Dataset Information

Clinical Impact of Vitamin K Dosing on Sorafenib Treatment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

ABSTRACT: Background: Some researchers have suggested that vitamin K enhances the antitumor effect of sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in vitro and in vivo. In this study, we examined the clinical impact of vitamin K dosing for sorafenib treatment. Methods: Twenty-nine out of 65 patients treated with sorafenib for HCC were simultaneously dosed with vitamin K. We retrospectively investigated progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the vitamin K-dosed group and sorafenib alone group. We also examined the changes in serum des-γ-carboxy prothrombin (DCP) levels, which vitamin K is involved with. Results: The median PFS was prolonged in the sorafenib + vitamin K group compared with the sorafenib alone group (6.0 months and 2.0 months, respectively; P<0.001, hazard ratio〔HR〕: 0.25). The median OS was also significantly extended (12.5 months vs. 10.0 months; P=0.009, HR: 0.47). Despite suppressed tumor growth, serum DCP levels had increased in cases of disease-controlled patients in the sorafenib alone group 8 weeks after the beginning of treatment, (2.28±0.91 to 2.64±1.03, P= 0.048). In contrast, the serum DCP levels of the sorafenib + vitamin K group had declined both in patients with controlled disease and in patients with progressive disease (1.97±0.57 to 1.29±0.28, P=0.002 and 2.90±1.32 to 1.78±0.53, P=0.034, respectively). Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first clinical report showing enhanced antitumor action of sorafenib by vitamin K. Our clinical findings suggest that vitamin K may have the synergistic effect by suppressing production of DCP, a tumor growth and angiogenesis factor.

SUBMITTER: Haruna Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5559959 | biostudies-other | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma waiting for liver transplantation are commonly treated with locoregional treatments, such as TACE and ablation, to prevent tumor progression and dropout and to improve long-term outcome after transplantation. We wanted to prospectively assess feasibility of systemic antitumor treatment with sorafenib as neoadjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma while waiting for liver transplantation, evaluating tolerability, toxicity and posttransplant morbidity. We also wanted to evaluate perfusion CT parameters to assess tumor properties and response early after start of sorafenib treatment in patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS:Twelve patients assigned for liver transplantation due to hepatocellular carcinoma, within the UCSF and who fulfilled other criteria, were included January 2012-August 2014. After baseline evaluation, sorafenib treatment was started. Treatment was evaluated by perfusion CT at 1, 4 and 12 weeks and thereafter every 8 weeks. Toxicity and quality of life was assessed at 1 and 4 weeks and every 4 weeks thereafter during treatment. Treatment was stopped when patients were prioritized on the transplantation waiting list or when intolerable side effects or tumor progress warranted other treatments. Posttransplant morbidity after 90 days was registered according to Clavien-Dindo. RESULTS:Baseline perfusion CT parameters in the tumors predicted the outcome according to RECIST/mRECIST at three months, but no change in CTp parameters was detected as a result of sorafenib. Sorafenib as neoadjuvant treatment was associated with intolerability and dose reductions. Therefore the prerequisites for evaluation of the sorafenib effect on both CT parameters and tumor response were impaired. CONCLUSIONS:This study failed to show changes in CTp parameters during sorafenib treatment. Despite the curative treatment intention, tolerability of neoadjuvant sorafenib treatment before liver transplantation was inadequate in this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION:EudraCT number: 2010-024306-36 (date 2011-04-07).

Project description:The prognosis for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is dependent upon tumour stage, performance status (PS), severity of underlying liver disease, and the availability of appropriate therapies. The unavailability of sorafenib may have a significantly adverse effect on the prognosis of UK patients with advanced HCC. During the study period, access to sorafenib was at the discretion of local health funding bodies, a process that may delay or deny access to the drug and that remains in place for Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Here, we attempt to address the impact of this system on patients with advanced HCC in the United Kingdom.This is a retrospective study performed in the two largest specialist hepatobiliary oncology units in the United Kingdom. Funding applications were made to local funding bodies for patients with advanced HCC for whom sorafenib was considered appropriate (advanced HCC not suitable for loco-regional therapies, compensated chronic liver disease, PS 0-2).A total of 133 applications were made, of which 57 (43%) were approved and 76 (57%) declined. Demographics and prognostic factors were balanced between the two groups. This cohort had a number of adverse prognostic features: patients were predominantly PS 1-2; the majority had multifocal disease with the largest lesion being >5 cm; and macroscopic vascular invasion, metastases, and AFP >,000 ng ml(-1), were each present in one-third of cases. The median time from application to funding decision was 17 days (range 3-260 days). For the primary 'intention-to-treat' analysis, median overall survival was 4.1 months when funding was declined, and 9.5 months when funding was approved (hazard ratio (HR) 0.48; 95% CI 0.3186-0.7267; P=0.0005).These data support the use of sorafenib for patients with advanced HCC as an effective intervention. In the United Kingdom, this applies to a relatively small group of patients, estimated to total ∼800 per year who, unfortunately, do not survive long enough to themselves lobby for the availability of this drug. These data provide a comparison of sorafenib with supportive care and demonstrate the potential detrimental impact on patient outcomes of rationing health-care resources on the basis of cost.

Project description:ImportancePrevious communication has reported significant improvement in overall survival (OS) when using doxorubicin plus sorafenib in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular cancer (HCC).ObjectiveTo determine if doxorubicin added to sorafenib therapy improves OS, with stratification for locally advanced and metastatic disease.Design, setting, and participantsThis unblinded randomized phase 3 clinical trial was led by Alliance in collaboration with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network, Canadian Cancer Trials Group, and Southwest Oncology Group. It was launched in February 2010 and completed in May 2015; data were also analyzed during this time frame. Patients with histologically proven advanced HCC, no prior systemic therapy, Child-Pugh grade A score, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 (later amended to 0-1), and adequate hematologic, hepatic, renal, and cardiac function were eligible. The OS primary end point had a final analysis planned with 364 events observed among 480 total patients with 90% power to detect a 37% increase in median OS.Interventions or exposuresPatients received either 60 mg/m2 of doxorubicin every 21 days plus 400 mg of sorafenib orally twice daily or the sorafenib alone, adjusted to half doses for patients with bilirubin levels of 1.3 to 3.0 mg/dL.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was OS, and progression-free survival (PFS) was a secondary end point.ResultsOf 356 patients included in the study, the mean (SD) age was 62 (10.1) years, and 306 (86.0%) were men. Although it was planned to include 480 patients, the study was halted after accrual of 356 patients (180 patients treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib and 176 with sorafenib alone) with a futility boundary crossed at a planned interim analysis. Median OS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.3-10.8 months) in the doxorubicin plus sorafenib arm and 9.4 months (95% CI, 7.3-12.9 months) in the sorafenib alone arm (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83-1.31). The median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.4-4.9 months) in the doxorubicin plus sorafenib arm and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.5 months) in the sorafenib alone arm (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.75-1.16). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia adverse events occurred in 61 (36.8%) and 29 (17.5%) patients, respectively, being treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib vs 1 (0.6%) and 4 (2.4%) patients treated with sorafenib.Conclusions and relevanceThis multigroup study of the addition of doxorubicin to sorafenib therapy did not show improvement of OS or PFS in patients with HCC.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01015833.

Dataset Information

Clinical Impact of Vitamin K Dosing on Sorafenib Treatment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure