Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Pick the Winner-Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Versus Immuno-oncology Agent-Based Combinations
The treatment landscape for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma has changed dramatically over the past 4 years. We now have numerous options for patients in frontline, second-line, and beyond. The most significant impact has been the introduction of immunotherapy into our treatment paradigms. We now h...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical oncology 2022-08, Vol.40 (24), p.JCO2102605-2773 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The treatment landscape for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma has changed dramatically over the past 4 years. We now have numerous options for patients in frontline, second-line, and beyond. The most significant impact has been the introduction of immunotherapy into our treatment paradigms. We now have regimens that induce consistent double-digit objective response rates and markedly improve overall survival (OS) with favorable side effect profiles. The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab has demonstrated that the combination of targeting programmed death-ligand 1 and the vascular endothelial growth factor axis can improve outcomes versus sorafenib in the IMBrave150 study. Results from the COSMIC-312 study evaluating the multikinase vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, hepatocyte growth factor receptor, and
tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitor cabozantinib in combination with atezolizumab improved progression-free survival versus sorafenib, but at this time, there is no improvement in OS and response rates were lower than expected. Additional data with similar combinations are awaited on the basis of encouraging early-phase data. In addition, the combination of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 and programmed cell death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 targeting is yielding similar promising early results, and the phase III HIMALAYA study met its primary end points of improving OS versus sorafenib for durvalumab plus tremelimumab and demonstrated noninferiority for single-agent durvalumab as well. However, this combination did not improve progression-free survival and objective response rates with this combination did not seem significantly different from that with single-agent durvalumab. Although there are still knowledge gaps in this rapidly changing landscape, we will address some of the important questions relevant to making therapeutic decisions in the management of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the modern era on the basis of our current knowledge of the safety and efficacy of these evolving regimens. The goal is to provide clinicians with the knowledge needed to optimize outcomes for their patients. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0732-183X 1527-7755 |
DOI: | 10.1200/jco.21.02605 |