Survival after sorafenib: expect the unexpected

Current options and future possibilities for the systemic treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Most hepatocellular carcinoma patients could not benefit from or experience disease recurrence after curative treatments. In 2007 sorafenib demonstrated efficacy in first line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. After a decade of negative trials, in early 2019 we now have another tyrosine kinase inhibitor available in first line, lenvatinib, three other targeted therapies in second line post-sorafenib (regorafenib, cabozantinib and ramucirumab) and promising data from two immunotherapies (nivolumab and pembrolizumab). Unfortunately, no biomarkers have been identified to help guide our choice. In this short review we summarize the results of these different therapies and propose a therapeutic algorithm based on subgroup analysis. It is most likely that we will not have head-to-head comparisons in second line trials.

Tumor and circulating biomarkers in patients with second-line hepatocellular carcinoma from the randomized phase II study with tivantinib

ARQ 197-215 was a randomized placebo-controlled phase II study testing the MET inhibitor tivantinib in second-line hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. It identified tumor MET as a key biomarker in HCC.Aim of this research was to study the prognostic and predictive value of tumor (MET, the receptor tyrosine kinase encoded by the homonymous MNNG-HOS transforming gene) and circulating (MET, hepatocyte growth factor [HGF], alpha-fetoprotein [AFP], vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF]) biomarkers in second-line HCC. Tumor MET-High status was centrally assessed by immunohistochemistry. Circulating biomarkers were centrally analyzed on serum samples collected at baseline and every 4-8 weeks, using medians as cut-off to determine High/Low status. Tumor MET, tested in 77 patients, was more frequently High after (82%) versus before (40%) sorafenib. A significant interaction (p = 0.04) between tivantinib and baseline tumor MET in terms of survival was observed. Baseline circulating MET and HGF (102 patients) High status correlated with shorter survival (HR 0.61, p = 0.03, and HR 0.60, p = 0.02, respectively), while the association between AFP (104 patients) or VEGF (103 patients) status and survival was non-significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor MET levels were higher in patients treated with sorafenib. Circulating biomarkers such as MET and HGF may be prognostic in second-line HCC. These results need to be confirmed in larger randomized clinical trials.

Tivantinib, a new option for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma? The experience of Italian centers

In the last decades the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has undergone significant changes following the introduction of novel therapies such as sorafenib, which have improved patient survival. Nevertheless, HCC is still the third most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide. The evidence-based therapy for advanced HCC that is unsuitable for locoregional treatment is limited to sorafenib, with no second-line option available. This article focuses on the development of the MET inhibitor tivantinib in HCC as a promising treatment option for patients who failed sorafenib. A randomized, placebo-controlled phase II study showed activity of tivantinib in patients with high MET expression. Based on these results, the METIV-HCC phase III study in second-line treatment for MET-high patients was initiated to demonstrate the survival advantage of tivantinib compared to placebo.

Prognosis of untreated hepatocellular carcinoma

The prognosis of untreated patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is heterogeneous, and survival data were mainly obtained from control arms of randomized studies. Clinical practice data on this topic are urgently needed, so as to help plan studies and counsel patients. We assessed the prognosis of 600 untreated patients with HCC managed by the Italian Liver Cancer Group. Prognosis was evaluated by subdividing patients according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification. We also assessed the main demographic, clinical, and oncological determinants of survival in the subgroup of patients with advanced HCC (BCLC C). Advanced (BCLC C: n = 138; 23.0%) and end-stage HCC (BCLC D; n = 210; 35.0%) represented the majority of patients. Overall median survival was 9 months, and the principal cause of death was tumor progression (n = 279; 46.5%). Patients' median survival progressively and significantly decreased as BCLC stage worsened (BCLC 0: 38 months; BCLC A: 25 months; BCLC B: 10 months; BCLC C: 7 months; BCLC D: 6 months; P < 0.0001). Female gender (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.33-0.90; P = 0.018), ascites (HR = 1.81; 95% CI = 1.21-2.71; P = 0.004), and multinodular (>3) HCC (HR = 1.79; 95% CI = 1.21-2.63; P = 0.003) were independent predictors of survival in patients with advanced HCC (BCLC C).

CONCLUSION

BCLC adequately predicts the prognosis of untreated HCC patients. In untreated patients with advanced HCC, female gender, clinical decompensation of cirrhosis, and multinodular tumor are independent prognostic predictors and should be taken into account for patient stratification in future therapeutic studies.