Tislelizumab vs Sorafenib as First-Line Treatment for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality, and additional first-line treatments are needed. The programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor tislelizumab demonstrated efficacy and a tolerable safety profile as second-line HCC treatment. Objective: To investigate efficacy and safety of tislelizumab vs sorafenib tosylate for first-line treatment of unresectable HCC. Design, Setting, and Participants: The open-label, global, multiregional phase 3 RATIONALE-301 randomized clinical trial enrolled systemic therapy-naive adults with histologically confirmed HCC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, disease progression following (or patient was not amenable to) locoregional therapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, and Child-Pugh class A, between December 27, 2017, and October 2, 2019. Data cutoff was July 11, 2022. Intervention: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive tislelizumab, 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, or sorafenib tosylate, 400 mg orally twice daily. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included objective response rate, progression-free survival, duration of response, and safety. Results: A total of 674 patients were included in the analysis (570 men [84.6%]; median age, 61 years [range, 23-86 years]). As of July 11, 2022, minimum study follow-up was 33 months. The primary end point of OS noninferiority of tislelizumab vs sorafenib was met in the intention-to-treat population (n = 674); median overall survival was 15.9 (95% CI, 13.2-19.7) months vs 14.1 (95% CI, 12.6-17.4) months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85 [95.003% CI, 0.71-1.02]), and superiority of tislelizumab vs sorafenib was not met. The objective response rate was 14.3% (n = 49) for tislelizumab vs 5.4% (n = 18) for sorafenib, and median duration of response was 36.1 (95% CI, 16.8 to not evaluable) months vs 11.0 (95% CI, 6.2-14.7) months, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.1 (95% CI, 2.1-3.5) months vs 3.4 (95% CI, 2.2-4.1) months with tislelizumab vs sorafenib (HR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.92-1.33]). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) was 96.2% (325 of 338 patients) for tislelizumab and 100% (n = 324) for sorafenib. Grade 3 or greater treatment-related AEs were reported in 75 patients (22.2%) receiving tislelizumab and 173 (53.4%) receiving sorafenib. There was a lower incidence of treatment-related AEs leading to drug discontinuation (21 [6.2%] vs 33 [10.2%]) and drug modification (68 [20.1%] vs 187 [57.7%]) with tislelizumab vs sorafenib. Conclusions and Relevance: In RATIONALE-301, tislelizumab demonstrated OS benefit that was noninferior vs sorafenib, with a higher objective response rate and more durable responses, while median progression-free survival was longer with sorafenib. Tislelizumab demonstrated a favorable safety profile vs sorafenib. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03412773.

The effects of tislelizumab treatment on the health-related quality of life of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

This study examined the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving tislelizumab versus docetaxel in the open-label, multicenter, Phase 3 trial called RATIONALE-303 (NCT03358875). HRQoL was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-LC13, and the EQ-5D-5L instruments. A longitudinal analysis of covariance assessed the change from baseline to Week 12 and from baseline to Week 18. A time to deterioration analysis was also performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Eight hundred and five patients were randomized to either tislelizumab (n = 535) or docetaxel, respectively (535 and 270 to tislelizumab and docetaxel, respectively). The tislelizumab arm improved while the docetaxel arm worsened in the QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL scale score (difference LS mean change Week 18: 5.7 [95% CI: 2.38, 9.07, p = 0.0008]), fatigue (Week 12: -3.2 [95% CI: -5.95, -0.37, p < 0.0266]; Week 18: -4.9 [95% CI: -8.26, -1.61, p = 0.0037]), and QLQ-LC13 symptom index score (Week 12: -5.5 [95% CI: -6.93, -4.04, P < 0.0001]; Week 18: -6.6 [95% CI: -8.25, -4.95, p < 0.0001]). The tislelizumab arm had improvements in coughing versus the docetaxel arm (Week 12: -4.7 [95% CI: -8.57, -0.78, p = 0.0188]; Week 18: -8.3 [95% CI: -13.02, -3.51, p = 0.0007]). The patients who received tislelizumab were less at risk for clinically meaningful worsening in the overall lung cancer symptom index scale (hazard ratio (HR): 0.24 [95% CI: 0.162, 0.356], p < 0.0001), dyspnea (HR: 0.74 [95% CI: 0.567, 0.958], p = 0.0109), coughing (HR: 0.74 [95% CI: 0.534, 1.019], p = 0.0309), and peripheral neuropathy (HR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.370, 0.810] p = 0.0011). In general, tislelizumab versus docetaxel was associated with improved HRQoL and symptoms of lung cancer in patients who previously failed treatment with platinum-containing chemotherapy.

Tislelizumab Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Previously Treated Advanced NSCLC (RATIONALE-303): A Phase 3, Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The phase 3 RATIONALE-303 trial (NCT03358875) investigated the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab versus docetaxel in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC. Here, we report the efficacy and safety results and describe the exploratory biomarker analyses. METHODS: A total of 805 patients aged more than or equal to 18 years with locally advanced or metastatic squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC were randomized 2:1 to intravenous tislelizumab 200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor cell expression greater than or equal to 25% populations. The exploratory biomarker analyses included PD-L1 expression, tumor mutation burden, and gene expression profile. RESULTS: At the prespecified interim analysis (August 10, 2020), the co-primary end point of OS in the ITT population was met, with a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS with tislelizumab versus docetaxel (median 17.2 versus 11.9 mo, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64, p < 0.0001). At the final analysis (July 15, 2021), the other co-primary end point of OS in the PD-L1 tumor cell greater than or equal to 25% population was further met (median 19.3 versus 11.5 mo, respectively; HR = 0.53, p < 0.0001), and OS continued to improve in the ITT population (median 16.9 versus 11.9 mo, respectively, HR = 0.66). Exploratory biomarker analyses revealed the potential association of NOTCH1-4 mutations with improved tislelizumab efficacy for both OS and progression-free survival, whereas tissue tumor mutation burden correlated with progression-free survival benefit, but not OS benefit. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Tislelizumab was found to have a significantly improved and long-term clinical benefit in OS versus docetaxel in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.

A pH-responsive stellate mesoporous silica based nanophotosensitizer for in vivo cancer diagnosis and targeted photodynamic therapy.

Development of a photosensitizer that can achieve tumor specificity, improve therapeutic efficacy, and reduce side effects remains a challenge for photodynamic therapy (PDT). In this work, a pH-sensitive activatable nanophotosensitizer (SMSN-ZnPc1) has been elaborately designed, which could be readily prepared by using a functionalized zinc(ii) phthalocyanine (ZnPc) to conjugate with stellate mesoporous silica nanoparticles (SMSNs) through an acid-sensitive hydrazone bond. Meanwhile, a non-activatable analogue SMSN-ZnPc2 has also been prepared as a negative control. The fluorescence emission and singlet oxygen generation of the photosensitizer are essentially quenched in the intact nanophotosensitizer. However, these properties of SMSN-ZnPc1 can be restored greatly both in acidic solutions and at the cellular level. More importantly, after intravenous administration, SMSN-ZnPc1 can also be selectively activated at the tumor site and exhibit efficient tumor growth inhibition in S180 rat ascitic tumor-bearing KM mice with negligible systemic toxicity. It thus may serve as a promising nanoplatform for cancer diagnosis and targeted PDT.

The increase in the number of spines on the gonadotropin-releasing hormone neuron across pubertal development in rats.

The onset of puberty is initiated by an increase in the release of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) from GnRH neurons in the hypothalamus. However, the precise mechanism that leads to the activation of GnRH neurons at puberty remains controversial. Spines are small protrusions on the surface of dendrites that normally receive excitatory inputs. In this study, we analyzed the number and morphology of spines on GnRH neurons to investigate changes in synaptic inputs across puberty in rats. For morphological estimation, we measured the diameter of the head (DH) of each spine and classified them into small-type (DH < 0.65 µm), large-type (DH > 0.65 µm) and giant-type (DH > 0.9 µm). The greatest number of spines was observed at the proximal dendrite within 50 µm of the soma. At the soma and proximal dendrite, the number of spines was greater in adults than in juveniles in both male and female individuals. Classification of spines revealed that the increase in spine number was due to increases in large- and giant-type spines. To further explore the relationship between spines on GnRH neurons and pubertal development, we next analyzed adult rats neonatally exposed to estradiol benzoate, in which puberty onset and reproductive functions are disrupted. We found a decrease in the number of all types of spines. These results suggest that GnRH neurons become to receive more and greater excitatory inputs on the soma and proximal dendrites as a result of the changes that occur at puberty and that alteration to spines plays a pivotal role in normal pubertal development.