Transarterial Radioembolization Versus Chemoembolization for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Clinical Trial

Official title:

Transarterial Radioembolization Versus Chemoembolization for the Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT02729506
• Other study ID #: RAC# 2131 134
• Status: Recruiting
• Phase: Phase 4
• First received: February 4, 2016
• Last updated: April 5, 2016
• Start date: January 2016
• Est. completion date: December 2017

Study information

• Verified date: March 2016
• Source: King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Center
• Contact: Mohamed I Al Sebayel, Prof.
• Phone: +966114647272
• Email: msebayel[@]kfshrc.edu.sa
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Health authority: Saudi Arabia: Research Advisory Council
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is a primary liver cancer. It is the 6th most common malignancy and the 3rd killers of all tumors worldwide with an incidence of 626,000 new patients a year. The intermediate stage of HCC is controlled by radiological interventions such as Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) or Radioembolization. Although 90Y radioembolization is increasingly being used in clinical practice, there is no high quality clinical evidence to justify this. To date, no prospective studies have been performed comparing both treatment modalities (TACE vs 90Y) in a randomized setting. This randomized controlled trial is designed to prospectively compare TACE and 90Y for treatment of patients with unresectable (BCLC intermediate stage) HCC. This will be done by recruiting 75 patients in each arm from. Investigators will compare between the two groups the time to progression (TTP) as the primary outcome and also examine time to local progression (TLP) as well as other factors like overall survival, response to therapy, toxicities and adverse events, quality of life and treatment-related costs.

Description:

Study Rationale:

Although 90Y increasingly used in clinical practice, there is no high quality clinical evidence to justify this. Most of the comparison studies are retrospective. Three studies compared TACE with 90Y retrospectively. The first was by Kooby et al in which patients treated with TACE were retrospectively compared to those treated with 90Y suggested that both treatment modalities have similar effectiveness and safety profiles in patients with unresectable HCC. Earlier Carr et al carried out a similar retrospective analysis and concluded that Chemoembolization or Radioembolization appeared to be equivalent regional therapies for patients with unresectable, non-metastatic HCC. More recently Salem et al retrospectively compared 122 HCC patients who received chemo-embolization with 123 patients who received Radioembolization and concluded both patient groups had similar survival times. Radioembolization resulted in longer time-to-progression and less toxicity than chemo-embolization.

A study on down-staging of HCC beyond Milan criteria compare 90Y with TACE of and concluded that 90Y outperforms TACE for down-staging HCC to within transplant criteria.

TACE-DEB is the standardized form TACE with better efficacy and safety profile and will be ideal to use to define the position of 90Y in the of locoregional treatment of HCC.

To date, no prospective studies have been performed comparing both treatment modalities in a randomized setting. This randomized controlled trial is designed to prospectively compare TACE and 90Y for treatment of patients with unresectable (BCLC intermediate stage) HCC.

Known Potential Benefits:

Chemo-embolization is the standard treatment for intermediate HCC with known efficacy and predicted toxicity. The arrival of TAC-DEBs made TACE more efficient, less toxic and more standardized. Y90 Radioembolization is of known efficacy and minimal toxicity base on cohort studies. Head to head comparison has never been conducted.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Recruiting
• Enrollment: 150
• Est. completion date: December 2017
• Est. primary completion date: December 2017
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: Both
• Age group: 18 Years to 80 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients with measurable, locally advanced HCC those are not suitable to have or have failed potentially curable intervention (Radio frequency ablation for small tumor, resection or transplantation).

• The diagnosis of HCC should be established either by cyto/histology; or, by characteristic imaging studies in patients with cirrhosis of the liver and/or chronic viral hepatitis B or C infection.

• Patients must not be less than 18 and not more than 80 and can be either gender.

• Patients must have a performance status of ECOG score equal to or less than 2.

• Child-Pugh's A or Early B, score 8 and above (see table)

• Patients must have adequate organ function as evidenced by:

Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) =1.5 x 109/L Platelet count =50 x 109/L Hg >9 g/d. AST or ALT =5 x ULN Serum creatinine =2 x ULN OR creatinine clearance =50 mL/min (estimated by Cockcroft Gault or measured) Normal mg and K Bleeding diathesis or on Vit. K therapy.

• Patients must fulfill Child-Pugh's Score

• Life expectancy equal to or more than 12 weeks.

• Signed informed consent.

• Sexually active patients, in conjunction with their partner, must practice birth control during, and for 2 months after therapy.

• Female patients at child-bearing age must have negative pregnancy test.

• No known HIV infection.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patients with metastases outside the liver.

• Patients with co-morbid condition that will be aggravated by the investigational drug or by the intervention.

• Patients with severe cardiopulmonary diseases (including history of stable, effort-induced or unstable angina pectoris or myocardiac infarction) and other systemic diseases under poor control.

• Patients with active infection.

• Patients with history of psychiatric disorder.

• Patients with concomitant active secondary malignancies, except for surgically cured carcinoma in situ of the cervix and basal or adequately treated squamous cell carcinoma of the skin. Disease-free of malignancies < 2 years before the study, are not eligible.

• Clinically significant third space fluid accumulation (i.e., ascites requiring paracentesis despite use of diuretics) or pleural effusion that either requires thoracocentesis or is associated with shortness of breath

• Impairment of gastrointestinal function or gastrointestinal disease that may significantly alter the absorption of the drug (e.g., ulcerative disease, uncontrolled nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, malabsorption syndrome, or small bowel resection.

• Concurrent usage of hormonal or chemotherapeutic agents.

• Patients who received surgery, radiotherapy except to bone, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or other investigational drug within 4 weeks before initiating study are not eligible.

• Patients who are pregnant, breast-feeding or not using appropriate birth control during the course of the study.

• Patients with partner of child bearing age who are not willing to use appropriate contraceptives during and 8 week after therapy.

• Non compliance.

• Unwilling to disclose medical information.

Study Design

Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Open Label, Primary Purpose: Treatment

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Carcinoma
• Carcinoma, Hepatocellular
• Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Intervention

Procedure:
• Transarterial Radioembolization
Yttrium-90 radioembolization (90Y) is a relatively new technique involving the trans-arterial administration of glass or resin microspheres loaded with Yttrium-90, a ß-emitting isotope, delivering selective internal radiation to the tumor.
• Transarterial Chemoembolization using drug-eluting beads
TACE is a procedure in which a catheter is introduced into the branches of the hepatic artery supplying the tumor. Embolic material and chemotherapeutic agents are deployed through the catheter directly into the tumor vasculature. This technique potentially enhances the cytotoxic effect by inducing ischemia and retention of the therapeutic agent in the vicinity of the tumor. The drug-eluting beads (DEBs) enable standardization of TACE since DEBs act as both an occluding agent as well as a drug-loaded carrier, achieving local ischemia and cytotoxic death of the tumor with one device.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Saudi Arabia	King Faisal Specilist Hopsital & Researchc Center	Riyadh

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Center

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Saudi Arabia, 

References & Publications (33)

Altman DG, Bland JM. Treatment allocation by minimisation. BMJ. 2005 Apr 9;330(7495):843. Review. — View Citation

Barentsz MW, Vente MA, Lam MG, Smits ML, Nijsen JF, Seinstra BA, Rosenbaum CE, Verkooijen HM, Zonnenberg BA, Van den Bosch MA. Technical solutions to ensure safe yttrium-90 radioembolization in patients with initial extrahepatic deposition of (99m)technet — View Citation

BREEDIS C, YOUNG G. The blood supply of neoplasms in the liver. Am J Pathol. 1954 Sep-Oct;30(5):969-77. — View Citation

Bruix J, Llovet JM. Major achievements in hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet. 2009 Feb 21;373(9664):614-6. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60381-0. — View Citation

Bruix J, Sherman M; American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology. 2011 Mar;53(3):1020-2. doi: 10.1002/hep.24199. — View Citation

Buijs M, Vossen JA, Frangakis C, Hong K, Georgiades CS, Chen Y, Liapi E, Geschwind JF. Nonresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term toxicity in patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization--single-center experience. Radiology. 2008 Oct;249(1 — View Citation

Cammà C, Schepis F, Orlando A, Albanese M, Shahied L, Trevisani F, Andreone P, Craxì A, Cottone M. Transarterial chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Radiology. 2002 Jul;224(1):47-54. — View Citation

Carr BI, Kondragunta V, Buch SC, Branch RA. Therapeutic equivalence in survival for hepatic arterial chemoembolization and yttrium 90 microsphere treatments in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a two-cohort study. Cancer. 2010 Mar 1;116(5):1305-14. d — View Citation

El-Serag HB. Hepatocellular carcinoma: recent trends in the United States. Gastroenterology. 2004 Nov;127(5 Suppl 1):S27-34. Review. — View Citation

Grosso M, Vignali C, Quaretti P, Nicolini A, Melchiorre F, Gallarato G, Bargellini I, Petruzzi P, Massa Saluzzo C, Crespi S, Sarti I. Transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma with drug-eluting microspheres: preliminary results from an — View Citation

Kooby DA, Egnatashvili V, Srinivasan S, Chamsuddin A, Delman KA, Kauh J, Staley CA 3rd, Kim HS. Comparison of yttrium-90 radioembolization and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. J Vasc Inte — View Citation

Lambert B, Mertens J, Sturm EJ, Stienaers S, Defreyne L, D'Asseler Y. 99mTc-labelled macroaggregated albumin (MAA) scintigraphy for planning treatment with 90Y microspheres. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010 Dec;37(12):2328-33. doi: 10.1007/s00259-010-1566 — View Citation

Lammer J, Malagari K, Vogl T, Pilleul F, Denys A, Watkinson A, Pitton M, Sergent G, Pfammatter T, Terraz S, Benhamou Y, Avajon Y, Gruenberger T, Pomoni M, Langenberger H, Schuchmann M, Dumortier J, Mueller C, Chevallier P, Lencioni R; PRECISION V Investig — View Citation

Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis. 2010 Feb;30(1):52-60. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1247132. Epub 2010 Feb 19. Review. — View Citation

Lewandowski RJ, Kulik LM, Riaz A, Senthilnathan S, Mulcahy MF, Ryu RK, Ibrahim SM, Sato KT, Baker T, Miller FH, Omary R, Abecassis M, Salem R. A comparative analysis of transarterial downstaging for hepatocellular carcinoma: chemoembolization versus radio — View Citation

Lewandowski RJ, Mulcahy MF, Kulik LM, Riaz A, Ryu RK, Baker TB, Ibrahim SM, Abecassis MI, Miller FH, Sato KT, Senthilnathan S, Resnick SA, Wang E, Gupta R, Chen R, Newman SB, Chrisman HB, Nemcek AA Jr, Vogelzang RL, Omary RA, Benson AB 3rd, Salem R. Chemo — View Citation

Liapi E, Georgiades CC, Hong K, Geschwind JF. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization: current technique and future promise. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2007 Mar;10(1):2-11. Review. — View Citation

Liapi E, Geschwind JF. Transcatheter and ablative therapeutic approaches for solid malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Mar 10;25(8):978-86. Review. — View Citation

Llovet JM, Bruix J. Systematic review of randomized trials for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: Chemoembolization improves survival. Hepatology. 2003 Feb;37(2):429-42. Review. — View Citation

Llovet JM, Fuster J, Bruix J; Barcelona-Clínic Liver Cancer Group. The Barcelona approach: diagnosis, staging, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Transpl. 2004 Feb;10(2 Suppl 1):S115-20. Review. — View Citation

Llovet JM, Real MI, Montaña X, Planas R, Coll S, Aponte J, Ayuso C, Sala M, Muchart J, Solà R, Rodés J, Bruix J; Barcelona Liver Cancer Group. Arterial embolisation or chemoembolisation versus symptomatic treatment in patients with unresectable hepatocell — View Citation

Lo CM, Ngan H, Tso WK, Liu CL, Lam CM, Poon RT, Fan ST, Wong J. Randomized controlled trial of transarterial lipiodol chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2002 May;35(5):1164-71. — View Citation

Malagari K, Alexopoulou E, Chatzimichail K, Hall B, Koskinas J, Ryan S, Gallardo E, Kelekis A, Gouliamos A, Kelekis D. Transcatheter chemoembolization in the treatment of HCC in patients not eligible for curative treatments: midterm results of doxorubicin — View Citation

Malagari K, Chatzimichael K, Alexopoulou E, Kelekis A, Hall B, Dourakis S, Delis S, Gouliamos A, Kelekis D. Transarterial chemoembolization of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with drug eluting beads: results of an open-label study of 62 patients. Ca — View Citation

Oliveri RS, Wetterslev J, Gluud C. Transarterial (chemo)embolisation for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Mar 16;(3):CD004787. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004787.pub2. Review. — View Citation

Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005 Mar-Apr;55(2):74-108. — View Citation

Poon RT, Tso WK, Pang RW, Ng KK, Woo R, Tai KS, Fan ST. A phase I/II trial of chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using a novel intra-arterial drug-eluting bead. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007 Sep;5(9):1100-8. Epub 2007 Jul 12. — View Citation

Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Kulik L, Wang E, Riaz A, Ryu RK, Sato KT, Gupta R, Nikolaidis P, Miller FH, Yaghmai V, Ibrahim SM, Senthilnathan S, Baker T, Gates VL, Atassi B, Newman S, Memon K, Chen R, Vogelzang RL, Nemcek AA, Resnick SA, Chrisman HB, Carr J, — View Citation

Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Mulcahy MF, Riaz A, Ryu RK, Ibrahim S, Atassi B, Baker T, Gates V, Miller FH, Sato KT, Wang E, Gupta R, Benson AB, Newman SB, Omary RA, Abecassis M, Kulik L. Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using Yttrium-90 microsph — View Citation

Sangro B, Salem R, Kennedy A, Coldwell D, Wasan H. Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a review of the evidence and treatment recommendations. Am J Clin Oncol. 2011 Aug;34(4):422-31. doi: 10.1097/COC.0b013e3181df0a50. Review. — View Citation

Varela M, Real MI, Burrel M, Forner A, Sala M, Brunet M, Ayuso C, Castells L, Montañá X, Llovet JM, Bruix J. Chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma with drug eluting beads: efficacy and doxorubicin pharmacokinetics. J Hepatol. 2007 Mar;46(3):474-81 — View Citation

Vente MA, Wondergem M, van der Tweel I, van den Bosch MA, Zonnenberg BA, Lam MG, van Het Schip AD, Nijsen JF. Yttrium-90 microsphere radioembolization for the treatment of liver malignancies: a structured meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2009 Apr;19(4):951-9. d — View Citation

Wigmore SJ, Redhead DN, Thomson BN, Currie EJ, Parks RW, Madhavan KK, Garden OJ. Postchemoembolisation syndrome--tumour necrosis or hepatocyte injury? Br J Cancer. 2003 Oct 20;89(8):1423-7. — View Citation

* Note: There are 33 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Time to Progression (TTP) is the primary outcome.		12 month	Yes
Secondary	Time to Local Progression (TLP)		12 month	Yes
Secondary	Overall survival		12 month	Yes
Secondary	Overall response to therapy according to mRECIST		12 month	Yes
Secondary	Toxicities and adverse events		12 month	Yes
Secondary	Quality of life		12 month	Yes
Secondary	Treatment-related costs, in terms of cost of therapy and number of hospitalization days.		12 month	Yes