BackgroundPaclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy (PIPN) is a disabling side effect of paclitaxel with few effective preventive strategies. We aim to determine the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological neuroprotective interventions in preventing PIPN incidence.MethodsBiomedical literature databases were searched from years 2000 to 2021 for trials comparing neuroprotective interventions and control. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model. The primary outcome was the incidence of PIPN.ResultsOf 24 relevant controlled trials, 14 were eligible for meta-analysis. Pooled results from seven non-pharmacological trials were associated with a statistically significant 48% relative reduction of PIPN risk with low heterogeneity. Conversely, pooled results from six pharmacological trials were associated with a significant 20% relative reduction of PIPN risk with moderate heterogeneity. Both pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches appear effective in reducing PIPN incidence in the treatment arm compared to control (pooled RR < 1).ConclusionCurrent evidence suggests that both interventions may reduce PIPN risk. Non-pharmacological interventions appear more effective than pharmacological interventions.

e16623 Background: The management of aHCC has evolved dramatically in recent years, with new agents like immunotherapy receiving regulatory approval. As we begin incorporating these drugs into routine clinical practice, data on real-world sequencing of therapies and clinical outcomes are needed. Methods: We utilised the DISCOVERYAI platform, a virtual machine containing de-identified patient electronic health records to review HCC patients treated at the National University Health System, Singapore from January 2015 to December 2019. We then identified those who received systemic therapy and correlated their clinical outcomes. Results: In total, 395 HCC patients were identified; 75 received surgery, 174 received loco-regional therapy and 102 referred for consideration of systemic therapy. Of those considered for systemic therapy, median age was 65 years (range 23-87); 88% male (n = 90); hepatitis B/hepatitis C/non-hepatitis, 41(40.2%)/ 10(9.8%)/ 51(50.0%). 75.5% (n = 77) of them received systemic therapy with a TKI and/or immunotherapy. 39% (n = 30) of these received second-line treatment. Child-Pugh score at start of treatment was A5/A6/B7/B8, 38(49.3%)/ 32(41.6%)/ 5(6.5%)/ 2(2.6%) respectively. In the first-line, 66% (n = 51) received TKI and 34% (n = 26) received immunotherapy. Amongst those treated with first-line TKI, 45% (n = 23) received second-line therapy; 65% (n = 15) immunotherapy, 35% (n = 8) another TKI. Of those treated with first-line immunotherapy, 27% (n = 7) received second-line TKI. At a median follow-up of 35 months, first-line median progression-free survival (mPFS) for TKI vs immunotherapy was 3.7 vs 3.1 months (HR 0.73; 95% CI, 0.40-1.33; p = 0.31). mPFS for second-line immunotherapy vs TKI was 4.0 vs 2.9 months (HR 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19-0.96; p = 0.04). When comparing sequencing of therapies, the combined first and second mPFS for TKI-immunotherapy/TKI-TKI/immunotherapy-TKI is 9.5/7.6/7.6 months respectively (log-rank test, p = 0.71). Those patients that received both immunotherapy and TKI had significantly higher overall survival (OS) compared to those receiving only immunotherapy or only TKI or none (mOS NR vs 10.1 vs 13.2 vs 4.7 months; p < 0.001). Conclusions: TKI remains an important pillar of treatment in aHCC in the era of immunotherapy. While immunotherapy provides long durable responses and benefit in a minority of patients, the majority appear to benefit from TKI. Biomarker studies are needed to discern treatment algorithms for aHCC.