A B S T R A C T PurposeThe purpose of cancer staging systems is to accurately predict patient prognosis. The outcome of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) depends on both the cancer stage and the extent of liver dysfunction. Many staging systems that include both aspects have been developed. It remains unknown, however, which of these systems is optimal for predicting patient survival. Patients and MethodsPatients with advanced HCC treated over a 5-year period at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center were identified from an electronic medical record database. Patients with sufficient data for utilization in all staging systems were included. TNM sixth edition, Okuda, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC), Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP), Chinese University Prognostic Index (CUPI), Japan Integrated Staging (JIS), and Groupe d'Etude et de Traitement du Carcinome Hepatocellulaire (GETCH) systems were ranked on the basis of their accuracy at predicting survival by using concordance index (c-index). Other independent prognostic variables were also identified. ResultsOverall, 187 eligible patients were identified and were staged by using the seven staging systems. CLIP, CUPI, and GETCH were the three top-ranking staging systems. BCLC and TNM sixth edition lacked any meaningful prognostic discrimination. Performance status, AST, abdominal pain, and esophageal varices improved the discriminatory ability of CLIP. ConclusionIn our selected patient population, CLIP, CUPI, and GETCH were the most informative staging systems in predicting survival in patients with advanced HCC. Prospective validation is required to determine if they can be accurately used to stratify patients in clinical trials and to direct the appropriate need for systemic therapy versus best supportive care. BCLC and TNM sixth edition were not helpful in predicting survival outcome, and their use is not supported by our data.

Context In a randomized phase 3 trial, 400 mg of sorafenib twice daily prolonged overall survival of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and Child-Pugh A disease. In a phase 1 study, sorafenib combined with doxorubicin, 60 mg/m 2 , was well tolerated by patients with refractory solid tumors. The combination of sorafenib and doxorubicin in patients with advanced HCC has not been evaluated in a phase 2 or 3 trial. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of doxorubicin plus sorafenib compared with doxorubicin alone in patients with advanced HCC and Child-Pugh A disease. Design, Setting, and Patients In a double-blind phase 2 multinational study, conducted from April 2005 to October 2006, 96 patients (76% male; median age, 65 years [range, 38-82 years]) with advanced HCC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2, Child-Pugh A status, and no prior systemic therapy were randomly assigned to receive 60 mg/m 2 of doxorubicin intravenously every 21 days plus either 400 mg of sorafenib or placebo orally twice a day. The date of the last patient's follow-up was April 2008. Main Outcome Measure Time to progression as determined by independent review. Results Following complete accrual, an unplanned early analysis for efficacy was performed by the independent data monitoring committee, so the trial was halted. The 2 patients remaining in the placebo group at that time were offered sorafenib. Based on 51 progressions, 63 deaths, and 70 events for progression-free survival, median time to progression was 6.4 months in the sorafenib-doxorubicin group (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8-9.2), and 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.6-5) in the doxorubicin-placebo monotherapy group (P=.02). Median overall survival was 13.7 months (95% CI, 8.9not reached) and 6.5 months (95% CI, 4.5-9.9; P=.006), and progression-free survival was 6.0 months (95% CI, 4.6-8.6) and 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.4-2.8) in these groups, respectively (P=.006). Toxicity profiles were similar to those for the single agents. Conclusions Among patients with advanced HCC, treatment with sorafenib plus doxorubicin compared with doxorubicin monotherapy resulted in greater median time to progression, overall survival, and progression-free survival. The degree to which this improvement may represent synergism between sorafenib and doxorubicin remains to be defined. The combination of sorafenib and doxorubicin is not yet indicated for routine clinical use.

Background:This study evaluated the addition of sorafenib to gemcitabine and cisplatin in biliary adenocarcinoma first-line therapy.Methods:Patients with advanced biliary adenocarcinomas received gemcitabine 1000 mg m−2 and cisplatin 25 mg m−2 on a 2 weeks on/1 week off cycle and sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. After the initial 16 patients were enrolled, the chemotherapy doses were amended in view of grade 3 and 4 hand–foot skin reaction and haematologic toxicity. Subsequently, 21 patients received gemcitabine 800 mg m−2, cisplatin 20 mg m−2 and sorafenib 400 mg. The primary end point was an improvement in 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6) from historical 57–77% (90% power, type I error of 10%). Pretreatment pERK, evaluated by immunostaining, was correlated with clinical outcome.Results:A total of 39 patients were accrued. The most common grade 3–4 toxicities noted in >10% of patients were fatigue, elevated liver function tests and haematologic toxicities including thromboemboli, hyponatraemia and hypophosphataemia. Six-month progression-free survival was 51% (95% confidence interval (CI) 34–66%). Median PFS and overall survival were 6.5 (95% CI: 3.5–8.3) and 14.4 months (95% CI: 11.6–19.2 months), respectively. No correlation was observed between pERK and outcomes.Conclusion:The addition of sorafenib to gemcitabine and cisplatin in biliary adenocarcinomas did not improve efficacy over historical data, and toxicity was increased.

K-ras vaccination for patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma proved to be safe and tolerable with however no elicitable immunogenicity and unproven efficacy. Future development of adjuvant vaccine therapies should use more immunogenic vaccines.

Background and Aims IGF-IR is implicated in hepatic carcinogenesis. This and preliminary evidence of biological activity of anti-IGF-1R monoclonal antibody cixutumumab in phase I trials prompted this phase II study. Methods Patients with advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A-B8, received cixutumumab 6 mg/kg weekly, in a Simon two-stage design study, with the primary endpoints being 4-month PFS and RECIST-defined response rate. Tissue and circulating markers plus different HCC scoring systems were evaluated for correlation with PFS and OS. Results As a result of pre-specified futility criteria, only stage 1 was accrued: N= 24: median age 67.5 years (range 49–83), KPS 80% (70–90%), 20 males (83%), 9 stage III (37%)/15 stage IV (63%), 18 Child-Pugh A (75%), 11 HBV (46%) /10 HCV (42%)/11 alcoholic cirrhosis (46%)/2 NASH (8%), 11 (46%) diabetic. Median number of doses: 7 (range 1–140). Grade 3/4 toxicities > 10% included: diabetes, elevated liver function tests, hyponatremia, and lymphopenia. Four-month PFS was 30% (95% CI 13–48), and there were no objective responses. Median overall survival was 8 months (95%CI 5.8– 14). IGF-R1 staining did not correlate with outcome. Elevated IGFBP-1 correlated with improved PFS (1.2 [95%CI 1–1.4]; p 0.009) and OS (1.2 [95%CI 1.1–1.4]; p 0.003). Conclusions Cixutumumab monotherapy did not have clinically meaningful activity in this unselected HCC population. Grade 3–4 hyperglycemia occurred in 46% of patients. Elevated IGFBP-1 correlated with improved PFS and OS.