented and is awaited

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)—closely associated with liver cirrhosis and, in fact, the main cause of death in patients with such disease—is now recognized as one of the most-prevalent and lethal neoplasms worldwide. Prognosis and allocation of the multiple available treatment options for patients with HCC are influenced not only by tumour stage, but also by the degree of liver-function impairment. Therefore, accurate assessment and classification of disease is important for patient management. According to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) algorithm, intermediate-stage HCC is defined as extensive multifocal disease without vascular invasion in patients with preserved liver function and absence of cancer-related symptoms; in this context, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is considered the standard treatment. The use of drug-eluting beads has enabled standardization of this procedure, resulting in higher reproducibility and tolerability of the treatment. Nevertheless, not all patients with intermediate-stage HCC are good candidates for TACE and, for such patients in whom TACE is not appropriate or has failed, other treatments can be considered, including sorafenib. Radioembolization is a promising alternative that deserves further prospective studies. Herein, we review the current approaches used to accurately stratify patients with intermediate-stage HCC and subsequently allocate the most-appropriate treatments. The key developments in therapeutic strategies are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: BCLC staging and treatment strategy.1
Figure 2: Proposed treatment algorithm after first-line TACE therapy in patients with intermediate-stage HCC.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Forner, A., Llovet, J. M. & Bruix, J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet 379, 1245–1255 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. El-Serag, H. B. & Mason, A. C. Rising incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 340, 745–750 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer. GLOBOCAN 2012: Estimated Cancer Incidence, Prevalence and Mortality Worldwide in 2012 [online], (2014).

  4. Sangiovanni, A. et al. The natural history of compensated cirrhosis due to hepatitis C virus: a 17-year cohort study of 214 patients. Hepatology 43, 1303–1310 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cabibbo, G. et al. A meta-analysis of survival rates of untreated patients in randomized clinical trials of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 51, 1274–1283 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. A new prognostic system for hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study of 435 patients: the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) investigators. Hepatology 28, 751–755 (1998).

  7. Vauthey, J. N. et al. Simplified staging for hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 20, 1527–1536 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kudo, M. et al. Validation of a new prognostic staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma: the JIS score compared with the CLIP score. Hepatology 40, 1396–1405 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tateishi, R. et al. Proposal of a new prognostic model for hepatocellular carcinoma: an analysis of 403 patients. Gut 54, 419–425 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Hsu, C. Y. et al. A new prognostic model for hepatocellular carcinoma based on total tumor volume: the Taipei Integrated Scoring System. J. Hepatol. 53, 108–117 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Forner, A., Reig, M. E., de Lope, C. R. & Bruix, J. Current strategy for staging and treatment: the BCLC update and future prospects. Semin. Liver Dis. 30, 61–74 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yau, T. et al. Development of Hong Kong liver cancer staging system with treatment stratification for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 146, 1691–1700 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Collette, S. et al. Prognosis of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of three staging systems in two French clinical trials. Ann. Oncol. 19, 1117–1126 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Huitzil-Melendez, F. D. et al. Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: which staging systems best predict prognosis? J. Clin. Oncol. 28, 2889–2895 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Pugh, R. N., Murray-Lyon, I. M., Dawson, J. L., Pietroni, M. C. & Williams, R. Transection of the oesophagus for bleeding oesophageal varices. Br. J. Surg. 60, 646–649 (1973).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sorensen, J. B., Klee, M., Palshof, T. & Hansen, H. H. Performance status assessment in cancer patients. An inter-observer variability study. Br. J. Cancer 67, 773–775 (1993).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Bruix, J. & Sherman, M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 53, 1020–1022 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. EASL–EORTC Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Hepatol. 56, 908–943 (2012).

  19. D'Amico, G., Garcia-Tsao, G. & Pagliaro, L. Natural history and prognostic indicators of survival in cirrhosis: a systematic review of 118 studies. J. Hepatol. 44, 217–231 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tsochatzis, E. A., Bosch, J. & Burroughs, A. K. Liver cirrhosis. Lancet 383, 1749–1761 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cillo, U. et al. The critical issue of hepatocellular carcinoma prognostic classification: which is the best tool available? J. Hepatol. 40, 124–131 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marrero, J. A. et al. Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of 7 staging systems in an American cohort. Hepatology 41, 707–716 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Llovet, J. M., Bru, C. & Bruix, J. Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: the BCLC staging classification. Semin. Liver Dis. 19, 329–338 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Llovet, J. M. et al. Arterial embolisation or chemoembolisation versus symptomatic treatment in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 359, 1734–1739 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Llovet, J. M. et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 359, 378–390 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cheng, A. L. et al. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 10, 25–34 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ferenci, P. et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): a global perspective. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 44, 239–245 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Verslype, C., Rosmorduc, O. & Rougier, P. Hepatocellular carcinoma: ESMO–ESDO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 23, vii41–vii48 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Beaugrand, M. et al. Treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma by seocalcitol (a vit D analogue): an International randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study in 747 patients. J. Hepatol. 42, 17A (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bruix, J. et al. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: subanalyses of a phase III trial. J. Hepatol. 57, 821–829 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Llovet, J. M. et al. Natural history of untreated nonsurgical hepatocellular carcinoma: rationale for the design and evaluation of therapeutic trials. Hepatology 29, 62–67 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Bolondi, L. et al. Heterogeneity of patients with intermediate (BCLC B) hepatocellular carcinoma: proposal for a subclassification to facilitate treatment decisions. Semin. Liver Dis. 32, 348–359 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Livraghi, T. et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhosis in 746 patients: long-term results of percutaneous ethanol injection. Radiology 197, 101–108 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Imamura, H. et al. Risk factors contributing to early and late phase intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy. J. Hepatol. 38, 200–207 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ikai, I. et al. Reevaluation of prognostic factors for survival after liver resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in a Japanese nationwide survey. Cancer 101, 796–802 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Todo, S. & Furukawa, H. Living donor liver transplantation for adult patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: experience in Japan. Ann. Surg. 240, 451–459 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Takayasu, K. et al. Prospective cohort study of transarterial chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in 8,510 patients. Gastroenterology 131, 461–469 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhu, A. X. et al. Efficacy, safety, and potential biomarkers of sunitinib monotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase II study. J. Clin. Oncol. 27, 3027–3035 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. N'Kontchou, G. et al. Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: Long-term results and prognostic factors in 235 Western patients with cirrhosis. Hepatology 50, 1475–1483 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Merani, S. et al. The impact of waiting list alpha-fetoprotein changes on the outcome of liver transplant for hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Hepatol. 55, 814–819 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Duvoux, C. et al. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a model including alpha-fetoprotein improves the performance of Milan criteria. Gastroenterology 143, 985–986 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Llovet, J. M. et al. Plasma biomarkers as predictors of outcome in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 18, 2290–2300 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Chevret, S. et al. A new prognostic classification for predicting survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Groupe d'Etude et de Traitement du Carcinome Hepatocellulaire. J. Hepatol. 31, 133–141 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Leung, T. W. et al. Construction of the Chinese University Prognostic Index for hepatocellular carcinoma and comparison with the TNM staging system, the Okuda staging system, and the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program staging system: a study based on 926 patients. Cancer 94, 1760–1769 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Kitai, S. et al. Validation of a new prognostic staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparison of the biomarker-combined Japan Integrated Staging Score, the conventional Japan Integrated Staging Score and the BALAD Score. Oncology 75 (Suppl. 1), 83–90 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Camma, C. et al. Survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: a comparison of BCLC, CLIP and GRETCH staging systems. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 28, 62–75 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Llovet, J. M. & Bruix, J. Systematic review of randomized trials for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: Chemoembolization improves survival. Hepatology 37, 429–442 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Lo, C. M. et al. Randomized controlled trial of transarterial lipiodol chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 35, 1164–1171 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Kudo, M. et al. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma in Japan: Consensus-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines proposed by the Japan Society of Hepatology (JSH) 2010 updated version. Dig. Dis. 29, 339–364 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Benson, A. B. et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: hepatobiliary cancers. J. Natl Compr. Canc. Netw. 7, 350–391 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Omata, M. et al. Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver consensus recommendations on hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol. Int. 4, 439–474 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Lencioni, R. Loco-regional treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 52, 762–773 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Raoul, J. L. et al. Chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinomas. A study of the biodistribution and pharmacokinetics of doxorubicin. Cancer 70, 585–590 (1992).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Kwok, P. C. et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing autologous blood clot and gelfoam in transarterial chemoembolization for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Hepatol. 32, 955–964 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Bruix, J. et al. Transarterial embolization versus symptomatic treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: results of a randomized, controlled trial in a single institution. Hepatology 27, 1578–1583 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Varela, M. et al. Chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma with drug eluting beads: efficacy and doxorubicin pharmacokinetics. J. Hepatol. 46, 474–481 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Furuse, J. et al. Pilot study of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization with degradable starch microspheres in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Am. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 159–164 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Lee, K.-H. et al. Evaluation of different calibrated spherical polyvinyl alcohol microspheres in transcatheter arterial chemoembolization: VX2 tumor model in rabbit liver. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 19, 1065–1069 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Chen, M. S. et al. High-dose iodized oil transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma. World J. Gastroenterol. 8, 74–78 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. [No authors listed] A comparison of lipiodol chemoembolization and conservative treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Groupe d'Etude et de Traitement du Carcinome Hepatocellulaire. N. Engl. J. Med. 332, 1256–1261 (1995).

  61. Pelletier, G. et al. Treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with lipiodol chemoembolization: a multicenter randomized trial. Groupe CHC. J. Hepatol. 29, 129–134 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Oliveri, R. S., Wetterslev, J. & Gluud, C. Transarterial (chemo)embolisation for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD004787. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004787.pub2.

  63. Ray, C. E. Jr, Haskal, Z. J., Geschwind, J. F. & Funaki, B. S. The use of transarterial chemoembolization in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a response to the Cochrane Collaboration review of 2011. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 22, 1693–1696 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Forner, A., Llovet, J. M. & Bruix, J. Chemoembolization for intermediate HCC: is there proof of survival benefit? J. Hepatol. 56, 984–986 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Raoul, J. et al. Evolving strategies for the management of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: available evidence and expert opinion on the use of transarterial chemoembolization. Cancer Treat. Rev. 37, 212–220 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Namur, J. et al. Drug-eluting beads for liver embolization: concentration of doxorubicin in tissue and in beads in a pig model. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 21, 259–267 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Poon, R. T. et al. A phase I/II trial of chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using a novel intra-arterial drug-eluting bead. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 5, 1100–1108 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Lammer, J. et al. Prospective randomized study of doxorubicin-eluting-bead embolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the PRECISION V study. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 33, 41–52 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Burrel, M. et al. Survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated by transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) using Drug Eluting Beads. Implications for clinical practice and trial design. J. Hepatol. 56, 1330–1335 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Malagari, K. et al. Chemoembolization with doxorubicin-eluting beads for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: five-year survival analysis. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 35, 1119–1128 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Takayasu, K. et al. Overall survival after transarterial lipiodol infusion chemotherapy with or without embolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: propensity score analysis. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 194, 830–837 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Takayasu, K. et al. Superselective transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. Validation of treatment algorithm proposed by Japanese guidelines. J. Hepatol. 56, 886–892 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Therasse, P. et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 92, 205–216 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Eisenhauer, E. A. et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur. J. Cancer 45, 228–247 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Forner, A. et al. Evaluation of tumor response after locoregional therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma: are response evaluation criteria in solid tumors reliable? Cancer 115, 616–623 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Bruix, J. et al. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver. J. Hepatol. 35, 421–430 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Llovet, J. M. et al. Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 100, 698–711 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Lencioni, R. & Llovet, J. M. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin. Liver Dis. 30, 52–60 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Riaz, A. et al. Imaging response in the primary index lesion and clinical outcomes following transarterial locoregional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. JAMA 303, 1062–1069 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Bargellini, I. et al. Modified RECIST to assess tumor response after transarterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma: CT-pathologic correlation in 178 liver explants. Eur. J. Radiol. 82, e212–e218 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Golfieri, R. et al. Efficacy of selective transarterial chemoembolization in inducing tumor necrosis in small (<5 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas. Hepatology 53, 1580–1589 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Riaz, A. et al. Role of the EASL, RECIST, and WHO response guidelines alone or in combination for hepatocellular carcinoma: radiologic-pathologic correlation. J. Hepatol. 54, 695–704 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Gillmore, R. et al. EASL and mRECIST responses are independent prognostic factors for survival in hepatocellular cancer patients treated with transarterial embolization. J. Hepatol. 55, 1309–1316 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Memon, K. et al. Radiographic response to locoregional therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma predicts patient survival times. Gastroenterology 141, 526–535 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Prajapati, H. J. et al. mRECIST and EASL responses at early time point by contrast-enhanced dynamic MRI predict survival in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated by doxorubicin drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization (DEB TACE). Ann. Oncol. 24, 965–973 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Choi, J. et al. Clinical significance of the best response during repeated transarterial chemoembolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Hepatol. 60, 1212–1218 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Lencioni, R. et al. Doxorubicin-eluting bead-enhanced radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: a pilot clinical study. J. Hepatol. 49, 217–222 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Peng, Z.-W. et al. Radiofrequency ablation with or without transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective randomized trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 31, 426–432 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Wang, W., Shi, J. & Xie, W.-F. Transarterial chemoembolization in combination with percutaneous ablation therapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Liver Int. 30, 741–749 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Ni, J., Liu, S., Xu, L., Sun, H. & Chen, Y. Transarterial chemoembolization combined with percutaneous radiofrequency ablation versus TACE and PRFA monotherapy in the treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 139, 653–659 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Lu, Z. et al. Radiofrequency ablation plus chemoembolization versus radiofrequency ablation alone for hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 25, 187–194 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Lencioni, R. et al. Transcatheter treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with doxorubicin-loaded DC Bead (DEBDOX): technical recommendations. Cardiovasc. Intervent. Radiol. 35, 980–985 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Park, J.-W. et al. Consensus recommendations and review by an International Expert Panel on Interventions in Hepatocellular Carcinoma (EPOIHCC). Liver Int. 33, 327–337 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Sergio, A. et al. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): the role of angiogenesis and invasiveness. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 103, 914–921 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Sieghart, W. et al. The ART of decision making: retreatment with transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 57, 2261–2273 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Hucke, F. et al. The ART-strategy: sequential assessment of the ART score predicts outcome of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma re-treated with TACE. J. Hepatol. 60, 118–126 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Bruix, J. et al. Clinical decision making and research in hepatocellular carcinoma: pivotal role of imaging techniques. Hepatology 54, 2238–2244 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Dufour, J. F. et al. Continuous administration of sorafenib in combination with transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: results of a phase I study. Oncologist 15, 1198–1204 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Lencioni, R. et al. Sorafenib or placebo in combination with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with doxorubicin-eluting beads (DEBDOX) for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): phase II, randomized, double-blind SPACE trial [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, LBA154 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Chung, Y. H. et al. Interim analysis of START: study in Asia of the combination of TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization) with sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma trial. Int. J. Cancer 132, 2448–2458 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Kudo, M. et al. A randomized, doubled-blind, multicenter phase 3 study of brivanib versus placebo as adjuvant therapy to trans-arterial chemoembolization in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: initial results [abstract O–022]. Presented at the 7th ILCA Annual Conference 2013.

  102. Yeo, W. et al. A randomized phase III study of doxorubicin versus cisplatin/interferon alpha-2b/doxorubicin/fluorouracil (PIAF) combination chemotherapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 97, 1532–1538 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Louafi, S. et al. Gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin (GEMOX) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): results of a phase II study. Cancer 109, 1384–1390 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Gish, R. G. et al. Phase III randomized controlled trial comparing the survival of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with nolatrexed or doxorubicin. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 3069–3075 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Boige, V. et al. Multicentre phase II trial of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: FFCD 03–03 trial. Br. J. Cancer 97, 862–867 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  106. Edeline, J. et al. Systemic chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma in non-cirrhotic liver: a retrospective study. World J. Gastroenterol. 15, 713–716 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Davila, J. A., Duan, Z., McGlynn, K. A. & El-Serag, H. B. Utilization and outcomes of palliative therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a population-based study in the United States. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 46, 71–77 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Qin, S. et al. Randomized, multicenter, open-label study of oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil/leucovorin versus doxorubicin as palliative chemotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma from Asia. J. Clin. Oncol. 31, 3501–3508 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Hanahan, D. & Weinberg, R. A. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell 100, 57–70 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Hanahan, D. & Weinberg, A. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 144, 646–674 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Villanueva, A. & Llovet, J. M. Targeted therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 140, 1410–1426 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Cheng, A. L. et al. Sunitinib versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular cancer: results of a randomized phase III trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 31, 4067–4075 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Llovet, J. M. et al. Brivanib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were intolerant to sorafenib or for whom sorafenib failed: results from the randomized phase III BRISK-PS study. J. Clin. Oncol. 31, 3509–3516 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Johnson, P. J. et al. Brivanib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with unresectable, advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: results from the randomized phase III BRISK-FL study. J. Clin. Oncol. 31, 3517–3524 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Zhu, A. X. et al. EVOLVE-1: phase 3 study of everolimus for advanced HCC that progressed during or after sorafenib [abstract]. J. Clin. Oncol. 32, a172 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Forner, A. et al. Diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma [Spanish]. Med. Clin. (Barc.) 132, 272–287 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Reig, M. et al. Post-progression survival of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Rationale for second line trial design. Hepatology 58, 2023–2031 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Raoul, J. L., Boucher, E., Rolland, Y. & Garin, E. Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with intra-arterial injection of radionuclides. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 7, 41–49 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Sangro, B., Inarrairaegui, M. & Bilbao, J. I. Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Hepatol. 56, 464–473 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Riaz, A. et al. Radiologic-pathologic correlation of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with internal radiation using yttrium-90 microspheres. Hepatology 49, 1185–1193 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Kulik, L. M. et al. Safety and efficacy of 90Y radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with and without portal vein thrombosis. Hepatology 47, 71–81 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Salem, R. et al. Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using Yttrium-90 microspheres: a comprehensive report of long-term outcomes. Gastroenterology 138, 52–64 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Hilgard, P. et al. Radioembolization with yttrium-90 glass microspheres in hepatocellular carcinoma: European experience on safety and long-term survival. Hepatology 52, 1741–1749 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Sangro, B. et al. Survival after yttrium-90 resin microsphere radioembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma across Barcelona clinic liver cancer stages: a European evaluation. Hepatology 54, 868–878 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Mazzaferro, V. et al. Yttrium-90 radioembolization for intermediate-advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase 2 study. Hepatology 57, 1826–1837 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Salem, R. et al. Radioembolization results in longer time-to-progression and reduced toxicity compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 140, 497–507 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Sangro, B. et al. Liver disease induced by radioembolization of liver tumors: description and possible risk factors. Cancer 112, 1538–1546 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov [online], (2013).

  129. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov [online], (2014).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd; Networked Biomedical Research Centre for Hepatic and Digestive Diseases) is funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III. The Instituto de Salud Carlos III has also supported the work of A.F. and J.B. (grants PI11/01830 and PI13/01229).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) Group, Liver Unit, Centre for Biomedical Research Network for Hepatic and Digestive Diseases, Hospital Clinic Barcelona, August Pi i Sunyer Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBAPS), University of Barcelona, C/ Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain

    Alejandro Forner & Jordi Bruix

  2. Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, 232 Boulevard de Sainte Marguerite, 13009, Marseille, France

    Marine Gilabert & Jean-Luc Raoul

Authors
  1. Alejandro Forner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marine Gilabert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jordi Bruix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jean-Luc Raoul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A.F., J.B. and J.-L.R. contributed to all stages of the preparation of the manuscript for submission. M.G. made substantial contributions researching data for article, discussion of content, and review/editing of the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jordi Bruix or Jean-Luc Raoul.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

A.F. has acted as a consultant for Bayer HealthCare. J.B. has acted as a consultant or in an advisory role for ArQule, Bayer, Biocompatibles, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Kowa, Lilly, Novartis, Roche, and Terumo. J.-L.R. has acted as a consultant or in an advisory role for Arqule, Bayer HealthCare, Biocompatibles, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Merck Serono. M.G. declares no competing interests.

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Forner, A., Gilabert, M., Bruix, J. et al. Treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 11, 525–535 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.122

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.122

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing