Tislelizumab versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: Impact on health-related quality of life in RATIONALE-301 population.

Authors

null

Richard S. Finn

Department of Medicine, Hematology/Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA;

Richard S. Finn , Shukui Qin , Masatoshi Kudo , Tim Meyer , Frederic Boisserie , Songzi Li , Yaxi Chen , Gisoo Barnes , Ramil Abdrashitov , Andrew X. Zhu , Arndt Vogel

Organizations

Department of Medicine, Hematology/Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA; , Eastern Theater General Hospital of PLA, Nanjing, China; , Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka, Japan; , Department of Oncology, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; , BeiGene, Ridgefield Park, NJ; , BeiGene Ltd., Ridgefield Park, NJ; , BeiGene Ltd., Beijing, China; , BeiGene Pharmaceuticals, Jenkintown, PA; , BeiGene USA Inc, Fulton, MD; , Jiahui International Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; , Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hanover Medical School, Hannover, Germany;

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
BeiGene

Background: RATIONALE-301 (NCT03412773), a global Phase 3 study, comparing tislelizumab (TIS) to sorafenib (SOR) as 1L treatment in adult patients (pts) with unresectable HCC (uHCC), met its primary endpoint of OS non-inferiority. This analysis examined the HRQoL outcomes in pts in both arms. Methods: Systemic therapy-naïve adults with histologically confirmed uHCC were randomized 1:1 to receive TIS (200 mg IV Q3W, n=342) or SOR (400 mg PO BID, n=332). HRQoL was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-HCC18 and EQ5D-5L. A mixed model for repeated measures using key pre-specified PRO endpoints of global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL), physical functioning and fatigue scales of the QLQ-C30, and HCC18 index score, fatigue and pain scores at the key pre-specified clinical cycles 4 and 6 were performed. Time to deterioration was examined with the Kaplan-Meier method using the PRO endpoints. Results: At both cycles, TIS had better HRQoL outcomes than SOR, as indicated by LS mean differences in GHS/QoL, physical functioning, fatigue and HCC symptom index, but not for pain. TIS had a lower risk for deterioration of QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68 [95% CI, 0.49-0.94]), physical functioning (0.53 [0.39-0.73]) and fatigue (0.48 [0.37, 0.63]) as well as for deterioration in the HCC18 index (0.53 [0.34-0.81]) and fatigue (0.60 [0.46-0.80]). Both arms had a similar risk for deterioration in pain (HR 0.78 [0.56-1.09]). TIS maintained while SOR declined EQ-5D-5L VAS (general health status) scores at cycle 4 (mean change from baseline =-0.4 [SD = 14.52] vs -4.3 [12.92]) and cycle 6 (-0.2 [17.03] vs -5.4 [13.09]). Conclusions: Pts with HCC treated with 1L TIS had better HRQoL outcomes compared with pts treated with SOR, particularly in terms of fatigue and physical functioning. These results, along with effects an overall survival, response rate, and a favorable safety profile, support the benefit of TIS as a potential 1L treatment option for uHCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03412773.

Cycle 4
TIS
n=220
Mean (95% CI)
Cycle 4
SOR
n=176
Mean (95% CI)
Cycle 4
Est Mean treatment Diff (95% CI)
Cycle 6
TIS
n=166
Mean (95% CI)
Cycle 6
SOR
n=137
Mean (95% CI)
Cycle 6
Est Mean treatment Diff (95% CI)
QLQ-C30
GHS/QoL-0.7 (-3.0, 1.6)-5.1 (-7.6, -2.6)4.3 (1.4, 7.3)*-0.9 (-3.4, 1.6)-5.9 (-8.6, -3.2)5.0 (1.8, 8.2)*
Physical functioning-1.3 (-3.1, 0.5)
-7.7 (-9.6, -5.8)
6.4 (4.2, 8.6)*
-1.0 (-3.0, 0.9)-7.2 (-9.3, -5.1)6.2 (3.7, 8.6)*
Fatigue1.5 (-0.9, 3.9)9.1 (6.5, 11.7)-7.6 (-10.6, -4.7)*2.2 (-0.4, 4.8)9.8 (7.0, 12.6)-7.6 (-10.8, -4.3)*
QLQ-HCC18
Index Score1.6 (0.4, 2.9)3.9 (2.6, 5.2)-2.3 (-3.8, -0.8)*2.2 (0.6, 3.7)4.9 (3.2, 6.5)-2.7 (-4.7, -0.7)*
Fatigue1.9 (-0.4, 4.2)8.1 (5.6, 10.6)-6.2 (-9.0, -3.4)*1.8 (-0.9, 4.5)7.8 (4.9, 10.7)-6.0 (-9.4, -2.5)*
Pain1.9 (-0.3, 4.0)2.5 (0.2, 4.8)-0.6 (-3.3, 2.1)2.4 (-0.1, 4.9)2.8 (0.1, 5.4)-0.4 (-3.6, 2.9)

*p≤0.01 (nominal p).

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

2023 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Rapid Oral Abstract Session

Session Title

Rapid Abstract Session B: Cancers of the Pancreas, Small Bowel, and Hepatobiliary Tract

Track

Pancreatic Cancer,Hepatobiliary Cancer,Neuroendocrine/Carcinoid,Small Bowel Cancer

Sub Track

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Real-World Evidence

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT03412773

Citation

J Clin Oncol 41, 2023 (suppl 4; abstr 495)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2023.41.4_suppl.495

Abstract #

495

Abstract Disclosures