Back to Search Start Over

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib in non-viral unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: an international propensity score matching analysis.

Authors :
Rimini M
Rimassa L
Ueshima K
Burgio V
Shigeo S
Tada T
Suda G
Yoo C
Cheon J
Pinato DJ
Lonardi S
Scartozzi M
Iavarone M
Di Costanzo GG
Marra F
Soldà C
Tamburini E
Piscaglia F
Masi G
Cabibbo G
Foschi FG
Silletta M
Pressiani T
Nishida N
Iwamoto H
Sakamoto N
Ryoo BY
Chon HJ
Claudia F
Niizeki T
Sho T
Kang B
D'Alessio A
Kumada T
Hiraoka A
Hirooka M
Kariyama K
Tani J
Atsukawa M
Takaguchi K
Itobayashi E
Fukunishi S
Tsuji K
Ishikawa T
Tajiri K
Ochi H
Yasuda S
Toyoda H
Ogawa C
Nishimur T
Hatanaka T
Kakizaki S
Shimada N
Kawata K
Tanaka T
Ohama H
Nouso K
Morishita A
Tsutsui A
Nagano T
Itokawa N
Okubo T
Arai T
Imai M
Naganuma A
Koizumi Y
Nakamura S
Joko K
Iijima H
Hiasa Y
Pedica F
De Cobelli F
Ratti F
Aldrighetti L
Kudo M
Cascinu S
Casadei-Gardini A
Source :
ESMO open [ESMO Open] 2022 Dec; Vol. 7 (6), pp. 100591. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Oct 06.
Publication Year :
2022

Abstract

Background: A growing body of evidence suggests that non-viral hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) might benefit less from immunotherapy.<br />Materials and Methods: We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients with non-viral advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib, or sorafenib, in 36 centers in 4 countries (Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, and UK). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib, and OS and PFS with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib. For the primary and secondary endpoints, we carried out the analysis on the whole population first, and then we divided the cohort into two groups: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) population and non-NAFLD/NASH population.<br />Results: One hundred and ninety patients received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, 569 patients received lenvatinib, and 210 patients received sorafenib. In the whole population, multivariate analysis showed that treatment with lenvatinib was associated with a longer OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.95; P = 0.0268] and PFS (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.51-0.86; P = 0.002) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the NAFLD/NASH population, multivariate analysis confirmed that lenvatinib treatment was associated with a longer OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.84; P = 0.0110) and PFS (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.38-0.82; P = 0.031) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the subgroup of non-NAFLD/NASH patients, no difference in OS or PFS was observed between patients treated with lenvatinib and those treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. All these results were confirmed following propensity score matching analysis. By comparing patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib, no statistically significant difference in survival was observed.<br />Conclusions: The present analysis conducted on a large number of advanced non-viral HCC patients showed for the first time that treatment with lenvatinib is associated with a significant survival benefit compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in particular in patients with NAFLD/NASH-related HCC.<br />Competing Interests: Disclosure LR has received consulting fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BMS, Celgene, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Taiho Oncology, Zymeworks; lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi; travel expenses from Ipsen; and institutional research funding from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Zymeworks. ACG has received grants and personal fees from MSD, Eisai, Bayer, and is an advisor for MSD, Eisai, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and GSK. MK has received grants from Taiho Pharmaceuticals, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Otsuka, Takeda, Sumitomo Dainippon-Sumitomo, Daiichi Sankyo, AbbVie, Astellas Pharma, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; has received grants and personal fees from MSD, Eisai, and Bayer; and is an adviser for MSD, Eisai, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, and ONO Pharmaceutical. FPi has received consulting or lecture fees from in the last 2 years from Astrazeneca, Bayer, Bracco, EISAI, ESAOTE, Exact Sciences, IPSEN, MSD, Roche, Samsung, and Tiziana Life Sciences. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Data sharing All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this article. Further enquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.<br /> (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
2059-7029
Volume :
7
Issue :
6
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
ESMO open
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
36208496
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100591