Subgroup analysis from JAVELIN Renal 101: Outcomes for avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 544-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Matthew T. Campbell ◽  
Boris Y. Alekseev ◽  
Motohide Uemura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

544 Background: In the ongoing phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial, progression-free survival (PFS) was longer (median, 13.8 vs 8.4 mo; hazard ratio, 0.69; p=0.0001) and the objective response rate (ORR) was higher (51% vs 26%) with A + Ax vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. Here we report outcomes from an analysis of several prespecified subgroups. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A (10 mg/kg) IV every 2 weeks + Ax (5 mg) PO twice daily or S (50 mg) PO once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). Primary and key secondary endpoints were PFS per independent review committee (IRC; RECIST v1.1) and OS in patients with PD-L1+ tumors (≥1% of immune cells) and in patients irrespective of PD-L1 expression; other secondary endpoints included OR per IRC (RECIST v1.1). Results: A total of 886 patients were randomized; 560 (63%) had PD-L1+ tumors. At data cut-off (Jun 2018), median follow-up was 12.0 vs 11.5 mo for A + Ax vs S groups. The table shows PFS and ORR by MSKCC and IMDC risk groups (F, favorable; I, intermediate; P, poor) and PD-L1 subgroup. Similar results for prognostic risk were seen in patients with PD-L1+ tumors. Outcome data (including PFS2) for additional clinical subgroups by baseline demographics and features will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006. Conclusions: A + Ax demonstrated PFS and OR benefit across all prognostic risk groups and PD-L1 subgroups vs S in aRCC.[Table: see text]

Efficacy of avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) by number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Extended follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 302-302
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Hideaki Miyake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
To Receive

302 Background: In the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006), A + Ax demonstrated progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) benefit across IMDC risk groups (favorable, intermediate, and poor) vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. Here we report efficacy of A + Ax vs S by number of IMDC risk factors (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4-6) and target tumor sites (1, 2, 3, and ≥4) at baseline from the second interim analysis of overall survival (OS). Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 wk + Ax 5 mg orally twice daily or S 50 mg orally once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). PFS and ORR per independent central review (RECIST 1.1) and OS were assessed. Results: At data cut-off (Jan 2019), median (m) follow-up for OS and PFS was 19.3 vs 19.2 mo and 16.8 vs 15.2 mo for the A + Ax vs S arm, respectively. The table shows OS, PFS, and ORR by number of IMDC risk factors and target tumor sites at baseline. A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across subgroups. Conclusions: With extended follow-up, A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across the number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in aRCC. OS was still immature; follow-up for the final analysis is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006 . [Table: see text]

Clinical outcomes of sunitinib (Su) for patients (pts) with desmoid tumors (DT).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11052-11052
Author(s):  
Salvatora tindara Miano ◽  
Guido Francini ◽  
Serenella Civitelli ◽  
Roberto Petrioli ◽  
Edoardo Francini
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Radiological Progression ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

11052 Background: The incidence of DT is steadily increasing in pts affected by familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and represents the first cause of death for pts who underwent preventive proctocolectomy. Currently, there is no standard therapy for DT and Tamoxifen (20 mg once daily) + Meloxicam (15 mg once daily) (TM) is the most commonly used regimen in clinical routine. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of Su, the most active PDGFR TKI, as first-line therapy for pts with DT. Methods: In this phase II IRB approved prospective study, pts with progressive, symptomatic, or recurrent DT were randomized to receive either Su (52 mg once daily) or TM. The primary end point was progression-free survival, defined as time from treatment start to clinical or radiological progression, whichever came first, at 2 years (2yr-PFS). Secondary endpoints were rates of objective response (OR), evaluated per RECIST criteria version 1.1, time to OR (ttOR), and toxicity. Adverse events (AE) were assessed per NCI-CTCAE version 4.02. Results: Of the 32 pts enrolled, 22 received Su and 10 TM. In both groups, median age at diagnosis was 43.5 years No OR was observed in the TM group. In the Su group, 17 pts had a partial response and 5 stable disease and the ORR was 75% (95% CI, 50 to 100). At a median follow-up of 27 months, the 2yr-PFS was 81% (95% CI, 69-96) and 36% (95% CI, 22-57) in the Su cohort and TM cohort, respectively (HR = 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05- 0.31; P<0.001). The median ttOR among pts who had an OR was 24 months. In the TM group, no toxicity was observed. The most frequently reported AE in the Su group were grade 1 or 2 hypothyroidism (73%), fatigue (67%), hypertension (55%), and diarrhea (51%). (HR: 0.260; p = 0.0035). All AE responded to dose reduction (37.5 mg). Conclusions: In a cohort of pts with progressive, recurrent, or symptomatic DT, Su seems to be well tolerated and improve 2yr-PFS and OR rate compared with TM therapy. Further prospective studies with larger samples are needed to verify these results.

Prevalence and outcomes of patients (pts) with EGFR S492R ectodomain mutations in ASPECCT: Panitumumab (pmab) vs. cetuximab (cmab) in pts with chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 740-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Jay Price ◽  
Kathryn Newhall ◽  
Marc Peeters ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Droplet Pcr ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Clinical Trial Information

740 Background: Mutations resistant to anti-EGFR treatment (tx), beyond those in RAS, have been reported and include EGFR S492R. We report results for pts with EGFR S492R mutations in the phase 3 ASPECCT trial. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive pmab or cmab. Crossover was not allowed. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. EGFR S492R was evaluated by digital droplet PCR in plasma samples collected pre-tx and post-tx (safety follow-up 4 wks after the last dose). Outcomes were analyzed by EGFR S492 status. Results: Of 999 pts randomized and treated, post-tx samples were available for EGFR S492 assessment from 53% of pts (261/496) in the pmab arm and 57% of pts (285/503) in the cmab arm. EGFR S492R was detected in 1% of pts in the pmab arm and 16% of pts in the cmab arm in post-tx samples. EGFR S492R was not detected in pre-tx samples. Results are shown (table). Conclusions: In a retrospective analysis of pts with available samples from ASPECCT, 16% of pts in the cmab arm and 1% of pts in the pmab developed EGFR S492R mutations. Pts with EGFR S492R in the cmab arm had longer tx duration before progressive disease (PD) and appeared to have worse OS vs pts with wild-type S492 in the cmab arm. Clinical trial information: NCT01001377. [Table: see text]

Results of a phase II study of capecitabine-based doublets in the treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e11538-e11538
Author(s):  
Ying Fan ◽  
Binghe Xu ◽  
Yuqian Liao ◽  
Fei Ma ◽  
Peng Yuan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cytotoxic Agents ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Setting ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

e11538 Background: It is extremely important to identify proper cytotoxic agents for TNBC which had limited choices except chemotherapy. Capecitabine are well established as a major chemotherapeutic agent in metastatic setting. The efficacy of capecitabine-based chemotherapy has not been prospectively studied in TNBC and data remains scant. This study was designed to investigate the efficacy of capecitabine-based doublets in the treatment of metastatic TNBC. Methods: Eligible metastatic TNBC women with measurable diseases were recruited to receive either TX regimen (docetaxel 75mg/m2 iv d1 plus capecitabine 1000mg/m2 bid, d1-14,q3w) or NX regimen (vinorelbine 25mg/m2 iv d1, 8 plus capecitabine 1000mg/m2 bid, d1-14, q3w) at the discretion of physicians for up to 6 cycles, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate and secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS). Results: 45 mTNBC patients, 27 in TX and 18 in NX were recruited, mostly (73.3%) as 1st line and the remaining as the 2nd line. The total objective response rate was 20.0% and clinical benefit rate was 62.2%. After a median follow-up of 28 months, PFS was 5.2 months (95%CI, 4.1-6.3mons) and OS was 18.2months (95%CI, 8.7-27.7mons). Almost half of the patients (22/45) progressed during treatment or within one month of the treatment discontinuation. PFS was significantly longer if patients got CR/PR (9.6 vs 4.3mons, P=0.015). When comparing two doublets, the response rate was numerically but not statistically lower in TX group than in NX group (14.8% vs 27.8%, P=0.449). Similarly, no difference was found in either PFS (4.9 vs 5.2 mons, P=0.483) or OS (21.5 vs 18.3 mons, P=0.964) between two regimens. Conclusions: Although the overall survival seems to be reasonable, efficacy of capecitabine-contained TX or NX regimen was relatively poor in terms of tumor remission and progression free survival in mTNBC patients, suggesting capecitabine may have limited potency in this subtype. These two combinations may be considered to be acceptable but may not be recommended as prior choice for mTNBC patients.

Efficacy of avelumab + axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) by IMDC risk group in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Extended follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4574-4574
Author(s):  
John B. A. G. Haanen ◽  
James Larkin ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Laurence Albiges ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Group ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Treatment Naïve ◽  
Group A ◽  
To Receive

4574 Background: In the phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006), treatment-naive patients with aRCC receiving A + Ax showed improved progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) across International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups (favorable [F], intermediate [I], and poor [P]) compared with patients receiving S. Here we report updated efficacy results for A + Ax vs S by IMDC risk groups from the third interim analysis. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either A (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus Ax (5 mg orally twice daily) or S (50 mg orally once daily) for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). Patients were categorized per IMDC risk group into F, I, and P subgroups, and outcomes were assessed for F, I, P, and I + P. Overall survival (OS) and PFS, ORR, complete response (CR), and duration of response (DoR) per investigator assessment (RECIST v1.1) were assessed. Results: The study enrolled 886 patients with aRCC. At data cutoff (Apr 2020), median (95% CI) follow-up for OS in the A + Ax was NR (42.2-NE) vs 37.8 (31.4-NE) months with S. The Table shows OS, PFS, ORR, CR, and DOR by IMDC risk group. A + Ax generally showed improved efficacy compared with S across IMDC groups. Conclusions: Consistent with previously reported results from prior interim analyses, extended follow-up confirms the efficacy benefits of A + Ax vs S across IMDC risk groups in patients with aRCC. Patients continue to be followed up for the final OS analysis. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006. [Table: see text]

The validity of progression-free survival (PFS) 2 as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of advanced solid tumors.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1516-1516
Author(s):  
Rachel Woodford ◽  
Deborah Zhou ◽  
Peey-Sei Kok ◽  
Sally Lord ◽  
Ian Marschner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Surrogate Endpoint ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Investigational Agents ◽  
Tumor Types

1516 Background: OS is the gold-standard endpoint for treatment efficacy in oncology RCTs. However, prolonged follow-up is required to obtain mature data, which impedes regulatory approval of potentially beneficial therapies. Furthermore, increasing therapeutic options including cross over to investigational agents at disease progression often confound OS findings. PFS-2, defined as time from randomization to progression on second-line therapy, has been proposed as a potential surrogate endpoint for OS. Using a meta-analytic approach, we aimed to assess the association between OS and PFS-2, and its validity compared with other surrogate endpoints. Methods: We performed an electronic literature search to identify RCTs of systemic therapies that reported PFS-2 as a pre-specified endpoint with defined follow up protocols. Articles were screened for eligibility and outcome data were extracted. Correlations in the relative treatment difference between treatment arms for OS vs PFS-2, PFS-1, and objective response rate (ORR) were assessed as the comparison of hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratio (OR) respectively. Results: 38 eligible RCTs comprising of 44 analysis units, with 19,031 patients across 8 unique tumor types were identified. The majority received targeted therapies (72.2%), followed by immunotherapy (IO; 26.3%). The correlations of HR-OS/HR-PFS-2, HR-OS/HR-PFS-1 and HR-OS/OR-ORR were r = 0.67 (95% CI 0.08-0.69), r = 0.12 (95% CI 0.00-0.13) and r = 0.21 (95% CI 0.00-0.33) respectively. Correlations between OS with surrogates was assessed in different subgroups according to post-progression survival times (SPP), types of treatment agents and rate of subsequent therapy after progression (table). Conclusions: Across diverse tumors and therapies, treatment effect on PFS-2 has modest to strong correlation with OS, but poor correlations were observed between OS-PFS-1 and OS-ORR respectively. Across all subgroups, PFS-2 performs consistently better than traditional surrogates of PFS-1 and ORR, validating and providing support for use in future RCTs.[Table: see text]

Multicenter phase II study of cetuximab plus docetaxel in 84 patients with recurrent or metastatic, platinum-pretreated SCCHN

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6048-6048 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. K. Knoedler ◽  
T. Gauler ◽  
A. Matzdorff ◽  
O. Jordan ◽  
M. Schroeder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Sensitivity ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

6048 Background: Cetuximab and docetaxel are both active in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). We investigated the efficacy of cetuximab plus docetaxel as second-line treatment in platinum-pre-treated patients with recurrent and or metastatic SCCHN. Methods: 84 patients were enrolled and received cetuximab (initial dose of 400 mg/m2, followed by subsequent weekly doses of 250 mg/m2) and docetaxel (35 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 of a 4-week cycle) for a maximum of 6 cycles. Patients with stable disease continued to receive cetuximab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate according to RECIST criteria. Secondary endpoints were response rate in relation to platinum sensitivity, progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity. Results: According to RECIST there were 10 PR (12%) and 23 SD (27%), resulting in a disease control rate of 39%. Response to protocol treatment was unrelated to previous platinum sensitivity. Median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 5.1) and median overall survival was 7 months (95% CI, 5.5 to 8.5). The duration on protocol treatment exceeded 12 months in 6 (8%) patients. Grade III/IV toxicities included gastric perforation (n = 1), pneumonia (n = 7), mucositis and skin toxicities. Conclusions: Cetuximab plus docetaxel was an active second-line treatment regimen with acceptable toxicity in patients with platinum-pretreated SCCHN. The responsiveness was independent of previous platinum sensitivity. [Table: see text]

Outcomes based on age in the phase 3 METEOR trial of cabozantinib (cabo) versus everolimus (eve) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 517-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frede Donskov ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Eric Voog ◽  
Elizabeth J. Hovey ◽  
Carsten Grüllich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Lesion Size ◽  
Target Lesion ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Mri Scans ◽  
Lesion Regression ◽  
The Impact ◽  
To Receive

517 Background: In the METEOR study (NCT01865747), cabo demonstrated improved progression-free survival (median 7.4 vs. 3.8 mo; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45–0.74; p<0.0001), OS (median 21.4 vs. 16.5 mo; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53-0.83, p=0.0003), and objective response rate (17% vs. 3%; p<0.0001) compared with eve in patients (pts) with advanced RCC who had received prior VEGFR TKI therapy (Choueiri NEJM 2015, Lancet Oncol 2016). Here we evaluate the impact of changes in target lesion size from baseline on OS. Methods: 658 pts were randomized 1:1 to receive cabo (60 mg qd) or eve (10 mg qd). Stratification factors were MSKCC risk group and number of prior VEGFR TKIs. Target lesion size was assessed per independent radiology review by CT/MRI scans at baseline, every 8 weeks for the first 12 months, and every 12 weeks thereafter. Three subgroups were defined by best change in target lesion size from baseline: decrease ≥30%, decrease <30%, and any increase. Results: The rate of target lesion regression was higher in the cabo arm (75%) compared with the eve arm (48%). A higher fraction of pts had a decrease ≥30% in target lesion size in the cabo arm, while a higher fraction of pts had an increase in target lesion size in the eve arm (Table). Medians for OS with cabo were not estimable (NE) (95% CI, NE‒NE), 20.8 mo (95% CI, 18.1‒NE), and 11.1 mo (95% CI, 7.6‒15.2) for the ≥30% decrease, <30% decrease, and any increase subgroups, respectively. Medians for OS with eve were NE (95% CI, 19.3‒NE), 18.0 mo (95% CI, 15.9‒20.4), and 14.0 mo (95% CI, 10.5‒16.3) for the ≥30% decrease, <30% decrease, and any increase subgroups, respectively. Median duration of follow-up for OS was 18.7 mo (IQR 16.1–21.1) for cabo and 18.8 mo (16.0–21.2) for eve. A higher proportion of pts received subsequent anticancer therapy in the any increase subgroup compared with the other subgroups. Conclusions: Cabo demonstrated a higher rate of tumor target lesion regression than eve, and greater target lesion regression was associated with improved OS in pts with advanced RCC. Clinical trial information: NCT01865747.

Two dosing regimens of nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) for advanced (adv) melanoma: Three-year results of CheckMate 511.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9516-9516
Author(s):  
Celeste Lebbe ◽  
Nicolas Meyer ◽  
Laurent Mortier ◽  
Ivan Marquez-Rodas ◽  
Caroline Robert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Unresectable Stage ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Dosing Regimens ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

9516 Background: NIVO 1 mg/kg plus IPI 3 mg/kg (NIVO1 + IPI3) is approved for treatment (tx) of unresectable/adv melanoma, with demonstrated durable clinical benefit on long-term follow-up. Analysis of the phase 3b/4 CheckMate 511 study (NCT02714218) at 1 y showed that NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg (NIVO3 + IPI1) improves the safety profile of the combination; efficacy with the 2 regimens was similar in descriptive analyses. Here we present 3-y safety/efficacy results. Methods: Patients (pts) ≥ 18 y of age with previously untreated unresectable stage III/IV melanoma were randomized 1:1 to receive NIVO3 + IPI1 Q3W × 4 (N = 180) or NIVO1 + IPI3 Q3W × 4 (N = 178), both followed by NIVO 480 mg Q4W until progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade (gr) 3–5 tx-related adverse events (TRAEs); secondary endpoints (descriptive analyses) included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The study was not powered to formally demonstrate noninferiority for efficacy endpoints. Results: At a median follow-up of 44.4 and 43.9 mo in the NIVO3 + IPI1 and NIVO1 + IPI3 groups, respectively, TRAEs led to tx discontinuation in 26% and 39% of pts; 57% and 42% of pts had received maintenance therapy. Gr 3–5 TRAE incidence remained significantly lower with NIVO3 + IPI1 than NIVO1 + IPI3 (33.9% vs 48.3%; odds ratio 0.55 [95% CI 0.36–0.84]). The most frequent TRAEs (any gr) were diarrhea (27%), fatigue (26%), and pruritus (26%) with NIVO3 + IPI1 and diarrhea (31%), pruritus (29%), and rash (27%) with NIVO1 + IPI3. In descriptive analyses, efficacy results were similar to those observed at 1 y. OS and tx-free–analysis outcomes were numerically similar in the 2 groups (table). Conclusions: At 3-y follow-up, NIVO3 + IPI1 continued to demonstrate an improved safety profile compared with NIVO1 + IPI3. In descriptive analyses, both groups demonstrated high 3-y OS rates that were numerically similar. This study provides important information regarding the benefit–risk profile of both dosing regimens of NIVO + IPI in pts with adv melanoma. Clinical trial information: NCT02714218. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals The Efficacy of TACE Combined With Lenvatinib Plus Sintilimab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fei Cao ◽  
Yi Yang ◽  
Tongguo Si ◽  
Jun Luo ◽  
Hui Zeng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Modified Recist

ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) combined with lenvatinib plus sintilimab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Patients and MethodsThe data of patients with unresectable HCC administered a combination therapy with TACE and lenvatinib plus sintilimab were retrospectively assessed. Patients received lenvatinib orally once daily 2 weeks before TACE, followed by sintilimab administration at 200 mg intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day therapeutic cycle after TACE. The primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) by the modified RECIST criteria.ResultsMedian duration of follow-up was 12.5 months (95%CI 9.1 to 14.8 months). ORR was 46.7% (28/60). Median DOR in confirmed responders was 10.0 months (95%CI 9.0-11.0 months). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 13.3 months (95%CI 11.9-14.7 months). Median overall survival (OS) was 23.6 months (95%CI 22.2-25.0 months).ConclusionsTACE combined with lenvatinib plus sintilimab is a promising therapeutic regimen in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document