| Literature DB >> 33741732 |
Kuimin Mei1, Shukui Qin2, Zhendong Chen3, Ying Liu4, Linna Wang5, Jianjun Zou5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emerging clinical data suggest that an immune checkpoint inhibitor in combination with an antiangiogenic agent is a reasonable strategy for multiple malignancies. We assessed the combination of camrelizumab with apatinib in pretreated advanced primary liver cancer (PLC, cohort A) from a multicohort phase Ib/II trial.Entities:
Keywords: combination; drug therapy; immunotherapy; liver neoplasms
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33741732 PMCID: PMC7986650 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2020-002191
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Immunother Cancer ISSN: 2051-1426 Impact factor: 13.751
Figure 1Trial profiles.
Baseline characteristics
| Camrelizumab+apatinib 125 mg (n=3) | Camrelizumab+apatinib 250 mg (n=3) | Camrelizumab+apatinib 375 mg (n=19) | Camrelizumab+apatinib 500 mg (n=3) | All patients (n=28) | |||||||||||
| HCC (n=2) | ICC (n=1) | Total (n=3) | HCC (n=2) | ICC (n=1) | Total (n=3) | HCC (n=14) | ICC (n=5) | Total (n=19) | HCC (n=3) | ICC (n=0) | Total (n=19) | HCC (n=21) | ICC (n=7) | Total (n=28) | |
| Age (years) | 44 (35–52) | 51 (51–51) | 51 (35–52) | 58 (58–58) | 66 (66–66) | 58 (58–66) | 47 (34–64) | 58 (49–67) | 51 (34–67) | 38 (38–52) | / | 38 (38–52) | 48 (34–64) | 58 (49–67) | 52 (34–67) |
| Sex | |||||||||||||||
| Male | 2 (100) | 1 (100) | 3 (100) | 2 (100) | 1 (100) | 3 (100) | 11 (78.6) | 1 (20.0) | 12 (63.2) | 3 (100) | / | 3 (100) | 18 (85.7) | 3 (42.9) | 21 (75.0) |
| Female | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 (21.4) | 4 (80.0) | 7 (36.8) | 0 | / | 0 | 3 (14.3) | 4 (57.1) | 7 (25.0) |
| ECOG performance status | |||||||||||||||
| 0 | 1 (50.0) | 0 | 1 (33.3) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 (50.0) | 2 (40.0) | 9 (47.4) | 0 | / | 0 | 8 (38.1) | 2 (28.6) | 10 (35.7) |
| 1 | 1 (50.0) | 1 (100) | 2 (66.7) | 2 (100) | 1 (100) | 3 (100) | 7 (50.0) | 3 (60.0) | 10 (52.6) | 3 (100) | / | 3 (100) | 13 (61.9) | 5 (71.4) | 18 (64.3) |
| AFP≥400 ng/mL | 2 (100) | 0 | 2 (66.7) | 1 (50.0) | 1 (100) | 2 (66.7) | 9 (64.3) | 0 | 9 (47.4) | 2 (66.7) | / | 2 (66.7) | 14 (66.7) | 1 (14.3) | 15 (53.6) |
| BCLC stage | |||||||||||||||
| B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 (21.4) | 0 | 3 (15.8) | 0 | / | 0 | 3 (14.3) | 0 | 3 (10.7) |
| C | 2 (100) | 0 | 2 (66.7) | 2 (100) | 0 | 2 (66.7) | 11 (78.6) | 0 | 11 (57.9) | 3 (100) | / | 3 (100) | 18 (85.7) | 0 | 18 (64.3) |
| Extrahepatic spread | 2 (100) | 1 (100) | 3 (100) | 2 (100) | 1 (100) | 3 (100) | 13 (92.9) | 5 (100) | 18 (94.7) | 2 (66.7) | / | 2 (66.7) | 19 (90.5) | 7 (100) | 26 (92.9) |
| HBV infection | 2 (100) | 1 (100) | 3 (100) | 2 (100) | 1 (100) | 3 (100) | 12 (85.7) | 1 (20.0) | 13 (68.4) | 3 (100) | / | 3 (100) | 19 (90.5) | 3 (42.9) | 22 (78.6) |
| Child-Pugh class | |||||||||||||||
| A (5–6) | 2 (100) | 1 (100) | 3 (100) | 2 (100) | 0 | 2 (66.7) | 14 (100) | 5 (100) | 19 (100) | 2 (66.7) | / | 2 (66.7) | 20 (95.2) | 6 (85.7) | 26 (92.9) |
| B (7) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (33.3) | / | 1 (33.3) | 1 (4.8) | 0 | 1 (3.6) |
Data are shown in median (range) or n (%).
/ indicates not applicable.
AFP, alpha-petoprotein; BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; HBV, hepatitis B virus; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; ICC, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.
Figure 2Treatment interruption and dose reduction of apatinib in the 375 mg group. Apatinib administration was interrupted in all 19 patients due to adverse events but was never resumed in two patients as the prespecified criteria for treatment resumption were not met, and the two patients progressed before the cut-off date. The 5 patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were labeled with asterisks (*), and the other 14 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were unlabeled.
TRAEs
| Camrelizumab plus apatinib (n=28) | ||
| Any grade | Grade≥3 | |
| TRAEs | ||
| Any | 28 (100) | 26 (92.9) |
| Serious | 4 (14.3) | 3 (10.7) |
| Any grade TRAEs occurring in at least 15% of patients | ||
| Clinical TRAEs | ||
| White blood cell count decreased | 16 (57.1) | 1 (3.6) |
| Aspartate aminotransferase increased | 16 (57.1) | 2 (7.1) |
| Platelet count decreased | 16 (57.1) | 4 (14.3) |
| Bilirubin conjugated increased | 13 (46.4) | 2 (7.1) |
| Blood bilirubin increased | 12 (42.9) | 1 (3.6) |
| Alanine aminotransferase increased | 11 (39.3) | 2 (7.1) |
| Biological TRAEs | ||
| Hypertension | 20 (71.4) | 9 (32.1) |
| Neutrophil count decreased | 15 (53.6) | 5 (17.9) |
| Proteinuria | 14 (50.0) | 1 (3.6) |
| Hand–foot syndrome | 10 (35.7) | 3 (10.7) |
| Hypothyroidism | 7 (25.0) | 0 |
| Diarrhea | 6 (21.4) | 2 (7.1) |
| RCCEP | 6 (21.4) | 0 |
| Decreased appetite | 6 (21.4) | 0 |
| Fatigue | 5 (17.9) | 1 (3.6) |
| Anemia | 5 (17.9) | 2 (7.1) |
Data are shown in n (%).
TRAE, treatment-related adverse event; RCCEP, reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation.
Figure 3Best percentage changes from baseline in terms of the target lesion sizes. The red stars represent the patients with confirmed partial response. The seven patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were labeled with asterisks (*), and the other 21 patients had hepatocellular carcinoma.
Figure 4(A) OS and (B) PFS. HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; ICC, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; NR, not reached; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival.