Long-term follow-up and exploratory analysis of lenvatinib in patients with metastatic or recurrent thymic carcinoma: Results from the multicenter, phase 2 REMORA trial.

OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this report was to detail the long-term follow-up data from the REMORA study, which investigated the safety and efficacy of lenvatinib in patients with thymic carcinoma. In addition, an exploratory analysis of the association between relative dose intensity (RDI) and the efficacy of lenvatinib is presented. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The single-arm, open-label, phase 2 REMORA study was conducted at eight Japanese institutions. Forty-two patients received oral lenvatinib 24 mg once daily in 4-week cycles until the occurrence of intolerable adverse events or disease progression. The REMORA long-term follow-up data were evaluated, including overall survival (OS). RDI was calculated by dividing the actual dose administered to the patient by the standard recommended dose. This trial is registered on JMACCT (JMA-IIA00285) and on UMIN-CTR (UMIN000026777). RESULTS: The updated median OS was 28.3 months (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 17.1-34.0 months), and the OS rate at 36 months was 35.7 % (95 % CI: 21.7 %-49.9 %). When grouped by RDI of lenvatinib, the median OS was 38.5 months (95 % CI: 31.2-not estimable) in patients with ≥ 75 % RDI and 17.3 months (95 % CI: 13.4-26.2 months) in patients with < 75 % RDI (hazard ratio 0.46 [95 % CI: 0.22-0.98]; P = 0.0406) at 8 weeks. Patients who maintained their lenvatinib dose over 8 weeks had a higher objective response rate than patients whose doses were reduced (75.0 % vs 29.4 %; P = 0.0379). No new safety concerns or treatment-related deaths were reported, and lenvatinib had a tolerable safety profile. CONCLUSION: This follow-up report updated OS in patients with metastatic or recurrent thymic carcinoma. A higher RDI of lenvatinib at 8 weeks could be associated with improved outcomes.

Comparison of safety outcomes of anticancer drugs in Japanese and non-Japanese patients in multi-regional clinical trials: meta-analysis of safety profiles.

No report has assessed the differences in adverse event (AE) profiles of anticancer drugs for all types of cancers in clinical trials involving Japanese patients. This study aimed to compare the safety outcomes of anticancer drugs in Japanese and non-Japanese patients in multi-regional clinical trials (MRCTs), regardless of the type of cancer or drug. All new approvals of oncology drugs in Japan from January 2009 to December 2018 were searched through the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency website. The odds ratio (OR) for comparing the incidence of AEs between Japanese and non-Japanese patients was estimated using the Mantel-Haenszel method with a random effect model. Sixty-six multi-regional phase 3 trials were identified involving 43,712 patients. Severe AE, AE leading to dose reduction, and AE leading to dose interruption were significantly more frequent in Japanese patients than in non-Japanese (odds ratios [ORs] were 1.32 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-1.53), 1.97 (95% CI: 1.66-2.31), and 1.63 (95% CI: 1.43-1.86), respectively). Serious AEs (SAEs) and AEs leading to death were significantly less frequent in Japanese patients (OR: 0.70 (95% CI: 0.62-0.77) vs. 0.56 (95% CI: 0.44-0.67), respectively). There were no differences in AEs leading to study withdrawal. The incidence of most AEs was significantly higher in Japanese patients. In Japanese patients, the incidence of SAEs and AEs leading to death was low, but severe AEs, AEs leading to dose reductions, AEs leading to dose interruption, and individual adverse events were high.

Overall survival and objective response in advanced unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A subanalysis of the REFLECT study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Validated surrogate endpoints for overall survival (OS) are important for expediting the clinical study and drug-development processes. Herein, we aimed to validate objective response as an independent predictor of OS in individuals with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving systemic anti-angiogenic therapy. METHODS: We investigated the association between objective response (investigator-assessed mRECIST, independent radiologic review [IRR] mRECIST and RECIST v1.1) and OS in REFLECT, a phase III study of lenvatinib vs. sorafenib. We conducted landmark analyses (Simon-Makuch) of OS by objective response at 2, 4, and 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: Median OS was 21.6 months (95% CI 18.6-24.5) for responders (investigator-assessed mRECIST) vs. 11.9 months (95% CI 10.7-12.8) for non-responders (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61; 95% CI 0.49-0.76; p <0.001). Objective response by IRR per mRECIST and RECIST v1.1 supported the association with OS (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.51-0.72; p <0.001 and HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.39-0.65; p <0.001, respectively). OS was significantly prolonged for responders vs. non-responders (investigator-assessed mRECIST) at the 2-month (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.49-0.76; p <0.001), 4-month (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.80; p <0.001), and 6-month (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.54-0.86; p <0.001) landmarks. Results were similar when assessed by IRR, with both mRECIST and RECIST v1.1. An exploratory multivariate Cox regression analysis identified objective response by investigator-assessed mRECIST (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.44-0.68; p <0.0001) and IRR-assessed RECIST v1.1 (HR 0.49; 95% CI, 0.38-0.64; p <0.0001) as independent predictors of OS in individuals with unresectable HCC. CONCLUSIONS: Objective response was an independent predictor of OS in individuals with unresectable HCC in REFLECT; additional studies are needed to confirm surrogacy. Participants achieving a complete or partial response by mRECIST or RECIST v1.1 had significantly longer survival vs. those with stable/progressive/non-evaluable disease. GOV NUMBER: NCT01761266. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: This analysis of data taken from a completed clinical trial (REFLECT) looked for any link between objective response and overall survival time in individuals with unresectable HCC receiving anti-angiogenic treatments. Significantly longer median overall survival was found for responders (21.6 months) vs. non-responders (11.9 months). Overall survival was also significantly longer for responders vs. non-responders (based on objective response status at 2, 4, and 6 months) in the landmark analysis. Our results indicate that objective response is an independent predictor of overall survival in this setting, confirming its validity as a rapid marker of efficacy that can be applied in phase II trials; however, further validation is required to determine is validity for other systemic treatments (e.g. immunotherapies), or as a surrogate of overall survival.

Impact of bodyweight-based starting doses on the safety and efficacy of lenvatinib in primarily Japanese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

AIM: The phase III REFLECT study utilized bodyweight-based lenvatinib dosing in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, based on results of the phase II Study 202. This post hoc analysis compared efficacy and safety in patients with lower and higher bodyweights. METHODS: This comparison included patients from Study 202 (Japanese, n = 43; Korean, n = 3) and Japanese patients from REFLECT (n = 81) who received lenvatinib. In Study 202, all patients received a starting dose of lenvatinib 12 mg/day; in REFLECT, patients received starting doses based on bodyweight (patients <60 kg, 8 mg/day; ≥60 kg, 12 mg/day). Safety and efficacy were assessed in both studies according to bodyweight. RESULTS: In Study 202, treatment-related, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) led to dose reductions in 80.8% and 55.0% of patients in the lower and higher bodyweight groups, respectively. In REFLECT, treatment-related TEAEs led to dose reductions in 52.5% and 70.7% of patients in the 8 and 12 mg groups, respectively. In Study 202, median overall survival (OS) was 16.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.8-25.1) and 21.3 months (95% CI, 10.1-not estimable) in the lower and higher bodyweight groups, respectively. In REFLECT, median OS was 15.8 months (95% CI, 10.4-27.6) and 18.2 months (95% CI, 11.3-26.9) in the 8 and 12 mg groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison between patients in Study 202 and REFLECT demonstrates efficacy was maintained with improved safety in patients with lower bodyweights who received lenvatinib 8 mg/day in REFLECT versus patients who received lenvatinib 12 mg/day in Study 202.

Lenvatinib dose, efficacy, and safety in the treatment of multiple malignancies.

INTRODUCTION: Lenvatinib is an oral multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has shown efficacy and manageable safety across multiple cancer types. The recommended starting doses for lenvatinib differ across cancer types and indications based on whether it is used as monotherapy or as combination therapy. AREAS COVERED: This review covers clinical trials that established the dosing paradigm and efficacy of lenvatinib and defined its adverse-event profile as a monotherapy; or in combination with the mTOR inhibitor, everolimus; or the anti-PD-1 antibody, pembrolizumab; and/or chemotherapy. EXPERT OPINION: Lenvatinib has been established as standard-of-care either as a monotherapy or in combination with other anticancer agents for the treatment of radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, and endometrial carcinoma, and is being investigated further across several other tumor types. The dosing and adverse-event management strategies for lenvatinib have been developed through extensive clinical trial experience. Collectively, the data provide the rationale to start lenvatinib at the recommended doses and then interrupt or dose reduce as necessary to achieve required dose intensity for maximized patient benefit. The adverse-event profile of lenvatinib is consistent with that of other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and clinicians are encouraged to review and adopt relevant symptom-management strategies.

Baseline Liver Function and Subsequent Outcomes in the Phase 3 REFLECT Study of Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Baseline liver function among patients starting treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) impacts survival and could impact efficacy outcomes and safety profiles of treatments. This post hoc analysis of the phase 3 REFLECT study examined the efficacy and safety outcomes for lenvatinib and for sorafenib in patients with uHCC, assessed by Child-Pugh score (CPS) and albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade. METHODS: Efficacy and safety were assessed in patient cohorts from REFLECT according to study entry baseline ALBI grade and CPS. RESULTS: Lenvatinib treatment generally provided survival benefits in all groups. Median overall survival (OS) among patients with an ALBI grade of 1 was consistently higher than among patients with an ALBI grade of 2 for both the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms (lenvatinib: 17.4 vs. 8.6 months; sorafenib: 14.6 vs. 7.7 months, respectively). Median OS among patients with a CPS of 5 was consistently higher than among patients with a CPS of 6 (lenvatinib: 15.3 vs. 9.4 months; sorafenib: 14.2 vs. 7.9 months, respectively). Progression-free survival and objective response rates for these ALBI grades and CPS demonstrated similar patterns. Among patients who received lenvatinib and experienced a treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse event leading to withdrawal, 6.6% had an ALBI grade of 1, while 13.3% had an ALBI grade of 2, and 7.9% had a CPS of 5, while 12.1% had a CPS of 6. CONCLUSIONS: Better liver function at baseline, as measured by ALBI grade or CPS, may be prognostic for better survival outcomes in patients with uHCC undergoing treatment with lenvatinib or sorafenib.

Lenvatinib versus sorafenib for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: patient-reported outcomes from a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma is the third-leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Preservation of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) during treatment is an important therapeutic goal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of treatment with lenvatinib versus sorafenib on HRQOL. METHODS: REFLECT was a previously published multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib versus sorafenib as a first-line systemic treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and one or more measurable target lesion per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C categorisation, Child-Pugh class A, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or lower, and adequate organ function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system; stratification factors for treatment allocation included region; macroscopic portal vein invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; ECOG performance status; and bodyweight. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), collected at baseline, on day 1 of each subsequent cycle, and at the end of treatment, were evaluated in post-hoc analyses of secondary and exploratory endpoints in the analysis population, which was the subpopulation of patients with a PRO assessment at baseline. A linear mixed-effects model evaluated change from baseline in PROs, including European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and hepatocellular carcinoma-specific QLQ-HCC18 scales (both secondary endpoints of the REFLECT trial). Time-to-definitive-deterioration analyses were done based on established thresholds for minimum differences for worsening in PROs. Responder analyses explored associations between HRQOL and clinical response. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01761266. FINDINGS: Of 954 eligible patients randomly assigned to lenvatinib (n=478) or sorafenib (n=476) between March 14, 2013, and July 30, 2015, 931 patients (n=468 for lenvatinib; n=463 for sorafenib) were included in this analysis. Baseline PRO scores reflected impaired HRQOL and functioning and considerable symptom burden relative to full HRQOL. Differences in overall mean change from baseline estimates in most PRO scales generally favoured the lenvatinib over the sorafenib group, although the differences were not nominally statistically or clinically significant. Patients treated with lenvatinib experienced nominally statistically significant delays in definitive, meaningful deterioration on the QLQ-C30 fatigue (hazard ratio [HR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·69-0·99), pain (0·80, 0·66-0·96), and diarrhoea (0·52, 0·42-0·65) domains versus patients treated with sorafenib. Significant differences in time to definitive deterioration were not observed for other QLQ-C30 domains, and there was no difference in time to definitive deterioration on the global health status/QOL score (0·89, 0·73-1·09). For most PRO scales, differences in overall mean change from baseline estimates favoured responders versus non-responders. Across all scales, HRs for time to definitive deterioration were in favour of responders; median time to definitive deterioration for responders exceeded those for non-responders by a range of 4·8 to 14·6 months. INTERPRETATION: HRQOL for patients undergoing treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma is an important therapeutic consideration. The evidence of HRQOL benefits in clinically relevant domains support the use of lenvatinib compared with sorafenib to delay functional deterioration in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING: Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers Predictive of Survival Benefit with Lenvatinib in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From the Phase III REFLECT Study.

PURPOSE: In REFLECT, lenvatinib demonstrated an effect on overall survival (OS) by confirmation of noninferiority to sorafenib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. This analysis assessed correlations between serum or tissue biomarkers and efficacy outcomes from REFLECT. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Serum biomarkers (VEGF, ANG2, FGF19, FGF21, and FGF23) were measured by ELISA. Gene expression in tumor tissues was measured by the nCounter PanCancer Pathways Panel. Pharmacodynamic changes in serum biomarker levels from baseline, and associations of clinical outcomes with baseline biomarker levels, were evaluated. RESULTS: Four hundred and seven patients were included in the serum analysis set (lenvatinib n = 279, sorafenib n = 128); 58 patients were included in the gene-expression analysis set (lenvatinib n = 34, sorafenib n = 24). Both treatments were associated with increases in VEGF; only lenvatinib was associated with increases in FGF19 and FGF23 at all time points. Lenvatinib-treated responders had greater increases in FGF19 and FGF23 versus nonresponders at cycle 4, day 1 (FGF19: 55.2% vs. 18.3%, P = 0.014; FGF23: 48.4% vs. 16.4%, P = 0.0022, respectively). Higher baseline VEGF, ANG2, and FGF21 correlated with shorter OS in both treatment groups. OS was longer for lenvatinib than sorafenib [median, 10.9 vs. 6.8 months, respectively; HR, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33-0.85; P-interaction = 0.0397] with higher baseline FGF21. In tumor tissue biomarker analysis, VEGF/FGF-enriched groups showed improved OS with lenvatinib versus the intermediate VEGF/FGF group (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.91; P = 0.0253). CONCLUSIONS: Higher baseline levels of VEGF, FGF21, and ANG2 may be prognostic for shorter OS. Higher baseline FGF21 may be predictive for longer OS with lenvatinib compared with sorafenib, but this needs confirmation.

Safety and efficacy of lenvatinib by starting dose based on body weight in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in REFLECT.

BACKGROUND: REFLECT was an open-label, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib versus sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). Based on phase 2 study (Study 202) results, body weight-based dosing for lenvatinib was used in REFLECT to minimize dose disruptions and modifications needed to address dose-related adverse events. This post hoc analysis of REFLECT data assessed lenvatinib efficacy and safety by body weight group. METHODS: The study randomly administered lenvatinib (n = 476) or sorafenib (n = 475) to patients with untreated (no prior systemic therapy) uHCC. Lenvatinib starting-dose data were stratified by body weight: patients weighing < 60 kg received 8 mg/day; patients weighing ≥ 60 kg received 12 mg/day. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and safety were assessed. RESULTS: Survival outcomes and safety profiles appeared similar between the two body-weight-based lenvatinib starting-dose groups. Median OS for patients in the < 60 kg body weight group (n = 153) was 13.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.5-15.7] compared to 13.7 months (95% CI 12.0-15.6) in the ≥ 60 kg body weight group (n = 325). In both lenvatinib groups, PFS was 7.4 months (< 60 kg group: 95% CI 5.4-9.2; ≥ 60 kg group: 95% CI 6.9-9.0). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) required dose modifications in 43.0% in the < 60 kg body weight group and 57.5% in the ≥ 60 kg body weight group. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis of data from REFLECT indicated that body weight-based lenvatinib dosing in patients with uHCC was successful in maintaining efficacy, with comparable rates of TEAEs and dose modifications in the two body weight groups. CLININCAL TRIAL: Trial registration ID: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT01761266.

Comparison of efficacy outcomes of anticancer drugs between Japanese patients and the overall population.

BACKGROUND: It is important to recognize regional and racial differences in drug efficacy and safety when performing multi-regional clinical trials (MRCTs). To understand regional differences, we compared the efficacy results in Japanese patients and the overall population in the MRCTs of anticancer drugs. METHODS: All new approvals of oncology drugs in Japan from January 2009 to December 2018 were searched using the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency web site to find phase 3 MRCTs for the analysis. As the supporting data source, a literature search was performed in PubMed and Google Scholar. Linear regression analysis was performed and Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were calculated to compare the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) between Japanese patients and the overall population. RESULTS: Seventy MRCTs were identified. The correlation of hazard ratios (HRs) for OS between Japanese patients and the overall population was moderate (r = 0.45), and OS was 1.31 times longer in Japanese patients than in the overall population, although the correlation of median OS was strong (r = 0.91). The HRs for PFS were moderately correlated (r = 0.70) and the correlation of median PFS was strong (r = 0.90). The correlation of ORR was very strong (r = 0.96). CONCLUSION: The PFS and ORR were consistent between Japanese patients and the overall population. A longer median OS was observed in Japanese patients. Our results would be a useful reference when planning and conducting MRCTs that include Japan for global simultaneous drug development.

REFLECT-a phase 3 trial comparing efficacy and safety of lenvatinib to sorafenib for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: an analysis of Japanese subset.

BACKGROUND: A phase 3, multinational, randomized, non-inferiority trial (REFLECT) compared the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib (LEN) and sorafenib (SOR) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). LEN had an effect on overall survival (OS) compared to SOR, statistically confirmed by non-inferiority [OS: median = 13.6 months vs. 12.3 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-1.06], and demonstrated statistically significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and the objective response rate (ORR) in the overall population. The results of a subset analysis that evaluated the efficacy and safety of LEN and SOR in the Japanese population are reported. METHODS: The intent-to-treat population enrolled in Japan was analyzed. RESULTS: Of 954 patients in the overall population, 168 Japanese patients were assigned to the LEN arm (N = 81) or the SOR arm (N = 87). Median OS was 17.6 months for LEN vs. 17.8 months for SOR (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.62-1.29). LEN showed statistically significant improvements over SOR in PFS (7.2 months vs. 4.6 months) and ORR (29.6% vs. 6.9%). The relative dose intensity of LEN and SOR in the Japanese population was lower than in the overall population. Frequently observed, related adverse events included palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (PPES), hypertension, decreased appetite, and proteinuria in the LEN arm, and PPES, hypertension, diarrhea, and alopecia in the SOR arm. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of LEN in the Japanese population were similar to those in the overall population of REFLECT. With manageable adverse events, LEN is a new treatment option for Japanese patients with uHCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: ClinicalTrials.gov. No. NCT01761266.

Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: In a phase 2 trial, lenvatinib, an inhibitor of VEGF receptors 1-3, FGF receptors 1-4, PDGF receptor α, RET, and KIT, showed activity in hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to compare overall survival in patients treated with lenvatinib versus sorafenib as a first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: This was an open-label, phase 3, multicentre, non-inferiority trial that recruited patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, who had not received treatment for advanced disease, at 154 sites in 20 countries throughout the Asia-Pacific, European, and North American regions. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system-with region; macroscopic portal vein invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; and bodyweight as stratification factors-to receive oral lenvatinib (12 mg/day for bodyweight ≥60 kg or 8 mg/day for bodyweight <60 kg) or sorafenib 400 mg twice-daily in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured from the date of randomisation until the date of death from any cause. The efficacy analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle, and only patients who received treatment were included in the safety analysis. The non-inferiority margin was set at 1·08. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01761266. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2013 and July 30, 2015, 1492 patients were recruited. 954 eligible patients were randomly assigned to lenvatinib (n=478) or sorafenib (n=476). Median survival time for lenvatinib of 13·6 months (95% CI 12·1-14·9) was non-inferior to sorafenib (12·3 months, 10·4-13·9; hazard ratio 0·92, 95% CI 0·79-1·06), meeting criteria for non-inferiority. The most common any-grade adverse events were hypertension (201 [42%]), diarrhoea (184 [39%]), decreased appetite (162 [34%]), and decreased weight (147 [31%]) for lenvatinib, and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (249 [52%]), diarrhoea (220 [46%]), hypertension (144 [30%]), and decreased appetite (127 [27%]) for sorafenib. INTERPRETATION: Lenvatinib was non-inferior to sorafenib in overall survival in untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The safety and tolerability profiles of lenvatinib were consistent with those previously observed. FUNDING: Eisai Inc.

Dose Finding of Lenvatinib in Subjects With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Based on Population Pharmacokinetic and Exposure-Response Analyses.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounts for up to 90% of primary liver cancer occurrences worldwide. Lenvatinib, a multikinase inhibitor, was approved in radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer. In this phase 2 study (study 202), we aimed to identify the lenvatinib optimal dose for subjects with advanced HCC Child-Pugh class A. Pooled data from phase 1 studies in healthy adults and in subjects with mixed tumor types, and from study 202 in subjects with HCC, were analyzed using a population pharmacokinetic approach. The relationship between treatment-emergent adverse events leading to withdrawal or dose reduction during cycle 1 and lenvatinib exposure was explored by logistic regression analysis. A receiver operating characteristics analysis was used to investigate the best cutoff values of lenvatinib exposure and body weight to identify a high-risk group for early dose modification. The final pharmacokinetic model included body-weight effects on apparent clearance and volume. The relationship between the lenvatinib area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) at steady state and body weight demonstrated an increase in AUC as body weight decreased in subjects with HCC. An exposure-response relationship was observed, with higher lenvatinib AUC and lower body weight resulting in earlier drug withdrawal or dose reduction. The best cutoff values for body weight and lenvatinib AUC were 57.8 kg and 2430 ng·h/mL, respectively, to predict the group at high risk for early drug withdrawal or dose reduction. We therefore recommend 12-mg and 8-mg starting doses for subjects ≥60 kg and <60 kg, respectively, in subjects with HCC Child-Pugh class A.

Phase 2 study of lenvatinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib is an oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1-3, fibroblast growth factor receptor 1-4, platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha, RET, and KIT. This phase 2, single-arm, open-label multicenter study evaluated lenvatinib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Patients with histologically/clinically confirmed advanced HCC who did not qualify for surgical resection or local therapies received lenvatinib at a dosage of 12 mg once daily (QD) in 28-day cycles. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to progression (TTP) per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1; secondary efficacy endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Between July 2010 and June 2011, 46 patients received lenvatinib at sites across Japan and Korea. The median TTP, as determined by independent radiological review, was 7.4 months [95 % confidence interval (CI): 5.5-9.4]. Seventeen patients (37 %) had partial response and 19 patients (41 %) had stable disease (ORR: 37 %; DCR: 78 %). Median OS was 18.7 months (95 % CI: 12.7-25.1). The most common any-grade adverse events (AEs) were hypertension (76 %), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (65 %), decreased appetite (61 %), and proteinuria (61 %). Dose reductions and discontinuations due to AEs occurred in 34 (74 %) and 10 patients (22 %), respectively. Median body weight was lower in patients with an early (<30 days) dose withdrawal or reduction than in those without. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib 12-mg QD showed clinical activity and acceptable toxicity profiles in patients with advanced HCC, but early dose modification was necessary in patients with lower body weight. Further development of lenvatinib in HCC should consider dose modification by body weight. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: www.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00946153.

Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Lenvatinib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum tolerable dose (MTD), safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy of lenvatinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This multicenter, open-label, phase I, dose-escalation study included patients aged 20 to 80 years, refractory to standard therapy, and stratified by hepatic function measured using Child-Pugh (CP) scores: CP-A (score, 5-6) and CP-B (score, 7-8). Lenvatinib was administered continually once daily for 4-week cycles. MTD was defined as the maximum dose associated with ≤ 1 dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) occurring in cycle 1 among 6 patients. RESULTS: In total, 20 patients (9 in CP-A and 11 in CP-B) were enrolled. The MTD was 12 and 8 mg once daily in CP-A and CP-B, respectively; DLTs included proteinuria, hepatic encephalopathy, and hyperbilirubinemia. The most common grade 3 toxicities included hypertension in CP-A and hyperbilirubinemia in CP-B. Lenvatinib plasma concentration at 24 hours after administration (C24 h) for 12 mg once daily was higher in patients with HCC than in patients with other solid tumors shown in a previous phase I study, but C24 h for 25 mg once daily lenvatinib was comparable. After lenvatinib treatment, the number of circulating endothelial and c-Kit(+) cells decreased and the levels of interleukin (IL)-6, IL10, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, and vascular endothelial growth factor increased (P < 0.05). Partial responses were observed in 3 patients and tumor shrinkage occurred in 14 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib (12 mg once daily) demonstrated preliminary efficacy with manageable toxicity and is the recommended dose for phase II studies in patients with HCC and CP-A.