A Phase I Trial of Trametinib in Combination with Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer

Lessons Learned

• The combination of trametinib and sorafenib has an acceptable safety profile, albeit at doses lower than approved for monotherapy.
• Maximum tolerated dose is trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice daily.
• The limited anticancer activity observed in this unselected patient population does not support further exploration of trametinib plus sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BackgroundThe RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway is associated with proliferation and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Preclinical data suggest that paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway may be one of the resistance mechanisms of sorafenib; therefore, we evaluated trametinib plus sorafenib in HCC.MethodsThis was a phase I study with a 3+3 design in patients with treatment‐naïve advanced HCC. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. The secondary objective was clinical efficacy.ResultsA total of 17 patients were treated with three different doses of trametinib and sorafenib. Two patients experienced dose‐limiting toxicity, including grade 4 hypertension and grade 3 elevation of aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/bilirubin over 7 days. Maximum tolerated dose was trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day. The most common grade 3/4 treatment‐related adverse events were elevated AST (37%) and hypertension (24%). Among 11 evaluable patients, 7 (63.6%) had stable disease with no objective response. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.7 and 7.8 months, respectively. Phosphorylated‐ERK was evaluated as a pharmacodynamic marker, and sorafenib plus trametinib inhibited phosphorylated‐ERK up to 98.1% (median: 81.2%) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.ConclusionTrametinib and sorafenib can be safely administered up to trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day with limited anticancer activity in advanced HCC.     

In Vivo Kinematics of Functional Ankle Instability Patients and Lateral Ankle Sprain Copers During Stair Descent

Patients with mechanic ankle instability experience increased tibiotalar and subtalar joint laxity. However, in vivo joint kinematics in functional ankle instability (FAI) patients and lateral ankle sprain (LAS) copers, especially during dynamic activities, are poorly understood. Ten FAI patients, 10 LAS copers, and 10 healthy controls were included in this study. A dual fluoroscopic imaging system was used to analyze the tibiotalar and subtalar joint kinematics during stair descent. Five key poses of stair descent were analyzed. Kinematic data from six degrees of freedom were calculated utilizing a solid modeling software. The range of motion and joint positions in each degree of freedom were compared among the three groups. The tibiotalar joints of FAI patients and LAS copers were significantly more inverted than those of healthy controls during the foot strike (p = 0.016, = 0.264). The subtalar joints of FAI patients were significantly more anteriorly translated (pose 2, p = 0.003, = 0.352; pose 3, p < 0.001, = 0.454; pose 4, p = 0.004, = 0.334), inverted (pose 4, p = 0.027, = 0.234; pose 5,p = 0.034, = 0.221), and externally rotated (pose 4, p = 0.037, = 0.217; pose 5; p = 0.004, = 0.331) than those of healthy controls during the mid‐stance and the heel off. The FAI patients showed excessive tibiotalar inversion and subtalar joint hypermobility during stair descent. Meanwhile, the LAS copers maintained subtalar joint stability, and only showed excessive tibiotalar inversion in foot strike. These data provide insight into the mechanisms behind the development of FAI after initial LAS. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 37:1860–1867, 2019     

Assessment of the reporting of quality and outcome measures in hepatic resections: a call for 90-day reporting in all hepatectomy series

BackgroundThe aim of this paper is to assess the current state of quality and outcomes measures being reported for hepatic resections in the recent literature.MethodsMedline and PubMed databases were searched for English language articles published between 1 January 2002 and 30 April 2013. Two examiners reviewed each article and relevant citations for appropriateness of inclusion, which excluded papers of liver donor hepatic resections, repeat hepatectomies or meta-analyses. Data were extracted and summarized by two examiners for analysis.ResultsFifty-five studies were identified with suitable reporting to assess peri-operative mortality in hepatic resections. In only 35% (19/55) of the studies was the follow-up time explicitly stated, and in 47% (26/55) of studies peri-operative mortality was limited to in-hospital or 30 days. The time period in which complications were captured was not explicitly stated in 19 out of 28 studies. The remaining studies only captured complications within 30 days of the index operation (8/28). There was a paucity of quality literature addressing truly patient-centred outcomes.ConclusionQuality outcomes after a hepatic resection are inconsistently reported in the literature. Quality outcome studies for a hepatectomy should report mortality and morbidity at a minimum of 90 days after surgery.