Search

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common type of liver cancer, accounting for 70% to 85% of individuals with primary liver cancer. Gene therapy, which uses genes to treat or prevent diseases, holds potential for treatment, especially for tumours. Trials on the effects of gene therapy in people with hepatocellular carcinoma have been published or are ongoing., Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of gene therapy in people with hepatocellular carcinoma, irrespective of sex, administered dose, and type of formulation., Search Methods: We identified randomised clinical trials through electronic searches in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science. We searched five online clinical trial registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. We checked reference lists of the retrieved studies for further trials. The date of last search was 20 January 2023., Selection Criteria: We aimed to include randomised clinical trials assessing any type of gene therapy in people diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma, irrespective of year, language of publication, format, or outcomes reported., Data Collection and Analysis: We followed Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager to prepare the review. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality/overall survival (whatever data were provided), serious adverse events during treatment, and health-related quality of life. The secondary outcomes were proportion of people with disease progression, adverse events considered non-serious, and proportion of people without improvement in liver function tests. We assessed risk of bias of the included trials using RoB 2 and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We presented the results of time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HR), dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR), and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Our primary analyses were based on intention-to-treat and outcome data at the longest follow-up., Main Results: We included six randomised clinical trials with 364 participants. The participants had unresectable (i.e. advanced inoperable) hepatocellular carcinoma. We found no trials assessing the effects of gene therapy in people with operable hepatocellular carcinoma. Four trials were conducted in China, one in several countries (from North America, Asia, and Europe), and one in Egypt. The number of participants in the six trials ranged from 10 to 129 (median 47), median age was 55.2 years, and the mean proportion of males was 72.7%. The follow-up duration ranged from six months to five years. As the trials compared different types of gene therapy and had different controls, we could not perform meta-analyses. Five of the six trials administered co-interventions equally to the experimental and control groups. All trials assessed one or more outcomes of interest in this review. The certainty of evidence was very low in five of the six comparisons and low in the double-dose gene therapy comparison. Below, we reported the results of the primary outcomes only. Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa-Vec) plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone There is uncertainty about whether there may be little to no difference between the effect of Pexa-Vec plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone on overall survival (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.82; 1 trial (censored observation at 20-month follow-up), 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and on serious adverse events (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; 1 trial at 20 months after treatment, 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial reported quality of life narratively as "assessment of quality of life and time to symptomatic progression was confounded by the high patient dropout rate." Adenovirus-thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV-TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation alone There is uncertainty about whether ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation may benefit all-cause mortality at the two-year follow-up (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.76; 1 trial, 45 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events other than mortality or quality of life. Double-dose ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation alone There is uncertainty about whether double-dose ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation may benefit all-cause mortality at five-year follow-up (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73; 1 trial, 86 participants; low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events other than mortality or quality of life. Recombinant human adenovirus-p53 with hydroxycamptothecin (rAd-p53/HCT) versus hydroxycamptothecin alone There is uncertainty about whether there may be little to no difference between the effect of rAd-p53/HCT versus hydroxycamptothecin alone on the overall survival at 12-month follow-up (RR 3.06, 95% CI 0.16 to 60.47; 1 trial, 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events or quality of life. rAd-p53/5-Fu (5-fluorouracil) plus transarterial chemoembolisation versus transarterial chemoembolisation alone The trial included 46 participants. We had insufficient data to assess overall survival. The trial did not report serious adverse events or quality of life. E1B-deleted (dl1520) adenovirus versus percutaneous ethanol injection The trial included 10 participants. It did not report data on overall survival, serious adverse events, or health-related quality of life. One trial did not provide any information on sponsorship; one trial received a national research grant, one trial by the Pedersen foundation, and three were industry-funded trials. We found five ongoing randomised clinical trials., Authors' Conclusions: The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of gene therapy on the studied outcomes because of high risk of bias and imprecision of outcome results. The trials were underpowered and lacked trial data on clinically important outcomes. There was only one trial per comparison, and we could not perform meta-analyses. Therefore, we do not know if gene therapy may reduce, increase, or have little to no effect on all-cause mortality or overall survival, or serious adverse events in adults with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. The impact of gene therapy on adverse events needs to be investigated further. Evidence on the effect of gene therapy on health-related quality of life is lacking., (Copyright © 2024 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Introduction: EGFR targeted therapies, have been proved beneficial for patients with HCC, nevertheless additional research on EGFR immunoexpresion and EGFR mutations is still needed, especially in population in which it has not been done yet. The aim of this study is to evaluate EGFR immunoexpression in HCC without EGFR exons 18-21 mutations and to evaluate its influence on survival in HCC patients in North Macedonia. Methods: We studied 31 cases of HCC for EGFR immunohistochemical expression and EGFR exons 18-21 mutations. The following clinical parameters were analyzed: Hepatitis B and C virus infection, presence of cirrhosis, tumor size, enlarged lymph nodes, metastases, alpha fetoprotein level and overall survival. Presence of the EGFR immunosignal (membranous and cytoplasmic) and the percentage of positive tumor cells in the entire tumor tissue specimen were semi-quantitatively determined. Results: Hepatitis B and C virus infection, tumor size, metastatic disease and EGFR immunoexpression have influence on patient's survival. No EGFR exons 18-21 mutations were detected in this group of HCCs. EGFR expression of 61%-80% in tumor tissue significantly influenced survival of the patients (p < 0.01). Multiple Cox regression confirmed tumor size of 5-10 cm (p < 0.05), tumor size > 10 cm (p < 0.01) and EGFR expression in range of 61% to 80% (p < 0.05) as independent survival predictors in patients with HCC. Conclusion: EGFR overexpression in range of 61% to 80% was an independent survival predictor in patients with HCC, implying that these patients could benefit from EGFR inhibition. However, the absence of EGFR mutations in exons 18-21 in any of the cases of this study suggest that single drug EGFR targeted therapy in patients with HCC may be insufficient., (© 2022 Dafina Nikolova et al., published by Sciendo.)

The aim of this study was to make a clinical characterisation of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and to investigate the expression of a set of molecular markers in patients from the Republic of North Macedonia. We analysed 60 patients for clinicopathologic factors, and we investigated tumour tissue and surrounding liver tissue for immunoexpression of E-cadherin, β-catenin, cyclin D1, and p53. Infection with hepatitis virus B and C (p < 0.001), tumour dimension (p < 0.001), vascular invasion (p < 0.002), and tumour differentiation (p < 0.021) significantly influenced the survival of the patients. E-cadherin and β-catenin expression reduction and cyclin D1 and p53 overexpression were significantly higher in the tumour than in the non-tumour tissue (p < 0.001; p < 0.001; p = 0.001; p < 0.001, respectively). No significant correlation was found between clinicopathological characteristics and the analysed molecules nor between the molecules themselves. The immunoexpression of E-cadherin, β-catenin, cyclin D1, and p53 was not related to the tumour aggressiveness and prognosis. However, their significantly higher expression in HCC tissue compared to that in non-tumour tissue indicate their important role in hepatocarcinogenesis. The clinicopathological characteristics of the neoplasm remain highly predictive factors for the survival of the patients.

Introduction: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling plays an important role in various cancers, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to evaluate immunoexpression of EGFR in HCC and surrounding non-tumor liver tissue and to correlate it to multiple clinicopathologic data., Material and Methods: We analyzed 60 patients with HCC for multiple clinicopathologic characteristics and survival. Presence of the immunosignal and the percentage of positive tumor cells at the whole tumor tissue sample and adjacent cirrhotic liver tissue were semi-quantitatively determined., Results: Nineteen patients (31.67%) were female and 41 (68.33%) were male ranging in age from 31 to 85 years, median 61.88±10.51. Mean survival time for female patients was 8.86±1.76 months, for male 13.03±1.50 months and overall survival was 11.6051±1.19 months. The most patients had: T2 status (41.67%), no enlarged lymph nodes (90%), vascular invasion (63.33%) and well differentiated (43.33%) tumors. EGFR immunoexpression was determined in range from 0% to 100% in both tumor and non-tumor tissue with mean value of 39.58% in tumor and 86.86% in cirrhotic tissue (p<0.00). Higher percent of tumor EGFR positive cells were found in cases with higher T status, higher levels of AFP and poorly differentiated carcinoma, but not significantly. Lower percent of tumor EGFR positive cells were found in patients with vascular invasion and enlarged lymph nodes, but also not significantly. EGFR expression in tumor tissue significantly influenced survival of the patients (p<0.05)., Conclusion: The study showed that expression of EGFR in lower percentage of tumor cells was associated to favorable prognosis, making it a potential prognostic marker and therapeutic target.

Background: Oxidative stress may cause gastrointestinal cancers. The evidence on whether antioxidant supplements are effective in preventing gastrointestinal cancers is contradictory., Objectives: To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of antioxidant supplements in preventing gastrointestinal cancers., Search Strategy: We identified trials through the trials registers of the four Cochrane Review Groups on gastrointestinal diseases, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2007), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, SCI-EXPANDED, and The Chinese Biomedical Database from inception to October 2007. We scanned reference lists and contacted pharmaceutical companies., Selection Criteria: Randomised trials comparing antioxidant supplements to placebo/no intervention examining occurrence of gastrointestinal cancers., Data Collection and Analysis: Two authors (GB and DN) independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. Outcome measures were gastrointestinal cancers, overall mortality, and adverse effects. Outcomes were reported as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analysis. Meta-regression assessed the effect of covariates across the trials., Main Results: We identified 20 randomised trials (211,818 participants), assessing beta-carotene (12 trials), vitamin A (4 trials), vitamin C (8 trials), vitamin E (10 trials), and selenium (9 trials). Trials quality was generally high. Heterogeneity was low to moderate. Antioxidant supplements were without significant effects on gastrointestinal cancers (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.06). However, there was significant heterogeneity (I(2) = 54.0%, P = 0.003). The heterogeneity may have been explained by bias risk (low-bias risk trials RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.13 compared to high-bias risk trials RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.80; test of interaction P < 0.0005), and type of antioxidant supplement (beta-carotene potentially increasing and selenium potentially decreasing cancer risk). The antioxidant supplements had no significant effects on mortality in a random-effects model meta-analysis (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.07, I(2) = 53.5%), but significantly increased mortality in a fixed-effect model meta-analysis (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.07). Beta-carotene in combination with vitamin A (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.23) and vitamin E (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11) significantly increased mortality. Increased yellowing of the skin and belching were non-serious adverse effects of beta-carotene. In five trials (four with high risk of bias), selenium seemed to show significant beneficial effect on gastrointestinal cancer occurrence (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.75, I(2) = 0%)., Authors' Conclusions: We could not find convincing evidence that antioxidant supplements prevent gastrointestinal cancers. On the contrary, antioxidant supplements seem to increase overall mortality. The potential cancer preventive effect of selenium should be tested in adequately conducted randomised trials.

Background: Oxidative stress may cause gastrointestinal cancers. The evidence on whether antioxidant supplements are effective in preventing gastrointestinal cancers is contradictory., Objectives: To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of antioxidant supplements in preventing gastrointestinal cancers., Search Strategy: We identified trials through the trials registers of the four Cochrane Review Groups on gastrointestinal diseases, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and SCI-EXPANDED from inception to February 2003, and The Chinese Biomedical Database (March 2003). We scanned reference lists and contacted pharmaceutical companies., Selection Criteria: Randomised trials comparing antioxidant supplements to placebo/no intervention examining the incidence of gastrointestinal cancers., Data Collection and Analysis: Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. The outcome measures were incidence of gastrointestinal cancers, overall mortality, and adverse events. Outcomes were reported as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on fixed and random effects meta-analyses., Main Results: We identified 14 randomised trials (170,525 participants), assessing beta-carotene (9 trials), vitamin A (4 trials), vitamin C (4 trials), vitamin E (5 trials), and selenium (6 trials). Trial quality was generally high. Heterogeneity was low to moderate. Neither the fixed effect (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.04) nor random effects meta-analyses (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.05) showed significant effects of supplementation with antioxidants on the incidences of gastrointestinal cancers. Among the seven high-quality trials reporting on mortality (131,727 participants), the fixed effect (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.10) unlike the random effects meta-analysis (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.15) showed that antioxidant supplements significantly increased mortality. Two low-quality trials (32,302 participants) found no significant effect of antioxidant supplementation on mortality. The difference between the mortality estimates in high- and low-quality trials was significant by test of interaction (z = 2.10, P = 0.04). Beta-carotene and vitamin A (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.45) and beta-carotene and vitamin E (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.20) significantly increased mortality, while beta-carotene alone only tended to do so (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11). Increased yellowing of the skin and belching were non-serious adverse effects of beta-carotene. In four trials (three with unclear/inadequate methodology), selenium showed significant beneficial effect on gastrointestinal cancer incidences., Reviewers' Conclusions: We could not find evidence that antioxidant supplements prevent gastrointestinal cancers. On the contrary, they seem to increase overall mortality. The potential cancer preventive effect of selenium should be studied in adequately conducted randomised trials.