scholarly journals Selecting the first line treatment in non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma - comparing clinical practice guidelines

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Soumya Jogi ◽  
Radha Varanai ◽  
Sravani S. Bantu ◽  
Ashish Manne
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Disease Process ◽  
Locoregional Therapy ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
First Line Treatment

Primary malignancy of the liver or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is unique in its presentation, disease process, and management. Unlike breast or colon cancer, the staging of HCC depends on performance status and baseline liver function along with pathological characteristics. Apart from traditional options like surgery and systemic therapy, effective management can be achieved in selected cases with liver transplant and locoregional therapy (LRT) like transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), transarterial radioembolization (TARE), and ablation. Liver study societies and cancer groups across the globe proposed guidelines to aid the treating physicians in choosing first-line treatment for liver cancer. It is tough to compare these guidelines as they differ not only in treatment recommendations but also in risk assessment (and staging). The approach to the same patient may be different in the country he or she is managed. In clinical practice, decisions are usually taken on the consensus of multidisciplinary tumor boards and do not necessarily adhere to any guidelines. In the early (and very early) stage HCC, curative options like surgery, transplant, and ablation are recommended. In intermediate stage HCC, LRT (TACE and TARE) is preferred in the first line and systemic therapy for treatment failure or residual disease. Systemic therapy, including the atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) like sorafenib and lenvatinib, is used for advanced stages. Supportive care is advised for terminal stage HCC.

scholarly journals Treatments for the early stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Laparoscopic Liver Resection or Percutaneous Radiofrequency, How to make the decision?

Liver Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinli Zheng ◽  
Wei Xie ◽  
Yunfeng Zhu ◽  
Li Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Liver Resection ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Overall Survival Rate ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

Hepatectomy is still as the first-line treatment for the early stage HCC, but the complication rate is higher than p-RFA and the overall survival rate is comparable in these two treatments. Therefore, the patients with small single nodular HCCs could get more benefit from p-RFA, and we need to do further research about p-RFA.

Efficacy of immunotherapy in hepatocholangiocarcinoma (HCC-CC): Proof of concept.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16194-e16194
Author(s):  
Osama Diab ◽  
Maloree Khan ◽  
Saqib Abbasi ◽  
Anwaar Saeed ◽  
Anup Kasi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Liver Cancers ◽  
First Line Treatment

e16194 Background: Hepatocholangiocarcinoma (HCC-CC) is a rare form of cancer with a poor prognosis. Of all primary liver cancers, the incidence of HCC-CC ranges from 0.4 to 14.2%. HCC-CC is a mixed carcinoma with findings of both hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a potent first line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma with multiple clinical trial showing effectiveness in cholangiocarcinoma. HCC-CC has limited proven treatment options as patients are generally excluded from clinical trials. In this study we reviewed outcomes of patients with HCC-CC who received immune checkpoint inhibitor in a single center. Methods: Records of patients who had a pathological confirmed HCC-CC by a subspecialized hepatic pathologist at the University of Kansas medical center were reviewed. We identified 6 patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic HCC-CC that received immune checkpoint inhibitor between February 2017 and January 2021. Baseline characteristics were obtained, as well as best response, line of therapy, and duration of response. Results: Of the six patients 4 (66%) received PD-1 inhibitor alone and 2 (34%) received combination therapy with CTLA-4 inhibitor for the treatment of HCC-CC. There were 3 (50%) females and 6 (100%) with prior hepatitis C infection. four (66%) patients had metastatic disease and 2 had locally unresectable advanced disease. Objective response rate was 83.3%. One patient achieved complete response and had a treatment holiday after receiving treatment for 2 years, and restarted immunotherapy upon relapse. Four patients had a partial response, of which two passed away after disease progression. One patient had stable disease on 2 different lines of immunotherapy then progressed. Of those who responded, one patient received immunotherapy, 3 (50%) received liver directed therapy and two received chemotherapy or Lenvatinib as first line treatment (Table). Conclusions: Immune checkpoint inhibitors demonstrate potential activity in patients with HCC-CC without unexpected side effect in this unmet need high-risk population. Larger studies are needed to confirm activity and efficacy in this setting.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals ATIM-13. MULTIMODAL IMMUNOTHERAPY WITH IO-VAC® FOR PATIENTS WITH GBM: A SINGLE INSTITUTION EXPERIENCE

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi4-vi4
Author(s):  
Stefaan Van Gool ◽  
Jennifer Makalowski ◽  
Wilfried Stuecker
Keyword(s):  
Tumor Antigens ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Local Therapy ◽  
Autologous Tumor ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Advanced Therapy Medicinal Product ◽  
Advanced Therapy ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Multimodal immunotherapy (Newcastle Disease Virus (NDV) + modulated electrohyperthermia + IO-VAC® + immunomodulatory strategies) is an innovative treatment for primary GBM and might prolong overall survival (OS). IO-VAC® consists of DCs loaded with autologous tumor antigens and matured with cytokine cocktail and NDV. We retrospectively reviewed 132 cases of primary GBM. Multimodal immunotherapy was integrated as individualized treatment approach and following different scenario’s in combination with standard treatment in the first line treatment in 71 patients, used at time of first or subsequent relapse as treatment with or without chemotherapy in 61 cases. Median ages were resp. 55 and 53 y. Median KPI at start of immunotherapy was 90 and 80. Median OS for the patients treated with immunotherapy as part of first-line treatment was 20 months with 2-y OS of 40% (CI95%: -13,+13). Median OS for patients treated at time of relapse was 7 months with but still with 18-m OS of 16% (CI95%: -12,+9). Two resp. 1 patients were lost of follow up. A subgroup of 34 GBM patients (10 females) with median age 58y (20–67) was detected, who received NDV + modulated electrohyperthermia during Temozolomide maintenance cycles followed by two IO-VAC® DC vaccinations, and further NDV + modulated electrohyperthermia courses. Median KPI was 70 (60–100). MGMT status was methylated (12), unmethylated (13), unknown (9). Median OS for this subgroup was 23.4 months with 2-year OS of 48% (CI95%: -18,+20). Immunotherapy was feasible without immunotherapy-related side effects of grade III or more. The data suggest that multimodal immunotherapy with IO-VAC® already during and after maintenance chemotherapy, at time of achieved minimal residual disease with local therapy, might help in prolongation of OS. Prolongation of OS in a small group of patients at time of relapse was also demonstrated. IO-VAC® is an approved advanced therapy medicinal product (DE-NW-04-GMP-2015-0030).

scholarly journals RADI-08. A SURVEY BASED STUDY OF BRAIN METASTASES MANAGEMENT FOR PATIENTS WITH NON-SMALL CELL LUNG CANCERS OR MELANOMA

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i23-i23
Author(s):  
Chin Heng Fong ◽  
Natasha Leighl ◽  
Marcus Butler ◽  
Mark Doherty ◽  
Timothy Kruser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Kinase Inhibitors ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Lung Cancers ◽  
Radiation Oncologists ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract INTRODUCTION: The standard of care for 1–4 brain metastases (BrM) is stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), whereas whole brain radiation remains the standard treatment for extensive BrM, and surgical resection is appropriate in certain scenarios. Some newer systemic therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapy have impressive CNS activity and are used by some practitioners either alone or in combination with other modalities as first-line treatment for BrM. We conducted a survey to ascertain current real-world practices for the treatment of BrM from NSCLC and melanoma. OBJECTIVES: Our study aimed to assess practice patterns of oncologists who treat BrM from NSCLC or melanoma. We also investigated the extent to which various clinical factors influence decision making. METHODOLOGY: We created 2 sets of surveys: one for Medical-/Clinical-/Neuro- oncologists and another for Radiation oncologists/Neurosurgeons. Surveys were conducted online or on-line. Following administration, data was tabulated and analyzed. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher’s exact test. RESULTS: Of 361 respondents, 250 were Radiation oncologists/Neurosurgeons, and 111 were Medical-/Clinical-/Neuro- oncologists. For patients with 1–3 brain lesions, all < 2cm, 34% of respondents recommended systemic therapy alone as first-line treatment. In contrast, only 15% recommend systemic therapy alone for >9 lesions, at least one > 2cm. Medical-/Clinical-/Neuro- oncologists were more likely to recommend systemic therapy alone compared to Radiation oncologists/ Neurosurgeons for 1–3 lesions, all < 2cm (53% vs. 28%, p< .0001). For patients with > 9 BrM, one >2cm diameter, Medical-/Clinical-/Neuro- oncologists were not significantly more likely to recommend systemic therapy alone (20% vs 13%, p=.11). DISCUSSION: Our results reveal that significant numbers of physicians recommend systemic therapy alone as first-line therapy in BrM and that management decisions correlate with a physician’s type of practice. These findings underscore the need for prospective clinical trials to direct appropriate BrM management.

scholarly journals Real-world systemic therapy treatment patterns for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in Canada

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Byrne ◽  
P. Hallworth ◽  
A. Abbas Tahami Monfared ◽  
A. Moshyk ◽  
J. W. Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Drug Treatment ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Line Drug ◽  
First Line Treatment

Background In the present study, we examined real-world treatment patterns for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (scchn) in Canada, which are largely unknown.Methods Oncologists across Canada provided data for disease history, characteristics, and treatment patterns during May–July 2016 for 6–8 consecutive patients receiving first-line or second-line drug treatment for scchn (including locally advanced and recurrent or metastatic disease).Results Information from 16 physicians for 109 patients receiving drug treatment for scchn was provided; 1 patient was excluded from the treatment-pattern analysis. Median age in the cohort was 63 years [interquartile range (iqr): 57–68 years], and 24% were current smokers, with a mean exposure of 26.2 ± 12.7 pack–years. The most common tumour site was the oropharynx (48%). Most patients (84%) received platinum-based regimens as first-line treatment (44% received cisplatin monotherapy). Use of cetuximab-based regimens as first-line treatment was limited (17%). Of 53 patients receiving second-line treatment, 87% received a first-line platinum-based regimen. Median time between first-line treatment with a platinum-based regimen and initiation of second-line treatment was 55 days (iqr: 20–146 days). The most common second-line regimen was cetuximab monotherapy (43%); platinum-based regimens were markedly infrequent (13%).Conclusions Our analysis provides real-world insight into scchn clinical practice patterns in Canada, which could inform reimbursement decision-making. High use of platinum-based regimens in first-line drug treatment was generally reflective of treatment guidelines; cetuximab use in the second-line was higher than anticipated. Additional real-world studies are needed to understand the effect of novel therapies such as immuno-oncology agents on clinical practice and outcomes, particularly for recurrent or metastatic scchn.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document