KEYNOTE-394
Pembrolizumab versus placebo as second-line therapy in patients from Asia with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial
Phase 3N = 453NCT03062358
- Population
- Patients from Asia with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and progression during or after, or intolerance of, sorafenib or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy
- Design
- Double-blind phase 3 trial; patients from Asia randomly assigned 2:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo once every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles plus best supportive care. Primary end point overall survival (one-sided significance threshold P = 0.0193, final analysis); secondary end points included progression-free survival and objective response rate (RECIST 1.1, blinded independent central review).
- Primary endpoint
- OS
- Arms
- Pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (experimental, n = 300): Pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles
- Placebo plus best supportive care (control, n = 153): Placebo once every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles
- People
- Qin S
OSHR 0.79 (95% CI 0.63–0.99)Δ median OS+1.6 monthsPFSHR 0.74 (95% CI 0.60–0.92)Δ median PFS+0.3 monthsΔ ORR+11.4 points
Show the numbers
| Endpoint | Analysis | Pembrolizumab plus best supportive care | Placebo plus best supportive care | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | finalQin 2023 | median 14.6 months | median 13 months | HR 0.79 (95% CI 0.63–0.99)P=0.0180One-sided P value; below the prespecified final-analysis threshold of P = 0.0193. Final analysis data cut-off 30 June 2021; median follow-up 33.8 months. |
| PFS | interimQin 2023 | median 2.6 months | median 2.3 months | HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.60–0.92)P=0.0032Secondary end point; second interim analysis (data cut-off 30 June 2020); one-sided P value below the prespecified boundary of P = 0.0134. |
| ORR | interimQin 2023 | 12.7% (9.1–17.0%) | 1.3% (0.2–4.6%) | P<0.0001Secondary end point; blinded independent central review, RECIST 1.1. |
| Endpoint | Analysis | Pembrolizumab plus best supportive care | Placebo plus best supportive care | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | finalQin 2023 | median 14.6 months | median 13 months | HR 0.79 (95% CI 0.63–0.99)P=0.0180One-sided P value; below the prespecified final-analysis threshold of P = 0.0193. Final analysis data cut-off 30 June 2021; median follow-up 33.8 months. |
| PFS | interimQin 2023 | median 2.6 months | median 2.3 months | HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.60–0.92)P=0.0032Secondary end point; second interim analysis (data cut-off 30 June 2020); one-sided P value below the prespecified boundary of P = 0.0134. |
| ORR | interimQin 2023 | 12.7% (9.1–17.0%) | 1.3% (0.2–4.6%) | P<0.0001Secondary end point; blinded independent central review, RECIST 1.1. |
Data table
| Endpoint | HR | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| OS | 0.79 | 0.63–0.99 |
| PFS | 0.74 | 0.6–0.92 |
- Pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (experimental)
- Placebo plus best supportive care (control)
Median-only curves assume a constant hazard (exponential) and fit plateaus, as seen with some immunotherapies, poorly.
Data table (modelled values)
| Months | Pembrolizumab plus best supportive care | Placebo plus best supportive care |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| 9 | 65.2% | 61.9% |
| 18 | 42.5% | 38.3% |
| 27 | 27.8% | 23.7% |
| 37 | 17.3% | 13.9% |
- Pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (experimental)
- Placebo plus best supportive care (control)
Median-only curves assume a constant hazard (exponential) and fit plateaus, as seen with some immunotherapies, poorly.
Data table (modelled values)
| Months | Pembrolizumab plus best supportive care | Placebo plus best supportive care |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| 2 | 58.7% | 54.7% |
| 3 | 44.9% | 40.5% |
| 5 | 26.4% | 22.2% |
| 7 | 15.5% | 12.1% |