Bingnan Zhang1, Richard S Finn1. 1. Division of Hematology Oncology Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif., USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since the approval of sorafenib there have been numerous failures of new agents in Phase III studies for treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). These studies have generally ignored the molecular heterogeneity of HCC and they have not enrolled patients based on predictive markers of response. The development of molecular targeted therapeutics in HCC needs to model the approach that has been taken with great success in other solid tumors, to decrease the likelihood of failure in future studies. SUMMARY: Here we review the paradigm taken with novel targeted agents in other solid tumors and highlight ongoing studies in HCC that are incorporating biomarkers in clinical development. KEY MESSAGES: With the appreciation of the molecular diversity of HCC, clinical development of new agents in HCC will need to be targeted towards those patients who are most likely to benefit. This strategy, based on biomarkers for patient selection, is more likely to yield positive results and mitigate the risk of continued negative Phase III studies.
BACKGROUND: Since the approval of sorafenib there have been numerous failures of new agents in Phase III studies for treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). These studies have generally ignored the molecular heterogeneity of HCC and they have not enrolled patients based on predictive markers of response. The development of molecular targeted therapeutics in HCC needs to model the approach that has been taken with great success in other solid tumors, to decrease the likelihood of failure in future studies. SUMMARY: Here we review the paradigm taken with novel targeted agents in other solid tumors and highlight ongoing studies in HCC that are incorporating biomarkers in clinical development. KEY MESSAGES: With the appreciation of the molecular diversity of HCC, clinical development of new agents in HCC will need to be targeted towards those patients who are most likely to benefit. This strategy, based on biomarkers for patient selection, is more likely to yield positive results and mitigate the risk of continued negative Phase III studies.
Authors: Bert H O'Neil; Laura W Goff; John Sae Wook Kauh; Jonathan R Strosberg; Tanios S Bekaii-Saab; Ruey-Min Lee; Aslamuzzaman Kazi; Dominic T Moore; Maria Learoyd; Richard M Lush; Said M Sebti; Daniel M Sullivan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sunil Verma; David Miles; Luca Gianni; Ian E Krop; Manfred Welslau; José Baselga; Mark Pegram; Do-Youn Oh; Véronique Diéras; Ellie Guardino; Liang Fang; Michael W Lu; Steven Olsen; Kim Blackwell Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-10-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew X Zhu; Olivier Rosmorduc; T R Jeffry Evans; Paul J Ross; Armando Santoro; Flair Jose Carrilho; Jordi Bruix; Shukui Qin; Paul J Thuluvath; Josep M Llovet; Marie-Aude Leberre; Markus Jensen; Gerold Meinhardt; Yoon-Koo Kang Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-12-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ganesan Raja; Haripriya Gupta; Yoseph Asmelash Gebru; Gi Soo Youn; Ye Rin Choi; Hyeong Seop Kim; Sang Jun Yoon; Dong Joon Kim; Tae-Jin Kim; Ki Tae Suk Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-01-25 Impact factor: 5.923