Donafenib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: An open-label, randomized, multicenter phase II/III trial.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4506-4506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Bi ◽  
Shukui Qin ◽  
Shanzhi Gu ◽  
Yuxian Bai ◽  
Zhendong Chen ◽  
...  

4506 Background: Sorafenib is still the standard first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Donafenib, a novel multikinase inhibitor, showed potential benefits in a previous phase Ib study in HCC. Methods: In this open-label, randomized phase II/III trial (ZGDH3), patients with unresectable or metastatic HCC, a Child-Pugh liver function score ≤ 7, and no prior systemic therapy were enrolled from 37 sites across China and randomized (1:1) to receive oral donafenib (0.2 g) or sorafenib (0.4 g) twice daily until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Efficacy analysis was primarily based on the full analysis set (FAS). Results: Between March 2016 and April 2018, 668 patients were randomized (donafenib, 334; sorafenib, 334) and included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) set, of whom 659 were analysed by FAS (328 vs 331). Donafenib was associated with a significantly longer median OS than sorafenib in both FAS (12.1 months vs 10.3 months, hazard ratio 0.831, 95% confidence interval 0.699–0.988, p = 0.0363) and ITT (12.0 months vs 10.1 months, 0.839, 0.706–0.996, p = 0.0446). There were no significant differences in median progression-free survival (3.7 months vs 3.6 months, p = 0.2824), objective response rate (4.6% vs 2.7%, p = 0.2448), and disease control rate (30.8% vs 28.7%, p = 0.5532). Grade 3 or worse adverse events (AEs) occurred in 191 (57.4%) and 224 (67.5%) patients ( p = 0.0082), respectively, and AEs of special interest and those leading to treatment interruption occurred in 287 (86.2%) vs 309 (93.1%, p = 0.0049) and 101 (30.3%) vs 141 (42.5%, p = 0.0013). A numerically lower number of patients reported serious AEs (55 [16.5%] vs 67 [20.2%], p = 0.2307) with donafenib. Common AEs with donafenib included hand-foot skin reaction (50.5%), aspartate aminotransferase increased (40.5%), blood bilirubin increased (39.0%), platelet count decreased (37.8%), and diarrhea (36.6%). Conclusions: Donafenib significantly improves OS over sorafenib with favourable safety and tolerability. Donafenib is a promising superior first-line therapy for advanced HCC. Funding: Zelgen. Clinical trial information: NCT02645981 .

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. 1973-1983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joong-Won Park ◽  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
Jun Suk Kim ◽  
Mark Karwal ◽  
Ruby K. Li ◽  
...  

Oncology ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 85 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chih-Hung Hsu ◽  
Yoon Koo Kang ◽  
Tsai-Shen Yang ◽  
Chia-Tung Shun ◽  
Yu-Yun Shao ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. JCO.21.00163
Author(s):  
Shukui Qin ◽  
Feng Bi ◽  
Shanzhi Gu ◽  
Yuxian Bai ◽  
Zhendong Chen ◽  
...  

PURPOSE Donafenib, a novel multikinase inhibitor and a deuterated sorafenib derivative, has shown efficacy in phase Ia and Ib hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) studies. This study compared the efficacy and safety of donafenib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for advanced HCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS This open-label, randomized, parallel-controlled, multicenter phase II-III trial enrolled patients with unresectable or metastatic HCC, a Child-Pugh score ≤ 7, and no prior systemic therapy from 37 sites across China. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral donafenib (0.2 g) or sorafenib (0.4 g) twice daily until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), tested for noninferiority and superiority. Efficacy was primarily assessed in the full analysis set (FAS), and safety was assessed in all treated patients. RESULTS Between March 21, 2016, and April 16, 2018, 668 patients (intention-to-treat) were randomly assigned to donafenib and sorafenib treatment arms; the FAS included 328 and 331 patients, respectively. Median OS was significantly longer with donafenib than sorafenib treatment (FAS; 12.1 v 10.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.831; 95% CI, 0.699 to 0.988; P = .0245); donafenib also exhibited superior OS outcomes versus sorafenib in the intention-to-treat population. The median progression-free survival was 3.7 v 3.6 months ( P = .0570). The objective response rate was 4.6% v 2.7% ( P = .2448), and the disease control rate was 30.8% v 28.7% (FAS; P = .5532). Drug-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in significantly fewer patients receiving donafenib than sorafenib (125 [38%] v 165 [50%]; P = .0018). CONCLUSION Donafenib showed superiority over sorafenib in improving OS and has favorable safety and tolerability in Chinese patients with advanced HCC, showing promise as a potential first-line monotherapy for these patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document