Dataset Information

Sorafenib Effectiveness in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Phase III trials show sorafenib improves survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Because of narrow trial eligibility, results may not be generalizable to a broader HCC population. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of initial sorafenib versus no treatment among Medicare beneficiaries with advanced HCC.

Materials and methods

Patients with advanced HCC diagnosed from 2008 to 2011 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database. Eligible patients received initial sorafenib or no therapy and were covered by Medicare parts A, B, and D. Sorafenib use and outcomes were described in this population. Using a propensity score (PS)-matched sample, we compared the effectiveness of sorafenib versus no treatment by Cox proportional hazards and binomial regression, using a landmark requiring all patients to survive ?60 days after diagnosis.

Results

Of 1,532 patients, 27% received initial sorafenib. Median duration of sorafenib use was 60 days (interquartile range [IQR], 30-107 days), and median survival from first prescription was 3 months (IQR, 1-8 months). In the PS-matched cohort, median survival was 3 months from the 60-day landmark in sorafenib-treated (n = 223) and 2 months in untreated (n = 223) patients (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.78-1.16]). Sorafenib was associated with a nonsignificant reduction in mortality at 3 months (44% versus 51%; adjusted risk ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.72-1.07]), but no reduction thereafter.

Conclusion

Survival after sorafenib initiation in newly diagnosed Medicare beneficiaries with HCC is exceptionally short, suggesting trial results are not generalizable to all HCC patients. The downsides of sorafenib use-high drug-related symptom burden and high drug cost-must be considered in light of this minimal benefit.

Implications for practice

The findings of a median survival of only 3 months in Medicare beneficiaries with HCC prescribed sorafenib as first-line therapy highlight the questionable value of sorafenib in this population. Patients should be cautioned that outside of the narrow confines of randomized trials, their life expectancy may be very short, and any benefit of sorafenib is likely to be quite small. Given that sorafenib causes considerable adverse effects and offers no symptom palliation, supportive care should be discussed as a reasonable alternative to sorafenib, particularly for patients who have a poor performance status or advanced cirrhosis.

SUBMITTER: Sanoff HK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5016063 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sorafenib Effectiveness in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Sanoff Hanna K HK Chang YunKyung Y Lund Jennifer L JL O'Neil Bert H BH Dusetzina Stacie B SB

The oncologist 20160516 9

<h4>Background</h4>Phase III trials show sorafenib improves survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Because of narrow trial eligibility, results may not be generalizable to a broader HCC population. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of initial sorafenib versus no treatment among Medicare beneficiaries with advanced HCC.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Patients with advanced HCC diagnosed from 2008 to 2011 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medica ...[more]

PMID: 27185615

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSorafenib and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) might both provide survival benefit for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Adopting either as a first-line therapy carries major cost and resource implications. We aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of sorafenib and TACE in advanced HCC.MethodsA Markov model was constructed in a hypothetical cohort of patients aged 60 years with advanced HCC and Child-Pugh A/B cirrhosis over a 2-year time frame. Three strategies (full or dose-adjusted sorafenib and TACE) were compared in two cost settings: China and the USA. Transition probabilities, utility and costs were extracted from systematic review of 27 articles. Sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo analysis were conducted.ResultsFull and dose-adjusted sorafenib respectively produced 0.435 and 0.482 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) while TACE produced 0.375 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of full-dose sorafenib versus TACE was $101,028.83/QALY in China whereas full-dose sorafenib is a dominant strategy (ICER of -$1,014,507.20/ QALY) compared with TACE in the USA. Compared to full-dose sorafenib, dose-adjusted sorafenib was the dominant strategy with the negative ICERs in both China (-$132,238.94/QALY) and the USA (-$230,058.09/QALY). However, dose-adjusted sorafenib is not available currently, so full-dose sorafenib should be compared with TACE. As the acceptability curves shown, full-dose sorafenib was the optimal strategy at the accepted thresholds of WTP in these two countries. Specifically, full-dose sorafenib was the cost-effective treatment compared with TACE if a WTP was set above $21,670 in the USA, whereas in China, TACE could be more favorable than full-dose sorafenib if a WTP was set below $10,473.ConclusionsDose-adjusted sorafenib may be cost-effective compared to full-dose sorafenib or TACE for advanced HCC patients. However, when confining the comparisons between full-dose sorafenib and TACE, full-dose sorafenib was cost-effective for these patients, under the accepted thresholds of WTP.

Project description:Objective: Nivolumab improves overall survival (OS) and is associated with fewer adverse events than sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). However, the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab compared with sorafenib treatment for aHCC remains unclear. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and sorafenib in the treatment of aHCC. Materials and methods: A partitioned survival model that included three mutually exclusive health states was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and sorafenib for treating aHCC. The clinical characteristics and outcomes of the patients in the model were obtained from the CheckMate 459. We performed deterministic one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to evaluate the robustness of the model. Subgroup analyses were also performed. Costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefits (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB) were measured. Results: The base case analysis showed that compared with sorafenib, treatment with nivolumab was associated with an increment of 0.50 (2.45 vs. 1.95) life-years and an increment of 0.32 (1.59 vs. 1.27) QALYs, as well as a $69,762 increase in cost per patient. The ICER was $220,864/QALY. The INHB and INMB were -0.15 QALYs and -$22,362 at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY, respectively. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the probability of nivolumab being cost-effective was only 10.38% at a WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY. The model was most sensitive to the costs of sorafenib and nivolumab according to the one-way sensitivity analysis. When the price of sorafenib exceeded $0.93/mg or nivolumab was less than $24.23/mg, nivolumab was more cost-effective. The subgroup analysis illustrated that the probability of cost-effectiveness was >50% in the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage B subgroups for nivolumab at a WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY. This study also showed that the probability of cost-effectiveness was <50% in most subgroups. Conclusion: Nivolumab was not cost-effective, although it was associated with better clinical benefit and a favorable safety profile for the treatment of aHCC compared with sorafenib from the third-party payer perspective in the United States. If the price of nivolumab is substantially reduced, favorable cost-effectiveness can be achieved among patients with aHCC.

Project description:Targeted therapy is currently the standard treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but an effective treatment after the discontinuation of sorafenib therapy remains uncertain. We aim to investigate the survival benefits of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) after stopping sorafenib therapy. We retrospectively analyzed all patients with advanced HCC, who had received palliative TACE after terminating sorafenib therapy, from January 2008 to June 2016. Patients who were in the terminal stage (Child-Pugh class C or performance status 3-4), who received a liver transplantation, or who had received any HCC treatment other than TACE, were excluded. Finally, 28 patients were recruited as the TACE group, and were randomly matched 1:1 by age, gender, Child-Pugh class, extrahepatic metastasis, and portal vein thrombosis with 28 controls who only received supportive care. For avoiding any immortal time bias, the index date of outcome follow-up was also matched. Cumulative incidences of, and hazard ratios (HRs) for, patient mortality were analyzed. The baseline demographic data between the TACE group and the control group were similar, but the 1-year overall survival rate in the TACE group was significantly higher than that of the control group (41.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.4-63.0% vs. 24.5%, 95% CI: 6.3-42.7%; p < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, after adjusting for alpha-fetoprotein > 400ng/mL, Child-Pugh class B, and tumor extension > 50% of liver volume, TACE was independently associated with a decreased mortality risk(HR 0.19, 95% CI: 0.08-0.42). In addition, tumor extension > 50% of the liver was another independent prognostic factor associated with an increased mortality risk (HR 2.99, 95% CI: 1.31-6.82). Multivariate stratified analyses verified the association of TACE with a decreased mortality rate in each patient subgroup (all HR < 1.0). By controlling intrahepatic tumor growth, TACE may be a treatment option for use in improving patient survival in advanced HCC, after the termination of sorafenib therapy.

Dataset Information

Sorafenib Effectiveness in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Implications for practice

Publications

Sorafenib Effectiveness in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets