Stage
Macfarlane [43]
Lee et al. [45]
I
T1 (<5 cm) N0M0
T1 (<5 cm) N0M0
II
T2 (>5 cm) N0M0
T2 (>5 cm) N0M0
III
T3 (local invasion without involvement of the adjacent organs) or mobile positive lymph nodes
T3/T4 (local invasion as shown by histological evidence of adjacent organ invasion, direct tumor extension to IVC, or tumor thrombosis within IVC or renal vein), and/or N1 (positive regional lymph nodes), M0
IV
T4 (invasion of the adjacent organs) or fixed positive lymph nodes or M1 (distant metastases)
T1–4, N0–1, M1 (distant metastases)
Table 23.2
Definitions of TNM
Primary tumor (T)a | |
---|---|
TX | Primary tumor cannot be assessed |
T0 | No evidence of primary tumor |
T1 | Tumor ≤5 cm in greatest dimension, no extra-adrenal invasion |
T2 | Tumor >5 cm, no extra-adrenal invasion |
T3 | Tumor of any size with local invasion, but not invading adjacent organsb |
T4 | Tumor of any size with invasion of adjacent organsb |
Table 23.3
Definitions of TNM
Regional lymph nodes (N)a | |
---|---|
NX | Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed |
N0 | No regional lymph node metastasis |
N1 | Metastases in regional lymph node(s) |
Table 23.4
Definitions of TNM
Distant metastasis (M)a | |
---|---|
M0 | No distant metastasis |
M1 | Distant metastasis |
Table 23.5
Definitions of TNM
Anatomic stage/prognostic groupsa | |||
---|---|---|---|
Stage | T | N | M |
I | T1 | N0 | M0 |
II | T2 | N0 | M0 |
III | T1 | N1 | M0 |
T2 | N1 | M0 | |
T3 | N0 | M0 | |
IV | T3 | N1 | M0 |
T4 | N0 | M0 | |
T4 | N1 | M0 | |
Any T |
In addition to the abovementioned AJCC staging, the European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors (ENSAT) staging system is widely used internationally [47]. The ENSAT staging system is essentially the same as the AJCC system, but this staging proposals tend to limit stage IV patients with distant metastasis. Presence of local invasion, venous tumor thrombosis, or local lymphadenopathy is defined as stage III. Most contemporary studies use this staging system because of superior prognostic stratification compared to AJCC scheme. According to the ENSAT scheme, 5-year disease-specific survival rates are 82 % for stage I disease, 61 % for stage II, 50 % for stage III, and 13 % for stage IV [48].
Proper staging should include CT of the abdomen and chest. Magnetic resonance imaging may increase specificity of CT evaluation. In-phase and out-of-phase T1-weighted imaging may be the most effective noninvasive method to differentiate benign from malignant adrenal masses. Extracapsular tumor invasion, extension into the vena cava, or metastases may be detected more accurately with MRI. Patency of surrounding vessels can often be demonstrated with gadolinium-enhanced sequences or flip-angle techniques [33, 35, 49].
23.7 Treatment
23.7.1 Surgical Resection
Complete surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment for ACC. Open surgical technique for adrenalectomy is recommended. Complete, en bloc, margin-negative resection should be the surgical goal [50, 51]. Lymph node dissection is recommended [52]. Resection of adjacent organs including the spleen, kidney, liver, or pancreas might be required if local invasion is present. Tumor extension into the inferior vena cava is not a contraindication to surgery, and resection can be performed by cardiopulmonary bypass. The role of laparoscopy is controversial; a number of previous studies showed that laparoscopic surgery for ACC increased the risk of local recurrence, peritoneal dissemination, and metastases [53–57], while others reported comparable results with open surgery particularly if the adrenal tumor is small [58]. Open surgery is currently the preferred approach by NCCN guidelines. Completeness of surgical resection is the most important factor that influences outcome [32, 59]. If resection is incomplete, repeated surgery for achieving clear margins should be considered.
Patients who undergo complete repeat resection of local recurrence or distant metastasis also have improved survival. One study showed that patients who had a complete second resection of local or distant recurrence had a median survival of 74 months (5-year survival, 57 %), whereas those with incomplete second resection had a median survival of 16 months (5-year survival, 0 %) [60]. Therefore surgery is still an important treatment in advanced disease when complete resection of recurrence and all metastases is feasible. Selected patients with uncontrollable symptomatic hormone excess might be candidates for debulking surgery.
The benefit of neoadjuvant systemic therapy prior to surgery for locally advanced disease is not known, and this is not considered a standard approach.
23.8 Systemic Therapy
23.8.1 Mitotane
Adrenocortical carcinoma is a rare tumor; thus there are no randomized trials of adjuvant therapy. Up to 80 % of the patients experience disease recurrence after radical resection; this forms the rationale behind adjuvant therapy. The only treatment which showed benefit in terms of disease-free and overall survival in retrospective reports is mitotane. Mitotane is a derivative of the insecticide dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT or rothane). Mitotane is metabolized to an active metabolite which leads to necrosis of the zona fasciculata and reticularis of the adrenal cortex and inhibition of adrenocortical hormone production (blocking adrenal 11-beta-hydroxylation and cholesterol side-chain cleavage) [61]. The largest series of adjuvant mitotane use after surgery compared to surgery alone in 177 patients with ACC from 8 centers in Italy and 47 centers in Germany was published recently. All patients had radical resection with a follow-up of up to 10 years. Forty-seven of the 177 patients received adjuvant mitotane after surgery, while the rest of the patients had surgery alone. Median recurrence-free survival was 42 months in the mitotane group, 10 months in the Italian control group (p < 0.001), and 25 months in the German control group (p = 0.005). Median overall survival was 110 months in the mitotane group, as compared with 52 months in the Italian control group (p = 0.01) and 67 months in the German control group (p = 0.1). Mitotane treatment had a significant advantage for recurrence-free survival in multivariate analysis [62]. The median duration of treatment was 29 months. Twenty-seven patients received 1–3 g/day and 20 patients received 3–5 g/day. Serum levels of mitotane were not assessed. Grade 3 gastrointestinal (nausea or vomiting or elevated serum GGT) or neurologic events (confusion, ataxia, vertigo) were observed in 15 and 20 % of the patients, and all occurred in patients who received the higher-dose mitotane regimen.
Adjuvant mitotane is indicated in patients with high risk of recurrence; however the definition of high risk is not uniform. This controversial topic was discussed in 2008 by an international panel of specialists for the treatment of patients with ACC. On these grounds, the panel unanimously stated that patients with potential residual disease (R1 or Rx resection) and/or Ki67 more than 10 % should be offered adjuvant mitotane, whereas adjuvant therapy was not considered mandatory in patients fulfilling all of the following criteria: stage I or II disease (based on the new European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors), histologically proven R0 resection, and Ki67 expressed in ≤10 % of neoplastic cells. The panel did not express a unanimous position with respect to whether or not patients with stage III ACC with R0 disease after surgery should receive adjuvant therapy in clinical routine [63]. Fassnacht et al. propose tumor size >8 cm and microscopic evidence of invasion of blood vessels or the tumor capsule as additional risk factors which require consideration of adjuvant therapy [4]. NCCN guidelines suggest that mitotane be “considered” (category 3 recommendation, with major disagreement that the intervention is appropriate) for all patients with resected low-grade or high-grade localized ACC regardless of stage or tumor size [52]. Intraoperative tumor spillage or fracture is also suggested by some authors as indication for adjuvant mitotane [64]. A large international randomized trial in 200 patients with low- to intermediate-risk resected disease [stage I to III, microscopically complete (R0) resection, Ki67 < 10 %] is currently ongoing (the ADIUVO trial, NCT00777244).
Response rates to single-agent mitotane in metastasized ACC are between 13 and 31 %. Responses are mostly partial and generally short-lived [65]. However these were early studies, mitotane doses were suboptimal, and response evaluations were not up to date. Median survival was less than 1 year. The main benefit of mitotane in patients with advanced disease is reduction in hypercortisolism symptoms. Mitotane is almost always administered in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy in metastatic disease given the higher response rates.
Side effects including anorexia, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea are common and can limit adjuvant mitotane use as a long-term treatment. Also monitoring for the blood level of mitotane is essential for effective treatment. Mitotane treatment starts 1 g twice daily orally and the dose is escalated up to 10 g/day. Patients metabolize mitotane to different degrees. Optimum dose of the drug can be safely and accurately delivered by monitoring the blood levels. Therefore monitoring of plasma levels of mitotane is required, and a target serum level between 14 and 20 mg/L should be achieved for obtaining optimal response and decreased toxic side effects [66].
Use of mitotane routinely induces atrophy and/or steroidogenic inhibition of the normal adrenal glands, thereby necessitating replacement therapy for cortisol deficiency; the zona glomerulosa is more resistant to the adrenolytic effect of mitotane, and aldosterone deficiency may occur after several months of therapy. Monitoring of blood sodium, potassium, creatinine, and 24-h urinary free cortisol levels is mandatory to assess adrenal insufficiency. Higher doses than the routine maintenance can be needed to avoid adrenal insufficiency. If signs or symptoms of mineralocorticoid deficiency (i.e., postural hypotension, hyperkalemia, etc.) develop, fludrocortisone should be added. Patients should also be monitored for hypogonadism and hypothyroidism. The most common side effects are fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and anorexia, but skin rash, diarrhea, lethargy, sedation, confusion, dizziness, ataxia, gynecomastia, arthralgias, leukopenia, prolonged bleeding time, hematuria, and reversible growth arrest in children also occur. Mitotane has significant drug interactions and can reduce efficacy of some calcium channel antagonists, opioids, benzodiazepines, macrolide-type antibiotics, and many other drugs [67].
There is no evidence for the role of cytotoxic chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of ACC. However, Fassnacht et al. from the German consortium suggest 3 cycles of 90 mg/m2 cisplatin in addition to mitotane in patients with Ki67 >30 % and a large tumor thrombus in the vena cava [68].
23.9 Chemotherapy
Unfortunately recurrences are seen very often in ACC after complete surgical resection with reported rates of 21–91 %. Recurrences are generally treated with chemotherapy–mitotane combination. Response rates of ACC to various chemotherapy agents are reported to be between 10 and 40 %. Chemotherapeutic agents should be used in combination rather than monotherapy as ACCs usually express multidrug resistance gene MDR-1 and develop resistance to chemotherapeutic agents over time.
Regarding the data in the literature, combination of mitotane with etoposide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (m-EDP) and combination of mitotane with streptozotocin [69, 70] are the two reasonable options for the management of patients with advanced ACC [71]. These two promising combinations were compared in the FIRM-ACT trial (which is still the only published randomized trial in ACC), results of which was published in 2013. A total of 304 patients were enrolled. Response rates were 23 % in the EDP–mitotane group versus 9 % in the streptozocin–mitotane group (p < 0.001). The first group had a 5-month progression-free survival compared to 2 months for the streptozotocin–mitotane group (p < 0.001), and overall survival was similar (14.8 vs 12 months, p = 0.07) [72]. Thus, evidence-based first-line treatment of choice is m-EDP in advanced ACC. However, the following comments were made by the investigators of this trial; as median PFS was 5 months and overall survival was 14.8 months, the outcome was actually poor. M-EDP regimen had similar activity in the second-line treatment as it was in the first line in previous studies. Therefore, patients with presumably less aggressive disease (slow tumor growth, long disease-free interval after initial surgery) might receive mitotane monotherapy in the first line followed by combination chemotherapy upon progression. Second, this patient group might also be good candidates for up-front experimental therapies as efficacy of several drugs is diminished once mitotane is used due to increased drug metabolism [68].
Patients receiving mitotane with or without chemotherapy should be assessed at 2-month intervals for tumor progression. Patients who show tumor regression or stable disease should be considered for surgical resection or continuation of therapy. Patients with progressive disease should consider other chemotherapy regimens or be enrolled in a clinical trial. There are currently no established second- or third-line chemotherapy regimens for systemic disease. However, there are phase II trials of gemcitabine plus capecitabine, and this combination has shown response rates as high as 46 %. Treated patients had stable disease for more than 4 months. This combination might represent a promising second-/third-line regimen [73].
Patients should be considered for clinical trials if they have progressive disease with conventional treatment.
23.10 Radiotherapy
Radiotherapy is not routinely used in the treatment of ACC. Formerly ACC was considered radioresistant. However, recent retrospective data showed efficacy of RT both in adjuvant and advanced setting, although no prospective randomized trials exist. Older radiotherapy techniques had higher toxicity because of the proximity of the adrenal bed to radiosensitive organs such as the kidney, liver, spinal cord, and small bowel [74]. Conformal radiotherapy techniques resulted in better efficacy and less toxicity; nevertheless optimal dose delivery may not always be possible in every patient depending on anatomic extension of the tumor.
Adjuvant radiotherapy to tumor bed after surgical excision is a controversial issue in ACC. Fassnacht et al. reported outcomes of 14 patients from the German ACC registry who received adjuvant radiotherapy to the tumor bed with a matched control group of 14 patients who did not. Local recurrence was significantly lower in the radiotherapy group, 14 % compared to 79 % in the control group. Disease-free and overall survival, however, were not significantly different [75]. Sabolch et al. reported 4.7 times higher risk of local recurrence in patients with ACC who did not receive adjuvant RT, again with no difference in DFS or OS [76] compared to those who did. On the other hand, a recent report from MD Anderson Cancer Center showed no benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy compared with surgery alone [77]; however radiotherapy indications were not uniform, and RT was applied in various community centers in this study.
Guidelines proposed by the German ACC consortium recommend adjuvant radiotherapy within 3 months of surgery for patients with microscopically involved or indeterminate resection margins and stage III disease regardless of resection status. In addition, radiotherapy should be considered for tumors greater than 8 cm, with a Ki-67 Index >10 % or invasion of adjacent vasculature [48].
In patients with locally advanced disease not amenable to surgical resection, definitive radiotherapy represents an applicable option [76]. Radiotherapy has been shown to effectively palliate symptomatic bone, brain, and inferior vena cava disease [48, 76, 78].
In conclusion, adjuvant RT in high-risk patients seems to reduce local recurrence rate without any improvement in DFS or OS. Definitive radiotherapy is an option in inoperable cases. Palliative radiotherapy may be used for symptomatic tumoral lesions.
23.11 Radiofrequency Ablation
Percutaneous image-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive and reasonable method for unresectable localized disease. Previous studies have shown that RFA can produce local control of primary ACC particularly for tumors less than 50 mm in size and is anatomically suitable. Among 8 patients with 15 ACC primary or recurrences, RFA resulted in decrease in tumor size or loss of enhancement on imaging in 53 % of patients. Smaller tumors had better response (<50 mm), with up to 67 % demonstrating complete ablation [79]. RFA, alone or in combination with surgical resection, may allow for better disease control in local and isolated systemic recurrences.
RFA is not an effective method of treatment in tumors near blood vessels as the vessels act as a “coolant” while RF ablation. Bleeding, infection, and injury to adjacent organs can occur. With advancing technology and growing experience, RFA has the potential to have a role in treatment options of recurrent and/or unresectable ACC in selected patients [78, 80].
23.12 Targeted Therapies
The results of studies with targeted therapies including antiangiogenic drugs, multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors are largely disappointing. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is highly expressed in ACC; however the combination of erlotinib and gemcitabine in salvage treatment showed limited activity with low response rates [81]. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is upregulated in ACC tumor tissue, but bevacizumab plus capecitabine also failed to show any benefit [82]. Although there are case reports of sustained clinical response with antiangiogenic drugs sunitinib or sorafenib, clinical trials yielded disappointing results [83, 84]. Inefficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in ACC may be secondary to significant interaction with mitotane, given the very long half-life of mitotane. Therefore, clinical trials using these drugs in first-line treatment (before mitotane) should be designed to overcome drug interaction.
Insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R) is overexpressed commonly in ACC. A study of the oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (OSI-906) which targets IGF-1R has shown promising results in phase I, with stabilization of disease seen in five out of 16 patients [85]. An international phase III trial of OSI-906 in patients with ACC has been recently completed and results are awaited (NCT00924989). mTOR is a downstream signaling node for a number of receptor tyrosine kinases including IGF-1R [86]; Fraenkel et al. studied an mTOR inhibitor, everolimus, as a single agent in salvage treatment of ACC, but there was no response. Inhibition of mTOR alone possibly leads to compensatory activation of other pathways, and this may limit the use of everolimus as a single agent for the treatment of ACC [87]. In a recent phase I trial, combination of everolimus with an IGF-1R antibody cixutumumab resulted in disease stabilization in 42 % of the patients for a minimum of 6 months [88]. This type of combinations warrants further clinical research.

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

