Shukui Qin, Weijia Fang, Zhenggang Ren, Shuangyan Ou, Ho Yeong Lim, Feng Zhang, Kin Chung Lee, Hye Jin Choi, Jiandong Tong, Min Tao, A. Xu, Ashley Cheng, Chang-Hsien Lu, Chang-Fang Chiu, Mohamed Ibrahim Abdul Wahid, Shital Kamble, Josephine M. Norquist, Wenyan Zhong, Chen Li, Zhendong Chen
Introduction KEYNOTE-394 showed pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate with manageable safety versus placebo for patients from Asia with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We present results on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods HRQoL was evaluated using the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaires. Key HRQoL endpoints were least squares mean (LSM) score changes from baseline to week 12 and time to deterioration (TTD) for EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL. p values were one-sided and nominal without adjustment for multiplicity. Results The HRQoL population included patients randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n = 298) and placebo (n = 152). From baseline to week 12, a greater decline in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL score was observed with placebo (LSM, −8.4; 95% CI: −11.7 to −5.1) versus pembrolizumab (−4.0; 95% CI: −6.4 to −1.6; difference vs placebo: 4.4; 95% CI: 0.5–8.4; nominal p = 0.0142). Similarly, a greater decline in EQ-5D-3L visual analog scale score was observed with placebo (−6.9; 95% CI: −9.4 to −4.5) versus pembrolizumab (−2.7; 95% CI: −4.5 to −1.0; difference vs placebo: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.2–7.2; nominal p = 0.0030). TTD in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL score was similar between arms (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI: 0.58–1.25; nominal p = 0.1993). Conclusion Patients receiving placebo showed greater decline in HRQoL than those receiving pembrolizumab. Combined with efficacy and safety data from KEYNOTE-394 and the global KEYNOTE-240 and KEYNOTE-224 trials, our data support the clinically meaningful benefit and manageable tolerability of pembrolizumab as second-line therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.
{"title":"A Phase 3 Study of Pembrolizumab Versus Placebo for Previously Treated Patients From Asia With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Health-Related Quality of Life Analysis From KEYNOTE-394","authors":"Shukui Qin, Weijia Fang, Zhenggang Ren, Shuangyan Ou, Ho Yeong Lim, Feng Zhang, Kin Chung Lee, Hye Jin Choi, Jiandong Tong, Min Tao, A. Xu, Ashley Cheng, Chang-Hsien Lu, Chang-Fang Chiu, Mohamed Ibrahim Abdul Wahid, Shital Kamble, Josephine M. Norquist, Wenyan Zhong, Chen Li, Zhendong Chen","doi":"10.1159/000535338","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000535338","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction\u0000KEYNOTE-394 showed pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate with manageable safety versus placebo for patients from Asia with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We present results on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).\u0000\u0000Methods\u0000HRQoL was evaluated using the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaires. Key HRQoL endpoints were least squares mean (LSM) score changes from baseline to week 12 and time to deterioration (TTD) for EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL. p values were one-sided and nominal without adjustment for multiplicity.\u0000\u0000Results\u0000The HRQoL population included patients randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n = 298) and placebo (n = 152). From baseline to week 12, a greater decline in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL score was observed with placebo (LSM, −8.4; 95% CI: −11.7 to −5.1) versus pembrolizumab (−4.0; 95% CI: −6.4 to −1.6; difference vs placebo: 4.4; 95% CI: 0.5–8.4; nominal p = 0.0142). Similarly, a greater decline in EQ-5D-3L visual analog scale score was observed with placebo (−6.9; 95% CI: −9.4 to −4.5) versus pembrolizumab (−2.7; 95% CI: −4.5 to −1.0; difference vs placebo: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.2–7.2; nominal p = 0.0030). TTD in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL score was similar between arms (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI: 0.58–1.25; nominal p = 0.1993).\u0000\u0000Conclusion\u0000Patients receiving placebo showed greater decline in HRQoL than those receiving pembrolizumab. Combined with efficacy and safety data from KEYNOTE-394 and the global KEYNOTE-240 and KEYNOTE-224 trials, our data support the clinically meaningful benefit and manageable tolerability of pembrolizumab as second-line therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":"71 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.8,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139440684","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gi-Ae Kim, Seogsong Jeong, Heejoon Jang, Dong Hyeon Lee, S. Joo, Won Kim
Introduction: This study aimed to investigate the liver-related outcomes of newly suggested metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and MASLD with increased alcohol intake (MetALD), as well as alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD). Methods: From a National Health Insurance Service Health Screening Cohort, we included 369,094 participants who underwent health check-ups between 2009 and 2010 in South Korea. SLD was defined as a fatty liver index ≥60. The risk of primary liver cancer (PLCa), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), incident cirrhosis, and decompensated cirrhosis was compared with no steatotic liver disease (SLD). The subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) was calculated using the Fine–Gray model regarding competing risks. Results: A total of 3,232 participants (0.9%) developed PLCa during the median follow-up of 3,227,176 person-years: 0.5% with no SLD, 1.1% with MASLD, 1.3% with MetALD, and 1.9% with ALD. Competing risk analysis revealed that compared with no SLD, MASLD (SHR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.44−1.88), MetALD (SHR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.52−2.29), and ALD (SHR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.39−2.49) were associated with an increased risk of PLCa. MASLD (SHR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.67−2.31), MetALD (SHR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.75−2.84), and ALD (SHR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.67−3.29) were associated with a higher risk of HCC. No significant difference was observed in the risk of iCCA. The risk of incident cirrhosis and decompensated cirrhosis increased in the order of no SLD, MASLD, MetALD, and ALD. Conclusion: MASLD, MetALD, and ALD have an increased risk of PLCa, HCC, incident cirrhosis, and decompensated cirrhosis but not iCCA. These findings may serve as a robust ground for the prognostic value of the newly suggested MASLD and MetALD.
{"title":"MASLD and MetALD increase the risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma and incident or decompensated cirrhosis: a Korean nationwide study","authors":"Gi-Ae Kim, Seogsong Jeong, Heejoon Jang, Dong Hyeon Lee, S. Joo, Won Kim","doi":"10.1159/000535943","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000535943","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: This study aimed to investigate the liver-related outcomes of newly suggested metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and MASLD with increased alcohol intake (MetALD), as well as alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD).\u0000Methods: From a National Health Insurance Service Health Screening Cohort, we included 369,094 participants who underwent health check-ups between 2009 and 2010 in South Korea. SLD was defined as a fatty liver index ≥60. The risk of primary liver cancer (PLCa), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), incident cirrhosis, and decompensated cirrhosis was compared with no steatotic liver disease (SLD). The subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) was calculated using the Fine–Gray model regarding competing risks.\u0000Results: A total of 3,232 participants (0.9%) developed PLCa during the median follow-up of 3,227,176 person-years: 0.5% with no SLD, 1.1% with MASLD, 1.3% with MetALD, and 1.9% with ALD. Competing risk analysis revealed that compared with no SLD, MASLD (SHR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.44−1.88), MetALD (SHR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.52−2.29), and ALD (SHR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.39−2.49) were associated with an increased risk of PLCa. MASLD (SHR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.67−2.31), MetALD (SHR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.75−2.84), and ALD (SHR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.67−3.29) were associated with a higher risk of HCC. No significant difference was observed in the risk of iCCA. The risk of incident cirrhosis and decompensated cirrhosis increased in the order of no SLD, MASLD, MetALD, and ALD.\u0000Conclusion: MASLD, MetALD, and ALD have an increased risk of PLCa, HCC, incident cirrhosis, and decompensated cirrhosis but not iCCA. These findings may serve as a robust ground for the prognostic value of the newly suggested MASLD and MetALD.","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":"18 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138946984","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
H. Nam, Jaejun Lee, J. Han, S. Lee, Hyun Yang, H. Lee, P. Sung, H. Kim, Seok-Hwan Kim, Myeong Jun Song, J. Kwon, Chang Wook Kim, S. Nam, Si Hyun Bae, J. Choi, S. Yoon, J. W. Jang
Background: Despite the emergence of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (A+B) as standard first-line systemic therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a comprehensive understanding of the clinical significance of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) remains limited. We aimed to assess the impact of irAEs on patients with HCC undergoing A+B treatment. Methods: This multicentre retrospective study included consecutive patients with HCC who were treated with the A+B regimen from September 2020 to December 2022. Patients were categorised into three groups based on the severity of irAEs, ranging from those without any experience of irAEs to those with severe irAEs, classified as grade 3 or higher. Results: This study included 150 patients with HCC, with a mean age of 63.3 years. Among them, 93.3% of patients were classified as Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C, 52.0% had portal vein tumour thrombosis (PVTT), and 60.7% extrahepatic spread. Patients were classified as follows: Group 1 (n = 84) had no irAEs, Group 2 (n = 37) had mild irAEs (grade 1–2), and Group 3 (n = 29) had severe irAEs (grade ≥ 3). The median overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) were 13.6, 5.7, and 3.6 months, respectively. Group 2 demonstrated significantly superior OS compared to Group 1 (9.5 months) and Group 3 (5.6 months), with a median OS of 23.0 months (p < 0.001). Furthermore, Group 2 demonstrated significantly better outcomes in terms of PFS and TTD compared to both Group 1 and Group 3 (p < 0.001 for both). Multivariate analysis identified mild irAEs (hazard ratio [HR], 0.353; p = 0.010), ALBI grade 1 (HR, 0.389; p = 0.006), Child-Pugh class A (HR, 0.338; p = 0.002), and the absence of PVTT (HR, 0.556; p = 0.043) as independent predictors of better OS. Conclusions: Our study highlights the significant impact of irAE severity on the outcomes of patients with HCC receiving A+B. Notably, the occurrence of mild irAEs was independently associated with favourable survival, suggesting their potential role as surrogate indicators of HCC prognosis.
{"title":"Analysis of Immune-Related Adverse Events of Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Cohort Study","authors":"H. Nam, Jaejun Lee, J. Han, S. Lee, Hyun Yang, H. Lee, P. Sung, H. Kim, Seok-Hwan Kim, Myeong Jun Song, J. Kwon, Chang Wook Kim, S. Nam, Si Hyun Bae, J. Choi, S. Yoon, J. W. Jang","doi":"10.1159/000535839","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000535839","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Despite the emergence of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (A+B) as standard first-line systemic therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a comprehensive understanding of the clinical significance of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) remains limited. We aimed to assess the impact of irAEs on patients with HCC undergoing A+B treatment.\u0000Methods: This multicentre retrospective study included consecutive patients with HCC who were treated with the A+B regimen from September 2020 to December 2022. Patients were categorised into three groups based on the severity of irAEs, ranging from those without any experience of irAEs to those with severe irAEs, classified as grade 3 or higher.\u0000Results: This study included 150 patients with HCC, with a mean age of 63.3 years. Among them, 93.3% of patients were classified as Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C, 52.0% had portal vein tumour thrombosis (PVTT), and 60.7% extrahepatic spread. Patients were classified as follows: Group 1 (n = 84) had no irAEs, Group 2 (n = 37) had mild irAEs (grade 1–2), and Group 3 (n = 29) had severe irAEs (grade ≥ 3). The median overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) were 13.6, 5.7, and 3.6 months, respectively. Group 2 demonstrated significantly superior OS compared to Group 1 (9.5 months) and Group 3 (5.6 months), with a median OS of 23.0 months (p < 0.001). Furthermore, Group 2 demonstrated significantly better outcomes in terms of PFS and TTD compared to both Group 1 and Group 3 (p < 0.001 for both). Multivariate analysis identified mild irAEs (hazard ratio [HR], 0.353; p = 0.010), ALBI grade 1 (HR, 0.389; p = 0.006), Child-Pugh class A (HR, 0.338; p = 0.002), and the absence of PVTT (HR, 0.556; p = 0.043) as independent predictors of better OS.\u0000Conclusions: Our study highlights the significant impact of irAE severity on the outcomes of patients with HCC receiving A+B. Notably, the occurrence of mild irAEs was independently associated with favourable survival, suggesting their potential role as surrogate indicators of HCC prognosis.\u0000","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138951750","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Objective Response to Systemic Therapy is a Strong Predictor of Overall Survival in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma","authors":"Masatoshi Kudo","doi":"10.1159/000535516","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000535516","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":"35 3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.8,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139214465","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A. Ichida, J. Arita, E. Hatano, S. Eguchi, A. Saiura, Hiroaki Nagano, J. Shindoh, Masaji Hashimoto, Nobuyuki Takemura, K. Taura, Y. Sakamoto, Yu Takahashi, Y. Seyama, Yasuharu Sasaki, Kohei Uemura, N. Kokudo, Kiyoshi Hasegawa
Introduction: The phase III REFLECT trial demonstrated that lenvatinib was superior to sorafenib in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression, and objective response rate (ORR) for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of preoperative lenvatinib therapy for patients with oncologically or technically unresectable HCC. Methods: In this multicenter single-arm phase II trial, patients with advanced HCC and factors suggestive of a poor prognosis (macroscopic vascular invasion, extrahepatic metastasis, or multinodular tumors) were enrolled. Patients with these factors, even with technically resectable HCC, were defined as oncologically unresectable because of the expected poor prognosis after surgery. After 8 weeks of lenvatinib therapy, the patients were assessed for resectability, and tumor resection was performed if the tumor was considered technically resectable. The primary endpoint was the surgical resection rate. The secondary endpoints were the macroscopic curative resection rate, overall survival (OS), ORR, PFS, and the change in the indocyanine green retention rate at 15 minutes as measured before and after lenvatinib therapy. The trial was registered with the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (s031190057). Results: Between July 2019 and January 2021, 49 patients (42 oncologically unresectable patients and 7 technically unresectable patients) from 11 centers were enrolled. The ORR was 37.5% based on mRECIST and 12.5% based on RECIST version 1.1. Thirty-three patients underwent surgery (surgical resection rate: 67.3%) without perioperative mortality. The surgical resection rate was 76.2% for oncologically unresectable patients and 14.3% for technically unresectable patients. The 1-year OS rate and median PFS were 75.9% and 7.2 months, respectively, with a median follow-up period of 9.3 months. Conclusions: The relatively high surgical resection rate seen in this study suggests the safety and feasibility of lenvatinib therapy followed by surgical resection for patients with oncologically or technically unresectable HCC.
{"title":"A Multicenter Phase 2 Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Preoperative Lenvatinib Therapy for Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (LENS-HCC Trial)","authors":"A. Ichida, J. Arita, E. Hatano, S. Eguchi, A. Saiura, Hiroaki Nagano, J. Shindoh, Masaji Hashimoto, Nobuyuki Takemura, K. Taura, Y. Sakamoto, Yu Takahashi, Y. Seyama, Yasuharu Sasaki, Kohei Uemura, N. Kokudo, Kiyoshi Hasegawa","doi":"10.1159/000535514","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000535514","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The phase III REFLECT trial demonstrated that lenvatinib was superior to sorafenib in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression, and objective response rate (ORR) for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of preoperative lenvatinib therapy for patients with oncologically or technically unresectable HCC. Methods: In this multicenter single-arm phase II trial, patients with advanced HCC and factors suggestive of a poor prognosis (macroscopic vascular invasion, extrahepatic metastasis, or multinodular tumors) were enrolled. Patients with these factors, even with technically resectable HCC, were defined as oncologically unresectable because of the expected poor prognosis after surgery. After 8 weeks of lenvatinib therapy, the patients were assessed for resectability, and tumor resection was performed if the tumor was considered technically resectable. The primary endpoint was the surgical resection rate. The secondary endpoints were the macroscopic curative resection rate, overall survival (OS), ORR, PFS, and the change in the indocyanine green retention rate at 15 minutes as measured before and after lenvatinib therapy. The trial was registered with the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (s031190057). Results: Between July 2019 and January 2021, 49 patients (42 oncologically unresectable patients and 7 technically unresectable patients) from 11 centers were enrolled. The ORR was 37.5% based on mRECIST and 12.5% based on RECIST version 1.1. Thirty-three patients underwent surgery (surgical resection rate: 67.3%) without perioperative mortality. The surgical resection rate was 76.2% for oncologically unresectable patients and 14.3% for technically unresectable patients. The 1-year OS rate and median PFS were 75.9% and 7.2 months, respectively, with a median follow-up period of 9.3 months. Conclusions: The relatively high surgical resection rate seen in this study suggests the safety and feasibility of lenvatinib therapy followed by surgical resection for patients with oncologically or technically unresectable HCC.","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.8,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139224239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Masatoshi Kudo, Kaoru Tsuchiya, Y. Shao, R. Finn, Peter R. Galle, Michel Ducreux, Ann-Lii Cheng, Tatsuya Yamashita, Hironori Koga, R. Take, Kyoko Yamada, T. Asakawa, Yuki Nakagawa, Masafumi Ikeda
Introduction: The Phase III IMbrave150 study established atezolizumab + bevacizumab as the global standard of care in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This exploratory analysis examined the impact of bevacizumab interruption due to bevacizumab adverse events of special interest (AESIs). Methods: Patients in IMbrave150 who were randomized to atezolizumab + bevacizumab and received treatment for ≥6 months (to reduce immortal time bias) were included in group A-1 if bevacizumab had ever been skipped due to bevacizumab AESIs or to group A-2 otherwise. Efficacy analyses included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by whether bevacizumab was skipped (group A-1 vs A-2). PFS was evaluated per independent review facility (IRF)–assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1 and HCC-modified RECIST (IRF-HCC mRECIST). Safety was also evaluated. Results: Of the 210 patients who received ≥6 months of atezolizumab + bevacizumab, 69 were assigned to group A-1 and 141 to A-2. At data cutoff (August 20, 2020), hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.64, 1.69) for group A-1 vs A-2. HR for PFS was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.55) per IRF-assessed RECIST 1.1 and 1.10 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.59; 15.5 vs 9.7 months) per IRF-HCC mRECIST for group A-1 vs A-2. Safety profiles for atezolizumab and bevacizumab were largely similar between groups. More group A-1 patients had grade 3/4 adverse events. A separate analysis investigating the impact of immortal time bias in patients who received ≥3 months of atezolizumab + bevacizumab supported the appropriateness of the ≥6-month landmark analysis. Discussion/Conclusion: Efficacy was similar between patients who skipped bevacizumab due to bevacizumab AESIs and those who did not. Although this comparison was nonrandomized and exploratory, results suggest that skipping bevacizumab due to bevacizumab AESIs did not considerably impact the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab.
{"title":"Impact of Bevacizumab Being Skipped due to Adverse Events of Special Interest for Bevacizumab in Patients With Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab: An Exploratory Analysis of the Phase III IMbrave150 study","authors":"Masatoshi Kudo, Kaoru Tsuchiya, Y. Shao, R. Finn, Peter R. Galle, Michel Ducreux, Ann-Lii Cheng, Tatsuya Yamashita, Hironori Koga, R. Take, Kyoko Yamada, T. Asakawa, Yuki Nakagawa, Masafumi Ikeda","doi":"10.1159/000535501","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000535501","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The Phase III IMbrave150 study established atezolizumab + bevacizumab as the global standard of care in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This exploratory analysis examined the impact of bevacizumab interruption due to bevacizumab adverse events of special interest (AESIs). Methods: Patients in IMbrave150 who were randomized to atezolizumab + bevacizumab and received treatment for ≥6 months (to reduce immortal time bias) were included in group A-1 if bevacizumab had ever been skipped due to bevacizumab AESIs or to group A-2 otherwise. Efficacy analyses included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by whether bevacizumab was skipped (group A-1 vs A-2). PFS was evaluated per independent review facility (IRF)–assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1 and HCC-modified RECIST (IRF-HCC mRECIST). Safety was also evaluated. Results: Of the 210 patients who received ≥6 months of atezolizumab + bevacizumab, 69 were assigned to group A-1 and 141 to A-2. At data cutoff (August 20, 2020), hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.64, 1.69) for group A-1 vs A-2. HR for PFS was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.55) per IRF-assessed RECIST 1.1 and 1.10 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.59; 15.5 vs 9.7 months) per IRF-HCC mRECIST for group A-1 vs A-2. Safety profiles for atezolizumab and bevacizumab were largely similar between groups. More group A-1 patients had grade 3/4 adverse events. A separate analysis investigating the impact of immortal time bias in patients who received ≥3 months of atezolizumab + bevacizumab supported the appropriateness of the ≥6-month landmark analysis. Discussion/Conclusion: Efficacy was similar between patients who skipped bevacizumab due to bevacizumab AESIs and those who did not. Although this comparison was nonrandomized and exploratory, results suggest that skipping bevacizumab due to bevacizumab AESIs did not considerably impact the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab.","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.8,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139217114","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sang Youn Hwang, Sangjune L. Lee, Hongqun Liu, Samuel S. Lee
Background: Immune check point inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy such as atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or durvalumab plus tremelimumab became mainstream first-line systemic treatment in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients since remarkably superior efficacy of ICI-based therapy compared to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) was reported in two recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (IMbrave150, HIMALAYA). However, the optimal second-line therapy after treatment failure of first-line ICI-based therapy remains unknown as no RCT has examined this issue. Summary: Therefore, at present most clinicians are empirically treating patients with TKIs or retrial of ICI or locoregional treatment (LRT) modality such as transarterial therapy, radiofrequency ablation, and radiation therapy in this clinical setting without solid evidence. In this review, we will discuss current optimal strategies for second-line treatment after the failure of first-line ICI-based therapy by reviewing published studies and ongoing prospective trials. Key Messages: Clinicians should consider carefully whether to treat the patients with TKI, other ICI-based therapy, or LRT in this situation by considering several factors including liver function reserve, performance status, adverse events of previous therapy, and presence of lesion that can consider LRT such as oligoprogression, vascular invasion, etc. In the meantime, we await the results of ongoing prospective trials to elucidate the best management options.
{"title":"Second-Line Treatment after Failure of Immune Check Point Inhibitors in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, Retrial of Immunotherapy, or Locoregional Therapy?","authors":"Sang Youn Hwang, Sangjune L. Lee, Hongqun Liu, Samuel S. Lee","doi":"10.1159/000534303","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000534303","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Immune check point inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy such as atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or durvalumab plus tremelimumab became mainstream first-line systemic treatment in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients since remarkably superior efficacy of ICI-based therapy compared to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) was reported in two recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (IMbrave150, HIMALAYA). However, the optimal second-line therapy after treatment failure of first-line ICI-based therapy remains unknown as no RCT has examined this issue. Summary: Therefore, at present most clinicians are empirically treating patients with TKIs or retrial of ICI or locoregional treatment (LRT) modality such as transarterial therapy, radiofrequency ablation, and radiation therapy in this clinical setting without solid evidence. In this review, we will discuss current optimal strategies for second-line treatment after the failure of first-line ICI-based therapy by reviewing published studies and ongoing prospective trials. Key Messages: Clinicians should consider carefully whether to treat the patients with TKI, other ICI-based therapy, or LRT in this situation by considering several factors including liver function reserve, performance status, adverse events of previous therapy, and presence of lesion that can consider LRT such as oligoprogression, vascular invasion, etc. In the meantime, we await the results of ongoing prospective trials to elucidate the best management options.","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":"54 24","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136282218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：