-
1.
Donafenib Versus Sorafenib in First-Line Treatment of Unresectable or Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Controlled Phase II-III Trial.
Qin, S, Bi, F, Gu, S, Bai, Y, Chen, Z, Wang, Z, Ying, J, Lu, Y, Meng, Z, Pan, H, et al
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2021;(27):3002-3011
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
PURPOSE Donafenib, a novel multikinase inhibitor and a deuterated sorafenib derivative, has shown efficacy in phase Ia and Ib hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) studies. This study compared the efficacy and safety of donafenib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for advanced HCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS This open-label, randomized, parallel-controlled, multicenter phase II-III trial enrolled patients with unresectable or metastatic HCC, a Child-Pugh score ≤ 7, and no prior systemic therapy from 37 sites across China. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral donafenib (0.2 g) or sorafenib (0.4 g) twice daily until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), tested for noninferiority and superiority. Efficacy was primarily assessed in the full analysis set (FAS), and safety was assessed in all treated patients. RESULTS Between March 21, 2016, and April 16, 2018, 668 patients (intention-to-treat) were randomly assigned to donafenib and sorafenib treatment arms; the FAS included 328 and 331 patients, respectively. Median OS was significantly longer with donafenib than sorafenib treatment (FAS; 12.1 v 10.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.831; 95% CI, 0.699 to 0.988; P = .0245); donafenib also exhibited superior OS outcomes versus sorafenib in the intention-to-treat population. The median progression-free survival was 3.7 v 3.6 months (P = .0570). The objective response rate was 4.6% v 2.7% (P = .2448), and the disease control rate was 30.8% v 28.7% (FAS; P = .5532). Drug-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in significantly fewer patients receiving donafenib than sorafenib (125 [38%] v 165 [50%]; P = .0018). CONCLUSION Donafenib showed superiority over sorafenib in improving OS and has favorable safety and tolerability in Chinese patients with advanced HCC, showing promise as a potential first-line monotherapy for these patients.
-
2.
Randomised, multicentre prospective trial of transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) plus sorafenib as compared with TACE alone in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: TACTICS trial.
Kudo, M, Ueshima, K, Ikeda, M, Torimura, T, Tanabe, N, Aikata, H, Izumi, N, Yamasaki, T, Nojiri, S, Hino, K, et al
Gut. 2020;(8):1492-1501
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This trial compared the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) plus sorafenib with TACE alone using a newly established TACE-specific endpoint and pre-treatment of sorafenib before initial TACE. DESIGN Patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were randomised to TACE plus sorafenib (n=80) or TACE alone (n=76). Patients in the combination group received sorafenib 400 mg once daily for 2-3 weeks before TACE, followed by 800 mg once daily during on-demand conventional TACE sessions until time to untreatable (unTACEable) progression (TTUP), defined as untreatable tumour progression, transient deterioration to Child-Pugh C or appearance of vascular invasion/extrahepatic spread. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), which is not a conventional one but defined as TTUP, or time to any cause of death plus overall survival (OS). Multiplicity was adjusted by gatekeeping hierarchical testing. RESULTS Median PFS was significantly longer in the TACE plus sorafenib than in the TACE alone group (25.2 vs 13.5 months; p=0.006). OS was not analysed because only 73.6% of OS events were reached. Median TTUP (26.7 vs 20.6 months; p=0.02) was also significantly longer in the TACE plus sorafenib group. OS at 1 year and 2 years in TACE plus sorafenib group and TACE alone group were 96.2% and 82.7% and 77.2% and 64.6%, respectively. There were no unexpected toxicities. CONCLUSION TACE plus sorafenib significantly improved PFS over TACE alone in patients with unresectable HCC. Adverse events were consistent with those of previous TACE combination trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT01217034.
-
3.
Cost-effectiveness analysis of ramucirumab treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who progressed on sorafenib with α-fetoprotein concentrations of at least 400 ng/ml.
Zheng, H, Qin, Z, Qiu, X, Zhan, M, Wen, F, Xu, T
Journal of medical economics. 2020;(4):347-352
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of ramucirumab versus placebo for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who progressed on sorafenib with α-fetoprotein concentrations (AFP) of at least 400 ng/ml in the United States.Methods: A Markov model was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of ramucirumab. Health outcomes were measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). With TreeAge software, the disease process was modeled as three health states: progression-free survival (PFS), progressive disease (PD), and death. Costs were extracted from the REACH-2 trial, and utility was derived from published literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to compare ramucirumab with placebo. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were developed to examine the robustness of the results.Results: In the base case analysis, ramucirumab therapy had a cost of $55,508.41 and generated 0.54 QALYs, while placebo therapy had a cost of $761.09 and generated 0.47 QALYs, leading to an additional $54,747.32 in costs and 0.07 QALYs. The ICER was $782,104.57 per QALY, which was much higher than the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY. According to sensitivity analyses, the utility of PD in the two groups was the dominant parameter influencing the ICER.Conclusion: Although ramucirumab was associated with prolonged survival for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who progressed on sorafenib treatment with an AFP of at least 400 ng/ml, it is not a cost-effective treatment from a United States payer perspective.
-
4.
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).
-
5.
Cabozantinib exposure-response analyses of efficacy and safety in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.
Nguyen, L, Chapel, S, Tran, BD, Lacy, S
Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. 2019;(6):577-589
Abstract
Cabozantinib, a multi-kinase inhibitor, is approved in the United States and European Union for treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma following prior sorafenib treatment. In the Phase III CELESTIAL trial, hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving cabozantinib showed longer overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) than those receiving placebo. The approved cabozantinib (Cabometyx®) dose is 60 mg once daily with allowable dose modifications to manage adverse events (AE). Time-to-event Cox proportional hazard exposure-response (ER) models were developed to characterize the relationship between predicted cabozantinib exposure and the likelihood of various efficacy and safety endpoints. The ER models were used to predict hazard ratios (HR) for efficacy and safety endpoints for starting doses of 60, 40, or 20 mg daily. Statistically significant relationships between cabozantinib exposure and efficacy and safety endpoints were observed. For efficacy endpoints, predicted HR were lower for OS and PFS at 40 and 60 mg relative to the 20 mg dose: HR for death (OS) are 0.84 (40 mg) and 0.70 (60 mg); HR for disease progression/death (PFS) are 0.73 (40 mg) and 0.62 (60 mg). For safety endpoints, predicted HR were lower for palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (PPE), diarrhea, and hypertension at 20 or 40 mg relative to the 60 mg dose: HR for PPE are 0.31 (20 mg) and 0.66 (40 mg); HR for diarrhea are 0.61 (20 mg) and 0.86 (40 mg); HR for hypertension are 0.46 (20 mg) and 0.76 (40 mg). The rate of dose modifications was predicted to increase in patients with lower cabozantinib apparent clearance. OS and PFS showed the greatest benefit at the 60 mg dose. However, higher cabozantinib exposure was predicted to increase the likelihood of AE and subsequent dose reductions appeared to decrease these risks.
-
6.
Antimicrobial prophylaxis for 1 day versus 3 days in liver cancer surgery: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.
Takayama, T, Aramaki, O, Shibata, T, Oka, M, Itamoto, T, Shimada, M, Isaji, S, Kanematsu, T, Kubo, S, Kusunoki, M, et al
Surgery today. 2019;(10):859-869
Abstract
PURPOSES This study compared the effectiveness of 1-day vs 3-days antibiotic regimen to prevent surgical site infection (SSI) in open liver resection. METHOD We performed a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial in 480 patients at 39 hospitals across Japan (registered as UMIN000002852). Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma scheduled to undergo resection were randomly assigned to receive either a 1-day regimen for antimicrobial prophylaxis, or a 3-day regimen. The primary endpoint was the incidence of SSI. RESULTS Among 480 randomized patients, 232 assigned to the 1-day regimen and 235 to the 3-day regimen were included in the full analysis set. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were well balanced. SSI was diagnosed in 22 patients (9.5%) in the 1-day group vs 23 patients (9.8%) in the 3-day group (difference, - 0.30; 90% CI - 4.80 to 4.19% [95% CI - 5.66% to 5.05%]; one-sided P = 0.001 for non-inferiority), meeting the non-inferiority hypothesis. In both groups, remote site infection (16 [6.9%] vs 22 [9.4%], P ˂ 0.001 for non-inferiority) and drain-related infection (5 [2.2%] vs 4 [1.7%], P ˂ 0.001 for non-inferiority) were comparable. CONCLUSION To prevent SSI in liver cancer surgery, a 1-day regimen of flomoxef sodium is recommended for antimicrobial prophylaxis because of confirming the non-inferiority to longer usage.
-
7.
Sorafenib with or without concurrent transarterial chemoembolization in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: The phase III STAH trial.
Park, JW, Kim, YJ, Kim, DY, Bae, SH, Paik, SW, Lee, YJ, Kim, HY, Lee, HC, Han, SY, Cheong, JY, et al
Journal of hepatology. 2019;(4):684-691
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Sorafenib is first-line standard of care for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), yet it confers limited survival benefit. Therefore, we aimed to compare clinical outcomes of sorafenib combined with concurrent conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) vs. sorafenib alone in patients with advanced HCC. METHODS In this investigator-initiated, multicenter, phase III trial, patients were randomized to receive sorafenib alone (Arm S, n = 169) or in combination with cTACE on demand (Arm C, n = 170). Sorafenib was started within 3 days and cTACE within 7-21 days of randomization. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS For Arms C and S, the median OS was 12.8 vs. 10.8 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91; 90% CI 0.69-1.21; p = 0.290); median time to progression, 5.3 vs. 3.5 months (HR 0.67; 90% CI 0.53-0.85; p = 0.003); median progression-free survival, 5.2 vs. 3.6 months (HR 0.73; 90% CI 0.59-0.91; p = 0.01); and tumor response rate, 60.6% vs. 47.3% (p = 0.005). For Arms C and S, serious (grade ≥3) adverse events occurred in 33.3% vs. 19.8% (p = 0.006) of patients and included increased alanine aminotransferase levels (20.3% vs. 3.6%), hyperbilirubinemia (11.8% vs. 3.0%), ascites (11.8% vs. 4.2%), thrombocytopenia (7.2% vs. 1.2%), anorexia (7.2% vs. 1.2%), and hand-foot skin reaction (10.5% vs. 11.4%). A post hoc subgroup analysis compared OS in Arm C patients (46.4%) receiving ≥2 cTACE sessions to Arm S patients (18.6 vs. 10.8 months; HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.40-0.82; p = 0.006). CONCLUSION Compared with sorafenib alone, sorafenib combined with cTACE did not improve OS in patients with advanced HCC. However, sorafenib combined with cTACE significantly improved time to progression, progression-free survival, and tumor response rate. Sorafenib alone remains the first-line standard of care for patients with advanced HCC. LAY SUMMARY For patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma requiring sorafenib therapy, co-administration with conventional transarterial chemoembolization did not improve overall survival compared to sorafenib alone. Therefore, sorafenib alone remains the first-line standard of care for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Clinical Trial Number: NCT01829035.
-
8.
Benefit-Risk Summary of Regorafenib for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma That Has Progressed on Sorafenib.
Pelosof, L, Lemery, S, Casak, S, Jiang, X, Rodriguez, L, Pierre, V, Bi, Y, Liu, J, Zirkelbach, JF, Patel, A, et al
The oncologist. 2018;(4):496-500
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
UNLABELLED On April 27, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved regorafenib for the treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who had previously been treated with sorafenib. Approval was based on the results of a single, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RESORCE) that demonstrated an improvement in overall survival (OS). Patients were randomly allocated to receive regorafenib160 mg orally once daily or matching placebo for the first 21 days of each 28-day cycle. The trial demonstrated a significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.79, p < .0001) with an estimated median OS of 10.6 months in the regorafenib arm and 7.8 months in the placebo arm. A statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) based on modified RECIST for HCC [Semin Liver Dis 2010;30:52-60] (HR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37-0.56, p < .0001) was also demonstrated; the estimated median PFS was 3.1 and 1.5 months in the regorafenib and placebo arms, respectively. The overall response rate, based on modified RECIST for HCC, was 11% in the regorafenib arm and 4% in the placebo arm. The toxicity profile was consistent with that observed in other indications; the most clinically significant adverse reactions were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, diarrhea, and hypertension. Based on the improvement in survival and acceptable toxicity, a favorable benefit-to-risk evaluation led to approval for treatment of patients with advanced HCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Regorafenib is the first drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma that has progressed on sorafenib and is expected to become a standard of care for these patients.
-
9.
Ramucirumab as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib: Patient-focused outcome results from the randomised phase III REACH study.
Chau, I, Peck-Radosavljevic, M, Borg, C, Malfertheiner, P, Seitz, JF, Park, JO, Ryoo, BY, Yen, CJ, Kudo, M, Poon, R, et al
European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990). 2017;:17-25
Abstract
PURPOSE To report patient-focused outcomes as measured by quality of life (QoL) and performance status (PS) in REACH, a phase III placebo-controlled randomised study, assessing ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who received prior sorafenib. METHODS Eligible patients had advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A, PS 0 or 1 and prior sorafenib. Patients received ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo (1:1) on day 1 of a 2-week cycle. QoL was assessed by FACT Hepatobiliary Symptom Index (FHSI)-8 and EuroQoL (EQ-5D) at baseline; cycles 4, 10, and 16; and end of treatment. PS was assessed at baseline, each cycle, and end of treatment. Deterioration in FHSI-8 was defined as a ≥3-point decrease from baseline and PS deterioration was defined as a change of ≥2. Both intention-to-treat and pre-specified subgroup of patients with baseline serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL were assessed. RESULTS There were 565 patients randomised to ramucirumab and placebo. Compliance with FHSI and EQ-5D was high and similar between groups. In the ITT population, deterioration in FHSI-8, EQ-5D, and PS was similar between ramucirumab and placebo. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, ramucirumab significantly reduced deterioration in FHSI-8 at the end of treatment compared with placebo (P = 0.0381), and there was a trend towards a delay in the deterioration of symptoms in FHSI-8 (HR 0.690; P = 0.054) and PS (HR 0.642; P = 0.057) in favour of ramucirumab. CONCLUSIONS We report one of the most comprehensive data sets of QoL and symptom burden in patients undergoing systemic therapy for advanced HCC. Ramucirumab was associated with no worsening of QoL. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, the significant survival benefit observed in patients treated with ramucirumab was coupled with a trend in patient-focused outcome benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT01140347.
-
10.
HATT: a phase IV, single-arm, open-label study of sorafenib in Taiwanese patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.
Lin, SM, Lu, SN, Chen, PT, Jeng, LB, Chen, SC, Hu, CT, Yang, SS, Le Berre, MA, Liu, X, Mitchell, DY, et al
Hepatology international. 2017;(2):199-208
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sorafenib significantly improves survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This phase IV study assessed sorafenib efficacy/safety in Taiwanese patients with advanced HCC and Child-Pugh A status. METHODS All patients received 400 mg sorafenib BID. Safety, efficacy, sorafenib pharmacokinetics, and Child-Pugh progression were evaluated. A hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) prevention substudy assessed HFSR incidence and grade/severity and time to HFSR in 29 and 34 patients randomized to corticosteroid and noncorticosteroid ointments, respectively, and in 88 nonrandomized patients. RESULTS The 151 patients included 120 (80%) male patients and 81 (54%) with stage IV disease. Mean sorafenib dose was 626 mg/day, and median treatment duration was 4.2 months. Median overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, and time to progression (TTP) were 8.6, 2.7, and 3.8 months, respectively. Disease control and response rates (partial responses only) were 48 and 6.6%, respectively. Median TTP from Child-Pugh A to B/C was 88 days. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 89.4% of patients; none were new or unexpected. The most frequent grade ≥3 drug-related, treatment-emergent AEs were HFSR (13.2%), diarrhea (11.9%), and hypertension (6.6%). Corticosteroid ointment tended to reduce the severity and incidence of all HFSR-associated parameters. Pharmacokinetic exposure was unaltered by Child-Pugh progression. The final pharmacokinetic model predicted 13.1 and 33.8% reductions in sorafenib exposure over 6 and 12 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS There was a trend of longer OS and TTP in Taiwanese patients with advanced HCC compared with patients with advanced HCC in the Asia-Pacific trial. Sorafenib exposure did not correlate with liver function. Reduced pharmacokinetic exposure over time was unrelated to reduced or interrupted dosing.