Purpose To compare the efficacy and safety of combined treatment with lenvatinib and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) versus TACE only in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). Methods Of the 120 patients enrolled in this study, 60 patients received treatment with TACE only, and 60 patients received TACE plus lenvatinib. We retrospectively compared the clinical outcomes including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and tumor response between the two groups. Both PFS and tumor response were based on the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST). Adverse events were analyzed to assess the safety profiles. Results The 1-year and 2-year OS rates were significantly higher in the TACE + lenvatinib group (88.4% and 79.8%) than that in the TACE group (79.2% and 49.2%, p = 0.047). A similar PFS benefit was observed in the TACE + lenvatinib group (1-y PFS rate: 78.4% vs. 64.7%, 2-y PFS rate: 45.5% vs. 38.0%, p < 0.001). The best overall objective response rate (ORR) was also better with TACE + lenvatinib treatment (ORR: 68.3% vs. 31.7%, p < 0.001) and disease control rate (DCR) numerically increased in the TACE + lenvatinib treatment (93.3% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.224). Patients’ liver function remained comparable to baseline in the TACE + lenvatinib group. The most common adverse events were decreased albumin (55.0%), hypertension (48.3%) and decreased platelet count (46.7%) in the TACE + lenvatinib group. Conclusions Combination treatment with TACE and lenvatinib may significantly improve clinical outcomes over TACE monotherapy with a manageable safety profile for unresectable HCC. The efficacy of the combination treatment should be validated in prospective studies with a large sample size. Graphical abstract

PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib combined with programmed death receptor-1 signaling inhibitors plus transarterial chemoembolization (LePD1-TACE) for treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) in a real-world setting in China.MethodsThis was a retrospective study involving consecutive patients with uHCC (n =114) receiving LePD1-TACE treatment from June 2019 to May 2021. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) were calculated to evaluate the antitumor efficacy. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were analyzed to assess the safety profiles. In addition, we also evaluated prognostic factors related to survival and disease progression.ResultsA total of 114 patients with a median age of 53 years were analyzed during a median follow-up duration of 10.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.5 -12.8). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the median OS was 18.0 months (95% CI: 14.1 - Not reached), the median PFS was 10.4 months (95% CI: 6.6 - 12.4). Based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the best ORR was 69.3% and DCR was 80.7%. Almost all patients suffered from TRAEs, the most common grade 3-4 TRAEs were hypertension (8.8%), proteinuria (3.6%), hyperbilirubinemia (1.8%), leukopenia (4.4%) and alanine aminotransferase elevation (3.6%) across all patients. The independent treatment factors associated with OS and PFS were tumor number, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the early tumor response. In the early tumor response (CR+PR) patients, median OS and PFS were 25.1 months (95% CI: 13.8 - Not reached) and 15.2 months (95% CI: 10.5 - 19.1). The patients with tumor number &lt; 3 had a superior median OS and PFS (25.1, 16.4 months) compared to patients with tumor number ≥ 3 (14.1 months, P = 0.012; 6.6 months, P = 0.007). The patients with NLR ≤ 2.165 had a longer median OS and PFS (Not reached, 15.2 months) than those with NLR &gt; 2.165 (17.7 months, P = 0.003; 7.5 months, P = 0.047).ConclusionIn this real-world study, LePD1-TACE triple therapy showed encouraging efficiency and manageable safety in patients with uHCC. The tumor number (&lt; 3), NLR (≤ 2.165) and early tumor response (CR+PR) could be one of the prognostic markers.

Vibrio vulnificus is a pathogenic marine bacteria associated with high mortality. Changes in climate and the global seafood trade have increased the prevalence of marine and freshwater systems affected by V. vulnificus. As a result, the incidence of land animals, plants, and insects contacting V. vulnificus and acting as disease vectors is on the rise. We report the case of a 53-year-old male who was infected with V. vulnificus as the result of a bee sting. The patient had no history of contact with the sea or fresh water or aquatic organisms or products. Due to bacterial pathogenicity and the patient's underlying diseases, his condition deteriorated rapidly and eventually resulted in death. Here, we review the pathogenic mechanisms and treatment of V. vulnificus. We determined that V. vulnificus has spread from seawater to freshwater and that individuals may become infected from insects, even in the absence of direct contact with infected water. This case report will inform clinicians about the possible sources of V. vulnificus infection and indicates the possibility that more insects may transmit V. vulnificus in the future.

Background The present study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety profiles of microspheres versus (vs.) polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) for bronchial artery embolization (BAE) treatment in patients with hemoptysis. Methods Totally, 152 patients with hemoptysis who were about to receive BAE treatment were consecutively enrolled and divided into microspheres group (N = 62) and PVA group (N = 90). Technical success and clinical success were assessed after BAE procedure, and the hemoptysis-recurrence status, survival status and adverse events were recorded during follow-up. Results Technical success rates were both 100% in microspheres group and PVA group; clinical success rate (96.8% vs. 100.0%, P = 0.165), 6-month (9.7% vs. 7.8%, P = 0.681) and 1-year (9.7% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.869) hemoptysis recurrence rate, 6-month (4.8% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.374) and 1-year (4.8% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.639) mortality were similar between microspheres group and PVA group. Furthermore, hemoptysis-free survival (P = 0.488) and overall survival (P = 0.321) were of no difference between two groups. In addition, all adverse events were mild, and there was no difference of adverse events between two groups (all P > 0.05). These data were validated by further multivariate regression analysis. Conclusions Microspheres present comparable efficacy and safety profiles compared with PVA for the BAE treatment in patients with hemoptysis, providing evidence for embolic agent selection.