Small molecule protein kinase inhibitors (PKIs) have become an effective strategy for cancer patients. However, hepatotoxicity is a major safety concern of these drugs, since the majority are reported to increase transaminases, and few of them (Idelalisib, Lapatinib, Pazopanib, Pexidartinib, Ponatinib, Regorafenib, Sunitinib) have a boxed label warning. The exact rate of PKI-induced hepatoxicity is not well defined due to the fact that the majority of data arise from pre-registration or registration trials on fairly selected patients, and the post-marketing data are often based only on the most severe described cases, whereas most real practice studies do not include drug-related hepatotoxicity as an end point. Although these side effects are usually reversible by dose adjustment or therapy suspension, or by switching to an alternative PKI, and fatality is uncommon, all patients undergoing PKIs should be carefully pre-evaluated and monitored. The management of this complication requires an individually tailored reappraisal of the risk/benefit ratio, especially in patients who are responding to therapy. This review reports the currently available data on the risk and management of hepatotoxicity of all the approved PKIs.

Background: Atezolizumab+Bevacizumab represents the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced HCC. However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune-checkpoint inhibitors(ICI)+tyrosine-kinase inhibitors(TKIs) are lacking. Objectives: This network meta-analysis(NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable-advanced HCC. Method:A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to 31st October, 2022. Phase III randomized controlled trials(RCTs) testing TKIs, including Sorafenib and Lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival(OS) and progression-free survival(PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time (RMST). A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy(15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade≥3(severe)adverse events(SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio(ISER) as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAEs probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments. Results:Nine RCTs enrolling 6600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability(88%)of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab was favored in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, Lenvatinib was favored in 76% of cases. Conclusions: Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab, Lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity.

No abstract

No abstract