Effectiveness of sorafenib dose modifications on treatment outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma: Analysis in real‐life settings

Multicentre phase II trial of cabozantinib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There has been a lack of prospective data on treatment after immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We conducted a phase II multicentred study on cabozantinib in HCC after ICI treatment.

METHODS

This is an investigator-initiated single-arm clinical trial involving academic centres in Hong Kong and Korea. Key eligibility criteria include diagnosis of HCC; refractoriness to prior ICI-based treatment; Child-Pugh A liver function. Maximally two prior lines of therapy were allowed. All patients were commenced cabozantinib at 60mg/day. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Total 47 patients were recruited from Oct 2020 to May 2022. The median follow-up was 11.2 months. In the study, 27 and 20 patients received one and two prior therapies. The median PFS was 4.1 months (95%CI:3.3-5.3). The median OS was 9.9 months (95%CI:7.3-14.4), and the 1-year OS rate was 45.3%. Partial response and stable disease occurred in 3 (6.4%) and 36 (76.6%) of patients. When used as a second-line treatment (n=20), cabozantinib was associated with a median PFS and OS of 4.3 (95%CI:3.3-6.7) and 14.3 months (95%CI:8.9-NR). The corresponding median PFS and OS was 4.3 (95%CI:3.3-11.0) and 14.3 months (95%CI:9.0-NR) for those receiving ICI-based regimen with proven benefits (n=17). Commonest grade 3-4 TRAE was thrombocytopenia (6.4%). The median dose of cabozantinib was 40mg/day. The number of prior therapy was an independent prognosticator (one vs. two; HR=0.37; p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Cabozantinib demonstrates efficacy in patients with prior ICI. The survival data of second-line cabozantinib following the first-line ICI regimen provide reference for clinical trial testing post-ICI therapy. The number of prior line of treatment may be considered a stratification factor in randomized study.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

There is a lack of prospective data on systemic therapy following prior immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The current phase II clinical trial reported the efficacy and safety data of cabozantinib in patients with prior ICI-based treatment. Exploratory analyses showed that the performance of cabozantinib differed significantly when used as second or third-line treatment. The above data could be used a reference for clinical practice and design of future clinical trials on subsequent treatment following ICIs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04588051.

Treatment and Implications of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibitor-Induced Blood Pressure Rise: A Clinical Cohort Study

Background Anti-cancer vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFI) frequently induce a rise in blood pressure (BP). The most effective treatment of this BP rise is currently unknown, and risk factors and its association with survival remain inconclusive. Methods and Results Baseline characteristics and BP readings were retrospectively collected from oncology patients who received oral VEGFI treatment (sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, regorafenib, lenvatinib, or cabozantinib). Risk factors for a clinically relevant BP rise (increase of ≥20 mm Hg in systolic BP or ≥10 mm Hg in diastolic BP) were investigated via logistic regression (relative), efficacy of antihypertensives via unpaired t-tests, and association of BP rise with survival via Cox regression analysis. In total, 162 (47%) of 343 included patients developed a clinically relevant BP rise ≥7 days after VEGFI treatment initiation. Both calcium channel blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors effectively reduced systolic BP (-24.1 and -18.2 mm Hg, respectively) and diastolic BP (-12.0 and -11.0 mm Hg, respectively). Pazopanib therapy (odds ratio, 2.71 [95% CI, 1.35-5.42; P=0.005], compared with sorafenib) and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min per 1.73 m² (OR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.99-3.18, P=0.054]) were risk factors for a BP rise, whereas a baseline BP ≥140/90 mm Hg associated with a lower risk (OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.25-0.62, P<0.001]). Only for renal cell carcinoma, BP rise was associated with a substantially improved median overall survival compared with no BP rise: 45.4 versus 20.3 months, respectively, P=0.003. Conclusions The type of VEGFI, baseline BP, and baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate determine the VEGFI-induced BP rise. Both calcium channel blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors are effective antihypertensive treatments. Particularly in patients with renal cell carcinoma, a BP rise is associated with improved overall survival.

Real-world treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health care resource utilization in advanced unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND: The incidence of advanced unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in developed countries and the prognosis of advanced HCC remains poor. Real-world evidence of treatment patterns and outcomes can highlight the unmet clinical need. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study of patients with advanced unresectable HCC diagnosed in Alberta, Canada (2008-2018) using electronic medical records and administrative claims data. A chart review was conducted on patients treated with systemic therapy to capture additional information related to treatment. RESULTS: A total of 1,297 advanced HCC patients were included of whom 555 (42.8%) were recurrent cases and the remainder were unresectable at diagnosis. Median age at diagnosis was 64 (range 21-94) years and 82.1% were men. Only 274 patients (21.1%) received first-line systemic therapy and, of those, 32 patients (11.7%) initiated second-line therapy. Nearly all of the patients received sorafenib (>96.4%) in first-line, and these patients had considerably higher median survival (12.23 months; 95% CI 10.72-14.10) compared with patients not treated with systemic therapy (2.66 months; 95% CI 2.33-3.12; log-rank p <0.001). Among patients treated with systemic therapy, overall survival was higher for recurrent cases, patients with Child-Pugh A functional status, and patients with HCV or multiple known HCC risk factors (p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In a Canadian real-world setting, patients who received systemic therapy had greater survival than those who did not, but outcomes were universally poor. These results underscore the need for effective front-line therapeutic options.

Feasibility of therapeutic drug monitoring of sorafenib in patients with liver or thyroid cancer

INTRODUCTION

Sorafenib is a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, thyroid carcinoma, and desmoid fibromatosis. As high inter-individual variability exists in exposure, there is a scientific rationale to pursue therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). We investigated the feasibility of TDM in patients on sorafenib and tried to identify sub-groups in whom pharmacokinetically (PK) guided-dosing might be of added value.

METHODS

We included patients who started on sorafenib (between October 2017 and June 2020) at the recommended dose of 400 mg BID or with a step-up dosing schedule. Plasma trough levels (C_trough) were measured at pre-specified time-points. Increasing the dose was advised if C_trough was below the target of 3750 ng/mL and toxicity was manageable.

RESULTS

A total of 150 samples from 36 patients were collected. Thirty patients (83 %) had a C_trough below the prespecified target concentration at a certain time point during treatment. Toxicity from sorafenib hampered dosing according to target C_trough in almost half of the patients. In 11 patients, dosing was adjusted based on C_trough. In three patients, this resulted in an adequate C_trough without additional toxicity four weeks after the dose increase. In the remaining eight patients, dose adjustment based on C_trough did not result in a C_trough above the target or caused excessive toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

TDM for sorafenib is not of added value in daily clinical practice. In most cases, toxicity restricts the possibility of dose escalations.

Durable objective response to sorafenib and role of sequential treatment in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

The response rate to sorafenib is limited for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Little is known about the long-term outcomes of objective responders. The role of second-line therapies on the survival of sorafenib-responders is unclear. We aimed to delineate the long-term outcomes and the role of subsequent treatment after responding to sorafenib.

Methods

From September 2012 to December 2019, 922 patients who received sorafenib treatment for unresectable HCC were retrospectively reviewed. Of these, 21 (2.3%) achieved a complete response (CR) and 54 (5.9%) had a partial response (PR) based on mRECIST criteria. Factors associated with survivals were analyzed.

Results

During the median follow-up of 35.3 months, the median duration of response was 18.3 months (range: 2.3-45.5) for patients achieving CR and 10.0 months (range: 1.9-60.3) for PR. The median overall survival (OS) was 39.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 28.4-50.5] including values not yet estimable for CR and 25.8 months for PR. Patients who experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) had better median OS than those without (44.9 versus 18.1 months, p = 0.003). Eventually, 53 patients developed tumor progression; 30 patients received second-line systemic treatment including nivolumab (n = 8), regorafenib (n = 15), and chemotherapy (n = 7). Sorafenib-nivolumab sequential therapy provided the best median OS versus sorafenib-regorafenib and sorafenib-chemotherapy in these patients (55.8, 39.5, and 25.5 months), respectively.

Conclusions

The response is durable for advanced HCC patients with CR or PR to sorafenib. Subsequent immunotherapy seems to provide the best survival. This information is important for characterizing outcomes of sorafenib-responders and the choice of sequential treatment.

Equal Efficacy and Safety Profile in Elderly Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Receiving Palliative Treatment

Palliative treatment of elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is often challenging due to comorbidities or frailty, and data about the outcome and overall survival (OS) in these patients are limited. This was a retrospective single centre study. Patients were grouped according to their age as young (<60 years; YP), intermediate (60-70 years; IP) or elderly (>70 years; EP). Administration of chemotherapy or transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) was defined as palliative treatment. Therapy-related adverse events (AE) were assessed via CTCAE 5.0. Out of 656 patients analyzed, n = 359 received palliative treatment: YP: n = 90; IP: n = 127 and EP: n = 142. The median OS (months) in patients receiving TACE (n = 254) was 17 vs. 18 vs. 20 months for YP, IP, and EP, respectively (p = 0.44) and 15 vs. 16 vs. 17 months (p = 0.56), respectively, in patients receiving chemotherapy (n = 105). AEs differed non-significantly between the subgroups. Multivariate analysis revealed impaired liver function and advanced tumor stage as significant factors for impaired OS. In this study, the mOS and rate of AEs were equal between elderly and younger HCC patients receiving palliative treatment. Therefore, we propose regular palliative treatment stratification in spite of the high age of patients.

Anti-PD-1 combined sorafenib versus anti-PD-1 alone in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matching study

Background

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) plays a role in the tumor microenvironment. Sorafenib, which inhibits the VEGF pathway, has an immune-modulation function but lacks substantial clinical data. This study aims to explore the efficacy of anti-PD-1 combined sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

HCC patients who underwent anti-PD-1 treatment at Taipei Veterans General Hospital (Taipei, Taiwan) between January 2016 and February 2019 were reviewed. The efficacy was compared between groups after propensity-score matching.

Results

There were 173 HCC patients receiving anti-PD-1. After excluding unsuitable cases, 140 patients were analyzed, of which 58 received combination therapy and 82 received anti-PD-1 alone. The combination therapy had a trend of higher CR rate (8.6% vs. 4.9%, ns.), ORR (22.4% vs. 19.5%, ns.) and significantly higher DCR (69.0% vs. 37.8%, p < 0.05) comparing to anti-PD-1 alone. After matching, combination group achieved longer progression-free survival (3.87 vs. 2.43 months, p < 0.05) and overall survival (not reached vs. 7.17 months, p < 0.05) than anti-PD-1 alone, without higher grade 3/4 AE (10.3% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.73). The tumor response varied among different metastatic sites, with high responses in adrenal glands, peritoneum and lungs. The more AFP declined (> 10, > 50 and > 66%), the higher the ORR (70, 80 and 92%) and CR rates (30, 35 and 58%) were achieved at day 28.

Conclusions

This is the first study to demonstrate the combination of anti-PD-1 and sorafenib had better efficacy and survival benefit. A prospective randomized study is needed to confirm this finding.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09173-4.

Sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma provides better prognosis after liver transplantation than without liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Although sorafenib has been used to treat advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the efficacy of sorafenib in patients with recurrent HCCs after liver transplantation (LT) has not been compared with that in patients without LT (non-LT).

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2019, a total of 832 consecutive HCC patients treated with sorafenib (790 in the non-LT group and 42 in the LT group) were enrolled. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were time-to-progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Treatment outcomes were assessed by multiple subgroup analyses and propensity-score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

The median follow-up duration was 152.5 days. The LT group was younger and had smaller intrahepatic HCC than the non-LT group. The LT group showed significantly better OS (16.8 vs. 7.1 months, p < 0.001), TTP, ORR and DCR than the non-LT group. The superior efficacy of sorafenib in the LT group was corroborated in multiple subgroup analyses stratified by metastasis, effective sorafenib maintenance dose, or Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A. LT was identified as an independent factor for favorable OS. Intrahepatic HCC was the strongest tumor-related factor for both OS and TTP and was significantly associated with tumor response and hepatic function. Finally, subanalyses including only patients with small intrahepatic HCC or PSM modeling showed no difference in sorafenib efficacy between the LT and the non-LT groups.

CONCLUSION

Sorafenib provides better outcomes in the LT setting than the non-LT setting. This benefit may be associated with the smaller intrahepatic HCC coupled with preserved hepatic function in LT recipients.