Linifanib Versus Sorafenib in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial

C Cainap, SK Qin, WT Huang, IJ Chung, HM Pan, Y Cheng, M Kudo, YK Kang, PJ Chen, HC Toh, V Gorbunova, Ferry Eskens, J Qian, MD McKee, JL Ricker, DM Carlson, S El-Nowiem

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

504 Citations (Scopus)
39 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Purpose This open-label phase III trial evaluated efficacy and tolerability of linifanib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) without prior systemic therapy. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned in a 1: 1 ratio to linifanib 17.5 mg once daily or sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Patients were stratified by region (Outside Asia, Japan, and rest of Asia), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score (ECOG PS; 0 or 1), vascular invasion or extrahepatic spread (yes or no), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection (yes or no). The primary end point of the study was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were time to progression (TTP) and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Results We randomly assigned 1,035 patients (median age, 60 years; Asian, 66.6%; ECOG PS 0, 65.2%; HBV, 49.1%; vascular invasion or extrahepatic spread, 70.1%). Median OS was 9.1 months on the linifanib arm (95% CI, 8.1 to 10.2) and 9.8 months on the sorafenib arm (95% CI, 8.3 to 11.0; hazard ratio [HR], 1.046; 95% CI, 0.896 to 1.221). For prespecified stratification subgroups, OS HRs ranged from 0.793 to 1.119 and the 95% CI contained 1.0. Median TTP was 5.4 months on the linifanib arm (95% CI, 4.2 to 5.6) and 4.0 months on the sorafenib arm (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.2; HR, 0.759; 95% CI, 0.643 to 0.895; P = .001). Best response rate was 13.0% on the linifanib arm versus 6.9% on the sorafenib arm. Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs); serious AEs; and AEs leading to discontinuation, dose interruption, and reduction were more frequent with linifanib (all P = .001). Conclusion Linifanib and sorafenib had similar OS in advanced HCC. Predefined superiority and non-inferiority OS boundaries were not met for linifanib and the study failed to meet the primary end point. TTP and ORR favored linifanib; safety results favored sorafenib. (C) 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)172-U77
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume33
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Research programs

  • EMC MM-03-86-08

Cite this