Literature DB >> 31790344

Pembrolizumab As Second-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in KEYNOTE-240: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial.

Richard S Finn1, Baek-Yeol Ryoo2, Philippe Merle3, Masatoshi Kudo4, Mohamed Bouattour5, Ho Yeong Lim6, Valeriy Breder7, Julien Edeline8, Yee Chao9, Sadahisa Ogasawara10, Thomas Yau11, Marcelo Garrido12, Stephen L Chan13, Jennifer Knox14, Bruno Daniele15, Scot W Ebbinghaus16, Erluo Chen16, Abby B Siegel16, Andrew X Zhu17, Ann-Lii Cheng18.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity and safety in the phase II KEYNOTE-224 trial in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). KEYNOTE-240 evaluated the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, phase III study was conducted at 119 medical centers in 27 countries. Eligible patients with advanced HCC, previously treated with sorafenib, were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS; one-sided significance thresholds, P = .0174 [final analysis] and P = .002 [first interim analysis], respectively). Safety was assessed in all patients who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug.
RESULTS: Between May 31, 2016, and November 23, 2017, 413 patients were randomly assigned. As of January 2, 2019, median follow-up was 13.8 months for pembrolizumab and 10.6 months for placebo. Median OS was 13.9 months (95% CI, 11.6 to 16.0 months) for pembrolizumab versus 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 13.5 months) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.781; 95% CI, 0.611 to 0.998; P = .0238). Median PFS for pembrolizumab was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.1 months) for placebo at the first interim analysis (HR, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.609 to 0.987; P = .0186) and 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.6 to 3.0 months) at final analysis (HR, 0.718; 95% CI, 0.570 to 0.904; P = .0022). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 147 (52.7%) and 62 patients (46.3%) for pembrolizumab versus placebo; those that were treatment related occurred in 52 (18.6%) and 10 patients (7.5%), respectively. No hepatitis C or B flares were identified.
CONCLUSION: In this study, OS and PFS did not reach statistical significance per specified criteria. The results are consistent with those of KEYNOTE-224, supporting a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for pembrolizumab in this population.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31790344     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.19.01307

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  365 in total

Review 1.  Mouse Models of Oncoimmunology in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Erin Bresnahan; Katherine E Lindblad; Marina Ruiz de Galarreta; Amaia Lujambio
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  Limited Impact of Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Monotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Masatoshi Kudo
Journal:  Liver Cancer       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 11.740

Review 3.  Imaging of treatment response during systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  William R Masch; Rony Kampalath; Neehar Parikh; Kimberly A Shampain; Anum Aslam; Victoria Chernyak
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-05-05

Review 4.  Non-immunotherapy options for the first-line management of hepatocellular carcinoma: exploring the evolving role of sorafenib and lenvatinib in advanced disease.

Authors:  S Perera; D Kelly; G M O'Kane
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 3.677

5.  Toward a new landscape for the mechanism of immunosuppression in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Chien-Wei Su; Han-Chieh Lin
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2021-03-13       Impact factor: 6.047

Review 6.  Therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma: overview, clinical indications, and comparative outcome evaluation. Part two: noncurative intention.

Authors:  Joseph H Yacoub; David Mauro; Andrew Moon; Aiwu R He; Mustafa R Bashir; Christine C Hsu; Thomas M Fishbein; Lauren M B Burke
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-04-16

Review 7.  Frontiers of therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Michael Heller; Neehar D Parikh; Nicholas Fidelman; Dawn Owen
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-04-10

8.  Predictors of response and survival in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with nivolumab: real-world experience.

Authors:  Wei-Fan Hsu; Po-Heng Chuang; Cheng-Kuo Chen; Hung-Wei Wang; Ming-Hung Tsai; Wen-Pang Su; Hung-Yao Chen; Chi-Ying Yang; Chun-Che Lin; Guan-Tarn Huang; Jaw-Town Lin; Hsueh-Chou Lai; Cheng-Yuan Peng
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 6.166

Review 9.  T lymphocytes in hepatocellular carcinoma immune microenvironment: insights into human immunology and immunotherapy.

Authors:  Jin Bian; Jianzhen Lin; Junyu Long; Xu Yang; Xiaobo Yang; Xin Lu; Xinting Sang; Haitao Zhao
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 6.166

10.  A Changing Paradigm for the Treatment of Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Asia-Pacific Primary Liver Cancer Expert Consensus Statements.

Authors:  Masatoshi Kudo; Kwang-Hyub Han; Sheng-Long Ye; Jian Zhou; Yi-Hsiang Huang; Shi-Ming Lin; Chung-Kwe Wang; Masafumi Ikeda; Stephen Lam Chan; Su Pin Choo; Shiro Miyayama; Ann Lii Cheng
Journal:  Liver Cancer       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 11.740

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.