View
28
Download
0
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Phase II Randomized Trial on Dose-Escalated Sorafenib vs Best Supportive Care (BSC) in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) With Disease Progression on Prior Sorafenib Treatment. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Phase II Randomized Trial on Dose-Escalated Sorafenib vs Best Supportive Care (BSC) in Patients
With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) With Disease Progression on Prior Sorafenib Treatment
Pressiani T1, Rimassa L1, Boni C2, Labianca R3, Fagiuoli S3, Ardizzoni A4, Foa P5, Cortesi E6, Porta C7, Artioli F8, Latini L9,
Carnaghi C1, Lutman FR1, Torzilli T1, Tommasini MA1, Cerianl R1,Covini G1, Giordano L1, Locopo N1, Santoro A1.
1Humanitas Cancer Center, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Rozzano (MI), Italy; 2Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy; 3Ospedali Riuniti, Bergamo, Italy; 4Azienda Ospedaliero - Universitaria, Parma, Italy; 5Ospedale San Paolo - Polo Universitario, Milano, Italy;6Azienda Policlinico Umberto I, Roma, Italy; 7I.R.C.C.S. Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy; 8Ospedale B. Ramazzini, Carpi (MO), Italy; 9Ospedale Generale Provinciale, Macerata, Italy.
Study Design
Primary endpoint: PFS
Sorafenib600 mg BID 49 patients
Advanced HCC
Child-Pugh Class A/B
Suitable for systemic treatment
(300 patients)
Sorafenib400 mg BID
PD
BSC52 patients
Randomization1:1
(101 patients)
From April 2007 to July 2008, 300 patients were prospectively treated with sorafenib 400 mg BID. At documented radiological PD, 101 patients (34%) were randomized: 49 patients (48.5%) to increased-dose sorafenib (600 mg BID) + BSC and 52 patients (51.5%) to BSC, respectively
PD=radiological progression, PFS=progression-free survival.
Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
Baseline Patient Characteristics
No. of Patients(%)
Sorafenibno. (%)
BSC no. (%) P value
Total 101 (100) 49 (48.5) 52 (51.5)Sex .089
Male 83 (82.2) 37 (75.5) 46 (88.5)Female 18 (17.8) 12 (24.5) 6 (11.5)
Child-Pugh Class .113†
A 94 (93.1) 48 (98.0) 46 (88.5)B 7 (6.9) 1 (2.0) 6 (11.5)
Histological subtype* 1.00† Trabecular 80 (79.2) 38 (97.4) 42 (93.33)Mixed 1 (1.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (2.22)Fibrolamellar 3 (3.0) 1 (2.6) 2 (4.44)Missing 17 (16.8)
Extrahepatic spread* .035Yes 69 (68.31) 38 (82.6) 31 (63.3)No 26 (25.74) 8 (17.4) 18 (36.7)Missing 6 (5.94)
Time at first relapse .269≤4 months 49 (48.5) 21 (42.9) 28 (53.9)>4 months 52 (51.5) 28 (57.1) 24 (46.2)
Associations are tested using the Chi-square test.*The sum does not add up to the total due to missing values. †Associations are tested using the Fisher exact test.
Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
Progression-Free Survival
HR sorafanib vs BSC, 0.67; CI 95%: (0.43-1.06), Pvalue: .089Risk reduction of 33%
All Median (range) Sorafenib Median (range) BSC Median (range)PFS (months) 3.58 (0.26-32.25) 3.91 (0.26-32.25) 2.69 (0.49-19.51)
CI=confidence interval, HR=hazard ratio.Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
Time to Progression
HR sorafanib vs BSC, 0.59; CI 95%: (0.33-1.05), Pvalue: .070Risk reduction of 41%
All Median (range) Sorafenib Median (range) BSC Median (range)TTP (months) 3.64 (0.62-32.25) 3.97 (0.62-32.2) 2.0 (1.2-19.5)
TTP=time to progression.Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
Overall Survival (OS)
HR sorafanib vs BSC, 0.71; CI 95% : (0.47-1.08); Pvalue: .107Risk reduction of 29%
All Median (range) Sorafenib Median (range) BSC Median (range)TTP (months) 6.11 (0.26-44.50) 7.55 (0.26-44.50) 5.89 (0.49-26.64)
Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
Adverse Events
Adverse Events (Grade 3/4) SorafenibNo. (%)
BSC No. (%) Pvalue
Diarrhea 9 (12.2) 6 (11.5) .335Hand foot skin reaction 5 (6.3) 8 (15.4) .437Fatigue 8 (16.3) 4 (7.7) .226Rash 3 (6.1) 4 (7.7) 1.000Weight loss 6 (12.2) 1 (1.9) .055Anemia 4 (8.1) 1 (1.9) .196Stomatitis 5 (6.3) 0 (0.0) .024Cachexia 3 (4.1) 2 (3.8) .672Abdominal pain 4 (8.1) 0 (0.0) .052Nausea and vomiting 2 (3.8) 1 (1.9) .610Encephalopathy 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) .233Amylase increase 1 (2.0) 1 (1.9) 1.000Thrombocytopenia 1 (2.0) 1 (1.9) 1.000Pain (non abdominal) 1 (2.0) 1 (1.9) 1.000Cardiovascular 1 (2.0) 1 (1.9) 1.000
Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
Drug Exposure
Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
All Patients (300): PFS and OS According to Child-Pugh Class
Median (range)OS PFS
All (months) 9.2 (0.4-46.7) 4.1 (0.4-35.3)n=234 Child-Pugh Class A (months) 10.9 (0.5-46.7) 4.7 (0.5-35.3)n=62 Child-Pugh Class B (months) 4.0 (0.4-27.3) 2.6 (0.4-27.3)
Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
Conclusions
These results demonstrate that increased-dose sorafenib in HCC patients progressing on standard-dose sorafenib is feasible, with an acceptable safety profile.
Trend toward improved PFS and OS, although not statistically significant, may justify the use of increased or standard dose of sorafenib beyond progression as an active control arm in Phase II – III trials evaluating new drugs as second-line therapy in HCC
Adapted from Pressiani T et al. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting; June 3-7, 2011; Chicago, IL.
Recommended