6 research outputs found

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

    Get PDF
    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: NCT0165887

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

    No full text
    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: NCT0165887

    Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence in patients with curative resection or ablation: impact of HCV eradication does not depend on the use of interferon

    No full text
    Background: In HCV-infected cirrhotic patients with successfully treated early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the time to HCC recurrence and the effects of sustained viral eradication (SVR) by interferon (IFN)-based or IFN-free regimens on HCC recurrence remain unclear. Aim: To perform an indirect comparison of time to recurrence (TTR) in patients with successfully treated early HCC and active HCV infection with those of patients with SVR by IFN-based and by IFN-free regimens. Methods: We evaluated 443 patients with HCV-related cirrhosis and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage A/0 HCC who had a complete radiological response after curative resection or ablation. Active HCV infection was present in 328, selected from the Italian Liver Cancer group cohort; 58 patients had SVR achieved by IFN-free regimens after HCC cure, and 57 patients had SVR achieved by IFN-based regimens after HCC cure. Individual data of patients in the last two groups were extracted from available publications. Results: TTR by Kaplan–Meier curve was significantly lower in patients with active HCV infection compared with those with SVR both by IFN-free (P = 0.02) and by IFN-based (P < 0.001) treatments. TTR was similar in patients with SVR by IFN-free or by IFN-based (P = 0.49) strategies. Conclusion: In HCV-infected, successfully treated patients with early HCC, SVR obtained by IFN-based or IFN-free regimens significantly reduce tumour recurrence without differences related to the anti-viral strategy used

    Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence in patients with curative resection or ablation: impact of HCV eradication does not depend on the use of interferon

    No full text
    Background: In HCV-infected cirrhotic patients with successfully treated early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the time to HCC recurrence and the effects of sustained viral eradication (SVR) by interferon (IFN)-based or IFN-free regimens on HCC recurrence remain unclear. Aim: To perform an indirect comparison of time to recurrence (TTR) in patients with successfully treated early HCC and active HCV infection with those of patients with SVR by IFN-based and by IFN-free regimens. Methods: We evaluated 443 patients with HCV-related cirrhosis and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage A/0 HCC who had a complete radiological response after curative resection or ablation. Active HCV infection was present in 328, selected from the Italian Liver Cancer group cohort; 58 patients had SVR achieved by IFN-free regimens after HCC cure, and 57 patients had SVR achieved by IFN-based regimens after HCC cure. Individual data of patients in the last two groups were extracted from available publications. Results: TTR by Kaplan–Meier curve was significantly lower in patients with active HCV infection compared with those with SVR both by IFN-free (P = 0.02) and by IFN-based (P < 0.001) treatments. TTR was similar in patients with SVR by IFN-free or by IFN-based (P = 0.49) strategies. Conclusion: In HCV-infected, successfully treated patients with early HCC, SVR obtained by IFN-based or IFN-free regimens significantly reduce tumour recurrence without differences related to the anti-viral strategy used

    Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence in patients with curative resection or ablation: impact of HCV eradication does not depend on the use of interferon

    No full text
    corecore