Eisai and Merck announced the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the kinase inhibitor Lenvima (lenvatinib) for the first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This approval was based on results from REFLECT (Study 304), where Lenvima demonstrated a proven treatment effect on overall survival (OS) by statistical confirmation of non-inferiority, as well as statistically significant superiority and clinically meaningful improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) when compared with sorafenib in patients with previously untreated unresectable HCC.
"Unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma is an extremely difficult-to-treat cancer, with no new first-line systemic therapy options for more than a decade," said Dr. Ghassan Abou-Alfa, medical oncologist, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. "REFLECT is the first-ever positive Phase 3 trial against an active comparator in unresectable HCC. The efficacy and safety data from REFLECT are important findings for oncologists and others in the multidisciplinary teams who treat liver cancer, as well as for our patients who are affected by it."
Adverse reactions, some of which can be serious or fatal, may occur with Lenvima, including hypertension, cardiac dysfunction, arterial thromboembolic events, hepatotoxicity, renal failure or impairment, proteinuria, diarrhea, fistula formation and gastrointestinal perforation, QT interval prolongation, hypocalcemia, reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome, hemorrhagic events, impairment of thyroid stimulating hormone suppression/thyroid dysfunction, and wound healing complications. Based on the severity of the adverse reaction, Lenvima should be monitored, withheld or discontinued. Based on its mechanism of action and data from animal reproduction studies, Lenvima can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman. Females of reproductive potential should be advised to use effective contraception. For more information, see "Important Safety Information" below.
REFLECT showed that Lenvima achieved the primary endpoint, demonstrating a treatment effect on OS by statistical confirmation of non-inferiority to sorafenib. Patients treated with LENVIMA experienced a median OS of 13.6 months compared to 12.3 months with sorafenib (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.79–1.06). The OS analysis was conducted when 351 events had occurred in the Lenvima arm and 350 events had occurred in the sorafenib arm, as prespecified in the statistical analysis plan. In addition, Lenvima showed statistically significant superiority and clinically meaningful improvements in the secondary efficacy endpoints of PFS and ORR, as confirmed by a blinded independent imaging review (IIR):
Median PFS was doubled with Lenvima compared to sorafenib: 7.3 months versus 3.6 months (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.55–0.75; p<0.001) per blinded independent imaging review based on mRECIST criteria, and 7.3 months with LENVIMA versus 3.6 months with sorafenib (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.56–0.77) per RECIST 1.1.
Lenvima showed nearly 3.5 times the ORR of sorafenib: 41% (95% CI: 36-45%) vs. 12% (95% CI: 10-16%) per blinded independent imaging review based on mRECIST criteria, respectively (p<0.001), and 19% (95% CI: 15-22%) with Lenvima versus 7% (95% CI: 4-9%) with sorafenib per RECIST 1.1.
Per mRECIST: Treatment with Lenvima resulted in complete response (CR) = 2.1% (n=10) vs. 0.8% (n=4) with sorafenib; treatment with Lenvima resulted in partial response (PR) = 38.5% (n=184) vs. 11.6% (n=55) with sorafenib
Per RECIST 1.1: Treatment with Lenvima resulted in CR = 0.4% (n=2) vs. 0.2% (n=1) with sorafenib; treatment with Lenvima resulted in PR = 18.4% (n=88) vs. 6.3% (n=30) with sorafenib
In addition, median time to progression (TTP) was doubled with Lenvima compared to sorafenib: 7.4 months versus 3.7 months (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.51–0.71; p<0.0001) per blinded independent imaging review based on mRECIST criteria, and 7.4 months with LENVIMA versus 3.7 months with sorafenib (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.51–0.72; p<0.0001) per RECIST 1.1. Time to progression is defined as time from randomization to radiological progression. Deaths during follow-up without evidence of radiological progression are censored. This differs from PFS and is less correlative to overall survival.
...
(All Rights Reserved)