Long-term results of sorafenib in advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: what can we learn from routine clinical practice?

Primary Tumor Radiomic Model for Identifying Extrahepatic Metastasis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Based on Contrast Enhanced Computed Tomography

This study aimed to identify radiomic features of primary tumor and develop a model for indicating extrahepatic metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Contrast-enhanced computed tomographic (CT) images of 177 HCC cases, including 26 metastatic (MET) and 151 non-metastatic (non-MET), were retrospectively collected and analyzed. For each case, 851 radiomic features, which quantify shape, intensity, texture, and heterogeneity within the segmented volume of the largest HCC tumor in arterial phase, were extracted using Pyradiomics. The dataset was randomly split into training and test sets. Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique (SMOTE) was performed to augment the training set to 145 MET and 145 non-MET cases. The test set consists of six MET and six non-MET cases. The external validation set is comprised of 20 MET and 25 non-MET cases collected from an independent clinical unit. Logistic regression and support vector machine (SVM) models were identified based on the features selected using the stepwise forward method while the deep convolution neural network, visual geometry group 16 (VGG16), was trained using CT images directly. Grey-level size zone matrix (GLSZM) features constitute four of eight selected predictors of metastasis due to their perceptiveness to the tumor heterogeneity. The radiomic logistic regression model yielded an area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.944 on the test set and an AUROC of 0.744 on the external validation set. Logistic regression revealed no significant difference with SVM in the performance and outperformed VGG16 significantly. As extrahepatic metastasis workups, such as chest CT and bone scintigraphy, are standard but exhaustive, radiomic model facilitates a cost-effective method for stratifying HCC patients into eligibility groups of these workups.

Ferroptosis in Cancer Immunotherapy—Implications for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Ferroptosis is a recently recognized iron-dependent form of non-apoptotic regulated cell death (RCD) characterized by lipid peroxide accumulation to lethal levels. Cancer cells, which show an increased iron dependency to enable rapid growth, seem vulnerable to ferroptosis. There is also increasing evidence that ferroptosis might be immunogenic and therefore could synergize with immunotherapies. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver tumor with a low survival rate due to frequent recurrence and limited efficacy of conventional chemotherapies, illustrating the urgent need for novel drug approaches or combinatorial strategies. Immunotherapy is a new treatment approach for advanced HCC patients. In this setting, ferroptosis inducers may have substantial clinical potential. However, there are still many questions to answer before the mystery of ferroptosis is fully unveiled. This review discusses the existing studies and our current understanding regarding the molecular mechanisms of ferroptosis with the goal of enhancing response to immunotherapy of liver cancer. In addition, challenges and opportunities in clinical applications of potential candidates for ferroptosis-driven therapeutic strategies will be summarized. Unraveling the role of ferroptosis in the immune response could benefit the development of promising anti-cancer therapies that overcome drug resistance and prevent tumor metastasis.

Combination of sorafenib and TACE inhibits portal vein invasion for intermediate stage HCC: a single center retrospective controlled study

Purpose

This study aims to investigate the effect of sorafenib plus Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) treatment on inhibiting portal vein invasion in patients with intermediate stage HCC.

Materials and Methods

The consecutive medical records of patients with HCC were retrospectively analyzed from October 2009 to February 2015. The propensity score matching method was applied into group matching. The Kaplan-Meier method and the Log-Rank Test was used to estimate the median survival time, median time to progression and median time to portal vein invasion. Factors associated with survival benefits were identified by univariate and multivariate Cox-regression model analyses.

Results

Of 97 patients enrolled, 19 patients received TACE-sorafenib treatment and 78 patients received TACE treatment. During the follow-up period of 15 months, the median time to portal vein invasion was 14.2 months vs 8.77 months, respectively (p=0.073). And the analysis of the cox's proportional hazard model revealed that patients treated with TACE treatment alone would run greater risk of portal vein invasion compared with TACE-sorafenib treatment (hr=7.49, p=0.021). Early administration of sorafenib was associated with lower risk of portal vein invasion (p=0.021) according to the univariate analysis. Adverse events (AEs) identified in the combined group were mostly classified as Grades 1 and 2, and skin-related reactions and fatigue were the most common.

Conclusions

Sorafenib may could inhibit portal vein invasion of hepatoma carcinoma cells. Early administration of sorafenib may bring more survival benefits.

Evolving role of Sorafenib in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignant diseases worldwide and comes third in cancer-related mortality. Although there is a broad spectrum of treatment options to choose from, only a few patients are eligible candidates to receive a curative therapy according to their stage of disease, and thus palliative treatment is implemented in the majority of the patients suffering from liver cancer. Sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, is the only currently approved agent for systemic therapy in patients with advanced stage HCC and early stage liver disease. It has been shown to improve the overall survival, but with various side effects, while its cost is not negligible. Sorafenib has been in the market for a decade and has set the stage for personalized targeted therapy. Its role during this time has ranged from monotherapy to neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment with surgical resection, liver transplantation and chemoembolization or even in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents. In this review our aim is to highlight in depth the current position of Sorafenib in the armamentarium against HCC and how that has evolved over time in its use either as a single agent or in combination with other therapies.

Sorafenib: 10 years after the first pivotal trial

Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor with anticancer activity against a wide spectrum of cancers. It is currently approved for the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, advanced renal cell carcinoma or progressive, locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid carcinoma. In this review, we present a number of studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in these settings. We also discuss the perspectives on the use of this molecule, including the role of sorafenib as comparator for the development of new drugs, the combination of sorafenib with additional therapies (such as transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma) and the use of this treatment in several other advanced refractory solid tumors.

Field practice study of half-dose sorafenib treatment on safety and efficacy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity score analysis

AIM

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who receive an initial full dose of sorafenib (800 mg/day) often require a decreased dose (400 mg/day) or discontinuation of therapy because of severe adverse events. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with HCC to compare the safety and efficacy of full- to half-dose sorafenib.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of 218 consecutive patients with intermediate or advanced stage HCC who received half (n = 73) or full-dose sorafenib (n = 145) between 2009 and 2012 at four institutions. A propensity score-matching analysis was used to adjust for potential bias.

RESULTS

Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that increased age was an independent factor for the selection of initial half-dose sorafenib (odds ratio, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.15; P < 0.001). Fifty-eight patients each in the half-dose and full-dose groups were selected for propensity score matching. The incidence of grade 3-4 severe adverse effects was lower in the half-dose group (47.4% vs 66.7%, P = 0.037). In contrast, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were not significantly different (half-dose group, 3.8 and 10.2 months; full-dose group, 2.5 and 8.8 months; P = 0.143 and 0.911, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Propensity score-matched analyses indicate that initial half-dose sorafenib treatment led to fewer severe adverse effects and a comparable survival benefit compared with a full dose in select patients with HCC, particularly for those of advanced age.

The adverse effects of sorafenib in patients with advanced cancers

Sorafenib is the first multi-kinase inhibitor (TKI) approved for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular cancer (HCC) and metastatic renal cell cancer (RCC) and is increasingly being used to treat patients with well-differentiated radioiodine-resistant thyroid cancer (DTC). Sorafenib demonstrates targeted activity on several families of receptor and non-receptor tyrosine kinases that are involved in angiogenesis, tumour growth and metastatic progression of cancer. Sorafenib treatment results in long-term efficacy and low incidence of life-threatening toxicities. Although sorafenib has demonstrated many benefits in patients, the adverse effects cannot be ignored. The most common treatment-related toxicities include diarrhoea, fatigue, hand-foot skin reaction and hypertension. Most of these toxicities are considered mild to moderate and manageable to varying degrees; however, cardiovascular events might lead to death. In this MiniReview, we summarize the adverse effects of sorafenib that commonly occur in patients with advanced cancers.

Comparison of standard-dose and half‑dose sorafenib therapy on clinical outcome in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in field practice: A propensity score matching analysis

The aims of the present study were to examine whether unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with initial dose of sorafenib of 400 mg/day (half-dose group) had comparable treatment efficacy, safety and survival merit as compared with those treated with initial dose of sorafenib of 800 mg/day (standard-dose group) in a multicenter large study. For reducing the bias in patient selection, we compared clinical outcomes of these two groups using propensity score matching analysis. A total of 465 patients were treated with sorafenib at fourteen hospitals in Japanese Red Cross Liver Study Group from 2008 to 2013. After propensity score matching, 139 matched HCC patients were selected for analysis in both groups. We retrospectively compared overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), best treatment response and sorafenib related serious adverse events (SAEs) in the two groups. There were no relevant differences in terms of OS (median OS intervals: 9.2 months in the standard-dose group and 9.7 months in the half‑dose group, P=0.350), PFS (median PFS intervals: 3.4 months in the standard-dose group and 3.2 months in the half-dose group, P=0.729) and best treatment efficacy (objective response rate: P=0.416; disease control rate: P=0.719). Grade 3 or more SAEs were observed in 37 patients (26.6%) in the standard-dose group and 33 patients (23.7%) in the half-dose group (P=0.580). Furthermore, in all subgroup analyses according to Child-Pugh classification and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage, there were no significant differences in the two groups. In conclusion, unresectable HCC patients treated with initial half‑dose sorafenib had comparable prognosis compared with those treated with initial standard-dose sorafenib.

Inhibition of Hec1 as a novel approach for treatment of primary liver cancer

PURPOSE

Highly expressed in cancer protein 1 (Hec1) is an oncogene and a promising molecular target for novel anticancer drugs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential of a Hec1 inhibitor, TAI-95, as a treatment for primary liver cancer.

METHODS

In vitro and in vivo methods were used to test the activity of TAI-95. Gene expression analysis was used to evaluate clinical correlation of the target.

RESULTS

In vitro growth inhibition results showed that TAI-95 has excellent potency on a wide range of primary liver cancer cell lines (hepatoblastoma or hepatocellular carcinoma) (GI(50) 30-70 nM), which was superior to sorafenib and other cytotoxic agents. TAI-95 was relatively inactive in non-cancerous cell lines (GI(50) > 10 μM). TAI-95 disrupts the interaction between Hec1 and Nek2 and leads to degradation of Nek2, chromosomal misalignment, and apoptotic cell death. TAI-95 showed synergistic activity in selected cancer cell lines with doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and topotecan, but not with sorafenib. TAI-95 shows excellent potency in a Huh-7 xenograft mouse model when administered orally. Gene expression analysis of clinical samples demonstrated increased expression of Hec1/NDC80 and associated genes (Nek2, SMC1A, and SMC2) in 27 % of patients, highlighting the potential for using this therapeutic approach to target patients with high Hec1 expression.

CONCLUSION

Inhibition of Hec1 using small molecule approach may represent a promising novel approach for the treatment of primary liver cancers.

Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: current status and future perspectives

The approval of sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor targeting primarily Raf kinase and the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, in 2007 for treating advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has generated considerable enthusiasm in drug development for this difficult-to-treat disease. However, because several randomized Phase III studies testing new multikinase inhibitors failed, sorafenib remains the standard of first-line systemic therapy for patients with advanced HCC. Field practice studies worldwide have suggested that in daily practice, physicians are adopting either a preemptive dose modification or a ramp-up strategy to improve the compliance of their patients. In addition, accumulating data have suggested that patients with Child-Pugh class B liver function can tolerate sorafenib as well as patients with Child-Pugh class A liver function, although the actual benefit of sorafenib in patients with Child-Pugh class B liver function has yet to be confirmed. Whether sorafenib can be used as an adjunctive therapy to improve the outcomes of intermediate-stage HCC patients treated with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization or early-stage HCC patients after curative therapies is being investigated in several ongoing randomized Phase III studies. An increasing number of studies have reported that sorafenib exerts "off-target" effects, including the modulation of signaling pathways other than Raf/MEK/ERK pathway, nonapoptotic cell death mechanisms, and even immune modulation. Finally, although sorafenib in combination with chemotherapy or other targeted therapies has the potential to improve therapeutic efficacy in treating HCC, it also increases toxicity. Additional clinical studies are warranted to determine useful sorafenib-based combinations for the treatment of advanced HCC.

Transarterial chemoembolization and sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is considered as the standard therapy for patients with intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. However, given the high heterogeneity of this population, no common strategy or protocol standardization has been defined yet. In the last few years TACE treatment has been combined with sorafenib systemic therapy, reporting overall positive results both in terms of safety and efficacy. This systematic review presents and critically discusses the evidence available on the use of TACE in combination (concomitant or sequential) with sorafenib, focusing also on clinical trials currently ongoing to better define an optimal therapeutic strategy for this group of patients.

Identification of responders to sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: is tumor volume measurement the way forward?

OBJECTIVES

Early assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) response during sorafenib (SO) treatment is challenging, since tumor necrosis, extension and radiological appearance can be inhomogeneous. We evaluated the predictive value of different imaging criteria - such as Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), modified RECIST (mRECIST), tumor density and volume variations - in the early follow-up of SO treatment.

METHODS

The study included 22 patients. CT images from baseline and 2 months were reviewed to assess response according to RECIST 1.1, mRECIST, EASL, Choi's criteria (decreased tumor density by ≥15%) and arterial-enhancing tumor volume ratio; α-fetoprotein (AFP) variations were expressed as AFP ratio.

RESULTS

The response criteria and volume measurements were reproducible (k > 0.80). The overall disease control rate was 40.9% by EASL and mRECIST, and 27.3% by RECIST 1.1; a ≥15% decrease in tumor density was observed in 9 patients (40.9%). The mean volume ratio was 1.73 ± 2.12, the mean AFP ratio 14 ± 37. The 1-year survival rate was 65.9%. Volume ratio was the only predictive factor for survival, with 1-year cumulative survival rates of 90% for volume ratios ≤1.1 and of 45.4% for volume ratios >1.1 (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor volume measurements are reproducible and might provide an early predictive marker of response in HCC patients treated with SO.

Sorafenib for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

The multikinase inhibitor sorafenib, which inhibits targets related to tumor cell proliferation and angiogenesis, was the first systemic agent to demonstrate a significant improvement in the overall survival for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in two large randomized controlled Phase III trials. Together with its manageable safety profile (mainly diarrhea, hand-foot skin reaction and fatigue), sorafenib was approved for the treatment of patients with (unresectable) HCC in 2007. Since then, sorafenib has been established as the standard of care in Child-Pugh A patients with advanced HCC or in those ineligible for or after failure of locoregional therapies in the intermediate stage of the disease. This article summarizes current knowledge and future perspectives regarding the use of sorafenib in patients with HCC.

Sorafenib: from literature to clinical practice

Sorafenib is considered the standard systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), in patients with well-preserved liver function (Child-Pugh A class) and advanced-stage HCC (BCLC-C) or in patients with HCC progressing after locoregional therapies, with a high grade of recommendation. The approval of sorafenib for this indication was grounded on the efficacy and the safety results reported by two international randomized, controlled trials, the SHARP and the Asia-Pacific studies. In addition, the efficacy and the safety of sorafenib in clinical practice are addressed by several field-practice experiences, including the multinational GIDEON study and the SOFIA study. Finally, further research on sorafenib is ongoing to optimize the use of this molecule. This review aims to provide an overview of the most relevant clinical data on the efficacy and the safety of sorafenib in patients with HCC.

Selection and management of hepatocellular carcinoma patients with sorafenib: recommendations and opinions from an Italian liver unit

Sorafenib (SO) was the first systemic agent to demonstrate a significant improvement in overall survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); international guidelines now recommend SO as a first-line treatment in patients with unresectable HCC who are not eligible for locoregional therapies and maintain preserved liver function. However, therapy with SO may require close management to further optimize the clinical outcomes and limit the onset of adverse events (AEs). SO has been in use at our Liver Unit (Avellino, Italy) for over 4 years, and in that time 85 patients with HCC have been treated with SO. Here we describe how patients with HCC are managed with SO in our unit where management is based on three pivotal strategies: targeted patient selection; use of dose escalation to increase compliance and reduce AEs; and adoption of measures to prevent and manage AEs and to provide open access for patients.

Assessment of response to sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma using perfusion computed tomography: results of a pilot study

AIMS

This prospective pilot study investigated the feasibility of perfusion computed tomography parameters as surrogate markers of angiogenesis and early response following sorafenib administration in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

Ten patients were evaluated with perfusion computed tomography before starting sorafenib and after 3 months. Blood flow, blood volume, mean transit time, hepatic arterial fraction, and permeability surface-product were compared in tumour lesions and in hepatic parenchyma at baseline and at follow-up. Correlation between these parameters and changes in alpha-fetoprotein levels was calculated.

RESULTS

At baseline, blood volume, blood flow, hepatic arterial fraction and permeability surface values were higher in lesions compared to those in hepatic parenchyma, while mean transit time was lower (p<0.05). After sorafenib treatment, only mean transit time was significantly increased versus baseline (p<0.05). At follow-up, plasma alpha-fetoprotein levels decreased in all patients. At follow-up, an inverse correlation was observed between baseline mean transit time and changes in alpha-fetoprotein (r=-0.6685, p=0.0125), as well as a correlation between baseline blood flow and alpha-fetoprotein (r=0.6476, p=0.0167).

CONCLUSION

This pilot study suggests that after sorafenib treatment an increase in mean transit time observed in tumour lesions is inversely correlated with alpha-fetoprotein reductions after therapy. Mean transit time may represent a possible marker of response irrespectively of alpha-fetoprotein values.

Adherence to American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: results of an Italian field practice multicenter study

AIM

Adherence to and the applicability of practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in field practice have not been fully addressed. We designed a multicenter field practice prospective study to evaluate the adherence to the 2005 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines in Italy.

MATERIALS & METHODS

The study began in September 2008 and consecutively enrolled cirrhotic patients with newly diagnosed HCC from 30 local, nonreference centers in Italy. Patients were stratified according to Child-Pugh, the model for end-stage liver disease, tumor-node metastasis, performance status and the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classifications. The diagnostic and therapeutic strategies adopted in each individual patient were recorded. Statistical analysis was carried out on 536 patients using all of the valuable data.

RESULTS

A total of 286 (54.5%) patients were ≥70 years old. Comorbidities, recorded in 397 (74%) patients, were classified as moderate to severe in 170 patients (43%). Overall, 174 (59%) patients with early-stage BCLC were ≥70 years; 104 (35%) of these had moderate-to-severe comorbidities and 54% were under a regular US surveillance program. Diagnosis was performed by computed tomography in 93% of patients, contrast-enhanced ultrasound in 62% and MRI in 17%. In patients with nodules of ≤2 cm, adherence to noninvasive diagnostic criteria was 56%. Adherence to the BCLC classification was shown to be suboptimal overall, particularly regarding allocation to surgical procedures, and a total of 119 patients (40%) with BCLC stage A did not receive curative therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter survey showed that, in the 'real world', adherence to the both the diagnostic and therapeutic American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases 2005 algorithms was low, particularly in patients with early-stage HCC. Difficulties in applying the algorithms in routine clinical practice and the high prevalence of older patients with relevant comorbidities may account for our findings. Strategies to help improve adherence to international guidelines for HCC in field practice are required.

Sorafenib versus capecitabine in the management of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

The only approved systemic therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) till now is sorafenib. A preliminary study suggested that capecitabine, an oral fluoropyrimidine, may be effective in advanced HCC. We have tested this hypothesis in this phase 2 study. In this single-center, phase 2, open-label trial, we randomly assigned 52 patients with advanced HCC who had not received previous systemic treatment to receive either sorafenib (at a dose of 400 mg twice daily) or capecitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily) (day 1-day 14). Primary outcome was progression-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the overall survival and safety. Median overall survival was 7.05 months in the sorafenib group and 5.07 months in the capecitabine group (hazard ratio in the capecitabine group 2.36; 95 % confidence interval 1.174-4.74; P < 0.016). The median progression-free survival was 6 months in the sorafenib group and 4 months in the capecitabine group (P < 0.005). Three patients in the sorafenib group (11.5 %) and one patient in the capecitabine group (3 %) had a partial response; one patient (3 %) had a complete response in the sorafenib group. Hand-foot skin reaction was more frequent in the sorafenib group, hyperbilirubinemia was more common in the capecitabine group, and diarrhea was equivalent between both groups. In patients with advanced HCC, capecitabine is inferior to sorafenib in terms of median progression-free survival and overall survival, and it should not be used alone for the treatment of advanced HCC, but rather, combination therapy with sorafenib should be considered.