Dataset Information

Randomized, phase II trial of sequential hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and sorafenib versus sorafenib alone as initial therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: SCOOP-2 trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The efficacy of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. We conducted a multi-center randomized phase II study comparing a sequential HAIC-sorafenib regimen versus sorafenib alone as an initial therapy for HCC.

Methods

Patients were randomly assigned (ratio, 1:1) to receive sequential HAIC with cisplatin followed by sorafenib (HAIC group, n?=?35) or sorafenib alone (sorafenib group, n?=?33) as an initial therapy. The primary endpoint was the one-year survival rate. Secondary endpoint included overall survival (OS), the 2-year survival rate, the time-to-progression (TTP), the objective response rate (ORR), the disease control rate (DCR), and safety.

Results

For the primary endpoint, the one-year survival rates were 46% in the HAIC group and 58% in the sorafenib group. The median OS period was 10.0?months (95% CI, 7.0-18.8) in the HAIC group and 15.2?months (95% CI, 8.2-19.7) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.86, P?=?0.78). The median TTP, ORR and DCR in the HAIC group were 2.8?months (95% CI, 1.7-5.5), 14.3, and 45.7%, respectively, while those in the sorafenib group were 3.9?months (95% CI, 2.3-6.8), 9.1, and 45.5%, respectively. No unexpected adverse events related to HAIC or sorafenib were observed in either group.

Conclusions

Sequential HAIC with cisplatin and sorafenib does not improve the survival benefit, compared with sorafenib alone, when used as an initial therapy for advanced HCC. However, this study was underpowered in regard to its primary and secondary endpoints, so the results should be interpreted with caution.

Trial registration

UMIN ID 000006147 , registration data: August 11, 2011.

SUBMITTER: Kondo M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6794885 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSorafenib is the first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein invasion; however, it has shown unsatisfactory survival benefit. Sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX) has shown promising results for these patients in a previous phase 2 study.ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of sorafenib plus HAIC compared with sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein invasion.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized, open-label clinical trial enrolled 818 screened patients. Of the 818 participants, 247 with hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein invasion were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequence to receive sorafenib plus HAIC or sorafenib. This trial was conducted at 5 hospitals in China and enrolled patients from April 1, 2016, to October 10, 2017, with a follow-up period of 10 months.InterventionsRandomization to receive 400 mg sorafenib twice daily (sorafenib group) or 400 mg sorafenib twice daily plus HAIC (SoraHAIC group) (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 on day 1, and fluorouracil infusion 2400 mg/m2 for 46 hours, every 3 weeks).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary endpoint was overall survival by intention-to-treat analysis. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least 1 dose of study treatment.ResultsFor 247 patients (median age, 49 years; range, 18-75 years; 223 men and 24 women), median overall survival was 13.37 months (95% CI, 10.27-16.46) in the SoraHAIC group vs 7.13 months (95% CI, 6.28-7.98) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.26-0.48; P < .001). The SoraHAIC group showed a higher response rate than the sorafenib group (51 [40.8%] vs 3 [2.46%]; P < .001), and a longer median progression-free survival (7.03 [95% CI, 6.05-8.02] vs 2.6 [95% CI, 2.15-3.05] months; P < .001). Grade 3/4 adverse events that were more frequent in the SoraHAIC group than in the sorafenib group included neutropenia (12 [9.68%] vs 3 [2.48%]), thrombocytopenia (16 [12.9%] vs 6 [4.96%]), and vomiting (8 [6.45%] vs 1 [0.83%]).Conclusions and relevanceSorafenib plus HAIC of FOLFOX improved overall survival and had acceptable toxic effects compared with sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein invasion.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02774187.

Project description:BackgroundLenvatinib is the first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but prognosis is still unsatisfactory. Recently, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), and immune checkpoint inhibitors showed promising results for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Considering different anti-malignancy mechanisms, combining these three treatments may improve outcomes. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib, toripalimab, plus HAIC versus lenvatinib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.MethodsThis was a retrospective study including patients treated with lenvatinib [8 mg (⩽60 kg) or 12 mg (>60 kg) once daily] or lenvatinib, toripalimab plus HAIC [LeToHAIC group, lenvatinib 0-1 week prior to initial HAIC, 240 mg toripalimab 0-1 day prior to every HAIC cycle, and HAIC with FOLFOX regimen (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 on day 1, and 5-fluorouracil infusion 2400 mg/m2 for 46 h, every 3 weeks)]. Progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and treatment-related adverse events were compared.ResultsFrom February 2019 to August 2019, 157 patients were included in this study: 71 in the LeToHAIC group and 86 in the lenvatinib group. The LeToHAIC group showed longer progression-free survival (11.1 versus 5.1 months, p < 0.001), longer overall survival (not reached versus 11 months, p < 0.001), and a higher objective response rate (RECIST: 59.2% versus 9.3%, p < 0.001; modified RECIST: 67.6% versus 16.3%, p < 0.001) than the lenvatinib group. In addition, 14.1% and 21.1% of patients in the LeToHAIC group achieved complete response of all lesions and complete response of the intrahepatic target lesions per modified RECIST criteria, respectively. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events that were more frequent in the LeToHAIC group than in the lenvatinib group included neutropenia (8.5% versus 1.2%), thrombocytopenia (5.6% versus 0), and nausea (5.6% versus 0).ConclusionsLenvatinib, toripalimab, plus HAIC had acceptable toxic effects and might improve survival compared with lenvatinib alone in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Project description:Purpose: Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy have synergistic effects in multiple malignancies. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of toripalimab plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus lenvatinib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods: We conducted this retrospective study at 3 hospitals in China and eligible patients were 18 years or older and had a primary diagnosis of unresectable HCC with macroscopic vascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread. These patients were treated with toripalimab plus HAIC or lenvatinib monotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease control rate per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) 1.1, and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1. The results were compared by Student's test or the chi-square test, and the survival curves were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and propensity-score matching (PSM) was used to reduce bias. Results: A total of 118 patients were recruited for this study: 53 in the TorHAIC group and 65 in the lenvatinib group. We found that the TorHAIC group showed a longer PFS (9.3 [95% CI, 7.81-10.8] vs 4.8 months [95% CI, 3.31-6.29]; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.57, 95% CI, 0.38-0.85; p = .006), a longer OS (17.13 [95% CI, 13.99-20.27] vs 10.1 months [95% CI, 8.14-12.06]; HR = 0.5, 95% CI, 0.31 - 0.81; p = .005), a higher disease control rate (86.8% vs 69.2%, p = .002) and a higher ORR (47.2% vs 9.2%, p < .001) by RECIST criteria than the lenvatinib group. Both toripalimab plus HAIC and lenvatinib had acceptable safety profiles. No treatment-related deaths occurred in this study. In the propensity score-matched cohorts (47 pairs), the outcomes in the TorHAIC group were also better than those in the lenvatinib group (p < .05). Conclusion: Toripalimab plus HAIC was tolerable and effective in advanced HCC and the result needs to be confirmed in the phase III trial.