Evaluation of sorafenib treatment and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative study using the propensity score matching method

Small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors approved for systemic therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: recent advances and future perspectives

Liver cancer is the sixth most commonly diagnosed cancer and the third leading cause of cancer death in the world, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common form of liver cancer. More than half of the HCC patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage and often require systemic therapy. Dysregulation of the activity of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) is involved in the development and progress of HCC, RTKs are therefore the potential targets for systemic therapy of advanced HCC (aHCC). Currently, a total of six small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been approved for aHCC, including first-line sorafenib, lenvatinib, and donafenib, and second-line regorafenib, cabozantinib, and apatinib. These TKIs improved patients survival, which are associated with disease stage, etiology, liver function, tumor burden, baseline levels of alpha-fetoprotein, and treatment history. This review focuses on the clinical outcomes of these TKIs in key clinical trials, retrospective and real-world studies and discusses the future perspectives of TKIs for aHCC, with an aim to provide up-to-date evidence for decision-making in the treatment of aHCC.

Randomized phase I/II study of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor peptide vaccines for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted peptide vaccines for the immunization of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who had responded to transarterial chemoembolization.

METHODS

Twenty-two patients were randomized 1:1 to receive VEGFR-targeted peptides or placebo. The primary end-point was the safety assessment of the immunization. The secondary end-points were evaluation of immunological responses and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

No severe adverse events were induced by the study agents. Among the 12 patients in the vaccine group, a VEGFR1-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) response was induced in eight (66.7%) patients and a VEGFR2-specific CTL response was induced in 10 (83.3%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 4.8 and 52.0 months, respectively, in the vaccine group, and 2.7 and 21.8 months, respectively, in the placebo group. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups (PFS p = 0.925, OS p = 0.190). When divided into two groups according to immunoreactivity, the median PFS of patients with and without a strong immune response to VEGFR1 were 7.4 and 2.7 months, and that to VEGFR2 were 10.6 and 2.7 months, respectively; there were significant differences according to the immune response.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunotherapy with peptide vaccines targeting VEGFR1 and VEGFR2 was well tolerated with no serious adverse events. It also effectively induced peptide-specific CTLs in patients with unresectable HCC.

External radiotherapy combined with sorafenib has better efficacy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a very low resectable rate. This meta-analysis aimed to compare efficacy of three combination strategies in treatment of advanced unresectable HCC with a view of guiding future selection of the best combination therapy for sorafenib and local therapy. A search was conducted to identify relevant literature published between April 2013 and May 2022, and then compared efficacy of sorafenib combined with external radiotherapy (SOF + RT), sorafenib with transarterial chemoembolization (SOF + TACE), sorafenib with hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (SOF + HAIC), sorafenib (SOF), external radiotherapy (RT), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), and hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) were studied and analyzed. Finally, the results were statistically analyzed using R 3.5.3 software and Stata/SE 15.0 software. A total of 46 studies, involving 7595 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of seven related treatment interventions revealed that the combination therapy had significantly higher efficacy than monotherapies. Among the combination therapies, SOF + RT was associated with the best OS and PFS rates, and the least adverse events compared to the other treatment modalities. The efficacy of combination therapy was better than monotherapy. In combination therapy, the overall survival time and progression-free survival time of SOF + RT were longer, and the adverse reactions were less. Therefore, SOF + RT may be the best choice for sorafenib combined with local therapy.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy of Oxaliplatin, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin With or Without Sorafenib as Initial Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Purpose

Our previous study showed that hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) using oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX) plus sorafenib provided a significant survival benefit over sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, it is unclear whether the survival benefit should be attributed to the synergism between HAIC and sorafenib or just HAIC alone. We aim to compare HAIC using FOLFOX plus sorafenib with HAIC alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Materials and Methods

This was a retrospective study including 225 eligible patients treated with HAIC using FOLFOX (HAIC alone group, n=126, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², leucovorin 400 mg/m², fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m² and 2400 mg/m² for 46 hours, every 3 weeks) alone or HAIC plus sorafenib (soraHAIC group, n=99, sorafenib 400 mg twice daily). Survival curves were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and propensity-score matching was used to reduce bias.

Results

The soraHAIC group showed a longer overall survival (12.9 [95% CI, 10.4-15.4] vs. 10.5 [95% CI, 9.5-11.5] months, HR=0.71 [95% CI, 0.53-0.96]; P=0.025), a better progression free survival (7.0 [95% CI, 5.3-8.8] vs. 5.3 [95% CI, 3.5-7.1] months, HR=0.76 [95% CI, 0.58-0.99]; P=0.046), and a higher disease control rate (RECIST 1.1: 74.8% vs. 61.1%, P=0.030) than the HAIC alone group. In multivariate analysis, soraHAIC was an independent favor factor for survival. In terms of the grade 3/4 adverse event, hand–foot skin reaction was more frequent in the soraHAIC group than the HAIC alone group. In the propensity-score matched cohorts (93 pairs), the overall survival, the progression free survival and disease control rates in the soraHAIC group were also better than those in the HAIC group (P<0.05).

Conclusion

HAIC plus sorafenib may improve overall survival and progression free survival compared with HAIC alone as initial treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Sorafenib versus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The clinical benefits and safety of Sorafenib versus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are inconsistent in some studies. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Sorafenib versus HAIC for patients with advanced HCC.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed from PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science to identify comparative studies evaluating Sorafenib versus HAIC for HCC. Objective response rate, disease control rate, overall survival, progression-free survival and adverse events were evaluated using meta-analytical techniques.

RESULTS

Fourteen retrospective studies with 1779 patients (Sorafenib = 773, HAIC = 1006) were included in the meta-analysis. HAIC delivered favorable outcomes in objective response rate (odds ratio 0.13; 95%CI, 0.07-0.24) and disease control rate (odds ratio 0.48; 95%CI 0.26-0.87) assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. The pooled hazard ratio for overall survival at 0.60 (95% CI 0.39-0.91) and the pooled hazard ratio for progression-free survival at 0.69(95% CI 0.51-0.95), further indicates that HAIC was superior to Sorafenib. There was a higher incidence of adverse events, including hypertension (odds ratio 13.07; 95% CI 2.37-71.67), fatigue (odds ratio 6.72; 95% CI 2.14-21.13), dermatological disorders (odds ratio 15.87; 95% CI 5.58-45.16) and gastrointestinal disorders (odds ratio 3.20; 95% CI 2.02-5.07) in patients receiving Sorafenib than in those receiving HAIC.

CONCLUSION

HAIC offers a safe and effective alternative to Sorafenib with better tumor response and longer overall survival and progression-free survival, hence HAIC should be recommended for the patients with advanced HCC.

Bi-monthly hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy as a novel strategy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in decompensated cirrhotic patients

Background and Aims

We previously reported the comparable efficacy of bi-monthly hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (B-HAIC) to that of sorafenib chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) in patients with compensated cirrhosis. In this study, we demonstrate the efficacy of B-HAIC in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

Methods

Forty-five patients with aHCC refractory to transcatheter arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) were treated with B-HAIC and were divided into two groups according to hepatic functional reserve (Child-Pugh grade). Overall survival period, treatment response, and adverse events in each group were analyzed.

Results

Efficacy and disease control rates in the Child-Pugh B group (n=24; 21% and 71%, respectively) were not significantly impaired compared the Child-Pugh A group (n=21; 38% and 67%, respectively). Median survival time and survival rate at 12 months in the Child-Pugh B group were 422 days and 58.3%, respectively, whereas those in the Child-Pugh A group were 567 days and 70.8%, respectively. Importantly, the hepatic functional reserve of patients did not worsen in either group during the treatment period. Furthermore, the occurrence rate of adverse events leading to discontinuation of anti-tumor treatment was not significantly increased in the Child-Pugh B group.

Conclusions

Given the preservation of hepatic functional reserve afforded by B-HAIC chemotherapy in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, B-HAIC might be an acceptable alternative strategy for aHCC patients who do not respond to TACE.

2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer globally and the fourth most common cancer in men in Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle-aged and elderly patients. These practice guidelines will provide useful and constructive advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 44 experts in hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2014 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions.

2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer globally and the fourth most common cancer in men in Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle-aged and elderly patients. These practice guidelines will provide useful and constructive advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 44 experts in hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology and radiation oncology in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2014 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions.

Transcatheter hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy vs sorafenib in the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C: a meta-analysis of Asian population

Objective

To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of transcatheter hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) with those of sorafenib in the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C.

Methods

Potentially relevant studies comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of HAIC with those of sorafenib were searched using Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases (Wanfang Data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure). Overall survival rate (OSR), tumor response rate, disease control rate (DCR), and serious adverse events (SAEs) were compared and analyzed. Pooled ORs with 95% CIs were calculated using either the fixed-effects model or the random-effects model. All statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager (version 5.3) from the Cochrane Collaboration.

Results

A total of 1,264 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results of this study showed that HAIC was associated with significantly higher 1-, 2-, and 3-year OSRs than sorafenib (OR 1.88, 95% CI1-year: [1.27-2.78], P1-year=0.002; OR 2.15, 95% CI2-year: [1.06-4.37], P2-year=0.03; OR 7.90, 95% CI3-year: [2.12-29.42], P3-year=0.002). Compared to sorafenib, HAIC was associated with superior complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and objective response rate (ORR) (OR 3.90, 95% CI_CR: [1.89-8.03], P _CR =0.0002; OR 3.47, 95% CI_PR: [2.31-5.24], P _PR <0.00001; OR 3.02, 95% CI_OR: [2.05-4.45], P _OR <0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between HAIC and sorafenib in stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), DCR, and SAEs (OR 0.86, 95% CI_SD: [0.51-1.45], P _SD =0.56; OR 0.62, 95% CI_PD: [0.35-1.11], P _PD =0.11; OR 0.53, 95% CI_SAE: [0.14-1.92], P _SAE =0.33).

Conclusion

This study showed that HAIC was associated with better efficacy than sorafenib in terms of OSR and tumor response. Therefore, HAIC can be considered as an alternative treatment option for patients with HCCs of BCLC stage C.

Treatment strategies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Sorafenib vs hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy

Sorafenib is used worldwide as a first-line standard systemic agent for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on the basis of the results of two large-scale Phase III trials. Conversely, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) is one of the most recommended treatments in Japan. Although there have been no randomized controlled trials comparing sorafenib with HAIC, several retrospective analyses have shown no significant differences in survival between the two therapies. Outcomes are favorable for HCC patients exhibiting macroscopic vascular invasion when treated with HAIC rather than sorafenib, whereas in HCC patients exhibiting extrahepatic spread or resistance to transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, good outcomes are achieved by treatment with sorafenib rather than HAIC. Additionally, sorafenib is generally used to treat patients with Child-Pugh A, while HAIC is indicated for those with either Child-Pugh A or B. Based on these findings, we reviewed treatment strategies for advanced HCC. We propose that sorafenib might be used as a first-line treatment for advanced HCC patients without macroscopic vascular invasion or Child-Pugh A, while HAIC is recommended for those with macroscopic vascular invasion or Child-Pugh A or B. Additional research is required to determine the best second-line treatment for HAIC non-responders with Child-Pugh B through future clinical trials.

Efficacy of bi-monthly hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

Even though the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system is widely accepted, controversies on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) still exist. We evaluated the efficacy of an approach with repeated hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) given at eight-week intervals for the treatment of advanced HCC.

Methods

Of the 66 compensated cirrhotic patients with advanced HCC refractory to transcatheter arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) enrolled in our study, 21 were treated by bi-monthly hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (B-HAIC) and the rest by sorafenib. The overall survival periods, curative responses, and adverse events in each group were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

The efficacy rate was significantly higher in the B-HAIC group (38%, 11%, P<0.05). The median survival time and the survival rate at 12 months in the B-HAIC group were 567 days and 70.8%, and those in the sorafenib group were 366 days and 47.6%, respectively. Thus, our data suggests that the B-HAIC treatment is not inferior to sorafenib for the treatment of advanced HCC in compensated cirrhotic patients. Furthermore, the occurrence of serious adverse events leading to discontinuation of treatment was less frequent in the B-HAIC group.

Conclusions

Given the hepatic function reserve preservation afforded by the B-HAIC treatment in our experience, we suggest that B-HAIC should be considered an alternative strategy for advanced HCC patients who do not respond to TACE.

Sorafenib plus low-dose cisplatin and fluorouracil hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus sorafenib alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (SILIUS): a randomised, open label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy plus sorafenib in phase 2 trials has shown favourable tumour control and a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. However, no randomised phase 3 trial has tested the combination of sorafenib with continuous arterial infusion chemotherapy. We aimed to compare continuous hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy plus sorafenib with sorafenib alone in patients with advanced, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial (SILIUS) at 31 sites in Japan. Eligible patients were aged 20 years or older, with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not suitable for resection, local ablation, or transarterial chemoembolisation; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1; Child-Pugh score 7 or lower; and adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive web response system with a computer-generated sequence to receive 400 mg sorafenib orally twice daily or 400 mg sorafenib orally twice daily plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (cisplatin 20 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 and fluorouracil 330 mg/m² continuously on days 1-5 and 8-12 of every 28-day cycle via an implanted catheter system). The primary endpoint was overall survival. The primary efficacy analysis comprised all randomised patients (the intention-to-treat population), and the safety analysis comprised all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01214343.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 4, 2010, and June 10, 2014, 206 patients were randomly assigned (103 to the sorafenib group, 103 to the sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy group). One patient in the sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy group withdrew after randomisation. Median overall survival was similar in the sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (n=102) and sorafenib monotherapy (n=103) groups (11·8 months [95% CI 9·1-14·5] vs 11·5 months [8·2-14·8]; hazard ratio 1·009 [95% CI 0·743-1·371]; p=0·955). Grade 3-4 adverse events that were more frequent in the sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy group than in the sorafenib monotherapy group included anaemia (15 [17%] of 88 vs six [6%] of 102), neutropenia (15 [17%] vs one [1%]), thrombocytopenia (30 [34%] vs 12 [12%]), and anorexia (12 [14%] vs six [6%]).

INTERPRETATION

Addition of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy to sorafenib did not significantly improve overall survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

FUNDING

Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Macrovascular Invasion: Defining the Optimal Treatment Strategy

BACKGROUND

Tumoral macrovascular invasion (MVI) of hepatic and/or portal vein branches is a common phenomenon in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and is associated with poorer prognosis when compared to HCC without MVI.

SUMMARY

Current international guidelines for the management of HCC recommend sorafenib as the only treatment option in case of MVI. Despite guideline recommendations, several alternative options have been tested to manage HCC with MVI: surgery, transarterial chemoembolization, external or internal radiation, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy, percutaneous treatment, cryotherapy, or the combination of two or more of these strategies, with or without sorafenib. Here we will provide a comprehensive state-of-the-art review for the management of this challenging clinical entity based on the most recent available data.

KEY MESSAGES

There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that alternative strategies to standard-of-care sorafenib might improve survival in patients with advanced HCC with MVI but the level of evidence remains weak. Randomized phase III trials are ongoing and will hopefully provide information leading towards a more personalized treatment algorithm.

Proposal of selection criteria for operative resection of hepatocellular carcinoma with inferior vena cava tumor thrombus incorporating hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Because operative resection of hepatocellular carcinoma with inferior vena cava tumor thrombus has been associated with a substantial risk of recurrence and postoperative morbidity, adequate patient selection for resection is necessary. Our aim was to propose selection criteria for resection of hepatocellular carcinoma with inferior vena cava tumor thrombus.

METHODS

Long-term outcomes were analyzed retrospectively in 39 operative cases of hepatocellular carcinoma with inferior vena cava tumor thrombus (1996-2015). Since 2003, preoperative hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy instead of immediate resection has been performed in patients with advanced inferior vena cava tumor thrombus, defined as those patients with suspected extrahepatic metastasis, who will need extracorporeal circulation, or who have marginal liver function and/or multiple bilobar tumors. Indication for resection has been based on the tumor response to hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy thereafter.

RESULTS

The median survival time for all patients was 15.2 months. Multivariate analysis revealed that preoperative hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (hazard ratio: 0.30), use of extracorporeal circulation (3.12), and extrahepatic metastasis (2.67) were independent prognostic factors for overall survival. Among patients with initially advanced inferior vena cava tumor thrombus, preoperative hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy was associated with a much more favorable prognosis compared with no hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (median survival time: unreached vs 8.3 months, P = .007). Overall survival was significantly worse in patients with uncontrolled, advanced inferior vena cava tumor thrombus than in those without advanced inferior vena cava tumor thrombus or with advanced inferior vena cava tumor thrombus controlled by preoperative hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (median survival time: 10.4 vs 26.1 months, P = .039).

CONCLUSION

An effective response to hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and subsequent operative resection salvaged patients with initially advanced inferior vena cava tumor thrombus. Our results suggest that operative resection should be indicated only in patients without advanced inferior vena cava tumor thrombus or with advanced inferior vena cava tumor thrombus controlled by preoperative hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy.

Role of DUSP1/MKP1 in tumorigenesis, tumor progression and therapy

Dual‐specificity phosphatase‐1 (DUSP1/MKP1), as a member of the threonine‐tyrosine dual‐specificity phosphatase family, was first found in cultured murine cells. The molecular mechanisms of DUSP1‐mediated extracellular signal‐regulated protein kinases (ERKs) dephosphorylation have been subsequently identified by studies using gene knockout mice and gene silencing technology. As a protein phosphatase, DUSP1 also downregulates p38 MAPKs and JNKs signaling through directly dephosphorylating threonine and tyrosine. It has been detected that DUSP1 is involved in various functions, including proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis in normal cells. In various human cancers, abnormal expression of DUSP1 was observed which was associated with prognosis of tumor patients. Further studies have revealed its role in tumorigenesis and tumor progression. Besides, DUSP1 has been found to play a role in tumor chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and biotherapy. In this review, we will focus on the function and mechanism of DUSP1 in tumor cells and tumor treatment.