Download PDF
Rofo 2021; 193(08): 928-936
DOI: 10.1055/a-1348-1932
Interventional Radiology

Chemosaturation with Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion: Outcome and Safety in Patients with Metastasized Uveal Melanoma

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Cornelia Lieselotte Angelika Dewald
1   Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
,
Jan B. Hinrichs 
1   Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
,
Lena Sophie Becker
1   Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
,
Sabine Maschke
1   Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
,
Timo C. Meine
1   Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
,
Anna Saborowski
2   Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
,
Leon Jonas Schönfeld
2   Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
,
Arndt Vogel
2   Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
,
Martha M. Kirstein
3   1st Department of Medicine, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein Lübeck Campus, Lübeck, Germany
,
Frank K. Wacker
1   Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, MHH, Hannover, Germany
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose Chemosaturation percutaneous hepatic perfusion (CS-PHP) allows selective intrahepatic delivery of high dose cytotoxic melphalan in patients with curatively untreatable liver tumors while limiting systemic toxicity through hemofiltration of the hepatic venous blood. Aim of this study was to investigate the response to therapy, survival and safety of the CS-PHP procedure in patients with liver-dominant metastatic uveal melanoma (UM).

Materials and Methods Overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST1.1). Median overall survival (mOS), median progression-free survival (mPFS) and hepatic progression-free survival (mhPFS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimation. Adverse events were evaluated with Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.

Results Overall, 30 patients were treated with 70 CS-PHP in a salvage setting from October 2014 to January 2019. In total, ORR and DCR were 42.3 % and 80.8 %, respectively. Overall, mOS was 12 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 7–15) months, and both, mPFS and mhPFS were 6 months, respectively (95 % CI 4–10; 95 % CI 4–13). Adverse events (AE) most frequently included significant but transient hematologic toxicities (87 % of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia), less frequent AEs were hepatic injury extending to liver failure (3 %), cardiovascular events including one case of ischemic stroke (3 %).

Conclusion Salvage treatment with CS-PHP is effective in selected patients with UM. The interventional procedure is safe. Serious hepatic and cardiovascular events, although rare, require careful patient selection and should be closely monitored.

Key Points: 

  • CS-PHP is safe for selected patients with liver-dominant metastatic uveal melanoma.

  • CS-PHP resulted in hepatic disease control in 80 % of patients.

  • Hematologic events following CS-PHP are common but manageable.

Citation Format

  • Dewald CL, Hinrichs JB, Becker LS et al. Chemosaturation with Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion: Outcome and Safety in Patients with Metastasized Uveal Melanoma. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2021; 193: 928 – 936

Key words

angiography - chemotherapy - interventional procedures - percutaneous - interventional oncology


Publication History

Received: 21 July 2020

Accepted: 04 January 2021

Article published online:
03 February 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Yang J, Manson DK, Marr BP. et al. Treatment of uveal melanoma: where are we now?. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2018; 10: 175883401875717
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Larkin J, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R. et al. Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Monotherapy in Untreated Melanoma. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 23-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Karydis I, Gangi A, Wheater MJ. et al. Percutaneous hepatic perfusion with melphalan in uveal melanoma: A safe and effective treatment modality in an orphan disease. J Surg Oncol 2018; 117: 1170-1178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Triozzi PL, Singh AD. Adjuvant Therapy of Uveal Melanoma: Current Status. Ocul Oncol Pathol 2015; 1 (01) 54-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Development of Metastatic Disease After Enrollment in the COMS Trials for Treatment of Choroidal Melanoma: Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study Group Report No. 26. Arch Ophthalmol 2005; 123: 1639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Abbott AM, Doepker MP, Kim Y. et al. Hepatic Progression-free and Overall Survival After Regional Therapy to the Liver for Metastatic Melanoma. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 2018; 41: 747-753
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kirstein MM, Marquardt S, Jedicke N. et al. Safety and efficacy of chemosaturation in patients with primary and secondary liver tumors. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2017; 143: 2113-2121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Marquardt S, Kirstein MM, Brüning R. et al. Percutaneous hepatic perfusion (chemosaturation) with melphalan in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: European multicentre study on safety, short-term effects and survival. Eur Radiol 2019; 29: 1882-1892
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hughes MS, Zager J, Faries M. et al. Results of a Randomized Controlled Multicenter Phase III Trial of Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion Compared with Best Available Care for Patients with Melanoma Liver Metastases. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23: 1309-1319
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Meijer TS, Burgmans MC, Fiocco M. et al. Safety of Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion with Melphalan in Patients with Unresectable Liver Metastases from Ocular Melanoma Using the Delcath Systems’ Second-Generation Hemofiltration System: A Prospective Non-randomized Phase II Trial. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2019; 42: 841-852
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Artzner C, Mossakowski O, Hefferman G. et al. Chemosaturation with percutaneous hepatic perfusion of melphalan for liver-dominant metastatic uveal melanoma: a single center experience. Cancer Imaging 2019; 19: 31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Vogl T, Zangos S, Scholtz J. et al. Chemosaturation with Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusions of Melphalan for Hepatic Metastases: Experience from Two European Centers. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2014; 186: 937-944
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Vogel A, Gupta S, Zeile M. et al. Chemosaturation Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion: A Systematic Review. Adv Ther 2016; 33: 2122-2138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Moeslein FM, McAndrew EG, Appling WM. et al. Evaluation of Delcath Systems’ Generation 2 (GEN 2) Melphalan Hemofiltration System in a Porcine Model of Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2014; 37: 763-769
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Schwartz LH, Litière S, de Vries E. et al. RECIST 1.1—Update and clarification: From the RECIST committee. European Journal of Cancer 2016; 62: 132-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Schönfeld L, Hinrichs JB, Marquardt S. et al Chemosaturation with percutaneous hepatic perfusion is effective in patients with ocular melanoma and cholangiocarcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol [Internet] 20. Juni 2020 [zitiert 8. Juli 2020]; Verfügbar unter: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00432-020-03289-5
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Feldman ED, Pingpank JF, Alexander HR. Regional Treatment Options for Patients With Ocular Melanoma Metastatic to the Liver. Ann Surg Oncol 2004; 11: 290-297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Jovanovic P, Mihajlovic M, Djordjevic-Jocic J. et al. Ocular melanoma: an overview of the current status. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2013; 6: 1230-1244
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 S3-Leitlinie zur Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Melanoms, Version 3.2, AWMF, Register-Nummer: 032/024OL 2019.
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Rantala ES, Hernberg M, Kivelä TT. Overall survival after treatment for metastatic uveal melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Melanoma Research 2019; 29: 561-568
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rowcroft A, Loveday BPT, Thomson BNJ. et al. Systematic review of liver directed therapy for uveal melanoma hepatic metastases. HPB 2020; 22: 497-505
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Khoja L, Atenafu EG, Suciu S. et al. Meta-analysis in metastatic uveal melanoma to determine progression free and overall survival benchmarks: an international rare cancers initiative (IRCI) ocular melanoma study. Annals of Oncology 2019; 30: 1370-1380
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Heppt MV, Amaral T, Kähler KC. et al. Combined immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic uveal melanoma: a retrospective, multi-center study. j immunotherapy cancer 2019; 7: 299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar