Pembrolizumab As Second-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in KEYNOTE-240: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

Pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity and safety in the phase II KEYNOTE-224 trial in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). KEYNOTE-240 evaluated the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, phase III study was conducted at 119 medical centers in 27 countries. Eligible patients with advanced HCC, previously treated with sorafenib, were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS; one-sided significance thresholds, P = .0174 [final analysis] and P = .002 [first interim analysis], respectively). Safety was assessed in all patients who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug.

RESULTS

Between May 31, 2016, and November 23, 2017, 413 patients were randomly assigned. As of January 2, 2019, median follow-up was 13.8 months for pembrolizumab and 10.6 months for placebo. Median OS was 13.9 months (95% CI, 11.6 to 16.0 months) for pembrolizumab versus 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 13.5 months) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.781; 95% CI, 0.611 to 0.998; P = .0238). Median PFS for pembrolizumab was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.1 months) for placebo at the first interim analysis (HR, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.609 to 0.987; P = .0186) and 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.6 to 3.0 months) at final analysis (HR, 0.718; 95% CI, 0.570 to 0.904; P = .0022). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 147 (52.7%) and 62 patients (46.3%) for pembrolizumab versus placebo; those that were treatment related occurred in 52 (18.6%) and 10 patients (7.5%), respectively. No hepatitis C or B flares were identified.

CONCLUSION

In this study, OS and PFS did not reach statistical significance per specified criteria. The results are consistent with those of KEYNOTE-224, supporting a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for pembrolizumab in this population.

Efficacy and safety of selective internal radiotherapy with yttrium-90 resin microspheres compared with sorafenib in locally advanced and inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (SARAH): an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Sorafenib is the recommended treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of sorafenib to that of selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) with yttrium-90 (90Y) resin microspheres in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

SARAH was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, investigator-initiated, phase 3 trial done at 25 centres specialising in liver diseases in France. Patients were eligible if they were aged at least 18 years with a life expectancy greater than 3 months, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, Child-Pugh liver function class A or B score of 7 or lower, and locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC] stage C), or new hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for surgical resection, liver transplantation, or thermal ablation after a previously cured hepatocellular carcinoma (cured by surgery or thermoablative therapy), or hepatocellular carcinoma with two unsuccessful rounds of transarterial chemoembolisation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a permutated block method with block sizes two and four to receive continuous oral sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) or SIRT with 90Y-loaded resin microspheres 2-5 weeks after randomisation. Patients were stratified according to randomising centre, ECOG performance status, previous transarterial chemoembolisation, and presence of macroscopic vascular invasion. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of sorafenib or underwent at least one of the SIRT work-up exams. This study has been completed and the final results are reported here. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01482442.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 5, 2011, and March 12, 2015, 467 patients were randomly assigned; after eight patients withdrew consent, 237 were assigned to SIRT and 222 to sorafenib. In the SIRT group, 53 (22%) of 237 patients did not receive SIRT; 26 (49%) of these 53 patients were treated with sorafenib. Median follow-up was 27·9 months (IQR 21·9-33·6) in the SIRT group and 28·1 months (20·0-35·3) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 8·0 months (95% CI 6·7-9·9) in the SIRT group versus 9·9 months (8·7-11·4) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% CI 0·94-1·41] for SIRT vs sorafenib; p=0·18). In the safety population, at least one serious adverse event was reported in 174 (77%) of 226 patients in the SIRT group and in 176 (82%) of 216 in the sorafenib group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (20 [9%] vs 41 [19%]), liver dysfunction (25 [11%] vs 27 [13%]), increased laboratory liver values (20 [9%] vs 16 [7%]), haematological abnormalities (23 [10%] vs 30 [14%]), diarrhoea (three [1%] vs 30 [14%]), abdominal pain (six [3%] vs 14 [6%]), increased creatinine (four [2%] vs 12 [6%]), and hand-foot skin reaction (one [<1%] vs 12 [6%]). 19 deaths in the SIRT group and 12 in the sorafenib group were deemed to be treatment related.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with locally advanced or intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma after unsuccessful transarterial chemoembolisation, overall survival did not significantly differ between the two groups. Quality of life and tolerance might help when choosing between the two treatments.

FUNDING

Sirtex Medical Inc.

Pembrolizumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin alone for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (KEYNOTE-966): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Biliary tract cancers, which arise from the intrahepatic or extrahepatic bile ducts and the gallbladder, generally have a poor prognosis and are rising in incidence worldwide. The standard-of-care treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer is chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Because most biliary tract cancers have an immune-suppressed microenvironment, immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy is associated with a low objective response rate. We aimed to assess whether adding the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin would improve outcomes compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.

METHODS

KEYNOTE-966 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done at 175 medical centres globally. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older; had previously untreated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer; had disease measurable per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo, both administered intravenously every 3 weeks (maximum 35 cycles), in combination with gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; no maximum duration) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; maximum 8 cycles). Randomisation was done using a central interactive voice-response system and stratified by geographical region, disease stage, and site of origin in block sizes of four. The primary endpoint of overall survival was evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. The secondary endpoint of safety was evaluated in the as-treated population. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04003636.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 4, 2019, and June 8, 2021, 1564 patients were screened for eligibility, 1069 of whom were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (pembrolizumab group; n=533) or placebo plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (placebo group; n=536). Median study follow-up at final analysis was 25·6 months (IQR 21·7-30·4). Median overall survival was 12·7 months (95% CI 11·5-13·6) in the pembrolizumab group versus 10·9 months (9·9-11·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·83 [95% CI 0·72-0·95]; one-sided p=0·0034 [significance threshold, p=0·0200]). In the as-treated population, the maximum adverse event grade was 3 to 4 in 420 (79%) of 529 participants in the pembrolizumab group and 400 (75%) of 534 in the placebo group; 369 (70%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 367 (69%) in the placebo group had treatment-related adverse events with a maximum grade of 3 to 4. 31 (6%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 49 (9%) in the placebo group died due to adverse events, including eight (2%) in the pembrolizumab group and three (1%) in the placebo group who died due to treatment-related adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

Based on a statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin without any new safety signals, pembrolizumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin could be a new treatment option for patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable biliary tract cancer.

FUNDING

Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Recent developments of c-Met as a therapeutic target in hepatocellular carcinoma

Aberrant c-Met activity has been implicated in the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), suggesting that c-Met inhibition may have therapeutic potential. However, clinical trials of nonselective kinase inhibitors with c-Met activity (tivantinib, cabozantinib, foretinib, and golvatinib) in patients with HCC have failed so far to demonstrate significant efficacy. This lack of observed efficacy is likely due to several factors, including trial design, lack of patient selection according to tumor c-Met status, and the prevalent off-target activity of these agents, which may indicate that c-Met inhibition is incomplete. In contrast, selective c-Met inhibitors (tepotinib, capmatinib) can be dosed at a level predicted to achieve complete inhibition of tumor c-Met activity. Moreover, results from early trials can be used to optimize the design of clinical trials of these agents. Preliminary results suggest that selective c-Met inhibitors have antitumor activity in HCC, with acceptable safety and tolerability in patients with Child-Pugh A liver function. Ongoing trials have been designed to assess the efficacy and safety of selective c-Met inhibition compared with standard therapy in patients with HCC that were selected based on tumor c-Met status. Thus, c-Met inhibition continues to be an active area of research in HCC, with well-designed trials in progress to investigate the benefit of selective c-Met inhibitors. (Hepatology 2018;67:1132-1149).

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus lenvatinib plus placebo for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (LEAP-002): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Systemic therapies have improved the management of hepatocellular carcinoma, but there is still a need to further enhance overall survival in first-line advanced stages. This study aimed to evaluate the addition of pembrolizumab to lenvatinib versus lenvatinib plus placebo in the first-line setting for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

In this global, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study (LEAP-002), patients aged 18 years or older with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, Child Pugh class A liver disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and no previous systemic treatment were enrolled at 172 global sites. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a central interactive voice-response system (block size of 4) to receive lenvatinib (bodyweight <60 kg, 8 mg/day; bodyweight ≥60 kg, 12 mg/day) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) or lenvatinib plus placebo. Randomisation was stratified by geographical region, macrovascular portal vein invasion or extrahepatic spread or both, α-fetoprotein concentration, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Dual primary endpoints were overall survival (superiority threshold at final overall survival analysis, one-sided p=0·019; final analysis to occur after 532 events) and progression-free survival (superiority threshold one-sided p=0·002; final analysis to occur after 571 events) in the intention-to-treat population. Results from the final analysis are reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03713593, and is active but not recruiting.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 17, 2019, and April 28, 2020, of 1309 patients assessed, 794 were randomly assigned to lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (n=395) or lenvatinib plus placebo (n=399). Median age was 66·0 years (IQR 57·0-72·0), 644 (81%) of 794 were male, 150 (19%) were female, 345 (43%) were Asian, 345 (43%) were White, 22 (3%) were multiple races, 21 (3%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 21 (3%) were Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, 13 (2%) were Black or African American, and 46 (6%) did not have available race data. Median follow up as of data cutoff for the final analysis (June 21, 2022) was 32·1 months (IQR 29·4-35·3). Median overall survival was 21·2 months (95% CI 19·0-23·6; 252 [64%] of 395 died) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus 19·0 months (17·2-21·7; 282 [71%] of 399 died) with lenvatinib plus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·84; 95% CI 0·71-1·00; stratified log-rank p=0·023). As of data cutoff for the progression-free survival final analysis (April 5, 2021), median progression-free survival was 8·2 months (95% CI 6·4-8·4; 270 events occurred [42 deaths; 228 progressions]) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus 8·0 months (6·3-8·2; 301 events occurred [36 deaths; 265 progressions]) with lenvatinib plus placebo (HR 0·87; 95% CI 0·73-1·02; stratified log-rank p=0·047). The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (69 [17%] of 395 patients in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group vs 68 [17%] of 395 patients) in the lenvatinib plus placebo group), increased aspartate aminotransferase (27 [7%] vs 17 [4%]), and diarrhoea (25 [6%] vs 15 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in four (1%) patients in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group (due to gastrointestinal haemorrhage and hepatorenal syndrome [n=1 each] and hepatic encephalopathy [n=2]) and in three (1%) patients in the lenvatinib plus placebo group (due to gastrointestinal haemorrhage, hepatorenal syndrome, and cerebrovascular accident [n=1 each]).

INTERPRETATION

In earlier studies, the addition of pembrolizumab to lenvatinib as first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma has shown promising clinical activity; however, lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab did not meet prespecified significance for improved overall survival and progression-free survival versus lenvatinib plus placebo. Our findings do not support a change in clinical practice.

FUNDING

Eisai US, and Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck.

Macrotrabecular-massive hepatocellular carcinoma: A distinctive histological subtype with clinical relevance

We recently identified a histological subtype of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), designated as "macrotrabecular-massive" (MTM-HCC) and associated with specific molecular features. In order to assess the clinical relevance of this variant, we investigated its prognostic value in two large series of patients with HCC treated by either surgical resection or radiofrequency ablation (RFA). We retrospectively included 237 HCC surgical samples and 284 HCC liver biopsies from patients treated by surgical resection and RFA, respectively. Histological slides were reviewed by pathologists specialized in liver disease, and the MTM-HCC subtype was defined by the presence of a predominant (>50%) macrotrabecular architecture (more than six cells thick). The main clinical and biological features were recorded at baseline. Clinical endpoints were early and overall recurrence. The MTM-HCC subtype was identified in 12% of the whole cohort (16% of surgically resected samples, 8.5% of liver biopsy samples). It was associated at baseline with known poor prognostic factors (tumor size, alpha-fetoprotein level, satellite nodules, and vascular invasion). Multivariate analysis showed that MTM-HCC subtype was an independent predictor of early and overall recurrence (surgical series: hazard ratio, 3.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.38-6.65; P = 0.006; and 2.76; 1.63-4.67; P < 0.001; RFA series: 2.37; 1.36-4.13; P = 0.002; and 2.19; 1.35-3.54; P = 0.001, respectively). Its prognostic value was retained even after patient stratification according to common clinical, biological, and pathological features of aggressiveness. No other baseline parameter was independently associated with recurrence in the RFA series.

CONCLUSION

The MTM-HCC subtype, reliably observed in 12% of patients eligible for curative treatment, represents an aggressive form of HCC that may require more specific therapeutic strategies. (Hepatology 2018;68:103-112).

Alternative Response Criteria (Choi, European association for the study of the liver, and modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST]) Versus RECIST 1.1 in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib

INTRODUCTION

Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1), may underestimate activity and does not predict survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib. This study assessed the value of alternative radiological criteria to evaluate response in HCC patients treated with sorafenib.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective blinded central analysis was performed of computed tomography (CT) scans from baseline and the first tumor evaluation in consecutive patients treated with sorafenib over a 2-year period in a single institution. Four different evaluation criteria were used: Choi, European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), modified RECIST (mRECIST), and RECIST 1.1.

RESULTS

Among 82 HCC patients, 64 with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B-C were evaluable with a median follow-up of 22 months. Median duration of sorafenib treatment was 5.7 months, and median overall survival was 12.8 months. At the time of the first CT scan, performed after a median of 2.1 months, Choi, EASL, mRECIST, and RECIST 1.1 identified 51%, 28%, 28%, and 3% objective responses, respectively. Responders by all criteria showed consistent overall survival >20 months. Among patients with stable disease according to RECIST 1.1, those identified as responders by Choi had significantly better overall survival than Choi nonresponders (22.4 vs. 10.6 months; hazard ratio: 0.43, 95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.86, p = .0097).

CONCLUSION

Choi, EASL, and mRECIST criteria appear more appropriate than RECIST 1.1 to identify responders with long survival among advanced HCC patients benefiting from sorafenib.

Systemic Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have a poor prognosis. First-line sorafenib has been the standard of care for a decade, but the treatment landscape is expanding. This review provides a practical overview of current and future systemic treatment options for advanced HCC and their place in clinical practice.

SUMMARY

First-line sorafenib and lenvatinib have shown to improve the survival of patients with advanced HCC. In the second line, regorafenib provides benefit for patients who previously tolerated sorafenib. Anti-PD1 antibodies, nivolumab and pembrolizumab, recently became available for second-line use in the US. Ramucirumab (for patients with α-fetoprotein [AFP] levels ≥400) and cabozantinib present potential future second-line treatment options. Combinations of systemic and locoregional treatment, such as radiofrequency ablation or selective internal radiotherapy, require further research. Precision medicine has not yet been translated into clinical practice, as the most common driver mutations (TERT promoter, CTNNB1, TP53, and ARID1A mutations) have not yet been shown to be suitable therapeutic targets. However, our growing understanding of signaling pathways and efforts in drug development are expected to pave the way for precision medicine in HCC in the future. Evaluating the place for the current and novel systemic treatment options in clinical practice can be challenging due to the diverse toxicity profiles of the treatment options and characteristics of the patient population. Sorafenib data elucidate the effect patient characteristics (such as the performance score, Child-Pugh class, AFP, etiology of the underlying disease, and level of macrovascular invasion and extrahepatic spread) may have on outcomes in advanced stages.

KEY MESSAGES

Lenvatinib is expected to join sorafenib as a preferred first-line treatment in advanced HCC. In the second line, the treatment of choice, regorafenib, is soon expected to be accompanied by cabozantinib and ramucirumab in patients with AFP ≥400 ng/mL, whereas nivolumab and pembrolizumab present second-line alternatives in the US.

Changes in tumor density in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sunitinib

PURPOSE

Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) may underestimate the efficacy of targeted therapies. In hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) studies with sunitinib, RECIST-defined response rates are low, although hypodensity on computed tomography (CT) scans occurs more frequently. This exploratory analysis investigated tumor density as a surrogate endpoint of sunitinib activity in a phase II HCC study.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Patients received sunitinib 50 mg/d (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Tumor size and density were assessed on CT scans by using RECIST and Choi criteria, the latter of which classify a partial response as a 15% or more reduction in tumor density or a 10% or more reduction in tumor size. The overall percentage volume of tumor necrosis was calculated with volumetric reconstruction. Tumor perfusion parameters were assessed by using perfusion CT scans with specific acquisition.

RESULTS

Among the 26 evaluable patients, 1 achieved a partial response and 22 had tumor stabilization by RECIST. In analysis of tumor density, 17 of 26 patients (65.4%) were responders by Choi criteria. Volumetric assessment showed major tumor necrosis (≥30% of tumor volume) in 10 of 21 patients (47.6%). Among four patients evaluated, tumor blood flow was reduced by 58.8% and blood volume by 68.4% after 4 weeks of treatment. The median time to progression (TTP) was 6.4 months. Patients with responses by Choi criteria had a significantly longer TTP (7.5 months) compared with nonresponders (4.8 months; HR = 0.33, two-sided P = 0.0182).

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor density assessment suggested that radiologic endpoints in addition to RECIST may be considered to capture sunitinib activity in HCC.

ESM1 as a Marker of Macrotrabecular-Massive Hepatocellular Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Macrotrabecular-massive hepatocellular carcinoma (MTM-HCC) is a novel morphological subtype of HCC associated with early relapse after resection or percutaneous ablation, independently of classical clinical and radiological prognostic factors. The aim of the present study was to identify immunohistochemical markers of MTM-HCC, to ease its diagnosis and implementation into clinical practice.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

To identify potential biomarkers of MTM-HCC, we first analyzed gene expression profiling data from The Cancer Genome Atlas study and further selected two candidate biomarkers. Performance of both biomarkers for diagnosis of MTM-HCC was further tested by immunohistochemistry in two independent series of 67 and 132 HCC biopsy samples.

RESULTS

Analysis of RNA sequencing data showed that MTM-HCC was characterized by a high expression of neoangiogenesis-related genes. Two candidate biomarkers, Endothelial-Specific Molecule 1 (ESM1) and Carbonic Anhydrase IX (CAIX), were selected. In the discovery series, sensitivity and specificity of ESM1 expression by stromal endothelial cells for the detection of MTM-HCC were 97% (28/29), and 92% (35/38), respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of CAIX were 48% (14/29) and 89% (34/38). In the validation set, sensitivity and specificity of ESM1 for the identification of MTM-HCC were 93% (14/15) and 91% (107/117), respectively. Interobserver agreement for ESM1 assessment was good in both series (Cohen Kappa 0.77 and 0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a molecular-driven selection of biomarkers, we identified ESM1 as a reliable microenvironment immunohistochemical marker of MTM-HCC. The results represent a step toward the implementation of HCC morpho-molecular subtyping into clinical practice.

Impact of COVID-19 on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in a high-prevalence area

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients affected by hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represent a vulnerable population during the COVID-19 pandemic and may suffer from altered allocation of healthcare resources. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of patients with HCC within 6 referral centres in the metropolitan area of Paris, France.

METHODS

We performed a multicentre, retrospective, cross-sectional study on the management of patients with HCC during the first 6 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic (exposed group), compared with the same period in 2019 (unexposed group). We included all patients discussed in multidisciplinary tumour board (MTB) meetings and/or patients undergoing a radiological or surgical programmed procedure during the study period, with curative or palliative intent. Endpoints were the number of patients with a modification in the treatment strategy, or a delay in decision-to-treat.

RESULTS

After screening, n = 670 patients were included (n = 293 exposed to COVID, n = 377 unexposed to COVID). Fewer patients with HCC presented to the MTB in 2020 (p = 0.034) and fewer had a first diagnosis of HCC (n = 104 exposed to COVID, n = 143 unexposed to COVID, p = 0.083). Treatment strategy was modified in 13.1% of patients, with no differences between the 2 periods. Nevertheless, 21.5% vs. 9.5% of patients experienced a treatment delay longer than 1 month in 2020 compared with 2019 (p <0.001). In 2020, 7.1% (21/293) of patients had a diagnosis of an active COVID-19 infection: 11 (52.4%) patients were hospitalised and 4 (19.1%) patients died.

CONCLUSIONS

In a metropolitan area highly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed fewer patients with HCC, and similar rates of treatment modification, but with a significantly longer treatment delay in 2020 vs. 2019.

LAY SUMMARY

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic era, fewer patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presented to the multidisciplinary tumour board, especially with a first diagnosis of HCC. Patients with HCC had a treatment delay that was longer in the COVID-19 period than in 2019.

Transarterial chemoembolisation enhances programmed death-1 and programmed death-ligand 1 expression in hepatocellular carcinoma

AIMS

Immunotherapies represent a new alternative therapeutic approach for hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), and have shown promising results when used in combination therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential of transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) to modulate programmed death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression profiles in a cohort of surgically treated HCCs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 82 surgically treated HCCs from patients who had undergone (n = 32) or not undergone (n = 50) preoperative TACE were included in the study. Immunohistochemical expression of PD-1 and of PD-L1 were analysed and compared according to TACE treatment. Pretreatment biopsies, which were available for 30 cases (20 with TACE and 10 without), were similarly analysed. Follow-up data were retrieved from patients' charts. PD-1 expression (≥1%) in intratumoral inflammatory cells (ICs) was observed in 46% of HCCs, and PD-L1 expression (≥1%) in ICs and PD-L1 expression in tumour cells (TCs) were observed in 46% and 16% of HCCs, respectively. A low level of PD-1 expression (<1%) was associated with strong and diffuse glutamine synthetase overexpression (8% versus 27%, P = 0.024). HCCs from patients with TACE pretreatment showed significantly higher PD-L1 expression in TCs than those from patients without TACE pretreatment (2% versus 0.4%, P = 0.027). PD-1 expression in ICs and PD-L1 expression in both ICs and TCs were higher in TACE-resected tumours than in corresponding pre-TACE biopsies (respectively: 1.8% versus 8.1%, P = 0.034; 0.8% versus 7.1%, P = 0.032; and 0% versus 2.4%, P = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

Our results, showing increases in PD-1 expression and PD-L1 expression in HCCs following TACE, support the use of TACE in combination with immunotherapy in selected cases to optimise tumour response.

Tolerance and outcome of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib

BACKGROUND

Sorafenib is the standard treatment for patients with an advanced stage of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aims of this study were (i) to evaluate the tolerance and survival of sorafenib-treated patients, in a nonselected population, especially in Child-Pugh B patients; and (ii) to identify potential prognostic factors of survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From April 2007 to December 2008, 50 patients received sorafenib for advanced HCC. Seventeen (34%) were Child-Pugh B patients. We recorded adverse events and the duration of treatment and survival. For 34 patients with histopathologically proven HCC, immunophenotypical analysis was carried out using antibodies against cluster differentiation 34, vascular endothelial growth factor, phosphorylated ERK, cytokeratin 19, and phosphorylated stat3.

RESULTS

Patients with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis had a more advanced stage of the disease compared with Child-Pugh A patients. The occurrence of adverse events was similar in Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B patients. Duration of treatment until discontinuation for bad tolerance was lower in Child-Pugh B patients (1.8 vs. 5 months, P=0.02). Survival of Child-Pugh A patients was higher compared with Child-Pugh B patients (8.9 vs. 2 months, P=0.004). Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, portal vein impairment, extra-hepatic spread, and alpha-foetoprotein were also prognostic factors. In multivariate analysis, the sole factor associated with survival was the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage. None of the immunohistological markers used was associated with tolerance and survival.

CONCLUSION

Occurrence of adverse events is similar in Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B patients. Nevertheless, the survival of Child-Pugh B patients is very low. Whether liver function or tumor spread is responsible for mortality is unclear. Opportunity of treatment for Child-Pugh B patients is questionable. The immunophenotype of tumoral tissue was not predictive of survival.

Durvalumab or placebo plus gemcitabine and cisplatin in participants with advanced biliary tract cancer (TOPAZ-1): updated overall survival from a randomised phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

In the preplanned interim analysis of the TOPAZ-1 study, durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin significantly improved overall survival versus placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin in participants with advanced biliary tract cancer. We aimed to report updated overall survival and safety data from TOPAZ-1 with additional follow-up and data maturity beyond the interim analysis.

METHODS

TOPAZ-1 was a phase 3, randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled, global study done at 105 sites in 17 countries. Participants aged 18 years or older with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin or placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin using a computer-generated randomisation scheme, stratified by disease status and primary tumour location. Participants received durvalumab (1500 mg) or placebo on day 1 of each cycle every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles, plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each cycle every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles, followed by durvalumab (1500 mg) or placebo monotherapy every 4 weeks until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria were met. Investigators and participants were masked to study treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. TOPAZ-1 met its primary endpoint at the preplanned interim analysis, and the study is active but no longer recruiting participants. Updated overall survival and safety data from TOPAZ-1, with additional follow-up (data cutoff Feb 25, 2022) and data maturity beyond the interim analysis, are reported here. Efficacy was assessed in the full analysis set (all randomly assigned participants). Safety was assessed in the safety analysis set (all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment). The TOPAZ-1 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03875235.

FINDINGS

From April 16, 2019, to Dec 11, 2020, 914 participants were enrolled, 685 of whom were randomly assigned (341 to the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 344 to the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group). 345 (50%) participants were male and 340 (50%) were female. Median follow-up at the updated data cutoff was 23·4 months (95% CI 20·6-25·2) in the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 22·4 months (21·4-23·8) in the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group. At the updated data cutoff, 248 (73%) participants in the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 279 (81%) participants in the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group had died (median overall survival 12·9 months [95% CI 11·6-14·1] vs 11·3 months [10·1-12·5]; hazard ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·64-0·91]). Kaplan-Meier-estimated 24-month overall survival rates were 23·6% (95% CI 18·7-28·9) in the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 11·5% (7·6-16·2) in the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group. Maximum grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 250 (74%) of 338 participants in the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 257 (75%) of 342 in the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group. The most common maximum grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (70 [21%] vs 86 [25%]), anaemia (64 [19%] vs 64 [19%]), and neutropenia (63 [19%] vs 68 [20%]).

INTERPRETATION

Durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin showed robust and sustained overall survival benefit with no new safety signals. Findings continue to support the regimen as a standard of care for people with untreated, advanced biliary tract cancer.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Imaging features of histological subtypes of hepatocellular carcinoma: Implication for LI-RADS

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The histopathological subtypes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are associated with distinct clinical features and prognoses. This study aims to report Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS)-defined imaging features of different HCC subtypes in a cohort of resected tumours and to assess the influence of HCC subtypes on computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) LI-RADS categorisation in the subgroup of high-risk patients.

METHODS

This retrospective institutional review board-approved study included patients with resected HCCs and available histopathological classification. Three radiologists independently reviewed preoperative CT and MRI exams. The readers evaluated the presence of imaging features according to LI-RADS v2018 definitions and provided a LI-RADS category in patients at high risk of HCC. Differences in LI-RADS features and categorisations were assessed for not otherwise specified (NOS-HCC), steatohepatitic (SH-HCC), and macrotrabecular-massive (MTM-HCC) types of HCCs.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-seven patients (median age 64.0 years, 215 [77.6%] men) were analysed, which involved 295 HCCs. There were 197 (66.7%) NOS-HCCs, 62 (21.0%) SH-HCCs, 23 (7.8%) MTM-HCCs, and 13 (4.5%) other rare subtypes. The following features were more frequent in MTM-HCC: elevated α-foetoprotein serum levels (p <0.001), tumour-in-vein (p <0.001 on CT, p ≤0.052 on MRI), presence of at least 1 LR-M feature (p ≤0.010 on CT), infiltrative appearance (p ≤0.032 on CT), necrosis or severe ischaemia (p ≤0.038 on CT), and larger size (p ≤0.006 on CT, p ≤0.011 on MRI). SH-HCC was associated with fat in mass (p <0.001 on CT, p ≤0.002 on MRI). The distribution of the LI-RADS major features and categories in high-risk patients did not significantly differ among the 3 main HCC subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

The distribution of LI-RADS major features and categories is not different among the HCC subtypes. Nevertheless, careful analysis of tumour-in-vein, LR-M, and ancillary features as well as clinico-biological data can provide information for the non-invasive diagnosis of HCC subtypes.

LAY SUMMARY

In high-risk patients, the overall distribution of LI-RADS major features and categories is not different among the histological subtypes of hepatocellular carcinoma, but tumour-in-vein, presence of LR-M features, and ancillary features can provide information for the non-invasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma subtypes.

Combining imaging and tumour biopsy improves the diagnosis of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is by definition a highly heterogeneous tumour, which significantly impacts its diagnosis. The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of imaging using computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance (MR) and biopsy for the diagnosis of cHCC-CCA.

METHODS

cHCC-CCA resected between December 2006 and April 2017 with available pre-operative imaging and tumour biopsy were retrospectively included. cHCC-CCA diagnosis was based on morphological and immunophenotypical features. A total of 21 cHCC-CCA were compared to 21 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) as controls. All biopsies were reviewed. Two radiologists reviewed the cases and classified tumours into four patterns (type 1 [progressive enhancement of the entire lesion, iCCA type], type 2 [arterial enhancement with washout, HCC type], type 3 [mixed pattern with combinations of 1, 2 and 4] and type 4 [atypical pattern, areas of arterial enhancement without washout and/or hypovascular]).

RESULTS

The presence of a type 3 pattern at imaging had a 48% sensitivity and 81% specificity for cHCC-CCA diagnosis. The initial diagnosis performed on biopsy was cHCC-CCA in 8/21 patients (38%). After reviewing and including immunophenotypical markers, two more cases were diagnosed as cHCC-CCA (48% sensibility, 100% specificity). When either imaging or biopsy suggested the diagnosis of cHCC-CCA, the sensitivity and specificity were 60% and 82% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We showed that a two-step strategy combining imaging as the first step and biopsy as the second step improved the diagnostic performance of cHCC-CCA.

Tislelizumab in Patients with Previously Treated Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (RATIONALE-208): A Multicenter, Non-Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 2 Trial

INTRODUCTION

Tislelizumab (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 antibody) showed preliminary antitumor activity and tolerability in patients with advanced solid tumors, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab in patients with previously treated advanced HCC.

METHODS

The multiregional phase 2 study RATIONALE-208 examined single-agent tislelizumab (200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks) in patients with advanced HCC with Child-Pugh A, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C, and who had received one or more prior lines of systemic therapy. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), radiologically confirmed per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by the Independent Review Committee. Safety was assessed in patients who received ≥1 dose of tislelizumab.

RESULTS

Between April 9, 2018, and February 27, 2019, 249 eligible patients were enrolled and treated. After a median study follow-up of 12.7 months, ORR was 13% (n = 32/249; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9-18), including five complete and 27 partial responses. The number of prior lines of therapy did not impact ORR (one prior line, 13% [95% CI, 8-20]; two or more prior lines, 13% [95% CI, 7-20]). Median duration of response was not reached. The disease control rate was 53%, and median overall survival was 13.2 months. Of the 249 total patients, grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 38 (15%) patients; the most common was liver transaminase elevations in 10 (4%) patients. Treatment-related adverse events led to treatment discontinuation in 13 (5%) patients or dose delay in 46 (19%) patients. No deaths were attributed to the treatment per investigator assessment.

CONCLUSION

Tislelizumab demonstrated durable objective responses, regardless of the number of prior lines of therapy, and acceptable tolerability in patients with previously treated advanced HCC.

Liver transplantation plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with permanently unresectable colorectal liver metastases (TransMet): results from a multicentre, open-label, prospective, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing efficacy of chemotherapy, permanently unresectable colorectal liver metastases are associated with poor long-term survival. We aimed to assess whether liver transplantation plus chemotherapy could improve overall survival.

METHODS

TransMet was a multicentre, open-label, prospective, randomised controlled trial done in 20 tertiary centres in Europe. Patients aged 18-65 years, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score 0-1, permanently unresectable colorectal liver metastases from resected BRAF-non-mutated colorectal cancer responsive to systemic chemotherapy (≥3 months, ≤3 lines), and no extrahepatic disease, were eligible for enrolment. Patients were randomised (1:1) to liver transplantation plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone, using block randomisation. The liver transplantation plus chemotherapy group underwent liver transplantation for 2 months or less after the last chemotherapy cycle. At randomisation, the liver transplantation plus chemotherapy group received a median of 21·0 chemotherapy cycles (IQR 18·0-29·0) versus 17·0 cycles (12·0-24·0) in the chemotherapy alone group, in up to three lines of chemotherapy. During first-line chemotherapy, 64 (68%) of 94 patients had received doublet chemotherapy and 30 (32%) of 94 patients had received triplet regimens; 76 (80%) of 94 patients had targeted therapy. Transplanted patients received tailored immunosuppression (methylprednisolone 10 mg/kg intravenously on day 0; tacrolimus 0·1 mg/kg via gastric tube on day 0, 6-10 ng/mL days 1-14; mycophenolate mofetil 10 mg/kg intravenously day 0 to <2 months and switch to everolimus 5-8 ng/mL), and postoperative chemotherapy, and the chemotherapy group had continued chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival analysed in the intention to treat and per-protocol population. Safety events were assessed in the as-treated population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02597348), and accrual is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 18, 2016, and July 5, 2021, 94 patients were randomly assigned and included in the intention-to-treat population, with 47 in the liver transplantation plus chemotherapy group and 47 in the chemotherapy alone group. 11 patients in the liver transplantation plus chemotherapy group and nine patients in the chemotherapy alone group did not receive the assigned treatment; 36 patients and 38 patients in each group, respectively, were included in the per-protocol analysis. Patients had a median age of 54·0 years (IQR 47·0-59·0), and 55 (59%) of 94 patients were male and 39 (41%) were female. Median follow-up was 59·3 months (IQR 42·4-60·2). In the intention-to-treat population, 5-year overall survival was 56·6% (95% CI 43·2-74·1) for liver transplantation plus chemotherapy and 12·6% (5·2-30·1) for chemotherapy alone (HR 0·37 [95% CI 0·21-0·65]; p=0·0003) and 73·3% (95% CI 59·6-90·0) and 9·3% (3·2-26·8), respectively, for the per-protocol population. Serious adverse events occurred in 32 (80%) of 40 patients who underwent liver transplantation (from either group), and 69 serious adverse events were observed in 45 (83%) of 54 patients treated with chemotherapy alone. Three patients in the liver transplantation plus chemotherapy group were retransplanted, one of whom died postoperatively of multi-organ failure.

INTERPRETATION

In selected patients with permanently unresectable colorectal liver metastases, liver transplantation plus chemotherapy with organ allocation priority significantly improved survival versus chemotherapy alone. These results support the validation of liver transplantation as a new standard option for patients with permanently unresectable liver-only metastases.

FUNDING

French National Cancer Institute and Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris.

Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and acquired resistance to sunitinib in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Based on the success of sorafenib, several anti-angiogenic therapies are currently evaluated in advanced hepatocellular carcinomas. Few biological data are currently available from patients that may help understanding mechanisms of acquired resistance to these drugs. Herein, we report translational data from a post-treatment surgical specimen in a patient who experienced acquired resistance to sunitinib.

METHODS

Clinical, radiological, and pathological data were collected before treatment, under treatment, and at the time of tumor progression. In addition, a biomolecular analysis was performed at the time of progression.

RESULTS

In this patient with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, initial response to sunitinib was followed by tumor progression within 6 months of treatment, requesting salvage surgical resection. Surprisingly, pathological examination on post-treatment specimens revealed the presence of two juxtaposed tissue components containing either sarcomatoid-like mesenchymal cells or well- to moderately-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Cancer cells retain a high α-fetoprotein expression in both components. However, while cells from carcinoma expressed E-cadherin but no vimentin, cancer cells from the mesenchymal component highly expressed vimentin and lost E-cadherin protein expression as measured by immunostaining. HMGA2 and Ki67 mRNA were also expressed at higher levels in mesenchymal than in carcinoma cells.

CONCLUSION

This case report suggests the occurrence of an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in discrete areas of hepatocellular carcinomas developing resistance to sunitinib.

Imaging response in neuroendocrine tumors treated with targeted therapies: the experience of sunitinib

Among neuroendocrine carcinomas of the gut, well-differentiated tumors are highly vascularized, featuring specific characteristics on contrast-enhanced imaging. Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors spontaneously harbor hypervascular enhancement, coexisting with areas of necrosis mainly located at the center of tumor lesions. When exposed to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGFR) inhibitors such as sunitinib, target lesions display few if any variation in tumor size, but rather detectable modifications in tumor density. In several patients treated with targeted therapy, a significant decrease of tumor density at first tumor evaluation can be detected as compared to baseline. Consistently, the two randomized trials leading to approval of sunitinib and everolimus in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors report objective response rate below 10%, emphasizing that Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), that focus only on the largest diameters of target lesions, may be insufficient to capture the full benefit of targeted therapies. Alternative criteria, such as those developed by Choi et al., consider both the size and the density of the tumor as parameters for response evaluation. Choi criteria have been recently proposed as a surrogate endpoint for efficacy and to identify patients that are good responders to VEGFR inhibitors such as sunitinib and sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, another disease highly addicted to angiogenesis. Preliminary data generated from patients included in the sunitinib phase III trial suggest that Choi criteria might also be considered as an alternative to RECIST to evaluate the effects of sunitinib in patients with advanced well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors.

Safety and efficacy of intra-arterial hepatic chemotherapy with doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles in hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Doxorubicin Transdrug (DT), a nanoformulation of doxorubicin, was demonstrated to overcome the chemoresistance of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in preclinical models. Its efficacy and safety were thus investigated in phase I and randomised phase II trials in unresectable HCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Phase I was a single dose of DT through the hepatic intra-arterial (HIA) route, dose-escalating 3+3 trial, evaluating five-dose levels from 10 to 40 mg/m2 with maximal tolerated dose (MTD) as primary endpoint. The multicentre phase II trial randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) patients to receive either 30 mg/m2 of DT through HIA route every 4 weeks for up to three courses or best standard of care (BSC). Progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 3 months was the primary endpoint. Overall survival (OS) and disease control rate (DCR) were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

In phase I, haematological and respiratory limited toxicities were reported at 35 and 40 mg/m2, giving MTD at 30 mg/m2. Partial response rate was 10%, and stable disease 70%. Phase II was discontinued due to three severe acute respiratory distress events in the DT group while 17 patients had received 30 mg/m2 DT and 11 BSC. At 3 months, PFS was 64% (95% CI 31 to 89) vs 75% (95% CI 35 to 97), and DCR 35% vs 27% in DT and BSC, respectively (p=NS). Median OS was 32.6 months (95% CI 8.2 to 34.1) in DT group and 15 months (95% CI 8.0 to 18.8) in BSC group (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

DT increased OS in unresectable HCC but induced severe respiratory distress. Efficacy data deserve further investigation using a safer dosing and schedule regimen.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EUDRACT 2006-004088-77; Results.

Novel molecular therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma

The approval of sorafenib as the standard of care (SOC) for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) fostered interest to further evaluate several other targeted therapies and extend the positioning of sorafenib alone and in combination with other drugs and local therapies at earlier stages and in an adjuvant setting. This review highlights current research using targeted therapies in HCC. Information for this review was compiled by searching PubMed and MEDLINE databases for articles published until September 2010. Several small molecules and humanized antibodies with anti-angiogenic and antiproliferative properties are currently being investigated in preclinical and/or clinical trials. Results are awaited from these clinical trials and offer promise for extending the current treatment options in HCC. Currently published data suggest that substantial progress may be achieved in the treatment of patients with HCC in the next 10 years.

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on liver cancer management (CERO-19)

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems and it may have heavily impacted patients with liver cancer (LC). Herein, we evaluated whether the schedule of LC screening or procedures has been interrupted or delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

An international survey evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical practice and clinical trials from March 2020 to June 2020, as the first phase of a multicentre, international, and observational project. The focus was on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, cared for around the world during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave.

RESULTS

Ninety-one centres expressed interest to participate and 76 were included in the analysis, from Europe, South America, North America, Asia, and Africa (73.7%, 17.1%, 5.3%, 2.6%, and 1.3% per continent, respectively). Eighty-seven percent of the centres modified their clinical practice: 40.8% the diagnostic procedures, 80.9% the screening programme, 50% cancelled curative and/or palliative treatments for LC, and 41.7% modified the liver transplantation programme. Forty-five out of 69 (65.2%) centres in which clinical trials were running modified their treatments in that setting, but 58.1% were able to recruit new patients. The phone call service was modified in 51.4% of centres which had this service before the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 19/37).

CONCLUSIONS

The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a tremendous impact on the routine care of patients with liver cancer. Modifications in screening, diagnostic, and treatment algorithms may have significantly impaired the outcome of patients. Ongoing data collection and future analyses will report the benefits and disadvantages of the strategies implemented, aiding future decision-making.

LAY SUMMARY

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems globally. Herein, we assessed the impact of the first wave pandemic on patients with liver cancer and found that routine care for these patients has been majorly disrupted, which could have a significant impact on outcomes.