-
1.
Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers Predictive of Survival Benefit with Lenvatinib in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From the Phase III REFLECT Study.
Finn, RS, Kudo, M, Cheng, AL, Wyrwicz, L, Ngan, RKC, Blanc, JF, Baron, AD, Vogel, A, Ikeda, M, Piscaglia, F, et al
Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. 2021;(17):4848-4858
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
PURPOSE In REFLECT, lenvatinib demonstrated an effect on overall survival (OS) by confirmation of noninferiority to sorafenib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. This analysis assessed correlations between serum or tissue biomarkers and efficacy outcomes from REFLECT. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Serum biomarkers (VEGF, ANG2, FGF19, FGF21, and FGF23) were measured by ELISA. Gene expression in tumor tissues was measured by the nCounter PanCancer Pathways Panel. Pharmacodynamic changes in serum biomarker levels from baseline, and associations of clinical outcomes with baseline biomarker levels, were evaluated. RESULTS Four hundred and seven patients were included in the serum analysis set (lenvatinib n = 279, sorafenib n = 128); 58 patients were included in the gene-expression analysis set (lenvatinib n = 34, sorafenib n = 24). Both treatments were associated with increases in VEGF; only lenvatinib was associated with increases in FGF19 and FGF23 at all time points. Lenvatinib-treated responders had greater increases in FGF19 and FGF23 versus nonresponders at cycle 4, day 1 (FGF19: 55.2% vs. 18.3%, P = 0.014; FGF23: 48.4% vs. 16.4%, P = 0.0022, respectively). Higher baseline VEGF, ANG2, and FGF21 correlated with shorter OS in both treatment groups. OS was longer for lenvatinib than sorafenib [median, 10.9 vs. 6.8 months, respectively; HR, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33-0.85; P-interaction = 0.0397] with higher baseline FGF21. In tumor tissue biomarker analysis, VEGF/FGF-enriched groups showed improved OS with lenvatinib versus the intermediate VEGF/FGF group (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.91; P = 0.0253). CONCLUSIONS Higher baseline levels of VEGF, FGF21, and ANG2 may be prognostic for shorter OS. Higher baseline FGF21 may be predictive for longer OS with lenvatinib compared with sorafenib, but this needs confirmation.
-
2.
A Randomized, Phase III Study of Lenvatinib in Chinese Patients with Radioiodine-Refractory Differentiated Thyroid Cancer.
Zheng, X, Xu, Z, Ji, Q, Ge, M, Shi, F, Qin, J, Wang, F, Chen, G, Zhang, Y, Huang, R, et al
Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. 2021;(20):5502-5509
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
PURPOSE Lenvatinib has shown efficacy in treating radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RR-DTC) in the multinational phase III SELECT study; however, it has not been tested in Chinese patients with RR-DTC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Chinese patients with confirmed RR-DTC (n = 151) were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive lenvatinib 24 mg/day or placebo in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, and key secondary endpoints included objective response rate and safety. Analyses for progression-free survival and objective response rate were conducted using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 and confirmed by independent imaging review. All adverse events were assessed and monitored. RESULTS Progression-free survival was significantly longer with lenvatinib treatment [n = 103; median 23.9 months; 95% confidence interval (CI), 12.9-not estimable] versus placebo (n = 48; median 3.7 months; 95% CI, 1.9-5.6; hazard ratio = 0.16; 95% CI, 0.10-0.26; P < 0.0001). The objective response rate was 69.9% (95% CI, 61.0-78.8) in the lenvatinib arm and 0% (95% CI, 0-0) in the placebo arm. At data cutoff, 60.2% of patients receiving lenvatinib remained on treatment; treatment-emergent adverse events led to lenvatinib discontinuation in 8.7% of patients. Overall, treatment-emergent adverse events of grade ≥3 occurred in 87.4% of patients in the lenvatinib arm, the most common being hypertension (62.1%) and proteinuria (23.3%). CONCLUSIONS Lenvatinib at a starting dose of 24 mg/day significantly improved progression-free survival and objective response rate in Chinese patients with RR-DTC versus placebo. There were no new or unexpected toxicities. Results are consistent with those from SELECT involving patients with RR-DTC.
-
3.
Lenvatinib versus sorafenib for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: patient-reported outcomes from a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.
Vogel, A, Qin, S, Kudo, M, Su, Y, Hudgens, S, Yamashita, T, Yoon, JH, Fartoux, L, Simon, K, López, C, et al
The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology. 2021;(8):649-658
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hepatocellular carcinoma is the third-leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Preservation of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) during treatment is an important therapeutic goal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of treatment with lenvatinib versus sorafenib on HRQOL. METHODS REFLECT was a previously published multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib versus sorafenib as a first-line systemic treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and one or more measurable target lesion per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C categorisation, Child-Pugh class A, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or lower, and adequate organ function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system; stratification factors for treatment allocation included region; macroscopic portal vein invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; ECOG performance status; and bodyweight. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), collected at baseline, on day 1 of each subsequent cycle, and at the end of treatment, were evaluated in post-hoc analyses of secondary and exploratory endpoints in the analysis population, which was the subpopulation of patients with a PRO assessment at baseline. A linear mixed-effects model evaluated change from baseline in PROs, including European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and hepatocellular carcinoma-specific QLQ-HCC18 scales (both secondary endpoints of the REFLECT trial). Time-to-definitive-deterioration analyses were done based on established thresholds for minimum differences for worsening in PROs. Responder analyses explored associations between HRQOL and clinical response. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01761266. FINDINGS Of 954 eligible patients randomly assigned to lenvatinib (n=478) or sorafenib (n=476) between March 14, 2013, and July 30, 2015, 931 patients (n=468 for lenvatinib; n=463 for sorafenib) were included in this analysis. Baseline PRO scores reflected impaired HRQOL and functioning and considerable symptom burden relative to full HRQOL. Differences in overall mean change from baseline estimates in most PRO scales generally favoured the lenvatinib over the sorafenib group, although the differences were not nominally statistically or clinically significant. Patients treated with lenvatinib experienced nominally statistically significant delays in definitive, meaningful deterioration on the QLQ-C30 fatigue (hazard ratio [HR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·69-0·99), pain (0·80, 0·66-0·96), and diarrhoea (0·52, 0·42-0·65) domains versus patients treated with sorafenib. Significant differences in time to definitive deterioration were not observed for other QLQ-C30 domains, and there was no difference in time to definitive deterioration on the global health status/QOL score (0·89, 0·73-1·09). For most PRO scales, differences in overall mean change from baseline estimates favoured responders versus non-responders. Across all scales, HRs for time to definitive deterioration were in favour of responders; median time to definitive deterioration for responders exceeded those for non-responders by a range of 4·8 to 14·6 months. INTERPRETATION HRQOL for patients undergoing treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma is an important therapeutic consideration. The evidence of HRQOL benefits in clinically relevant domains support the use of lenvatinib compared with sorafenib to delay functional deterioration in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme.
-
4.
Correlation of Performance Status and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio with Efficacy in Radioiodine-Refractory Differentiated Thyroid Cancer Treated with Lenvatinib.
Taylor, MH, Takahashi, S, Capdevila, J, Tahara, M, Leboulleux, S, Kiyota, N, Dutcus, CE, Xie, R, Robinson, B, Sherman, S, et al
Thyroid : official journal of the American Thyroid Association. 2021;(8):1226-1234
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Background: Radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RR-DTC) has a low 10-year patient-survival rate and is challenging to treat. Lenvatinib is a multikinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of RR-DTC. This study aims to assess Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as prognostic markers for patients with RR-DTC treated with lenvatinib. Methods: In this retrospective analysis of the Study of (E7080) LEnvatinib in Differentiated Cancer of the Thyroid (SELECT), patients randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib were classified according to baseline ECOG PS (0 or 1) or baseline NLR (≤3 or >3). The effects of baseline ECOG PS and NLR on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) were evaluated. In addition, the effects of baseline ECOG PS on the change in diameter of target lesions and correlations between baseline NLR and the sums of the diameters of target lesions were calculated. Results: Among patients who received lenvatinib, patients with a baseline ECOG PS of 0 had statistically improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI 0.35-0.77]; p = 0.001), OS (HR 0.42 [CI 0.26-0.69]; p = 0.0004), and ORR (odds ratio [OR] 3.51 [CI 2.02-6.10]; p < 0.0001) compared with patients with a baseline ECOG PS of 1. Patients who received lenvatinib with a baseline NLR ≤3 also had improved PFS (HR 0.43 [CI 0.29-0.65]; p < 0.0001) and OS (HR 0.48 [CI 0.29-0.78]; p = 0.0029) versus patients with a baseline NLR >3. Moreover, patients with a baseline NLR ≤3 had a trend toward increased ORR (OR 1.57 [CI 0.94-2.64]; p = 0.08) compared with patients with a baseline NLR >3. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally similar among patients who received lenvatinib, irrespective of patients' ECOG PS at baseline. Conclusion: Lower ECOG PS and NLR may provide prognostic value for improved efficacy in patients with RR-DTC. ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT01321554.
-
5.
Covariate-adjusted analysis of the Phase 3 REFLECT study of lenvatinib versus sorafenib in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.
Briggs, A, Daniele, B, Dick, K, Evans, TRJ, Galle, PR, Hubner, RA, Lopez, C, Siebert, U, Tremblay, G
British journal of cancer. 2020;(12):1754-1759
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the Phase 3 REFLECT trial in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), the multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, lenvatinib, was noninferior to sorafenib in the primary outcome of overall survival. Post-hoc review revealed imbalances in prognostic variables between treatment arms. Here, we re-analyse overall survival data from REFLECT to adjust for the imbalance in covariates. METHODS Univariable and multivariable adjustments were undertaken for a candidate set of covariate values that a physician panel indicated could be prognostically associated with overall survival in uHCC. The values included baseline variables observed pre- and post-randomisation. Univariable analyses were based on a stratified Cox model. The multivariable analysis used a "forwards stepwise" Cox model. RESULTS Univariable analysis identified alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) as the most influential variable. The chosen multivariable Cox model analysis resulted in an estimated adjusted hazard ratio for lenvatinib of 0.814 (95% CI: 0.699-0.948) when only baseline variables were included. Adjusting for post-randomisation treatment variables further increased the estimated superiority of lenvatinib. CONCLUSIONS Covariate adjustment of REFLECT suggests that the original noninferiority trial likely underestimated the true effect of lenvatinib on overall survival due to an imbalance in baseline prognostic covariates and the greater use of post-treatment therapies in the sorafenib arm. TRIAL REGISTRATION Trial number: NCT01761266 (Submitted January 2, 2013).
-
6.
Final Overall Survival Results from a Phase 3 Study to Compare Tivozanib to Sorafenib as Third- or Fourth-line Therapy in Subjects with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.
Pal, SK, Escudier, BJ, Atkins, MB, Hutson, TE, Porta, C, Verzoni, E, Needle, MN, Powers, D, McDermott, DF, Rini, BI
European urology. 2020;(6):783-785
Abstract
Tivozanib is a potent and selective inhibitor of the VEGF receptor. In an open-label, randomized phase 3 trial, we compared tivozanib to sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who had received two or three prior therapies. We have previously reported that the study met its primary endpoint, demonstrating an improvement in progression-free survival with tivozanib versus sorafenib (5.6 mo vs 3.9 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.94; p=0.016). The current report reflects the final assessment of overall survival, showing no difference between treatment with tivozanib and sorafenib (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.75-1.24). Given its activity and distinct tolerability profile, tivozanib represents a treatment option for patients with previously treated mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY We show that tivozanib, a targeted therapy, can delay tumor growth relative to an already approved targeted therapy (sorafenib) in patients with kidney cancer who have received two or three prior treatments. No difference in survival was observed.
-
7.
REFLECT-a phase 3 trial comparing efficacy and safety of lenvatinib to sorafenib for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: an analysis of Japanese subset.
Yamashita, T, Kudo, M, Ikeda, K, Izumi, N, Tateishi, R, Ikeda, M, Aikata, H, Kawaguchi, Y, Wada, Y, Numata, K, et al
Journal of gastroenterology. 2020;(1):113-122
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND A phase 3, multinational, randomized, non-inferiority trial (REFLECT) compared the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib (LEN) and sorafenib (SOR) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). LEN had an effect on overall survival (OS) compared to SOR, statistically confirmed by non-inferiority [OS: median = 13.6 months vs. 12.3 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-1.06], and demonstrated statistically significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and the objective response rate (ORR) in the overall population. The results of a subset analysis that evaluated the efficacy and safety of LEN and SOR in the Japanese population are reported. METHODS The intent-to-treat population enrolled in Japan was analyzed. RESULTS Of 954 patients in the overall population, 168 Japanese patients were assigned to the LEN arm (N = 81) or the SOR arm (N = 87). Median OS was 17.6 months for LEN vs. 17.8 months for SOR (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.62-1.29). LEN showed statistically significant improvements over SOR in PFS (7.2 months vs. 4.6 months) and ORR (29.6% vs. 6.9%). The relative dose intensity of LEN and SOR in the Japanese population was lower than in the overall population. Frequently observed, related adverse events included palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (PPES), hypertension, decreased appetite, and proteinuria in the LEN arm, and PPES, hypertension, diarrhea, and alopecia in the SOR arm. CONCLUSIONS The efficacy and safety of LEN in the Japanese population were similar to those in the overall population of REFLECT. With manageable adverse events, LEN is a new treatment option for Japanese patients with uHCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID ClinicalTrials.gov. No. NCT01761266.
-
8.
Urine protein:creatinine ratio vs 24-hour urine protein for proteinuria management: analysis from the phase 3 REFLECT study of lenvatinib vs sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma.
Evans, TRJ, Kudo, M, Finn, RS, Han, KH, Cheng, AL, Ikeda, M, Kraljevic, S, Ren, M, Dutcus, CE, Piscaglia, F, et al
British journal of cancer. 2019;(3):218-221
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proteinuria monitoring is required in patients receiving lenvatinib, however, current methodology involves burdensome overnight urine collection. METHODS To determine whether the simpler urine protein:creatinine ratio (UPCR) calculated from spot urine samples could be accurately used for proteinuria monitoring in patients receiving lenvatinib, we evaluated the correlation between UPCR and 24-hour urine protein results from the phase 3 REFLECT study. Paired data (323 tests, 154 patients) were analysed. RESULTS Regression analysis showed a statistically significant correlation between UPCR and 24-hour urine protein (R2: 0.75; P < 2 × 10-16). A UPCR cut-off value of 2.4 had 96.9% sensitivity, 82.5% specificity for delineating between grade 2 and 3 proteinuria. Using this UPCR cut-off value to determine the need for further testing could reduce the need for 24-hour urine collection in ~74% of patients. CONCLUSION Incorporation of UPCR into the current algorithm for proteinuria management can enable optimisation of lenvatinib treatment, while minimising patient inconvenience. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT01761266.
-
9.
Impact of baseline characteristics on outcomes of advanced HCC patients treated with sorafenib: a secondary analysis of a phase III study.
Abdel-Rahman, O
Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology. 2018;(5):901-908
Abstract
BACKGROUND The current study aims to investigate the impact of baseline characteristics on the outcomes of sorafenib-treated advanced Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients in the setting of a clinical trial. METHODS This is a secondary analysis of the comparator arm (sorafenib arm) of the NCT00699374 study which is a phase III multicenter study conducted between 2008 and 2010. The univariate probability of overall and progression-free survival was assessed among different patient subsets through Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank testing. Multivariate analysis of factors affecting overall and progression-free survival was then conducted through Cox regression analysis. RESULTS All patients within the comparator (sorafenib) arm were included in the analysis (N = 544 patients). In multivariate analysis, prior hepatectomy (P = 0.028), prior locoregional treatment (P = 0.048), grade 1 ALBI score (P < 0.001), ECOG performance score of 0 (P < 0.001), BMI ≥ 25 (P = 0.026), AFP < 200 (P = 0.001), and no extra-hepatic spread (P = 0.007) were associated with better overall survival. Likewise, in multivariate analysis, non-Asian race (P = 0.004), grade 1 ALBI score (P = 0.001), ECOG performance score of 0 (P = 0.006), and no extra-hepatic spread (P = 0.005) were associated with better progression-free survival. Moreover, development of high-grade hand-foot skin reaction was associated with a statistically significant improvement in overall survival (P = 0.003), which was further confirmed in a multivariate analysis adjusted for other relevant baseline factors (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION Within a cohort of highly selected advanced HCC patients, baseline patient-, liver-, and disease-centered variables play an important role in predicting patient outcomes. This information is important in terms of therapeutic decision-making and patient counseling.
-
10.
Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial.
Kudo, M, Finn, RS, Qin, S, Han, KH, Ikeda, K, Piscaglia, F, Baron, A, Park, JW, Han, G, Jassem, J, et al
Lancet (London, England). 2018;(10126):1163-1173
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND In a phase 2 trial, lenvatinib, an inhibitor of VEGF receptors 1-3, FGF receptors 1-4, PDGF receptor α, RET, and KIT, showed activity in hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to compare overall survival in patients treated with lenvatinib versus sorafenib as a first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS This was an open-label, phase 3, multicentre, non-inferiority trial that recruited patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, who had not received treatment for advanced disease, at 154 sites in 20 countries throughout the Asia-Pacific, European, and North American regions. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system-with region; macroscopic portal vein invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; and bodyweight as stratification factors-to receive oral lenvatinib (12 mg/day for bodyweight ≥60 kg or 8 mg/day for bodyweight <60 kg) or sorafenib 400 mg twice-daily in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured from the date of randomisation until the date of death from any cause. The efficacy analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle, and only patients who received treatment were included in the safety analysis. The non-inferiority margin was set at 1·08. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01761266. FINDINGS Between March 1, 2013 and July 30, 2015, 1492 patients were recruited. 954 eligible patients were randomly assigned to lenvatinib (n=478) or sorafenib (n=476). Median survival time for lenvatinib of 13·6 months (95% CI 12·1-14·9) was non-inferior to sorafenib (12·3 months, 10·4-13·9; hazard ratio 0·92, 95% CI 0·79-1·06), meeting criteria for non-inferiority. The most common any-grade adverse events were hypertension (201 [42%]), diarrhoea (184 [39%]), decreased appetite (162 [34%]), and decreased weight (147 [31%]) for lenvatinib, and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (249 [52%]), diarrhoea (220 [46%]), hypertension (144 [30%]), and decreased appetite (127 [27%]) for sorafenib. INTERPRETATION Lenvatinib was non-inferior to sorafenib in overall survival in untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The safety and tolerability profiles of lenvatinib were consistent with those previously observed. FUNDING Eisai Inc.