View clinical trials related to Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Filter by:There are two studies included in this protocol. One is an open-label Phase Ⅱ study . The other is a multi-center, double-blind, randomized, phase III study .
This is an open label, multi-center, single arm study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab combined with sitravatinib as adjuvant therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who are at high risk of recurrence after curative resection.
To evaluate local tumor progression rate at 12 months after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation with gradual radiofrequency energy delivery mode with Octopus electrodes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
This is An Open-label, Single-arm Exploratory Study to determine the efficacy and safety of Multifocal Stereotactic Radiotherapy Combined with Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab in the Treatment of Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma
To learn if piflufolastat F18 can be used in imaging scans for patients with breast cancer, HCC, or pancreatic cancer
Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common type of liver cancer, which is the 3rd leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. The incidence is expected to increase as a consequence of chronic liver disease with its multiple risk factors, including chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections, excessive alcohol consumption, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, hemochromatosis, and aflatoxin B1.It is estimated that 70%-90% of patients with HCC have chronic liver disease and cirrhosis, which limits the feasibility of surgical procedures in advanced cases. There are limited treatment options for HCC patients who are ineligible for surgical resection. Locoregional therapies, such as radiofrequency ablation, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), transarterial embolization (TAE), or hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), are primarily recommended, and if one of those fail, then systemic therapy is considered. The 2013 Japan Society of Hepatology HCC Guidelines outlined that the factors influencing treatment decisions should be based on the degree of liver damage (Child-Pugh), presence or absence of extrahepatic spread and macrovascular invasion, the number of tumors, and tumor diameter. Sorafenib has been the standard of care since 2007, when the SHARP trial demonstrated that sorafenib improved median overall survival (OS) compared to placebo in patients who had not received prior systemic therapy (10.7 vs 7.9 months, HR =0.69, P<0.001). In patients from the Asia-Pacific region taking sorafenib, the median improvement in overall survival compared with placebo was 2.3 months (6.5 months vs 4.2 months; HR 0.68; p=0.014). Drug development for hepatocellular carcinoma in the past 10 years has been marked by four failed global phase 3 trials (of sunitinib, brivanib, linifanib, and erlotinib plus sorafenib) that did not show non-inferiority. Sorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor, has been the only systemic therapy demonstrated to extend overall survibility as a firstline treatment, showing a median improvement of 2.8 months compared with placebo (10.7 months vs. 7.9 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.69; p\0.001).6 Inpatients from the Asia-Pacific region taking sorafenib, the median OS (mOS) improvement compared with placebo was 2.3 months (HR 0.68; p = 0.014). The use of other molecularly targeted agents has not demonstrated efficacy via non-inferiority or superiority to sorafenib; thus, until the appearance of lenvatinib, sorafenib has also been widely used as the first-line treatment for uHCC patients in Japan. Recently, regorafenib and Nivolumab were approved as a second-line systemic treatment for patients who do not respond to the first-line treatments. Otherwise, best supportive care or participation in clinical trials is recommended in the second-line setting by treatment guidelines. Chemotherapy in combination with sorafenib (doxorubicin) and radioembolization with SIR Spheres Y-90 resin microspheres failed to demonstrate a survival benefit or showed a worse safety profile compared to sorafenib in the first-line setting. Eventually, the PhaseIII non-inferiority REFLECT trial showed that lenvatinib was non-inferior compared to sorafenib.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver tumour and is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. In Denmark, the incidence of HCC is 5.2 per 100.000 population per year with a dismal prognosis as the median survival time is just 7.7 month. Extrahepatic spread of HCC is common at advanced stages. The majority of patients who develop HCC has cirrhosis of the liver and in these patients, diagnosis can be made non-invasively with characteristic contrast-enhancement pattern on CT and/or MRI. Although contrast-enhanced CT and MRI are considered equal in current guidelines, MRI may have a better sensitivity especially for small lesions. Positron emission tomography (PET) is a molecular imaging technique based on the injection of a very small dose of a tracer substance labelled with a positron emitting radioisotope. PET with the glucose tracer 18F-FDG is an important tool in the staging of many cancer forms, but it is not included in the international guidelines for management of HCC because of suboptimal sensitivity of only up to 50-60 % for HCC situated in the liver. Other PET tracers such as 11C- or 18F-choline have also been investigated in patients with HCC with detection rates of 84% in meta-analysis. In Aarhus, the liver specific tracer 18F-FDGal has been developed. It is a fluorine-18 labelled galactose analogue which in the human body is trapped in hepatocytes by phosphorylation by galactokinase. The first study of the diagnostic use of 18F-FDGal PET/CT in patients suspected for having HCC was published in 2011. The study showed good clinical potential for 18F-FDGal as a tracer for detection of intra- as well as extrahepatic HCC. Both 18F-choline and 18F-FDGal show potential to improve the detection of extrahepatic disease. Some centres use 18F-choline PET/CT in evaluation of patients with HCC, but the reported results for choline PET/CT do not appear superior to 18F-FDGal PET/CT. Furthermore, 18F-FDGal PET/CT also enables evaluation of regional metabolic liver. A head-to-head study of the two tracers is very much warranted. The aim of the present project is to establish the clinical impact and utilization of 18F-FDGal PET in concert with state-of-the art radiological methods (CT and MRI) in patients with HCC. Hypotheses: i) 18F-FDGal PET performs better than 18F-choline for diagnosis and staging of patients with HCC. ii) MRI is expected to perform better than contrast-enhanced CT.
This is a single-arm, open label, multi-center Phase 1 clinical study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of autologous memory lymphocyte therapy (NewishT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma at high risk of recurrence after radical resection.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounts for more than 90% of primary liver cancers and is the sixth most common cancer in the world and ranked third in mortality. Most patients with HCC are diagnosed at an advanced stage and miss the opportunity for radical surgical resection, therefore, most patients receive mainly non-curative local and systemic treatments. Anti-angiogenic drugs with immunotherapy for unresectable HCC has achieved an objective response rate of about 30%. In addition, transarterial hepatic artery chemoembolization and hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy have further increased the objective response rate and depth of tumor regression. For patients with initially unresectable HCC, conversion therapy can result tumor shrinkage and downstaging, ultimately allowing patients the opportunity to undergo resection. However, it raise the question of whether surgical resection of the tumor is still necessary after achieving clinical complete response? On the one hand, some researchers believe that as long as resection is feasible, the tumor must be completely removed. Viable tumor cells may still remain and become a source of tumor recurrence. On the other hand, some researchers believe that patients who achieve clinical complete response after conversion therapy can consider a non-surgical watch and wait strategy. Whether the inactive lesions with clinical complete response still require surgical resection is still inconclusive. This study compared the efficacy and safety of surgical resection versus non-surgical resection in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma patients who achieved clinical complete response after hepatic arterial intervention (chemoembolization/infusion chemotherapy) combined with targeted and immunosuppressive therapy. It is expected to provide reliable clinical evidence support for guiding the treatment of such patients.
The purpose of this multicenter, dual-cohort, prospective real-world study is to explore the efficacy and safety of penpulimab and anlotinib combined with or without TACE, as well as the optimum interval of the combination of penpulimab and anlotinib with TACE in advanced HCC patients.