Song MJ. Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(13): 3843-3849 [PMID: 25852268 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i13.3843]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Myeong Jun Song, MD, PhD, Division of Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Daejeon St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, the Catholic University of Korea, Daeheung-ro 64, Jung-gu, Daejeon 301-723, South Korea. mjsong95@gmail.com
Research Domain of This Article
Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Article-Type of This Article
Review
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Myeong Jun Song, Division of Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Daejeon St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, the Catholic University of Korea, Daejeon 301-723, South Korea
ORCID number: $[AuthorORCIDs]
Author contributions: Song MJ solely contributed to this paper.
Conflict-of-interest: There is no conflict of interest.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Correspondence to: Myeong Jun Song, MD, PhD, Division of Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Daejeon St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, the Catholic University of Korea, Daeheung-ro 64, Jung-gu, Daejeon 301-723, South Korea. mjsong95@gmail.com
Telephone: +82-42-2209291
Received: November 24, 2014 Peer-review started: November 25, 2014 First decision: December 26, 2014 Revised: January 2, 2015 Accepted: February 5, 2015 Article in press: February 5, 2015 Published online: April 7, 2015 Processing time: 134 Days and 1.6 Hours
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. Surgery, percutaneous ablation and liver transplantation are the only curative treatment modalities for HCC. However, the majority of patients have unresectable disease at diagnosis. Therefore, effective treatment options for patients with advanced HCC are required. In advanced HCC, according to current international guidelines, sorafenib, a molecular targeted agent, is the standard treatment. However, alternative treatment modalities are required because of the low response rates and unsuitability of molecular agents in real practice. In various treatment modalities, mostly in Asia, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) has been applied to advanced HCC with a view to increasing the therapeutic efficacy. HAIC provides direct drug delivery into the tumor feeding vessels and also minimizes systemic toxicities through a greater first-pass effect in the liver. However, the sample sizes of studies on HAIC have been small and large randomized trials are still lacking. In this article, we describe the treatment efficacy of HAIC for advanced stage HCC and discuss future therapeutic possibilities.
Core tip: Sorafenib is the standard of treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the suitability of sorafenib is limited by its low response rates, and unsuitability for patients with poor liver function. Therefore, other treatment modalities are required. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) has the advantages of delivering high levels of chemotherapeutic drugs directly into tumor-associated hepatic arterial branches and repeat injections are relatively simple to carry out. Thus the local therapeutic level is increased and systemic adverse effects are decreased. In the future, HAIC may be a promising treatment strategy for the management of advanced HCC.
Citation: Song MJ. Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(13): 3843-3849
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common malignancy and shows high cancer-related mortality worldwide[1]. The incidence of HCC is increasing with the prevalence of major risk factors such as hepatitis B, hepatitis C, alcohol and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Despite surveillance programs in high-risk patients, most patients with HCC are diagnosed at an advanced stage. In limited patients (fewer than 30%), curative treatments, including resection, liver transplantation, or radiofrequency ablation, can be applied[2]. The prognosis of patients with HCC is still poor, and life expectancy is difficult to predict[3]. Furthermore, advanced HCC patients may show heterogeneous clinical features, from single nodules associated with limited portal vein thrombosis, to multiple intrahepatic metastasis associated with extrahepatic spread[4,5].
Sorafenib, the multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was reported to show survival benefits and is the current standard treatment in advanced HCC[6,7]. Sorafenib treatment has shifted the treatment strategy towards molecular targeted therapies for advanced HCC[8]. However, other alternative treatment modalities are required because of low response rates[9] and the unsuitability of molecular agents in real clinical practice.
In other alternative therapies, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) has been applied to advanced stage HCC with a view to increasing the therapeutic efficacy in Japan and Korea. HAIC provides direct delivery of chemotherapeutic agents into tumor feeding vessels and also minimizes systemic toxicities through a greater first-pass effect in the liver[10,11]. Therefore, the purpose of this article was to describe the treatment efficacy of HAIC for advanced stage HCC and discuss future therapeutic possibilities.
HEPATIC ARTERY INFUSION CHEMOTHERAPY
HAIC has been applied to treat advanced HCC patients with tumors that are unresectable, refractory to TACE in single or multiple tumors, the infiltrative type or those with portal vein thrombosis. Theoretically, HAIC shows better efficacy than systemic chemotherapy in advanced HCC because the infusion of the chemotherapeutic agents through the hepatic artery provides direct delivery of high concentrations of drugs to the feeding arteries of HCC. In addition, HAIC also minimizes systemic toxicities through a greater first-pass effect in the liver, reflecting the lower the systemic levels of the drugs compared to systemic infusion. HAIC has been applied in advanced stage HCC with a view to improving the therapeutic indexes in Asia, especially Japan and Korea. However, there is no evidence for a survival benefit of HAIC compared with sorafenib.
Various chemotherapeutic agents based on 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and cisplatin are commonly used and have been investigated for HAIC[12,13]. The mechanisms of the 5-FU are the disruption of RNA synthesis and inhibition of the nucleotide synthetic enzyme thymidylate synthase by active metabolites of 5-FU, including fluorodeoxyuridine monophosphate (FdUMP), fluorodeoxyuridine triphosphate and fluorouridine triphospate[14]. Cisplatin also shows cytotoxic effects and reinforces the effect of 5-FU[8,15]. The mechanism of cisplatin is the direct inhibition of DNA replication and interruption of methionine transport in cancer cells. Furthermore, cisplatin increases levels of intracellular folic acid, which is important for binding of FdUMP, an active metabolite of 5-FU to thymidylate synthetase[16,17]. Therefore, the synergistic effect of cisplatin and 5-FU is the basis of HAIC. While various treatment regimens based on 5-FU and cisplatin have been tried in HAIC[18,19] , few comparative trials for these regimens have been evaluated in advanced HCC patients.
TECHNICAL ASPECT
To evaluate hepatic artery vascularization and patency of portal vein, angiography of the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery were performed through access to the femoral artery. Any reflux of anti-cancer drugs into the gastrointestinal tract, and out of the liver, is a contraindication for HAIC. If necessary, embolization of non-tumor feeding vessels is performed to prevent the reflux of cytotoxic drugs into both uninvolved liver parenchyma and extrahepatic organs, such as the stomach and duodenum. After selection of the tumor feeding artery, the catheter was inserted at the proper hepatic or common hepatic artery and connected to the port system. The port device in a subcutaneous pocket was implanted in the right or left iliac fossa. An infusion pump is necessary to prevent the reflux of chemotherapeutic agents because of implantation of the infusion port in the hepatic artery (Figure 1).
Figure 1 Technical aspects of hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy.
A: Liver dynamic computed tomography showing multinodular hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein thrombosis; B: The embolization of non-target vessels to minimize the flow of chemotherapeutic agents into both uninvolved liver parenchyma and extrahepatic tissues; C: After finding HCC in the feeding artery, the tip of the catheter was located at the proper hepatic or common hepatic artery, chemotherapeutic agents were infused through a pump; D: The proximal end of the catheter was connected to the injection port, which was implanted in a subcutaneous pocket in the right iliac fossa.
TREATMENT OUTCOME
In 1995, Toyoda et al[20] reported the treatment outcome of HAIC in HCC patients with portal vein thrombosis as first. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has long been used as a palliative therapy for unresectable HCC in real clinical practice. However, HAIC has shown favorable outcomes in patients with intractable, advanced HCC compared with TACE (Figures 2 and 3).
Figure 2 Favorable outcome of patient with infiltrative hepatocellular carcinoma treated by hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy.
A: Patient with infiltrative type hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein thrombosis in liver dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed high FDG uptake; B: After hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy, this patient showed no viable HCC except focal portal vein thrombosis in a follow-up liver MRI and positron emission tomography/computed tomography.
Figure 3 Favorable response of patient with multinodular hepatocellular carcinoma treated by hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy.
A: Patient with multinodular type hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein thrombosis in baseline liver dynamic computed tomography (CT); B: After hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy, this patient showed partial necrosis of HCC in a follow-up liver dynamic CT.
Sumie et al[21] reported a comparative study between TACE and HAIC in advanced HCC. The tumor response rates (objective response) of HAIC and TACE groups were 56.3% and 23.8%, respectively. In advanced HCC (TNM stage IV or the tumor maximal diameter > 5 cm), patients tended to show better survival benefits in the HAIC group than in the TACE group, although the overall survival rates between the two groups showed no significant difference. Kim et al[22] also reported that the objective response rate and overall survival in HAIC showed better than TACE group (16.7% vs 0%, P = 0.030, median survival; 193 vs 119 d, P = 0.026, respectively). In terms of adverse events, there were no significant differences between the HAIC and TACE group.
The reported overall response rate was 15%-56% (Table 1). Various combination regimens based on 5-FU and cisplatin have been investigated for HAIC. Hamada et al[23] reported treatment response and survival in HAIC using cisplatin (10 mg) and 5-FU (250 mg). The objective response rate was 17% (CR 1%, PR 16%). The median survival time was 19.5 mo. Lin et al[24] prospectively evaluated the effect of HAIC of the combination of cisplatin, mitomycin C, 5-FU and leucovorin. The treatment regimen consisted of cisplatin (10 mg/m2), mitomycin C (2 mg/m2), leucovorin (15 mg/m2) and 5-FU (100 mg/m2) for 5 consecutive days. The objective response was 28.3% (CR 9.4%, PR 18.9%). The patients with treatment response showed longer survival benefits than the patients without treatment response (24.6 vs 8.7 mo, P < 0.001). Hwang et al[25] evaluated the efficacy of HAIC using the FEM (5-FU, epirubicin, mitomycin C) regimen for advanced HCC. The regimen consisted of 5-FU (330 mg/m2, every week), epirubicin (30 mg/m2, every 4 wk) and mitomycin-C (2.7 mg/m2, every 2 wk). The objective response was 38.9% and the median survival was 8 mo.
Table 1 Treatment response and survival rate of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy.
While various treatment regimens based on 5-FU and cisplatin have been tried in HAIC, few comparative trials for these regimens have been evaluated in advanced HCC patients. Recently, in a prospective study in Korea, Woo et al[26] reported a comparative study between high dose HAIC (5-FU, 500 mg/m2 for 3 consecutive days and cisplatin, 60 mg/m2 on day 2) and low dose HAIC (5-FU, 170 mg/m2 and cisplatin, 7 mg/m2 on days for 5 consecutive days). The objective response rate in the high-dose HAIC showed significantly better efficacy than the low-dose HAIC (16.7% vs 0%, P = 0.024). The median time to progression and overall survival showed more favorable trends in the high-dose HAIC group than in the low-dose HAIC group (145 vs 90 d, P = 0.095, 193 vs 153 d, P = 0.108, respectively). Furthermore, Kim et al[17] showed a better long-term outcome of high dose HAIC. During the follow-up period, overall survival and time to progression were 9.5 and 6.0 mo, respectively. These results seem comparable to the reported outcome of sorafenib.
A randomized phase II trial by Yamashita et al[27] compared the response rates to treatment with interferon combined with HAIC using 5-FU and cisplatin (IFN/FU + CDDP) or 5-FU (IFN/FU) alone. The response rates were 45.6% for the IFN/FU + CDDP group and 24.6% for the IFN/FU group (P = 0.030). Although there was no significant difference in overall survival, the progression free survival showed a better outcome in the IFN/FU+CDDP compared with the IFN/FU group (6.5 mo vs 3.3 mo, respectively, P = 0.0048).
Recently, Nouso et al[28] evaluated the efficacy of HAIC of 5-FU and cisplatin for advanced HCC in a nationwide survey in Japan. The outcome of 476 patients with HCC who underwent HAIC was compared with 1466 patients who did not receive active therapy. In propensity score-matched analysis, median survival in patients with HAIC was longer than that in patients with supportive care (14.0 vs 5.2 mo, respectively, P < 0.0001). Song et al[29] reported a comparative study between sorafenib and HAIC. The median overall survival in the HAIC treatment group was better than that in the sorafenib group (7.1 vs 5.5 mo, P = 0.011). Therefore, HAIC might show a survival benefit as well as reducing the tumor burden. However, most previous reports were retrospective designs. The small sample size and disparity in the treatment response of each institution are limitations.
SAFETY AND COMPLICATION
The complications of using HAIC were reported as fever, jaundice, GI complication (nausea, vomiting or abdominal pain) and complication of port insertion site (infection and thrombosis). The rates of these post embolization complications in HAIC are lower than TACE. In particular, TACE may induce the following adverse effects: hepatic artery injury (stenosis or obstruction) or the development of collaterals, such as periportal or inferior phrenic artery. HAIC could be precluded by these complications. In some cases, hepatic or renal failure was reported. These cases may have been caused by underlying liver disease or disease progression rather than toxicity of HAIC.
CONCLUSION
Molecular targeting agents, including sorafenib, have been used and investigated clinically to treat advanced HCC. Although sorafenib treatment has shifted to the treatment strategy of molecular targeted therapies for advanced HCC, other alternative therapies are required because of the low response rates and unsuitability for patients with poor liver function. These studies may suggest the possibility of HAIC as an alternative therapy for advanced HCC. In particular, the indications for HAIC were unresectable, refractory to TACE in single or multiple tumors, infiltrative type or tumor with portal vein thrombosis. The advantages of HAIC are the delivery high doses of chemotherapeutic drugs directly into the hepatic arterial branches relating with the tumors and the ability to repeat the injection relatively simply, consequently increasing the local therapeutic level and decreasing systemic adverse effects. Therefore, HAIC may be a promising treatment strategy for the management of advanced HCC.
However, the limitations of this study on HAIC are that the sample size was small and that large randomized trials are still lacking. Further study to determination of appropriate treatment regimen in HAIC is important. As sorafenib is the standard treatment for advanced HCC, a comparative study between sorafenib and HAIC is needed. Currently, randomized controlled trials between HAIC and sorafenib in advanced HCC are ongoing to validate the overall clinical benefits of HAIC.
Footnotes
P- Reviewer: Celikbilek M, Morales-Gonzalez JA S- Editor: Qi Y L- Editor: Stewart G E- Editor: Wang CH
El-Serag HB, Mason AC. Rising incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States.N Engl J Med. 1999;340:745-750.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM, Beaugrand M, Lencioni R, Burroughs AK, Christensen E, Pagliaro L, Colombo M, Rodés J. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver.J Hepatol. 2001;35:421-430.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Tandon P, Garcia-Tsao G. Prognostic indicators in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of 72 studies.Liver Int. 2009;29:502-510.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Cheng AL, Kang YK, Chen Z, Tsao CJ, Qin S, Kim JS, Luo R, Feng J, Ye S, Yang TS. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:25-34.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ][Cited by in Crossref: 3854][Cited by in F6Publishing: 4463][Article Influence: 278.9][Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
Park JY, Ahn SH, Yoon YJ, Kim JK, Lee HW, Lee do Y, Chon CY, Moon YM, Han KH. Repetitive short-course hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with high-dose 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.Cancer. 2007;110:129-137.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ][Cited by in Crossref: 78][Cited by in F6Publishing: 90][Article Influence: 5.3][Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
Ishikawa T, Imai M, Kamimura H, Tsuchiya A, Togashi T, Watanabe K, Seki K, Ohta H, Yoshida T, Kamimura T. Improved survival for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis treated by intra-arterial chemotherapy combining etoposide, carboplatin, epirubicin and pharmacokinetic modulating chemotherapy by 5-FU and enteric-coated tegafur/uracil: a pilot study.World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:5465-5470.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Nishiyama M, Yamamoto W, Park JS, Okamoto R, Hanaoka H, Takano H, Saito N, Matsukawa M, Shirasaka T, Kurihara M. Low-dose cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in combination can repress increased gene expression of cellular resistance determinants to themselves.Clin Cancer Res. 1999;5:2620-2628.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Murata K, Shiraki K, Kawakita T, Yamamoto N, Okano H, Nakamura M, Sakai T, Deguchi M, Ohmori S, Nakano T. Low-dose chemotherapy of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil or doxorubicin via implanted fusion port for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.Anticancer Res. 2003;23:1719-1722.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Toyoda H, Nakano S, Kumada T, Takeda I, Sugiyama K, Osada T, Kiriyama S, Suga T, Takahashi M. The efficacy of continuous local arterial infusion of 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin through an implanted reservoir for severe advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.Oncology. 1995;52:295-299.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Kim HY, Kim JD, Bae SH, Park JY, Han KH, Woo HY, Choi JY, Yoon SK, Jang BK, Hwang JS. A comparative study of high-dose hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and transarterial chemoembolization using doxorubicin for intractable, advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.Korean J Hepatol. 2010;16:355-361.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ][Cited by in Crossref: 32][Cited by in F6Publishing: 39][Article Influence: 3.0][Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
Lin CP, Yu HC, Cheng JS, Lai KH, Lo GH, Hsu PI, Lin CK, Chen HH, Lo CC, Liang HL. Clinical effects of intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy with cisplatin, mitomycin C, leucovorin and 5-flourouracil for unresectable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.J Chin Med Assoc. 2004;67:602-610.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Hwang JY, Jang BK, Kwon KM, Chung WJ, Park KS, Cho KB, Hwang JS, Ahn SH, Kim GC, Kim YH. [Efficacy of hepatic arterial infusion therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma using 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and mitomycin-C].Korean J Gastroenterol. 2005;45:118-124.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Yamashita T, Arai K, Sunagozaka H, Ueda T, Terashima T, Yamashita T, Mizukoshi E, Sakai A, Nakamoto Y, Honda M. Randomized, phase II study comparing interferon combined with hepatic arterial infusion of fluorouracil plus cisplatin and fluorouracil alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.Oncology. 2011;81:281-290.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Nouso K, Miyahara K, Uchida D, Kuwaki K, Izumi N, Omata M, Ichida T, Kudo M, Ku Y, Kokudo N. Effect of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy of 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the Nationwide Survey of Primary Liver Cancer in Japan.Br J Cancer. 2013;109:1904-1907.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ][Cited by in Crossref: 120][Cited by in F6Publishing: 113][Article Influence: 10.3][Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
Song DS, Song MJ, Bae SH, Chung WJ, Jang JY, Kim YS, Lee SH, Park JY, Yim HJ, Cho SB. A comparative study between sorafenib and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis.J Gastroenterol. 2014;Epub ahead of print.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ][Cited by in Crossref: 87][Cited by in F6Publishing: 100][Article Influence: 11.1][Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
Sim MK, Kim DY, Park JY, Kim JK, Kim SA, Ahn SH, Chon CY, Moon YM, Won JY, Lee DY. [Efficacy of repeated hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis].Korean J Hepatol. 2005;11:268-274.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]
Lim TY, Cheong JY, Cho SW, Sim SJ, Kim JS, Choi SJ, Choi JW, Kwon HC, Lee KM, Kim JK. [Effect of low dose 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with decompensated cirrhosis].Korean J Hepatol. 2006;12:65-73.
[PubMed] [DOI][Cited in This Article: ]