RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy plus sorafenib in phase 2 trials has shown favourable tumour control and a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. However, no randomised phase 3 trial has tested the combination of sorafenib with continuous arterial infusion chemotherapy. We aimed to compare continuous hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy plus sorafenib with sorafenib alone in patients with advanced, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial (SILIUS) at 31 sites in Japan. Eligible patients were aged 20 years or older, with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not suitable for resection, local ablation, or transarterial chemoembolisation; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1; Child-Pugh score 7 or lower; and adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive web response system with a computer-generated sequence to receive 400 mg sorafenib orally twice daily or 400 mg sorafenib orally twice daily plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (cisplatin 20 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and fluorouracil 330 mg/m2 continuously on days 1-5 and 8-12 of every 28-day cycle via an implanted catheter system). The primary endpoint was overall survival. The primary efficacy analysis comprised all randomised patients (the intention-to-treat population), and the safety analysis comprised all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01214343. FINDINGS: Between Nov 4, 2010, and June 10, 2014, 206 patients were randomly assigned (103 to the sorafenib group, 103 to the sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy group). One patient in the sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy group withdrew after randomisation. Median overall survival was similar in the sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (n=102) and sorafenib monotherapy (n=103) groups (11·8 months [95% CI 9·1-14·5] vs 11·5 months [8·2-14·8]; hazard ratio 1·009 [95% CI 0·743-1·371]; p=0·955). Grade 3-4 adverse events that were more frequent in the sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy group than in the sorafenib monotherapy group included anaemia (15 [17%] of 88 vs six [6%] of 102), neutropenia (15 [17%] vs one [1%]), thrombocytopenia (30 [34%] vs 12 [12%]), and anorexia (12 [14%] vs six [6%]). INTERPRETATION: Addition of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy to sorafenib did not significantly improve overall survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING: Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/tratamiento farmacológico , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Sorafenib/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/mortalidad , Cisplatino/efectos adversos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/efectos adversos , Arteria Hepática , Humanos , Infusiones Intraarteriales , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Neoplasias Hepáticas/mortalidad , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sorafenib/efectos adversos , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: REACH evaluated ramucirumab in the second-line treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. In the intent-to-treat population (n = 565), a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) was not observed. In patients with an elevated baseline α-fetoprotein (AFP) level (400 ng/mL or greater), an improvement in OS was demonstrated. An analysis of the Japanese patients in REACH was performed. METHODS: An analysis was performed with the subset of the intent-to-treat population enrolled in Japan (n = 93). RESULTS: The median OS was 12.9 months for the ramucirumab arm (n = 45) and 8.0 months for the placebo arm (n = 48) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.621 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.391-0.986); P = 0.0416]. The median progression-free survival was 4.1 months for the ramucirumab arm and 1.7 months for the placebo arm [HR 0.449 (95 % CI 0.285-0.706); P = 0.0004]. The objective response rates were 11 % for the ramucirumab arm and 2 % for the placebo arm (P = 0.0817). The grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in more than 5 % of patients with a higher incidence for the ramucirumab arm (n = 44) than for the placebo arm (n = 47) were ascites (7% vs 2 %), hypertension (7 % vs 2 %), and cholangitis (7 % vs 0 %). In patients with a baseline AFP level of 400 ng/mL or greater, the median OS was 12.9 months for the ramucirumab arm (n = 20) and 4.3 months for the placebo arm (n = 22) [HR 0.464 (95 % CI 0.232-0.926); P = 0.0263]. CONCLUSIONS: In the Japanese patients in REACH, ramucirumab treatment improved OS, including in patients with a baseline AFP level of 400 ng/mL or greater; improvements in progression-free survival and objective response rate were also demonstrated. The safety profile of ramucirumab was acceptable and well tolerated in Japanese patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01140347.