Sorafenib Failure Research Articles

AS050 - Regorafenib versus nivolumab after sorafenib failure: real-world data in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

AS050 - Regorafenib versus nivolumab after sorafenib failure: real-world data in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Cabozantinib for the Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Data and Future Perspectives.

Cabozantinib (Cabometyx®) is a potent multikinase inhibitor targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor 2, the mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) receptor, and the “anexelekto” (AXL) receptor tyrosine kinase. It is approved for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after failure of sorafenib in Europe (since November 2018) and in the USA (since January 2019). The approval of cabozantinib was based on results of the randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 CELESTIAL trial in patients with unresectable HCC, who received one or two prior lines of treatment including sorafenib. At the second planned interim analysis, the trial was stopped, because the primary end point overall survival was clearly in favor for cabozantinib. Additionally, median progression-free survival was superior to placebo. The most common ≥ grade 3 relevant adverse events in patients with HCC treated with cabozantinib were palmar–plantar erythrodysesthesia, hypertension, fatigue, and diarrhea. In this review, current data on cabozantinib for the treatment of patients with advanced HCC, with a focus on the management of common adverse events and ongoing clinical trials, are discussed.

Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real-World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Regorafenib and nivolumab are drugs approved for second‐line treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sorafenib failure. However, the effectiveness of regorafenib and nivolumab following sorafenib has not been directly compared. This study retrospectively evaluated 373 patients with HCC who were treated with regorafenib (n = 223) or nivolumab (n = 150) after sorafenib failure between July 2017 and February 2019. Progression‐free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69‐1.06; P = 0.150), time to progression (TTP; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77‐1.19; P = 0.680), and overall survival (OS; HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64‐1.07; P = 0.154) did not differ significantly between groups of patients treated with regorafenib and nivolumab, findings consistently observed by multivariable‐adjusted, propensity score‐matched, and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses. However, the objective response rate was significantly higher in the nivolumab than in the regorafenib group (13.3% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.002). When the effectiveness of regorafenib and nivolumab was compared in nonprogressors to treatment, defined as patients who achieved complete response, partial response, or stable disease after first response evaluation, PFS (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33‐0.75; P = 0.001), TTP (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31‐0.73; P < 0.001), and OS (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31‐0.87; P = 0.013) were significantly longer in the 59 nonprogressors to nivolumab than in the 104 nonprogressors to regorafenib, findings also observed by multivariable‐adjusted and IPTW analyses. Conclusion: Survival outcomes in patients treated with regorafenib and nivolumab after sorafenib failure did not differ significantly. However, nivolumab may be more effective than regorafenib in nonprogressors.

Impact of treatment modalities on patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation: Preliminary experience

Post-liver transplantation (LT) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence still occurs in approximately 20% of patients and drastically affects their survival. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of various treatments for recurrent HCC after LT in a Chinese population. A total of 64 HCC patients with tumor recurrence after LT were enrolled in this study. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors affecting post-recurrence survival. Of the 64 patients with recurrent HCC after LT, those who received radical resection followed by nonsurgical therapy had a median overall survival (OS) of 20.9 months after HCC recurrence, significantly superior to patients who received only nonsurgical therapy (9.4 months) or best supportive care (2.4 months). The one- and two-year OS following recurrence was favorable for patients receiving radical resection followed by nonsurgical therapy (93.8%, 52.6%), poor for patients receiving only nonsurgical therapy (30.8%, 10.8%), and dismal for patients receiving best supportive care (0%, 0%; overall P < 0.001). Median OS in sorafenib-tolerant patients treated with lenvatinib was 19.5 months, far surpassing the patients that discontinued sorafenib or were treated with regorafenib after sorafenib failure (12 months, P < 0.001). Compared with tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive therapy, OS was significantly increased with sirolimus-based therapy at one and two years after HCC recurrence (P = 0.035). Multivariate analysis showed radical resection combined with nonsurgical therapy for recurrent HCC and sorafenib-lenvatinib sequential therapy were independent favorable factors for post-recurrence survival. Aggressive surgical intervention in well-selected patients significantly improves OS after recurrence. A multidisciplinary treatment approach is required to slow down disease progression for patients with unresectable recurrent HCC.

Molecular targeting of renal cell carcinoma by an oral combination

The 5-year survival rate of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is <12% due to treatment failure. Therapeutic strategies that overcome resistance to modestly effective drugs for mRCC, such as sorafenib (SF), could improve outcome in mRCC patients. SF is terminally biotransformed by UDP-glucuronosyltransferase-1A9 (A9) mediated glucuronidation, which inactivates SF. In a clinical-cohort and the TCGA-dataset, A9 transcript and/or protein levels were highly elevated in RCC specimens and predicted metastasis and overall-survival. This suggested that elevated A9 levels even in primary tumors of patients who eventually develop mRCC could be a mechanism for SF failure. 4-methylumbelliferone (MU), a choleretic and antispasmodic drug, downregulated A9 and inhibited SF-glucuronidation in RCC cells. Low-dose SF and MU combinations inhibited growth, motility, invasion and downregulated an invasive signature in RCC cells, patient-derived tumor explants and/or endothelial-RCC cell co-cultures; however, both agents individually were ineffective. A9 overexpression made RCC cells resistant to the combination, while its downregulation sensitized them to SF treatment alone. The combination inhibited kidney tumor growth, angiogenesis and distant metastasis, with no detectable toxicity; A9-overexpressing tumors were resistant to treatment. With effective primary tumor control and abrogation of metastasis in preclinical models, the low-dose SF and MU combinations could be an effective treatment option for mRCC patients. Broadly, our study highlights how targeting specific mechanisms that cause the failure of “old” modestly effective FDA-approved drugs could improve treatment response with minimal alteration in toxicity profile.

Regorafenib Alteration of the BCL-xL/MCL-1 Ratio Provides a Therapeutic Opportunity for BH3-Mimetics in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Models.

Background: The multikinase inhibitor regorafenib, approved as second-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sorafenib failure, may induce mitochondrial damage. BH3-mimetics, inhibitors of specific BCL-2 proteins, are valuable drugs in cancer therapy to amplify mitochondrial-dependent cell death. Methods: In in vitro and in vivo HCC models, we tested regorafenib’s effect on the BCL-2 network and the efficacy of BH3-mimetics on HCC treatment. Results: In hepatoma cell lines and Hep3B liver spheroids, regorafenib cytotoxicity was potentiated by BCL-xL siRNA transfection or pharmacological inhibition (A-1331852), while BCL-2 antagonism had no effect. Mitochondrial outer membrane permeabilization, cytochrome c release, and caspase-3 activation mediated A-1331852/regorafenib-induced cell death. In a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) HCC model, BCL-xL inhibition stimulated regorafenib activity, drastically decreasing tumor growth. Moreover, regorafenib-resistant HepG2 cells displayed increased BCL-xL and reduced MCL-1 expression, while A-1331852 reinstated regorafenib efficacy in vitro and in a xenograft mouse model. Interestingly, BCL-xL levels, associated with poor prognosis in liver and colorectal cancer, and the BCL-xL/MCL-1 ratio were detected as being increased in HCC patients. Conclusion: Regorafenib primes tumor cells to BH3-mimetic-induced cell death, allowing BCL-xL inhibition with A-1331852 or other strategies based on BCL-xL degradation to enhance regorafenib efficacy, offering a novel approach for HCC treatment, particularly for tumors with an elevated BCL-xL/MCL-1 ratio.

Efficacy of Regorafenib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Regorafenib showed promising results as a second-line agent after sorafenib failure in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in hepatocarcinoma patients. A computerized bibliographic search was performed on the main databases. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, tumor response, and the adverse events rate. Outcomes were pooled through a random-effects model and summary estimates were expressed in terms of median and 95% confidence interval or rates, as appropriate. One randomized-controlled trial and seven non-randomized studies with 809 patients were included. The great majority of recruited patients were in Child-Pugh A and ECOG 0 stage. Median overall survival was 11.08 months (9.46–12.71) and sensitivity analyses confirmed this finding, with a median survival ranging from 10.2 to 13.8 months. Duration of regorafenib therapy was 3.58 months, whereas median progression-free survival was 3.24 months (2.68–3.86). The pooled objective response rate was 10.1% (7.8–12.5%) while the disease control rate was 65.5% (61.3–69.7%) with no evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 0%; Diarrhea, fatigue, and hand-foot skin reaction were the most frequent adverse events. The current meta-analysis shows that regorafenib represents a valuable and relatively safe therapeutic option in intermediate/advanced hepatocellular carcinomapatients who progress on sorafenib.

Local Thermal Ablation Reboots the Response in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Stable or Atypical Progressive Diseases During Anti-PD-1 Therapy

Abstract Background The anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor is the recommended second-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sorafenib failure. However, only a small subset of patients benefited from anti-PD-1 therapy due to a limited response rate. The goal of this study is to evaluate the impact of ablation on the tumor in patients with advanced HCC who had stable disease or atypical response during single anti-PD-1 therapy after sorafenib failure. Methods This prospective study enrolled 50 patients treated with an anti-PD-1 inhibitor of nivolumab or pembrolizumab monotherapy between July 2015 and Nov 2017. Thirty-three cases with stable disease or atypical response to anti-PD-1 inhibitor received subtotal thermal ablation. The safety and the response of ablation during anti-PD-1 therapy were evaluated. The survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier curve. Results Of all 50 patients treated with anti-PD-1 therapy, the rate of response, stable disease, atypical and typical progression were 10% (n = 5), 42% (n = 21) 32% (n = 16) and 12% (n = 6), respectively. Additional ablation improved efficacy with tolerable toxicity, and the response rate was increased from 10% to 24% (12/50). The median time to progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 6.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-11.2), 5 months (95%CI, 2.9-7.1) and 16.9 months (95%CI, 7.7-26.1), respectively. Conclusion Additional ablation could increase the objective response rate with tolerated toxicity and achieved a relatively better median survival, in advanced HCC patients who had stable or atypical progressive diseases during anti-PD-1 therapy, which may provide a potentially promising strategy to treat advanced HCC. Clinical trial identification NCT03939975. Legal entity responsible for the study The authors. Funding Has not received any funding. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Review article: new therapeutic interventions for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) portends a poor prognosis; however recent advances in first-line and second-line treatment options should yield significant improvements in survival. To summarize the evolving landscape of treatment options for patients with advanced HCC. We reviewed published clinical trials conducted in patients with advanced HCC published in PubMed or presented at national conferences. Sorafenib was approved for treatment of unresectable HCC in 2007 and remained the only therapy with proven survival benefit in advanced HCC for several years. Lenvatinib, another tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, was recently shown to have non-inferior survival vs sorafenib and is another first-line treatment option. The tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, regorafenib and cabozantinib, were shown to significantly improve survival in the second-line setting after sorafenib failure. Ramucirumab, a VEGF inhibitor, can also improve survival in the second-line setting among patients with AFP≥400ng/dL. Phase II data highlight potential durable objective responses with immune checkpoint inhibitors, prompting conditional FDA approval of nivolumab and pembrolizumab in the second-line setting; however, recent phase III data have failed to demonstrate improved survival compared to other treatment options. Ongoing trials are evaluating combination immune checkpoint inhibitor and immune checkpoint inhibitors with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors or VEGF inhibitors in hopes of further increasing objective responses and overall survival in this patient population. There are several first-line and second-line therapeutic options available for patients with advanced HCC. Further studies are needed to determine how best to select between and sequence the growing number of therapeutic options.

An Analysis for Survival Predictors for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Who Failed to Sorafenib Treatment in Pre-regorafenib Era

Background/Aims: Sorafenib is the standard treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to investigate the prognosis predictors and the role of second-line cytotoxic systemic chemotherapy (CSC) in patients with advanced HCC after sorafenib discontinuation in the pre-regorafenib era. Methods: From 2007 to 2015 in the pre-regorafenib era, the medical records of 166 HCC patients, who had permanently discontinued sorafenib, were retrospectively reviewed. For further analysis of survival factors after sorafenib treatment failure, we compared the survival of patients who had maintained liver function after second-line treatment with the best supportive care (BSC) group and selective BSC (SBSC) group. Results: After discontinuation of sorafenib, median overall survival (OS) was 2.8 (1.9-3.7) months. The OS in patients who discontinued sorafenib due to adverse effect, progression, and poor clinical condition were 5.5 (2.4-8.6), 5.5 (2.2-8.9), and 0.9 (0.5-1.3) months, respectively (P<0.001). The independent predictive factors of survival after sorafenib failure were serum level of bilirubin and albumin, α-fetoprotein, discontinuation cause, and second-line CSC. In comparison with survival between second-line CSC and BSC group, the CSC group showed better survival outcome compared to the BSC group (10.6 vs. 1.6 months, P<0.001) and SBSC group (10.6 vs. 4.2 months, P=0.023). Conclusions: The survival after sorafenib failure in patients who discontinued sorafenib due to progression and adverse effects was significantly better than in those who discontinued treatment due to clinical deterioration. In the pre-regorafenib era, patients who received second-line CSC showed better survival than those who received only supportive care after sorafenib failure. (J Liver Cancer 2019;19:117-127)

Outcome of third-line sunitinib after sequential therapy with cytokines and sorafenib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Third-line sunitinib is occasionally used for selected patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical significance of third-line sunitinib after failure of first-line cytokine therapy and second-line sorafenib in patients with clear-cell mRCC. A total of 14 consecutive patients with clear-cell mRCC treated with third-line sunitinib between December 2008 and February 2012 were enrolled in the present study. Disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and relative dose intensity (RDI) were compared with those of first-line (n=20) and second-line (n=14) sunitinib treatment. The DCR was 42.9%, the median PFS was 12.0 months, and the median OS was 20.0 months for third-line sunitinib; there were no statistically significant differences compared with first-line and second-line sunitinib. The mean RDI was significantly lower for third-line sunitinib compared with first- and second-line sunitinib (P=0.0003 and 0.0109, respectively). Therefore, third-line sunitinib is an effective treatment option for selected patients with mRCC, as optimized therapeutic efficacy was obtained with a relatively low dose of sunitinib.

Preliminary experience on safety of regorafenib after sorafenib failure in recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation.

Regorafenib is one option for second-line treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), improving overall survival (OS) of sorafenib-tolerant patients who develop progression. We aim to evaluate the safety and outcomes of regorafenib as second-line treatment for HCC recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). This is a retrospective, multicenter, international study including regorafenib-treated LT patients (2015-2018), with analysis of baseline characteristics and evolutionary events during sorafenib/regorafenib treatment. Twenty-eight LT patients (57years, 7% cirrhotics, 54% performance status 1) were included. Median time from LT to regorafenib initiation was 3.9 (1.1-18.5)years; median time on sorafenib was 11.3 (0.7-76.4)months and 14 (1-591)days from sorafenib discontinuation to regorafenib. During regorafenib (6.3months), all patients had at least one adverse event (AE), the most common grade 3/4 AEs were fatigue (n=7) and dermatological reaction (n=5). While no liver rejection was observed, plasma levels of immunosuppressive drugs increased in five. Twenty-four patients developed progression (38% extrahepatic growth, 33% new extrahepatic lesions/vascular invasion). Median OS from regorafenib initiation was 12.9 (95% CI, 6.7-19.1) and 38.4months (95% CI, 18.5-58.4) for the sorafenib initiation. This is the first study showing safety of regorafenib after LT, thus providing the rational of considering regorafenib in the clinical decision-making in sorafenib-tolerant patients with HCC recurrence after LT.

Abstract 2065: Biomarker-targeted novel combination for renal cell carcinoma

Abstract INTRODUCTION: The survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is &amp;lt; 10% at 5-years, despite treatment. Sorafenib (SF) is a second-line oral treatment which improves overall survival by 12-18%. However, mechanism for SF failure is not known. Hyaluronic acid (HA) promotes cell proliferation, invasion and motility through its receptors CD44 and RHAMM. Hymecromone (HC) is a non−toxic dietary supplement that inhibits HA synthesis and down regulates CD44 and RHAMM mRNA levels. In this study we examined the mechanism of SF resistance and the efficacy of HC+SF combination as a targeted therapy for advanced RCC. METHODS: HAS3 levels were measured in kidney specimens (normal=45; tumor= 86) by qPCR. HAS3 promoter was cloned and effect of SF and HC on HAS3 promoter activity was determined. Response of Vector-only (EV) or HAS3-overexpressing (HAS3) or HAS3-knockdown (HAS3-KO) transfectants of 786-O and Caki-1 cells, primary RCC spheroids and endothelial cells to SF+HC combination was examined in proliferation, apoptosis, motility and invasion assays. Immunoblotting was performed for target analysis. Treatment efficacy was evaluated in the Caki−1 subcutaneous (s.c.) and orthotopic xenograft models. RESULTS: HAS3 levels were 5-10-fold elevated in mRCC patients’ tumors as compared to non-mRCC patients and normal kidney tissues, respectively. HAS3 levels were an independent predictor of metastasis (P=0.043; sensitivity: 85.7%). Combination of SF (5 µM) with HC (20, 40 µg/mL) downregulated (&amp;gt;80%) HAS3 expression, HAS3 promoter activity and HA synthesis in RCC cells. HC+SF combination inhibited RCC cell and primary tumor spheroid proliferation &amp;gt; 90%, motility/invasion (&amp;gt;80%) and induced apoptosis (5-fold). While HAS3 transfectants were resistant to SF+HC treatment, HAS3-KO transfectants were sensitive to SF. HA addition also attenuated the effect of HC+SF observed in EV cells. Endothelial cells co-cultured with HAS3 transfectants were resistant to SF+HC treatment. SF+HC up-regulated apoptosis effectors, but downregulated CD44, RHAMM, and phospho-Met levels in EV but not in HAS3 transfectants. HC (100 or 200 mg/kg) and SF (30 mg/kg) oral combination abrogated Caki-1 tumor growth (&amp;gt;80%), without serum/tissue toxicity. HC+SF treatment decreased HAS3/HA levels, Ki67 index and microvessel density. HAS-overexpressing tumors were resistant to treatment. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to demonstrate that HAS3 overexpression in mRCC contributes to SF failure and that HAS3/HA downregulation is a mechanism to re-sensitize cells to SF. HC+SF is an orally bioavailable and non-toxic combination that may be an effective therapeutic strategy for mRCC. Citation Format: Jiaojiao Wang, Andre R. Jordan, Sarrah S. Lahorewala, Vinata B. Lokeshwar. Biomarker-targeted novel combination for renal cell carcinoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2065.

Abstract 2080: Novel molecularly targeted combination for renal cell carcinoma

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Despite many available treatments, &amp;gt;90% of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients die within 5 years. Due to its modest efficacy, Sorafenib (SF) is a second line treatment for mRCC. Molecular basis for SF failure is unknown. Hymecromone (HC) is a non−toxic orally bioavailable agent used in Europe for improving liver health. We examined the molecular basis of SF failure in clinical specimens and provided mechanistic evidence for why SF+HC could be a potent therapeutic combination against mRCC. METHODS: UGT1A9 (A9) levels and SF glucuronidation were measured in kidney specimens (45 normal; 86 tumor) by qPCR and a glucuronidation assay using tumor microsomes. Response to SF+HC combination in vector-only (EV), A9-overexpressing (A9) and A9-knockdown (A9-KO) 786-0 and Caki-1 transfectants, primary RCC spheroids, and endothelial cells was examined by proliferation, apoptosis, motility and invasion assays. Target analysis was performed by immunoblot. Treatment efficacy was evaluated in Caki−1 s.c. and orthotopic xenograft models, with bioluminescence imaging. RESULTS: A9 has been shown to glucuronidate and inactivate SF. A9 levels were 8-10-fold elevated in mRCC patients’ tumors compared to non-mRCC patients and normal kidney tissues. A9 levels were an independent predictor of metastasis (P=0.022; efficacy: 73%; sensitivity: 93.8%). Tumor microsomes from mRCC patients’ glucuronidated SF 5-fold higher than from non-mRCC patients. In RCC cells, HC treatment downregulated A9 levels, A9 promoter activity and inhibited SF-glucuronidation. SF (5 µM) and HC (20-40 µg/ml) combination inhibited RCC cell and primary tumor spheroid proliferation (&amp;gt;90%), motility/invasion (&amp;gt;80%), and induced apoptosis (5-fold). While A9 transfectants were resistant to SF+HC treatment, A9-KO cells were sensitive to SF alone. Endothelial cells co-cultured with A9 transfectants were resistant to SF+HC treatment. SF+HC upregulated apoptosis effectors, but downregulated CD44, RHAMM, and phospho-Met levels in EV but not A9 transfectants. HC (100 or 200 mg/kg) and SF (30 mg/kg) oral combination abrogated Caki−1 tumor growth (&amp;gt;80%) without serum/tissue toxicity. HC+SF treatment decreased A9 levels, Ki67 index and microvessel density. A9-overexpressing tumors were resistant to treatment. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to demonstrate that A9 overexpression in mRCC is likely a mechanism of SF failure and A9 downregulation can re-sensitize cells. HC+SF is an orally bioavailable and non-toxic combination that may be an effective therapeutic strategy for mRCC. Citation Format: Andre R. Jordan, Jiaojiao Wang, Luis E. Lopez, Daley S. Morera, Vinata B. Lokeshwar. Novel molecularly targeted combination for renal cell carcinoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2080.

Clinical research progression of molecular-targeted drugs and PD-1 inhibitors for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Since sorafenib has been first-line molecular-targeted drug for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), clinical studies in the last 10 years failed to confirm that a new molecular-targeted drug or immune checkpoint inhibitor was superior or non-inferior to sorafenib, or approved second-line treatment for patients with the failure of sorafenib. However, many clinical studies published in 2017 have changed people's previous understanding. REFLECT trial showed that as the first-line treatment of advanced HCC, lenvatinib was non-inferior than sorafenib. In addition, RESORCE trial and CheckMate-040 trial confirmed respectively that regorafenib and PD-1 inhibitor nivolumab were options of second-line treatment for patients with advanced HCC after sorafenib treatment. The development of these drugs will bring a new prospect for advanced HCC patients.

Vaccinia-based oncolytic immunotherapy Pexastimogene Devacirepvec in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after sorafenib failure: a randomized multicenter Phase IIb trial (TRAVERSE)

ABSTRACT Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa-Vec) is a vaccinia virus-based oncolytic immunotherapy designed to preferentially replicate in and destroy tumor cells while stimulating anti-tumor immunity by expressing GM-CSF. An earlier randomized Phase IIa trial in predominantly sorafenib-naïve hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit. This randomized, open-label Phase IIb trial investigated whether Pexa-Vec plus Best Supportive Care (BSC) improved OS over BSC alone in HCC patients who failed sorafenib therapy (TRAVERSE). 129 patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to Pexa-Vec plus BSC vs. BSC alone. Pexa-Vec was given as a single intravenous (IV) infusion followed by up to 5 IT injections. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (RR), time to progression (TTP) and safety. A high drop-out rate in the control arm (63%) confounded assessment of response-based endpoints. Median OS (ITT) for Pexa-Vec plus BSC vs. BSC alone was 4.2 and 4.4 months, respectively (HR, 1.19, 95% CI: 0.78–1.80; p = .428). There was no difference between the two treatment arms in RR or TTP. Pexa-Vec was generally well-tolerated. The most frequent Grade 3 included pyrexia (8%) and hypotension (8%). Induction of immune responses to vaccinia antigens and HCC associated antigens were observed. Despite a tolerable safety profile and induction of T cell responses, Pexa-Vec did not improve OS as second-line therapy after sorafenib failure. The true potential of oncolytic viruses may lie in the treatment of patients with earlier disease stages which should be addressed in future studies. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01387555

Treatment Patterns and Economic Burden by Lines of Therapy Among Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Systemic Cancer Therapy

PurposeThis study examined clinical and economic outcomes among patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with systemic agents by line of therapy.MethodsAdults with ≥ 2 medical claims for primary diagnosed HCC (from January 1, 2008, through September 30, 2015) and ≥ 1 claim for systemic HCC-related therapy were identified in the IBM MarketScan® Research Databases. Continuous enrollment was required 6 months before and 1 month after diagnosis. Patients were categorized into first- (1L) and second-line (2L) treatment cohorts; those receiving sorafenib as 1L were evaluated. Treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization, costs, and survival during 1L and 2L therapy were measured. Survival was assessed for patients linked to the Social Security Administration Master Death File.Results1459 patients, 758 with death data, met the 1L cohort criteria; 163 patients, 87 with death data, later received 2L therapy. 77.1% had 1L sorafenib, alone or in combination. Median 1L treatment duration was 3.0 months; median survival time from start of 1L to death or censor was 6.8 months. There was no predominant 2L agent. Median 2L treatment duration was 3.0 months; median survival time from start of 2L was 9.3 months. Median total healthcare costs per patient per month were $13,297 for 1L (all), $13,471 for 1L (sorafenib), and $11,786 for 2L.ConclusionsFindings confirm high 1-year mortality for advanced HCC, suggesting a high cost burden. While no 2L therapy was available during this analysis, recently approved 2L agents have the potential to improve survival after sorafenib failure or intolerance.

Suppression of LSD1 enhances the cytotoxic and apoptotic effects of regorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma cells

Regorafenib has been approved to treat patients who have HCC progression after sorafenib failure, however, regorafenib also faces the risk of drug resistance and subsequent progression of HCC patients. As LSD1 inhibitors can alleviate acquired resistance to sorafenib, in this context, we are interested to investigate the role of LSD1 in regorafenib treatment. Firstly, over-expressed LSD1 was observed in HCC patients and predicted poor prognosis. However, regorafenib failed to suppress the expression of LSD1 in HCC cells. Thus, we hypothesized that LSD1 inhibition could enhance the anti-HCC activity of regorafenib. As expected, LSD1 knockdown could enhance anti-proliferation effect of regorafenib in HCC cells. LSD1 inhibitor SP2509 could enhance the cytotoxic and apoptotic effects of regorafenib in HCC cells. In addition, clinically used LSD1 inhibitor tranylcypromine also enhanced anti-HCC effect of regorafenib. Furthermore, LSD1 suppressed by SP2590 or tranylcypromine could alleviate the activated p-AKT (ser473) induced by regorafenib in HCC cells. Thus, inhibiting LSD1 might be an attractive target for regorafenib sensitization and clinical HCC therapy, our findings could help to elucidate more effective therapeutic options for HCC patients.

New Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Since the approval of sorafenib for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 2007, many drugs have failed in the first and second-line setting. Fortunately, during the recent 2 years, between 2017 and 2018, four drugs (regorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab) were found to be effective and tolerable for patients with HCC as the first- or second-line therapy. Regorafenib, a multi-kinase inhibitor, has a similar structure to sorafenib, and was shown to improve the survival of patients who progressed after sorafenib treatment compared to the placebo control. According to the phase III trial of regorafenib, it became the first approved systemic therapy for patients with progression after sorafenib. Lenvatinib is also a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and in a phase III trial comparing sorafenib and lenvatinib, the primary end-point of non-inferior survival was met. Based on the trial results, lenvatinb has become another systemic therapy for treatment-na?ve patients with advanced HCC. Cabozantinib is a dual inhibitor of Mesenchymal-Epithelial Transition factor/Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor2, and was shown to prolong the overall survival in patients who progressed after sorafenib compared to the placebo. Ramucirumab is a monoclonal antibody to inhibit a single target of VEGFR2. First, this drug failed to improve the survival of patients who progressed after sorafenib failure. On the other hand, it was effective in patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, In a subsequent clinical trial that enrolled only patients with AFP ≥400 ng/mL, ramucirumab was also found to improve the overall survival compared to placebo. Thus, ramucirumab became the first biomarker-driven systemic treatment. Another category of drugs that are attracting considerable interest are immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as anti-programmed cell death protein (PD) 1 or anti-PD-ligand 1. This review provides a synopsis of new systemic therapies, including TKI, monoclonal antibody, and immune-oncology drugs.

Clinical features of lenvatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in real-world conditions: Multicenter analysis.

Background/AimPresently, there are no therapeutic options for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u‐HCC) patients who are intolerant to sorafenib or regorafenib failure. There have been no reports with detailed clinical findings of lenvatinib (LEN), a newly developed first‐line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), obtained in real‐world practice. We aimed to elucidate the therapeutic efficacy of LEN.Materials/MethodsFrom March to August 2018, 105 u‐HCC patients were treated with LEN. Following exclusion of those who started with a reduced LEN dose and/or had a short observation period (<2 weeks), 77 patients (72.0 ± 8.9 years, 59 males, 8 mg/12 mg = 49/28, Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan 6th [LCSGJ]‐TNM stage II/III/IVa/IVb = 8/28/4/37, and American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control 8th [AJCC/UICC]‐TNM stage IB:II:IIIA:IIIB:IVA:IVB = 2:27:6:5:9:28) were divided into two groups (TKI naïve [n = 33] and TKI experienced [n = 44], including 11 with regorafenib history). Therapeutic response was evaluated using mRECIST. Clinical data were retrospectively evaluated.ResultsThere were significant differences in age (74.6 ± 11.2 vs 70.0 ± 5.9 years, P = 0.040), LCSGJ‐TNM (II:III:IVa:IVb = 8:12:1:12 vs 0:16:3:25, P = 0.006), and AJCC/UICC‐TNM (IB:II:IIIA:IIIB:IVA:IVB = 2:17:1:1:4:8 vs 0:10:5:4:5:20, P = 0.028), while hepatic reserve function, adverse event (AE) profiles, and progression‐free survival (89.7%/80.4% vs 90.5%/80.1%, P = 0.499) and overall survival (96.7%/96.7% vs 100%/92.3%, P = 0.769) after 4 and 12 weeks were not significantly different between the TKI‐naïve and TKI‐experienced groups. Overall response rate and disease control rate at 4 weeks (n = 52) were 38.5% and 80.8%, respectively, and 32.4% and 70.3%, respectively, at 12 weeks (n = 37). A significant decline in log10 AFP from the baseline to 4 weeks after introducing LEN was observed in patients with PR and SD (2.047 ± 1.148 vs 1.796 ± 1.179, P < 0.001).ConclusionRegardless of past TKI therapy, therapeutic response and AEs after introducing LEN were similar. LEN may be an important treatment for the present unmet need regarding TKI treatment against u‐HCC.