Dataset Information

Comparative Efficacy of Cabozantinib and Regorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:No trials have compared cabozantinib and regorafenib for the second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). OBJECTIVES:Conduct a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of the efficacy and safety of second-line cabozantinib and regorafenib in patients with advanced HCC and disease progression after prior sorafenib. METHODS:The CELESTIAL and RESORCE trials were used for indirect comparison of second-line cabozantinib and regorafenib in advanced HCC. Population-level data were available for RESORCE, individual patient data (IPD) for CELESTIAL. To align with RESORCE, the CELESTIAL population was limited to patients who received first-line sorafenib only. To minimize potential effect-modifying population differences, the CELESTIAL IPD were weighted to balance the distribution of clinically relevant baseline characteristics with those of RESORCE. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated for the matching-adjusted second-line CELESTIAL population and compared with those for RESORCE using weighted Kaplan-Meier curves and parametric modeling. Rates of grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) affecting?>?5% of patients in any study arm were compared. RESULTS:In the matching-adjusted second-line populations (CELESTIAL, effective sample size?=?266; RESORCE, n?=?573), median (95% confidence interval) OS was similar for cabozantinib and regorafenib (11.4 [8.9-17.0] versus 10.6 [9.1-12.1] months; p?=?0.3474, log-rank test). Median PFS was longer for cabozantinib than regorafenib (5.6 [4.9-7.3] versus 3.1 [2.8-4.2] months; p?=?0.0005, log-rank test). There was a trend for lower rates of some grade 3/4 TEAEs with regorafenib than with cabozantinib, which may reflect the exclusion of sorafenib-intolerant patients from RESORCE but not from CELESTIAL, a difference that the MAIC methods could not remove. Only diarrhea rates were statistically significantly lower for regorafenib (p ?? 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Cabozantinib may achieve similar OS and prolonged PFS compared with regorafenib in patients with progressive advanced HCC after prior sorafenib.

SUBMITTER: Kelley RK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7467441 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative Efficacy of Cabozantinib and Regorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Kelley Robin K RK Mollon Patrick P Blanc Jean-Frédéric JF Daniele Bruno B Yau Thomas T Cheng Ann-Lii AL Valcheva Velichka V Marteau Florence F Guerra Ines I Abou-Alfa Ghassan K GK

Advances in therapy 20200518 6

<h4>Background</h4>No trials have compared cabozantinib and regorafenib for the second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).<h4>Objectives</h4>Conduct a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of the efficacy and safety of second-line cabozantinib and regorafenib in patients with advanced HCC and disease progression after prior sorafenib.<h4>Methods</h4>The CELESTIAL and RESORCE trials were used for indirect comparison of second-line cabozantinib and regorafenib in adva ...[more]

PMID: 32424805

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCabozantinib inhibits tyrosine kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3, MET, and AXL, which are implicated in the progression of hepatocellular carcinoma and the development of resistance to sorafenib, the standard initial treatment for advanced disease. This randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial evaluated cabozantinib as compared with placebo in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.MethodsA total of 707 patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive cabozantinib (60 mg once daily) or matching placebo. Eligible patients had received previous treatment with sorafenib, had disease progression after at least one systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, and may have received up to two previous systemic regimens for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival and the objective response rate.ResultsAt the second planned interim analysis, the trial showed significantly longer overall survival with cabozantinib than with placebo. Median overall survival was 10.2 months with cabozantinib and 8.0 months with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.92; P=0.005). Median progression-free survival was 5.2 months with cabozantinib and 1.9 months with placebo (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.52; P<0.001), and the objective response rates were 4% and less than 1%, respectively (P=0.009). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 68% of patients in the cabozantinib group and in 36% in the placebo group. The most common high-grade events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (17% with cabozantinib vs. 0% with placebo), hypertension (16% vs. 2%), increased aspartate aminotransferase level (12% vs. 7%), fatigue (10% vs. 4%), and diarrhea (10% vs. 2%).ConclusionsAmong patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, treatment with cabozantinib resulted in longer overall survival and progression-free survival than placebo. The rate of high-grade adverse events in the cabozantinib group was approximately twice that observed in the placebo group. (Funded by Exelixis; CELESTIAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01908426 .).

Project description:Background and aimsThe multikinase inhibitor cabozantinib has been approved for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) previously treated with sorafenib. We report safety and efficacy data of an international, multicenter, real-life cohort of patients with advanced HCC treated with cabozantinib.MethodsPatients with HCC who were treated with cabozantinib were retrospectively identified across 11 centers in Austria, Switzerland, and Germany. Patients' characteristics, adverse events, duration of treatment and overall survival (OS) data were analyzed until April 1, 2020.ResultsEighty-eight patients from 11 centers were included. The predominant underlying liver diseases were NAFLD/NASH in 26 (30%) and hepatitis C infection in 21 (24%) patients. Seventy-eight patients (89%) were classified as Barcelona clinic liver cancer (BCLC) stage C. Sixty patients (68%) were Child-Pugh A, whereas 22 (25%) were Child-Pugh B, respectively. Cabozantinib was used as systemic second- and third-line or later treatment in 41 (47%) and 46 (52%) patients, respectively. The following best responses under cabozantinib were documented: partial response in 6 (7%), stable disease in 28 (32%), and progressive disease in 28 (32%) patients, respectively. Fifty-two patients (59%) died during follow-up. The median OS from start of cabozantinib treatment was 7.0 months in the entire cohort and 9.7 months in Child-Pugh A patients, while Child-Pugh B patients had a median OS of 3.4 months, respectively. Thirty-seven (42%) patients fulfilled the CELESTIAL inclusion and exclusion criteria, showing a median OS of 11.1 months. Most common adverse events were fatigue (15.6%) and diarrhea (15.6%).ConclusionCabozantinib treatment was effective, safe, and feasible in patients with advanced HCC in patients with compensated cirrhosis. Patients in the real-life setting had more advanced liver disease - in which 25% of patients were Child-Pugh B. However, OS in patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis was similar to that reported in the phase 3 trial (CELESTIAL).

Project description:BackgroundCabozantinib was approved by the European Medicines Agency and the Federal Drug Administration as an option for sorafenib-resistant advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, increasing overall survival and progression-free survival compared with placebo. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib in the second-line setting for patients with an advanced hepatocellular carcinoma from the German statutory health insurance perspective compared with an US scenario using US prices.MethodsA Markov model was developed to compare the costs and effectiveness of cabozantinib with best supportive care in the second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma over a lifetime horizon. Health outcomes were measured in discounted life years and discounted quality-adjusted life years. Survival probabilities were estimated using parametric survival distributions based on CELESTIAL trial data. Utilities were derived from the literature. Costs contained drugs, monitoring and adverse events measured in US Dollars. Model robustness was addressed in univariable, scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ResultsCabozantinib generated a gain of 0.18 life years (0.15 quality-adjusted life years) compared with best supportive care. The total mean cost per patient was $56,621 for cabozantinib and $2064 for best supportive care in the German model resulting in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for cabozantinib of $306,778/life year and $375,470/quality-adjusted life year. Using US prices generated costs of $177,496 for cabozantinib and $4630 for best supportive care and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $972,049/life year and $1,189,706/quality-adjusted life year.ConclusionsOur analysis established that assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $163,371/life year (quality-adjusted life year) for the German model and $188,559/life year (quality-adjusted life year) for the US model, cabozantinib is not cost-effective compared with best supportive care. Sensitivity analyses showed that cabozantinib was not cost-effective in almost all our scenarios.

Dataset Information

Comparative Efficacy of Cabozantinib and Regorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Publications

Comparative Efficacy of Cabozantinib and Regorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets