Therapeutic efficacy of lenvatinib as third‐line treatment after regorafenib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma progression. Issue 8 (5th May 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hiraoka, Atsushi; Kumada, Takashi; Hatanaka, Takeshi; Tada, Toshifumi; Kariyama, Kazuya; Tani, Joji; Fukunishi, Shinya; Atsukawa, Masanori; Hirooka, Masashi; Tsuji, Kunihiko; Ishikawa, Toru; Takaguchi, Koichi; Itobayashi, Ei; Tajiri, Kazuto; Shimada, Noritomo; Shibata, Hiroshi; Ochi, Hironori; Kawata, Kazuhito; Yasuda, Satoshi; Toyoda, Hidenori; Chikara, Ogawa; Tamai, Tsutomu; Kakizaki, Satoru; Tojima, Hiroki; Nagashima, Tamon; Ueno, Takashi; Takizawa, Daichi; Naganuma, Atsushi; Ohama, Hideko; Nouso, Kazuhiro; Tsutsui, Akemi; Nagano, Takuya; Itokawa, Norio; Okubo, Tomomi; Arai, Taeang; Imai, Michitaka; Koizumi, Yohei; Nakamura, Shinichiro; Joko, Kouji; Michitaka, Kojiro; Hiasa, Yoichi; Kudo, Masatoshi;
• Is Part Of: Hepatology research. Volume 51:Issue 8(2021)
• Page Start: 880
• Page End: 889
• Publication Date: 2021-05-05
• Subjects: hepatocellular carcinoma -- lenvatinib -- regorafenib -- sequential treatment -- sorafenib; Liver -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Liver Diseases -- Periodicals; Foie -- Maladies -- Périodiques; 616.362
• DOI: 10.1111/hepr.13644
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1386-6346

Abstract

Abstract: Aim: Multiple molecular agents have been developed for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. This study aimed to elucidate the clinical efficacy of sequential treatment with lenvatinib after regorafenib failure. Methods: From June 2017 to October 2020, 63 patients with Child–Pugh A and treated with regorafenib followed by sorafenib were enrolled (median age 71 years, 52 men, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer B:C = 23:40). They were divided into two groups, those treated with lenvatinib after regorafenib treatment (R‐L group, n = 47) and those who did not receive lenvatinib after regorafenib (non‐R‐L group, n = 16). Prognostic factors were retrospectively analyzed after adjustment with inverse probability weighting. Results: Serum albumin level at the start of regorafenib and reasons for discontinuation of regorafenib were significantly different between the R‐L and non‐R‐L groups, whereas the albumin‐bilirubin score, Child–Pugh class, and tumor burden were not. Progression‐free survival was also not significantly different (median 4.1 vs. 3.8 months, p = 0.586). As for overall survival, the R‐L group showed better prognosis after introducing regorafenib and after introducing sorafenib, following inverse probability weighting adjustment (MST 19.7 vs. 10.3 months, 33.8 vs. 15.3 months, p < 0.001 and p = 0.022, respectively). Modified albumin‐bilirubin grade 2b (score >−2.27) at the start of regorafenib (HR 2.074, p = 0.041) and the presence of lenvatinib treatment after regorafenib failure (HR 0.355, p = 0.004) were found to be significant prognostic factors in Cox proportional hazards multivariate analysis, after inverse probability weighting adjustment. Conclusion: These results show that lenvatinib is a good sequential treatment option after progression under regorafenib therapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients with better hepatic reserve function.