Wiener klinische Wochenschrift

, Volume 123, Issue 1–2, pp 61–64 | Cite as

Sorafenib in unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma: a case report

  • Matthias Pinter
  • Wolfgang Sieghart
  • Michael Reisegger
  • Friedrich Wrba
  • Markus Peck-Radosavljevic
Case report

Summary

BACKGROUND: The oral multikinase inhibitor sorafenib is the new reference standard for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Only few data are available on the use of sorafenib in cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCC). METHODS: A 70-year-old male patient with histologically confirmed unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma not amenable to any other systemic chemotherapy was treated with sorafenib 400 mg bid. RESULTS: Sorafenib treatment led to a significant improvement of tumor symptoms, liver function parameters, and a decrease in tumor marker levels. The best radiologic tumor response according to RECIST and mRECIST was stable disease (SD) with a time to progression (TTP) of 5.7 months. Side effects of sorafenib (diarrhea, fatigue, and skin toxicity) were low-grade and manageable. Twenty-four months after sorafenib initiation the patient is still alive and presents in a well-preserved physical constitution, performance status 0. Gene analyses revealed that neither B-raf nor K-ras was mutated in our patient. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib was effective and well-tolerated in a patient with advanced cholangiocellular carcinoma. Prospective trials are warranted to evaluate the benefit of sorafenib in unresectable CCC.

Keywords

Cholangiocellular carcinoma Sorafenib Multikinase inhibitor Angiogenesis 

Sorafenib bei nicht-resektablem intrahepatischem cholangiozellulärem Karzinom: ein Fallbericht

Zusammenfassung

HINTERGRUND: Der orale Multikinase-inhibitor Sorafenib ist der neue Referenzstandard zur Therapie des fortgeschrittenen hepatozellulären Karzinoms. Bisher gibt es kaum Daten zur Anwendung von Sorafenib beim cholangiozellulären Karzinom (CCC). METHODEN: Ein 70-jähriger männlicher Patient mit histologisch nachgewiesenem inoperablem intrahepatischem CCC ohne Möglichkeit zur Chemotherapie wurde mit Sorafenib 400 mg zweimal täglich behandelt. ERGEBNISSE: Sorafenib-Therapie führte zu einer signifikanten Verbesserung der Symptome, der Leberfunktion und der Tumormarkerspiegel. Das beste radiologische Ansprechen nach RECIST und mRECIST war eine stabile Erkrankung (SD) mit einer Zeit zur Progression (TTP) von 5,7 Monaten. Nebenwirkungen von Sorafenib (Diarrhoe, Müdigkeit, Hauttoxizität) waren niedrigen Grades und gut behandelbar. 24 Monate nach Sorafenib-Beginn lebt der Patient und findet sich in guter körperlicher Verfassung (ECOG Performance Status 0). Die genetische Untersuchung erbrachte, dass weder B-raf noch K-ras in diesem Patienten mutiert sind. KONKLUSION: Sorafenib war effektiv und wurde von dem Patienten mit fortgeschrittenem cholangiozellulären Karzinom gut toleriert. Prospektive Studien zur Evaluierung der Wirksamkeit von Sorafenib beim inoperablen CCC sind angezeigt.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Olnes MJ, Erlich R. A review and update on cholangiocarcinoma. Oncology 2004;66:167–79CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Jarnagin WR, Fong Y, DeMatteo RP, et al. Staging, resectability, and outcome in 225 patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg 2001;234:507–17; discussion 517–509CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Shaib YH, Davila JA, Henderson L, et al. Endoscopic and surgical therapy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the united states: a population-based study. J Clin Gastroenterol 2007;41:911–7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Tan JC, Coburn NG, Baxter NN, et al. Surgical management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma – a population-based study. Ann Surg Oncol 2008;15:600–8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Goldstein RM, Stone M, Tillery GW, et al. Is liver transplantation indicated for cholangiocarcinoma? Am J Surg 1993;166:768–771; discussion 771–762CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Eckel F, Schmid RM. Chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract carcinoma: a pooled analysis of clinical trials. Br J Cancer 2007;96:896–902CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Valle J, Wasan H, Palmer DH, et al. Cisplatin plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for biliary tract cancer. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1273–81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Carriaga MT, Henson DE. Liver, gallbladder, extrahepatic bile ducts, and pancreas. Cancer 1995;75:171–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V, et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2008;359:378–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Burgmann H, Janata O, Allerberger F, et al. Hospital antibiotic management in Austria – results of the ABS maturity survey of the ABS International group. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2008;120:280–3CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Kierner KA, Gartner V, Bartsch R, et al. Attitudes towards palliative care in primary metastatic cancer: a survey among oncologists. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2010;122:45–9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Schmid K, Oehl N, Wrba F, et al. EGFR/KRAS/BRAF mutations in primary lung adenocarcinomas and corresponding locoregional lymph node metastases. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:4554–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis;30:52–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pinter M, Sieghart W, Graziadei I, et al. Sorafenib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma from mild to advanced stage liver cirrhosis. Oncologist 2009;14:70–6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Llovet JM, Fuster J, Bruix J. The Barcelona approach: diagnosis, staging, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Transpl 2004;10:S115–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Huether A, Hopfner M, Baradari V, et al. Sorafenib alone or as combination therapy for growth control of cholangiocarcinoma. Biochem Pharmacol 2007;73:1308–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. LaRocca RV, Hicks MD, Mull L, et al. Effective palliation of advanced cholangiocarcinoma with sorafenib: a two-patient case report. J Gastrointest Cancer 2007;38:154–6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. El-Khoueiry AB, Rankin C, Lenz HJ, et al. SWOG 0514: a phase II study of sorafenib (BAY 43-9006) as single agent in patients (pts) with unresectable or metastatic gallbladder cancer or cholangiocarcinomas. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:4639:Abstract 4618SGoogle Scholar
  19. Bengala C, Bertolini F, Malavasi N, et al. Sorafenib in patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma: a phase II trial. Br J Cancer 2010;102:68–72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Wilhelm SM, Carter C, Tang L, et al. BAY 43-9006 exhibits broad spectrum oral antitumor activity and targets the RAF/MEK/ERK pathway and receptor tyrosine kinases involved in tumor progression and angiogenesis. Cancer Res 2004;64:7099–109CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Tannapfel A, Sommerer F, Benicke M, et al. Mutations of the BRAF gene in cholangiocarcinoma but not in hepatocellular carcinoma. Gut 2003;52:706–12CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthias Pinter
    • 1
  • Wolfgang Sieghart
    • 1
  • Michael Reisegger
    • 2
  • Friedrich Wrba
    • 3
  • Markus Peck-Radosavljevic
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Gastroenterology & HepatologyAKH & Medical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyAKH & Medical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  3. 3.Department of PathologyAKH & Medical University of ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations