Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39114762›Full record

ArticleLiver cancer2024

Impact of Bevacizumab Being Skipped due to Adverse Events of Special Interest for Bevacizumab in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab: An Exploratory Analysis of the Phase III IMbrave150 Study.

Masatoshi Kudo, Kaoru Tsuchiya, Yu-Yun Shao, Richard S Finn, Peter R Galle, Michel Ducreux, Ann-Lii Cheng, Tatsuya Yamashita, Hironori Koga, Ryosuke Take and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Liver cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Masatoshi KudoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Kaoru TsuchiyaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Yu-Yun ShaoDepartment of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Richard S FinnDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Peter R GalleDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Michel DucreuxDepartment of Medical Oncology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Paris-Saclay University, Villejuif, France.
Ann-Lii ChengDepartment of Oncology, National Taiwan University Cancer Center and National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Tatsuya YamashitaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kanazawa University Hospital, Kanazawa, Japan.
Hironori KogaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kurume University Hospital, Kurume, Japan.
Ryosuke TakeChugai Pharmaceutical Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Kyoko YamadaChugai Pharmaceutical Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Takashi AsakawaChugai Pharmaceutical Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Yuki NakagawaChugai Pharmaceutical Ltd, Tokyo, Japan.
Masafumi IkedaDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan.

Funding

Women's CancersP30CA016042 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI Samuel Wheeler French · 1985 to 2026
$134.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016042
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The phase III IMbrave150 study established atezolizumab + bevacizumab as the global standard of care in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This exploratory analysis examined the impact of bevacizumab interruption due to bevacizumab adverse events of special interest (AESIs). Methods: Patients in IMbrave150 who were randomized to atezolizumab + bevacizumab and received treatment for ≥6 months (to reduce immortal time bias) were included in group A-1 if bevacizumab had ever been skipped due to bevacizumab AESIs or to group A-2 otherwise. Efficacy analyses included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by whether bevacizumab was skipped (group A-1 vs. A-2). PFS was evaluated per independent review facility (IRF)-assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1 and HCC-modified RECIST (IRF-HCC mRECIST). Safety was also evaluated. Results: Of the 210 patients who received ≥6 months of atezolizumab + bevacizumab, 69 were assigned to group A-1 and 141 to A-2. At data cutoff (August 20, 2020), hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.64, 1.69) for group A-1 versus A-2. HR for PFS was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.55) per IRF-assessed RECIST 1.1 and 1.10 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.59; 15.5 vs. 9.7 months) per IRF-HCC mRECIST for group A-1 versus A-2. Safety profiles for atezolizumab and bevacizumab were largely similar between groups. More group A-1 patients had grade 3/4 adverse events. A separate analysis investigating the impact of immortal time bias in patients who received ≥3 months of atezolizumab + bevacizumab supported the appropriateness of the ≥6-month landmark analysis. Discussion/Conclusion: Efficacy was similar between patients who skipped bevacizumab due to bevacizumab AESIs and those who did not. Although this comparison was nonrandomized and exploratory, results suggest that skipping bevacizumab due to bevacizumab AESIs did not considerably impact the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab.

Indexed as

Adverse events of special interestAtezolizumabBevacizumabSkipped bevacizumabUnresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID39114762
PMCPMC11305667

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.