Ramucirumab as Second-Line Treatment in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Analysis of REACH Trial Results by Child-Pugh Score.

IMPORTANCE: REACH is the first phase 3 trial to provide information on hepatocellular cancer (HCC) in the second-line (postsorafenib) setting categorized by Child-Pugh score, a scoring system used to measure the severity of chronic liver disease. This exploratory analysis demonstrates the relationship between a potential ramucirumab survival benefit, severity of liver disease, and baseline α-fetoprotein (αFP). OBJECTIVE: To assess treatment effects and tolerability of ramucirumab by Child-Pugh score in patients with HCC enrolled in the REACH trial. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial of ramucirumab and best supportive care vs placebo and best supportive care as second-line treatment in patients with HCC enrolled between November 4, 2010 and April 18, 2013, from 154 global sites. Overall, 643 patients were randomized and included in this analysis; 565 patients considered Child-Pugh class A (Child-Pugh scores 5 and 6) and 78 patients considered class B (Child-Pugh scores 7 and 8). INTERVENTIONS: Ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo intravenously plus best supportive care every 2 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall survival (OS), defined as time from randomization to death from any cause. RESULTS: In the randomized population of 643 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.8 [11.1] years) in this analysis, a potential ramucirumab OS benefit was observed for patients with a Child-Pugh score of 5 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.63-1.02; P = .06) but no apparent benefit for patients with Child-Pugh scores of 6 or 7 and 8. In patients with baseline αFP levels of 400 ng/mL (to convert ng/mL to µg/L, multiply by 1.0) or more, a ramucirumab OS benefit was significant for a score of Child-Pugh 5 (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.87; P = .01) and Child-Pugh 6 (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42-0.98; P = .04), but was not significant for Child-Pugh 7 and 8. The overall safety profile of ramucirumab, regardless of Child-Pugh score, was considered manageable. Regardless of treatment arm, patients with Child-Pugh scores of 7 and 8 experienced a higher incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events, including ascites and asthenia, and special-interest events, including liver injury and/or failure and bleeding, compared with patients with Child-Pugh scores of 5 or 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In unselected patients, a trend for ramucirumab survival benefit was observed only for patients with a Child-Pugh score of 5. In patients with baseline αFP levels of 400 ng/mL or more, a ramucirumab survival benefit was observed for Child-Pugh scores of 5 and 6. Ramucirumab had a manageable toxic effect profile. These results support the ongoing REACH-2 study of ramucirumab in patients with advanced HCC with underlying Child-Pugh A cirrhosis and baseline αFP levels of 400 ng/mL or more. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01140347.

Management of Skin Reactions During Cetuximab Treatment in Association With Chemotherapy or Radiotherapy: Update of the Italian Expert Recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: Cetuximab was shown in phase III clinical trials to improve chemotherapy efficacy in patients with advanced colorectal and head-neck cancer. Appropriate management of skin reactions associated with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor therapy is necessary to allow adequate drug compliance and to improve patient quality of life and outcomes. METHODS: The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used by a group of experts to produce new Italian recommendations on the management of skin reactions in this setting. Statements were generated on the basis of an updated systematic review of the literature and rated twice by a panel of 38 expert physicians. A meeting of the panel was held after the first rating session. RESULTS: Skin reactions included acneiformic rash, skin dryness (xerosis), pruritus, paronychia, hair abnormalities, mucositis, and increased growth of eyelashes or facial hair. Updates of the previous recommendations on the prevention and treatment of each type of reaction were proposed. CONCLUSIONS: This updated Expert Opinion focuses on how to assess and correctly grade skin reactions according to the latest National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and on how to manage these adverse events in clinical practice.