贝伐单抗
阿替唑单抗
医学
内科学
危险系数
肿瘤科
不利影响
肝细胞癌
实体瘤疗效评价标准
胃肠病学
临床研究阶段
临床试验
无容量
癌症
置信区间
化疗
免疫疗法
作者
Masatoshi Kudo,Kaoru Tsuchiya,Yu‐Yun Shao,Richard S. Finn,Peter R. Galle,Michel Ducreux,Ann‐Lii Cheng,Tatsuya Yamashita,Hironori Koga,R. Take,Kyoko Yamada,T. Asakawa,Yuki Nakagawa,Masafumi Ikeda
出处
期刊:Liver cancer
[S. Karger AG]
日期:2023-11-28
卷期号:: 1-12
被引量:1
摘要
<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> The phase III IMbrave150 study established atezolizumab + bevacizumab as the global standard of care in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This exploratory analysis examined the impact of bevacizumab interruption due to bevacizumab adverse events of special interest (AESIs). <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Patients in IMbrave150 who were randomized to atezolizumab + bevacizumab and received treatment for ≥6 months (to reduce immortal time bias) were included in group A-1 if bevacizumab had ever been skipped due to bevacizumab AESIs or to group A-2 otherwise. Efficacy analyses included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by whether bevacizumab was skipped (group A-1 vs. A-2). PFS was evaluated per independent review facility (IRF)-assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1 and HCC-modified RECIST (IRF-HCC mRECIST). Safety was also evaluated. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of the 210 patients who received ≥6 months of atezolizumab + bevacizumab, 69 were assigned to group A-1 and 141 to A-2. At data cutoff (August 20, 2020), hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.64, 1.69) for group A-1 versus A-2. HR for PFS was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.55) per IRF-assessed RECIST 1.1 and 1.10 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.59; 15.5 vs. 9.7 months) per IRF-HCC mRECIST for group A-1 versus A-2. Safety profiles for atezolizumab and bevacizumab were largely similar between groups. More group A-1 patients had grade 3/4 adverse events. A separate analysis investigating the impact of immortal time bias in patients who received ≥3 months of atezolizumab + bevacizumab supported the appropriateness of the ≥6-month landmark analysis. <b><i>Discussion/Conclusion:</i></b> Efficacy was similar between patients who skipped bevacizumab due to bevacizumab AESIs and those who did not. Although this comparison was nonrandomized and exploratory, results suggest that skipping bevacizumab due to bevacizumab AESIs did not considerably impact the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI