Two cases of rapid progression of esophageal varices after atezolizumab-bevacizumab treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma

Variceal bleeding following treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in two patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Bleeding-related adverse events may occur due to anti-vascular endothelial growth factors. Here, we report two cases of variceal rupture during atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ATZ/BV) treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC).Case 1 involved a man in his 60 s with alcoholic liver cirrhosis (LC) and u-HCC. Seventy-four days after ATZ/BV administration, the patient was admitted for hematemesis. Upper esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed worsening of the esophageal varices (EVs) to F2 grade with active bleeding. Endoscopic variceal ligation successfully achieved hemostasis.Case 2 involved a man in his 70 s with alcoholic LC and u-HCC. The patient was admitted with hematemesis 114 days after ATZ/BV administration. During EGD, the EVs deteriorated to F3 grade, although hemostasis had already been achieved. The evaluation was discontinued during the observation stage because of the worsening hepatic reserve.Neither patient had EVs warranting prophylactic treatment before ATZ/BV administration, showed a partial tumor response, or had portal vein tumor thrombus. Both patients demonstrated increased total diameters of the collateral veins and splenic volume compared to those before treatment. These findings suggest that ATZ/BV treatment may increase portal pressure. In conclusion, the administration of ATZ/BV to patients with LC and u-HCC necessitates careful management of EVs aggravation and rupture.

Progression of portal hypertension after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for hepatocellular carcinoma-report a case and literature review

BACKGROUND

Atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy became the first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Gastroesophageal varices should be monitored and managed before treatment. The progression of portal hypertension during bevacizumab-containing therapy is unclear.

METHOD

A case of new development of esophageal varices, ascites, and hepatic hydrothorax during atezolizumab/bevacizumab therapy at National Taiwan University Hospital was reported, and relevant literature was reviewed.

RESULTS

We presented an 83-year-old male with resolved hepatitis B without cirrhosis. He had BCLC stage C HCC and received tri-weekly atezolizumab/bevacizumab therapy for 34 cycles with sustained partial response. Progressive ascites, esophageal varices, and hepatic hydrothorax developed, though his portal vein was patent and the tumor was under control. Five similar cases of HCC (BCLC B/C: n = 3/2) had been reported previously. Among them, three had cirrhosis with pre-existing small esophageal varices before treatment. After the administration of 1-15 cycles of atezolizumab/bevacizumab therapy, one patient had a progression of varices, and the other four developed variceal bleeding. The association between atezolizumab/bevacizumab and portal hypertension was possible, which might relate to the VEGF pathway and immune-related adverse events with progressive hepatic fibrosis.

CONCLUSION

Atezolizumab/bevacizumab treatment might exacerbate portal hypertension. Careful monitoring and management should be considered during treatment.

Ultrarapid Development of Ruptured Esophageal Varices in a Patient With a History of Heller Myotomy

Esophageal varices commonly affect cirrhotic patients as a result of elevated portal system resistance. Blood pools within esophageal portosystemic collateral vessels, which can eventually rupture, leading to life-threatening hemorrhage. To prevent this, cirrhotic patients without a history of varices undergo endoscopic surveillance for varices every 2-3 years. We present an unusual case of variceal hemorrhage in a patient who was seen to have no varices on endoscopic evaluation only a month earlier.

Management of Portal Hypertension in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Systemic Treatment: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

The management of CSPH in patients undergoing systemic treatment for HCC has emerged as a critical concern due to the absence of reliable diagnostic criteria and uncertainties surrounding therapeutic approaches. This review aims to underscore the primary pathophysiological aspects linking HCC and PH, while also addressing the current and emerging clinical strategies for the management of portal hypertension. A review of studies from January 2003 to June 2023 was conducted using the PubMed database and employing MeSH terms, such as "hepatocellular carcinoma", "immune checkpoint inhibitors", "systemic therapy", "portal hypertension", "variceal bleeding" and "tyrosine kinase inhibitors". Despite promising results of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in animal models for PH and fibrosis, only Sorafenib has demonstrated similar effects in human studies, whereas Lenvatinib appears to promote PH development. The impact of Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab on PH remains uncertain, with an increasing risk of bleeding related to Bevacizumab in patients with prior variceal hemorrhage. Given the absence of specific guidelines, endoscopic surveillance during treatment is advisable, and primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding should adhere to the Baveno VII recommendations. Furthermore, in patients with advanced HCC, refinement of diagnostic criteria for CSPH and guidelines for its surveillance are warranted.

Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in patients with portal hypertension for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination therapy (Atezo + Beva) is used as the first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC). Serious adverse events (AEs), including rupture of esophagogastric varices, have been seen during treatment. Therefore, the relationships of efficacy, safety, and portal hypertension (PH) were analyzed.

METHODS

A total of 146 patients with u-HCC and Child-Pugh Scores of 5-7 received Atezo + Beva. Prophylactic treatment for varices was performed for patients with the risk of rupture of varices before the start of Atezo + Beva. A propensity score-matched cohort was created to minimize the risk of potential confounders. Efficacy was assessed in 41 propensity score-matched pairs. AEs were assessed between patients without PH (n = 80) and with PH (n = 66).

RESULTS

In patients without PH and with PH, median overall survival was 18.4 months and 18.8 months (p = 0.71), and median progression-free survival was 8.6 months and 5.8 months (p = 0.92), respectively. On the best radiological response evaluation for Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the objective response rate was 31.7% and 26.8% (p = 0.81), respectively. Variceal rupture occurred in three patients with PH, but there were no significant differences in the occurrence of variceal rupture (p = 0.090) and Grade 3-4 AEs between patients without and with PH.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in efficacy and safety were observed with PH. Prophylactic treatment for varices before the start of Atezo + Beva would allow treatment to continue relatively safely.

Complications of immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are highly effective in cancer treatment. However, the risks associated with the treatment must be carefully balanced against the therapeutic benefits. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are generally unpredictable and may persist over an extended period. In this review, we analyzed common irAEs reported in highly cited original articles and systematic reviews. The prevalent adverse reactions include fatigue, pyrexia, rash, pruritus, diarrhea, decreased appetite, nausea, abdominal pain, constipation, hepatitis, and hypothyroidism. Therefore, it is crucial to conduct evaluations not only of gastrointestinal organs but also of cardiac, neurologic, endocrine (including the frequently affected thyroid), and ophthalmic systems before commencing ICIs. This review further explores commonly reported types of irAEs, specific irAEs associated with each ICI agent, rare yet potentially fatal irAEs, and available treatment options for managing them.

Reduced-Dose or Discontinuation of Bevacizumab Might Be Considered after Variceal Bleeding in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Receiving Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab: Case Reports

Background and Objectives: Variceal bleeding (VB) is the most concerning condition that is difficult to treat after atezolizumab/bevacizumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods: We would like to introduce the cases of two patients who underwent bevacizumab reduction or discontinuation when VB occurred after atezolizumab/bevacizumab. Results: VB occurred in two patients who showed good tumor response after atezolizumab/bevacizumab treatment, and all VBs were successfully treated with endoscopic variceal ligations. In the first patient, VB did not occur as the tumor response decreased after a 50% reduction in bevacizumab. In the second patient, VB occurred again after a 50% bevacizumab reduction, so bevacizumab was discontinued and treatment with atezolizumab alone has been successfully maintained. Conclusions: Accordingly, we would like to suggest that considering bevacizumab dose reduction instead of changing to tyrosine kinase inhibitor may be a good clinical choice in atezolizumab/bevacizumab patients who develop VB.

Portal hypertension and variceal bleeding in patients with liver cancer: Evidence gaps for prevention and management

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Portal hypertension (PHT) and HCC are 2 major complications of cirrhosis that often coexist in the same patient and impact the prognosis, especially in patients with acute variceal bleeding. In this review, we aim to discuss the best strategy for PHT screening and primary prophylaxis, as well as the management of acute variceal bleeding, to improve the management of PHT in HCC patients.

RESULTS

Recent therapeutic advances observed in the management of HCC, notably through the advent of immunotherapy, have led to a clear improvement in the survival of patients. The prevention of complications related to underlying cirrhosis, such as PHT and acute variceal bleeding, is now part of the management of HCC patients. The Baveno VII conference recently redefined screening and prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis. However, data regarding the applicability of these criteria in patients with HCC have been sparse. From our point of view, the Baveno criteria are not appropriate to exclude high-risk esophageal varices (EV) in HCC patients, and endoscopy should be performed except in HCC patients with a liver stiffness measurement (LSM) ≥25 kPa, who should benefit from nonselective beta-blockers (NSSBs) without performing endoscopy. We are also in favor of using NSBBs as primary prophylaxis in patients with EV regardless of the size and with gastric varices since these patients display clinically significant PHT.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate evaluation and treatment of PHT remain major issues in improving the outcomes of HCC patients. Many questions remain unanswered, opening the field to many areas of research.

Baveno VI and VII criteria are not suitable for screening for large varices or clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Baveno VI and VII criteria are used in patients with cirrhosis to rule out large size oesophageal varices (EV) and rule in/out clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH).

AIM

To evaluate their diagnostic performance in these patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively included all patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis and HCC who had endoscopy, liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and platelet count within 6 months. They were classified according to the BCLC stage. Favourable Baveno VI criteria were defined by LSM < 20 kPa and platelets > 150 G/L (to rule out large EV), favourable Baveno VII criteria if LSM ≤ 15 kPa and platelets ≥ 150 G/L (to rule out CSPH, which was defined by a HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg.

RESULTS

We included 185 patients; 46% were BCLC-0/A, 28% BCLC-B and 26% BCLC-C. EV were present in 44% (23% large), and HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg in 42% (mean 8 mm Hg). In patients with favourable Baveno VI criteria, 8% of the whole cohort (Se 93%, NPV 92%), 11% of BCLC-0-A (Se 89%, NPV 89%) and 10.0% of BCLC-C patients (Se 91%, NPV 90%) had large EV. Among patients with HVPG < 10 mm Hg, 6% had large EV and 17% small. CSPH was present in 23% of patients with favourable Baveno VII criteria among the whole cohort, and in 25% of those with BCLC-0/A. The specificity of LSM ≥ 25 kPa to rule in CSPH was 48%.

CONCLUSIONS

Favourable Baveno VI criteria are not appropriate to rule out the presence of high-risk EV, or Baveno VII criteria to rule CSPH in/out in patients with HCC.

Factors associated with the response to atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

Background and Aim

The purpose of this study was to analyze factors associated with the overall survival (OS) of atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). We also assessed the OS of patients with ineffective therapy and those who discontinued treatment owing to adverse events (AEs).

Methods

This retrospective multicenter study involved 139 patients with aHCC who received atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy between November 2020 and September 2022.

Results

The median duration of treatment was 136.5 days, and the median observation period was 316 days. The overall response rate was 40%, and the disease control rate was 78% according to mRECIST criteria. Grade ≥2 AEs occurred in 63 patients (43%) and led to treatment discontinuation in 16 patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that treatment response and occurrence of grade ≥2 AEs after therapy, as well as low level of albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade and low level of des-gamma carboxy prothrombin (DCP) before therapy, were extracted as factors that contributed to OS. Log-rank tests with the Kaplan-Meier method showed significant differences in OS among these factors. The OS of patients who discontinued owing to AEs was significantly shorter than that of other patients.

Conclusion

Not only factors before therapy but also treatment response and the appearance of AEs are involved in OS for atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy. Although the development of AEs also contributed to OS, appropriate management of AEs is important to avoid discontinuing treatment with this combination.

A Case of Duodenal Variceal Rupture during Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab Treatment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Duodenal varices are detected infrequently, and their rupture is very rare. We encountered an 87-year-old man who developed duodenal varices rupture during chemotherapy with atezolizumab and bevacizumab (ATZ/BV) for hepatocellular carcinoma. We identified massive bleeding of a ruptured varix in the horizontal portion of the duodenum with emergency esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Successful hemostasis was achieved by endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with Histoacryl. Although ATZ/BV can cause esophageal varices rupture, there have been no cases of duodenal varices rupture. We should take care to check the duodenal varices as well as esophagogastric varices before ATZ/BV treatment.

Case Report: Exacerbation of varices following atezolizumab plus bevacizumab treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: A case series and literature review

Recently, a combined regimen of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (AB) treatment has been approved as a first-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), contributing to prolonged survival. However, we often encounter cases where treatment must be discontinued due to the occurrence of adverse events. One of these events, which is often fatal, is gastrointestinal bleeding. To clarify the clinical effects of gastrointestinal bleeding after AB treatment, we evaluated patients with HCC who were treated with AB at our institution. Of the 105 patients, five treated with AB developed gastrointestinal bleeding, necessitating treatment discontinuation. Additionally, we encountered two cases where exacerbation of varicose veins was observed, and AB therapy could be continued by preventive treatment of varices. In conclusion, an appropriate follow-up is required during treatment with AB to prevent possible exacerbation of varicose veins.