Andrew X. Zhu

EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma

EASL–EORTC Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) define the use of surveillance, diagnosis, and therapeutic strategies recommended for patients with this type of cancer. This is the first European joint effort by the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) to provide common guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma. These guidelines update the recommendations reported by the EASL panel of experts in HCC published in 2001 [1]. Several clinical and scientific advances have occurred during the past decade and, thus, a modern version of the document is urgently needed. The purpose of this document is to assist physicians, patients, health-care providers, and health-policy makers from Europe and worldwide in the decision-making process according to evidencebased data. Users of these guidelines should be aware that the recommendations are intended to guide clinical practice in circumstances where all possible resources and therapies are available. Thus, they should adapt the recommendations to their local regulations and/or team capacities, infrastructure, and cost– benefit strategies. Finally, this document sets out some recommendations that should be instrumental in advancing the research and knowledge of this disease and ultimately contribute to improve patient care. The EASL–EORTC CPG on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma provide recommendations based on the level of evidence and the strength of the data (the classification of evidence is adapted from National Cancer Institute [2]) (Table 1A) and the strength of recommendations following previously reported systems (GRADE systems) (Table 1B).

The role of signaling pathways in the development and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a highly prevalent, treatment-resistant malignancy with a multifaceted molecular pathogenesis. Current evidence indicates that during hepatocarcinogenesis, two main pathogenic mechanisms prevail: (1) cirrhosis associated with hepatic regeneration after tissue damage caused by hepatitis infection, toxins (for example, alcohol or aflatoxin) or metabolic influences, and (2) mutations occurring in single or multiple oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes. Both mechanisms have been linked with alterations in several important cellular signaling pathways. These pathways are of interest from a therapeutic perspective, because targeting them may help to reverse, delay or prevent tumorigenesis. In this review, we explore some of the major pathways implicated in HCC. These include the RAF/MEK/ERK pathway, phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway, WNT/β-catenin pathway, insulin-like growth factor pathway, hepatocyte growth factor/c-MET pathway and growth factor-regulated angiogenic signaling. We focus on the role of these pathways in hepatocarcinogenesis, how they are altered, and the consequences of these abnormalities. In addition, we also review the latest preclinical and clinical data on the rationally designed targeted agents that are now being directed against these pathways, with early evidence of success.

Biomarkers of response and resistance to antiangiogenic therapy

No validated biological markers (or biomarkers) currently exist for appropriately selecting patients with cancer for antiangiogenic therapy. Nor are there biomarkers identifying escape pathways that should be targeted after tumors develop resistance to a given antiangiogenic agent. A number of potential systemic, circulating, tissue and imaging biomarkers have emerged from recently completed phase I–III studies. Some of these are measured at baseline (for example VEGF polymorphisms), others are measured during treatment (such as hypertension, MRI-measured Ktrans, circulating angiogenic molecules or collagen IV), and all are mechanistically based. Some of these biomarkers might be pharmacodynamic (for example, increase in circulating VEGF, placental growth factor) while others have potential for predicting clinical benefit or identifying the escape pathways (for example, stromal-cell-derived factor 1α, interleukin-6). Most biomarkers are disease and/or agent specific and all of them need to be validated prospectively. We discuss the current challenges in establishing biomarkers of antiangiogenic therapy, define systemic, circulating, tissue and imaging biomarkers and their advantages and disadvantages, and comment on the future opportunities for validating biomarkers of antiangiogenic therapy.

Efficacy, safety, and potential biomarkers of sunitinib monotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase II study.

PURPOSE To assess the safety and efficacy of sunitinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and explore biomarkers for sunitinib response. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a multidisciplinary phase II study of sunitinib, an antivascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in advanced HCC. Patients received sunitinib 37.5 mg/d for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks of rest per cycle. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate vascular changes in HCC after sunitinib treatment. Circulating molecular and cellular biomarkers were evaluated before and at six time points after sunitinib treatment. RESULTS Thirty-four patients were enrolled. The objective response rate was 2.9%, and 50% of patients had stable disease. Median PFS was 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 6.9 months), and overall survival was 9.8 months (95% CI, 7.4 months to not available). Grade 3 or 4 toxicities included leukopenia/neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, elevation of aminotransferases, and fatigue. Sunitinib rapidly decreased vessel leakiness, and this effect was more pronounced in patients with delayed progression. When evaluated early (at baseline and day 14) as well as over three cycles of treatment, higher levels of inflammatory molecules (eg, interleukin-6, stromal-derived factor 1alpha, soluble c-KIT) and circulating progenitor cells were associated with a poor outcome. CONCLUSION Sunitinib shows evidence of modest antitumor activity in advanced HCC with manageable adverse effects. Rapid changes in tumor vascular permeability and circulating inflammatory biomarkers are potential determinants of response and resistance to sunitinib in HCC. Our study suggests that control of inflammation might be critical for improving treatment outcome in advanced HCC.

Phase II Study of Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin in Combination With Bevacizumab in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

PURPOSE Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a vascular tumor with poor prognosis. Given the reported activity of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) in HCC and the potential benefits of targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway with bevacizumab (B), a phase II study of GEMOX-B was undertaken to define efficacy and toxicity profiles in HCC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients had pathologically proven measurable unresectable or metastatic HCC. For cycle 1 (14 days), bevacizumab 10 mg/kg was administered alone intravenously on day 1. For cycle 2 and beyond (28 days/cycle), bevacizumab 10 mg/kg was administered on days 1 and 15, gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 was administered as a dose rate infusion at 10 mg/m2/min followed by oxaliplatin at 85 mg/m2 on days 2 and 16. RESULTS Thirty-three patients were enrolled and 30 patients were assessable for efficacy. The objective response rate was 20%, and 27% of patients had stable disease. Median overall survival was 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.0 months to not available) and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 8.7 months); the PFS rate at 3 and 6 months was 70% (95% CI, 54% to 85%) and 48% (95% CI, 31% to 65%), respectively. The most common treatment-related grade 3 to 4 toxicities included leukopenia/neutropenia, transient elevation of aminotransferases, hypertension, and fatigue. CONCLUSION GEMOX-B could be safely administered with close monitoring and had moderate antitumor activity for patients with advanced HCC. The high 6-month PFS rate is encouraging, and this regimen is worthy of further investigation.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The Need for Progress

to 25%, and systemic chemotherapy has never been shown to prolong survival in patients with HCC. The majority of HCC occurs in patients with liver cirrhosis and consequent hepatic dysfunction, which complicates safe administration of systemic therapy and poses a challenge to conducting clinical trials in this patient population.Hepatocellularcarcinomaisaheterogeneousdisease in terms of etiology and underlying associations as well as biologic and clinical behavior. The underlying liver dysfunction, aggressive nature of the disease, lack of general consensus regarding treatment, and lower incidence in the United States contribute to the challenges of studying and developing effective systemic therapies for HCC.

Frequent Mutation of Isocitrate Dehydrogenase (IDH)1 and IDH2 in Cholangiocarcinoma Identified Through Broad-Based Tumor Genotyping

Cancers of origin in the gallbladder and bile ducts are rarely curable with current modalities of cancer treatment. Our clinical application of broad-based mutational profiling for patients diagnosed with a gastrointestinal malignancy has led to the novel discovery of mutations in the gene encoding isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) in tumors from a subset of patients with cholangiocarcinoma. A total of 287 tumors from gastrointestinal cancer patients (biliary tract, colorectal, gastroesophageal, liver, pancreatic, and small intestine carcinoma) were tested during routine clinical evaluation for 130 site-specific mutations within 15 cancer genes. Mutations were identified within a number of genes, including KRAS (35%), TP53 (22%), PIK3CA (10%), BRAF (7%), APC (6%), NRAS (3%), AKT1 (1%), CTNNB1 (1%), and PTEN (1%). Although mutations in the metabolic enzyme IDH1 were rare in the other common gastrointestinal malignancies in this series (2%), they were found in three tumors (25%) of an initial series of 12 biliary tract carcinomas. To better define IDH1 and IDH2 mutational status, an additional 75 gallbladder and bile duct cancers were examined. Combining these cohorts of biliary cancers, mutations in IDH1 and IDH2 were found only in cholangiocarcinomas of intrahepatic origin (nine of 40, 23%) and in none of the 22 extrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas and none of the 25 gallbladder carcinomas. In an analysis of frozen tissue specimens, IDH1 mutation was associated with highly elevated tissue levels of the enzymatic product 2-hydroxyglutarate. Thus, IDH1 mutation is a molecular feature of cholangiocarcinomas of intrahepatic origin. These findings define a specific metabolic abnormality in this largely incurable type of gastrointestinal cancer and present a potentially new target for therapy.

Metabolic syndrome and hepatocellular carcinoma: two growing epidemics with a potential link.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most rapidly increasing cause of cancer death in the United States. Although many risk factors for HCC are well defined, including hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and alcohol, most series have indicated that 5% to 30% of patients with HCC lack a readily identifiable risk factor for their cancer. The majority of “cryptogenic” HCC in the United States is attributed to nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), a hepatic manifestation of the metabolic syndrome. The metabolic syndrome is a constellation of problems that includes insulin resistance, obesity, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Increasingly, components of the metabolic syndrome are being linked to various forms of cancer with respect to both increased risk of disease and worsened outcome. In this review, the authors focused on the relation between metabolic syndrome and HCC. They investigated the increased risks of HCC among individuals with features of metabolic syndrome, potentially worsened cancer outcomes in these patients, possible pathogenic mechanisms to explain these relations, and treatment options for those with NAFLD and its progressive counterpart, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. It is predicted that metabolic syndrome will lead to large increases in the incidence of HCC over the next decades. A better understanding of the relation between these 2 diseases ultimately should lead to improved screening and treatment options for patients with HCC. Cancer 2009.

Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: An International Multi-Institutional Analysis of Prognostic Factors and Lymph Node Assessment

PURPOSE To identify factors associated with outcome after surgical management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and examine the impact of lymph node (LN) assessment on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS From an international multi-institutional database, 449 patients who underwent surgery for ICC between 1973 and 2010 were identified. Clinical and pathologic data were evaluated using uni- and multivariate analyses. RESULTS Median tumor size was 6.5 cm. Most patients had a solitary tumor (73%) and no vascular invasion (69%). Median survival was 27 months, and 5-year survival was 31%. Factors associated with adverse prognosis included positive margin status (hazard ratio [HR], 2.20; P < .001), multiple lesions (HR, 1.80; P = .001), and vascular invasion (HR, 1.59; P = .015). Tumor size was not a prognostic factor (HR, 1.03; P = .23). Patients were stratified using the American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union Against Cancer T1, T2a, and T2b categories (seventh edition) in a discrete step-wise fashion (P < .001). Lymphadenectomy was performed in 248 patients (55%); 74 of these (30%) had LN metastasis. LN metastasis was associated with worse outcome (median survival: N0, 30 months v N1, 24 months; P = .03). Although patients with no LN metastasis were able to be stratified by tumor number and vascular invasion (N0; P < .001), among patients with N1 disease, multiple tumors and vascular invasion, either alone or together, failed to discriminate patients into discrete prognostic groups (P = .34). CONCLUSION Although tumor size provides no prognostic information, tumor number, vascular invasion, and LN metastasis were associated with survival. N1 status adversely affected overall survival and also influenced the relative effect of tumor number and vascular invasion on prognosis. Lymphadenectomy should be strongly considered for ICC, because up to 30% of patients will have LN metastasis.

Effect of Everolimus on Survival in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Failure of Sorafenib The EVOLVE-1 Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Aside from the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib, there are no effective systemic therapies for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy of everolimus in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma for whom sorafenib treatment failed. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS EVOLVE-1 was a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study conducted among 546 adults with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh A liver function whose disease progressed during or after sorafenib or who were intolerant of sorafenib. Patients were enrolled from 17 countries between May 2010 and March 2012. Randomization was stratified by region (Asia vs rest of world) and macrovascular invasion (present vs absent). INTERVENTIONS Everolimus, 7.5 mg/d, or matching placebo, both given in combination with best supportive care and continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Per the 2:1 randomization scheme, 362 patients were randomized to the everolimus group and 184 patients to the placebo group. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included time to progression and the disease control rate (the percentage of patients with a best overall response of complete or partial response or stable disease). RESULTS No significant difference in overall survival was seen between treatment groups, with 303 deaths (83.7%) in the everolimus group and 151 deaths (82.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.86-1.27; P = .68; median overall survival, 7.6 months with everolimus, 7.3 months with placebo). Median time to progression with everolimus and placebo was 3.0 months and 2.6 months, respectively (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.75-1.15), and disease control rate was 56.1% and 45.1%, respectively (P = .01). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events for everolimus vs placebo were anemia (7.8% vs 3.3%, respectively), asthenia (7.8% vs 5.5%, respectively), and decreased appetite (6.1% vs 0.5%, respectively). No patients experienced hepatitis C viral flare. Based on central laboratory results, hepatitis B viral reactivation was experienced by 39 patients (29 everolimus, 10 placebo); all cases were asymptomatic, but 3 everolimus recipients discontinued therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Everolimus did not improve overall survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma whose disease progressed during or after receiving sorafenib or who were intolerant of sorafenib. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01035229.