Optimal combination of antiangiogenic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

The success of sorafenib in prolonging survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) makes therapeutic inhibition of angiogenesis a component of treatment for HCC. To enhance therapeutic efficacy, overcome drug resistance and reduce toxicity, combination of antiangiogenic agents with chemotherapy, radiotherapy or other targeted agents were evaluated. Nevertheless, the use of antiangiogenic therapy remains suboptimal regarding dosage, schedule and duration of therapy. The issue is further complicated by combination antiangiogenesis to other cytotoxic or biologic agents. There is no way to determine which patients are most likely respond to a given form of antiangiogenic therapy. Activation of alternative pathways associated with disease progression in patients undergoing antiangiogenic therapy has also been recognized. There is increasing importance in identifying, validating and standardizing potential response biomarkers for antiangiogenesis therapy for HCC patients. In this review, biomarkers for antiangiogenesis therapy including systemic, circulating, tissue and imaging ones are summarized. The strength and deficit of circulating and imaging biomarkers were further demonstrated by a series of studies in HCC patients receiving radiotherapy with or without thalidomide.     

Lifitegrast clinical efficacy for treatment of signs and symptoms of dry eye disease across three randomized controlled trials

Objective: Report efficacy findings from three clinical trials (one phase 2 and two phase 3 [OPUS-1, OPUS-2]) of lifitegrast ophthalmic solution 5.0% for treatment of dry eye disease (DED).

Research design and methods: Three 84-day, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trials. Adults (≥18 years) with DED were randomized (1:1) to lifitegrast 5.0% or matching placebo. Changes from baseline to day 84 in signs and symptoms of DED were analyzed.

Main outcome measures: Phase 2, pre-specified endpoint: inferior corneal staining score (ICSS; 0–4); OPUS-1, coprimary endpoints: ICSS and visual-related function subscale (0–4 scale); OPUS-2, coprimary endpoints: ICSS and eye dryness score (EDS, VAS; 0–100).

Results: Fifty-eight participants were randomized to lifitegrast 5.0% and 58 to placebo in the phase 2 trial; 293 to lifitegrast and 295 to placebo in OPUS-1; 358 to lifitegrast and 360 to placebo in OPUS-2. In participants with mild-to-moderate baseline DED symptomatology, lifitegrast improved ICSS versus placebo in the phase 2 study (treatment effect, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.05–0.65; p?=?0.0209) and OPUS-1 (effect, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10–0.38; p?=?0.0007). Among more symptomatic participants (baseline EDS ≥40, recent artificial tear use), lifitegrast improved EDS versus placebo in a post hoc analysis of OPUS-1 (effect, 13.34; 95% CI, 2.35–24.33; nominal p?=?0.0178) and in OPUS-2 (effect, 12.61; 95% CI, 8.51–16.70; p?<?0.0001).

Limitations: Trials were conducted over 12 weeks; efficacy beyond this period was not assessed.

Conclusions: Across three trials, lifitegrast improved ICSS in participants with mild-to-moderate baseline symptomatology in two studies, and EDS in participants with moderate-to-severe baseline symptomatology in two studies. Based on the overall findings from these trials, lifitegrast shows promise as a new treatment option for signs and symptoms of DED.