CheckMate 459: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a randomized, multicenter phase III study of nivolumab (NIVO) versus sorafenib (SOR) as first-line (1L) treatment in patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC).
Julien Edeline, Thomas Yau, Joong‐Won Park, Masatoshi Kudo, Kwang‐Hyub Han, Philippe Mathurin, Philippe Merle, Richard S. Finn, Tobias Müller, Fiona Taylor, Mike Greenwood, Damir Begic, Marina Tschaika, Christine Yip, Emma Pranschke, Kim Cocks, Gwilym Thompson, Steven I. Blum, Tami Wisniewski, Bruno Sangro
Abstract
483 Background: SOR is approved as 1L therapy for pts with aHCC, but there is still an unmet need to help improve or maintain HRQoL. This phase 3 study compared HRQoL of NIVO vs SOR as 1L therapy in pts with aHCC as an exploratory endpoint. Methods: FACT-Hep was administered cycle 1, day 1 and every other cycle. The effect of NIVO vs SOR on HRQoL using FACT-Hep was assessed via repeated measures mixed models (MMRM). Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox proportional-hazards models determined between-treatment differences in time to first and time until definitive deterioration (TTD/TUDD) based on prespecified thresholds for minimally important differences. The GP5 item from FACT-Hep was used to assess the burden associated with treatment side effects. Results: 743 pts with aHCC were randomized to NIVO (n = 371) or SOR (n = 372). Median OS was 16.4 mo for NIVO, 14.7 mo for SOR (HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.72–1.02]; P = 0.0752). ORR was 15% for NIVO, 7% for SOR (OR 2.41 [95% CI 1.48–3.92]). HRQoL scores were completed at baseline by 94.6% and 92.5% of participants, respectively, and were similar (FACT-Hep total: NIVO 140.7 [SD 21.5] and SOR 140. 6 [SD 19.1]. Questionnaire compliance rates exceeded 70% at most visits. MMRM analyses yielded clinically meaningful and statistically significant least squares means differences favoring NIVO on FACT-Hep total (10.1 [95% CI 7.3–13.0]), physical well-being (PWB; 2.0 [95% CI 1.4–2.6]), and functional well-being (FWB; 2.5 [95% CI 1.7–3.2]) scores. No sub-scales favored sorafenib. TTD was significantly delayed in NIVO for FACT-Hep total (HR 0.62 [95% CI 0.51–0.74]), PWB (HR 0.62 [95% CI 0.52–0.74]), FWB (HR 0.73 [95% CI 0.61–0.88]), and hepatobiliary cancer subscale (HR 0.57 [95% CI 0.48–0.69]). TUDD results were consistent with TTD. A greater proportion of NIVO pts did not experience increased burden of side effects (50%–67.7%) compared with SOR (26.8%–45%) based on the GP5 item. Conclusions: These patient-reported findings demonstrate that pts taking NIVO had superior HRQoL and reduced side effect burden, further supporting clinical data showing a treatment benefit for 1L NIVO in aHCC. Clinical trial information: NCT02576509.