First line atezolizumab + bevacizumab (atezo/bev) or durvalumab ± tremelimumab (durva±treme) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): A real world, multi-institutional retrospective cohort study.

I Ioannis Kournoutas (Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN) P Paulina S Marell (Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN) A Anina Peersen (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN) G Garima Gupta (Pangaea Data, London, United Kingdom) M Mehmet Akce (O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL) J Ju Dong Yang P Pin-Jung Chen (Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA) N Nikolas Naleid (H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL) A Amit Mahipal (Department of Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH) V Vaibhav Sahai S Scott Thompson (University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus) Z Zhaohui Jin S Sudhakar Venkatesh (Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN) M Mitesh J. Borad (Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ) H Hani M. Babiker (Division of Hematology Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL) T Tanios S. Bekaii-Saab R Robert R. McWilliams T Thorvardur Ragnar Halfdanarson (Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN) F Fang-Shu Ou (Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN) N Nguyen H. Tran (Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL)

Abstract

532 Background: HCC accounts for 80% of primary liver cancers, and worldwide, is the third common cause of cancer-related death. Two FDA approved 1st line systemic treatment options include atezo/bev and durva ± treme. Herein we report outcomes of these regimens in the 1st line setting via a real-world, multi-institutional retrospective cohort study. Methods: We reviewed clinical outcomes of patients (pts) who initiated 1st line atezo/bev or durva ± treme for unresectable HCC between March 2017 and February 2024, across 5 institutions (Mayo Clinic, University of Alabama, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and University of Michigan). Time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Best (objective) response was tabulated. Multivariable analyses were performed using Cox models and logistic regression for time-to-event and binary outcomes, respectively, while adjusting for age, sex, race, HCC etiology, Child-Pugh class, and ALBI grade. Results: A total of 433 HCC pts were included; atezo/bev (336), durva ± treme (97). Median age at the start of therapy was 68 years; 77% were male, 82% were Caucasian. Etiologies of HCC were viral hepatitis (38%), MASLD (20%), alcohol (10%), non-viral multifactorial (10%), or unknown (22%). Pts receiving durva ± treme were less likely to have cirrhosis (11% vs. 28%, p<0.01) but similar in terms of macrovascular invasion (63% vs. 58%, p=0.35) compared to pts receiving atezo/bev. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were similar between the two groups, with the most common being disease progression - atezo/bev (56%) and durva ± treme (47%). The differences in clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly and remained consistent after multivariable adjustment. (Table, atezo/bev as the reference group). Outcomes were significantly different between Child-Pugh classes (CP: A,B,C) respectively, OS: 19.0 m, 6.4 m, 1.9 m (p<0.001); TTF: 6.1 m, 2.7 m, 1.3 m (p<0.001). Conclusions: In this real-world retrospective cohort study of unresectable HCC, the differences in overall survival, objective response, and time to treatment failure were not statistically significant between atezo/bev and durva ± treme in the 1st line setting. Outcome Atezo/bev Durva±treme Univariate p-value Multivariable adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) Multivariable adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) Overall Survival, Median (month) 14.0 14.6 0.77 0.78 (0.54-1.14) --- Time to Treatment Failure, Median (month) 4.9 4.1 0.71 0.95 (0.72-1.26) --- Objective response, % 26.3% 21.1% 0.31 --- 0.78 (0.43-1.39)

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 43, Issue 4_suppl
Published February 01, 2025
Pages 532-532
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (20)

I

Ioannis Kournoutas

Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

P

Paulina S Marell

Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

A

Anina Peersen

Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN

G

Garima Gupta

Pangaea Data, London, United Kingdom

M

Mehmet Akce

O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL

J

Ju Dong Yang

P

Pin-Jung Chen

Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA

N

Nikolas Naleid

H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL

A

Amit Mahipal

Department of Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

V

Vaibhav Sahai

S

Scott Thompson

University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus

Z

Zhaohui Jin

S

Sudhakar Venkatesh

Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

M

Mitesh J. Borad

Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ

H

Hani M. Babiker

Division of Hematology Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL

T

Tanios S. Bekaii-Saab

R

Robert R. McWilliams

T

Thorvardur Ragnar Halfdanarson

Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

F

Fang-Shu Ou

Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN

N

Nguyen H. Tran

Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL