-
1.
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.
-
2.
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.
-
3.
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.
-
4.
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.
-
5.
RESILIENCE: Phase III Randomized, Double-Blind Trial Comparing Sorafenib With Capecitabine Versus Placebo With Capecitabine in Locally Advanced or Metastatic HER2-Negative Breast Cancer.
Baselga, J, Zamagni, C, Gómez, P, Bermejo, B, Nagai, SE, Melichar, B, Chan, A, Mángel, L, Bergh, J, Costa, F, et al
Clinical breast cancer. 2017;(8):585-594.e4
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Sorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic/antiproliferative activity. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial, we assessed first- or second-line capecitabine with sorafenib or placebo in patients with locally advanced/metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer resistant to a taxane and anthracycline and with known estrogen/progesterone receptor status. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 537 patients were randomized to capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 orally twice per day for days 1 to 14 every 21 days with oral sorafenib 600 mg/d or placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients were stratified according to hormone receptor status, previous chemotherapies for metastatic breast cancer, and geographic region. RESULTS Treatment with sorafenib with capecitabine, compared with capecitabine with placebo, did not prolong median PFS (5.5 vs. 5.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.973; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.779-1.217; P = .811) or overall survival (OS; 18.9 vs. 20.3 months; HR, 1.195; 95% CI, 0.943-1.513; P = .140); or enhance overall response rate (ORR; 13.5% vs. 15.5%; P = .515). Any grade toxicities (sorafenib vs. placebo) included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (PPES; 79.2% vs. 59.6%), diarrhea (47.3% vs. 37.8%), mucosal inflammation (15.4% vs. 6.7%), and hypertension (26.2% vs. 5.6%). Grade 3/4 toxicities included PPES (15.4% vs. 7.1%), diarrhea (4.2% vs. 6.4%), and vomiting (3.5% vs. 0.7%). CONCLUSION The combination of sorafenib with capecitabine did not improve PFS, OS, or ORR in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Rates of Grade 3 toxicities were higher in the sorafenib arm.
-
6.
Multimodality Treatment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Portal Vein Tumor Thrombus: A Large-Scale, Multicenter, Propensity Mathching Score Analysis.
Wang, K, Guo, WX, Chen, MS, Mao, YL, Sun, BC, Shi, J, Zhang, YJ, Meng, Y, Yang, YF, Cong, WM, et al
Medicine. 2016;(11):e3015
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
The optimal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) remains controversial. We aimed to investigate the best treatment for patients with HCC with PVTT. From January 2002 to January 2014, the data from all consecutive patients with HCC with PVTT who underwent surgical treatment (ST),TACE,TACE combined with sorafenib (TACE-Sor), or TACE combined with radiotherapy (TACE-RT) in the 4 largest tertiary hospitals in China were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into 3 subtypes according to the extent of PVTT in the portal vein (type I-III). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). A total of 1580 patients with HCC with PVTT were included in the study. The median survival times (MST) for ST (n = 745) for type I, II, and III patients (95% CI) were 15.9 (13.3-18.5), 12.5 (10.7-14.3), and 6.0 (4.3-7.7) months, respectively. The corresponding figures for patients after TACE (n = 604) were 9.3 (5.6-12.9), 4.9 (4.1-5.7), and 4.0 (3.1-4.9), respectively; for patients after TACE-Sor (n = 113) 12.0 (6.6-17.4), 8.9 (6.7-11.1), and 7.0 (3.0-10.9), respectively; and for patients after TACE-RT (n = 118) 12.2 (0-24.7), 10.6 (6.8-14.5), and 8.9 (5.2-12.6), respectively. Comparison among the different treatments for the 3 subtypes of PVTT patients after propensity score (PS) matching showed the effectiveness of ST to be the best for type I and type II PVTT patients, and TACE-RT was most beneficial for type III patients. Treatment was an independent risk factor of OS. ST was the best treatment for type I and II PVTT patients with Child-Pugh A and selected B liver function. TACE-RT should be given to type III PVTT patients.
-
7.
Concurrent sorafenib therapy extends the interval to subsequent TACE for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.
Yao, X, Yan, D, Zeng, H, Liu, D, Li, H
Journal of surgical oncology. 2016;(6):672-7
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES To compare the impact of concurrent TACE + sorafenib versus TACE alone on overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). A secondary goal was to determine if sorafenib use increases the interval between courses of TACE. METHODS This study enrolled 150 patients with uHCC from June 2011 to June 2014, including 50 treated with TACE + sorafenib and 100 treated with TACE alone. Factors associated with OS and TTP were identified by univariate and multivariate Cox-regression model analyses. Average TACE interval was defined as TTP/TACE frequency. RESULTS The median OS (21.7 vs. 11.5 months) and TTP (10.2 vs. 6.7 months) were longer in the TACE + sorafenib group compared to the TACE group. Patients receiving combination therapy had higher survival rate (P < 0.032) and longer average interval to TACE (P < 0.001), but lower progression rate (P < 0.001). TACE + sorafenib therapy was associated with improved OS (P ≤ 0.009) and TTP (P ≤ 0.021). The majority of AEs identified in patients receiving the combination therapy were classified as Grades 1 and 2, and skin-related reactions and fatigue were the most common. CONCLUSION Concurrent sorafenib with TACE provides survival benefits over TACE monotherapy, which may be related to a prolonged interval between subsequent TACE courses. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:672-677. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
-
8.
CT imaging findings in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib: Alternative response criteria (Choi, European Association for the Study of the Liver, and modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (mRECIST)) versus RECIST 1.1.
Gavanier, M, Ayav, A, Sellal, C, Orry, X, Claudon, M, Bronowicki, JP, Laurent, V
European journal of radiology. 2016;(1):103-112
Abstract
PURPOSE The first aim was to compare Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST) 1.1, modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (mRECIST), Choi and European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) evaluations to assess the response to sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The second aim was to describe the evolution of HCC and to identify whether some imaging features are predictive of the absence of response. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective study included 60 patients with advanced HCC treated with sorafenib. Patients must have undergone a scan prior to treatment to identify the number of lesions, size, enhancement and endoportal invasions, and repeat scans thereafter. Computed tomography (CT) scans were analyzed using RECIST 1.1, mRECIST, Choi and EASL criteria. Overall survival was analyzed. RESULTS The median overall survival was 10.5 months. On the first CT reevaluation, the sorafenib response rates were 20%, 5%, 7% and 3% according to Choi, EASL, mRECIST and RECIST 1.1. The responders based on Choi exhibited significantly better overall survival compared with non-responders (20.4 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.042, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.186-0.94, p=0.035). A modification of imaging findings was observed in 48.3% of patients, and necrosis was present in 44.1% of patients. CONCLUSION This study found a significant difference between Choi versus RECIST 1.1, mRECIST and EASL when evaluating the response to sorafenib in HCC patients.
-
9.
Randomized Phase II Study of the X-linked Inhibitor of Apoptosis (XIAP) Antisense AEG35156 in Combination With Sorafenib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC).
Lee, FA, Zee, BC, Cheung, FY, Kwong, P, Chiang, CL, Leung, KC, Siu, SW, Lee, C, Lai, M, Kwok, C, et al
American journal of clinical oncology. 2016;(6):609-613
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of AEG35156 in addition to sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), as compared with sorafenib alone. METHODS Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive AEG35156 (300 mg weekly intravenous infusion) in combination with sorafenib (400 mg twice daily orally) or sorafenib alone. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Other endpoints include overall survival (OS), objective response rates (ORR), and safety profile. RESULTS A total of 51 patients were enrolled; of them, 48 were evaluable. At a median follow-up of 16.2 months, the median PFS and OS were 4.0 months (95% CI, 1.2-4.1) and 6.5 months (95% CI, 3.9-11.5) for combination arm, and 2.6 (95% CI, 1.2-5.4) and 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.3-11.2) for sorafenib arm. Patients who had the study treatment interrupted or had dose modifications according to protocol did significantly better, in terms of PFS and OS, than those who had no dose reduction in combination arm and those in sorafenib arm. The ORR based on Choi and RECIST criteria were 16.1% and 9.7% in combination arm, respectively. The ORR was 0 in control arm. One drug-related serious adverse event of hypersensitivity occurred in the combination arm, whereas 2 gastrointestinal serious adverse events in the sorafenib arm. CONCLUSION AEG35156 in combination with sorafenib showed additional activity in terms of ORR and was well tolerated. The benefit on PFS is moderate but more apparent in the dose-reduced subgroups.
-
10.
Short-term and long-term efficacy of 7 targeted therapies for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis: Efficacy of 7 targeted therapies for AHCC.
Niu, M, Hong, D, Ma, TC, Chen, XW, Han, JH, Sun, J, Xu, K
Medicine. 2016;(49):e5591
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND A variety of targeted drug therapies in clinical trials have been proven to be effective for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our study aims to compare the short-term and long-term efficacies of different targeted drugs in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (AHCC) treatment using a network meta-analysis approach. METHODS PubMed, Embase, Ovid, EBSCO, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different targeted therapies implemented to patients with AHCC. And the retrieval resulted in 7 targeted drugs, namely, sorafenib, ramucirumab, everolimus, brivanib, tivantinib, sunitinib, and sorafenib+erlotinib. Direct and indirect evidence were combined to evaluate stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), complete response (CR), partial response (PR), disease control rate (DCR), overall response ratio (ORR), overall survival (OS), and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of patients with AHCC. RESULTS A total of 11 RCTs were incorporated into our analysis, including 6594 patients with AHCC, among which 1619 patients received placebo treatment and 4975 cases had targeted therapies. The results revealed that in comparison with placebo, sorafenib, and ramucirumab displayed better short-term efficacy in terms of PR and ORR, and brivanib was better in ORR. Regarding long-term efficacy, sorafenib and sorafenib+erlotinib treatments exhibited longer OS. The data of cluster analysis showed that ramucirumab or sorafenib+erlotinib presented relatively better short-term efficacy for the treatment of AHCC. CONCLUSION This network meta-analysis shows that ramucirumab and sorafenib+erlotinib may be the better targeted drugs for AHCC patients, and sorafenib+erlotinib achieved a better long-term efficacy.