3 kwo hepatocellular cancer
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

3 kwo hepatocellular cancer

on

  • 653 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
653
Views on SlideShare
496
Embed Views
157

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0

4 Embeds 157

http://www.2012gihepupdate.com 95
http://www.webnexustechnologies.com 29
http://2012gihepupdate.com 17
http://localhost 16

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

3 kwo hepatocellular cancer 3 kwo hepatocellular cancer Presentation Transcript

  • Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The growing disease burden Paul Y Kwo, MD Professor of Medicine Medical Director, Liver Transplantation Gastroenterology/Hepatology Division Indiana University School of Medicine 975 W. Walnut, IB 327 Indianapolis, IN 46202-5121 phone 317-274-3090 fax 317-274-3106 pkwo@iupui.edu
  • Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC)• Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the 6th most commoncancer in the world•Third leading cause of cancer related death•Age-adjusted US incidence has increased 2-fold: 1985-1998•American Cancer Society statistics for liver cancer in 2008 •Most patients with HCC in US have liver cirrhosis mainly by hepatitis B and C viruses •Estimation of new cases: 21,370 •Estimation of deaths: 17,000
  • HCC: Epidemiology• Hepatitis B virus is the most frequent underlyingcause world wide• 85% of HCC cases occur in Eastern andSoutheastern Asian and Sub Saharan Africa(endemic HBV infection)• In the US, HCV-related HCC is a rapidly risingcancer (50-70% of cases)• Other risk factors in the United States includealcohol use, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease , inheritedliver disease, smoking* • Hemochromatosis (highest risk, though low disease penetrance)•Cirrhosis is a pre-malignant condition View slide
  • Rising Mortality Rate from HCC in US (Age Adjusted) View slide
  • Age-Specific Incidence of HCC among White Men in SEER Database
  • Origin of HCC• Cirrhotic liver – All causes• Noncirrhotic liver – Hepatitis B – Fibrolamellar variant – Rare metabolic diseases (eg, glycogenosis, porphyria) – Hepatitis C (rare) – Other
  • Incidence of HCC as it relates to etiology of cirrhosisNon-alcoholic fatty liver disease
  • REVEAL: Baseline HBV DNA and Liver Disease ProgressionProspective, multicenter, observational cohort study 1991-1992: 7 Taiwanese townships Individuals aged 30-65 years eligible (N = 89,293) HCC-free individuals enrolled (n = 23,820) Excluded if cirrhotic within 6 months Cirrhosis Analysis HCC Analysis (n = 3774) (n = 3653) 2004: 42,115 PYs follow-up 2004: 41,779 PYs follow-up 395 cirrhotic patients (10.5%) 164 HCC patients (4.5%)Chen CJ, et al. JAMA 2006;295:65-73.Iloeje UH, et al. Gastroenterology 2006;130:678-686.
  • REVEAL Study: HBV DNA Levels and Long-Term Outcomes Viral Load at Baseline < 300 (Undetectable) 10,000-99,999 ≥ 1 Million 300-9,999 100,000-999,999 Cumulative incidence of HCC Multivariate-adjusted (%) (n = 3653) relative risk of cirrhosis (n = 3482) 20 12 10.6 9.7 10 14.89% 15 12.17% 8 10 6 4 3.6 5 3.57% 2.0 2 1.30% 1.37% 1.0 0 0Chen CJ, et al. JAMA. 2006;295:65-73.Iloeje UH, et al. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:678-686.
  • HCC: Pathogenesis• Carcinogenesis is typically a stepwise process – Sequential genetic mutations – Oncogene activation – Tumor suppressor gene inactivation• No dominant pathways of hepatocellular carcinogenesis have been identified
  • Molecular Pathogenesis of HCC • 2 key mechanisms implicated in development of Chronic liver HCC damage – Liver cirrhosis following tissue damage (infectious or toxic damage) Hepatocyte regeneration – Mutations occurring in 1 or more oncogenic or tumor suppressor genes Cirrhosis • Abnormalities in cellular signaling pathways – Raf/MEK/ERK – PI3K/AKT/mTOR Genetic – Wnt/β-catenin – Angiogenic signaling alterations HCCMarotta F et al. Clin Ter. 2004;155:187-199. Thorgeirsson SS, et al. Nat Genet. 2002;31:339-346. WiesenauerCA, et al. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;198:410-421. Wang XW, et al. Toxicology. 2002;181-182:43-47. FeitelsonMA, et al. Surg Clin North Am. 2004;84:339-354. Avila MA, et al. Oncogene. 2006;25:3866-3884. Adaptedfrom CCO
  • Growth Rates of HCC 14 13 Median Doubling Time = Number of Cases 12 117 Days (Range: 29-398) 10 9 8 6 5 4 2 2 1 0 <30 30-90 90-150 150-210 >210 Doubling Time (Days)Sheu J-C, et al. Gastroenterology. 1985;89:259.
  • Actuarial Survival of Patients With Untreated HCC 100 80 Probability (%) 60 40 20 0 12 24 36 48 60 Months Patients at Risk 102 57 40 21   8 1Llovet JM, et al. Hepatology. 1999;29:62.
  • Spread of HCC 4 32 5 1 Extrahepatic Spread to: Lungs Bone Adrenals
  • How do we screen for HCC• No studies define unequivocally the best modality fordiagnosing HCC• Ultrasonography (US)every 6-12 months with alpha-fetoprotein(AFP) every six months is current standard of care for screeninghigh risk patients •US has technical limitations (operator dependence, reduced efficacy in those with elevated BMI) •US if subject has normal BMI•AFP alone is not sufficient unless imaging modalities are notavailable•Our practice at IU: MRI every 9 months or Dual Phase Spiral CT, or US every 6-12 months if normal BMI •MRI or US preferred due to radiation risk with CT scan
  • AASLD Guidelines• Surveillance recommended in at-risk groups – Specific hepatitis B carriers – Nonhepatitis B cirrhosis• US preferred surveillance tool – AFP alone should not be used unless US unavailable• Patients should be screened at 6- to 12-month intervals
  • HCC Screening: Caveats with Ultrasound• Detection of hypo- or hyperechoic nodule should raise suspicion of HCC in a cirrhotic patient – Less than half of nodules less than 1 cm size correspond to hepatocellular carcinoma – Nodules less than 1 cm are followed with repeat ultrasound every three months until lesion greater than 1 cm – Absence of growth does not rule out HCC
  • How is HCC Diagnosed: Dynamic Imaging (CT scan or MRI)• HCCs have blood supply from hepatic artery• Dual Phase Spiral CT scan or MRI with intravenous contrast allows rapid acquisition of images during hepatic arterial phase and portal venous phases• Lesions seen during the arterial phase and which are less well seen during portal venous phase are suspicious for HCC – Requires relatively preserved renal function for both
  • Triple Phase CT Scan of HCC at 0 and 6 Months Time 0: No Contrast Arterial Phase Portovenous Phase6 months later: Arterial Phase Portovenous Phase
  • How is HCC Diagnosed: MRI• MRI provides another way of distinguishing hepatocellular carcinoma from normal liver tissue• Most tumors have a low signal intensity on T 1 -weighted images and a high signal intensity on T 2 -weighted images• Gradient-echo sequences and turbo spin-echo sequences have greatly reduced the time needed for MRI. – (breath holding for 40 seconds for optimal images)• Less dependent on normal renal function
  • MRI demonstrating HCC/Tumor Thrombosis
  • How is HCC Diagnosed?•Nodules >1 cm can be confidently diagnosed withCT or MRI without needing a biopsy positive forHCC•If lesion has atypical enhancement, need 2dynamic imaging studies with typical washout,otherwise, biopsy•A biopsy of a nodule negative for HCC shouldnever be accepted as having excluded malignancy
  • Mass found with surveillance
  • Effect of Surveillance on Outcomes • Retrospective analysis of patients with cirrhosis and HCC (N = 269) – Standard-of-care surveillance (n = 172) • Ultrasound or other abdominal imaging ≥ 1 time/year – Substandard surveillance (n = 48) • Lack of abdominal imaging within 1 year of cancer diagnosis – Absence of surveillance (n = 59) Outcomes, % Standard-of-Care Substandard Absence of P Value Surveillance Surveillance Surveillance (n = 172) (n = 48) (n = 59) HCC diagnosis at 69 35 18 < .001 stages 1/2 Liver transplantation 32 13 7 < .05 Mean 3-year survival 40 27 13 < .005 from cancer diagnosisStravitz RT, et al. Am J Med. 2008;121:119-126.
  • Alpha-fetoprotein Levels•Values greater than 400 ng/ml have been validated as confirming hepatocellular carcinoma•Viral liver disease often associated with transientincreases of AFP coinciding with inflammatory flares ofdisease•Values > 200 ng/ml with mass associated with highlikelihood of HCC
  • Staging of HCC• Staging systems – TNM nomenclature – Okuda system – BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) – CLIP (Cancer of the Liver Italian Program)• Key features – Tumor size – Liver function – Performance status of the patient
  • HCC Factors Affecting Survival • Constitutional syndrome • Performance status • Vascular invasion • Extrahepatic spreadLlovet JM, et al. Hepatology. 1999;29:62.
  • Prognosis of Patients With HCC Patient Survival Therapy 1 Year 3 Years No “radical” therapy 54% 28% Surgical resection 81% 44% Ethanol injection 82% 38% Transplantation 84% 74%Castells A, et al. Hepatology. 1993;18:11211. Llovet JM, et al. Hepatology.1998;27:1572. Llovet JM, et al. Hepatology. 1999;29:62.
  • HCC Treatment Options: 2012• Surgical resection• Liver transplantation• Transarterial Chemo-embolization or Radioembolization (Yttrium-90 microspheres)• Stereotactic Radiation• Radiofrequency ablation• Sorafenib
  • Surgical Resection• Small group of cirrhotics with HCC (<5% of HCC patients) are candidates• HCC without cirrhosis are also candidates• Criteria – Child-Pugh class A – Normal bilirubin – Absence of portal hypertension – <5 cm in diameter• 5-year survival rate: 60%-70%• Tumor recurrence: 50% in 3 years
  • Survival Following Surgical Resection for HCC 100 Probability of Survival (%) N = 77 Log Rank 0.00001 80 No portal hypertension 60 (<10 mm Hg) Portal hypertension 40 + bilirubin <1 mg/dL Portal hypertension 20 + bilirubin >1 mg/dL 0 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 Postoperative MonthLlovet JM, et al. Hepatology. 1999;30:1434.
  • Transplantation for HCC: Milan Criteria• 1 lesion ≤ 5 cm• 3 lesions ≤ 3 cm• No vascular invasion• No extrahepatic metastases
  • Survival and Recurrence-Free Survival Following Liver Transplantation for HCC 100 100Overall Survival (%) Recurrence-Free 80 Survival (%) 80 60 60 40 40 20 20 0 0 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 Months After Transplantation Months After Transplantation Patients at Risk Patients at Risk 48 45 40 32 27 21 17 9 5 48 43 38 29 25 19 15 9 5 Mazzaferro V, et al. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:693.
  • Transplantation for HCC: UCSF Criteria• Lesion ≤ 6.5 cm• 2-3 lesions • - largest ≤ 4.5 cm • - total < 8 cm diameter• No vascular invasion• No extrahepatic metastases
  • Survival Following OLT for HCC Milan and UCSF Criteria 1.0 UCSF 0.8 Milan Survival 0.6 distribution function 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Years after liver transplantationLiver Transplantation 8:769, 2002 CP1078048-2
  • Survival Following LT for HCC 1.0 UCSF (n=37) Survival distribution 0.8 function 0.6 0.4 > UCSF (n=8) 0.2 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Years after liver transplantationYao et al: Liver Transp 8:765, 2002 CP1238402-7
  • Yttrium90-laden microspheres: Therasphere®– Glass microspheres 20-30 μ in diameter Yttrium90 is an integral component of the glass– Each 0.3 ml vial contains 1.2 - 8 million microspheres (3-20 GBq Y90)– Activity/sphere = 2500 Becquerel (2400 disintegrations per second)
  • 25 microns
  • Trans-arterial hepaticradioembolisation of yttrium-90 microspheres
  • Chemoembolization Hepatocellular carcinoma Hepatic artery Ivalon plus CDDP Catheter Adriamycin Mitomycin C
  • HCC: Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE)Pre-treatment Post-treatment
  • ASTRO - ACR PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR SBRT Int. J. Rad. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 60: 1026–1032, 2004• ASTRO definition: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a method to very precisely deliver a high dose of radiation to an extracranial target within the body, using a single dose or a small number of fractions. – Specialized treatment planning results in high target dose and steep dose gradients beyond the target. – Highly precise, accurate & reproducible target localization, using a 3D coordinate system: IGRT
  • Treatment Logistics: Sterotactic Body radiation to the liver• Patient positioning and immobilization in the SBF in a Vac- Lok, with diaphragmatic control device – Fluoroscopic evaluation of diaphragmatic excursion (≤ 0.5 cm) – CT scan with IV contrast (2.5 mm slice interval, 2mm thickness) – GI contrast patients with medial liver lesions or in the caudate lobe – TPCT, MRI scan or PET-CT fusion
  • Typical Response to SBRTPre Treatment month arterial 1 1 month venous 3 months arterial 47 year old male with hepatitis C induced Child’s B-liver cirrhosis with a 2 cm hypervascular mass in segments 5 and 6. Arterial and venous phase post-gadolinium MR images 1 month after treatment show reduced enhancement of the mass (black arrows) but no significant change in size. Note peritumoral hyper enhancement in both phases (white arrows). Arterial phase image at 3 months showed the mass is almost completely necrotic, smaller, with thin enhancing rim (arrow).
  • Radiofrequency AblationA 14 gauge needle is directed into the tumor by ultrasound or CT guidance and an alternating current is applied,similar to microwave, Best in tumors less than 5 cm.
  • HCC: Post RFA Treatment
  • Sorafenib Improves Survival in HepatocellularCarcinoma: Results of a Phase III Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial Josep M Llovet, Sergio Ricci, Vincenzo Mazzaferro, Philip Hilgard,Jean-Luc Raoul, Stefan Zeuzem, Armando Santoro, MinghuaShan, Marius Moscovici, Dimitris Voliotis, and Jordi Bruix, for the SHARP Investigators Study Group Supported by Bayer HealthCare and Onyx Pharmaceuticals
  • Cellular targets of sorafenib VEGF PDGFβ SCF GDNF VEGFR PDGFR c-Kit RET Receptor autophosphorylation Cell survival (anti- Sorafenib Activation of Raf apoptotic effects) Invasion and Neovascularisation MEK/ERK metastasis Tumour cell proliferation Wilhelm S, et al. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006;5:835–44
  • Phase III SHARP Trial Overall survival (Intention-to-treat) 1.00 Sorafenib Median: 46.3 weeks (10.7 mo) 0.75 (95% CI: 40.9, 57.9) Placebo Survival Probability Median: 34.4 weeks (7.9 mo) (95% CI: 29.4, 39.4) 0.50 0.25 Hazard ratio (S/P): 0.69 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.88). P=0.00058* 0 0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 WeeksPatients at risk Sorafenib: 299 274 241 205 161 108 67 38 12 0 0 Placebo: 303 276 224 179 126 78 47 25 7 2 0 *O’Brien-Fleming threshold for statistical significance was P=0.0077.
  • Phase III SHARP Trial Time to Progression (Independent central review) 1.00 Probability of progression 0.75 Sorafenib 0.50 Median: 24.0 weeks (5.5 mo) (95% CI: 18.0, 30.0) Placebo Median: 12.3 weeks (2.8 mo) 0.25 (95% CI: 11.7, 17.1) Hazard ratio (S/P): 0.58 (95% CI: 0.44, 0.74) P=0.000007 0 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 WeeksPatients at risk Sorafenib: 299 196 126 80 50 28 14 8 2 0 Placebo: 303 192 101 57 31 12 8 2 1 0
  • Summary• HCC usually arises in cirrhotic liver• Growth rate varies• Long asymptomatic phase• Child-Pugh stage and performance status are important determinants of survival
  • Conclusions• Liver transplantation offers best chance for cure in selected cases (preoperative locoregional therapy may provide additional benefit)• Living donor liver transplantation may provide timely transplantation• Radical (Stereotactic radiation and RFA) therapies are effective for small tumors before OLT
  • Conclusions• Radioembolization (Y90) in non-transplant patients appears to improve survival• Sorafenib conferred a survival benefit in unresectable HCC is being studied in multiple patient populations with HCC• Important to identify patients with end stage liver disease and other high risk groups, particularly Hepatitis B and C carriers as well as NAFL-D in the US