RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate overall survival (OS) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of first-line isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) compared to best alternative care (BAC) for patients with uveal melanoma liver metastases. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Approximately half of patients with uveal melanoma develop metastatic disease, most commonly in the liver and systemic treatment options are limited. Isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) is a locoregional therapy with high response rates but with unclear effect on overall survival (OS). METHODS: In this phase III randomized controlled multicenter trial (the SCANDIUM trial) patients with previously untreated isolated uveal melanoma liver metastases were included between 2013-2021, with at least 24 months of follow-up. The planned accrual was 90 patients randomized 1:1 to receive a one-time treatment with IHP or BAC. Crossover to IHP was not allowed. The primary endpoint was the 24-month OS rate, with the hypothesis of a treatment effect leading to a 50% OS rate in the IHP group compared to 20% in the control group. HRQOL was measured by the EuroQol 5-domains 3-levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire over 12 months. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat (ITT) population included 87 patients randomized to the IHP group (43 patients; 41 [89%] received IHP) or the control group (44 patients). The control group received chemotherapy (49%), immunotherapy (39%), or localized interventions (9%). In the ITT population, the median PFS was 7.4 months in the IHP group compared with 3.3 months in the control group, with a hazard ratio of 0.21 (95% CI, 0.12-0.36). The 24-month OS rate was 46.5% in the IHP group versus 29.5% in the control group (P=0.12). The median OS was 21.7 months versus 17.6 months, with a hazard ratio of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.37-1.10). EQ-5D-3L showed a sustained high health status for the IHP group over 12 months, compared to a deteriorating trend in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with liver metastases from uveal melanoma, IHP offers high response rates translating to a benefit in PFS including a trend of better HRQOL compared to the control group. However, the primary endpoint of OS at 24 months was not met.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In patients with Alagille syndrome, cholestasis-associated clinical features can include high serum bile acids and severe pruritus that can necessitate liver transplantation. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the ileal bile acid transporter inhibitor odevixibat versus placebo in patients with Alagille syndrome. METHODS: The ASSERT study was a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled patients at 21 medical centres or hospitals in ten countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Poland, Türkiye, the UK, and the USA). Eligible patients had a genetically confirmed diagnosis of Alagille syndrome, a history of significant pruritus, and elevated serum bile acids. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive oral odevixibat 120 µg/kg per day or placebo for 24 weeks (in a block size of six and stratified by age: <10 years and ≥10 years to <18 years) via a web-based system. Patients, clinicians, study staff, and people analysing the data were masked to treatment allocation. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in caregiver-reported scratching score (on the PRUCISION instrument; range 0-4) from baseline to weeks 21-24. The prespecified key secondary efficacy endpoint was change in serum bile acid concentration from baseline to the average of weeks 20 and 24. Outcomes were analysed in patients who received at least one dose of study drug (the full analysis set for efficacy outcomes and the safety analysis set for safety outcomes). This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04674761) and EudraCT (2020-004011-28), and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Feb 26, 2021, and Sept 9, 2022, 52 patients were randomly assigned to receive odevixibat (n=35) or placebo (n=17), all of whom were included in the analysis sets. The median age was 5·5 years (IQR 3·2 to 8·9). 27 (52%) of 52 patients were male and 25 (48%) were female. The mean scratching score was elevated at baseline in both groups (2·8 [SD 0·5] for odevixibat vs 3·0 [0·6] for placebo). Mean scratching scores at weeks 21-24 were 1·1 (0·9) for odevixibat and 2·2 (1·0) for placebo, representing a least-squares (LS) mean change of -1·7 (95% CI -2·0 to -1·3) for odevixibat and -0·8 (-1·3 to -0·3) for placebo, which was significantly greater for odevixibat than for placebo (difference in LS mean change from baseline -0·9 [95% CI -1·4 to -0·3]; p=0·0024). Odevixibat also resulted in significantly greater reductions in mean serum bile acids from baseline versus placebo (237 µmol/L [SD 115] with odevixibat vs 246 µmol/L [121] with placebo) to the average of weeks 20 and 24 (149 µmol/L [102] vs 271 µmol/L [167]; LS mean change -90 µmol/L [95% CI -133 to -48] with odevixibat vs 22 µmol/L [-35 to 80] with placebo; difference in LS mean change -113 µmol/L [95% CI -179 to -47]; p=0·0012). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhoea (ten [29%] of 35 patients in the odevixibat group vs one [6%] of 17 in the placebo group) and pyrexia (eight [23%] vs four [24%]). Seven patients had serious treatment-emergent adverse events during the treatment period: five (14%) in the odevixibat group and two (12%) in the placebo group. No patients discontinued treatment and there were no deaths. INTERPRETATION: Odevixibat could be an efficacious non-surgical intervention to improve pruritus, reduce serum bile acids, and enhance the standard of care in patients with Alagille syndrome. Longer-term safety and efficacy data of odevixibat in this population are awaited from the ongoing, open-label ASSERT-EXT study. FUNDING: Albireo Pharma, an Ipsen company.