Donafenib Versus Sorafenib in First-Line Treatment of Unresectable or Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Controlled Phase II-III Trial

Shukui Qin, Feng Bi, Shanzhi Gu, Yuxian Bai, Zhendong Chen, Zishu Wang, Jieer Ying, Yinying Lu, Zhiqiang Meng, Hongming Pan, Ping Yang, Helong Zhang, Xi Chen, Aibing Xu, Chengxu Cui, Bo Zhu, Jian Wu, Xiaoli Xin, Jufeng Wang, Jinlu Shan, Junhui Chen, Zhendong Zheng, Li Xu, Xiaoyu Wen, Zhenyu You, Zhenggang Ren, Xiufeng Liu, Meng Qiu, Liqing Wu, Feng Chen, Shukui Qin, Feng Bi, Shanzhi Gu, Yuxian Bai, Zhendong Chen, Zishu Wang, Jieer Ying, Yinying Lu, Zhiqiang Meng, Hongming Pan, Ping Yang, Helong Zhang, Xi Chen, Aibing Xu, Chengxu Cui, Bo Zhu, Jian Wu, Xiaoli Xin, Jufeng Wang, Jinlu Shan, Junhui Chen, Zhendong Zheng, Li Xu, Xiaoyu Wen, Zhenyu You, Zhenggang Ren, Xiufeng Liu, Meng Qiu, Liqing Wu, Feng Chen

Abstract

Purpose: Donafenib, a novel multikinase inhibitor and a deuterated sorafenib derivative, has shown efficacy in phase Ia and Ib hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) studies. This study compared the efficacy and safety of donafenib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for advanced HCC.

Patients and methods: This open-label, randomized, parallel-controlled, multicenter phase II-III trial enrolled patients with unresectable or metastatic HCC, a Child-Pugh score ≤ 7, and no prior systemic therapy from 37 sites across China. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral donafenib (0.2 g) or sorafenib (0.4 g) twice daily until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), tested for noninferiority and superiority. Efficacy was primarily assessed in the full analysis set (FAS), and safety was assessed in all treated patients.

Results: Between March 21, 2016, and April 16, 2018, 668 patients (intention-to-treat) were randomly assigned to donafenib and sorafenib treatment arms; the FAS included 328 and 331 patients, respectively. Median OS was significantly longer with donafenib than sorafenib treatment (FAS; 12.1 v 10.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.831; 95% CI, 0.699 to 0.988; P = .0245); donafenib also exhibited superior OS outcomes versus sorafenib in the intention-to-treat population. The median progression-free survival was 3.7 v 3.6 months (P = .0570). The objective response rate was 4.6% v 2.7% (P = .2448), and the disease control rate was 30.8% v 28.7% (FAS; P = .5532). Drug-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in significantly fewer patients receiving donafenib than sorafenib (125 [38%] v 165 [50%]; P = .0018).

Conclusion: Donafenib showed superiority over sorafenib in improving OS and has favorable safety and tolerability in Chinese patients with advanced HCC, showing promise as a potential first-line monotherapy for these patients.

Conflict of interest statement

Zhenggang RenConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Roche, Merck Sharp & DohmeLiqing WuEmployment: Suzhou Zelgen Biopharmaceuticals Co, Ltd.Stock and other ownership interests: Suzhou Zelgen Biopharmaceuticals Co, Ltd.No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Figures

FIG 1.
FIG 1.
Patient disposition from March 21, 2016, to September 30, 2019 (cutoff date). PD, progressive disease.
FIG 2.
FIG 2.
Kaplan-Meier analysis of OS in the (A) FAS and (B) ITT populations, and (C) Kaplan-Meier analysis of PFS in the FAS. FAS, full analysis set; HR, hazard ratio; ITT, intention-to-treat; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival.
FIG A1.
FIG A1.
Kaplan-Meier analysis of OS (PPS). HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival; PPS, per-protocol set.
FIG A2.
FIG A2.
Forest plot of HRs for OS on the basis of subgroups. AFP, alpha-fetoprotein; BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; HBV, hepatitis B virus; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival.
FIG A3.
FIG A3.
Kaplan-Meier analysis of TTP (FAS). FAS, full analysis set; HR, hazard ratio; TTP, time to progression.

References

    1. Bray F Ferlay J Soerjomataram I, et al. : Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68:394-424, 2018
    1. Chen W Zheng R Baade PD, et al. : Cancer statistics in China, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin 66:115-132, 2016
    1. European Association for the Study of the Liver: EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 69:182-236, 2018
    1. Yang JD, Roberts LR: Hepatocellular carcinoma: A global view. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 7:448-458, 2010
    1. Fan JH Wang JB Jiang Y, et al. : Attributable causes of liver cancer mortality and incidence in China. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 14:7251-7256, 2013
    1. Yang JD Hainaut P Gores GJ, et al. : A global view of hepatocellular carcinoma: Trends, risk, prevention and management. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 16:589-604, 2019
    1. Qin S Bai Y Lim HY, et al. : Randomized, multicenter, open-label study of oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil/leucovorin versus doxorubicin as palliative chemotherapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma from Asia. J Clin Oncol 31:3501-3508, 2013
    1. Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) : Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Primary Liver Cancer (ed 2020). Beijing, China, 2020
    1. Li X Qiu M Wang S, et al. : A Phase I dose-escalation, pharmacokinetics and food-effect study of oral donafenib in patients with advanced solid tumours. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 85:593-604, 2020
    1. Roche : Investor Update, 2020.
    1. Cainap C Qin S Huang WT, et al. : Linifanib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Results of a randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 33:172-179, 2015
    1. Cheng AL Kang YK Chen Z, et al. : Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 10:25-34, 2009
    1. Cheng AL Kang YK Lin DY, et al. : Sunitinib versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular cancer: Results of a randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 31:4067-4075, 2013
    1. Johnson PJ Qin S Park JW, 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 31:3517-3524, 2013
    1. Kudo M Finn RS Qin S, et al. : Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet 391:1163-1173, 2018
    1. Llovet JM, Montal R, Villanueva A: Randomized trials and endpoints in advanced HCC: Role of PFS as a surrogate of survival. J Hepatol 70:1262-1277, 2019
    1. Yau T Park JW Finn RS, et al. : CheckMate 459: A randomized, multi-center phase III study of nivolumab (NIVO) vs sorafenib (SOR) as first-line (1L) treatment in patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). Ann Oncol 30:2, 2019
    1. Zhu AX Rosmorduc O Evans TR, et al. : SEARCH: A phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sorafenib plus erlotinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 33:559-566, 2015
    1. Finn RS Qin S Ikeda M, et al. : Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 382:1894-1905, 2020
    1. Ren Z Zhu K Kang H, et al. : Randomized controlled trial of the prophylactic effect of urea-based cream on sorafenib-associated hand-foot skin reactions in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 33:894-900, 2015
    1. Bi F Qiu M Chai X, et al. : A multicenter phase II study of donafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 35, 2017. (suppl; abstr e15682)
    1. Qin S: Primary liver cancer diagnosis and treatment expert panel of the Chinese Ministry of Health: Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of primary liver cancer (2011 edition). Chin Clin Oncol 1:10, 2012
    1. Bruix J, Sherman M: American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: An update. Hepatology 53:1020-1022, 2011
    1. Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V: Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 359:378-390, 2008
    1. Bruix J, da Fonseca LG, Reig M: Insights into the success and failure of systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 16:617-630, 2019
    1. Russak EM, Bednarczyk EM: Impact of deuterium substitution on the pharmacokinetics of pharmaceuticals. Ann Pharmacother 53:211-216, 2019
    1. Furuse J Ishii H Nakachi K, et al. : Phase I study of sorafenib in Japanese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Sci 99:159-165, 2008
    1. Minami H Kawada K Ebi H, et al. : Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of sorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor, in Japanese patients with advanced refractory solid tumors. Cancer Sci 99:1492-1498, 2008
    1. US Food and Drug Administration : Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Approval Package for: Application Number NDA 21-923; Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review. Nexavar, 2005
    1. Marisi G Cucchetti A Ulivi P, et al. : Ten years of sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: Are there any predictive and/or prognostic markers? World J Gastroenterol 24:4152-4163, 2018

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe