Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab vs. Lenvatinib as First-Line Therapy for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Real-World, Multi-Center Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beom Kyung Kim ◽  
Jaekyung Cheon ◽  
Hyeyeong Kim ◽  
Beodeul Kang ◽  
Yeonjung Ha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Real World ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Multi Center Study ◽  
Center Study

Modeling sequential systemic therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the era of immunotherapy: What comes next?

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 324-324
Author(s):  
Ciro Celsa ◽  
Giuseppe Cabibbo ◽  
Marco Enea ◽  
Salvatore Battaglia ◽  
Giacomo Emanuele Maria Rizzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
Survival Curve ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Sequential Strategy

324 Background: Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab represents the new best performing first-line approach for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC). However, the best sequential strategy after every first-line failure (for progression or intolerance) remains elusive, and options for retreating patients failing Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab with multi-kinase inhibitors (MKI) or immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) are yet undefined. Methods: We developed a Markov model to analyze simulated-Overall Survival (s-OS) of second-line ICIs or MKIs after first-line Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab over a lifetime horizon. For first-line therapy, PFS of Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab was extracted from Imbrave 150 trial and it was used as endpoint since it is not influenced by post-progression survival. For second-line retreatment, pooled OS of MKIs (Regorafenib and Cabozantinib), or ICIs (Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab) were adopted. Survival estimates for sequential settings considered the proportion of patients who did not receive second-line therapy due to death during first-line therapy. Individual patient survival data were extracted from PFS and OS Kaplan-Meier curves of RESORCE trial for Regorafenib, CELESTIAL trial for Cabozantinib, CheckMate-040 for Nivolumab and Keynote-240 for Pembrolizumab. Each reconstructed survival curve was inspected for accuracy and was compared with originally published curves. Results: First-line Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab followed by second-line ICIs turned on from the model as the best sequential strategy (median s-OS 24 months; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 23-26 months) and extends survival when compared Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab followed by MKIs (median s-OS 20 months; 95% CI 19-21 months). Conclusions: To our knowledge and given the absence of adequately designed sequential RCTs, this is the first model to date which suggests, with a proper methodological approach, an accurate estimate of outcome of patients with u-HCC treated by sequential systemic therapies. In patients with u-HCC failing first-line treatment, modelling estimates of s-OS for each retreatment strategies may assist in choosing the most promising sequences in order to plan appropriate RCTs.

scholarly journals Lenvatinib as the key component of first-line therapy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 142-148
Author(s):  
L. V. Bolotina
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
First Line Treatment

Throughout the last 10 years, liver cancer mortality rate in the Russian Federation consistently exceeded the morbidity rate, which is related to the complexity of early diagnostics, absence of effective screening and oncological alertness of allied-profession doctors. In the situation when late disease intelligence does not frequently allow radical treatment, palliative methods remain the only option of survivability enhancement and improving the patients quality of life. Lenvatinib was approved as the first-line drug in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma based on the data of the REFLECT trial, in which the drug demonstrated achieving the patients overall survival (OS) comparable to the activity of sorafenib (13.6 months for lenvatinib vs 12.3 months for sorafenib; hazard ratio HR 0.92; 95% confidence interval CI 0.791.06). At the same time, significant inferiority of lenvatinib was observed for secondary endpoints: progression-free survival PFS (7.4 months for lenvatinib vs 3.7 months for sorafenib; HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.570.77;р0.0001), time to progression (8.9 months for lenvatinib vs 3.7 months for sorafenib; HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.530.73;р0.0001) and objective response rate ORR (24.1% for lenvatinib vs 9.2% for sorafenib). The further analysis of the results of the REFLECT study revealed the additional factors impacting patients survival, such as the level of a-fetoprotein (AFP) before treatment, treatment ORR, performance of subsequent antitumor therapy and procedures after completion of the target first-line therapy. In patients responding to lenvatinib in the first line and further receiving any second-line therapy, the mOS was 25.7 months as compared with the median overall survival (mOS) of 22.3 months in patients responding to sorafenib and receiving further second-line therapy. Additionally, in responders switching from lenvatinib to sorafenib, the mOS was 26.2 months. In the recently published comparative study of lenvatinib and transarterial chemoembolization on the BCLC B stage, inferiority of lenvatinib was demonstrated in terms of OS, PFS and ORR in certain patient categories. Considering the data obtained in the REFLECT population, where in patients achieving the RR to the first-line treatment with lenvatinib and further receiving the local antitumor procedures the mOS increased to 27.2 months (95% CI 20.729.8), prescribing target and locoregional therapy in certain cases in this very sequence is possible. The recently published data about administration of lenvatinib outside of the inclusion criteria for the REFLECT trial, have proved the efficacy and safety of this drug administration in real clinical practice, thus significantly expanding our understanding of the key role of lenvatinib in the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in the real-world treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: Results from a Canadian multicenter database (HCC CHORD).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 275-275
Author(s):  
Carla Pires Amaro ◽  
Michael J Allen ◽  
Jennifer J. Knox ◽  
Erica S Tsang ◽  
Howard John Lim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Drug Discontinuation ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Real ◽  
First Line Therapy

275 Background: The REFLECT trial establishedlenvatinib (LEN) as a first-line treatment option for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Compared to sorafenib (S), LEN has a higher objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) with a slightly different toxicity profile. The aim of this study was to gather data regarding the efficacy and safety of LEN when used in the real-world treatment of HCC. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine LEN use in HCC patients treated outside of Asia. Methods: HCC patients treated with LEN from 10 cancer centers in the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Nova Scotia between July 2018 to July 2020 were included. Overall survival (OS), PFS, disease control rate (DCR) and ORR were retrospectively analyzed and compared across first- and second-to-fourth line use of LEN. ORR was determined radiographically according to the treating physician´s opinion in clinical notes and not RECIST 1.1 or mRECIST. Toxicities were also examined. Results: A total of 220 patients were included in this analysis. Median age was 67 years, 80% were men and 25.5% East Asian. The most frequent causes of liver disease were hepatitis C (37%) and B (26%). 62% of patients received any localized treatment before LEN, of those 26% had TACE, 15% TARE and 7.7% had liver transplant. Before starting LEN 29% of patients were ECOG 0 and 59% were ECOG 1. Most patients were Child-Pugh A (81%) and BCLC stage C (75.5%). Main portal vein invasion was present in 14% of the patients. Median follow-up was 4.5 months. A total of 173 patients (79%) received LEN as first line therapy and 47 patients (21%) were treated in second-to-fourth line. Of patients receiving LEN in first line, 22 (13%) started treatment with S, but switched to LEN before progression due to poor tolerance of S. ORR, DCR, PFS and OS are shown in the table. Toxicities occurred in 86% of patients and led to dose reductions in 76 (35%) patients and drug discontinuation in 53 (24%) patients. The most common side effects were fatigue (59%), hypertension (41%), decreased appetite (25%) and diarrhea (22%). Conclusions: Outcomes of HCC patients treated in Canada with LEN in the first line are comparable to those demonstrated in the REFLECT trial, despite the inclusion of Child-Pugh B and ECOG >1 patients. LEN use in second or later lines also showed similar outcomes, although more conclusions are difficult to draw due to the small numbers. LEN appears to be effective and safe in real world practice outside of Asia in first- and second-to-fourth line treatment of HCC. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document