Cochrane · systematic review · CD013731
Gene therapy for people with hepatocellular carcinoma
Naing, C, Ni, H, Aung, HH, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2024 · Cochrane Library
Hepato-BiliaryAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
30
current version
GRADE rated
14
No studies
16
Included studies
NR
No studies 16 · 53.3%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 13 · 43.3%Low 1 · 3.3%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa‐Vec) plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Population: participants with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival (absolute effect size estimates based on survival rate at 20 months) (censored observation) Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa‐Vec) plus best supportive care vs best supportive care alone | HR 1.19 [0.78, 1.82] | 1 study · 129 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Proportion of people with ≥ 1 serious adverse events (at 20 months) Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa‐Vec) plus best supportive care vs best supportive care alone | RR 1.42 [0.6, 3.33] | 1 study · 129 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Health‐related quality of life Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa‐Vec) plus best supportive care vs best supportive care alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 129 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Proportion of people with disease progression Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa‐Vec) plus best supportive care vs best supportive care alone | RR 2.64 [1.29, 5.43] | 1 study · 129 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events considered non‐serious (number of participants) Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa‐Vec) plus best supportive care vs best supportive care alone | RR 2 [1.47, 2.72] | 1 study · 129 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Population: participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality Adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | RR 0.39 [0.2, 0.76] | 1 study · 45 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Proportion of people with ≥ 1 serious adverse events during treatment Adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health‐related quality of life Adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of people with disease progression Adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events considered non‐serious (number of participants) Adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | RR 20.13 [1.25, 324] | 1 study · 45 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Double‐dose adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Population: participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality Double‐dose adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | RR 0.4 [0.22, 0.73] | 1 study · 86 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Proportion of people with ≥ 1 serious adverse events during treatment Double‐dose adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health‐related quality of life Double‐dose adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of people with disease progression Double‐dose adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events considered non‐serious Double‐dose adenovirus‐thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV‐TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation vs liver transplantation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and hydroxycamptothecin (rAd‐p53/HCT) versus hydroxycamptothecin for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Population: participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival Censored Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and hydroxycamptothecin (rAd‐p53/HCT) vs hydroxycamptothecin | RR 3.06 [0.16, 60.47] | 1 study · 48 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Proportion of people with ≥ 1 serious adverse events Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and hydroxycamptothecin (rAd‐p53/HCT) vs hydroxycamptothecin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health‐related quality of life Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and hydroxycamptothecin (rAd‐p53/HCT) vs hydroxycamptothecin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of people with disease progression Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and hydroxycamptothecin (rAd‐p53/HCT) vs hydroxycamptothecin | RR 2.4 [0.57, 10.08] | 1 study · 48 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events considered non‐serious (number of events) Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and hydroxycamptothecin (rAd‐p53/HCT) vs hydroxycamptothecin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 48 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and 5‐fluorouracil (rAd‐p53/5‐Fu) plus transarterial chemoembolisation versus transarterial chemoembolisation for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
Population: participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and 5‐fluorouracil (rAd‐p53/5‐Fu) plus transarterial chemoembolisation vs transarterial chemoembolisation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of people with ≥ 1 serious adverse events Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and 5‐fluorouracil (rAd‐p53/5‐Fu) plus transarterial chemoembolisation vs transarterial chemoembolisation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health‐related quality of life Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and 5‐fluorouracil (rAd‐p53/5‐Fu) plus transarterial chemoembolisation vs transarterial chemoembolisation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of people with disease progression Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and 5‐fluorouracil (rAd‐p53/5‐Fu) plus transarterial chemoembolisation vs transarterial chemoembolisation | RR 0.86 [0.34, 2.16] | 1 study · 46 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events considered non‐serious (number of events) Recombinant human adenovirus‐p53 and 5‐fluorouracil (rAd‐p53/5‐Fu) plus transarterial chemoembolisation vs transarterial chemoembolisation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
E1B‐deleted (dl1520) adenovirus versus percutaneous ethanol injection
Population: participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall survival E1B‐deleted (dl1520) adenovirus vs percutaneous ethanol injection | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of people with ≥ 1 serious adverse events E1B‐deleted (dl1520) adenovirus vs percutaneous ethanol injection | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health‐related quality of life E1B‐deleted (dl1520) adenovirus vs percutaneous ethanol injection | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of people with disease progression E1B‐deleted (dl1520) adenovirus vs percutaneous ethanol injection | RR 1.33 [0.58, 3.09] | 1 study · 10 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events considered non‐serious (number of participants) E1B‐deleted (dl1520) adenovirus vs percutaneous ethanol injection | RR 0.82 [0.49, 1.38] | 1 study · 10 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |