Dataset Information

Defining the Ideal Patient with Hepatocellular Carcinoma for Second-Line Treatment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Second line of treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has notably changed in recent years as three novel drugs with a different mechanism of action have demonstrated to improve survival compared to placebo; thus, there is a need to better define the profile of optimal candidates to second-line treatment with these drugs in order to maximize clinical benefit.

Materials and methods

We performed a pooled analysis from the subgroup analysis of all published phase III trials for approved targeted therapy in the second line of treatment for HCC, with the aim to discover possible clinical-pathological predictive factors.

Results

Four studies were included in the analysis for a total of 2137 cases whose results supported the use of these novel agents in male patients with ECOG: 0, extrahepatic metastases, and HBV infection.

Conclusions

Future studies are awaited to define best candidates for novel agents approved in the second line of treatment for HCC.

SUBMITTER: Roviello G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7321521 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Defining the Ideal Patient with Hepatocellular Carcinoma for Second-Line Treatment.

Roviello Giandomenico G Casadei-Gardini Andrea A Nobili Stefania S Mini Enrico E Fancelli Sara S

Journal of oncology 20200619

<h4>Background</h4>Second line of treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has notably changed in recent years as three novel drugs with a different mechanism of action have demonstrated to improve survival compared to placebo; thus, there is a need to better define the profile of optimal candidates to second-line treatment with these drugs in order to maximize clinical benefit.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We performed a pooled analysis from the subgroup analysis of all published phase III t ...[more]

PMID: 32655640

Similar Datasets

Project description::Background: Recent advances in the development of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have enabled patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to receive multiple TKIs in sequence. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of good candidates for second-line treatment after disease progression during sorafenib treatment. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of 190 consecutive HCC patients who were treated with sorafenib in our hospital. Three criteria of good candidates for second-line TKI at the time of disease progression during sorafenib treatment were defined as follows: criterion 1 was the same as the inclusion criteria of the regorafenib for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who progressed on sorafenib treatment (RESORCE) study, criterion 2 was the inclusion criteria of the RESORCE study plus Child-Pugh score 5, and criterion 3 was the inclusion criteria of the RESORCE study plus albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 1. Factors at baseline and at week 4 during sorafenib treatment were used to predict patients fulfilling each of these three criteria. Results: The distribution of patients was 29%, 13%, and 6% in criteria 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Significant factors for meeting criterion 1 was the combination of baseline albumin >3.7 g/dL (odds ratio (OR) 2.7) plus degree of decrease in albumin (Δalbumin) at week 4 <0.2 g/dL (OR 2.6), or the combination of baseline ALBI score <-2.33 (OR 2.5) and ΔALBI at week 4 <0.255 (OR 4.9). For criterion 2, the value of baseline albumin and ALBI score was identical to criterion 1; however, Δalbumin (<0.1 g/dL) and ΔALBI score (<0.19) became stricter. For criterion 3, the value of baseline albumin (>3.8 g/dL) and ALBI (<-2.55) became stricter, as did Δalbumin (<0.1 g/dL) and ΔALBI (<0.085). Furthermore, tumor burden (>11) was selected as an additional predictor (OR 5.4). Conclusion: Predictors to satisfy the RESORCE study inclusion criteria were as follows: preserved liver function at baseline, as reflected by albumin or ALBI score, and small deterioration of liver function early during sorafenib therapy, as reflected by Δalbumin or ΔALBI at week 4. Liver function at baseline and degree of change in liver function during sorafenib treatment need to be stricter for better outcomes of liver function with disease progression.

Project description:BackgroundHistorically, high hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-related mortality has been, in part, due to lack of effective therapies; however, several systemic therapies have been recently approved for HCC treatment, including regorafenib and ramucirumab. These two treatments utilize different routes of administration (four daily tablets and biweekly intravenous infusions, respectively) and have different risks of adverse events (AEs). However, we lack data on patient preferences in balancing the route of administration and risk of AEs in patients with HCC. We aimed to determine patient preferences and trade-offs for second-line treatment in patients with HCC. METHODS: Patients with advanced or metastatic HCC were recruited through their physicians for this study. Patient preferences were assessed by using a modified threshold technique (TT) design in which respondents were asked two direct-elicitation questions before (assuming same safety and efficacy and only varying mode of administration) and after (incorporating the safety profiles of ramucirumab and regorafenib) the TT series on seven risks of clinically relevant AEs.ResultsIn total, of the 157 patients recruited by their physicians, 150 were eligible and consented to participate. In the first elicitation question (assuming risk and efficacy were equivalent), 61.3% of patients preferred daily tablets. However, 76.7% of patients preferred the biweekly infusion when the safety profiles of the two available second-line therapies were included. The TT analysis confirmed that preferences for oral administration were not strong enough to balance out the risk of AEs that differentiate the two therapies.DiscussionWe found that when patients were asked to choose between a daily, oral medication and a biweekly IV medication for HCC, they were more likely to choose a daily, oral medication if efficacy and safety profiles were the same. However, when risks of AEs representing the safety profiles of two currently available second-line treatments were introduced in a second direct-elicitation question, respondents often selected an IV administration with a safety profile similar to ramucirumab, rather than oral tablets with a safety profile similar to regorafenib. Our findings indicate that the risk profile of a second-line treatment for HCC may be more important than the mode of administration to patients.

Dataset Information

Defining the Ideal Patient with Hepatocellular Carcinoma for Second-Line Treatment.

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Defining the Ideal Patient with Hepatocellular Carcinoma for Second-Line Treatment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets