assessment of disease burden in the phase iii celestial trial of cabozantinib c versus placebo p in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma hcc

n/

Supplementary Material for: Phase I Trial of Sorafenib Following Liver Transplantation in Patients with High-Risk Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver transplantation offers excellent long-term survival for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who fall within established criteria. For those outside such criteria, or with high-risk pathologic features in the explant, HCC recurrence rates are higher. We conducted a multicenter phase I trial of sorafenib in liver transplantation patients with high-risk HCC. Subjects had HCC outside the Milan criteria (pre- or post-transplant), poorly differentiated tumors, or vascular invasion. We used a standard 3+3 phase I design with a planned duration of treatment of 24 weeks. Correlative studies included the number of circulating endothelial cells (CECs), plasma biomarkers, and tumor expression of p-Erk, p-Akt, and c-Met in tissue micro-arrays. We enrolled 14 patients with a median age of 63 years. Of these, 93% were men and 71% had underlying hepatitis C virus (HCV) and 21% had HBV. The maximum tolerated dose of sorafenib was 200 mg BID. Grade 3-4 toxicities seen in >10% of subjects included leukopenia (21%), elevated gamma-glutamyl transferase (21%), hypertension (14%), hand-foot syndrome (14%) and diarrhea (14%). Over a median follow-up of 953 days, one patient died and four recurred. The mean CEC number at baseline was 21 cells/4 ml for those who recurred, and 80 cells/4 ml for those who did not (p=0.10). Mean soluble vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 levels decreased after 1 month on sorafenib (p=0.09), but did not correlate with recurrence. There was a trend for tumor c-Met expression to correlate with increased risk of recurrence. Post-transplant sorafenib was found to be feasible and tolerable at 200 mg PO BID. The effect of post-transplant sorafenib on recurrence-free survival is potentially promising but needs further validation in a larger study

Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Previously Treated with Sorafenib: The CheckMate 040 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Most patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are diagnosed with advanced disease not eligible for potentially curative therapies; therefore, new treatment options are needed. Combining nivolumab with ipilimumab may improve clinical outcomes compared with nivolumab monotherapy. Objective: To assess efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced HCC who were previously treated with sorafenib. Design, Setting, and Participants: CheckMate 040 is a multicenter, open-label, multicohort, phase 1/2 study. In the nivolumab plus ipilimumab cohort, patients were randomized between January 4 and September 26, 2016. Treatment group information was blinded after randomization. Median follow-up was 30.7 months. Data cutoff for this analysis was January 2019. Patients were recruited at 31 centers in 10 countries/territories in Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients had advanced HCC (with/without hepatitis B or C) previously treated with sorafenib. A total of 148 patients were randomized (50 to arm A and 49 each to arms B and C). Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to either nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, administered every 3 weeks (4 doses), followed by nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks (arm A); nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg, administered every 3 weeks (4 doses), followed by nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks (arm B); or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks (arm C). Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary end points were safety, tolerability, and objective response rate. Duration of response was also measured (investigator assessed with the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1). Results: Of 148 total participants, 120 were male (81%). Median (IQR) age was 60 (52.5-66.5). At data cutoff (January 2019), the median follow-up was 30.7 months (IQR, 29.9-34.7). Investigator-assessed objective response rate was 32% (95% CI, 20%-47%) in arm A, 27% (95% CI, 15%-41%) in arm B, and 29% (95% CI, 17%-43%) in arm C. Median (range) duration of response was not reached (8.3-33.7+) in arm A and was 15.2 months (4.2-29.9+) in arm B and 21.7 months (2.8-32.7+) in arm C. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events were reported in 46 of 49 patients (94%) in arm A, 35 of 49 patients (71%) in arm B, and 38 of 48 patients (79%) in arm C; there was 1 treatment-related death (arm A; grade 5 pneumonitis). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, nivolumab plus ipilimumab had manageable safety, promising objective response rate, and durable responses. The arm A regimen (4 doses nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks then nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks) received accelerated approval in the US based on the results of this study. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01658878

Supplementary Material for: 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

<b><i>Objectives:</i></b> 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). <b><i>Methods:</i></b> 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 (<i>n</i> = 47) (B+E) or 400 mg S orally twice daily (<i>n</i> = 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. <b><i>Results:</i></b> 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; <i>p</i> = 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 (<i>n</i> = 39) and 10.26 months (95% CI: 5.9–13.0) for patients treated with S (<i>n</i> = 38) (HR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.53–1.46). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> 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