Cargando…
Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real‐World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Regorafenib and nivolumab are drugs approved for second‐line treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sorafenib failure. However, the effectiveness of regorafenib and nivolumab following sorafenib has not been directly compared. This study retrospectively evaluated 373 patient...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7327222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32626838 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hep4.1523 |
_version_ | 1783552499473448960 |
---|---|
author | Choi, Won‐Mook Choi, Jonggi Lee, Danbi Shim, Ju Hyun Lim, Young‐Suk Lee, Han Chu Chung, Young‐Hwa Lee, Young‐Sang Park, Sook Ryun Ryu, Min‐Hee Ryoo, Baek‐Yeol Lee, So Jung Kim, Kang Mo |
author_facet | Choi, Won‐Mook Choi, Jonggi Lee, Danbi Shim, Ju Hyun Lim, Young‐Suk Lee, Han Chu Chung, Young‐Hwa Lee, Young‐Sang Park, Sook Ryun Ryu, Min‐Hee Ryoo, Baek‐Yeol Lee, So Jung Kim, Kang Mo |
author_sort | Choi, Won‐Mook |
collection | PubMed |
description | Regorafenib and nivolumab are drugs approved for second‐line treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sorafenib failure. However, the effectiveness of regorafenib and nivolumab following sorafenib has not been directly compared. This study retrospectively evaluated 373 patients with HCC who were treated with regorafenib (n = 223) or nivolumab (n = 150) after sorafenib failure between July 2017 and February 2019. Progression‐free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69‐1.06; P = 0.150), time to progression (TTP; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77‐1.19; P = 0.680), and overall survival (OS; HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64‐1.07; P = 0.154) did not differ significantly between groups of patients treated with regorafenib and nivolumab, findings consistently observed by multivariable‐adjusted, propensity score‐matched, and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses. However, the objective response rate was significantly higher in the nivolumab than in the regorafenib group (13.3% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.002). When the effectiveness of regorafenib and nivolumab was compared in nonprogressors to treatment, defined as patients who achieved complete response, partial response, or stable disease after first response evaluation, PFS (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33‐0.75; P = 0.001), TTP (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31‐0.73; P < 0.001), and OS (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31‐0.87; P = 0.013) were significantly longer in the 59 nonprogressors to nivolumab than in the 104 nonprogressors to regorafenib, findings also observed by multivariable‐adjusted and IPTW analyses. Conclusion: Survival outcomes in patients treated with regorafenib and nivolumab after sorafenib failure did not differ significantly. However, nivolumab may be more effective than regorafenib in nonprogressors. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7327222 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73272222020-07-02 Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real‐World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Choi, Won‐Mook Choi, Jonggi Lee, Danbi Shim, Ju Hyun Lim, Young‐Suk Lee, Han Chu Chung, Young‐Hwa Lee, Young‐Sang Park, Sook Ryun Ryu, Min‐Hee Ryoo, Baek‐Yeol Lee, So Jung Kim, Kang Mo Hepatol Commun Original Articles Regorafenib and nivolumab are drugs approved for second‐line treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sorafenib failure. However, the effectiveness of regorafenib and nivolumab following sorafenib has not been directly compared. This study retrospectively evaluated 373 patients with HCC who were treated with regorafenib (n = 223) or nivolumab (n = 150) after sorafenib failure between July 2017 and February 2019. Progression‐free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69‐1.06; P = 0.150), time to progression (TTP; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77‐1.19; P = 0.680), and overall survival (OS; HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64‐1.07; P = 0.154) did not differ significantly between groups of patients treated with regorafenib and nivolumab, findings consistently observed by multivariable‐adjusted, propensity score‐matched, and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses. However, the objective response rate was significantly higher in the nivolumab than in the regorafenib group (13.3% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.002). When the effectiveness of regorafenib and nivolumab was compared in nonprogressors to treatment, defined as patients who achieved complete response, partial response, or stable disease after first response evaluation, PFS (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33‐0.75; P = 0.001), TTP (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31‐0.73; P < 0.001), and OS (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31‐0.87; P = 0.013) were significantly longer in the 59 nonprogressors to nivolumab than in the 104 nonprogressors to regorafenib, findings also observed by multivariable‐adjusted and IPTW analyses. Conclusion: Survival outcomes in patients treated with regorafenib and nivolumab after sorafenib failure did not differ significantly. However, nivolumab may be more effective than regorafenib in nonprogressors. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-06-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7327222/ /pubmed/32626838 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hep4.1523 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Hepatology Communications published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., on behalf of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Choi, Won‐Mook Choi, Jonggi Lee, Danbi Shim, Ju Hyun Lim, Young‐Suk Lee, Han Chu Chung, Young‐Hwa Lee, Young‐Sang Park, Sook Ryun Ryu, Min‐Hee Ryoo, Baek‐Yeol Lee, So Jung Kim, Kang Mo Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real‐World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma |
title | Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real‐World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma |
title_full | Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real‐World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma |
title_fullStr | Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real‐World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real‐World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma |
title_short | Regorafenib Versus Nivolumab After Sorafenib Failure: Real‐World Data in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma |
title_sort | regorafenib versus nivolumab after sorafenib failure: real‐world data in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7327222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32626838 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hep4.1523 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT choiwonmook regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT choijonggi regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT leedanbi regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT shimjuhyun regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT limyoungsuk regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT leehanchu regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT chungyounghwa regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT leeyoungsang regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT parksookryun regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT ryuminhee regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT ryoobaekyeol regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT leesojung regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma AT kimkangmo regorafenibversusnivolumabaftersorafenibfailurerealworlddatainpatientswithhepatocellularcarcinoma |