scholarly journals Scientific Rationale for Combined Immunotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 Antibodies and VEGF Inhibitors in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1089 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masatoshi Kudo
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Vegf Receptor ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Vegf Inhibitors ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials ◽  
Immunosuppressive Microenvironment

A successful phase III trial for the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (the IMbrave150 trial) in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma has recently been reported. This is groundbreaking because nivolumab and pembrolizumab, both programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) antibodies, have failed to show efficacy as first- and second-line therapeutics, respectively, in phase III clinical trials. Immunotherapy with a combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab resulted in better survival than treatment with sorafenib for the first time since sorafenib was approved in 2007. The high efficacy of the combination of PD-1/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibodies is not only due to their additive effects on tumor growth, but also to their reprogramming of the immunosuppressive microenvironment into an immunostimulatory microenvironment. These results were confirmed in a phase Ib trial that showed significantly longer progression-free survival in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group than in patients that received atezolizumab alone. These results demonstrate that immunotherapy with a combination of PD-1/PD-L1 and VEGF inhibitors is effective and may result in a reprogramming of the tumor microenvironment. The results of an ongoing phase III trial of a PD-1 antibody in combination with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) are highly anticipated.

Clinical Outcomes of 2nd- and 3rd-Line Regorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Oncology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Kensuke Naruto ◽  
Tomokazu Kawaoka ◽  
Kei Amioka ◽  
Yutaro Ogawa ◽  
Kikukawa Chihiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> This study compared clinical outcomes of 2nd- and 3rd-line regorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> In this retrospective cohort study, 48 patients were treated with regorafenib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Thirty-five and 13 patients were initiated on 2nd- and 3rd-line therapy, respectively. We assessed the responses to and safety of the therapy. <b><i>Results:</i></b> There were no statistically significant differences in clinical characteristics at the start of 2nd- or 3rd-line regorafenib therapy. The overall response rate of 2nd- and 3rd-line regorafenib was 20 and 8%, respectively. The disease control rate was 57 and 54%, respectively. Median overall survival (mOS) from the start of 2nd-line regorafenib was 17.5 months. mOS from the start of 3rd-line regorafenib was not obtained. Median progression-free survival of 2nd- and 3rd-line regorafenib was 4.9 and 2.3 months, respectively. mOS from 1st-line therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitor plus sorafenib-regorafenib-lenvatinib was 29.5 months; that with lenvatinib-sorafenib-regorafenib was not obtained. Patients on 3rd-line therapy tended to have better Child-Pugh scores and tumor factors at the start of 1st-line therapy than other patients. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Patients on 2nd- and 3rd-line regorafenib showed favorable responses. Good Child-Pugh scores and tumor factors may be associated with a better response rate and OS.

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.

scholarly journals Cabozantinib in combination with atezolizumab versus sorafenib in treatment-naive advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: COSMIC-312 Phase III study design

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (21) ◽  
pp. 1525-1536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Kate Kelley ◽  
Jennifer W Oliver ◽  
Saswati Hazra ◽  
Fawzi Benzaghou ◽  
Thomas Yau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Single Agent Therapy ◽  
Treatment Naïve ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Immunomodulatory Properties

Cabozantinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets VEGFR, MET and the TAM (TYRO3, AXL, MER) family of kinase receptors. In addition to their role in tumor growth and angiogenesis, cabozantinib targets promote an immune-suppressive microenvironment. Cabozantinib is approved as single-agent therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who received prior sorafenib. Owing to its antitumor and immunomodulatory properties, cabozantinib is being developed in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Early studies of these combinations have shown promising antitumor activity and tolerability in patients with solid tumors. Here, we describe the rationale and design of COSMIC-312, a Phase III study evaluating the safety and efficacy of cabozantinib in combination with atezolizumab (anti–PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) versus sorafenib for treatment-naive patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. ClinicalTrial.gov Registration: NCT03755791

scholarly journals Real-World Efficacy and Safety of Lenvatinib in Korean Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis

Liver Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 613-624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaekyung Cheon ◽  
Hong Jae Chon ◽  
Yeonghak Bang ◽  
Neung Hwa Park ◽  
Jung Woo Shin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Real World ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Clinical Trial Data ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line

Introduction/Objective: Lenvatinib demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the randomized phase III REFLECT trial. Considering the discrepancies in patients between clinical trial data and daily practice, an account of practical experience is needed. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis in which 3 tertiary referral centers participated. A total of 92 patients with advanced HCC treated with lenvatinib between September 2018 and January 2020 were analyzed. Results: Lenvatinib was used as the first-line therapy for 67 (72.8%) patients, and for 25 (27.2%) patients previously treated with other systemic therapy including immune checkpoint inhibitors. At the time of initiation of lenvatinib, 74 (80.4%) and 18 (19.6%) patients were classified as Child-Pugh A and B, respectively. Thirty-five patients (38.0%) had extensive disease that would have excluded them from the REFLECT trial. In the Child-Pugh A group, the response rate graded according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 was 21.1%, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1–6.1) months, and overall survival (OS) was 10.7 (95% CI 4.8–16.5) months for patients treated with first-line lenvatinib (n = 57). With second- or later-line lenvatinib (n = 17), median PFS and OS were 4.1 (95% CI 3.1–5.1) and 6.4 (95% CI 5.1–7.7) months, respectively. In the Child-Pugh B group (n = 18), median PFS and OS were 2.6 (95% CI 0.6–4.6) and 5.3 (95% CI 2.0–8.5) months, respectively. The most common grade 3–4 toxicities were hyperbilirubinemia (n = 8; 8.7%), AST elevation (n = 6; 6.5%), and diarrhea (n = 5; 5.4%) across all study patients. Conclusions: In this real-world study, lenvatinib was found to be well tolerated and effective in more heterogeneous HCC patient populations.

Efficacy of Daratumumab Based Regimens Compared to Standard of Care for Transplant Ineligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma in Phase III Clinical Trials: A Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 32-33
Author(s):  
Zahoor Ahmed ◽  
Karun Neupane ◽  
Rabia Ashraf ◽  
Amna Khan ◽  
Moazzam Shahzad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials

Introduction: Daratumumab (Dara) is a human anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody approved for multiple myeloma (MM) treatment. Dara has a promising efficacy and a favorable safety profile in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients. This study is focused on the efficacy and safety of Dara when added to the standard care regimen in transplant ineligible NDMM in phase III clinical trials. Methods: We performed a comprehensive database search on four major databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov). Our search strategy included MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms and key words for multiple myeloma and Dara including trade names and generic names from date of inception to May 2020. Initial search revealed 587 articles. After excluding review articles, duplicates, and non-relevant articles, two phase III clinical trials were included which reported overall response rate (ORR), and progression free survival (PFS) of transplant ineligible NDMM patients with Dara addition to standard care regimen. Odds ratios (OR) of ORR were computed and hazard ratios (HR) of PFS (along with 95% confidence intervals; CI) were extracted to compute a pooled HR using a fixed effect model in RevMan v.5.4. Results: A total of 1453 transplant ineligible NDMM patients were enrolled and evaluated in two phase III randomized clinical trials. Seven hundred and eighteen patients were in Dara group and 735 patients were in control group. Bahlis et al. (2019) studied Dara + lenolidamide (R) and dexamethasone (d) vs Rd in NDMM pts (n=737) in MAIA phase III trial. Similarly, Mateos et al. (2018) reported the role of Dara + bortezomib (V) + melphalan (M), and prednisone (P) vs VMP in NDMM pts (n=706) in a phase III trial (Alcyone). A pooled analysis of these phase III trials showed ORR (OR: 3.26, 95% CI 2.36-4.49; p &lt; 0.00001, I2 = 0%), and progression free survival (PFS) (HR: 0.53, 95% CI 0.43-0.65; p &lt; 0.00001, I2 = 0%). Achievement of minimal residual disease (MRD) negative status was significant in Dara based regimen as compared to control group (OR: 4.49, 95% CI 3.31-6.37; p &lt; 0.00001, I2 = 0%). Dara addition to standard care regimen (Rd and VMP) decreased the risk of progression/death to 42% (HR: 0.58, 95% CI 0.48-0.70; p &lt; 0.00001, I2 = 0%). The addition of Dara increased the risk of neutropenia (OR: 1.41, 95% CI 1.07-1.85; p &lt; 0.02, I2 = 44%), and pneumonia (OR: 2.25, 95% CI 1.54-3.29; p &lt; 0.0001, I2 = 37%) vs control group. However, decreased risk of anemia (OR: 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.85: p &lt; 0.002, I2=30%) was observed in Dara group vs control group (Figure 1). Conclusion: Addition of Dara to the standard care regimen for transplant ineligible NDMM achieved the surrogate end points with improved efficacy and MRD negative status with manageable toxicity. However, data from more randomized controlled trials is needed. Table Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

KEYNOTE-224: Phase II study of pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS504-TPS504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew X. Zhu ◽  
Jennifer J. Knox ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Stephen L. Chan ◽  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Locoregional Therapy ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Previously Treated

TPS504 Background: The tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib is the standard of care for first-line hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). For patients with HCC after disease progression on sorafenib or for those with intolerance to sorafenib, no approved therapies are available. Because HCC is often driven by inflammation and is also associated with a suppressed immunoenvironment, there is a strong rationale to evaluate immunotherapy in patients with this type of cancer. The single-arm, multisite, phase 2 KEYNOTE-224 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02702414) was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the anti–PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced HCC. Methods: Approximately 100 patients will be enrolled. Inclusion criteria include age ≥18 years, histologically or cytologically confirmed diagnosis of HCC Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C disease or BCLC stage B disease not amenable to or refractory to locoregional therapy, and disease not amenable to a curative treatment approach (eg, transplantation, surgery, or ablation). Patients must also have measurable disease based on RECIST v1.1 as confirmed by central imaging vendor review, documented objective radiographic progression after stopping treatment with sorafenib or intolerance to sorafenib, Child-Pugh liver score A, ECOG performance status 0-1, and predicted life expectancy > 3 months. Patients will be allocated to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles (~2 years) or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Response will be assessed every 9 weeks per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review. Adverse events (AEs) will be assessed throughout treatment and for 30 days thereafter (90 days for serious AEs) and graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0. The primary end point is objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review. Secondary end points are overall survival; safety and tolerability; and duration of response, disease control rate, time to progression, and progression-free survival per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review. Enrollment in KEYNOTE-224 is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02702414.

Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Study of Oxaliplatin Plus Fluorouracil/Leucovorin Versus Doxorubicin As Palliative Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma From Asia

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (28) ◽  
pp. 3501-3508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shukui Qin ◽  
Yuxian Bai ◽  
Ho Yeong Lim ◽  
Sumitra Thongprasert ◽  
Yee Chao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Palliative Chemotherapy ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Local Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Open Label ◽  
End Point

Purpose To determine whether FOLFOX4 (infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) administered as palliative chemotherapy to patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) provides a survival benefit and efficacy versus doxorubicin. Patients and Methods This multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase III study in mainland China, Taiwan, Korea, and Thailand involved 371 patients age 18 to 75 years who had locally advanced or metastatic HCC and were ineligible for curative resection or local treatment. They were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive either FOLFOX4 (n = 184) or doxorubicin (n = 187). The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR) by RECIST (version 1.0), and safety. Results At the prespecified final analysis, median OS was 6.40 months with FOLFOX4 (95% CI, 5.30 to 7.03) and 4.97 months with doxorubicin (95% CI, 4.23 to 6.03; P = .07; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.02). Median PFS was 2.93 months with FOLFOX4 (95% CI, 2.43 to 3.53), and 1.77 months with doxorubicin (95% CI, 1.63 to 2.30; P < .001; HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.79). RR was 8.15% with FOLFOX4 and 2.67% with doxorubicin (P = .02). On continued follow-up, the trend toward increased OS with FOLFOX4 was maintained (P = .04; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.99). Toxicity was consistent with previous experiences with FOLFOX4; proportions of grade 3 to 4 adverse events were similar between treatments. Conclusion Although the study did not meet its primary end point, the trend toward improved OS with FOLFOX4, along with increased PFS and RR, suggests that this regimen may confer some benefit to Asian patients, but an OS benefit cannot be concluded from these data.

scholarly journals Immunotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a focus on special subgroups

Gut ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 204-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Pinter ◽  
Bernhard Scheiner ◽  
Markus Peck-Radosavljevic
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Solid Organ Transplantation ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Solid Organ ◽  
United States Food ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Following the success of immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) in different cancer types, a large number of studies are currently investigating ICBs in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), alone or in combination with other treatments. Both nivolumab and pembrolizumab, as well as the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab have been granted accelerated approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sorafenib-pretreated patients. While nivolumab and pembrolizumab both failed to meet their primary endpoints in phase III trials, the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab eventually improved overall and progression-free survival compared with sorafenib in a front-line phase III trial, and thus, will become the new standard of care in this setting. Despite this breakthrough, there are patient populations with certain underlying conditions that may not be ideal candidates for this new treatment either due to safety concerns or potential lack of efficacy. In this review, we discuss the safety of ICBs in patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease, IBD or a history of solid organ transplantation. Moreover, we summarise emerging preclinical and clinical data suggesting that ICBs may be less efficacious in patients with underlying non-alcoholic steatohepatitis or HCCs with activated Wnt/β-catenin signalling.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document