Posttreatment after Lenvatinib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Authors: Koroki Keisuke , Kanogawa Naoya , Maruta Susumu , Ogasawara Sadahisa , Iino Yotaro , Obu Masamichi , Okubo Tomomi , Itokawa Norio , Maeda Takahiro , Inoue Masanori , Haga Yuki , Seki Atsuyoshi , Okabe Shinichiro , Koma Yoshihiro , Azemoto Ryosaku , Atsukawa Masanori , Itobayashi Ei , Ito Kenji , Sugiura Nobuyuki , Mizumoto Hideaki , Unozawa Hidemi , Iwanaga Terunao , Sakuma Takafumi , Fujita Naoto , Kanzaki Hiroaki , Kobayashi Kazufumi , Kiyono Soichiro , Nakamura Masato , Saito Tomoko , Kondo Takayuki , Suzuki Eiichiro , Ooka Yoshihiko , Nakamoto Shingo , Tawada Akinobu , Chiba Tetsuhiro , Arai Makoto , Kanda Tatsuo , Maruyama Hitoshi , Kato Jun , Kato Naoya 
Published: April 2021

<b><i>Background:</i></b> There is no standard posttreatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in whom lenvatinib therapy has failed. This study aimed to investigate rates of migration to posttreatment after lenvatinib and to explore candidates for second-line agents in the patients with failed lenvatinib therapy. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We retrospectively collected data on patients with advanced HCC who received lenvatinib as the first-line agent in 7 institutions. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) of 178 patients who received lenvatinib as the first-line agent were 13.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.5–15.2) and 6.7 months (95% CI, 5.6–7.8), respectively. Sixty-nine of 151 patients (45.7%) who discontinued lenvatinib moved on to posttreatment. The migration rates from lenvatinib to the second-line agent and from the second-line agent to the third-line agent were 41.7 and 44.4%, respectively. Based on multivariate analysis, response to lenvatinib (complete or partial response according to modified RECIST) and discontinuation of lenvatinib due to radiological progression, as well as male were associated with a significantly higher probability of migration to posttreatment after lenvatinib. On the other hand, alpha-fetoprotein levels of 400 ng/mL or higher was correlated with a significantly lower probability of migration to posttreatment after lenvatinib. Of 63 patients who received second-line systemic therapy, 53 (84.2%) were administered sorafenib. PFS, objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) for sorafenib treatment were 1.8 months (95% CI, 0.6–3.0), 1.8%, and 20.8%, respectively. According to the Cox regression hazard model, Child-Pugh class B significantly contributed to shorter PFS. PFS, ORR, and DCR of 22 patients who received regorafenib after lenvatinib in any lines were 3.2 months (range, 1.5–4.9 months), 13.6%, and 36.3%, respectively. Similarly, PFS, ORR, and DCR of 17 patients who received regorafenib after lenvatinib in the third-line (after sorafenib) were 3.8 months (range, 1.1–6.5 months), 17.6%, and 41.2%, respectively. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Sorafenib may not be a candidate for use as a posttreatment agent after lenvatinib, according to the results of the present study. Regorafenib has the potential to become an appropriate posttreatment agent after lenvatinib.