Literature DB >> 27388325

Efficacy of sorafenib in BRAF-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and no response in synchronous BRAF wild type-hepatocellular carcinoma: a case report.

Andrea Casadei Gardini1, Elisa Chiadini2, Luca Faloppi3, Giorgia Marisi2, Angelo Delmonte4, Mario Scartozzi5, Cristian Loretelli3, Alessandro Lucchesi4, Devil Oboldi6, Alessandra Dubini7, Giovanni Luca Frassineti4, Paola Ulivi2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is a multi-targeted kinase inhibitor with a demonstrated activity in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and it is currently used for the treatment of these pathologies. Ongoing clinical trials are studying its activity in other malignancies, such as non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, no biological marker is known to define either the sensitivity or resistance to the drug. CASE
PRESENTATION: Here we report a case of a patient with two synchronous tumors, HCC and NSCLC, with metastases in the contralateral lung and bone. The patient was treated with gemcitabine as first line, with a resulting progressive disease after two months, and then with sorafenib at standard dosage in the second line setting. After 6 months of treatment CT scan showed a partial response in the primary lesion of the lung, complete response of the metastasis in the contralateral lung, and stability of HCC. The patient had progression in the lung, liver and bone after 13 months of therapy. A molecular characterization of NSCLC and HCC lesions was performed, revealing a BRAF exon 11 mutation (G469V) only in NSCLC. We hypothesize that the response observed in NSCLC lesions could be due to the presence of BRAF mutation, and that this alteration could be responsible in determining sorafenib sensitivity.
CONCLUSIONS: Results observed in this case encourage further research on the activity of sorafenib in both HCC and NSCLC, based on the presence of BRAF mutation. This could lead to a selection of HCC patients to be treated with this drug, and could help identify a novel treatment strategy for BRAF-mutated NSCLC patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BRAF; Case report; HCC; NSCLC; Sorafenib

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27388325      PMCID: PMC4937544          DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2463-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Cancer        ISSN: 1471-2407            Impact factor:   4.430


Background

Sorafenib is a multi-targeted kinase inhibitor with proven activity in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) [1, 2]. It was originally discovered as an inhibitor of Raf-1 kinase, but was found to have an expanded target profile with potent activity against other kinases including BRAF, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-1, VEGFR-2, VEGFR-3, platelet derived growth factor (PDGFR)-β, KIT, Flt-3, and RET. It has a broad-spectrum efficacy in human tumor xenograft models including NSCLC [3, 4]. NSCLC seemed an ideal disease in which to further investigate sorafenib based on the frequency of RAS mutations, particularly in adenocarcinomas [5-7]. Several clinical trials have evaluated sorafenib in the treatment of advanced NSCLC alone or in combination with chemotherapy or targeted agents, without reaching consistent results on efficacy [8-11]. Markers of sorafenib efficacy or resistance have yet to be identified [12-15].

Case presentation

We present a case of a 74-year-old man smoker patient with NSCLC with bone metastases (T2NXM1) and HCC (BCLC stage C). The patient had a related liver cirrhosis metabolic syndrome, good liver function (Child Pugh A5), and reported a diabetes mellitus type II in his past medical history. In July 2014 for chest and abdominal pain he performed a CT scan with evidence of lung and liver lesions, and bone metastasis. Lung biopsy performed on primary lung lesion showed pulmonary adenocarcinoma (TTF1 positive and p40 negative) (Fig. 1a-b) and liver biopsy showed HCC (grade 2 Edmondson) (Fig. 1c-d). As the patient was not in good clinical conditions due to grade 2 asthenia, we decided to start with gemcitabine in monochemotherapy in August 2014. After 2 months of chemotherapy a further CT scan showed a disease progression in both the lung and the liver. We decided to initiate treatment with sorafenib with standard schedule (400 mg bid continuously).
Fig. 1

Lung: high power view of aggregate of primary lung adenocarcinoma cells a, with diffuse and intense nuclear staining for Thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1). b. Liver: high power view of HCC, c, with a distinct granular cytoplasmic staining for HepPar-1, d

Lung: high power view of aggregate of primary lung adenocarcinoma cells a, with diffuse and intense nuclear staining for Thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1). b. Liver: high power view of HCC, c, with a distinct granular cytoplasmic staining for HepPar-1, d CT scan before therapy showed that the primary liver lesion measured 97 mm × 98.3 mm (Fig. 2a). The primary lung lesion measured 40.9 mm × 29.3 mm (Fig. 2d) and the metastasis in the contralateral lung measured 27 mm × 25 mm (Fig. 2d). After 20 days we decided to reduce the dose of sorafenib to 400 mg per day for adverse events (hypertension grade 2 and mucositis grade 3). This dose was maintained until progression, without adverse events. CT scan after 2 months showed partial response in both lung lesions and stable disease in the liver and bone lesions. CT scan after 6 months of therapy showed partial response of the primary lung lesion and complete response of the lung metastasis (Fig. 2e). HCC was stable (Fig. 2b). After 13 months of therapy CT scan showed a disease progression in both the lung and the liver (Fig. 2c-f). Due to poor performance status of the patient we decided to treat patient with only best supportive care.
Fig. 2

CT scan confirmed the presence of liver, a and lung lesions, d. CT re-evaluation after 6 months showed stability of HCC, b, a partial response in the right lobe of the lung and a complete response in the left lobe of the lung, e. Disease progression in the lung and liver, c-f

CT scan confirmed the presence of liver, a and lung lesions, d. CT re-evaluation after 6 months showed stability of HCC, b, a partial response in the right lobe of the lung and a complete response in the left lobe of the lung, e. Disease progression in the lung and liver, c-f The pulmonary lesion underwent routine diagnostic molecular characterization for EGFR, KRAS, NRAS, PIK3CA, BRAF, ERBB2, ALK, DDR2, MAP2K1, RET mutations using Myriapod Lung Status (MassARRAY Sequenom). Results revealed an exon 11 point mutation on BRAF gene (G469V). The same analysis was performed on the liver lesion, with no mutations in the different genes. Genomic DNA extraction from both lesions was performed starting from tumor sections composed of about 70 % of tumor cells. Taking into consideration our previous results obtained in HCC patients, in which we have demonstrated that specific polymorphisms of eNOS, VEGFA, VEGFC and HIF-1alpha seem to correlate with response to sorafenib [16-18], we performed the analysis of such polymorphisms on our patient. Results showed an homozygous status for eNOS VNTR (4bb) and HIF-1alpha rs12434438 GG. Both of these polymorphisms were associated with a worse prognosis in our previous studies [16-18]. The molecular determinations performed on the liver lesion (not part of routine molecular diagnostics) and the polymorphism analyses, both part of an ongoing research protocol on liver cancer approved by our Local Ethics Committee, were carried out after obtaining written consent from the patient.

Conclusions

In this case report we showed that BRAF-mutated tumors could be responsive to sorafenib. Results of recent studies have shown an activity of anti-BRAF agents, such as vemurafenib and dabrafenib, in BRAF V600E-mutated NSCLC patients [19, 20]. In a retrospective study performed on BRAF mutated NSCLC patients receiving anti-BRAF treatment outside clinical studies, one patient was treated with sorafenib showing a partial response [21]. Very few data are present in the literature on the role of BRAF non-V600E mutations in determining the type of response to anti-BRAF agents in NSCLC. A case report of a patient with BRAF G469L demonstrated absence of response to vemurafenib [22]. Conversely, another case report of a patient with lung adenocarcinoma harboring BRAF G469R mutation, showed a strong and rapid response to sorafenib [5] for up to 6 months. Moreover, a recent case report demonstrated a strong and durable response to sorafenib in a patient with lung adenocarcinoma carrying an ARAF (p. S214C) mutation [23], suggesting the potential of this drug in treating patients with alterations in this pathway. No clinical studies have evaluated the role of sorafenib in BRAF mutated NSCLC patients, and clinical trials on sorafenib in unselected patients with advanced NSCLC have demonstrated modest activity, with no survival advantage [7, 10]. A phase II study evaluated the activity of sorafenib in an unselected NSCLC case series. In this study, performed on 34 patients, 2 partial responses and 20 stable diseases were observed, without correlation with neither KRAS nor EGFR statuses. However, BRAF status was not determined [24]. We report a case showing efficacy of sorafenib in one NSCLC patient carrying an exon 11 G469V BRAF mutation. The patient, treated with sorafenib for synchronous HCC, showed a good response in lung lesions, carrying the BRAF mutation, whereas no response was observed in the hepatic lesion, which was BRAF wt. Conflicting results are found in the literature on the frequency of BRAF mutation in HCC, as about 20 % of HCC mutated in one Italian study [25], whereas no or a very low mutation rate was observed in other studies [26, 27]. However, no results are reported on the correlation between BRAF mutation and sorafenib response in this pathology. Results of this case report seem to suggest that sorafenib activity could be more evident in lesions carrying a BRAF mutation (lung lesions in this case), with respect to the BRAF wt lesion (hepatic lesion). Although no correlation has been observed between sorafenib and KRAS mutation, the association with BRAF mutation remains to be established. As biochemical assays, performed to demonstrate the activity of the drug on the different components of RAF/MEK/ERK pathway, showed that the higher activity of sorafenib is evident against CRAF and BRAF (both wt and mutant) proteins [28], we hypothesized that sorafenib could be effective in BRAF mutated cells, where the RAF pathway is constitutively activated. With regard to polymorphisms analyses, the results indicated a patient genotype correlated to a worse prognosis, as we previously found [16-18], in accordance with the absence of response observed in this patient’s HCC lesion. In conclusion, our results suggest that sorafenib could be effective in BRAF-mutated tumors. Considering that sorafenib is able to induce clinical response in about 30 % of HCC patients, it could be worth verifying the real frequency of BRAF mutations in this type of cancer, and whether a higher frequency of mutation is related to sorafenib response. In addition, clinical trials that evaluate the efficacy of sorafenib in NSCLC patients carrying BRAF mutations would be highly beneficial.

Abbreviations

HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; RCC, renal cell carcinoma
  25 in total

1.  Effects of metformin on clinical outcome in diabetic patients with advanced HCC receiving sorafenib.

Authors:  Andrea Casadei Gardini; Giorgia Marisi; Emanuela Scarpi; Mario Scartozzi; Luca Faloppi; Nicola Silvestris; Gianluca Masi; Caterina Vivaldi; Oronzo Brunetti; Stefano Tamberi; Francesco Giuseppe Foschi; Emiliano Tamburini; Elena Tenti; Salvatore Ricca Rosellini; Paola Ulivi; Stefano Cascinu; Oriana Nanni; Giovanni Luca Frassineti
Journal:  Expert Opin Pharmacother       Date:  2015-10-29       Impact factor: 3.889

2.  Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Bernard Escudier; Tim Eisen; Walter M Stadler; Cezary Szczylik; Stéphane Oudard; Michael Siebels; Sylvie Negrier; Christine Chevreau; Ewa Solska; Apurva A Desai; Frédéric Rolland; Tomasz Demkow; Thomas E Hutson; Martin Gore; Scott Freeman; Brian Schwartz; Minghua Shan; Ronit Simantov; Ronald M Bukowski
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-01-11       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Evaluation of KRAS mutations, angiogenic biomarkers, and DCE-MRI in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving sorafenib.

Authors:  Ronan J Kelly; Arun Rajan; Jeremy Force; Ariel Lopez-Chavez; Corrine Keen; Liang Cao; Yunkai Yu; Peter Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Mark Raffeld; Liqiang Xi; Seth M Steinberg; John J Wright; Shivaani Kummar; Martin Gutierrez; Giuseppe Giaccone
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 4.  Discovery of a novel Raf kinase inhibitor.

Authors:  J F Lyons; S Wilhelm; B Hibner; G Bollag
Journal:  Endocr Relat Cancer       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 5.678

5.  A double-blind randomized discontinuation phase-II study of sorafenib (BAY 43-9006) in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer patients: eastern cooperative oncology group study E2501.

Authors:  Heather A Wakelee; Ju-Whei Lee; Nasser H Hanna; Anne M Traynor; David P Carbone; Joan H Schiller
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 15.609

6.  VEGF and VEGFR genotyping in the prediction of clinical outcome for HCC patients receiving sorafenib: the ALICE-1 study.

Authors:  Mario Scartozzi; Luca Faloppi; Gianluca Svegliati Baroni; Cristian Loretelli; Fabio Piscaglia; Massimo Iavarone; Pierluigi Toniutto; Giammarco Fava; Samuele De Minicis; Alessandra Mandolesi; Maristella Bianconi; Riccardo Giampieri; Alessandro Granito; Floriana Facchetti; Davide Bitetto; Sara Marinelli; Laura Venerandi; Sara Vavassori; Stefano Gemini; Antonietta D'Errico; Massimo Colombo; Luigi Bolondi; Italo Bearzi; Antonio Benedetti; Stefano Cascinu
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Josep M Llovet; Sergio Ricci; Vincenzo Mazzaferro; Philip Hilgard; Edward Gane; Jean-Frédéric Blanc; Andre Cosme de Oliveira; Armando Santoro; Jean-Luc Raoul; Alejandro Forner; Myron Schwartz; Camillo Porta; Stefan Zeuzem; Luigi Bolondi; Tim F Greten; Peter R Galle; Jean-François Seitz; Ivan Borbath; Dieter Häussinger; Tom Giannaris; Minghua Shan; Marius Moscovici; Dimitris Voliotis; Jordi Bruix
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2008-07-24       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of gemcitabine/cisplatin alone or with sorafenib for the first-line treatment of advanced, nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Luis G Paz-Ares; Bonne Biesma; David Heigener; Joachim von Pawel; Timothy Eisen; Jaafar Bennouna; Li Zhang; Meilin Liao; Yan Sun; Steven Gans; Kostas Syrigos; Etienne Le Marie; Maya Gottfried; Johan Vansteenkiste; Vincente Alberola; Uwe Phillip Strauss; Elaine Montegriffo; Teng Jin Ong; Armando Santoro
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  BRAF and PIK3CA genes are somatically mutated in hepatocellular carcinoma among patients from South Italy.

Authors:  M Colombino; P Sperlongano; F Izzo; F Tatangelo; G Botti; A Lombardi; M Accardo; L Tarantino; I Sordelli; M Agresti; A Abbruzzese; M Caraglia; G Palmieri
Journal:  Cell Death Dis       Date:  2012-01-19       Impact factor: 8.469

10.  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.

Authors:  Scott M Wilhelm; Christopher Carter; Liya Tang; Dean Wilkie; Angela McNabola; Hong Rong; Charles Chen; Xiaomei Zhang; Patrick Vincent; Mark McHugh; Yichen Cao; Jaleel Shujath; Susan Gawlak; Deepa Eveleigh; Bruce Rowley; Li Liu; Lila Adnane; Mark Lynch; Daniel Auclair; Ian Taylor; Rich Gedrich; Andrei Voznesensky; Bernd Riedl; Leonard E Post; Gideon Bollag; Pamela A Trail
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 13.312

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Classifying BRAF alterations in cancer: new rational therapeutic strategies for actionable mutations.

Authors:  Matthew Dankner; April A N Rose; Shivshankari Rajkumar; Peter M Siegel; Ian R Watson
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 9.867

2.  Hybrid Capture-Based Genomic Profiling Identifies BRAF V600 and Non-V600 Alterations in Melanoma Samples Negative by Prior Testing.

Authors:  Lise Boussemart; Annie Nelson; Michael Wong; Jeffrey S Ross; Jeffrey Sosman; Janice Mehnert; Gregory Daniels; Kari Kendra; Siraj Mahamed Ali; Vincent A Miller; Alexa B Schrock
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-01-25

3.  Extraordinary clinical benefit to sequential treatment with targeted therapy and immunotherapy of a BRAF V600E and PD-L1 positive metastatic lung adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Shuyu D Li; Annia Martial; Alexa B Schrock; Jane J Liu
Journal:  Exp Hematol Oncol       Date:  2017-11-06

Review 4.  Predictive and Prognostic Factors in HCC Patients Treated with Sorafenib.

Authors:  Oronzo Brunetti; Antonio Gnoni; Antonella Licchetta; Vito Longo; Angela Calabrese; Antonella Argentiero; Sabina Delcuratolo; Antonio Giovanni Solimando; Andrea Casadei-Gardini; Nicola Silvestris
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2019-10-21       Impact factor: 2.430

Review 5.  BRAF: A Two-Faced Janus.

Authors:  Pasquale Pisapia; Francesco Pepe; Antonino Iaccarino; Roberta Sgariglia; Mariantonia Nacchio; Gianluca Russo; Gianluca Gragnano; Umberto Malapelle; Giancarlo Troncone
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 6.600

6.  Drug repurposing using transcriptome sequencing and virtual drug screening in a patient with glioblastoma.

Authors:  Mohamed E M Saeed; Onat Kadioglu; Henry Johannes Greten; Adem Yildirim; Katharina Mayr; Frederik Wenz; Frank A Giordano; Thomas Efferth
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2020-12-12       Impact factor: 3.850

7.  Immune inflammation indicators and implication for immune modulation strategies in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving sorafenib.

Authors:  Andrea Casadei Gardini; Emanuela Scarpi; Luca Faloppi; Mario Scartozzi; Nicola Silvestris; Daniele Santini; Giorgio de Stefano; Giorgia Marisi; Francesca V Negri; Francesco Giuseppe Foschi; Martina Valgiusti; Giorgio Ercolani; Giovanni Luca Frassineti
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-10-11

Review 8.  Sorafenib Resistance in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The Relevance of Genetic Heterogeneity.

Authors:  Loraine Kay D Cabral; Claudio Tiribelli; Caecilia H C Sukowati
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 6.639

9.  Cell-Free DNA Analysis by Whole-Exome Sequencing for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Pilot Study in Thailand.

Authors:  Pattapon Kunadirek; Natthaya Chuaypen; Piroon Jenjaroenpun; Thidathip Wongsurawat; Nutcha Pinjaroen; Pongserath Sirichindakul; Intawat Nookaew; Pisit Tangkijvanich
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 10.  Genetic Heterogeneity, Therapeutic Hurdle Confronting Sorafenib and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Sara M Atwa; Margarete Odenthal; Hend M El Tayebi
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-08-27       Impact factor: 6.639

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.