| Literature DB >> 30922248 |
Ying Fan1, Shu Li2, Xiaoyan Ding1,3, Jian Yue1, Jun Jiang1, Hong Zhao1, Rui Hao4, Weiliang Qiu5, Kezhen Liu6, Ying Li7, Shengdian Wang7, Limin Zheng8, Bin Ye2, Kun Meng2, Binghe Xu9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With poor prognosis and limited treatment options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), development of novel therapeutic agents is urgently needed. This single-arm phase I study sought to assess the safety and preliminary efficacy of icaritin in human as a potential oral immunotherapy in addition to the immune-checkpoint inhibitors.Entities:
Keywords: Phase I trial in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma; Small molecule immune modulation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30922248 PMCID: PMC6437929 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5471-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Fig. 3Icaritin blocks the immune-suppression in myeloid cells in vitro. a. Icaritin treatment induced gene expression patterns of M1-type and M2-type macrophages in vitro. The relative copy numbers of M1-type genes (INOS, TNF-α and CXCL10) and M2-type genes (Arg1, Ym1 and Fizz1) were induced by icaritin (2 and 10 μM) and normalized to β-actin. b. Icaritin treatment down-regulates immune MDSCs (M-CSFR expression, a key marker of activated MDSCs). Flow cytometric analysis of M-CSFR in cytokine-induced CB-MDSCs with or without icaritin (2.5 μM, 72 h) treatment with CD14+ and CD15+ sorting. Summary of cell population ratio of CD14+M-CSFR+ and CD15+M-CSFR+ cells in cytokine-induced CB-MDSCs with or without icaritin treatment (*p < 0.05, see additional file for method details)
Baseline characteristics of HCC patients
| Characteristic | Icaritin | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 600 mg bid | 800mg bid | Total | |
| (N = 14) | (N = 6) | ( | |
| Median age, years (range) | 61 (31–74) | 43 (33–73) | 58 (31–74) |
| Male, no.(%) | 12 (85.7) | 5 (83.3) | 17 (85.0) |
| ECOG performance status, no.(%) | |||
| 0 | 2 (14.3) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (10.0) |
| 1 | 11 (78.6) | 6 (100.0) | 17 (85.0) |
| 2 | 1 (7.1) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (5.0) |
| Macroscopic vascular invasion, no.(%) | |||
| Yes | 5 (35.7) | 2 (33.3) | 7 (35.0) |
| No | 9 (64.3) | 4 (66.7) | 13 (65.0) |
| Portal vein tumor thrombus, no.(%) | |||
| Yes | 3 (21.4) | 2 (33.3) | 5 (25.0) |
| No | 11 (78.6) | 4 (66.7) | 15 (75.0) |
| Bulky tumor*, no.(%) | |||
| Yes | 1 (7.1) | 1 (16.7) | 2 (10.0) |
| No | 13 (92.9) | 5 (83.3) | 18(90.0) |
| Extrahepatic metastasis, no.(%) | |||
| Yes | 13 (92.9) | 5 (83.3) | 18 (90.0) |
| No | 1 (7.1) | 1 (16.7) | 2 (10.0) |
| Extrahepatic metastatic site, no.(%) | |||
| Lymph node | 7 (50.0) | 4 (66.7) | 11 (55.0) |
| Lung | 7 (50.0) | 3 (50.0) | 10 (50.0) |
| BCLC stage, no.(%) | |||
| B | 1 (7.1) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (5.0) |
| C | 13 (92.9) | 6 (100.0) | 19 (95.0) |
| Number of tumor sites, no.(%) | |||
| 1 | 2 (14.3) | 1 (16.7) | 3 (15.0) |
| 2 | 6 (42.9) | 1 (16.7) | 7 (35.0) |
| 3 | 3 (21.4) | 2 (33.3) | 5 (25.0) |
| ≥ 4 | 3 (21.4) | 2 (33.3) | 5 (25.0) |
| Hepatitis virus status, no.(%) | |||
| HBV infection | 12(85.7) | 6 (100.0) | 18 (90.0) |
| HCV infection | 1 (7.1) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (5.0) |
| Liver cirrhosis, no.(%) | |||
| Yes | 10 (71.4) | 5 (83.3) | 15 (75.0) |
| No | 4 (28.6) | 1 (16.7) | 5 (25.0) |
| Child-Pugh classification, no.(%) | |||
| A | 13 (92.9) | 5 (83.3) | 18 (90.0) |
| B | 1 (7.1) | 1 (16.7) | 2 (10.0) |
| AFP > ULN (laboratory), no.(%) | 13 (92.9) | 6 (100.0) | 19 (95.0) |
| Previous treatment, no.(%) | |||
| Surgery | 3 (21.4) | 4 (66.7) | 7 (35.0) |
| TACE/RFA | 11 (78.6) | 3 (50.0) | 14 (70.0) |
| Sorafenib or Chemo | 1 (7.1) | 3 (50.0) | 4 (20.0) |
*Bulky tumor: Tumor mass in liver ≥10cm. Abbreviations: ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; BCLC: Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; HBV: Hepatitis B Virus; HCV: Hepatitis C Virus; ULN: Upper Limits of Normal; TACE: Transarterial Chemoembolization; RFA: Radiofrequency Ablation
Incidence of drug-related adverse events
| Drug-related AE# (≥5%) | 600 mg bid (N = 14) | 800mg bid (N = 6) | Total (N = 20) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 1 | Grade2 | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | N (%) | |
| Laboratory abnormality | |||||
| Leukopenia | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3(15.0) |
| Neutropenia | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3(15.0) |
| LDH increased | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1(5.0) |
| Thrombocytopenia | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1(5.0) |
| Skin and subcutaneous tissue disease | |||||
| Rash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1(5.0) |
| Gastrointestinal disorders | |||||
| Constipation | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1(5.0) |
| Diarrhea | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1(5.0) |
| Serious Adverse Event (SAE)* | 600 mg bid | 800 mg bid | Outcome | ||
| Gastrointestinal bleeding | 1 | 1 | Resolved/Death | ||
| Dyspnea | 2 | 0 | Death | ||
| Seroperitoneum | 1 | 0 | Unresolved | ||
| Liver abscess | 1 | 0 | Unresolved | ||
| Cardiac sudden death | 1 | 0 | Death | ||
| Liver function damage aggravated | 0 | 1 | Death | ||
#No grade 3/4 drug-related AEs were observed
*All SAE were judged by the investigators as drug-unrelated
Abbreviation: LDH: lactate dehydrogenase
Fig. 1Icaritin induces anti-cancer activities in advanced HCC patients. a. Plot view of overall survival (OS) of all enrolled 20 (15 were evaluable) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. Patients with star (*) indicate the second line treatment and with baseline refractory progression status after sorafenib or chemo-treatment. b. Icaritin treatment outcome was associated with the dynamic changes of circulating immune cells in advanced HCC patients. Icaritin treatment induced changes of neutrophil percentage were normalized with baseline as 100% (B1, green lines show stable disease (SD) patients with transient decreases in neutrophils). Icaritin treatment induced changes of neutrophil from baseline to D8 were significantly associated with time-to-progression (TTP) (p = 0.0067, B2). Dynamic changes of lymphocyte percentage were normalized to baseline as 100% (B3, green lines show SD patients with transient increases in lymphocytes after icaritin treatment). Icaritin treatment induced lymphocyte changes from baseline to D8 were significantly associated with TTP (p = 0.0337, B4). c. Baseline levels of inflammation and immune cell indices including neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR, C1), inflammation-immune index (SII, C2), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR, C3) and AFP (C4), were associated with OS in HCC. Median values were used as cut-off for survival estimation per the Kaplan-Meier analysis
Fig. 2Icaritin induces durable partial response and immune biomarkers. a. Time course images (MRI and RECIST1.1) of a PR patient demonstrate tumour shrinkage after 8, 16 and 32 weeks of icaritin treatment compared to the baseline image. The CT images show that the retroperitoneal multiple lymph node metastases (not liver tumour lesion; multiple lesion sites are indicated by the arrows in red) were significantly reduced during the time course of icaritin treatment. The red arrows indicate lesions with diameter > 1.5 cm at baseline and week 8 of treatment. After 16 weeks of treatment, target lesions were evaluated as complete response (CR) (with maximum measurable diameter < 0.5 cm) according to RECIST1.1. b. Dynamic changes of AFP biomarkers and cytokine panel (IL-6, IL-8 IL-10, ΤΝF-α, and IFN-γ) in the time course of icaritin treatment. (Note: The time course tumour CT 3D-tomography images may not from identical sections, but they are valid for comparison of the dynamic changes and drug efficacy. a) By selecting the section with the maximum diameter of lesion using the RECIST1.1 global standard, the section location reference was according to the great vessels of the retroperitoneum, especially the large vessels of the retroperitoneum. b) Tumour shrinkage asymmetrically. c) CT section of images of organs may vary from time to time due to breath and other uncontrolled factors of patient)
Fig. 4Schematic mechanism of Icaritin treatment induced anti-cancer and immune-modulation activities via IL-6/JAK2/Stat3-associated protein networking in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). a. Icaritin induced anti-tumour cell proliferation, anti-inflammation and immune modulation activities. b. Simplified sketch for the potential cytokine-mediated network interactions between tumour cells and immune cells in the tumour microenvironment (modified from Dr. Fisher DT et al. Semin Immunol. 2014; 26(1): 38–47. doi:10.1016/j.smim.2014.01.008)