The diagnostic value of a new tumor marker, c-erbB-2, was studied in the sera of 50 controls, 112 patients with benign diseases and 534 patients with malignancies. Using 15 U/ml as the cutoff, no healthy subjects, patients with benign diseases (excluding liver cirrhosis) or patients with no evidence of disease (45 patients) had serum levels higher than this limit. Abnormal c-erbB-2 levels were found in 38.5% (10 of 26) of the patients with liver cirrhosis and in 26.7% (8 of 30) of those patients with primary liver cancer. No differences were found between the c-erbB-2 serum concentrations in liver cirrhosis or primary liver cancer, suggesting the possible catabolism of this antigen in the liver. Abnormal levels of this antigen were found in 20% (56 of 278) of the patients with breast carcinoma (lo-coregional 7%, metastases 41.5%), in 21 % (6 of 28) of ovarian carcinomas (stage I-II 0%, stage III-IV 42.8%), in 21% (3 of 14) of the colorectal tumors (locoregional 0%, metastases 30%), and in 13.3% (11 of 83) of the patients with lung cancer (locoregional 11.5%, metastases 16%). C-erbB-2 sensitivity in other patients with advanced disease was: 25% (9 of 36) in prostatic cancer; 22% (2 of 9) in gastric cancer, and 11% (1 of 9) in vesical tumors. When patients with liver metastases were excluded, abnormal c-erbB-2 serum levels were only found in breast, lung, prostatic and ovarian carcinomas. C-erbB-2 sensitivity in patients with lung cancer was related to tumor histology with significantly higher values in non-small cell lung cancer (mainly adenocarcinomas) than in patients with small cell lung cancer (p < 0.013). C-erbB-2 concentrations in patients with breast cancer were significantly higher in patients with recurrence (mainly bone and liver metastases) and in patients with progesterone receptor-negative ( < 15 fmol/mg) tumors (p < 0.01). In conclusion, c-erbB-2 is not a specific tumor marker and abnormal serum levels may be found in patients with liver pathologies. Its sensitivity suggests its possible application as a tumor marker in breast, ovarian, lung (mainly adenocarcinomas) and prostatic tumors.

10.1159/000218029

Cite

Citations (71)

Nitroglycerin Improves the Hemodynamic Response to Vasopressin in Portal Hypertension

Hepatology (1982)

Roberto J. Groszmann David Kravetz Jaime Bosch Mortom Glickman Jordi Bruix

This study was designed to investigate whether the addition of nitroglycerin to vasopressin infusion could avoid the deleterious systemic effects of vasopressin while maintaining or enhancing the therapeutic benefits of portal pressure reduction. The effect of nitroglycerin on splanchnic and systemic hemodynamics was studied in cirrhotic patients and portal hypertensive dogs receiving i.v. vasopressin. During i.v vasopressin infusion (0.4 units per min), the cardiac output decreased in patients by 14% from 7.6 +/- 0.9 (mean +/- S.E.) to 6.5 +/- 0.7 liters per min, p less than 0.01, the mean arterial pressure increased 21% from 87 +/- 2 to 105 +/- 4, p less than 0.01, and the heart rate decreased 11% from 79 +/- 3 to 71 +/- 3, p less than 0.01. The administration of sublingual nitroglycerin (0.4 mg) returned all the systemic hemodynamic parameters to baseline values. In dogs, vasopressin infusion significantly reduced portal pressure and flow while increasing portal venous resistance. Nitroglycerin when added to the vasopressin infusion reduced portal venous resistance and further decreased portal pressure in dogs. In patients, vasopressin reduced the hepatic blood flow (44%), wedged hepatic venous pressure (11%), and the gradient between wedged and free hepatic venous pressures (23%). Nitroglycerin administration caused a further reduction of the wedged hepatic venous pressure (23.6 +/- 2.3 to 21.1 +/- 2.0, 11%, p less than 0.01). There was a small but not significant further decline (7%) in the hepatic venous pressure gradient. These results provide evidence that the addition of nitroglycerin to an i.v. infusion of vasopressin reversed the detrimental effects of vasopressin while preserving the beneficial effects.

10.1002/hep.1840020602

Cite

Citations (242)

Brivanib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Who Were Intolerant to Sorafenib or for Whom Sorafenib Failed: Results From the Randomized Phase III BRISK-PS Study

Journal of Clinical Oncology (2013)

Josep M. Llovet Thomas Decaens Jean‐Luc Raoul Éveline Boucher Masatoshi Kudo

Brivanib is a selective dual inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor and fibroblast growth factor receptors implicated in tumorigenesis and angiogenesis in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). An unmet medical need persists for patients with HCC whose tumors do not respond to sorafenib or who cannot tolerate it. This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial assessed brivanib in patients with HCC who had been treated with sorafenib.In all, 395 patients with advanced HCC who progressed on/after or were intolerant to sorafenib were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive brivanib 800 mg orally once per day plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included time to progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) and safety.Median OS was 9.4 months for brivanib and 8.2 months for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95.8% CI, 0.69 to 1.15; P = .3307). Adjusting treatment effect for baseline prognostic factors yielded an OS HR of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.04; P = .1044). Exploratory analyses showed a median time to progression of 4.2 months for brivanib and 2.7 months for placebo (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.76; P < .001), and an mRECIST ORR of 10% for brivanib and 2% for placebo (odds ratio, 5.72). Study discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 61 brivanib patients (23%) and nine placebo patients (7%). The most frequent treatment-related grade 3 to 4 AEs for brivanib included hypertension (17%), fatigue (13%), hyponatremia (11%), and decreased appetite (10%).In patients with HCC who had been treated with sorafenib, brivanib did not significantly improve OS. The observed benefit in the secondary outcomes of TTP and ORR warrants further investigation.

Clinical endpoint

Discontinuation

10.1200/jco.2012.47.3009

Cite

Citations (579)

Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Elsevier eBooks (2019)

Álvaro Díaz‐González Alejandro Forner María Reig Jordi Bruix

Liver Cancer

Liver function

Systemic therapy

10.1016/b978-0-12-801238-3.65714-8