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.

A Randomized Phase II Open-Label Multi-Institution Study of the Combination of Bevacizumab and Erlotinib Compared to Sorafenib in the First-Line Treatment of Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical efficacy and tolerability of the combination of bevacizumab (B) and erlotinib (E) compared to sorafenib (S) as first-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: A total of 90 patients with advanced HCC, Child-Pugh class A-B7 cirrhosis, and no prior systemic therapy were randomly assigned (1: 1) to receive either 10 mg/kg B intravenously every 14 days and 150 mg E orally daily (n = 47) (B+E) or 400 mg S orally twice daily (n = 43). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), objective response rate based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1), time to progression, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: The median OS was 8.55 months (95% CI: 7.00-13.9) for patients treated with B+E and 8.55 months (95% CI: 5.69-12.2) for patients receiving S. The hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.57-1.47). The median EFS was 4.37 months (95% CI: 2.99-7.36) for patients receiving B+E and 2.76 months (95% CI: 1.84-4.80) for patients receiving S. The HR for EFS was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.42-1.07; p = 0.09), favoring B+E over S. When OS was assessed among patients who were Child-Pugh class A, the median OS was 11.4 months (95% CI: 7.5-15.7) for patients treated with B+E (n = 39) and 10.26 months (95% CI: 5.9-13.0) for patients treated with S (n = 38) (HR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.53-1.46). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in efficacy between the B+E and S arms, although the safety and tolerability profile tended to favor B+E over S based on competing risk analysis.

Nivolumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma after platinum therapy (CheckMate 275): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma have a dismal prognosis and few treatment options after first-line chemotherapy. Responses to second-line treatment are uncommon. We assessed nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, for safety and activity in patients with metastatic or surgically unresectable urothelial carcinoma whose disease progressed or recurred despite previous treatment with at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen. METHODS: In this multicentre, phase 2, single-arm study, patients aged 18 years or older with metastatic or surgically unresectable locally advanced urothelial carcinoma, measurable disease (according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors v1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance statuses of 0 or 1, and available tumour samples for biomarker analysis received nivolumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks until disease progression and clinical deterioration, unacceptable toxicity, or other protocol-defined reasons. The primary endpoint was overall objective response confirmed by blinded independent review committee in all treated patients and by tumour PD-L1 expression (≥5% and ≥1%). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02387996, and is completed. Follow-up is still ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 9, 2015, and Oct 16, 2015, 270 patients from 63 sites in 11 countries received nivolumab, and 265 were evaluated for activity. Median follow-up for overall survival was 7·00 months (IQR 2·96-8·77). Confirmed objective response was achieved in 52 (19·6%, 95% CI 15·0-24·9) of 265 patients. Confirmed objective response was achieved in 23 (28·4%, 95% CI 18·9-39·5) of the 81 patients with PD-L1 expression of 5% or greater, 29 (23·8%, 95% CI 16·5-32·3) of the 122 patients with PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater, and 23 (16·1%, 95% CI 10·5-23·1) of the 143 patients with PD-L1 expression of less than 1%. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 48 (18%) of 270 patients-most commonly grade 3 fatigue and diarrhoea, which each occurred in five patients. Three deaths were attributed to treatment (pneumonitis, acute respiratory failure, and cardiovascular failure). INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab monotherapy provided meaningful clinical benefit, irrespective of PD-L1 expression, and was associated with an acceptable safety profile in previously treated patients with metastatic or surgically unresectable urothelial carcinoma. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Ramucirumab versus placebo as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib (REACH): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: VEGF and VEGF receptor-2-mediated angiogenesis contribute to hepatocellular carcinoma pathogenesis. Ramucirumab is a recombinant IgG1 monoclonal antibody and VEGF receptor-2 antagonist. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib. METHODS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial (REACH), patients were enrolled from 154 centres in 27 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had hepatocellular carcinoma with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C disease or stage B disease that was refractory or not amenable to locoregional therapy, had Child-Pugh A liver disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had previously received sorafenib (stopped because of progression or intolerance), and had adequate haematological and biochemical parameters. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo every 2 weeks, plus best supportive care, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Randomisation was stratified by geographic region and cause of liver disease with a stratified permuted block method. Patients, medical staff, investigators, and the funder were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01140347. FINDINGS: Between Nov 4, 2010, and April 18, 2013, 565 patients were enrolled, of whom 283 were assigned to ramucirumab and 282 were assigned to placebo. Median overall survival for the ramucirumab group was 9·2 months (95% CI 8·0-10·6) versus 7·6 months (6·0-9·3) for the placebo group (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·72-1·05]; p=0·14). Grade 3 or greater adverse events occurring in 5% or more of patients in either treatment group were ascites (13 [5%] of 277 patients treated with ramucirumab vs 11 [4%] of 276 patients treated with placebo), hypertension (34 [12%] vs ten [4%]), asthenia (14 [5%] vs five [2%]), malignant neoplasm progression (18 [6%] vs 11 [4%]), increased aspartate aminotransferase concentration (15 [5%] vs 23 [8%]), thrombocytopenia (13 [5%] vs one [<1%]), hyperbilirubinaemia (three [1%] vs 13 [5%]), and increased blood bilirubin (five [2%] vs 14 [5%]). The most frequently reported (≥1%) treatment-emergent serious adverse event of any grade or grade 3 or more was malignant neoplasm progression. INTERPRETATION: Second-line treatment with ramucirumab did not significantly improve survival over placebo in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. No new safety signals were noted in eligible patients and the safety profile is manageable. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Co.

Characterization and Management of Adverse Reactions in Patients With Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Lenvatinib.

Aims: Advanced practice providers (APPs) play a vital role in monitoring for and managing adverse reactions (ARs). As lenvatinib ARs can resemble cirrhosis (commonly presenting with hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]), APP input is important for timely detection and management of ARs and to promote medication adherence. Design: The goal of this post-hoc analysis of the REFLECT trial was to characterize key ARs associated with lenvatinib, and to discuss management strategies. Methods: In REFLECT, patients with unresectable HCC were randomized to either daily lenvatinib (12 mg/day for patients who weighed ≥ 60 kg or 8 mg/day for those < 60 kg) or sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Adverse events in the lenvatinib arm were grouped into ARs (hypertension, fatigue, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, proteinuria, and decreased appetite) per the United States Prescribing Information (USPI) for lenvatinib. Results: Key ARs in the lenvatinib arm (n = 476) generally occurred within months of starting lenvatinib. Some cases of proteinuria, decreased appetite, and diarrhea were first reported at about 2 years of treatment. Conclusions: The onset of key ARs associated with lenvatinib treatment can be predicted and generally be managed (per the lenvatinib USPI and REFLECT) by withholding lenvatinib and resuming it at a reduced dose after the severity decreases. However, lenvatinib should generally be discontinued if the AR is life-threatening.

Association of Body Mass Index With the Safety Profile of Nivolumab With or Without Ipilimumab.

Importance: Increased survival with immune checkpoint inhibitors has been reported for patients with obesity vs a normal body mass index (BMI). However, the association of obesity with the safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors warrants study. Objective: To investigate associations between BMI and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) among patients with advanced cancers treated with nivolumab monotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study was a retrospective pooled analysis of 3772 patients from 14 multicenter CheckMate clinical trials across 8 tumor types. Patients with advanced cancers received nivolumab, 3 mg/kg (n = 2746); nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, plus ipilimumab, 1 mg/kg (n = 713); or nivolumab, 1 mg/kg, plus ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg (n = 313). Baseline BMI was categorized as normal weight or underweight (<25), overweight (25 to <30), or obese (≥30) according to World Health Organization criteria. The studies began patient enrollment between February 9, 2012, and May 21, 2015, and patients were followed up to database lock on May 1, 2019. Data analysis was conducted from May 1 to September 1, 2019. Interventions: Nivolumab, 3 mg/kg; nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, plus ipilimumab, 1 mg/kg; and nivolumab, 1 mg/kg, plus ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg. Main Outcomes and Measures: Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for incidence of any-grade and grade 3 or 4 irAEs were calculated for patients with obesity vs normal weight or underweight BMI in the overall cohort and in subgroups based on patient and tumor characteristics. Analyses for nivolumab plus ipilimumab cohorts were exploratory. Results: A total of 3772 patients were included, 2600 were male (69%), and median age was 61 years (range, 18-90 years). For patients receiving monotherapy with nivolumab, 3 mg/kg (n = 2746), the incidence of any-grade irAEs was higher in patients with obesity (n = 543) vs those with normal weight or underweight BMI (n = 1266; OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.38-2.11). Incidence of grade 3 or 4 irAEs did not differ between patients with obesity and those with normal weight or underweight BMI (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92-1.61). Risk of any-grade and grade 3 or 4 irAEs appeared consistent with that in the overall population across all subgroups evaluated except for a higher likelihood of grade 3 or 4 irAEs among female patients with obesity vs normal weight or underweight BMI (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.07-2.79). For patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab, the incidence of irAEs appeared consistent across BMI categories. Conclusions and Relevance: Obesity appeared to be associated with an increased incidence of any-grade irAEs among patients treated with nivolumab monotherapy and with grade 3 or 4 irAEs among female patients only. These findings may inform the monitoring of patients at high risk of developing irAEs.

Quality of life assessment of cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the CELESTIAL trial.

BACKGROUND: The CELESTIAL trial (NCT01908426) demonstrated overall survival benefit for cabozantinib versus placebo in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) who had received prior sorafenib treatment. This analysis of CELESTIAL compared the impact of cabozantinib versus placebo on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Health status was assessed using the EuroQol five-dimension five-level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire over the 800-day follow-up period. EQ-5D-5L health states were mapped to health utility scores using reference values for the UK population. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated for each treatment group as the area under the curve for the plot of health utility score over time. The between-treatment group difference in restricted mean QALYs was calculated by generalized linear models and adjusted for baseline differences. A difference of 0.08 in health utility score (or in QALY) was deemed a minimally important difference and to be clinically significant. RESULTS: At week 5, the difference in mean health utility score between cabozantinib and placebo was -0.097 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: -0.126, -0.067; p ≤ 0.001). Between-group differences in health utility scores diminished over time and were generally non-significant. The cabozantinib group accrued more QALYs than the placebo group over follow-up. Differences in mean QALYs (cabozantinib minus placebo) were statistically and clinically significant, ranging from +0.092 (95% CI: 0.016, 0.169) to +0.185 (95% CI: 0.126, 0.243) in favour of cabozantinib, depending on the reference value set used. CONCLUSIONS: These HRQoL findings support a positive benefit-risk profile for cabozantinib in previously treated patients with aHCC.

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.

Niraparib Suppresses Cholangiocarcinoma Tumor Growth by Inducing Oxidative and Replication Stress.

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most common hepatobiliary cancer, an aggressive malignancy with limited therapeutic options. PARP (poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) 1 and 2 are important for deoxyribonucleotide acid (DNA) repair and maintenance of genomic stability. PARP inhibitors (PARPi) such as niraparib have been approved for different malignancies with genomic alteration in germline BRCA and DNA damage response (DDR) pathway genes. Genomic alterations were analyzed in DDR genes in CCA samples employing The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. Mutations were observed in various DDR genes, and 35.8% cases had alterations in at least one of three genes (ARID1A, BAP1 and ATM), suggesting their susceptibility to PARPi. Niraparib treatment suppressed cancer cell viability and survival, and also caused G2/M cell cycle arrest in patient-derived xenograft cells lines (PDXC) and established CCA cells harboring DDR gene mutations. PARPi treatment also induced apoptosis and caspase3/7 activity in PDXC and CCA cell lines, and substantially reduced expression of BCL2, BCL-XL and MCL1 proteins. Niraparib caused a significant increase in oxidative stress, and induced activation of DNA damage markers, phosphorylation of CHK2 and replication fork stalling. Importantly, niraparib, in combination with gemcitabine, produced sustained and robust inhibition of tumor growth in vivo in a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) model more effectively than either treatment alone. Furthermore, tissue samples from mice treated with niraparib and gemcitabine display significantly lower expression levels of pHH3 and Ki-67, which are a mitotic and proliferative marker, respectively. Taken together, our results indicate niraparib as a novel therapeutic agent alone or in combination with gemcitabine for CCA.

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.

Lenalidomide and rituximab in Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia.

PURPOSE: Thalidomide and its more potent immunomodulatory derivative lenalidomide enhance rituximab-mediated antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. We therefore evaluated lenalidomide and rituximab in symptomatic Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM) patients naive to either agent. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Intended therapy consisted of 48 weeks of lenalidomide (25 mg/d for 3 weeks and then 1 week off) along with rituximab (375 mg/m(2)/wk) dosed on weeks 2 to 5 and 13 to 16. Sixteen patients were enrolled, 12 of whom were previously untreated. RESULTS: Unexpectedly, we observed an acute decrease in hematocrit in 13 of 16 patients (median hematocrit decrease, 4.8%), which was attributable to lenalidomide patients and which led to cessation of further enrollment on this study. Lenalidomide-related anemia was observed even at doses as low as 5 mg/d and occurred in the absence of hemolysis or other cytopenias. The overall response and major response (<50% decrease in serum IgM) rates were 50% and 25%, respectively, on an intent-to-treat basis. With a median follow-up of 31.3 months, 4 of 8 responding patients have progressed with a median time to progression of 18.9 months. CONCLUSION: Lenalidomide produces unexpected but clinically significant acute anemia in patients with WM. In comparison with our previous study with thalidomide and rituximab in an analogous patient population, the responses achieved in WM patients with lenalidomide and rituximab appear less favorable.

Randomised phase II trial (SWOG S1310) of single agent MEK inhibitor trametinib Versus 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine in refractory advanced biliary cancer.

BACKGROUND: The rationale for the evaluation of trametinib in advanced biliary cancer (BC) is based on the presence of mitogen-activated protein kinase alterations and on earlier promising results with MEK inhibitors in BC. METHODS: Patients with histologically proven BC who progressed on gemcitabine/platinum were randomised to trametinib daily (arm 1) versus fluoropyrimidine therapy (infusional 5-fluorouracil or oral capecitabine, arm 2). The primary end-point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end-points included progression free survival (PFS) and response rate. A planned interim futility analysis of objective response was performed on the first 14 patients registered to the trametinib arm. RESULTS: The study was stopped early based on the lack of measurable response in the trametinib arm. A total of 44 eligible patients were randomised (24 patients in arm 1 and 20 patients in arm 2). Median age was 62 years and the primary sites of tumour were cholangiocarcinoma (68%) and gallbladder (32%). The overall response rate was 8% (95% CI 0%-19%) in arm 1 versus 10% (95% CI 0%-23%) in arm 2 (p > .99) Median OS was 4.3 months for arm 1 and 6.6 months for arm 2. The median PFS was 1.4 months for arm 1 and 3.3 months for arm 2. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective randomised study of a targeted agent versus chemotherapy for the second-line treatment of BC. In this unselected population, the interim analysis result of unlikely benefit with trametinib resulted in early closure.

Second-line cabozantinib after sorafenib treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial, cabozantinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This subgroup analysis evaluated cabozantinib in patients who had received sorafenib as the only prior systemic therapy. METHODS: CELESTIAL randomised (2:1) patients with advanced HCC and Child-Pugh class A liver function to treatment with cabozantinib (60 mg daily) or placebo. Eligibility required prior treatment with sorafenib, and patients could have received ≤2 prior systemic regimens. The primary endpoint was OS. Outcomes in patients who had received sorafenib as the only prior therapy were analysed by duration of prior sorafenib (<3 months, 3 to <6 months and ≥6 months). RESULTS: Of patients who had received only prior sorafenib, 331 were randomised to cabozantinib and 164 to placebo; 136 patients had received sorafenib for <3 months, 141 for 3 to <6 months and 217 for ≥6 months. Cabozantinib improved OS relative to placebo in the overall second-line population who had received only prior sorafenib (median 11.3 vs 7.2 months; HR=0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88). This improvement was maintained in analyses by prior sorafenib duration with longer duration generally corresponding to longer median OS-median OS 8.9 vs 6.9 months (HR=0.72, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.10) for prior sorafenib <3 months, 11.5 vs 6.5 months (HR=0.65, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.00) for 3 to <6 months and 12.3 vs 9.2 months (HR=0.82, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.16) for ≥6 months. Cabozantinib also improved PFS in all duration subgroups. Safety data were consistent with the overall study population. CONCLUSION: Cabozantinib improved efficacy outcomes versus placebo in the second-line population who had received only prior sorafenib irrespective of duration of prior sorafenib treatment, further supporting the utility of cabozantinib in the evolving treatment landscape of HCC. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01908426.

Phase Ib Study of Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab in Patients With Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The immunomodulatory effect of lenvatinib (a multikinase inhibitor) on tumor microenvironments may contribute to antitumor activity when combined with programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) signaling inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We report results from a phase Ib study of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) in unresectable HCC (uHCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label multicenter study, patients with uHCC received lenvatinib (bodyweight ≥ 60 kg, 12 mg; < 60 kg, 8 mg) orally daily and pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The study included a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) phase and an expansion phase (first-line patients). Primary objectives were safety/tolerability (DLT phase), and objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) by modified RECIST (mRECIST) and RECIST version 1.1 (v1.1) per independent imaging review (IIR; expansion phase). RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were enrolled. No DLTs were reported (n = 6) in the DLT phase; 100 patients (expansion phase; included n = 2 from DLT phase) had received no prior systemic therapy and had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B (n = 29) or C disease (n = 71). At data cutoff, 37% of patients remained on treatment. Median duration of follow-up was 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.5 months). Confirmed ORRs by IIR were 46.0% (95% CI, 36.0% to 56.3%) per mRECIST and 36.0% (95% CI, 26.6% to 46.2%) per RECIST v1.1. Median DORs by IIR were 8.6 months (95% CI, 6.9 months to not estimable [NE]) per mRECIST and 12.6 months (95% CI, 6.9 months to NE) per RECIST v1.1. Median progression-free survival by IIR was 9.3 months per mRECIST and 8.6 months per RECIST v1.1. Median overall survival was 22 months. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 67% (grade 5, 3%) of patients. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab has promising antitumor activity in uHCC. Toxicities were manageable, with no unexpected safety signals.

Phase I Study of DSTP3086S, an Antibody-Drug Conjugate Targeting Six-Transmembrane Epithelial Antigen of Prostate 1, in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of the prostate 1 (STEAP1) is highly expressed in prostate cancers. DSTP3086S is a humanized immunoglobulin G1 anti-STEAP1 monoclonal antibody linked to the potent antimitotic agent monomethyl auristatin E. This study evaluated the safety and activity of DSTP3086S in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a 3 + 3 dose escalation study to evaluate DSTP3086S (0.3 to 2.8 mg/kg intravenously) given once every 3 weeks followed by cohort expansion at the recommended phase II dose or weekly (0.8 to 1.0 mg/kg). RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were given DSTP3086S once every 3 weeks, and seven were treated weekly. Two patients in the once-every-3-weeks dose escalation had dose-limiting grade 3 transaminitis. Grade 3 hyperglycemia and grade 4 hypophosphatemia were dose-limiting toxicities in one patient treated at 1.0 mg/kg weekly. Initial cohort expansion evaluated dosing at 2.8 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (n = 10), but frequent dose reductions led to testing of 2.4 mg/kg (n = 39) in the expansion phase. Common related adverse events (> 20%) across doses (once every 3 weeks) were fatigue, peripheral neuropathy, nausea, constipation, anorexia, diarrhea, and vomiting. DSTP3086S pharmacokinetics were linear. Among 62 patients who received > 2 mg/kg DSTP3086S once every 3 weeks, 11 (18%) demonstrated a ≥ 50% decline in prostate-specific antigen; two (6%) of 36 with measurable disease at baseline achieved a radiographic partial response; and of 27 patients with informative unfavorable baseline circulating tumor cells ≥ 5/7.5 mL of blood, 16 (59%) showed conversions to favorable circulating tumor cells < 5. No prostate-specific antigen or RECIST responses were seen with weekly dosing. CONCLUSION: DSTP3086S has acceptable safety at the recommended phase II dose level of 2.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. Antitumor activity at doses between 2.25 and 2.8 mg/kg once every 3 weeks supports the potential benefit of treating STEAP1-expressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with an STEAP1-targeting antibody-drug conjugate.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): current and evolving therapies.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is associated with a historical 5-year survival rate of less than 5%. Evidence suggests that the incidence of HCC is rising in several countries, including the US. Current curative treatment options for HCC include surgical resection and liver transplantation, but these approaches are restricted to carefully selected patients who may benefit from such interventions. Other curative options include ablative therapies, which destroy tumor cells via the injection of chemical substances, radiation, or heating or cooling. Patients with more advanced HCC may be candidates for noncurative treatments, including transarterial embolization and transarterial ablative therapy with beads impregnated with radiation-emitting substances - if the tumor has not invaded vessels or disseminated outside the liver. New therapeutic approaches include Raf kinase inhibitors, such as sorafenib. Other treatments under investigation include immunotherapy, tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitors, and treatments arising from technical advances in ablation and radiation. These new approaches may help to address the enormous need for expanded treatment options for patients with HCC.

Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor, has shown promising preclinical and clinical activity against metastatic colorectal cancer, particularly in combination with chemotherapy. METHODS: Of 813 patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, we randomly assigned 402 to receive irinotecan, bolus fluorouracil, and leucovorin (IFL) plus bevacizumab (5 mg per kilogram of body weight every two weeks) and 411 to receive IFL plus placebo. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival, the response rate, the duration of the response, safety, and the quality of life. RESULTS: The median duration of survival was 20.3 months in the group given IFL plus bevacizumab, as compared with 15.6 months in the group given IFL plus placebo, corresponding to a hazard ratio for death of 0.66 (P<0.001). The median duration of progression-free survival was 10.6 months in the group given IFL plus bevacizumab, as compared with 6.2 months in the group given IFL plus placebo (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.54; P<0.001); the corresponding rates of response were 44.8 percent and 34.8 percent (P=0.004). The median duration of the response was 10.4 months in the group given IFL plus bevacizumab, as compared with 7.1 months in the group given IFL plus placebo (hazard ratio for progression, 0.62; P=0.001). Grade 3 hypertension was more common during treatment with IFL plus bevacizumab than with IFL plus placebo (11.0 percent vs. 2.3 percent) but was easily managed. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of bevacizumab to fluorouracil-based combination chemotherapy results in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in survival among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

INST OX-05-024: first line gemcitabine, oxaliplatin, and erlotinib for primary hepatocellular carcinoma and bile duct cancers: a multicenter Phase II trial.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) incidence is increasing in the USA. Gemcitabine (G) and oxaliplatin (O) are active in HCC and biliary duct cancer (BDC). Erlotinib (E) is an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with known activity against both. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of the combination G+O+E. Patients with either of the two diagnosis were treated in a phase II trial. Simons 2 stage design was used. A disease-control rate (DCR), complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)+ stable disease (SD) at 24 weeks of ≤20% and >40% (P0 and P1 of 0.2 and 0.4, respectively) were set as undesirable (null) and desirable results. 26 HCC and 7 BDC patients were accrued. In HCC, 1 PR, 10 SD, and 9 PDs were seen. DCR in HCC was 42%. Among seven (7) patients with BDC, one patient was not evaluable; one achieved a long lasting PR, and five patients had SD and DCR was 86%. Median overall survival (OS) times and progression-free survivals (PFS) were 196 and 149 days in HCC and 238 days and not reached in BDC. PFS at 26 weeks in HCC was 41% and at 21 weeks in BDC was 60%. Grade 3 toxicities in >5% of patients were fatigue (12.9%), neutropenia (9.6%), thrombocytopenia (9.6%), and diarrhea (6.4%). G+O+E exceeded both preset P0a and P1 of the primary objective with a PFS of 41% at 26 weeks for HCC and preliminary BDC data may warrant further investigations.

Ramucirumab as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib: Patient-focused outcome results from the randomised phase III REACH study.

PURPOSE: To report patient-focused outcomes as measured by quality of life (QoL) and performance status (PS) in REACH, a phase III placebo-controlled randomised study, assessing ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who received prior sorafenib. METHODS: Eligible patients had advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A, PS 0 or 1 and prior sorafenib. Patients received ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo (1:1) on day 1 of a 2-week cycle. QoL was assessed by FACT Hepatobiliary Symptom Index (FHSI)-8 and EuroQoL (EQ-5D) at baseline; cycles 4, 10, and 16; and end of treatment. PS was assessed at baseline, each cycle, and end of treatment. Deterioration in FHSI-8 was defined as a ≥3-point decrease from baseline and PS deterioration was defined as a change of ≥2. Both intention-to-treat and pre-specified subgroup of patients with baseline serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL were assessed. RESULTS: There were 565 patients randomised to ramucirumab and placebo. Compliance with FHSI and EQ-5D was high and similar between groups. In the ITT population, deterioration in FHSI-8, EQ-5D, and PS was similar between ramucirumab and placebo. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, ramucirumab significantly reduced deterioration in FHSI-8 at the end of treatment compared with placebo (P = 0.0381), and there was a trend towards a delay in the deterioration of symptoms in FHSI-8 (HR 0.690; P = 0.054) and PS (HR 0.642; P = 0.057) in favour of ramucirumab. CONCLUSIONS: We report one of the most comprehensive data sets of QoL and symptom burden in patients undergoing systemic therapy for advanced HCC. Ramucirumab was associated with no worsening of QoL. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, the significant survival benefit observed in patients treated with ramucirumab was coupled with a trend in patient-focused outcome benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01140347.