Comparative clinical outcomes with lenvatinib versus cabozantinib post-progression on first-line immunotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Abstract

e16246 Background: First line systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) includes immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapy, with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), lenvatinib or cabozantinib, commonly used as second line therapy. However, there is limited data comparing efficacy of TKIs following first line ICI therapy. In the present study, we compared survival and risk of hospitalization in a propensity score matched analysis of patients who received lenvatinib or cabozantinib following progression on first line ICI therapy in patients with advanced HCC. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from TriNetX, a healthcare database of over 150 million patients in the United States. We identified adult patients with a history of HCC who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A+B) or durvalumab plus tremelimumab (D+T) as first line treatment. We then stratified patients by use of lenvatinib or cabozantinib in the subsequent line setting. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted between those who received lenvatinib and those who received cabozantinib, matching for demographic factors (age, sex, race), clinical characteristics (history of alcohol use, ascites, esophageal varices, or viral hepatitis), and laboratory parameters [platelets, albumin, bilirubin, INR and alpha-1-fetoprotein (AFP)]. Results: We identified 416 patients who were initially treated with either A+B or D+T, with 327 patients receiving A+B and 89 patients receiving D+T. Of these, 336 patients (80.8%) subsequently received lenvatinib and 80 patients (19.2%) received cabozantinib. Baseline characteristics of demographic factors, clinical characteristics, and laboratory parameters were comparable between patients in the lenvatinib arm and cabozantinib arm with all standardized mean differences (SMD) < 0.10. After PSM, 76 patients were included in the analyses, with all variables adequately balanced. There was no significant difference in the risk of hospitalization between those receiving lenvatinib or cabozantinib at 3 months [31.6% vs 34%, odds ratio (OR) 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-2.2]. There was also no significant difference in mOS between those receiving lenvatinib and cabozantinib [9.5 vs 9.0 months, hazard ratio (HR) 1.03, 95% CI 0.62-1.7]. Conclusions: In patients with HCC who received lenvatinib or cabozantinib as second-line therapy following first-line ICI combination therapy, we found no significant differences in rate of hospitalization or survival. These findings suggest that either option may be appropriate, and decisions may be based in side effect profile and patient preferences. Prospective studies will be important to further assess differences in patient outcomes.