Dataset Information

Phase I Trial on Arterial Embolization with Hypoxia Activated Tirapazamine for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Tirapazamine (TPZ) is a hypoxia activated drug that may be synergistic with transarterial embolization (TAE). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety of combining TPZ and TAE in patients with unresectable HCC and determine the optimal dose for Phase II.

Methods

This was a Phase 1 multicenter, open-label, non-randomized trial with a classic 3+3 dose escalation and an expansion cohort in patients with unresectable HCC, Child Pugh A, ECOG 0 or 1. Two initial cohorts consisted of I.V. administration of Tirapazamine followed by superselective TAE while the remaining three cohorts underwent intraarterial administration of Tirapazamine with superselective TAE. Safety and tolerability were assessed using NCI CTCAE 4.0 with clinical, imaging and laboratory examinations including pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis and an electrocardiogram 1 day pre-dose, at 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, and 24 hours post-TPZ infusion and an additional PK at 15- and 30-minutes post-TPZ. Tumor responses were evaluated using mRECIST criteria.

Results

Twenty-seven patients (mean [range] age of 66.4 [37-79] years) with unresectable HCC were enrolled between July 2015 and January 2018. Two patients were lost to follow-up. Mean tumor size was 6.53 cm ± 2.60 cm with a median of two lesions per patient. Dose limiting toxicity and maximum tolerated dose were not reached. The maximal TPZ dose was 10 mg/m² I.V. and 20 mg/m² I.A. One adverse event (AE) was reported in all patients with fatigue, decreased appetite or pain being most common. Grade 3-5 AE were hypertension and transient elevation of AST/ALT in 70.4% of patients. No serious AE were drug related. Sixty percent (95% CI=38.7-78.9) achieved complete response (CR), and 84% (95% CI=63.9-95.5) had complete and partial response per mRECIST for target lesions.

Discussion

TAE with TPZ was safe and tolerable with encouraging results justifying pursuit of a Phase II trial.

SUBMITTER: Abi-Jaoudeh N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8139681 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Sarcopenia has been associated with lower overall survival in patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing surgical resection, TACE, TARE, or transplantation. This monocentric study evaluated the prognostic significance of sarcopenia in patients affected by HCC who received bland transarterial embolization (TAE) therapy, by analyzing its impact on survival and treatment-related complications. All consecutive patients who underwent the 1st TAE between March 1st 2011 and July 1st 2019 in our Institution were retrospectively studied. To evaluate sarcopenia, the skeletal muscle index (SMI) was calculated by normalizing the cross-sectional muscle area at the level of L3 on an abdominal CT scan prior to embolization (cm2) by patient height (m2). SMI cut-off values for sarcopenia were considered ≤ 39 cm2/m2 for women and ≤55 cm2/m2 for men. Data about age, gender, body mass index (BMI), underlying liver disease, liver function, MELD score, Child-Pugh score, multifocal disease, performance status, previous interventions, length of stay (LOS), complications after the procedure, readmission rate within 30 days, survival time from TAE and total number and type of TAE received following the first procedure were collected. From 2011 to 2019, 142 consecutive patients underwent 305 TAEs. Observation time ranged from 1.4 to 100.5 months (median 20.1 SD = 22). Sarcopenia at baseline was present in 121 (85%) patients. Overall 87 (61.2%) patients died during follow-up with survival rates at 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year of 71%, 41%, 22%, 16% and 11% respectively. After multivariate analysis sarcopenia (HR = 2.22, p = 0.046), previous ablation/resection (HR = 0.51, p = 0.005) and multifocal disease (HR = 1.84, p = 0.02) were associated with reduced survival. Sarcopenia did not influence the safety of TAE in terms of LOS (2 days vs 1.5 days, p = 0.2), early complications rate (8% vs 5%, p = 0.5) and readmission rate within 30 days (7% vs 5%, p = 0.74). Sarcopenia, estimated by the L3SMI method, is an emerging prognostic factor in patients with HCC undergoing bland TAE therapy as it is associated with increased mortality, without impairing the safety of the locoregional treatment. Measures to ameliorate the SMI, such as nutritional support and physical exercise, should be evaluated in clinical trials for HCC patients receiving liver embolization to determine their impact on overall survival.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Globally, hepatocellular carcinoma is the second most common cause of cancer deaths. It remains challenging to intensify cancer treatment without impairing liver function. OBJECTIVE:The objective of the TheraSphere in the Treatment of Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma (STOP-HCC) study is to examine the hypothesis that transarterial radioembolization (TheraSphere yttrium-90 glass microspheres) combined with standard first-line treatment with sorafenib will improve outcomes over treatment with sorafenib alone in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. The STOP-HCC study is the largest international, multicenter, prospective study of intra-arterial treatment in combination with sorafenib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Here we report the study design. METHODS:STOP-HCC is a prospective, phase 3, open-label, randomized controlled study conducted across up to 105 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia. Eligible adults have unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks, 1 or more unidimensional measurable lesions, Child-Pugh score 7 points or less, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score 1 or lower, and are candidates for treatment with sorafenib. Presence of branch portal vein tumor thrombosis is permitted. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either sorafenib alone or transarterial radioembolization followed by sorafenib within 2 to 6 weeks. The primary outcome is overall survival. Secondary outcomes are time to progression, time to untreatable progression, time to symptomatic progression, tumor response, quality of life, and adverse event occurrence. The study is an adaptive trial, comprising a group-sequential design with 2 interim analyses with 520 patients, and an option to increase the sample size to 700 patients at the second interim analysis. The sample size of 520 patients allows for 417 deaths to give 80% power to detect an increase in median overall survival from 10.7 months for the sorafenib group (based on the Sorafenib Hepatocellular Carcinoma Assessment Randomized Protocol [SHARP] trial) to 14.2 months for the transarterial radioembolization+sorafenib group (hazard ratio 0.754) with 2-sided alpha of .05. The increased sample size of 700 patients allows for 564 deaths to give 80% power to detect a smaller difference in median overall survival from 10.7 months for the sorafenib group to 13.7 months for the transarterial radioembolization+sorafenib group (hazard ratio 0.781). RESULTS:Enrollment for the study completed in September 2017. Results of the first and second interim analyses were reviewed by the Independent Data Monitoring Committee. The recommendation of the committee, at both interim analyses, was to continue the study without any changes. CONCLUSIONS:The STOP-HCC study will contribute toward the establishment of the role of combination therapy with transarterial radioembolization and sorafenib in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with and without branch portal vein tumor thrombosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01556490; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01556490 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/7188iygKs). REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER:RR1-10.2196/11234.

Project description:ImportanceHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality, and additional first-line treatments are needed. The programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor tislelizumab demonstrated efficacy and a tolerable safety profile as second-line HCC treatment.ObjectiveTo investigate efficacy and safety of tislelizumab vs sorafenib tosylate for first-line treatment of unresectable HCC.Design, setting, and participantsThe open-label, global, multiregional phase 3 RATIONALE-301 randomized clinical trial enrolled systemic therapy-naive adults with histologically confirmed HCC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, disease progression following (or patient was not amenable to) locoregional therapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, and Child-Pugh class A, between December 27, 2017, and October 2, 2019. Data cutoff was July 11, 2022.InterventionPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive tislelizumab, 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, or sorafenib tosylate, 400 mg orally twice daily.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included objective response rate, progression-free survival, duration of response, and safety.ResultsA total of 674 patients were included in the analysis (570 men [84.6%]; median age, 61 years [range, 23-86 years]). As of July 11, 2022, minimum study follow-up was 33 months. The primary end point of OS noninferiority of tislelizumab vs sorafenib was met in the intention-to-treat population (n = 674); median overall survival was 15.9 (95% CI, 13.2-19.7) months vs 14.1 (95% CI, 12.6-17.4) months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85 [95.003% CI, 0.71-1.02]), and superiority of tislelizumab vs sorafenib was not met. The objective response rate was 14.3% (n = 49) for tislelizumab vs 5.4% (n = 18) for sorafenib, and median duration of response was 36.1 (95% CI, 16.8 to not evaluable) months vs 11.0 (95% CI, 6.2-14.7) months, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.1 (95% CI, 2.1-3.5) months vs 3.4 (95% CI, 2.2-4.1) months with tislelizumab vs sorafenib (HR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.92-1.33]). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) was 96.2% (325 of 338 patients) for tislelizumab and 100% (n = 324) for sorafenib. Grade 3 or greater treatment-related AEs were reported in 75 patients (22.2%) receiving tislelizumab and 173 (53.4%) receiving sorafenib. There was a lower incidence of treatment-related AEs leading to drug discontinuation (21 [6.2%] vs 33 [10.2%]) and drug modification (68 [20.1%] vs 187 [57.7%]) with tislelizumab vs sorafenib.Conclusions and relevanceIn RATIONALE-301, tislelizumab demonstrated OS benefit that was noninferior vs sorafenib, with a higher objective response rate and more durable responses, while median progression-free survival was longer with sorafenib. Tislelizumab demonstrated a favorable safety profile vs sorafenib.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03412773.