-
1.
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.
-
2.
The leukotriene receptor antagonist montelukast in the treatment of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: A proof-of-concept, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Abdallah, MS, Eldeen, AH, Tantawy, SS, Mostafa, TM
European journal of pharmacology. 2021;:174295
Abstract
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is associated with fat accumulation in the liver which can progress into non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). There is no specific treatment strategy for NASH. In this context, this study aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of montelukast in the treatment of patients with NASH. In this randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study, 52 overweight/obese patients with NASH were randomized into group 1 (n = 26) which received montelukast 10 mg tablets once daily and group 2 (n = 26) which received placebo tablets once daily for 12 weeks. The fibro-scan was used to assess liver stiffness as a primary outcome at baseline and 12 weeks post-treatment. Furthermore, patients were assessed for biochemical analysis of liver aminotransferases, metabolic parameters, TNF-α, 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG), liver fibrosis biomarkers including hyaluronic acid (HA) and transforming growth factor beta-1 (TGF-β1). Beck depression inventory questionnaire was used to report depressive symptoms. Data were statistically analyzed by paired and unpaired student's t-test, and Chi-square test. A total number of 44 patients completed the study. The two groups were statistically similar at baseline. After treatment and as compared to baseline data and placebo, montelukast showed a statistically significant improvement in liver stiffness, liver enzymes, metabolic parameters (except LDL-C), TNF-α, 8-OHdG, and liver fibrosis biomarkers (HA and TGF-β1). Furthermore, montelukast was well tolerated and didn't provoke depression. In this proof-of-concept study, treatment with montelukast may represent a promising therapeutic strategy for patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis secondary to its efficacy and safety. Clinicaltrial.gov ID: NCT04080947.
-
3.
The Efficacy and Safety of Anlotinib in Neoadjuvant Treatment of Locally Advanced Thyroid Cancer: A Single-Arm Phase II Clinical Trial.
Huang, NS, Wei, WJ, Xiang, J, Chen, JY, Guan, Q, Lu, ZW, Ma, B, Sun, GH, Wang, YL, Ji, QH, et al
Thyroid : official journal of the American Thyroid Association. 2021;(12):1808-1813
Abstract
Background: Surgery is the primary treatment for locally advanced thyroid cancer. For some cases, R0/R1 resection could not be achieved at initial diagnosis and neoadjuvant treatment would be an option. Anlotinib is a multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor, which demonstrated antitumor activity in radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer and medullary thyroid cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib in locally advanced thyroid cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. Methods: This single-arm phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of anlotinib (12 mg orally daily, 2 weeks on/1 week off) for 2-6 cycles in patients with locally advanced thyroid cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. The key eligibility criteria included age 14-80 years old; locally advanced thyroid cancer that would benefit from surgery, and at least one measurable lesion. Operable patients received surgery after neoadjuvant treatment. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Results: A total of 13 patients were enrolled and received an average of 3.5 cycles of anlotinib treatment. The ORR of anlotinib was 76.9% (95% confidence interval: 46.2-95.0%). The R0/R1 resection rate in the intent-to-treat population was 61.5% and in the per-protocol population was 72.7%. The median time to response was 61.5 days, and the disease control rate at 18 weeks was 92.3%. No patients had blood transfusion or tracheotomy. Most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1 or 2 and tended to discontinue when neoadjuvant treatment ceased. Common AEs of all grades were hypertension (76.9%), hypertriglyceridemia (69.2%), proteinuria (53.8%), thyrotropin increase (53.8%), cholesterol elevation (53.8%), and hand-foot syndrome (38.5%). Conclusions: Anlotinib demonstrated antitumor activity in the neoadjuvant treatment and the majority of patients achieved R0/R1 resection. AEs were consistent with the known anlotinib AE profile. These results suggest that anlotinib neoadjuvant treatment represents a new option for locally advanced thyroid cancer. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04309136.
-
4.
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.
-
5.
Induction and Long-term Follow-up With ABX464 for Moderate-to-severe Ulcerative Colitis: Results of Phase IIa Trial.
Vermeire, S, Hébuterne, X, Tilg, H, De Hertogh, G, Gineste, P, Steens, JM, ,
Gastroenterology. 2021;(7):2595-2598.e3
-
6.
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.
-
7.
Safety and Efficacy of Pitavastatin in Patients With Impaired Fasting Glucose and Hyperlipidemia: A Randomized, Open-labeled, Multicentered, Phase IV Study.
Lee, HY, Han, KH, Chung, WB, Her, SH, Park, TH, Rha, SW, Choi, SY, Jung, KT, Park, JS, Kim, PJ, et al
Clinical therapeutics. 2020;(10):2036-2048
Abstract
PURPOSE Although the role of high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy in cardiovascular protection has broadened, concerns still exist about new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM), especially in vulnerable patients. This study aimed to compare the effect of high-dose (4 mg/d) and usual dose (2 mg/d) pitavastatin on glucose metabolism in patients with hyperlipidemia and impaired fasting glucose (IFG). METHODS In this 12-month study, glucose tolerance and lipid-lowering efficacy of high-dose pitavastatin (4 mg [study group]) was compared with that of usual dose pitavastatin (2 mg [control group]) in patients with hyperlipidemia and IFG. The primary end point was the change of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) after 24 weeks of treatment. The secondary end points were as follows: (1) NODM within 1 year after treatment, (2) change of lipid parameters, (3) changes of adiponectin, and (4) change of blood glucose and insulin levels. FINDINGS Of the total 417 patients screened, 313 patients with hypercholesterolemia and IFG were randomly assigned into groups. The mean (SD) change in HbA1c was 0.06% (0.20%) in the study group and 0.03% (0.22%) in the control group (P = 0.27). Within 1 year, 27 patients (12.3%) developed NODM, including 12 (10.6%) of 113 patients in the study group and 15 (14.2%) of 106 in the control group (P = 0.43). The study group had a significantly higher reduction of total cholesterol and LDL-C levels and a higher increase in apolipoprotein A1/apolipoprotein B ratio (0.68 [0.40] vs 0.51 [0.35], P < 0.01). IMPLICATIONS The high-dose pitavastatin therapy did not aggravate glucose metabolism compared with the usual dose therapy. Moreover, it had a better effect on cholesterol-lowering and apolipoprotein distribution in the patients with hyperlipidemia and IFG.
-
8.
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.
-
9.
Carnitine insufficiency is associated with fatigue during lenvatinib treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
Okubo, H, Ando, H, Ishizuka, K, Kitagawa, R, Okubo, S, Saito, H, Kokubu, S, Miyazaki, A, Ikejima, K, Shiina, S, et al
PloS one. 2020;(3):e0229772
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fatigue is a common adverse event during lenvatinib treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. One mechanism contributing to development of fatigue might involve abnormal adenosine triphosphate synthesis that is caused by carnitine deficiency. To address this possibility, we examined the relationship between carnitine levels and fatigue during lenvatinib treatment. METHODS This prospective study evaluated 20 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent lenvatinib treatment. Both blood and urine samples were collected from the patients before starting lenvatinib therapy (day 0), and on days 3, 7, 14, and 28 thereafter. Plasma and urine concentrations of free and acyl carnitine (AC) were assessed at each time point. The changes in daily fatigue were evaluated using the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI). RESULTS Plasma levels of free carnitine (FC) at days 3 and 7 were significantly higher compared with baseline (p = 0.005, p = 0.005, respectively). The urine FC level at day 3 was significantly higher compared with baseline (p = 0.030) and that of day 7 tended to be higher compared with baseline (p = 0.057). The plasma AC concentration at days 14 and 28 was significantly higher compared with that of baseline (p = 0.002, p = 0.005, respectively). The plasma AC-to-FC (AC/FC) ratio on days 14 and 28 was significantly higher compared with baseline (p = 0.001, p = 0.003, respectively). There were significant correlations between the plasma AC/FC ratio and the change in the BFI score at days 14 and 28 (r = 0.461, p = 0.041; r = 0.770, p = 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Longitudinal assessments of carnitine and fatigue in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma suggest that lenvatinib affects the carnitine system in patients undergoing lenvatinib therapy and that carnitine insufficiency increases fatigue. The occurrence of carnitine insufficiency may be a common cause of fatigue during the treatment.
-
10.
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.