| Literature DB >> 36246617 |
Meng Hu1, Weirong Yao1, Qinglin Shen1,2.
Abstract
Primary liver cancer (PLC) is one of the most common malignant tumors, which clinically characterized by occult onset, rapid development, easy recurrence and poor prognosis. With the rapid development of tumor immunotherapy research, tumor immunotherapy has also achieved remarkable clinical efficacy, and jointly promoted the overall improvement of tumor immunology from mechanism research to clinical transformation, from single discipline to multi-disciplinary integration. Immunotherapy has obvious advantages in treatment-related toxicity and efficacy compared with traditional therapy. In hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), immunotherapy alone or in combination with other therapies may help to control tumor progression, and there are many immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) widely used in clinical or ongoing clinical trials. However, tumor immunology research is still facing many challenges. How to effectively evaluate the efficacy, whether there are related biomarkers, the generation of immune tolerance and the lack of clinical trials to objectively evaluate the efficacy are still urgent problems to be solved, but it also brings new research opportunities for basic and clinical immunology researchers. The study of treatment of ICIs of PLC has become a hot spot in clinical research field. This paper summarizes and prospects the research progress and challenges of ICIs for PLC.Entities:
Keywords: advances; challenges; immune checkpoint inhibitors; immunotherapy; primary liver cancer
Year: 2022 PMID: 36246617 PMCID: PMC9561712 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.1005658
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Genet ISSN: 1664-8021 Impact factor: 4.772
Progress of various immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of primary liver cancer.
| Drug name | Characteristics of cohort study | Target (mechanism) | Patient selection | Intervention measures | grouping | Clinical results (ORR, PFS, OS) | Main side effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atilizumab + Bevacizumab (A+ T) | Imbravei50 phase III multicenter study | PD-1+ VEGF inhibitor | 501 unresectable HCC patients who had not received systematic treatment before | They were randomly assigned into the experimental group and the control group according to 2:1. The experimental group received 1200 mg intravenous infusion of atilizumab, followed by 15 mg/kg intravenous infusion of bevacizumab on the same day, Q3W; The control group was treated with sorafenib 400 mg orally twice a day until the disease progressed or intolerable toxicity appeared | A+ T | A+ T | 38% of people had serious AE (Grade 3–4), and the most common AEs (in ≥20% of patients) were hypertension, fatigue and proteinuria |
| ORR 29.8% | |||||||
| Camrelizumab + apatinib | Non-random, open, multi center, phase II project carried out by 25 centers in China | PD-1+VEGFR-2 inhibitor | Phase II clinical study on the first-line and second-line treatment of 190 cases of advanced liver cancer in rescue | Camrelizumab (intravenous, 200 mg [for body weight ≥50 kg] or 3 mg/kg [for body weight <50 kg], Q2W) + Apatinib (250 mg/day, Q4W) | Camrelizumab + Apatinib | In the first-line treatment group, mOS was 20.3 m, mPFS was 5.7 m, ORR was 34.3% | The frequency of TRAs above Grade 3 was 78.6% |
| Nivolumab + Ipilimumab (O+ Y) | Checkmate 040 cohort 4 phase I/II global multicenter single arm study | PD-L1+CTLA-4 | Second line phase I/II study of 148 cases of advanced liver cancer | The patients were randomly assigned according to the ratio of 1 ∶ 1 ∶ 1. They received 1 mg/kg of Nivolumab combined with 3 mg/kg of Ipilimumab Q3W (4 doses), and then 240 mg of Nivolumab Q2W (group A); Nivolumab 3 mg/kg combined with Ipitumab 1 mg/kg Q3W (4 doses), and then 240 mg Nivolumab Q2W (group B); Or 3 mg/kg of Nivolumab Q2W and 1 mg/kg of Ipilizumab Q6W (Group C) | Group A (Nivolumab 1 mg/kg, Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, Q3W, followed by Nivolumab 240 mg Q2W after 4 courses of treatment); Group B (Nivolumab 3 mg/kg, Ipilimumab 1 mg/kg, Q3W, followed by Nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks after 4 courses of treatment); Group C (Nivolumab 3 mg/kg, Ipilimumab 1 mg/kg, Q6W) | (mOS : 22.8 | The TRAEs of double immunosuppressants were slightly higher, 3/4 of the patients in group A had AEs, but they were controllable as a whole |
| Durvalumab + Tremelimumab(T + D) | Study22 VII global multicenter research | PD-L1+CTLA-4 | Phase II clinical study on second-line treatment of 322 cases of advanced HCC | T300 + D75 (T 300 mg + D 1500 mg, sequential D 1500 mg after one course of treatment, Q4W) | T300 + D75 (T 300 mg + D 1500mg, sequential D 1500 mg after one course of treatment, Q4W) | mOS: 18.7 | Grade 3–4 AE: 35.1% |
| D 104 (D 1500 mg Q4W); | T69 (T 750mg, Q4W in the first 7 cycles and Q12W after 7 cycles); | 42.0% | |||||
| T69 (T 750mg, Q4W in the first 7 cycles and Q12W after 7 cycles) | T75 + D 84 (T 75 mg + D 1500mg, sequential D drug 1500 mg after 4 cycles, Q4W) | ||||||
| D 104 (D 1500 mg Q4W); | |||||||
| Nivolumab (O) | Checkmate 459 phase III global multicenter study | PD-1 | 493 cases of advanced HCC | Checkmate 459 is a randomized, multicenter, phase III clinical study involving 743 patients with advanced liver cancer aged 18 or over who did not receive systematic treatment. 1: 1 after randomization, 371 patients received intravenous 240 mg navulizumab Q2W, and 372 patients took 400 mg sorafenib orally twice a day | Navuliumab(371) | OS:16.4 | Grade 3–4 AE: 22 vs. 49% |
| Pembrolizumab | Keynote 240 phase III global multicenter study | PD-1 | Second line treatment of 413 cases of advanced HCC | The patients were randomly assigned to receive Pembrolizumab 200 mg + best supportive treatment vs. Placebo + best supportive treatment according to 2:1, Q3W | Pembrolizumab(278)vs. Placebo(135) | OS:13.9 | Grade 3–4 AE: 18.6vs. 7.5% |
| Camrelizumab | Phase II China multicenter single arm study | PD-1 | 220 patients were included, of which the proportion of HBV infection was as high as 83.4% | Camrelizumab 3 mg/kg, Group(Q2W) | Q2W(3 mg/kG)vs. Q3W(3 mg/kG) | OS:14.2 vs. 13.2 m; PFS:2.3 | Grade 3–4 AEs: 22%, mainly reactive skin capillary hyperplasia, and most patients mainly have grade 1–2 AEs |
| Sintilimab + Bevacizumab | Randomized, controlled, open phase III clinical study | Domestic PD-1 + VEGF inhibitor | 571 cases of unresectable or metastatic HCC treated with first-line therapy | The patients were randomly divided into groups according to 2:1 and received Sintilimab + Bevacizumab | Sintilimab + Bevacizumab | mOS:Not reached(NR) | The incidence of grade 3–4 AEs was similar to that of sorafenib |
| Toripalimab + Lefatini | Single arm phase II | RTK inhibitor + PD-1 + HIC | 36 adult patients with advanced HCC (≥18 years old) had ECoG score of 0–2 and child Pugh class a liver function | Lefatini (8 mg when body weight <60 kg, 12 mg when body weight ≥60kg, oral once a day) was used 3–7 days before the initial HAIC to determine tolerance. They were then treated with lenvatinib for 21 days (one cycle from day 1 to day 21), treprizumab (intravenous infusion of 240 mg on day 1), HAIC (day 1 to day 2) and FOLFOX regimen (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, folic acid 400 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 on day 1 and 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 for 224 h), Until the disease progresses or intolerable toxicity occurs | Toripalimab + Lefatini | PFS: 11.1 | Grade 3–4 TRAs (trae) occurred in 72.2% of patients. The most common were thrombocytopenia (13.9%), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST; 13.9%) and hypertension (11.1%) |