scholarly journals SEARCH: A Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Sorafenib Plus Erlotinib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 559-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew X. Zhu ◽  
Olivier Rosmorduc ◽  
T.R. Jeffry Evans ◽  
Paul J. Ross ◽  
Armando Santoro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Class A ◽  
Pugh Class

Purpose To compare the clinical outcomes of sorafenib plus either erlotinib or placebo in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in a multicenter, multinational, randomized, phase III trial. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced HCC and underlying Child-Pugh class A cirrhosis, who were naive to systemic treatment (N = 720), were randomly assigned to sorafenib plus either erlotinib (n = 362) or placebo (n = 358). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results Median OS was similar in the sorafenib plus erlotinib and sorafenib plus placebo groups (9.5 v 8.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.929; P = .408), as was median time to progression (3.2 v 4.0 months, respectively; HR, 1.135; P = .18). In the sorafenib/erlotinib arm versus the sorafenib/placebo arm, the overall response rate trended higher (6.6% v 3.9%, respectively; P = .102), whereas the disease control rate was significantly lower (43.9% v 52.5%, respectively; P = .021). The median durations of treatment with sorafenib were 86 days in the sorafenib/erlotinib arm and 123 days in the sorafenib/placebo arm. In the sorafenib/erlotinib and sorafenib/placebo arms, the rates of treatment-emergent serious AEs (58.0% v 54.6%, respectively) and drug-related serious AEs (21.0% v 22.8%, respectively) were similar. AEs matched the known safety profiles of both agents, but rates of rash/desquamation, anorexia, and diarrhea were higher in the sorafenib/erlotinib arm, whereas rates of alopecia and hand-foot skin reaction were higher in the sorafenib/placebo arm. Withdrawal rates for AEs during cycles 1 to 3 were higher in the sorafenib/erlotinib arm. Conclusion Adding erlotinib to sorafenib did not improve survival in patients with advanced HCC.

Brivanib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Who Were Intolerant to Sorafenib or for Whom Sorafenib Failed: Results From the Randomized Phase III BRISK-PS Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (28) ◽  
pp. 3509-3516 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep M. Llovet ◽  
Thomas Decaens ◽  
Jean-Luc Raoul ◽  
Eveline Boucher ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Growth Factor ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptors ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Dual Inhibitor

Purpose Brivanib is a selective dual inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor and fibroblast growth factor receptors implicated in tumorigenesis and angiogenesis in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). An unmet medical need persists for patients with HCC whose tumors do not respond to sorafenib or who cannot tolerate it. This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial assessed brivanib in patients with HCC who had been treated with sorafenib. Patients and Methods In all, 395 patients with advanced HCC who progressed on/after or were intolerant to sorafenib were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive brivanib 800 mg orally once per day plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included time to progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) and safety. Results Median OS was 9.4 months for brivanib and 8.2 months for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95.8% CI, 0.69 to 1.15; P = .3307). Adjusting treatment effect for baseline prognostic factors yielded an OS HR of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.04; P = .1044). Exploratory analyses showed a median time to progression of 4.2 months for brivanib and 2.7 months for placebo (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.76; P < .001), and an mRECIST ORR of 10% for brivanib and 2% for placebo (odds ratio, 5.72). Study discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 61 brivanib patients (23%) and nine placebo patients (7%). The most frequent treatment-related grade 3 to 4 AEs for brivanib included hypertension (17%), fatigue (13%), hyponatremia (11%), and decreased appetite (10%). Conclusion In patients with HCC who had been treated with sorafenib, brivanib did not significantly improve OS. The observed benefit in the secondary outcomes of TTP and ORR warrants further investigation.

Apatinib as second-line therapy in Chinese patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase III study.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4507-4507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiu Li ◽  
Shukui Qin ◽  
Shanzhi Gu ◽  
Xiaoming Chen ◽  
Lizhu Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Chinese Patients ◽  
Biological Behavior ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Sorafenib Treatment ◽  
Advanced Hcc

4507 Background: Chinese patients (pts) account for more than 50% of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases in the world and have special features in etiology, biological behavior, treatment strategy and prognosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apatinib, an inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2, in Chinese pts with pretreated advanced HCC. Methods: In this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial done in 31 sites in China, pts with HCC who had received at least one line of systemic therapy (including sorafenib and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, which is another first-line standard-of-care in China) and had Child-Pugh liver function class A or B ≤7 points were enrolled. The pts were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive 750 mg apatinib orally once daily or placebo and stratified by ECOG performance status (0 or 1), previous sorafenib treatment (yes or no), and extrahepatic spread and/or macrovascular invasion (yes or no) in 28-day treatment cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Results: Between Apr 01, 2014 and May 03, 2017, 393 pts were randomized and received at least one dose of study treatment (261 in apatinib arm and 132 in placebo arm). The median OS was significantly longer with apatinib than that with placebo (8.7 months [95% CI 7.5-9.8] vs 6.8 months [95% CI 5.7-9.1]; hazard ratio 0.785 [95% CI 0.617-0.998]; p=0.0476). Pts in the apatinib arm also had prolonged median progression free survival (PFS) compared with those in the placebo arm (4.5 months [95% CI 3.9-4.7] vs 1.9 months [95% CI 1.9-2.0]; hazard ratio 0.471 [95% CI 0.369-0.601]; p˂0.0001). The objective response rate was 10.7% (95% CI 7.2-15.1) with apatinib versus 1.5% (95% CI 0.2-5.4) with placebo. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 250 (97.3%) pts in the apatinib arm and 92 (70.8%) pts in the placebo arm. The most common TRAEs of grade 3 and 4 were hypertension (71 [27.6%] pts in the apatinib arm vs 3 [2.3%] pts in the placebo arm), hand-foot syndrome (46 [17.9%] vs 0), decreased platelet count (34 [13.2%] vs 1 [0.8%]), and decreased neutrophil count (27 [10.5%] vs 0). 24 (9.3%) pts with apatinib and 13 (10.0%) pts with placebo died due to adverse events, and none were deemed treatment-related by investigators. Conclusions: Apatinib significantly prolonged OS and PFS in Chinese pts with pretreated advanced HCC, and was well tolerated with a manageable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT02329860 .

Identification of a high-response patient population to S-1 via predictive enrichment strategy analysis of the S-CUBE phase III trial.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 229-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Takuji Okusaka ◽  
Shuichi Kaneko ◽  
Junji Furuse ◽  
Madoka Takeuchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Population ◽  
The United States ◽  
High Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Strategy Analysis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Enrichment Strategy

229 Background: S-CUBE was a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of S-1 in patients with sorafenib-refractory advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The study’s primary outcome was presented at the 2015 ASCO Annual Meeting. Although S-1 did not significantly improve overall survival (OS) in all cohort (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86; confidence interval [CI] = 0.67–1.10; P = 0.2201), we conducted predictive enrichment strategy analysis (PESA) to identify a patient population with a better response to S-1. Methods: Predictive enrichment strategy is a newly introduced concept proposed by the United States Food and Drug Administration, “to select a study population in which detection of a drug effect (if one is in fact present) is more likely than it would be in an unselected population. (Temple R. [2012] )” Therefore, in our study, PESA provides robust results and identifies advanced HCC patients who are more likely to respond to S-1. Clinically meaningful baseline characteristics were selected to create a scoring system; patients were ranked based on their scores, and the population with a better response was identified. Patient mapping was used to further characterize the population. Results: The full S-CUBE analysis set consisted of 333 patients, including 222 in the S-1 arm and 111 in the placebo. PESA and patient mapping identified 219 patients (65.8% of the total population) as the high-response patient population. High-response patients are classified as those with the following criteria; 1) TNM stage III, IVa, or IVb, 2) Child-Pugh class A, and 3) Levels of both the tumor markers are not high (AFP ≥ 400 ng/mL and PIVKA-II ≥ 10000 mAU/mL). In this population, the median OS of S-1 group was significantly longer than that of placebo group (426.0 days vs. 375.5 days; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.93; P = 0.0156). Conclusions: PESA and patient mapping identified a high-response patient population to S-1. This statistically robust analysis demonstrated S-1 showed survival benefit for identified clinically-important population of sorafenib-refractory advanced HCC patients. Clinical trial information: JapicCTI-090920.

Arterial Chemotherapy of Oxaliplatin Plus Fluorouracil Versus Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Biomolecular Exploratory, Randomized, Phase III Trial (FOHAIC-1)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ning Lyu ◽  
Xun Wang ◽  
Ji-Bin Li ◽  
Jin-Fa Lai ◽  
Qi-Feng Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Hepatic Arterial Infusion ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Curative Surgery ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Infusion Chemotherapy

PURPOSE Interventional hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy of infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (HAIC-FO) displayed an encouraging safety profile and antitumor activity in a previous phase II trial and a propensity-score-matching study involving patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS In this open-label, phase III trial, patients with advanced HCC, previously untreated with systemic therapy, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive HAIC-FO or sorafenib. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. An exploratory model for predicting the efficacy of HAIC-FO on the basis of genomic sequencing was developed. RESULTS Between May 2017 and May 2020, 262 patients were randomly assigned. The median tumor size was 11.2 cm (interquartile range, 8.5-13.7 cm). Macrovascular invasion was present in 65.6%, and the percentage of patients with > 50% tumor volume involvement of the liver and/or Vp-4 portal vein tumor thrombosis was 49.2%. At data cutoff (October 31, 2020), median OS was 13.9 months for HAIC-FO and 8.2 for sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.408; 95% CI, 0.301 to 0.552; P < .001). Tumor downstaging occurred in 16 (12.3% of 130) patients receiving HAIC-FO, including 15 receiving curative surgery or ablation, and finally achieving a median OS of 20.8 months, with a 1-year OS rate of 93.8%. In high-risk subpopulations, OS was significantly longer with HAIC-FO than with sorafenib (10.8 months v 5.7 months; HR 0.343; 95% CI, 0.219 to 0.538; P < .001). A newly developed 15-mutant-gene prediction model identified 83% of patients with response to HAIC-FO. HAIC-FO responders had longer OS than HAIC-FO nonresponders (19.3 months v 10.6 months; HR 0.323; 95% CI, 0.186 to 0.560; P = .002). CONCLUSION HAIC-FO achieved better survival outcomes than sorafenib in advanced HCC, even in association with a high intrahepatic disease burden.

Evidence-based treatment algorithm for BCLC C advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15649-e15649
Author(s):  
Hasmukh J. Prajapati ◽  
Hyun S. "Kevin" Kim
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Treatment Algorithm ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Comprehensive Review ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Class A ◽  
Pugh Class ◽  
Ecog Ps

e15649 Background: Barcelona clinic liver cancer (BCLC) C advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) has a poor prognosis. Different treatment methods have shown a survival benefit. The purpose of the study is to suggest the treatment algorithm based on a comprehensive review of the literature on aHCC treated with different methods. Methods: Studies were identified by searching Google Scholar using the following keywords: ‘‘advanced hepatocellular carcinoma’’ or ‘‘advanced HCC’’ or “BCLC C” in a time period from 2008 to 2017. Search identified more than 700 articles. Then, articles were searched manually for BCLC C HCC. Articles were excluded if they dealt with only liver metastases or portal vein thrombosis, or if they did not report median survival. A total of 3 randomized control studies (RCT) and 21 non-RCT studies met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Results:Overall median survivals (OS) according to different methods is shown in table 1. OSs of aHCC treated with TACE, Yittrium 90 transarterial radioembolization (Y90 TARE) and sorafenib were not significantly different (p>0.5). The pooled results of NRCT demonstrated that Child Pugh class A or without portal vein thrombosis (PVT) or ECOG PS 0 treated with TACE had best median survivals of 15 months(m), 17 m and 20 m respectively. Conclusions: No treatment method appears clearly better than any other. However, aHCC patients with Child Pugh class A or ECOG PS 0 or without PVT treated with TACE showed highest survival. Sorafenib/TACE or sorafenib/Y90 TARE combinations show promise as an effective and a tolerable treatment strategy for advanced HCC. Radiation therapy alone showed poor survival benefit. [Table: see text]

Pembrolizumab As Second-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in KEYNOTE-240: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
Baek-Yeol Ryoo ◽  
Philippe Merle ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Mohamed Bouattour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Previously Treated

PURPOSE Pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity and safety in the phase II KEYNOTE-224 trial in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). KEYNOTE-240 evaluated the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS This randomized, double-blind, phase III study was conducted at 119 medical centers in 27 countries. Eligible patients with advanced HCC, previously treated with sorafenib, were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS; one-sided significance thresholds, P = .0174 [final analysis] and P = .002 [first interim analysis], respectively). Safety was assessed in all patients who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug. RESULTS Between May 31, 2016, and November 23, 2017, 413 patients were randomly assigned. As of January 2, 2019, median follow-up was 13.8 months for pembrolizumab and 10.6 months for placebo. Median OS was 13.9 months (95% CI, 11.6 to 16.0 months) for pembrolizumab versus 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 13.5 months) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.781; 95% CI, 0.611 to 0.998; P = .0238). Median PFS for pembrolizumab was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.1 months) for placebo at the first interim analysis (HR, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.609 to 0.987; P = .0186) and 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.6 to 3.0 months) at final analysis (HR, 0.718; 95% CI, 0.570 to 0.904; P = .0022). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 147 (52.7%) and 62 patients (46.3%) for pembrolizumab versus placebo; those that were treatment related occurred in 52 (18.6%) and 10 patients (7.5%), respectively. No hepatitis C or B flares were identified. CONCLUSION In this study, OS and PFS did not reach statistical significance per specified criteria. The results are consistent with those of KEYNOTE-224, supporting a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for pembrolizumab in this population.

Tumor c-Met expression and prognosis of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 317-317
Author(s):  
Yu Yun Shao ◽  
Chi-Huang Hsiao ◽  
Ray Lee ◽  
Oscar Puig ◽  
Soa-Yu Chan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Score ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Clinical Scores ◽  
Tumor Tissues ◽  
Pugh Class ◽  
Tumor Expression

317 Background: Overexpression of c-Met signaling has been associated with development and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We explored the prognostic role of tumor c-Met expression in patients with advanced HCC. Methods: Patients who had received sorafenib alone as first-line therapy for advanced HCC and had available archival tumor tissues were enrolled. Expression of total c-Met was determined by immunohistochemical staining using CONFIRM anti-total c-MET (SP44) rabbit monoclonal primary antibody (Ventana) on the BenchMark ULTRA staining platform. We evaluated c-Met expression by H scores and by a clinical score as defined in the table. Results: The study enrolled 62 patients, all with Child-Pugh class A status. The HCC etiology was hepatitis B in 48 patients, and hepatitis C in 12 patents; 57 had BCLC disease; 40 had extrahepatic metastasis, and 37 had macrovascular invasion. Clinical scores of c-Met were 0 in 30 (48%) patients, 1 in 31 (50%) patients, 2 in 1 (2%) patients, and 3 in 0 patients. Patients with different clinical scores of c-Met had similar PFS (p = 0.821) or OS (p = 0.533). The median membranous H score and cytoplasmic score were 32.5 and 5, respectively. Patients with higher (≥ median) and lower c-Met membranous H scores or cytoplasmic H scores also had similar PFS and OS. Conclusions: High c-Met expression was rare in this advanced HCC cohort. Tumor expression of c-Met had no obvious associations with the prognosis of advanced HCC. (This study was supported by National Science Council, Taiwan (NSC-102-2314-B-002-120, NSC-103-2314-B-002-181-MY2, NSC-103-2314-B-002-092)). [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document