Adjuvant chemoimmunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Adriamycin, interleukin-2, and lymphokine-activated killer cells versus adriamycin alone.

To determine improved postresection survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, two postoperative protocols were compared: adoptive chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy. Following resection, 24 patients were allocated at random to receive (1) arterial infusion of Adriamycin, recombinant interleukin-2 and lymphokine-activated killer cells or (2) arterial infusion of Adriamycin alone. The spleen was removed at operation and used to prepare lymphokine-activated killer cells. Each group had 12 patients. They were followed until signs of recurrence appeared. The overall survival rates of the patients were 91.7%, 82.9%, and 72.5% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively, and slightly higher than would be expected with surgery alone. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups either in the survival rate (generalized Wilcoxon test, P = .936) or in the cumulative disease free rate (P = .182). However, when patients who had had hepatic resection with negative margin (> or = 1 cm) were separated, the 2-year cumulative disease-free rate in the adoptive chemoimmunotherapy was higher (83.3%, n = 6) than that in chemotherapy (37.5%, n = 8). Toxicity to adoptive chemoimmunotherapy was moderate; no severe side effects were observed. Totally no statistical difference between the two groups was found. Although only one of six patients in adoptive chemoimmunotherapy experienced recurrence after hepatic resection with negative margin, it was not feasible to determine the role of interleukin-2 and lymphokine-activated killer cells. We conclude that the adoptive chemoimmunotherapy in this study is not an ideal adjuvant protocol after hepatic resection.