IMbrave150: Exploratory analysis to examine the association between treatment response and overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with atezolizumab (atezo) + bevacizumab (bev) versus sorafenib (sor).

Authors

null

Michel Ducreux

Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Villejuif, France

Michel Ducreux , Andrew X. Zhu , Ann-Lii Cheng , Peter R. Galle , Masafumi Ikeda , Alan Nicholas , Wendy Verret , Lindong Li , Vincent E. Gaillard , Riccardo Lencioni , Richard S. Finn

Organizations

Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Villejuif, France, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States and Jiahui International Cancer Center, Jiahui Health, Shanghai, China, National Taiwan University Cancer Center and National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, Roche Product Development, Shanghai, China, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., Basel, Switzerland, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd

Background: Based on IMbrave150 (NCT03434379) results, atezo + bev has been approved in > 60 countries for pts with unresectable HCC who have not received prior systemic therapy (Finn RS, NEJM 2020). OS and objective response rate (ORR) improvements with atezo + bev vs sor were maintained with an additional 12 mo of follow up since primary analysis. Updated median OS was 19.2 mo with atezo + bev vs 13.4 mo with sor (stratified HR, 0.66; 95% CI: 0.52, 0.85). Updated ORR was 30% with atezo + bev vs 11% with sor by independently-assessed (IRF) RECIST 1.1 (Finn RS, ASCO GI 2021). Here, we report an exploratory analysis examining the association of response by RECIST 1.1 with OS and independent predictors of survival. Methods: Pts in this Ph III study were systemic treatment–naive with unresectable HCC, ≥1 measurable untreated lesion (RECIST 1.1), Child-Pugh class A liver function and ECOG PS 0/1. Pts were randomized 2:1 to atezo 1200 mg IV q3w + bev 15 mg/kg IV q3w or sor 400 mg bid until unacceptable toxicity or loss of clinical benefit per investigator. ORR was determined by IRF RECIST 1.1. Kaplan-Meier analyses of OS by response status were conducted without landmark and with 4- and 6-mo landmarks. Multivariate analysis was conducted using Cox modeling with time-dependent covariate (responder [yes/no]) with backwards elimination. These analyses only included pts treated with atezo + bev. Results: IMbrave150 enrolled 501 pts, including 336 treated with atezo + bev. Median follow-up was 15.6 mo. OS was longer in pts with confirmed response per RECIST 1.1 (responders, CR + PR) vs non-responders by Kaplan-Meier analyses without landmark and with 4- and 6-mo landmarks (Table). By multivariate analysis, in addition to responder (yes/no), 5 of the 10 initially included predictors of OS remained in the final Cox model (P< 0.10): ECOG PS (0/1), geographic region (Asia excluding Japan/rest of the world), etiology (hepatitis B/hepatitis C/non-viral), macrovascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread (yes/no), and baseline alpha-fetoprotein ( < 400 ng/mL/≥400 ng/mL). Conclusions: Atezo + bev is the new standard of care for pts with previously untreated, unresectable HCC. Here we showed that in IMbrave150 pts treated with atezo + bev, response by RECIST 1.1 was associated with OS, suggesting that confirmed response is an independent predictor of OS in these pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03434379

Kaplan-Meier analyses of the association between confirmed response by RECIST 1.1 and OS.

Analysis
Responders
n
Median OS

(95% CI), mo
HRa
(95% CI)
No landmark
Yes
100
NE (26.2, NE)
0.20 (0.13, 0.32)

No
222
14.7 (12.5, 17.0)

4-mo landmark
Yes
44
NE (NE)
0.23 (0.11, 0.47)

No
258
15.1 (12.8, 19.6)

6-mo landmark
Yes
68
NE (20.2, NE)
0.27 (0.15, 0.47)

No
208
13.8 (11.1, 17.7)

NE, not estimable. a Responders vs non-responders in each analysis.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2021 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Gastroesophageal, Pancreatic, and Hepatobiliary

Track

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Gastroesophageal, Pancreatic, and Hepatobiliary

Sub Track

Hepatobiliary Cancer

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT03434379

Citation

J Clin Oncol 39, 2021 (suppl 15; abstr 4071)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.4071

Abstract #

4071

Poster Bd #

Online Only

Abstract Disclosures