Target - Therapie des HCC
| Studie | Name | OS | PFS | Bemerkungen |
| Qin 2021 (9) | Donafenib | 12,1 Mo | 3,7 Mo | Donafenib überlegen |
| Sorafenib | 10,3 Mo | 3,6 Mo | ||
| SHARP-Studie | Sorafenib | 10,7 Mo | 5,5 Mo | Sorafenib überlegen |
| Placebo | 7,9Mo | 2,8 Mo | OS: HR = 0,69 (95-%-CI, 0,55-0,87); p = 0,00058. PFS: HR = 0,58 (95-%-CI, 0,45-0,74); p < 0,001 | |
| ASIA-PACIFIC-Studie | Sorafenib | 6,5 Mo | 2,8 Mo | Sorafenib überlegen |
| Placebo | 4,2 Mo | 1,4 Mo | OS: HR = 0,68 (95-%-CI, 0,50-0,93); p = 0,014. PFS: HR = 0,57 (95-%-CI, 0,42-0,79); p = 0,0005 | |
| SUN-Studie (3) | Sunitinib | 7,2 Mo | 3,8 Mo | Sorafenib überlegen |
| Sorafenib | 10,2 Mo | 4,1 Mo | OS: HR = 1,30 (95-%-CI, 1,13-1,5); p = 0,001. PFS: HR =1,13 (95-%-CI, 0,98-1,31); p = 0,16 | |
| BRISK-FL-Studie (5) | Brivanib | 9,5 Mo | 4,1 Mo | Brivanib nicht unterlegen |
| Sorafenib | 9,9 Mo | 4,2 Mo | OS: HR = 1,05 (95-%-CI, 0,94-1,23); p = 0,31. PFS: HR =1,01 (95-%-CI, 0,88-1,16); p = 0,8 | |
| LIGHT-Studie | Linifanib | 9,1 Mo | 5,4 Mo | Linifinib nicht unterlegen |
| Sorafenib | 9,8 Mo | 4 Mo | OS: HR =1,04 (95-%-CI, 0,89-1,22); p = ns. PFS: HR = 0,76 (95-%-CI, 0,64-0,89); p < 0,001 | |
| SEARCH-Studie | Sorafenib-Erlotinib | 9,5 Mo | 3,2 Mo | Sorafenib-Erlotinib nicht besser als Sorafenib allein |
| Sorafenib | 8,5 Mo | 4,0 Mo | OS: HR = 0,92 (95-%-CI, 0,78-1,1); p = 0,2. PFS: HR = 1,13 (95-%-CI, 0,94-1,36); p = 0,91 |
| Studie | Name | OS | PFS | Bemerkungen |
| BRISK-PS-Studie (4) | Brivanib | 9,4 Mo | 4,2 Mo | PFS: Brivanib überlegen. OS: n.s. |
| Placebo | 8,2 Mo | 2,7 Mo | OS HR = 0,89 (95-%-CI, 0,69-1,15); p = 0,33. PFS: HR = 0,56 (95-%-CI, 0,42-0,78); p = 0,001 | |
| EVOLVE-Studie (6) | Everolimus | 7,6 Mo | 2,9 Mo | Everolimus nicht besser als Placebo |
| Placebo | 7,3 Mo | 2,6 Mo | OS: HR = 1,05 (95-%-CI, 0,86-1,27); p = 0,67 2,9. PFS: HR = 0,93 (95-%-CI, 0,75-1,15); p = ns | |
| REACH-Studie | Ramucirumab | 9,2 Mo | 2,8 Mo | PFS: Ramucirumab überlegen. OS: n.s. |
| Placebo | 7,6 Mo | 2,1 Mo | OS: HR = 0,866 (95-%-CI, 0,717-1,046); p = 0,1391. PFS: HR = 0,625 (95-%-CI, 0,522-0,750; p< 0,0001 |
Quelle
Hepatozelluläres Karzinom: Individuelles Gesamtkonzept.
Dtsch Arztebl 111(2014) Supl. 4-6
2.) Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V, Hilgard P, Gane E, Blanc JF, de Oliveira AC, et al.:
Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.
N Engl J Med 359(2008): 378–90
3.) Cheng AL, Kang YK, Lin DY, Park JW, Kudo M, Qin S, Chung HC, et al.:
Sunitinib versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular cancer: results of a randomized phase III trial.
J Clin Oncol 31(2013): 4067–75
4.) Llovet JM, Decaens T, Raoul JL, Boucher E, Kudo M, Chang C, Kang YK, et al.:
Brivanib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were intolerant to sorafenib or for whom sorafenib failed: results from the randomized phase III BRISK-PS study.
J Clin Oncol 31(2013): 3509–16
5.) Johnson PJ, Qin S, Park JW, Poon RT, Raoul JL, Philip PA, Hsu CH, et al.:
Brivanib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with unresectable, advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: results from the randomized phase III BRISK-FL study.
J Clin Oncol 31(2013): 3517–24
6.) Zhu AX, Kudo M, Assenat E, Cattan S, Kang YK, Lim HY, Poon RT, et al.:
Effect of everolimus on survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after failure of sorafenib: the EVOLVE-1 randomized clinical trial.
JAMA 312(2014): 57–67
7.) O’Neil BH, Goff LW, Kauh JS, Strosberg JR, Bekaii-Saab TS, Lee RM, Kazi A, et al.:
Phase II study of the mitogen-activated protein kinase 1/2 inhibitor selumetinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.
J Clin Oncol 29(2011): 2350–6
8.) Santoro A, Rimassa L, Borbath I, Daniele B, Salvagni S, Van Laethem JL, Van Vlierberghe H, et al.:
Tivantinib for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2 study.
Lancet Oncol 14(2013): 55–63
9.) Qin S, et al.:
Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Controlled Phase II-III Trial.
J Clin Oncol 2021;39:3002-3011
