Real-world outcomes of first-line therapies for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States.
Abstract
4079 Background: Unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) remains a significant clinical challenge despite advances in systemic therapies. Real-world evidence complements clinical trials by evaluating treatment effectiveness in diverse patient populations. This study assessed real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (rwOS) for current standard-of-care first-line (1L) systemic therapies for uHCC. Methods: This retrospective study used the Flatiron Health database and included untreated uHCC patients diagnosed on or after January 1, 2018, who initiated 1L systemic therapies (atezolizumab + bevacizumab [atezo + bev], lenvatinib, sorafenib, or durvalumab + tremelimumab [durva + treme]) on or after May 29, 2020. Baseline characteristics, including ECOG status, ALBI grade, and demographic factors, were reported across cohorts. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate rwPFS and rwOS for each cohort. Results: A total of 1,539 patients were included: atezo + bev (n = 1,070), durva + treme (n = 238), lenvatinib (n = 139), and sorafenib (n = 92). Baseline characteristics were similar across cohorts. Most patients had ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) status 0–1 (57%–70%), with 15%–21% having ECOG 2+. ALBI (Albumin-Bilirubin) grade 2 was observed in 41%–60% of patients, while ALBI grade 3+ was present in 8.1%–17%. The median rwPFS for atezo + bev, lenvatinib, and durva + treme were similar at 4.7 months (95% CI: 4.1–5.4), 4.6 months (95% CI: 3.8–5.5), and 4.2 months (95% CI: 3.2–5.7), respectively. Sorafenib had a significantly shorter rwPFS at 3.0 months (95% CI: 2.5–4.4). The median rwOS for atezo + bev, lenvatinib, and sorafenib were similar at 10.7 months (95% CI: 9.5–11.8), 10.4 months (95% CI: 7.8–13.4), and 10.5 months (95% CI: 5.6–14.9). Durva + treme had a significantly shorter rwOS at 7.6 months (95% CI: 5.7–18.6). At 12 months, the survival probabilities for rwOS were 45% (95% CI: 42%, 48%) for Atezo + Bev, 41% (95% CI: 33%, 50%) for Durva+Treme, 45% (95% CI: 36%, 55%) for lenvatinib, and 43% (95% CI: 33%, 56%) for sorafenib. At 24 months, survival probabilities for rwOS were 27% (95% CI: 24%, 31%) for Atezo + Bev, 26% (95% CI: 19%, 36%) for lenvatinib, 21% (95% CI: 12%, 35%) for sorafenib, and data were undetermined for Durva + Treme. Conclusions: Findings from this real-world analysis show that atezo + bev demonstrated comparable outcomes versus lenvatinib, and potential benefits in rwPFS versus sorafenib and rwOS versus durva + treme. The median rwOS was approximately 10 months across treatments and highlights the need for novel therapies to improve long-term survival in uHCC. These results underscore the importance of evaluating treatment effectiveness in real-world populations, which may differ from clinical trial cohorts. Further analyses are warranted to explore these findings and optimize treatment strategies for uHCC.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (8)
Masafumi Ikeda
Sumie Kakehi
Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ
Jeremy Snider
4Flatiron Health, New York, United States
Lisa Rosenblatt
Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ
Ronald Matteotti
Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ
Daria Salyakina
Flatiron Health West, San Francisco, CA
Lauren Michelle Damato
Flatiron Health, New York, NY
Matthias Pinter