EASL 2012: Brivanib Did Not Improve Overall Liver Cancer Survival, but Did Show Anti-tumor Activity


The experimental cancer drug brivanib did not lengthen overall survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, but it did increase time to progression, demonstrating that it had anti-tumor activity, researchers reported at the 47th International Liver Congress (EASL 2012) last week in Barcelona.

Over years or decades chronic hepatitis B or C infection -- as well as heavy alcohol consumption, hereditary liver diseases and other causes -- can lead to advanced liver damage including cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a type of liver cancer.

HCC is often not detected until advanced stages and is difficult to treat. Sorafenib (Nexavar) is the only drug shown to improved survival in HCC patients who are not eligible for surgical removal, but some people are unable to tolerate it.

Josep Llovet from the University of Barcelona and Mount Sinai School of Medicine and an international team of colleagues conducted a Phase 3 trial comparing brivanib versus placebo in liver cancer patients who were unable to take or progressed despite using sorafenib.

Brivanib is a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and fibroblast growth factor receptor that demonstrated promising evidence of efficacy in Phase 2 studies.

The BRISK-PS trial enrolled 395 HCC patients in Europe (42%), Asia (41%), and the Americas (17%). Most (about 85%) were men and the median age was just over 60 years. All had tried sorafenib for at least 14 days, but had used no other systemic anti-cancer therapy.

Nearly 40% had liver cancer secondary to hepatitis B, almost 30% had hepatitis C, and about 25% had alcoholic liver disease. About 85% had advanced BCLC stage C HCC and two-thirds had metastasis; patients randomized to receive brivanib were more likely to have microvascular invasion of tumors into blood vessels. They generally did not have severely impaired liver function, however, with more than 90% at Child-Pugh stage A.

Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive 800 mg once-daily oral brivanib or placebo along with the best supportive care. They were followed until they experienced disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

The primary endpoint was overall survival, but the researchers also looked at other outcomes including time to cancer progression, disease control rate, objective response rate, and safety.


The researchers concluded that while "the primary endpoint of improved overall survival was not met...there were improvements in time to progression, disease control rate and objective response rate, indicating anti-tumour activity of brivanib." They added that, "Brivanib had an acceptable safety profile."

In a overview of liver cancer research on the final day of the congress, Jordi Bruix from the University of Barcelona noted that sorafenib had "changed the view of liver cancer as an impossible cancer to treat." He said that while brivanib did not demonstrate a significant survival advantage in BRISK, it did delay tumour progression, raising the question of what types of response should be measured.

Further studies of brivanib are currently underway.



JM Llovet, T Decaens, J-L Raoul, et al. Brivanib versus Placebo in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Who Failed or Were Intolerant to Sorafenib: Results from the Phase 3 BRISK-PS Study. 47th International Liver Congress (EASL 2012). Barcelona, April 18-22, 2012. Abstract 1398.