Plans among American medical oncologists (AMO) for inclusion of trans-arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) as part of first-line therapy in patients with liver only hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) not amenable to surgical therapy.

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14617-e14617
Author(s):  
S. Britton ◽  
M. Morse ◽  
M. R. Green ◽  
J. Willey ◽  
K. E. Lemke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
American Medical ◽  
Surgical Therapy ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Medical Oncologists

Immediate impact of the FOLFIRINOX phase III data reported at the 2010 ASCO Annual Meeting on prescribing plans of American oncology physicians for patients with metastatic pancreas cancer (MPC).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 286-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. C. Bendell ◽  
S. Britton ◽  
M. R. Green ◽  
J. Willey ◽  
K. E. Lemke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
American Medical ◽  
Pancreas Cancer ◽  
Package Insert ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Steady Growth ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Medical Oncologists ◽  
Physician Prescribing

286 Background: Since 2005 we at Xcenda, LLC have studied prescribing plans of American medical oncologists for first-line therapy in patients with MPC. In 2008 we reported the steady growth of prescribing plans for the gemcitabine-erlotinib (GE) combination from 23% in late 2005 to 46% in 2007. In 2007, gemcitabine (G) alone was the second most common regimen planned (27%) (Green MR. Proc GI ASCO 2008). No cytotoxic doublet consistently garnered >10% prescribing share in this clinical setting. At ASCO 2010 Conroy et al. (J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(15s): Abstract 4010) reported a survival advantage for the FOLFIRINOX regimen compared to package insert dose and schedule of G alone as first-line therapy in patients with MPC and excellent PS (0-1). Methods: Between 7/31 and 8/28/2010 we again used our extensively tested, live research vehicle, NMCR Challenging Cases, to assess current prescribing plans of over 370 American medical oncologists for first-line therapy in a patient with metastatic pancreas cancer and either PS 1 or PS 2. Results: The FOLFIRINOX data have produced an immediate change in the distribution of planned first-line prescribing with 18% share for the PS 1 scenario, largely substituted for previous use of GE for this setting (Table). In PS 2, plans for FOLFIRINOX are minimal with G alone followed by GE as the dominant selections. Conclusions: The recently reported phase III FOLFIRINOX data are impacting first-line prescribing plans for patients with MPC. We will continue to quantitate physician-prescribing plans to more fully understand the additional impact the FOLFIRINOX data may have on overall chemotherapy management of these patients. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document