Tivantinib (ARQ 197) versus placebo in patients (Pts) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who failed one systemic therapy: Results of a randomized controlled phase II trial (RCT).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
4006 Background: Tivantinib (T) is a selective, oral inhibitor of c-Met, the tyrosine kinase receptor for hepatocyte growth factor involved in tumor cell migration, invasion, proliferation and angiogenesis. T has shown promising results in HCC in phase 1 studies as monotherapy and in combination with sorafenib. Methods: This multi-center RCT, enrolled pts with unresectable HCC, 1 failed systemic therapy, ECOG PS <2. Child-Pugh B-C were excluded. Pts were randomized 2:1 to oral T {360 mg bid (A), 240 mg bid (B)} or placebo (P), stratifying by PS and vascular invasion (VI). Treatment continued until disease progression (PD) or unacceptable toxicity. RECIST 1.1 response was evaluated by CT / MRI every 6 weeks. Crossover to open-label T was allowed after PD. Primary endpoint was time to tumor progression (TTP) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population by central radiology review. Other endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), PFS, OS, efficacy in Met+ (Met ≥ 2+ in >50% of tumor at immunohistochemistry) pts, safety. Results: Characteristics of the 107 enrolled HCC pts (A= 38, B= 33, P= 36) in T/P: 58/28 male; median age 70/68; PS 0 41/21; VI 22/13; Met+ 22/15; Met- 27/13. Dose A was reduced to B in all pts due to G≥3 neutropenia (NEUT) rate. Major TTP, DCR and PFS benefits were obtained in Met+ pts, with preliminary OS trend favoring T (HR=0.47) and no detrimental effect in Met- pts. DCR (95% CI) in T/P was 44 (31-56) / 31(16-48)% for ITT and 50 (28-72) / 20 (4-48)% in Met+ pts. Most common AEs in T were asthenia (26.8%), NEUT (25.4%), low appetite (25.4%); most common drug-related AEs were NEUT (25.4%), anemia (15.5%). Most frequent drug-related serious AE was neutropenic sepsis (4.2%). Efficacy was similar in A / B with less frequent NEUT in B (21.1% / 6.1%). Final OS, PK, biomarker data will be presented. Conclusions: Compared to P, T significantly benefited second-line HCC pts, especially if Met+, with manageable safety profile at 240 mg BID. [Table: see text]
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".