Stereotactic body radiation therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with Macrovascular invasion.

BACKGROUND: In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), macrovascular invasion (MVI) is associated with a poor prognosis. The purpose of this study is to describe long-term outcomes of patients with HCC and MVI treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS: Patients with HCC and MVI who were treated with SBRT from January 2003 to December 2016 were analyzed. Patients who had extrahepatic disease or previous liver transplant were excluded. Demographical, clinical, and treatment variables were analyzed. RESULTS: 128 eligible patients with HCC and MVI were treated with SBRT. Median age was 60.5 years (39 to 90 years). Baseline Child-Pugh (CP) score was A5 in 67%, A6 in 20%. Median SBRT dose was 33.3 Gy (range: 27 to 54 Gy) in 5 fractions. Local control at 1 year was 87.4% (95% CI 78.6 to 96.1%). Median overall survival (OS) was 18.3 months (95% CI 11.2 to 21.4 months); ECOG performance status > 1 (HR:1.85, p = 0.0138) and earlier treatment era (HR: 2.20, p = 0.0015) were associated with worsening OS. In 43 patients who received sorafenib following SBRT, median OS was 37.9 months (95% CI 19.5 to 54.4 months). Four patients developed GI bleeding possibly related to SBRT at 2 to 8 months, and 27% (31/112 evaluable patients) had worsening of CP class at three months after SBRT. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT was associated with encouraging outcomes for patients with HCC and MVI, especially in those patients who received sorafenib after SBRT. Randomized phase III trials of SBRT with systemic and/or regional therapy are warranted and ongoing.

Phase I trial of radiation therapy and sorafenib in unresectable liver metastases.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and toxicities of sorafenib combined with stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) or whole liver radiotherapy (WLRT) in patients with liver metastases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eligible patients had unresectable liver metastases. Sorafenib dose was escalated in 2 strata: I - SBRT: effective liver volume irradiated (Veff)<80% (30-60Gy in 6 fractions); II - WLRT: Veff>80% (21.6Gy in 6 fractions). Four weeks of sorafenib, with radiotherapy during weeks 2-3, was delivered at 3 escalating dose levels (200-400mg twice daily). Dose limiting toxicity was defined as any grade 3+ liver toxicity, or grade 4+ treatment-related toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were treated: 18 in stratum I (median dose 42Gy), 15 in stratum II. The MTD was not reached. Grade 3+ toxicity was seen in 33% of patients, at a median of 10days. Two deaths from non-classic liver toxicity occurred post WLRT in stratum II. The median overall survival was 22.3 and 5.7months for strata I and II respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib and 21.6Gy in 6 fraction WLRT resulted in unacceptably high rates of liver toxicity. Although sorafenib combined with SBRT was tolerable, the observed efficacy does not merit further clinical evaluation.

Phase 1/2 Study of the Addition of Cisplatin to Adjuvant Chemotherapy With Image Guided High-Precision Radiation Therapy for Completely Resected Gastric Cancer.

PURPOSE: Locoregional recurrence is common after surgery for gastric cancer. Adjuvant therapy improves outcomes but with toxicity. This phase 1/2 study investigated infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in combination with biweekly cisplatin delivered concurrently with image guided high-precision radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligible patients had completely resected stage IB to IV (Union for International Cancer Control TNM 6th edition) nonmetastatic gastric adenocarcinoma. Treatment constituted 12 weeks of infusional 5-FU (200 mg/m2/day) with cisplatin added in a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation protocol (0, 20, 30, and 40 mg/m2) during weeks 1, 3, 5, and 7, and an additional week 9 dose in the final cohort. Radiation therapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions) was delivered during weeks 3 to 7. Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined in phase 1 and confirmed in phase 2. RESULTS: Among the 55 patients (median age, 54 years; range 28-77 years; 55% male), the median follow-up time was 3.0 years (range, 0.3-5.3 years). Five patients in phase 1 experienced dose-limiting toxicity, and MTD was determined as 4 cycles of 40 mg/m2 cisplatin. Twenty-seven patients were treated at MTD. Acute grade 3 to 4 toxicity rate was 37.0% at MTD and 29.1% across all dose levels. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Fourteen patients experienced recurrent disease. The 2-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival were 85% and 74%, respectively. Median OS has not been reached. Quality of life (QOL) was impaired during treatment, but most scores recovered by 4 weeks. CONCLUSION: Cisplatin can be safely delivered with 5-FU-based chemoradiation therapy. Acute toxicity was acceptable, and patient-reported QOL showed the regimen was tolerable. Outcomes are encouraging and justify further study of this regimen.

Changes in Liver Volume Observed Following Sorafenib and Liver Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify unexpected liver volume reductions in patients treated with sorafenib prior to and during liver radiation therapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen patients were treated in a phase 1 study of sorafenib for 1 week, followed by concurrent sorafenib-RT (in 6 fractions). Patients had either focal cancer (treated with stereotactic body RT [SBRT]) or diffuse disease (treated with whole-liver RT). Liver volumes were contoured and recorded at planning (day 0) from the exhale CT. After 1 week of sorafenib (day 8), RT image guidance at each fraction was performed using cone beam CT (CBCT). Planning liver contours were propagated and modified on the reconstructed exhale CBCT. This was repeated in 12 patients treated with SBRT alone without sorafenib. Three subsequent patients (2 sorafenib-RT and 1 non-sorafenib) were also assessed with multiphasic helical breath-hold CTs. RESULTS: Liver volume reductions on CBCT were observed in the 15 sorafenib-RT patients (median decrease of 68 cc, P=.02) between day 0 and 8; greater in the focal (P=.025) versus diffuse (P=.52) cancer stratum. Seven patients (47%) had reductions larger than the 95% intraobserver contouring error. Liver reductions were also observed from multiphasic CTs in the 2 additional sorafenib-RT patients between days 0 and 8 (decreases of 232.5 cc and 331.7 cc, respectively) and not in the non-sorafenib patient (increase of 92 cc). There were no significant changes in liver volume between planning and first RT in 12 patients with focal cancer treated with SBRT alone (median increase, 4.8 cc, P=.86). CONCLUSIONS: Liver volume reductions were observed after 7 days of sorafenib, prior to RT, most marked in patients with focal liver tumors, suggesting an effect of sorafenib on normal liver. Careful assessment of potential liver volume changes immediately prior to SBRT may be necessary in patients in sorafenib or other targeted therapies.

Phase 1 Trial of Sorafenib and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximally tolerated dose of sorafenib delivered before, during, and after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in hepatocellular carinoma (HCC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligible patients had locally advanced Child-Pugh class A HCC, showed Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and were ineligible for standard local-regional therapies. Sorafenib was dose escalated in 2 strata: (1) low effective irradiated liver volume (veff) < 30% and (2) high veff 30%to 60%. Sorafenib (400 mg daily = dose level 1) was administered for 12 weeks, with 6 fractions SBRT delivered weeks 2 and 3, and escalation to full dose (400 mg twice daily) after 12 weeks as tolerated. Standard 3 + 3 cohorts with dose escalation of sorafenib were planned. RESULTS: Sixteen patients (4 low veff, median dose 51 Gy; 12 high veff, median dose 33 Gy) were treated at 2 sorafenib dose levels. Of those patients 75% were had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C, and 63% had main branch portal vein invasion. In the low veff stratum, no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed in 4 patients treated with SBRT and sorafenib 400 mg. Inb the high veff stratum: 2 of 3 evaluable patients treated with sorafenib 400 mg experienced DLT (grade 3 large bowel bleed and grade 4 bowel obstruction 51 and 27 days, respectively, after SBRT). One of 6 evaluable patients at dose level -1 (200 mg once daily) experienced a grade 3 tumor rupture at week 5. Median overall survival and in-field local progression have not been reached. Worsening of Child-Pugh liver function class was seen in 6 of 12 patients in the high veff stratum. CONCLUSIONS: Significant toxicity was observed in the high veff stratum, and concurrent SBRT with sorafenib is not recommended outside a clinical trial.

SWOG S0809: A Phase II Intergroup Trial of Adjuvant Capecitabine and Gemcitabine Followed by Radiotherapy and Concurrent Capecitabine in Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The role of postoperative therapy in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) or gallbladder carcinoma (GBCA) is unknown. S0809 was designed to estimate 2-year survival (overall and after R0 or R1 resection), pattern of relapse, and toxicity in patients treated with this adjuvant regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility criteria included diagnosis of EHCC or GBCA after radical resection, stage pT2-4 or N+ or positive resection margins, M0, and performance status 0 to 1. Patients received four cycles of gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 8) and capecitabine (1,500 mg/m(2) per day on days 1 to 14) every 21 days followed by concurrent capecitabine (1,330 mg/m(2) per day) and radiotherapy (45 Gy to regional lymphatics; 54 to 59.4 Gy to tumor bed). With 80 evaluable patients, results would be promising if 2-year survival 95% CI were > 45% and R0 and R1 survival estimates were ≥ 65% and 45%, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 79 eligible patients (R0, n = 54; R1, n = 25; EHCC, 68%; GBCA, 32%) were treated (86% completed). For all patients, 2-year survival was 65% (95% CI, 53% to 74%); it was 67% and 60% in R0 and R1 patients, respectively. Median overall survival was 35 months (R0, 34 months; R1, 35 months). Local, distant, and combined relapse occurred in 14, 24, and nine patients. Grade 3 and 4 adverse effects were observed in 52% and 11% of patients, respectively. The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse effects were neutropenia (44%), hand-foot syndrome (11%), diarrhea (8%), lymphopenia (8%), and leukopenia (6%). There was one death resulting from GI hemorrhage. CONCLUSION: This combination was well tolerated, has promising efficacy, and provides clinicians with a well-supported regimen. Our trial establishes the feasibility of conducting national adjuvant trials in EHCC and GBCA and provides baseline data for planning future phase III trials.

Sorafenib and radiation therapy for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment options for advanced hepatocellular cancer (HCC) are limited. Sorafenib, an orally active multi-kinase inhibitor, is the only systemic agent with a survival benefit in randomized studies. However, the gain in survival is modest and new treatment strategies are needed. CLINICAL CASES: We report two cases of advanced HCC treated with a combination of sorafenib and radiation therapy. Impressive and sustained clinical and radiological responses were seen. Treatment was well-tolerated in both cases with no unexpected toxicities reported. DISCUSSION: There is sound rationale for the combination of sorafenib and radiation therapy for treatment of HCC. These two cases suggest both feasibility and efficacy of this combination, in selected patients. Prospective studies addressing this combination are ongoing.

Radiation recall dermatitis triggered by multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors: sunitinib and sorafenib.

Small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors are rapidly being integrated into the management of cancer. This is the first report of sorafenib and sunitinib, both small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor and platelet-derived growth factor receptors, triggering radiation recall dermatitis. The pathophysiology of radiation recall is poorly understood, and several possible mechanisms have been proposed. The clinical presentations of these two cases were consistent with one hypothesized mechanism of radiation recall, an idiosyncratic drug hypersensitivity reaction.