Liver Metastases of Other Indications

Concept
Resection + intra-arterial chemotherapy vs. resection alone
N
51
Access
Catheter via A. femoralis in truncus coeliacus
Therapy
d1: 10 mg/m2 mitoxantrone (over 1 h)
d2–4: 170 mg/m2 FA (over 10 min) + 600 mg/m2 5-FU (over 2 h)
d5: 60 mg/m2 cisDDP (over 1 h)
Frequency
Every 4 weeks
Survival
23 mo vs. 11 mo
R0-resection (at 4 years): 54 vs. 10 %
Hepatic metastasis
Reduction to 17 %
Toxicity
No severe local side effects
Conclusion
The results demonstrate that CAI is well tolerated, reduces the risk of liver metastasis, and increases the survival time of pancreatic cancer patients
d days, mo months
Cantore et al. (2006) [2]
Concept
Resection + intra-arterial chemotherapy ±IV gemcitabine
N
47
Access
Catheter via A. femoralis in truncus coeliacus
Therapy
5FU 750 mg/m2, leucovorin 75 mg/m2, epirubicin 45 mg/m2, carboplatin 225 mg/m2 (FLEC regimen)
Frequency
Every 3 weeks
Survival
Median disease-free-survival: 16.9 months, median overall survival: 29.7 months
Hepatic metastasis
62 % of recurrence
Toxicity
Main grade 3 toxicity related to HAI was only nausea/vomiting in 4 % of the patients
Conclusion
FLEC regimen with or without gemcitabine is active with a very mild toxicity and results are very encouraging in an adjuvant setting
Hayashibe et al. (2007) [3]
Concept
Resection + intra-arterial chemotherapy vs. resection alone (non randomized)
N
22
Access
Catheter via A. femoralis in proper hepatic artery
Therapy
5FU 500 mg/m2 180 min infusion + cisplatin 10 mg/m2
Frequency
weekly “as much as possible”
Survival
15.8 mo vs. 13.4 mo NS
Hepatic metastasis
33 % in the treated group vs. 54 % in the control group
Toxicity
No severe local side effects
Conclusion
In patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent the curative operation, the intra-arterial adjuvant chemotherapy had the tendency to suppress the rate of liver metastasis and improve cumulative survival

7.2.2 Metastatic Disease

Homma and Niitsu (2002) [4]
Concept
Hepatic arterial infusion
N
31
Access
Catheter into A. femoralis to celiac artery
Therapy
20 mg/m2 cisDDP (d1, 3, 5) + 500 mg/m2 5-FU (d1–7)
Frequency
Every 4 weeks
Survival
1, 2, 3 y: 67, 31, 14 %
Median survival: 16 mo
Toxicity
Cytopenia (grade II): N = 11, transient nausea, mild anorexia
Conclusion
In patients with stage IV advanced pancreatic carcinoma, arterial infusion chemotherapy after hemodynamic change was found to be effective against both primary tumors and metastatic liver lesions
y years
Vogl et al. (2006) [5]
Concept
Intra-arterial dose finding of gemcitabine +/6 starch microspheres
N
24
Access
Catheter into A. femoralis placed in the truncus coeliacus
Therapy
HAI: initial dose, 1,000 mg/m2 (d1 + d8) every 2 weeks (max. 6 cycles); dose steps, 200 mg/m2 (till MTD)
TACE: initial dose, HAI-MTD – 1 dose-step, + microspheres
MTD
HAI: 1,600 mg/m2
TACE: 1,800 mg/m2
Response rates
TtP
HAI: 4 mo
TACE: 7 mo
Survival
Median survival
HAI: 14 mo
TACE: 20 mo
Toxicity
Myelosuppression (grade III)
Conclusion
This clinical study indicates that the intra-arterial application of gemcitabine with doses higher than the recommended 1,000 mg/m2 is well tolerated if combined with microspheres and yields respectable results in patients who do not respond to systemic chemotherapy
Cantore et al. (2003) [6]
Concept
Intra-arterial chemotherapy vs. IV gemcitabine
N
71 vs. 67
Access
Catheter via A. femoralis in truncus coeliacus
Therapy
5FU 1,000 mg/m2, leucovorin 100 mg/m2, epirubicin 60 mg/m2, carboplatin 300 mg/m2 (FLEC regimen)
Frequency
Every 3 weeks
Response rate
14 % for FLEC vs. 5.9 % for gemcitabine (NS)
Survival
Median overall survival: 7.9 months in the FLEC group vs. 5.8 months in the gemcitabine group (p = 0.13)
Toxicity
Main grade 3 toxicity related to IAC was only nausea/vomiting in 4 %; regarding gemcitabine, grade 3 toxicities were anemia 8 %, leukopenia 8 %, thrombocytopenia 17 %, and nausea/vomiting 4 %
Conclusion
FLEC regimen with or without gemcitabine is active with a very mild toxicity and results are very encouraging in an adjuvant setting
Ikeda et al. (2007) [7]
Concept
HAI + IV therapy
N
33
Access
Port system (catheter into A. subclavia or right A. femoralis)
Therapy
IV: 1,000 mg/m2 gemcitabine (over 30 min) d1, 8, 15
HAI: 250 mg/m2 5-FU d1–5
Frequency
Every 4 weeks
Response rates
PR: N = 8 (24 %), PD: 9 (27 %)
Survival???
 
Toxicity
Leukopenia (grade III), N = 8; thrombocytopenia, N = 6; non-hematologic (grade III), N = 5
Conclusion
For patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, HAI with systemic chemotherapy appeared to be effective and may prolong survival
Azizi et al. (2011) [8]
Concept
TACE for liver metastases
N
32
Access
Femoral arterial access, advanced into the relevant segmental artery
Therapy
8 mg/m2 MMC + 40 mg/m2 cisDDP + 1,000 mg/m2 gemcitabine + lipiodol + 200–450 mg DSM
Frequency
Every 4–8 weeks
Response rates
PR: N = 3 (9 %), SD: N = 23 (72 %), PD: N = 6 (19 %)
Survival
Median survival: 16 mo (SD: 20 mo, PD: 5 mo)
Toxicity
No major complications
Conclusion
Repetitive TACE resulted in a relevant response for the control of liver metastases of pancreatic cancer with respectable median survival time
Recommendations
Locoregional treatment of liver metastases of pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains a matter of research. It is conceptually interesting for the treatment of pancreatic carcinoma even if recent polychemotherapy has given interesting results (FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel). In adjuvant setting the data are scarce, but considering the high level of liver recurrence after surgical excision of pancreatic cancer and even if systemic treatment has given some hope, it could be considered in future trials.

7.3 Liver Metastases of Melanoma

7.3.1 Hepatic Arterial Infusion

Becker et al. (2002) [9]
Concept
HAI or IV of fotemustine + SC IL-2 + IFN
N
48
Inclusion criteria
Liver and extrahepatic metastases
Therapy
d1: IA 100 mg/m2 fotemustine (over 60 min) or
 IV 100 mg/m2 fotemustine (over 15 min)
d31–33: SC 10 × 106 IU/m2 IL-2 (2×/d)
d36, 38, 40: SC 10 × 106 IU/m2 IFN + SC 5 ×106 IU/m2 IL-2
Response rates
RR: 15 % (N = 7); (5 from the HAI group)
HAI vs. IV: 22 vs. 8 %
CR: N = 1; PR: N = 6
Survival
8.5 mo (HAI vs. IV: 369 vs. 349 d)
Toxicity
Thrombocytopenia, leukopenia (more prominent systemic side effects in the IV group)
Conclusions
Although objective responses were more frequent within the cohort receiving intra-arterial fotemustine, this difference did not translate into a significant benefit in overall survival. Of note, this overall survival is much longer than that repeatedly reported for stage IV uveal melanoma not treated with fotemustine, suggesting a therapeutic activity of this cytostatic drug even after systemic administration
Peters et al. (2006) [10]
Concept
HAI (retrospective study)
N
101
Inclusion criteria
Chemotherapeutic naive patients
Therapy
100 mg/m2 fotemustine (over 4 h)
Every 4 weeks
Response rates
RR: 36 %
CR: N = 15; PR: N = 21; SD: N = 48
TtP: 9 mo
Survival
Median survival: 15 mo
1 y, 2 y, 3 y: 67, 29, 12 %
Toxicity
Grade III and IV: 11 % (mainly hematoxicity), grade II: (mainly hematoxicity)
Complications with catheters: N = 21 (thrombosis, dislocation, obstruction, leakage)
Conclusions
Locoregional treatment with fotemustine is well tolerated and seems to improve outcome of this poor prognosis patient population
Siegel et al. (2007) [11]
Concept
HAI (retrospective study)
N
30 (18 uveal)
Inclusion criteria
Liver-limited disease
Therapy
100 mg/m2 fotemustine (over 4 h)
Every 4 weeks
Response rates
RR: 30 %
PR: N = 9; SD: N = 10
TtP: 9 mo
Survival
Median survival: 14 mo
1 y, 2 y, 3 y: 67, 29, 12 %
Toxicity
≥ Grade III thrombocytopenia/30 %; ≥ grade 3 neutropenia: 7 %
Conclusions
Hepatic arterial fotemustine chemotherapy was well tolerated. Meaningful response and survival rates were achieved in ocular as well as cutaneous melanoma
Voelter et al. (2008) [12]
Concept
HAI (prospective study, historical control)
N
22
Inclusion criteria
High risk of liver metastases patients
Therapy
100 mg/m2 fotemustine (over 4 h)
Every 3 weeks
Response
NA – adjuvant treatment
Survival
Median survival: 9 years vs. 7.4 years for control group
5-year survival: 75 % vs. 56 %
Toxicity
50 % grade 3–4 hepatotoxicity including one patient with cholangitis 8 years later
Conclusions
Although these data suggest a survival benefit, it was not statistically significant. Confirming such a benefit would require a large, internationally coordinated, prospective randomized trial

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Jun 4, 2017 | Posted by in ONCOLOGY | Comments Off on Liver Metastases of Other Indications

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access