Real-World Data for Lenvatinib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma (ELEVATOR): A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

Background: Lenvatinib is approved as first-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The efficacy of lenvatinib in Caucasian real-world patients is insufficiently defined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of lenvatinib in a multi-center cohort (ELEVATOR) from Germany and Austria. Methods: A retrospective data analysis of 205 patients treated with first-line systemic lenvatinib at 14 different sites was conducted. Overall survival, progression free survival, overall response rate and adverse event rates were assessed and analyzed. Results: Patients receiving lenvatinib in the real-world setting reached a median overall survival of 12.8 months, which was comparable to the results reported from the REFLECT study. Median overall survival (mOS) and progression free survival (mPFS) was superior in those patients who met the inclusion criteria of the REFLECT study compared to patients who failed to meet the inclusion criteria (mOS 15.6 vs 10.2 months, HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.81, p=0.002; mPFS 8.1 vs 4.8 months HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46-0.91, p=0.0015). For patients with an impaired liver function according to the Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI) grade, or reduced ECOG performance status ≥2, survival was significantly shorter compared to patients with sustained liver function (ALBI grade 1) and good performance status (ECOG performance status 0), respectively (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.07-2.66, p=0.023; HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.19-4.23, p=0.012). Additionally, macrovascular invasion (HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.02-2.37, p=0.041) and an AFP ≥200 ng/mL (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.03-2.34, p=0.034) were confirmed as independent negative prognostic factors in our cohort of patients with advanced HCC. Conclusion: Overall, our data confirm the efficacy of lenvatinib as first-line treatment and did not reveal new or unexpected side effects in a large retrospective Caucasian real-world cohort, supporting the use of lenvatinib as meaningful alternative for patients that cannot be treated with IO-based combinations in first-line HCC.

Atezolizumab and bevacizumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with impaired liver function and prior systemic therapy: a real-world experience.

Objective: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab/bevacizumab in a real-world HCC cohort, including patients with impaired liver function and prior systemic therapy. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 147 HCC patients treated with atezolizumab/bevacizumab at six sites in Germany and Austria. Results: The overall response rate and disease control rate were 20.4% and 51.7%, respectively. Seventy-three patients (49.7%) met at least one major exclusion criterion of the IMbrave150 trial (IMbrave-OUT), whereas 74 patients (50.3%) were eligible (IMbrave-IN). Median overall survival (mOS) as well as median progression-free survival (mPFS) was significantly longer in IMbrave-IN versus IMbrave-OUT patients [mOS: 15.0 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 10.7-19.3] versus 6.0 months (95% CI: 3.2-8.9; p < 0.001) and mPFS: 8.7 months (95% CI: 5.9-11.5) versus 3.7 months (95% CI: 2.7-4.7; p < 0.001)]. Prior systemic treatment did not significantly affect mOS [hazard ratio (HR): 1.32 (95% CI: 0.78-2.23; p = 0.305)]. mOS according to ALBI grades 1/2/3 were 15.0 months (95% CI: not estimable), 8.6 months (95% CI: 5.4-11.7), and 3.2 months (95% CI: 0.3-6.1), respectively. ALBI grade and ECOG score were identified as independent prognostic factors [ALBI grade 2 versus 1; HR: 2.40 (95% CI: 1.34 - 4.30; p = 0.003), ALBI grade 3 versus 1; HR: 7.28 (95% CI: 3.30-16.08; p < 0.001), and ECOG ⩾2 versus 0; HR: 2.09 (95% CI: 1.03 - 4.23; p = 0.042)], respectively. Sixty-seven patients (45.6%) experienced an adverse event classified as CTCAE grade ⩾3. Patients in the IMbrave-OUT group were at increased risk of hepatic decompensation with encephalopathy (13.7% versus 1.4%, p = 0.004) and/or ascites (39.7% versus 9.5%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: In this real-world cohort, efficacy was comparable to the results of the IMbrave150 study and not affected by prior systemic treatment. ALBI grade and ECOG score were independently associated with survival. IMbrave-OUT patients were more likely to experience hepatic decompensation.

Molecular diagnostics and therapies for gastrointestinal tumors: a real-world experience.

PURPOSE: Several targeted agents demonstrated efficacy in early clinical trials for gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, but in many cases, phase-III trials and/or approval by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) are lacking. The primary focus of this study was to assess the regulatory processes associated with use and reimbursement of off-label treatment in precision oncology and to evaluate the benefit of targeted therapy in a real-world population in Germany. METHODS: Our cohort comprises 137 patients with GI cancers and is biased towards cancer entities with a high frequency of known targetable alterations, such as cholangiocarcinoma. Genetic testing was used to identify molecular targets, and therapy response was evaluated based on CT scans. RESULTS: A molecular target for precision oncology was identified in 53 patients and 43 requests for cost coverage were submitted to health insurance companies. 60% of the requests received approval after initial application and another 7% after appeal. Half of the rejected requests were denied despite ESCAT IA level evidence. The median time between initiation of molecular testing and start of therapy was 75 days. 35 patients received matched targeted therapies (n = 28) or, in the case of MSI, immunotherapy (IO) (n = 7). We observed a trend in favor of molecular therapy when compared to the immediate prior treatment. CONCLUSION: Relevant treatment options were identified by molecular testing in a significant subset of patients. When targeted therapies that lack EMA approval are considered, treatment initiation may be delayed by the duration of the molecular analysis and the regulatory processes.

[Best supportive care in a young patient with locally advanced MSI-high colon cancer?] / Best supportive care bei einer jungen Patientin mit lokal fortgeschrittenem MSI-high-Kolonkarzinom?

Molecular diagnostics are increasingly important to guide treatment decisions in oncologic patients. For instance, the presence of high-grade microsatellite-instability (MSI-high) is considered to be one of the major positive predictors of therapy response to immune-checkpoint inhibitors in patients with solid tumors. Based on impressive results from several immune-oncology trials, the American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval to immunotherapy in any previously treated, MSI-high solid cancer in 2017. Here, we report the clinical case of a young patient with MSI-high colorectal cancer. The case illustrates, that insurance companies in Germany are still reluctant to cover the cost of immunotherapy in this specific patient subgroup, which, in our opinion, results in an ethically problematic therapeutic dilemma.