| Literature DB >> 34898585 |
Atsushi Sofuni1, Yasutsugu Asai1, Takayoshi Tsuchiya1, Kentaro Ishii1, Reina Tanaka1, Ryosuke Tonozuka1, Mitsuyoshi Honjo1, Shuntaro Mukai1, Kazumasa Nagai1, Kenjiro Yamamoto1, Yukitoshi Matsunami1, Takashi Kurosawa1, Hiroyuki Kojima1, Toshihiro Homma1, Hirohito Minami1, Ryosuke Nakatsubo1, Noriyuki Hirakawa1, Hideaki Miyazawa1, Yuichi Nagakawa2, Akihiko Tsuchida2, Takao Itoi1.
Abstract
High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is a novel advanced therapy for unresectable pancreatic cancer (PC). HIFU therapy with chemotherapy is being promoted as a novel method to control local advancement by tumor ablation. We evaluated the therapeutic effects of HIFU therapy in locally advanced and metastatic PC. PC patients were treated with HIFU as an optional local therapy and systemic chemotherapy. The FEP-BY02 (Yuande Bio-Medical Engineering) HIFU device was used under ultrasound guidance. Of 176 PC patients, 89 cases were Stage III and 87 were Stage IV. The rate of complete tumor ablation was 90.3%, while that of symptom relief was 66.7%. The effectiveness on the primary lesions were as follows: complete response (CR): n = 0, partial response (PR): n = 21, stable disease (SD): n = 106, and progressive disease (PD): n = 49; the primary disease control rate was 72.2%. Eight patients underwent surgery. The median survival time (MST) after diagnosis for HIFU with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone (100 patients in our hospital) was 648 vs. 288 days (p < 0.001). Compared with chemotherapy alone, the combination of HIFU therapy and chemotherapy demonstrated significant prolongation of prognosis. This study suggests that HIFU therapy has the potential to be a novel combination therapy for unresectable PC.Entities:
Keywords: combination therapy; high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU); pancreatic cancer; tumor ablation
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34898585 PMCID: PMC8628685 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol28060409
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Oncol ISSN: 1198-0052 Impact factor: 3.677
General data of using HIFU and chemotherapy.
| Total | Stage III | Stage IV | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of treatment cases | 332 | 158 | 174 | N/A |
| Number of new cases | 176 | 89 | 87 | N/A |
| Number of only one time of treatment cases | 93 | 44 | 49 | |
| Number of repeated treatment cases | 83 | 45 | 38 | |
| Mean number of repeated treatments | 2.94 (2–12) | 3.01 (2–12) | 3.32 (2–9) | |
| Mean treatment sessions (times) | 2.0 (1–5) | 2.2 (1–5) | 1.9 (1–4) | |
| Mean total treatment time (min) | 89.4 (15–600) | 96.3 (15–280) | 82.2 (15–600) | |
| Mean total number of irradiation (shots/1 session) | 1709.6 (280–6420) | 1905 (280–6420) | 1510 (280–4104) | |
| Rate of given anesthesia (sedation) (%) | 0 (0/176) | 0 (0/89) | 0 (0/87) | N/A |
| Rate of given pain-killer (%) | 0.6 (1/176) | 0 (0/89) | 1.1 (1/87) | |
| Adverse event (%) | 2.8 (5/176) | 2.2 (2 */89) | 3.4 (3 **/87) |
* Pseudocyst, Skin burn (mild), ** Pseudocyst, Pancreatitis, Gastric ulcer (mild), # p < 0.05.
Therapeutic effect data of HIFU treatment.
| Total | Stage III | Stage IV | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean tumor size; before therapy | 33.3 (±10.9) | 33.0 (±10.2) | 33.5 (±11.6) | |
| after therapy | 33.5 (±11.3) | 33.5 (±11.3) | 34.0 (±12.2) | |
| The rate of complete tumor ablation (%) | 90.3 | 92.1 | 88.5 | |
| The rate of symptom relief effect (%) | 66.7 | 64.4 | 44.9 | |
| Rate of no worsening change of CA19-9 level (%) | 48.1 | 63.2 | 34.9 | |
| The effectiveness of primary lesion (CR/PR/SD/PD) | 0/21/106/49 | 0/12/60/17 | 0/9/46/32 | N/A |
| Primary disease control rate (DCR) (%) | 72.2 | 80.9 | 63.2 | |
| Therapy after HIFU | 8/149/1/0/4/22 | 7/74/0/0/1/12 | 1/75/1/0/3/10 | N/A |
* p < 0.05.
Figure 1A case with a better prognosis after HIFU therapy: The patient was an 83-year-old woman with pancreatic body cancer 20 mm in size. (a) B-mode ultrasonography (US) (pre HIFU); the pancreatic body tumor showed hypoechogenicity in B-mode US. (b) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) (pre HIFU); the tumor showed isovascular on CEUS. (c) Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) (pre HIFU); the tumor showed low-density area in CECT. (d) B-mode US (post HIFU); after one session of HIFU therapy, the tumor showed echogenic changes in B-mode US. (e) CEUS (post HIFU); the tumor showed hypovascular changes on CEUS. (f) CECT (post HIFU); it showed a low-density area with no contrast effect, and complete coagulative necrosis was observed. Thereafter, she survived for 2 years without active treatment.
Figure 2Survival curve after diagnosis of PC: MST after diagnosis of PC in the H and C Groups were 648 vs. 288 days (21.3 vs. 9.5 months), respectively. The MST of the H Group was significantly longer than that of the C Group.
Figure 3Survival curve after diagnosis of PC in Stratified Analysis 1: stratified analysis matching the conditions with H and C Groups was performed on 176 patients in the H Group (H’ Group) and 89 patients in the C Group (C’ Group). MST after diagnosis of PC in the H ‘and C’ Groups were 648 vs. 310 days (21.3 vs. 10.2 months), respectively. The MST of the H’ Group was significantly longer than that of the C’ Group.
Figure 4Survival curve after diagnosis of PC in Stratified Analysis 2: Considering that the mean treatment time to reach HIFU therapy was 288.5 days and that it was the third-line treatment, we compared 49 patients in C” Group, where the second-line chemotherapy was PD and 164 patients in the H” Group. MST after diagnosis of PC in the H” Group and C” Group was 733 vs. 522 days (24.1 vs. 17.2) months, respectively. The MST of the H” Group was significantly longer than that of the C” Group.
Figure 5Survival curves of Stages III and IV after HIFU therapy in the H Group: A comparison of MST after HIFU therapy in Stages III and IV of the H Group was 372 vs. 220 days (12.2 vs. 7.2 months), respectively. The MST of Stage III was significantly longer than that of Stage IV.
The characteristics of patients (H Group; HIFU with chemotherapy).
| Total (n = 176) | Stage III (n = 89) | Stage IV (n = 87) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (range) | 64 (22–92) | 66 (22–92) | 63 (28–87) |
| Sex (male/female) | 90/86 | 41/48 | 49/38 |
| Performance status (0/1/2/3/4) | 85/87/4/0/0 | 49/39/1/0/0 | 36/48/3/0/0 |
| Location | |||
| (head/uncus/body/ | 49/21/73/ | 28/15/39/ | 21/6/34/ |
| body-tail/tail/others *) | 7/4/22 | 6/1/0 | 1/3/22 |
| Chemotherapy regimen | (n = 165) (%) | (n = 83) (%) | (n = 82) (%) |
| GEM | 90 (54.5) | 52 (62.7) | 38 (46.3) |
| S-1 | 28 (17.0) | 9 (10.8) | 19 (23.2) |
| GEM + S-1 | 20 (12.1) | 11 (13.3) | 9 (11.0) |
| GEM + nab-PTX | 22 (13.3) | 9 (10.8) | 13 (15.9) |
| m FOLFIRINOX | 5 (3.0) | 2 (2.4) | 3 (3.7) |
* Recurrence lesion (including LN).
The characteristics of patients (C Group; chemotherapy alone).
| Total (n = 100) | Stage III (n = 49) | Stage IV (n = 51) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (range) | 63 (45–75) | 63 (45–74) | 64 (46–75) |
| Sex (male/female) | 57/43 | 27/25 | 30/18 |
| Performance status (0/1/2/3/4) | 35/31/23/11/0 | 20/18/11/3/0 | 15/13/12/8/0 |
| Location | |||
| (head/uncus/body/ | 46/7/27/ | 22/3/17/ | 24/4/10/ |
| body-tail/tail/others *) | 5/14/1 | 2/5/0 | 3/9/1 |
| Chemotherapy regimen | (n = 100) (%) | (n = 49) (%) | (n = 51) (%) |
| GEM | 66 (66.0) | 36 (73.5) | 30 (58.8) |
| S-1 | 10 (10.0) | 5 (10.2) | 5 (9.8) |
| GEM + S-1 | 18 (19.0) | 7 (14.3) | 11 (21.5) |
| GEM + erlotinib | 1 (1.0) | 0 (0) | 1 (2.0) |
| GEM + nab-PTX | 4 (4.0) | 1 (2.0) | 3 (5.9) |
| m FOLFIRINOX | 1 (1.0) | 0 (0) | 1 (2.0) |
* recurrence lesion (including LN).
Figure 6FEP-BY 02 Series HIFU Therapy System: the HIFU therapeutic system used was the Model FEP-BY02 HIFU system. The HIFU system includes a computer control, GE ultrasound imaging system, and a treatment table with dual transducers (upper and lower sides). The therapy for PC made use of an upper transducer.
Figure 7The principles of HIFU therapy system: (a,b) This system had the capacity to deliver HIFU from an external source deep into tissues, with a large convergence angle. The aperture diameter was 37 cm, the radius of curvature was 25.5 cm, and the therapeutic transducer had a 251 element array. The configuration (aperture diameter and radius of curvature) is used to reduce the risk of skin burn. The upper transducer was accompanied by a water sac filled with degassed water. The abdomen was pressed by the water sac, and the target was visualized with ultrasonic waves for observation. A total of 251 ultrasonic waves embedded in the transducer were focused on the target through the water sac. (c) Upper transducer; upper transducer with the imaging probe and therapeutic transducer with 251 elements array (frequency: 1.1 MHz). (d) Targeting system: The ultrasound wave converges to a focus point. The multi-element array technology ensures an even acoustic field and an 80° angle of convergence. The focus was an oval shape, and the practical focused volume was approximately 3 × 3 × 10 mm, whereas the effective focused volume was 6 × 6 × 10 mm. The target tumor was treated by shifting every 3 mm while seeing in real-time US.