Assessment of treatment efficacy in hepatocellular carcinoma: Response rate, delay in progression or none of them

Complete response under sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Relationship with dermatologic adverse events

“…Overall, if we apply the mRECIST definition for CR, the prevalence of CR would be higher than it actually is. Indeed, reliable definition of response is one of the controversial points in the Lencioni et al study testing the value of mRECIST in the brivanib second‐line trial …”

“…Thus, the clinical relevance of existing metastasic lymph nodes for achieving CR with antiangiogenic drugs may deserve further attention. Interestingly, the combined analysis of the two seminal sorafenib versus placebo trials has shown that patients without extrahepatic spread have a significantly higher treatment benefit from sorafenib compared with those with dissemination …”

“…Indeed, reliable definition of response is one of the controversial points in the Lencioni et al study testing the value of mRECIST in the brivanib second-line trial. (24,25) Sorafenib is a powerful vasoconstrictor, as is the case with all antiangiogenics. This implies a reduction in hepatic artery blood flow that may result in hypodensity within the tumor nodules.…”

“…Interestingly, the combined analysis of the two seminal sorafenib versus placebo trials has shown that patients without extrahepatic spread have a significantly higher treatment benefit from sorafenib compared with those with dissemination. (25,34) Thus, the main question in clinical practice is whether sorafenib should be stopped upon detection of CR or if treatment should be kept in place without time limits.…”

Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: Statistical confirmation of improved survival in responders by landmark analyses

“…However, such software tools are not currently available. Bruix et al have recently outlined the limitations response and highlighted the need for validating studies.…”