Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) for primary and metastatic liver tumors with functional treatment planning.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 222-222
Author(s):  
Alexander V. Kirichenko ◽  
Ngoc Thai ◽  
Erik Lappinen ◽  
Olivier Gayou ◽  
Ellen Day ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Liver Disease ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Hepatic Cirrhosis ◽  
Liver Tumors ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Normal Liver ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
4D Ct ◽  
True Value

222 Background: We report on outcomes and toxicity of liver SRT/SBRT based on 3D-CT/SPECT treatment planning with conformal avoidance of well perfused functional normal liver volumes (FNLV). Methods: 51 patients with unresectable metastatic (36) or primary (15) hepatic tumors (65 targets) completed SRT planning with 99mTc sulfur colloid 3D-SPECT/CT to define FNLVs. Various degrees of FNLV retraction as a result of hepatic cirrhosis or systemic or intrahepatic chemotherapy were observed. For conformal avoidance of the residual FNLV, total dose and fractionation were adapted to FNLV constraints. 4D-CT and SPECT-based dosimetry were compared and treatment outcomes and toxicity were analyzed with medium followup 14.5 months (3-36months). Results: The in-field local control rate was 95%, hepatic failure free survival - 88%, hepatic progression free survival - 78% and overall survival - 70%. 25% patients developed Grade ≤ 2 elevation of liver enzymes with no incidence of “classic” radiation-induced liver disease. No patients with hepatic cirrhosis had Child-Pugh score progression. The most common toxicity was Grade ≤ 2 fatigue. For the group, FNLVs were significantly reduced compared to CT-derived NLV (p<0.01) with marked FNLV contraction in patients with Child-Pugh ≥ B cirrhosis, those who completed hepatic resections or received TACE within 2 months prior to SRT. Treatment planning with incorporated SPECT/CT helps to reduce volumes of functionally active liver parenchyma receiving doses above prescription threshold in patients with HCC compared to conventional 4D-CT treatment planning (p<0.01). There was no such correlation for non-HCC patients. Conclusions: 3D-SPECT/CT treatment planning allows identification and conformal avoidance of FNLV from high radiation doses facilitating safety of liver SRT in patients with preexisting liver disease. Outcomes are favorable, however participation in prospective Phase III trial would estimate true value of this method.

Clinical Outcomes and Safety of Patients Treated with NAb-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: The NAPA Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 887-895 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Catalano ◽  
Giandomenico Roviello ◽  
Raffaele Conca ◽  
Alberto D’Angelo ◽  
Valeria Emma Palmieri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Hematological Toxicity ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Prognostic And Predictive Markers

Background: The phase III MPACT trial demonstrated the superiority of gemcitabine (Gem) combined with Nab-paclitaxel (Nab-P) versus gemcitabine alone in previously untreated patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of Gem/Nab-P in routine clinical practice. Methods: From January 2015 to December 2018, patients with metastatic PDAC receiving firstline treatment with a combination of gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel were included in a multicentre retrospective observational study. Exploratory analyses of efficacy, and prognostic and predictive markers, were performed. Results: The cohort comprised 115 patients (median age 65 [range 50-84] years) with good performance status (ECOG PS 0-1). The median overall survival (OS) was 11 months (95% CI; 9-13) and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6 months (95% CI 5-7). Partial response and stable disease were achieved in 44 and 30 patients, respectively, yielding an overall disease control rate (DCR) of 64.3%. Grade 3-4 hematological toxicity frequency was 22.61% for neutropenia, 5.22% for anemia, and 3.48% for thrombocytopenia. Grade 3 asthenia was recorded in 2.61% of patients. No grade 4 non-hematological events were reported. Dose reduction was necessary in 51.3% of the patients. Conclusions: Our results confirm the efficacy and safety of a first-line regimen comprising gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel in metastatic PDAC in a real-life population.

scholarly journals Efficacy of lenvatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma based on background liver disease etiology: multi-center retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsushi Hiraoka ◽  
Takashi Kumada ◽  
Toshifumi Tada ◽  
Joji Tani ◽  
Kazuya Kariyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Liver Disease ◽  
Hazard Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Significant Prognostic Factor ◽  
Disease Etiology ◽  
Alcoholic Fatty Liver ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractIt was recently reported that hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are not responsive to immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment. The present study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of lenvatinib in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/NASH-related unresectable-HCC (u-HCC). Five hundred thirty u-HCC patients with Child–Pugh A were enrolled, and divided into the NAFLD/NASH (n = 103) and Viral/Alcohol (n = 427) groups. Clinical features were compared in a retrospective manner. Progression-free survival (PFS) was better in the NAFLD/NASH than the Viral/Alcohol group (median 9.3 vs. 7.5 months, P = 0.012), while there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) (20.5 vs. 16.9 months, P = 0.057). In Cox-hazard analysis of prognostic factors for PFS, elevated ALT (≥ 30 U/L) (HR 1.247, P = 0.029), modified ALBI grade 2b (HR 1.236, P = 0.047), elevated AFP (≥ 400 ng/mL) (HR 1.294, P = 0.014), and NAFLD/NASH etiology (HR 0.763, P = 0.036) were significant prognostic factors. NAFLD/NASH etiology was not a significant prognostic factor in Cox-hazard analysis for OS (HR0.758, P = 0.092), whereas AFP (≥ 400 ng/mL) (HR 1.402, P = 0.009), BCLC C stage (HR 1.297, P = 0.035), later line use (HR 0.737, P = 0.014), and modified ALBI grade 2b (HR 1.875, P < 0.001) were significant. Lenvatinib can improve the prognosis of patients affected by u-HCC irrespective of HCC etiology or its line of treatment.

scholarly journals Transarterial Radioembolization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma, Liver-Dominant Hepatic Colorectal Cancer Metastases, and Cholangiocarcinoma Using Yttrium90 Microspheres: Eight-Year Single-Center Real-Life Experience

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 122
Author(s):  
Julie Pellegrinelli ◽  
Olivier Chevallier ◽  
Sylvain Manfredi ◽  
Inna Dygai-Cochet ◽  
Claire Tabouret-Viaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Liver Tumors ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Transarterial Radioembolization ◽  
Cancer Metastases ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Metastases

Liver tumors are common and may be unamenable to surgery or ablative treatments. Consequently, other treatments have been devised. To assess the safety and efficacy of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with Yttrium-90 for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), liver-dominant hepatic colorectal cancer metastases (mCRC), and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), performed according to current recommendations, we conducted a single-center retrospective study in 70 patients treated with TARE (HCC, n = 44; mCRC, n = 20; CCA, n = 6). Safety and toxicity were assessed using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria. Treatment response was evaluated every 3 months on imaging studies using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) or mRECIST criteria. Overall survival and progression-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median delivered dose was 1.6 GBq, with SIR-Spheres® or TheraSphere® microspheres. TARE-related grade 3 adverse events affected 17.1% of patients. Median follow-up was 32.1 months. Median progression-free survival was 5.6 months and median overall time from TARE to death was 16.1 months and was significantly shorter in men. Progression-free survival was significantly longer in women (HR, 0.49; 95%CI, 0.26–0.90; p = 0.031). Risk of death or progression increased with the number of systemic chemotherapy lines. TARE can be safe and effective in patients with intermediate- or advanced-stage HCC, CCA, or mCRC refractory or intolerant to appropriate treatments.

Phase III Study of Intravenous Vinorelbine in Combination With Epirubicin Versus Epirubicin Alone in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer: A Scandinavian Breast Group Trial (SBG9403)

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. 2313-2320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bent Ejlertsen ◽  
Henning T. Mouridsen ◽  
Sven T. Langkjer ◽  
Jorn Andersen ◽  
Johanna Sjöström ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Complete Response Rate ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Severe Toxicity ◽  
Free Survival

Purpose To determine whether the addition of intravenous (IV) vinorelbine to epirubicin increased the progression-free survival in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Patients and Methods A total of 387 patients were randomly assigned to receive IV epirubicin 90 mg/m2 on day 1 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, or epirubicin 90 mg/m2 IV on day 1. Both regimens were given every 3 weeks for a maximum of 1 year but discontinued prematurely in the event of progressive disease or severe toxicity. In addition, epirubicin was discontinued at a cumulative dose of 1,000 mg/m2 (950 mg/m2 from June 1999). Prior anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy and prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer was not allowed. Reported results were all based on intent-to-treat analyses. Results Overall response rates to vinorelbine and epirubicin, and epirubicin alone, were 50% and 42%, respectively (P = .15). The complete response rate was significantly superior in the combination arm (17% v 10%; P = .048) as was median duration of progression-free survival (10.1 months v 8.2 months; P = .019). Median survival was similar in the two arms (19.1 months v 18.0 months; P = .50). Leukopenia related complications, stomatitis, and peripheral neuropathy were more common in the combination arm. The incidences of cardiotoxicity and constipation were similar in both arms. Conclusion Addition of vinorelbine to epirubicin conferred a significant advantage in terms of complete response rate and progression-free survival, but not in terms of survival.

AMEERA-5: A randomized, double-blind phase III study of amcenestrant (SAR439859) + palbociclib versus letrozole + palbociclib for previously untreated ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS1104-TPS1104
Author(s):  
Aditya Bardia ◽  
Javier Cortes ◽  
Sara A. Hurvitz ◽  
Suzette Delaloge ◽  
Hiroji Iwata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii Study

TPS1104 Background: Selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) block estrogen receptor (ER) associated signaling and have created interest for treating patients (pts) with advanced ER+ breast cancer (BC). Fulvestrant is currently the only SERD available for advanced BC but requires intramuscular administration, limiting the applied dose, exposure and receptor engagement. Amcenestrant (SAR439859) is an oral SERD that binds with high affinity to both wild-type and mutant ER, blocking estradiol binding and promoting up to 98% ER degradation in preclinical studies. In the phase I AMEERA-1 study of pretreated pts with ER+/HER2- advanced BC, amcenestrant 150–600 mg once daily (QD) showed a mean ER occupancy of 94% with plasma concentrations > 100 ng/mL and a favorable safety profile (Bardia, 2019; data on file). Combination therapy with amcenestrant + palbociclib (palbo) was also evaluated as part of this ongoing phase I study. CDK 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) combined with an aromatase inhibitor (AI), the gold standard for first line treatment for advanced breast cancer, prolong progression free survival (PFS) in pts with no prior treatment for ER+/HER2- advanced BC, but OS benefit has not been shown yet in postmenopausal pts. There remains a clinical need for more effective treatments in this setting. Methods: AMEERA-5 (NCT04478266) is an ongoing, prospective, randomized, double-blind phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of amcenestrant + palbo with that of letrozole + palbo in pts with advanced, locoregional recurrent or metastatic ER+/HER2- BC who have not received prior systemic therapy for advanced disease. The study includes men, pre/peri-menopausal (with goserelin) and post-menopausal women. Pts with progression during or within 12 months of (neo)adjuvant endocrine therapy using any of the following agents are excluded: AI, selective estrogen receptor modulators, CDK4/6i. Pts are randomized 1:1 to either continuous amcenestrant 200 mg or letrozole 2.5 mg QD orally with matching placebos; both combined with palbo 125 mg QD orally (d1–21 every 28-d cycle). Randomization is stratified according to disease type (de novo metastatic vs recurrent disease), the presence of visceral metastasis, and menopausal status. The primary endpoint is investigator assessed progression free survival (PFS) (RECIST v1.1). Secondary endpoints are overall survival, PFS2, objective response rate, duration of response, clinical benefit rate, pharmacokinetics of amcenestrant and palbo, health-related quality of life, time to chemotherapy, and safety. Biomarkers will be measured in paired tumor biopsies and cell free deoxyribonucleic acid (cfDNA) over time. Target enrolment = 1066 pts; enrolment as of 1/2021 = 33 pts. Bardia A, et al., J Clin Oncol. 2019; 37 (15 suppl):1054 Clinical trial information: NCT04478266 .

scholarly journals Combined BRAF and MEK Inhibition with Vemurafenib and Cobimetinib for Patients with Advanced Melanoma

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (01) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Antonio M Grimaldi ◽  
Ester Simeone ◽  
Lucia Festino ◽  
Vito Vanella ◽  
Paolo A Ascierto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mapk Pathway ◽  
Combined Therapy ◽  
Acquired Resistance ◽  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Mek Inhibition ◽  
Braf Mutant

Acquired resistance is the most common cause of BRAF inhibitor monotherapy treatment failure, with the majority of patients experiencing disease progression with a median progression-free survival of 6-8 months. As such, there has been considerable focus on combined therapy with dual BRAF and MEK inhibition as a means to improve outcomes compared with monotherapy. In the COMBI-d and COMBI-v trials, combined dabrafenib and trametinib was associated with significant improvements in outcomes compared with dabrafenib or vemurafenib monotherapy, in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma. The combination of vemurafenib and cobimetinib has also been investigated. In the phase III CoBRIM study in patients with unresectable stage III-IV BRAF-mutant melanoma, treatment with vemurafenib and cobimetinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) compared with vemurafenib alone. One-year OS was 74.5% in the vemurafenib and cobimetinib group and 63.8% in the vemurafenib group, while 2-year OS rates were 48.3% and 38.0%, respectively. The combination was also well tolerated, with a lower incidence of cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma and keratoacanthoma compared with monotherapy. Dual inhibition of both MEK and BRAF appears to provide a more potent and durable anti-tumour effect than BRAF monotherapy, helping to prevent acquired resistance as well as decreasing adverse events related to BRAF inhibitor-induced activation of the MAPK-pathway. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition is the standard of care in patients with advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document