-
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Oct 2022Cancer patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections are at high risk of viral reactivation after cancer treatment. However, there is a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cancer patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections are at high risk of viral reactivation after cancer treatment. However, there is a paucity of data regarding HBV or HCV reactivation in cancer patients who receive newer anticancer drugs such as immune checkpoint inhibitors; Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors; agents targeting CD22, CD38, and CC chemokine receptor 4 (CCR4); and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies.
OBJECTIVES
In this narrative review article, we describe the rate, characteristics, and outcomes of HBV and HCV reactivation in patients receiving novel systemic anticancer therapies.
SOURCES
We searched MEDLINE for all original research articles, case reports, and systematic reviews published in English between July 2013 and December 2021 on cancer patients with HBV or HCV infection receiving novel systemic anticancer therapy.
CONTENT
The risk of HBV or HCV reactivation is not well defined in cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (durvalumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, and tremelimumab); BTK inhibitors (ibrutinib and acalabrutinib); agents targeting CD22 (inotuzumab ozogamicin), CD38 (daratumumab, isatuximab), and CCR4 (mogamulizumab); and CAR T-cell therapy (axicabtagene-ciloleucel). However, screening for chronic HBV and HCV infections and routine monitoring of patients with such infections during novel anticancer therapy are recommended for early identification of viral reactivation, which can impact outcomes of oncologic treatment or be fatal.
IMPLICATIONS
Specific strategies for risk assessment, monitoring, and management should be designed to reduce the risk of reactivation after novel anticancer therapy in patients with chronic HBV or HCV infections.
Topics: Agammaglobulinaemia Tyrosine Kinase; Antiviral Agents; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis B; Hepatitis B virus; Hepatitis B, Chronic; Hepatitis C; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Inotuzumab Ozogamicin; Ipilimumab; Neoplasms; Nivolumab; Receptors, CCR4; Receptors, Chimeric Antigen; Virus Activation
PubMed: 35283317
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.02.042 -
JAMA Oncology May 2020Checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed cell death 1 or its ligand (PD-L1) as monotherapies or in combination with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab vs Standard Chemotherapy in First-line Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The MYSTIC Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.
IMPORTANCE
Checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed cell death 1 or its ligand (PD-L1) as monotherapies or in combination with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 have shown clinical activity in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.
OBJECTIVE
To compare durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial (MYSTIC) was conducted at 203 cancer treatment centers in 17 countries. Patients with treatment-naive, metastatic non-small cell lung cancer who had no sensitizing EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were randomized to receive treatment with durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, or chemotherapy. Data were collected from July 21, 2015, to October 30, 2018.
INTERVENTIONS
Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive treatment with durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks), durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks) plus tremelimumab (1 mg/kg every 4 weeks, up to 4 doses), or platinum-based doublet chemotherapy.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary end points, assessed in patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1, were overall survival (OS) for durvalumab vs chemotherapy, and OS and progression-free survival (PFS) for durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy. Analysis of blood tumor mutational burden (bTMB) was exploratory.
RESULTS
Between July 21, 2015, and June 8, 2016, 1118 patients were randomized. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. Among 488 patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1, median OS was 16.3 months (95% CI, 12.2-20.8) with durvalumab vs 12.9 months (95% CI, 10.5-15.0) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 97.54% CI, 0.56-1.02; P = .04 [nonsignificant]). Median OS was 11.9 months (95% CI, 9.0-17.7) with durvalumab plus tremelimumab (HR vs chemotherapy, 0.85; 98.77% CI, 0.61-1.17; P = .20). Median PFS was 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.8-5.0) with durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.6-5.8) with chemotherapy (HR, 1.05; 99.5% CI, 0.72-1.53; P = .71). Among 809 patients with evaluable bTMB, those with a bTMB ≥20 mutations per megabase showed improved OS for durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy (median OS, 21.9 months [95% CI, 11.4-32.8] vs 10.0 months [95% CI, 8.1-11.7]; HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32-0.74). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 55 (14.9%) of 369 patients who received treatment with durvalumab, 85 (22.9%) of 371 patients who received treatment with durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and 119 (33.8%) of 352 patients who received treatment with chemotherapy. These adverse events led to death in 2 (0.5%), 6 (1.6%), and 3 (0.9%) patients, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The phase 3 MYSTIC study did not meet its primary end points of improved OS with durvalumab vs chemotherapy or improved OS or PFS with durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy in patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1. Exploratory analyses identified a bTMB threshold of ≥20 mutations per megabase for optimal OS benefit with durvalumab plus tremelimumab.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalT rials.gov Identifier: NCT02453282.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Female; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Metastasis
PubMed: 32271377
DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.0237 -
Cancer Cell Apr 2018With the use of a mouse model expressing human Fc-gamma receptors (FcγRs), we demonstrated that antibodies with isotypes equivalent to ipilimumab and tremelimumab...
With the use of a mouse model expressing human Fc-gamma receptors (FcγRs), we demonstrated that antibodies with isotypes equivalent to ipilimumab and tremelimumab mediate intra-tumoral regulatory T (Treg) cell depletion in vivo, increasing the CD8 to Treg cell ratio and promoting tumor rejection. Antibodies with improved FcγR binding profiles drove superior anti-tumor responses and survival. In patients with advanced melanoma, response to ipilimumab was associated with the CD16a-V158F high affinity polymorphism. Such activity only appeared relevant in the context of inflamed tumors, explaining the modest response rates observed in the clinical setting. Our data suggest that the activity of anti-CTLA-4 in inflamed tumors may be improved through enhancement of FcγR binding, whereas poorly infiltrated tumors will likely require combination approaches.
Topics: Animals; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; CTLA-4 Antigen; Cell Line, Tumor; Female; Humans; Ipilimumab; Melanoma; Mice; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Receptors, IgG; T-Lymphocytes, Regulatory; Treatment Outcome; Xenograft Model Antitumor Assays
PubMed: 29576375
DOI: 10.1016/j.ccell.2018.02.010 -
Journal of Hepatology Feb 2020Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have reshaped cancer therapy. ICIs enhance T cell activation through various mechanisms and may help reverse the exhausted phenotype... (Review)
Review
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have reshaped cancer therapy. ICIs enhance T cell activation through various mechanisms and may help reverse the exhausted phenotype of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. However, disrupting the key role that checkpoint molecules play in immune homeostasis may result in autoimmune complications. A broad range of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) involve almost every organ but mostly affect the skin, digestive system, lung, endocrine glands, nervous system, kidney, blood cells, and musculoskeletal system. They are usually manageable but can be life-threatening. The incidence of irAEs is not very different in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared to other tumour types, although there is a trend towards a higher incidence of hepatic irAEs. HCC usually develops on a background of cirrhosis with associated systemic manifestations. Extrahepatic organ dysfunction in cirrhosis may cause signs and symptoms that overlap with irAEs or increase their severity. Available guidelines for the management of irAEs have not specifically considered the assessment of toxicities in the context of patients with liver cancer and cirrhosis. This review addresses the toxicity profile of ICIs in patients with HCC, focusing on the challenges that the underlying liver disease poses to their diagnosis and management. Challenges include late recognition, inadequate work-up and delayed treatment, overdiagnosis and inappropriate interruption of ICIs, complications caused by immunosuppressive therapy, and increased cost. A specific algorithm for the management of hepatic irAEs is provided.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Endocrine System Diseases; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Hematologic Diseases; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Immunotherapy; Kidney Diseases; Liver Neoplasms; Nervous System Diseases; Skin Diseases
PubMed: 31954495
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2019.10.021 -
The Lancet. Oncology Feb 2022Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that is resistant to PD-1 and PD-L1 (PD[L]-1)-targeted therapy have poor outcomes. Studies suggest that radiotherapy... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Durvalumab plus tremelimumab alone or in combination with low-dose or hypofractionated radiotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer refractory to previous PD(L)-1 therapy: an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.
BACKGROUND
Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that is resistant to PD-1 and PD-L1 (PD[L]-1)-targeted therapy have poor outcomes. Studies suggest that radiotherapy could enhance antitumour immunity. Therefore, we investigated the potential benefit of PD-L1 (durvalumab) and CTLA-4 (tremelimumab) inhibition alone or combined with radiotherapy.
METHODS
This open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial was done by the National Cancer Institute Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network at 18 US sites. Patients aged 18 years or older with metastatic NSCLC, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and progression during previous PD(L)-1 therapy were eligible. They were randomly assigned (1:1:1) in a web-based system by the study statistician using a permuted block scheme (block sizes of three or six) without stratification to receive either durvalumab (1500 mg intravenously every 4 weeks for a maximum of 13 cycles) plus tremelimumab (75 mg intravenously every 4 weeks for a maximum of four cycles) alone or with low-dose (0·5 Gy delivered twice per day, repeated for 2 days during each of the first four cycles of therapy) or hypofractionated radiotherapy (24 Gy total delivered over three 8-Gy fractions during the first cycle only), 1 week after initial durvalumab-tremelimumab administration. Study treatment was continued until 1 year or until progression. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (best locally assessed confirmed response of a partial or complete response) and, along with safety, was analysed in patients who received at least one dose of study therapy. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02888743, and is now complete.
FINDINGS
Between Aug 24, 2017, and March 29, 2019, 90 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, of whom 78 (26 per group) were treated. This trial was stopped due to futility assessed in an interim analysis. At a median follow-up of 12·4 months (IQR 7·8-15·1), there were no differences in overall response rates between the durvalumab-tremelimumab alone group (three [11·5%, 90% CI 1·2-21·8] of 26 patients) and the low-dose radiotherapy group (two [7·7%, 0·0-16·3] of 26 patients; p=0·64) or the hypofractionated radiotherapy group (three [11·5%, 1·2-21·8] of 26 patients; p=0·99). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were dyspnoea (two [8%] in the durvalumab-tremelimumab alone group; three [12%] in the low-dose radiotherapy group; and three [12%] in the hypofractionated radiotherapy group) and hyponatraemia (one [4%] in the durvalumab-tremelimumab alone group vs two [8%] in the low-dose radiotherapy group vs three [12%] in the hypofractionated radiotherapy group). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in one (4%) patient in the durvalumab-tremelimumab alone group (maculopapular rash), five (19%) patients in the low-dose radiotherapy group (abdominal pain, diarrhoea, dyspnoea, hypokalemia, and respiratory failure), and four (15%) patients in the hypofractionated group (adrenal insufficiency, colitis, diarrhoea, and hyponatremia). In the low-dose radiotherapy group, there was one death from respiratory failure potentially related to study therapy.
INTERPRETATION
Radiotherapy did not increase responses to combined PD-L1 plus CTLA-4 inhibition in patients with NSCLC resistant to PD(L)-1 therapy. However, PD-L1 plus CTLA-4 therapy could be a treatment option for some patients. Future studies should refine predictive biomarkers in this setting.
FUNDING
The US National Institutes of Health and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.
Topics: Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Combined Modality Therapy; Female; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Metastasis; Radiation Dose Hypofractionation; Radiotherapy Dosage
PubMed: 35033226
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00658-6 -
Clinical Cancer Research : An Official... Feb 2023A novel single-dose regimen of 300 mg tremelimumab in combination with durvalumab [Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab (STRIDE)] has demonstrated a favorable...
PURPOSE
A novel single-dose regimen of 300 mg tremelimumab in combination with durvalumab [Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab (STRIDE)] has demonstrated a favorable benefit-risk profile in the phase I/II Study 22 (NCT02519348) and phase III HIMALAYA study (NCT03298451). This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics, exposure-response, and exposure-pharmacodynamics relationships of tremelimumab in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC).
PATIENTS AND METHODS
A previous tremelimumab population pharmacokinetic model was validated using data from parts 2 and 3 of Study 22. Exposure-response analyses explored relationships of tremelimumab exposure with efficacy and safety. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics relationships were evaluated using linear and nonlinear regression models.
RESULTS
The observed pharmacokinetics of tremelimumab in uHCC were consistent with predictions; no significant covariates were identified. Tremelimumab exposure was not significantly associated with adverse events, objective response rate, or progression-free survival. Overall survival (OS) was longer for patients with tremelimumab exposure, minimum serum drug concentration (Cmin1) ≥ median versus Cmin1 < median (18.99 months vs. 10.97 months), but this exposure-survival analysis might be confounded with baseline characteristics of albumin level and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, which had a significant impact on OS (P = 0.0004 and 0.0001, respectively). The predicted Cmin1 of tremelimumab in STRIDE regimen (12.9 μg/mL) was greater than the estimated concentration of tremelimumab eliciting half-maximal increases (EC50 = 5.24 μg/mL) in CD8+Ki67+ T-cell counts.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings support novel insights into tremelimumab pharmacokinetics and exposure-response relationships in HCC and support the clinical utility of the STRIDE regimen in patients with uHCC.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Treatment Outcome; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Liver Neoplasms
PubMed: 36477555
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-1983 -
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal... Jul 2020Targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis has demonstrated clinical benefit in recurrent/metastatic head and neck... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis has demonstrated clinical benefit in recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). Combining immunotherapies targeting PD-L1 and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) has shown evidence of additive activity in several tumor types. This phase III study evaluated the efficacy of durvalumab (an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) or durvalumab plus tremelimumab (an anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody) versus standard of care (SoC) in R/M HNSCC patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 : 1 : 1 durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks [q2w]), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (durvalumab 20 mg/kg q4w plus tremelimumab 1 mg/kg q4w × 4, then durvalumab 10 mg/kg q2w), or SoC (cetuximab, a taxane, methotrexate, or a fluoropyrimidine). The primary end points were overall survival (OS) for durvalumab versus SoC, and OS for durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and duration of response.
RESULTS
Patients were randomly assigned to receive durvalumab (n = 240), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (n = 247), or SoC (n = 249). No statistically significant improvements in OS were observed for durvalumab versus SoC [hazard ratio (HR): 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72-1.08; P = 0.20] or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.85-1.26; P = 0.76). The 12-month survival rates (95% CI) were 37.0% (30.9-43.1), 30.4% (24.7-36.3), and 30.5% (24.7-36.4) for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and SoC, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were consistent with previous reports. The most common trAEs (any grade) were hypothyroidism for durvalumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab (11.4% and 12.2%, respectively), and anemia (17.5%) for SoC. Grade ≥3 trAE rates were 10.1%, 16.3%, and 24.2% for durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and SoC, respectively.
CONCLUSION
There were no statistically significant differences in OS for durvalumab or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus SoC. However, higher survival rates at 12 to 24 months and response rates demonstrate clinical activity for durvalumab.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02369874.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck
PubMed: 32294530
DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.04.001 -
JAMA Oncology Jun 2020Single-agent immune checkpoint inhibition has not shown activities in advanced refractory colorectal cancer (CRC), other than in those patients who are... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Single-agent immune checkpoint inhibition has not shown activities in advanced refractory colorectal cancer (CRC), other than in those patients who are microsatellite-instability high (MSI-H).
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate whether combining programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibition improved patient survival in metastatic refractory CRC.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
A randomized phase 2 study was conducted in 27 cancer centers across Canada between August 2016 and June 2017, and data were analyzed on October 18, 2018. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum; received all available standard systemic therapies (fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab if appropriate; cetuximab or panitumumab if RAS wild-type tumors; regorafenib if available); were aged 18 years or older; had adequate organ function; had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and measurable disease.
INTERVENTIONS
We randomly assigned patients to receive either 75 mg of tremelimumab every 28 days for the first 4 cycles plus 1500 mg durvalumab every 28 days, or best supportive care alone (BSC) in a 2:1 ratio.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary end point was overall survival (OS) and a 2-sided P<.10 was considered statistically significant. Circulating cell-free DNA from baseline plasma was used to determine microsatellite instability (MSI) and tumor mutation burden (TMB).
RESULTS
Of 180 patients enrolled (121 men [67.2%] and 59 women [32.8%]; median [range] age, 65 [36-87] years), 179 were treated. With a median follow-up of 15.2 months, the median OS was 6.6 months for durvalumab and tremelimumab and 4.1 months for BSC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 90% CI, 0.54-0.97; P = .07). Progression-free survival was 1.8 months and 1.9 months respectively (HR, 1.01; 90% CI, 0.76-1.34). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were significantly more frequent with immunotherapy (75 [64%] patients in the treatment group had at least 1 grade 3 or higher adverse event vs 12 [20%] in the BSC group). Circulating cell-free DNA analysis was successful in 168 of 169 patients with available samples. In patients who were microsatellite stable (MSS), OS was significantly improved with durvalumab and tremelimumab (HR, 0.66; 90% CI, 0.49-0.89; P = .02). Patients who were MSS with plasma TMB of 28 variants per megabase or more (21% of MSS patients) had the greatest OS benefit (HR, 0.34; 90% CI, 0.18-0.63; P = .004).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This phase 2 study suggests that combined immune checkpoint inhibition with durvalumab plus tremelimumab may be associated with prolonged OS in patients with advanced refractory CRC. Elevated plasma TMB may select patients most likely to benefit from durvalumab and tremelimumab. Further confirmation studies are warranted.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02870920.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; B7-H1 Antigen; Canada; Colorectal Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Immunotherapy; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Middle Aged; Palliative Care; Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor; Progression-Free Survival
PubMed: 32379280
DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.0910 -
European Journal of Cancer (Oxford,... Oct 2022Dual programmed cell death-1 and vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibition is the novel standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dual programmed cell death-1 and vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibition is the novel standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Direct comparisons between first-line treatments are lacking.
METHOD
We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), the Cochrane library (https://www.cochranelibrary.com) and Embase (www.embase.com) between January 2007 and February 2022. We included phase III randomised controlled trials that tested immune-checkpoint inhibitors or tyrosine kinase inhibitors, including sorafenib, lenvatinib and donafenib, and evaluated as primary end-point overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS). Studies testing loco-regional therapies were excluded. The primary end-point was to compare the efficacy of first-line options in terms of OS and PFS. We extracted Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for OS and PFS and performed a frequentist network meta-analysis with fixed effect multivariable meta-regression models. The research protocol was registered in PROSPERO, an international prospective register of systematic reviews (registration code CRD42022312489).
FINDINGS
Literature review yielded 13709 results, after duplicates removal and exclusion of not relevant studies, 70 papers were available for screening. After full-text review, 9 studies were eligible for analysis. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab reduced the risk of death compared to placebo (HR 0·40; 95% CI 0·28-0·57), sorafenib (HR 0·58; 95% CI 0·42-0·80), lenvatinib (HR 0·63; 95% CI 0·44-0·89), atezolizumab plus cabozantinib (HR 0·64; 95% CI 0·43-0·97), nivolumab (HR 0·68; 95% CI 0·48-0·98) and donafenib (HR 0·69; 95% CI 0·48-0·99). Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was not statistically superior to durvalumab plus tremelimumab (HR 0·74; 95% CI 0·52-1·06) and sintilimab plus IBI305 (HR 1·02; 95% CI 0·67-1·55) in reducing the risk of death. Efficacy was associated with a higher risk of grade 3 adverse events.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Bevacizumab; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Liver Neoplasms; Nivolumab; Phenylurea Compounds; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Quinolines; Sorafenib; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
PubMed: 35970037
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.06.058