Search: A phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sorafenib plus erlotinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of sorafenib plus either erlotinib or placebo in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in a multicenter, multinational, randomized, phase III trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced HCC and underlying Child-Pugh class A cirrhosis, who were naive to systemic treatment (N = 720), were randomly assigned to sorafenib plus either erlotinib (n = 362) or placebo (n = 358). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Median OS was similar in the sorafenib plus erlotinib and sorafenib plus placebo groups (9.5 v 8.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.929; P = .408), as was median time to progression (3.2 v 4.0 months, respectively; HR, 1.135; P = .18). In the sorafenib/erlotinib arm versus the sorafenib/placebo arm, the overall response rate trended higher (6.6% v 3.9%, respectively; P = .102), whereas the disease control rate was significantly lower (43.9% v 52.5%, respectively; P = .021). The median durations of treatment with sorafenib were 86 days in the sorafenib/erlotinib arm and 123 days in the sorafenib/placebo arm. In the sorafenib/erlotinib and sorafenib/placebo arms, the rates of treatment-emergent serious AEs (58.0% v 54.6%, respectively) and drug-related serious AEs (21.0% v 22.8%, respectively) were similar. AEs matched the known safety profiles of both agents, but rates of rash/desquamation, anorexia, and diarrhea were higher in the sorafenib/erlotinib arm, whereas rates of alopecia and hand-foot skin reaction were higher in the sorafenib/placebo arm. Withdrawal rates for AEs during cycles 1 to 3 were higher in the sorafenib/erlotinib arm. CONCLUSION: Adding erlotinib to sorafenib did not improve survival in patients with advanced HCC

An Examination of Liver Offers to Candidates on the Liver Transplant Wait-List

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We aimed to characterize offers of organs to candidates awaiting liver transplantation (LT). METHODS: We analyzed data from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry on all US LT candidates with non-fulminant disease who were offered livers from February 1 2005 to January 31, 2010 and ultimately received transplants. We excluded candidates with a final model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores <15. Livers were classified as high quality if they were from donors 18–50 years of age who were ≥170 cm tall, of non-black race, suffered brain death secondary to trauma, hepatitis C antibody-negative, not categorized as high risk by the Centers for Disease Control, and locally or regionally located. RESULTS: Of 33,389 candidates for LT, 20% died or were removed from the list and 64% were received LT; the median (interquartile range) number of liver offers for all candidates was 5 (range, 2–12). Of those who died or were removed from the list, 84% received ≥1 liver offer (s). Overall, 55% those who died or were removed from the list, and 57% of those who received LT, received ≥1 offer of a high-quality liver, when they had MELD scores ≥15 (P=.005). However, the proportion of last liver offers of high-quality to patients that underwent LT was twice that of patients that died or were removed from the list (28 vs 14%; P<0.001). Most liver offers (68%) were refused for reasons related to donor quality. CONCLUSIONS: Most candidates for LT who died or were removed from the list received ≥1 offer of a liver beforehand, and 55% received ≥1 offer of a high-quality liver. These findings indicate that a substantial proportion of wait-list mortality results in part from declined, rather than lack of opportunity, for transplantation. Understanding the real-time factors involved in the complex decision to accept a liver offer is vital to reducing wait-list mortality for LT candidates

Open‐label, clinical trial extension:Two‐year safety and efficacy results of seladelpar in patients with primary biliary cholangitis

SummaryBackgroundSeladelpar is a potent and selective peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor‐δ agonist that targets multiple cell types involved in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), leading to anti‐cholestatic, anti‐inflammatory and anti‐pruritic effects.AimsTo evaluate the long‐term safety and efficacy of seladelpar in patients with PBC.MethodsIn an open‐label, international, long‐term extension study, patients with PBC completing seladelpar lead‐in studies continued treatment. Seladelpar was taken orally once daily at doses of 5 or 10 mg with dose adjustment permitted for safety or tolerability. The primary analysis was for safety and the secondary efficacy analysis examined biochemical markers of cholestasis and liver injury. The study was terminated early due to the unexpected histological findings in a concurrent study for non‐alcoholic steatohepatitis, which were subsequently found to predate treatment. Safety and efficacy data were analysed through 2 years.ResultsThere were no serious treatment‐related adverse events observed among 106 patients treated with seladelpar for up to 2 years. There were four discontinuations for safety, one possibly related to seladelpar. Among 53 patients who completed 2 years of seladelpar, response rates increased from years 1 to 2 for the composite endpoint (alkaline phosphatase [ALP] &lt;1.67 × ULN, ≥15% decrease in ALP, and total bilirubin ≤ULN) and ALP normalisation from 66% to 79% and from 26% to 42%, respectively. In those with elevated bilirubin at baseline, 43% achieved normalisation at year 2.ConclusionsSeladelpar was safe, and markedly improved biochemical markers of cholestasis and liver injury in patients with PBC. These effects were maintained or improved throughout the second year. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03301506; Clinicaltrialsregister.eu: 2017‐003910‐16.</jats:sec

Obeticholic acid for the treatment of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: interim analysis from a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Background Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is a common type of chronic liver disease that can lead to cirrhosis. Obeticholic acid, a farnesoid X receptor agonist, has been shown to improve the histological features of NASH. Here we report results from a planned interim analysis of an ongoing, phase 3 study of obeticholic acid for NASH. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, adult patients with definite NASH,non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) activity score of at least 4, and fibrosis stages F2–F3, or F1 with at least oneaccompanying comorbidity, were randomly assigned using an interactive web response system in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive oral placebo, obeticholic acid 10 mg, or obeticholic acid 25 mg daily. Patients were excluded if cirrhosis, other chronic liver disease, elevated alcohol consumption, or confounding conditions were present. The primary endpointsfor the month-18 interim analysis were fibrosis improvement (≥1 stage) with no worsening of NASH, or NASH resolution with no worsening of fibrosis, with the study considered successful if either primary endpoint was met. Primary analyses were done by intention to treat, in patients with fibrosis stage F2–F3 who received at least one dose of treatment and reached, or would have reached, the month 18 visit by the prespecified interim analysis cutoff date. The study also evaluated other histological and biochemical markers of NASH and fibrosis, and safety. This study is ongoing, and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02548351, and EudraCT, 20150-025601-6. Findings Between Dec 9, 2015, and Oct 26, 2018, 1968 patients with stage F1–F3 fibrosis were enrolled and received at least one dose of study treatment; 931 patients with stage F2–F3 fibrosis were included in the primary analysis (311 in the placebo group, 312 in the obeticholic acid 10 mg group, and 308 in the obeticholic acid 25 mg group). The fibrosis improvement endpoint was achieved by 37 (12%) patients in the placebo group, 55 (18%) in the obeticholic acid 10 mg group (p=0·045), and 71 (23%) in the obeticholic acid 25 mg group (p=0·0002). The NASH resolution endpoint was not met (25 [8%] patients in the placebo group, 35 [11%] in the obeticholic acid 10 mg group [p=0·18], and 36 [12%] in the obeticholic acid 25 mg group [p=0·13]). In the safety population (1968 patients with fibrosis stages F1–F3), the most common adverse event was pruritus (123 [19%] in the placebo group, 183 [28%] in the obeticholic acid 10 mg group, and 336 [51%] in the obeticholic acid 25 mg group); incidence was generally mild to moderate in severity. The overall safety profile was similar to that in previous studies, and incidence of serious adverse events was similar across treatment groups (75 [11%] patients in the placebo group, 72 [11%] in the obeticholic acid 10 mg group, and 93 [14%] in the obeticholic acid 25 mg group). Interpretation Obeticholic acid 25 mg significantly improved fibrosis and key components of NASH disease activity among patients with NASH. The results from this planned interim analysis show clinically significant histological improvement that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. This study is ongoing to assess clinical outcomes

CRASH COURSE GASTROENTEROLOGY

vii, 235 hlm.; illus 20x28 c

Combined effects of hyponatremia and hepatic encephalopathy on inpatient mortality

Introduction and Objectives: Although hyponatremia and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) are known independent predictors of mortality, their combined effect is unknown. We investigated whether the inpatient mortality differed among patients with both hyponatremia and HE compared to those with either hyponatremia or HE alone. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, data were extracted from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to identify US adults (aged ≥18 years) with cirrhosis between January 1st, 2016, and December 31st, 2017. We analyzed the effects of hyponatremia, HE, or a combination of hyponatremia and HE on inpatient mortality using logistic regression. Results: Among 309,841 cirrhosis-related admissions, 22,870 (7%) patients died during hospitalization. Those with a combination of hyponatremia and HE had higher mortality (14%) than those with HE only (11%), hyponatremia only (9%), and neither hyponatremia nor HE (6%) (p<0.001). When compared to patients without hyponatremia or HE, patients with both hyponatremia and HE had the highest odds (adjusted odds ratio or aOR) of inpatient mortality (aOR 1.90, 95% CI: 1.79 – 2.01) followed by patients with HE only (aOR 1.75, 95% CI: 1.69 – 1.82) and patients with hyponatremia only (aOR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.12 – 1.22). Patients with HE only had 50% higher odds of inpatient mortality when compared to those with hyponatremia only (aOR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.43 – 1.57). Conclusions: In this nationwide study, the presence of both hyponatremia and HE was associated with higher inpatient mortality than either hyponatremia or HE alone