LBA34 Primary results from the phase III LEAP-002 study: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus lenvatinib as first-line (1L) therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC)

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Combined With Lenvatinib With or Without PD-1 Inhibitors as Initial Treatment for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical benefit and safety of the triple combination of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), lenvatinib, and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors with the dual combination of SBRT and lenvatinib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with uHCC who received SBRT in combination with lenvatinib and PD-1 inhibitors or SBRT in combination with lenvatinib alone as first-line treatment from October 2018 to July 2022 were reviewed in this study. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were intrahepatic PFS, extrahepatic PFS, and objective remission rate. In addition, safety profiles were assessed by analyzing treatment-related adverse events between the two groups to assess safety profiles.

RESULTS

In total, 214 patients with uHCC who received combination therapy were included in this retrospective study. Among them, 146 patients received triple combination therapy of SBRT, lenvatinib, and PD-1 inhibitors (SBRT-L-P group), and 68 patients received dual therapy of SBRT and lenvatinib (SBRT-L group). The median OS times of the 2 groups were 31.2 months and 17.4 months, respectively (P < .001). The median PFS time was significantly longer in the SBRT-L-P group than in the SBRT-L group (15.6 months vs 8.8 months, P < .001). Additionally, the median intrahepatic PFS (17.5 vs 9.9 months, P < .001) and extrahepatic PFS (20.9 vs 11.6 months, P < .001) were significantly longer in the SBRT-L-P group than in the SBRT-L group. The objective remission rate in the SBRT-L-P group was higher than in the SBRT-L group (63.0 vs 39.7%, P = .002). The incidence and severity of treatment-related adverse events in the SBRT-L-P group were comparable to those in the SBRT-L group.

CONCLUSION

The use of both lenvatinib and PD-1 inhibitors with SBRT in patients with uHCC was associated with improved overall survival compared with lenvatinib and SBRT alone with a manageable safety profile.

Systemic treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma secondary to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer death globally, with 15% of cases arising on a background of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). NAFLD is a heterogenous condition ranging from fatty liver to cirrhosis and is itself a growing global problem, with estimated worldwide prevalence of 50% in 2040. Pathophysiology of NAFLD-HCC is not well understood, there are no dedicated screening programs, and there have been no clinical studies of anti-cancer treatments in this population specifically. However, the NAFLD-HCC population appears different than other aetiologies - patients tend to be older, diagnosed at more advanced stages, have more comorbidities, and overall worse prognosis. Understanding of best treatment options for this group of patients is an urgent unmet clinical need. This narrative review discusses NAFLD-HCC pathophysiology and systemic treatment, and offers suggestions for future directions in this therapy area.

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy combined with systemic therapy sequentially or simultaneously for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) combined with targeted therapy and PD-(L)1 blockade (triple therapy), either sequentially (SE) or simultaneously (SI), in the treatment of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

APPROACH AND RESULTS

From January 1, 2018, to June 1, 2022, 575 patients with BCLC stage C HCC who underwent SE or SI triple therapy were retrospectively enrolled. Propensity score matching (PSM; 1:1) was performed to eliminate possible confounder imbalances across cohorts. We used the Kaplan-Meier method and a log-rank test to compare the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates between the SI and SE groups. The tumor response and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) were reported. After PSM, 182 patients in each of the two groups were matched. The median OS in the SI group was significantly longer than that in the SE group (28.8 vs. 16.1 months; P = 0.002), and the median PFS was significantly improved in the SI versus SE group (9.6 vs. 7.0 months; P = 0.01). The objective response rate based on the mRECIST was higher in the SI group (58% vs. 37%; P < 0.001). The total incidences of grade 3-4 AEs were 111/182 (60.9%) and 128/182 (70.3%) in the SE and SI groups, respectively. No grade 5 AEs were reported in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous HAIC plus targeted therapy and PD-(L)1 blockade significantly improved outcomes compared to the sequential regimen in patients with BCLC stage C HCC, with no unexpected AEs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

The patients who received hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy and PD-(L)1 blockade simultaneously have a better prognosis than those who received it sequentially.

Cadonilimab (PD-1/CTLA-4) in combination with lenvatinib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC): A retrospective real-world study

Background

Previous research has shown that combining tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with immunotherapy results in synergistic clinical efficacy. Cadonilimab, the first approved bi-specific antibody targeting PD-1 and CTLA-4, was studied to evaluate its efficacy and safety in combination with Lenvatinib as a first-line treatment for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC).

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted on 29 uHCC patients diagnosed at Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, between July 7, 2022, and March 3, 2023. Patients received Cadonilimab (10 mg/kg, IV, every 3 weeks) combined with Lenvatinib (8 mg, orally, daily). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR), with secondary endpoints including disease control rate (DCR), median progression-free survival (mPFS), median overall survival (mOS), median time to progression (mTTP), and safety.

Results

By April 2023, 29 patients had been enrolled in the study. The ORR was 37.9 %, DCR was 82.8 %, mPFS was 8.1 months, mTTP was 8.2 months, and mOS was not reached. A total of 93.1 % of patients experienced at least one treatment-related adverse event (TRAE). The most common adverse events were weight loss (51.7 %), increased aspartate aminotransferase (48.3 %), leukocytopenia (48.3 %), and neutropenia (48.3 %). TRAEs of grade 3 or higher occurred in 51.7 % of patients, with no grade 4 TRAEs observed.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of this combination, potentially improving outcomes as a first-line therapy, and offering a novel therapeutic approach for advanced HCC.

Disease Etiology Impact on Outcomes of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Treated with Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab: A Real-World, Multicenter Study

Introduction

The impact of etiology on response to immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is being debated, with contrasting findings between early and recent post hoc analyses of IMbrave-150 and metanalyses of clinical trials of PD-1/PD-L1 blockers. As a results, it is not clear whether the first-line systemic treatment atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A + B) is equally effective in viral and nonviral patients.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 885 HCC patients treated with the first-line A + B from multiple centers from Eastern and Western countries, 53.9% having viral and 46.1% nonviral etiology. Baseline clinical and laboratory characteristics were analyzed with uni- and multivariate models to explore potential differences on overall survival (OS), time-to-progression (TTP), disease control rates (DCRs) based on etiology and to identify putative prognostic factors in etiology subgroups. Treatment toxicities and access to the second-line treatments and outcomes were also reported and compared between etiologies.

Results

Overall, no statistically significant differences were found in median OS (mOS: viral 15.9 months; nonviral 16.3 months), TTP (mTTP: viral 8.3 months; nonviral 7.2 months), and DCRs (viral 78.1%; nonviral 80.8%) based on etiology. Prognostic factors of survival and progression were mainly shared between viral and nonviral etiologies, including alpha-fetoprotein, aspartate transaminase, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and ALBI score. Exploratory analyses highlighted a possible stronger association of immunological factors, i.e., NLR and eosinophil count, to treatment outcomes in viral patients. The toxicity profile, the access to and type of the second-line treatments and their outcome in terms of OS almost overlap in the two etiology subgroups.

Conclusion

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab efficacy does not vary according to underlying etiology of HCC in a multicenter, real-world population, matching recent post hoc findings from the IMbrave-150 trial. Preliminary analyses suggest that some prognostic factors differ between viral and nonviral patients, potentially due to biological and immunological differences. Prospective and comparative trials stratifying by etiology are warranted to validate these findings and guide clinical practice.

Characterization of Tumor Responses in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Lenvatinib in the Phase 3 Randomized Trial: REFLECT

Introduction

In REFLECT, lenvatinib was noninferior to sorafenib in terms of overall survival (OS) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC; median 13.6 vs. 12.3 months; HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.06). The objective response rate (ORR) with lenvatinib was 18.8% by blinded independent imaging review (IIR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1); per modified RECIST (mRECIST), the ORR was 40.6%. We sought to further characterize these tumor responses and explore ORR's importance among outcomes for patients with HCC.

Methods

Efficacy assessments included all patients randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib treatment (if bodyweight ≥60 kg, 12 mg/day; if <60 kg, 8 mg/day). Time to first objective response (TTR) and duration of response (DOR) included patients who achieved a partial or complete tumor response. Tumors were assessed by IIR per RECIST v1.1 or mRECIST.

Results

Four hundred seventy-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib. By IIR, 90 patients (18.8%) achieved an objective response per RECIST v1.1, and 194 (40.6%) had an objective response per mRECIST. Median TTR/DOR were 2.8 months/7.4 months in responders per RECIST v1.1, and 1.9 months/7.3 months in responders per mRECIST, respectively. Per baseline disease characteristics, ORRs by Child-Pugh score (A5/A6) were 21.2%/11.2% per RECIST v1.1 and 42.9%/33.6% per mRECIST, respectively. By baseline alpha-fetoprotein level (<400/≥400 ng/mL), ORRs were 21.4%/15.4% per RECIST v1.1 and 45.6%/33.8% per mRECIST, respectively. Incidences of treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were 98.9% in responders per RECIST v1.1 and 97.9% in responders per mRECIST.

Conclusions

Responses were seen even in those patients with more severe disease at baseline. Tumor responses occurred early and were durable.

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy plus camrelizumab and apatinib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is limited information on combination of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) and systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (Ad-HCC). We aim to compare the efficacy and safety of HAIC plus camrelizumab (a PD-1 inhibitor) and apatinib (an VEGFR-2 inhibitor) versus camrelizumab and apatinib for Ad-HCC.

METHODS

From April 2019 to October 2022, 416 patients with Ad-HCC who received either HAIC plus camrelizumab and apatinib (TRIPLET protocol, n = 207) or camrelizumab and apatinib (C-A protocol, n = 209) were reviewed retrospectively. The propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce selective bias. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test. Cox regression analyses of independent prognostic factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

After PSM 1:1, 109 patients were assigned to two groups. The median OS of not reached in the TRIPLET group was significantly longer than that of 19.9 months in the C-A group (p < 0.001), while in the TRIPLET group, the median PFS of 11.5 months was significantly longer than that of 9.6 months in the C-A group (p < 0.001). Multivariate analyses showed that the factors significantly affected the OS were CTP grade, tumor number > 3, and TRIPLET treatment (p < 0.001). Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred at a rate of 82.1% vs. 71.3% in TRIPLET and C-A groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The TRIPLET protocol has promising survival benefits in the management of patients with Ad-HCC, with acceptable safety.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

The study has been retrospectively registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/ , ChiCTR2300075828).

Evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of combining PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with anti-angiogenic agents in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, particularly when diagnosed at an unresectable stage. Traditional treatments for advanced HCC have limited efficacy, prompting the exploration of combination therapies. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the effectiveness and safety of combining PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with anti-angiogenic agents in patients with unresectable HCC.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science, including studies up to June 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing combination therapy (PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with anti-angiogenic agents) to monotherapy or standard treatments in unresectable HCC patients were included. Data were synthesized using random-effects models, with pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and risk ratios (RRs) for objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs).

Results

Five Phase III RCTs involving 1515 patients were included. Combination therapy significantly improved OS (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.60-0.85) and PFS (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.53-0.77) compared to monotherapy or standard treatments. The pooled OR for ORR was 1.27 (95% CI: 1.57-2.11), indicating a higher response rate with combination therapy. However, the risk of AEs was also higher in the combination therapy group (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.02-1.06). Subgroup analyses revealed consistent benefits across different types of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and anti-angiogenic agents, with no significant publication bias detected.

Conclusions

The combination of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with anti-angiogenic agents offers significant benefits in improving OS and PFS in patients with unresectable HCC, although it is associated with an increased risk of adverse events.

Radiotherapy with targeted and immunotherapy improved overall survival and progression-free survival for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) combined with targeted therapy and immunotherapy in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) is still unclear. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of RT combined with targeted therapy and immunotherapy in HCC with PVTT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-two patients with HCC with PVTT treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) plus programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor with or without RT from December 2019 to December 2023 were included. After propensity score matching (PSM) for adjusting baseline differences, 32 pairs were identified in RT + TKI + PD-1 group (n = 32) and TKI + PD-1 group (n = 32). Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).

RESULTS

Median OS (mOS) in RT + TKI + PD-1 group was significantly longer than TKI + PD-1 group (15.6 vs. 8.2 months, P = .008). Median PFS (mPFS) in RT + TKI + PD-1 group was dramatically longer than TKI + PD-1 group (8.1 vs. 5.2 months, P = .011). Patients in TKI + PD-1 + RT group showed favorable ORR and DCR compared with TKI + PD-1 group (78.1% vs. 56.3%, P = .055; 93.8% vs. 81.3%, P = .128). Subgroup analysis demonstrated a remarkable OS and PFS benefit with TKI + PD-1 + RT for patients with main PVTT (type III/IV) and those of Child-Pugh class A. Multivariate analysis confirmed RT + TKI + PD-1 as an independent prognostic factor for longer OS (HR 0.391, P = .024) and longer PFS (HR 0.487, P = .013), with no mortality or severe TRAEs.

CONCLUSION

RT combined with TKI and PD-1 inhibitor could significantly improve mOS and mPFS without inducing severe TRAEs or mortality.

A Phase 1a/1b Dose Escalation/Expansion Study of the Anti-PD-1 Monoclonal Antibody Nofazinlimab in Chinese Patients with Solid Tumors or Lymphoma

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint blockade with anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) antibodies has demonstrated efficacy in multiple tumor types. Nofazinlimab is a humanized rat antibody targeting PD-1. A first-in-human study of nofazinlimab conducted in Australia found no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was not reached in the range of 1-10 mg/kg.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated nofazinlimab for multiple advanced malignancies in Chinese patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a phase 1a/1b, open-label, multicenter, dose-escalation/expansion trial. In phase 1a, patients received an abbreviated dose escalation of nofazinlimab at 60 mg and 200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W) to determine DLTs and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). In phase 1b, patients received the RP2D (monotherapy/combination) in six arms by tumor type; DLTs were evaluated for nofazinlimab plus lenvatinib in the unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) arm. Safety (continuously monitored in patients who received nofazinlimab) and efficacy (patients with measurable baseline disease) were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 107 patients were eligible and received nofazinlimab. In phase 1a, no DLTs were observed; the RP2D was 200mg Q3W. In phase 1b, no DLTs were observed with nofazinlimab plus lenvatinib. The safety profile was consistent with that observed in the first-in-human study (NCT03475251). In phase 1b, 21/88 (23.9%) patients achieved confirmed objective responses, 26 (29.5%) had stable disease, and 9/20 (45.0%) patients with uHCC achieved confirmed objective responses to nofazinlimab plus lenvatinib.

CONCLUSIONS

Nofazinlimab was well tolerated in Chinese patients. Preliminary efficacy was encouraging, particularly for nofazinlimab plus lenvatinib in uHCC, which is being studied in an ongoing phase 3 trial.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03809767; registered 18 January 2019.

Immunotherapy vs Best Supportive Care for Patients With Hepatocellular Cancer With Child-Pugh B Dysfunction

Importance

Whether patients with Child-Pugh class B (CP-B) cancer with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) benefit from active anticancer treatment vs best supportive care (BSC) is debated.

Objective

To evaluate the association of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapies vs BSC with overall survival (OS) of patients with uHCC and CP-B liver dysfunction.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective, multicenter, international clinical case series examined data of patients with CP-B with uHCC who were receiving first-line ICI-based regimens from September 2017 to December 2022 whose data were extracted from an international consortium and compared with a cohort of patients with CP-B receiving BSC. Patients were treated in tertiary care centers across Europe, US, and Asia in routine clinical practice. After applying the inclusion criteria, 187 and 156 patients were left in the ICI and BSC groups, respectively. The propensity score was calculated for the following variables: age, alpha-fetoprotein levels, Child-Pugh score, extrahepatic spread, portal vein tumor thrombosis, cirrhosis, ascites, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.

Exposures

Patients in the ICI group received first-line systemic therapy with either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A+B) (n = 141) or nivolumab (n = 46).

Main Outcomes and Measures

OS in the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) populations was the main outcome, and it was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method; univariable Cox regression test was used to make comparisons between the 2 groups.

Results

The median age was 66 (IQR, 61-72) and 73 (IQR, 66-81) years in the ICI (33 women [18%]) and BSC groups (41 women [26%]), respectively. In the IPTW populations, median OS was significantly longer in the ICI group (7.50 months; 95% CI, 5.62-11.15) compared with BSC (4.04 months; 95% CI, 3.03-5.03; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.80; P < .001). Multivariable analysis confirmed that ICI exposure was associated with a reduction of approximately 50% in the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35-0.86; P < .001), and the presence of portal vein tumor thrombosis, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of greater than 1, and alpha-fetoprotein levels of 400 ng/mL or greater were associated with increased risk of death.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this case series provide comparative evidence of improved survival in association with ICI treatment compared with BSC in patients with uHCC with CP-B liver dysfunction.

A Prospective, Single-Arm, Phase 2 Study of Modified Transarterial Chemoembolization Using Low-Dose Chemotherapy with Blank Microspheres Plus Low-Dose Lenvatinib and Microwave Ablation in Patients with Large (≥7 cm) Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The TALEM Trial

Introduction

For patients with large unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the effectiveness of conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) remains suboptimal. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of modified TACE using low-dose chemotherapy with blank microspheres (BMS-TACE) plus low-dose lenvatinib (LD-LEN) and microwave ablation (MWA) in patients with large unresectable HCC.

Methods

In this prospective, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients with unresectable HCC exceeding the up-to-seven criteria, with maximum tumor diameter ≥7 cm, and without macrovascular invasion or extrahepatic metastases, received initial BMS-TACE (lipiodol, low-dose doxorubicin, and lobaplatin up to 30 mg each, and blank microspheres; subsequently modified and repeated in most patients) plus LD-LEN (4-8 mg/day) and MWA. The primary endpoint was downstaging rate (DSR); secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events.

Results

From November 2019 to March 2022, 43 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 21.2 months. Median largest tumor diameter was 11.2 cm (interquartile range [IQR], 7-25). Following BMS-TACE and LD-LEN, downstaging occurred in 37 (86.0%) patients, 32 of whom received MWA, and 8 of whom had a complete response (CR) without MWA. ORR was 93.0% (CR in 32 [74.4%] and partial response in 8 [18.6%] patients). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year PFS rates were 57.5%, 25.9%, and 18.1%, respectively (median PFS, 14.7 months [95% CI: 8.1-19.5]). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 85.8%, 67.7%, and 61.6%, respectively (median OS, 36.4 months [95% CI: 26.8-not reached]). After BMS-TACE, a significant decline in CD11b+/CD33+/HLA-DR- myeloid-derived suppressor cells and early elevation in CXCR5+/CD8+ and CXCR5+/CD4+ T cells were observed (both p < 0.05).

Conclusion

BMS-TACE plus LD-LEN and MWA resulted in promising efficacy and tolerable toxicity in patients with large unresectable HCC exceeding the up-to-seven criteria with a maximum tumor diameter ≥7 cm and without macrovascular invasion or extrahepatic metastases.

Cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors as a first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review

Since 2017, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been available for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or unresectable HCC, but their adoption into national medical insurance programs is still limited. Cost-effectiveness evidence can help to inform treatment decisions. This systematic review aimed to provide a critical summary of economic evaluations of ICIs as a treatment for advanced HCC and identify key drivers (PROSPERO 2023: CRD42023417391). The databases used included Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central. Economic evaluations of ICIs for the treatment of advanced HCC were included. Studies were screened by two people. Of the 898 records identified, 17 articles were included. The current evidence showed that ICIs, including atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, sintilimab plus bevacizumab/bevacizumab biosimilar, nivolumab, camrelizumab plus rivoceranib, pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib, tislelizumab, durvalumab, and cabozantinib plus atezolizumab, are probably not cost-effective in comparison with tyrosine kinase inhibitors or other ICIs. The most influential parameters were price of anticancer drugs, hazard ratios for progression-free survival and overall survival, and utility for health statest. Our review demonstrated that ICIs were not a cost-effective intervention in advanced HCC. Although ICIs can significantly enhance the survival of patients with advanced HCC, decision-makers should consider the findings of economic evaluations and affordability before adoption of new therapies.

Immune landscape of hepatocellular carcinoma: From dysregulation of the immune responses to the potential immunotherapies

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presents a considerable global health burden due to its late diagnosis and high morbidity. The liver's specific anatomical and physiological features expose it to various antigens, requiring precise immune regulation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that a comprehensive overview of the interactions between the immune system and gut microbiota in the development of HCC, as well as the relevant therapeutic approaches are discussed. Dysregulation of immune compartments within the liver microenvironment drives HCC pathogenesis, characterized by elevated regulatory cells such as regulatory T cells (Tregs), myeloid-derived suppressor cells, and M2 macrophages as well as suppressive molecules, alongside reduced number of effector cells like T cells, natural killer cells, and M1 macrophages. Dysbiosis of gut microbiota also contributes to HCC by disrupting intestinal barrier integrity and triggering overactivated immune responses. Immunotherapy approaches, particularly immune checkpoint inhibitors, have exhibited promise in HCC management, yet adoptive cell therapy and cancer vaccination research are in the early steps with relatively less favorable outcomes. Further understanding of immune dysregulation, gut microbiota involvement, and therapeutic combination strategies are essential for advancing precision immunotherapy in HCC.

The impact of PD-1 inhibitors on prognosis in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with TACE and lenvatinib: a retrospective study

Our aim was to explore whether programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitors would improve the prognosis of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus lenvatinib. In this single-center retrospective study, patients with unresectable HCC who underwent TACE and were administered lenvatinib with or without PD-1 inhibitors were enrolled and divided into the TACE + lenvatinib group and TACE + lenvatinib + PD-1 group. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and tumor response were assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1 and mRECIST). Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, version 5.0). In total, 35 eligible patients with unresectable HCC were included; 82.9% of patients had Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, and 88.6% of patients had liver cirrhosis. A total of 88.6% of patients had multiple tumors, and the median diameter of the largest tumor was 10.1 cm. A total of 14.3% of patients had extrahepatic metastasis, and 51.4% of patients had portal vein tumor thrombus. The percentages of BCLC stages A, B and C were 5.7%, 28.6% and 65.7%, respectively. There were 16 patients in the TACE + lenvatinib group and 19 patients in the TACE + lenvatinib + PD-1 group. The median follow-up time was 7.7 months (ranging from 1.7 to 31.6 months). Neither group reached the median overall survival. Under RECIST v1.1 criteria, the median PFS was 10.4 and 7.9 months in the TACE + lenvatinib and TACE + lenvatinib + PD-1 groups (HR, 1.13; 95% CI 0.45-2.84; p = 0.80), the objective response rates (ORR) were 31.3% and 31.6% (p > 0.05), and the disease control rates (DCR) were 93.8% and 78.9% (p > 0.05), respectively. Under mRECIST criteria, the median PFS was 10.4 and 10.1 months (HR, 0.98; 95% CI 0.38-2.54, p = 0.97), the ORR was 62.5% and 63.2% (p > 0.05), and the DCR was 93.8% and 73.7% (p > 0.05), respectively. Overall, AEs were relatively similar between the two groups. PD-1 inhibitors did not improve the PFS and tumor response of unresectable HCC treated with TACE plus lenvatinib. Hepatitis B infection, liver cirrhosis, portal vein tumor thrombus, multiple tumors and large tumor diameter may be potential factors that affect the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors but need further validation.

Anti-PD-1/L1 antibody plus anti-VEGF antibody vs. plus VEGFR-targeted TKI as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis

Background

This article is based on our previous research, which was presented at the 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting I and published in Journal of Clinical Oncology as Conference Abstract (JCO. 2023;41:e16148. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.e16148). Both anti-programmed death 1/ligand-1 (PD-1/L1) antibody + anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibody (A + A) and anti-PD-1/L1 antibody + VEGF receptor (VEGFR)-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (A + T) are effective first-line therapies for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. However, there lacks evidence from head-to-head comparisons between these two treatments. We conducted a network meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of them.

Methods

After a rigorous literature research, 6 phase III trials were identified for the final analysis, including IMbrave150, ORIENT-32, COSMIC-312, CARES-310, LEAP-002, and REFLECT. The experiments were classified into three groups: A + A, A + T, and intermediate reference group. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for OS and PFS, odds ratio (OR) for ORR, and relative risk (RR) for all grade and grade ≥3 TRAEs were calculated. Under Bayesian framework, the meta-analysis was conducted using sorafenib as intermediate reference.

Results

With the rank probability of 96%, A + A showed the greatest reduction in the risk of death, without significant difference from A + T (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.65-1.04). A + T showed the greatest effect in prolonging PFS and improving ORR with the rank probability of 77%, but there were no statistical differences with A + A. A + A was safer than A + T in terms of all grade of TRAEs (RR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82-1.00) and particularly in those grade ≥3 (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.54-0.77).

Conclusions

A + A had the greatest probability of delivering the longest OS, while A + T was correlated with larger PFS benefits at the cost of a lower safety rate.

Antiangiogenic-immune-checkpoint inhibitor combinations: lessons from phase III clinical trials

Antiangiogenic agents, generally antibodies or tyrosine-kinase inhibitors that target the VEGF-VEGFR pathway, are currently among the few combination partners clinically proven to improve the efficacy of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). This benefit has been demonstrated in pivotal phase III trials across different cancer types, some with practice-changing results; however, numerous phase III trials have also had negative results. The rationale for using antiangiogenic drugs as partners for ICIs relies primarily on blocking the multiple immunosuppressive effects of VEGF and inducing several different vascular-modulating effects that can stimulate immunity, such as vascular normalization leading to increased intratumoural blood perfusion and flow, and inhibition of pro-apoptotic effects of endothelial cells on T cells, among others. Conversely, VEGF blockade can also cause changes that suppress antitumour immunity, such as increased tumour hypoxia, and reduced intratumoural ingress of co-administered ICIs. As a result, the net clinical benefits from antiangiogenic-ICI combinations will be determined by the balance between the opposing effects of VEGF signalling and its inhibition on the antitumour immune response. In this Perspective, we summarize the results from the currently completed phase III trials evaluating antiangiogenic agent-ICI combinations. We also discuss strategies to improve the efficacy of these combinations, focusing on aspects that include the deleterious functions of VEGF-VEGFR inhibition on antitumour immunity, vessel co-option as a driver of non-angiogenic tumour growth, clinical trial design, or the rationale for drug selection, dosing and scheduling.

Immunotherapy combination approaches: mechanisms, biomarkers and clinical observations

The approval of the first immune checkpoint inhibitors provided a paradigm shift for the treatment of malignancies across a broad range of indications. Whereas initially, single-agent immune checkpoint inhibition was used, increasing numbers of patients are now treated with combination immune checkpoint blockade, where non-redundant mechanisms of action of the individual agents generally lead to higher response rates. Furthermore, immune checkpoint therapy has been combined with various other therapeutic modalities, including chemotherapy, radiotherapy and other immunotherapeutics such as vaccines, adoptive cellular therapies, cytokines and others, in an effort to maximize clinical efficacy. Currently, a large number of clinical trials test combination therapies with an immune checkpoint inhibitor as a backbone. However, proceeding without inclusion of broad, if initially exploratory, biomarker investigations may ultimately slow progress, as so far, few combinations have yielded clinical successes based on clinical data alone. Here, we present the rationale for combination therapies and discuss clinical data from clinical trials across the immuno-oncology spectrum. Moreover, we discuss the evolution of biomarker approaches and highlight the potential new directions that comprehensive biomarker studies can yield.

A Post-International Gastrointestinal Cancers' Conference (IGICC) Position Statements

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most prevalent liver tumor, is usually linked with chronic liver diseases, particularly cirrhosis. As per the 2020 statistics, this cancer ranks 6th in the list of most common cancers worldwide and is the third primary source of cancer-related deaths. Asia holds the record for the highest occurrence of HCC. HCC is found three times more frequently in men than in women. The primary risk factors for HCC include chronic viral infections, excessive alcohol intake, steatotic liver disease conditions, as well as genetic and family predispositions. Roughly 40-50% of patients are identified in the late stages of the disease. Recently, there have been significant advancements in the treatment methods for advanced HCC. The selection of treatment for HCC hinges on the stage of the disease and the patient's medical status. Factors such as pre-existing liver conditions, etiology, portal hypertension, and portal vein thrombosis need critical evaluation, monitoring, and appropriate treatment. Depending on the patient and the characteristics of the disease, liver resection, ablation, or transplantation may be deemed potentially curative. For inoperable lesions, arterially directed therapy might be an option, or systemic treatment might be deemed more suitable. In specific cases, the recommendation might extend to external beam radiation therapy. For all individuals, a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach should be adopted when considering HCC treatment options. The main treatment strategies for advanced HCC patients are typically combination treatments such as immunotherapy and anti-VEGFR inhibitor, or a combination of immunotherapy and immunotherapy where appropriate, as a first-line treatment. Furthermore, some TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors may be used as single agents in cases where patients are not fit for the combination therapies. As second-line treatments, some treatment agents have been reported and can be considered.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Beyond the Border of Advanced Stage Therapy

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the deadliest emergent health issue around the globe. The stronger oncogenic effect, proteins, and weakened immune response are precisely linked with a significant prospect of developing HCC. Several conventional systemic therapies, antiangiogenic therapy, and immunotherapy techniques have significantly improved the outcomes for early-, intermediate-, and advanced-stage HCC patients, giving new hope for effective HCC management and prolonged survival rates. Innovative therapeutic approaches beyond conventional treatments have altered the landscape of managing HCC, particularly focusing on targeted therapies and immunotherapies. The advancement in HCC treatment suggested by the Food and Drug Administration is multidimensional treatment options, including multikinase inhibitors (sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, ramucirumab, and cabozantinib) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, durvalumab, tremelimumab, ipilimumab, and nivolumab), in monotherapy and in combination therapy to increase life expectancy of HCC patients. This review highlights the efficacy of multikinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors in monotherapy and combination therapy through the analysis of phase II, and III clinical trials, targeting the key molecular pathways involved in cellular signaling and immune response for the prospective treatment of advanced and unresectable HCC and discusses the upcoming combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors-tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors-vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors. Finally, the hidden challenges with pharmacological therapy for HCC, feasible solutions for the future, and implications of possible presumptions to develop drugs for HCC treatment are reported.

Systemic Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update an evidence-based guideline to assist in clinical decision-making for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

ASCO convened an Expert Panel to update the 2020 guideline on systemic therapy for HCC. The panel updated the systematic review to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through October 2023 and updated recommendations.

RESULTS

Ten new RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were added to the evidence base.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Atezolizumab + bevacizumab (atezo + bev) or durvalumab + tremelimumab (durva + treme) may be offered first-line for patients with advanced HCC, Child-Pugh class A liver disease, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1. Where there are contraindications to these therapies, sorafenib, lenvatinib, or durvalumab may be offered first-line. Following first-line treatment with atezo + bev, second-line therapy with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), ramucirumab (for patients with alpha-fetoprotein [AFP] ≥400 ng/mL), durva + treme, or nivolumab + ipilimumab (nivo + ipi) may be recommended for appropriate candidates. Following first-line therapy with durva + treme, second-line therapy with a TKI is recommended. Following first-line treatment with sorafenib or lenvatinib, second-line therapy options include cabozantinib, regorafenib for patients who previously tolerated sorafenib, ramucirumab (AFP ≥400 ng/mL), nivo + ipi, or durvalumab; atezo + bev or durva + treme may be considered for patients who did not have access to these therapies in the first-line setting, and do not have contraindications. Pembrolizumab or nivolumab are also options for appropriate patients following sorafenib or lenvatinib. Third-line therapy may be considered in Child-Pugh class A patients with good PS, using one of the agents listed previously that has a nonidentical mechanism of action with previously received therapy. A cautious approach to systemic therapy is recommended for patients with Child-Pugh class B advanced HCC. Further guidance on choosing between options is included within the guideline.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

Radiographic and serologic response in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma receiving systemic antineoplastic treatments: A trial-level analysis

BACKGROUND

In a disease like unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, overall survival is an inadequate outcome measure for evaluating the effectiveness of treatments given the high risk of death from liver failure. There is an unmet need for reliable alternative end points for clinical trials and daily clinical practice. To evaluate treatment response in patients with unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (mHCC), imaging-related end points are often used, whereas serologic end points have been developed for patients with serum alpha-fetoprotein levels >20 ng/mL. The objective of this study was to evaluate clinical trials that report concomitant assessment of radiographic and serologic response in patients with mHCC.

METHODS

After a systematic review, studies that evaluated response according to radiographic and serologic criteria were selected. A correlation between progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was performed, and a linear regression of each response-related outcome measure with OS was reported. Finally, the effect of eight baseline variables on OS and response-related measures was evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included, including 16 first-line studies and 10 second-line studies. PFS and response rates demonstrated a significant relationship with OS, whereas disease control rates did not. The responses were correlated with OS, particularly in the first-line setting, after targeted therapy, and whenever assessment was early. Among the baseline variables, only performance status had a prognostic role, whereas hepatitis B virus-related liver disease was associated with higher radiographic response rates.

CONCLUSIONS

PFS and radiographic and serologic response rates appear to be reliable intermediate end points in patients with mHCC who are undergoing systemic antineoplastic therapy. However, the serologic response is available earlier.

Insights in Molecular Therapies for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

We conducted a comprehensive review of the current literature of published data and clinical trials (MEDLINE), as well as published congress contributions and active recruiting clinical trials on targeted therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma. Combinations of different agents and medical therapy along with radiological interventions were analyzed for the setting of advanced HCC. Those settings were also analyzed in combination with adjuvant situations after resection or radiological treatments. We summarized the current knowledge for each therapeutic setting and combination that currently is or has been under clinical evaluation. We further discuss the results in the background of current treatment guidelines. In addition, we review the pathophysiological mechanisms and pathways for each of these investigated targets and drugs to further elucidate the molecular background and underlying mechanisms of action. Established and recommended targeted treatment options that already exist for patients are considered for systemic treatment: atezolizumab/bevacizumab, durvalumab/tremelimumab, sorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, regorafenib, and ramucirumab. Combination treatment for systemic treatment and local ablative treatment or transarterial chemoembolization and adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment strategies are under clinical investigation.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: Advances in systemic therapies

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is traditionally associated with limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. Sorafenib, a multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was introduced in 2007 as a first-in-class systemic agent for advanced HCC. After sorafenib, a range of targeted therapies and immunotherapies have demonstrated survival benefits in the past 5 years, revolutionizing the treatment landscape of advanced HCC. More recently, evidence of novel combinations of systemic agents with distinct mechanisms has emerged. In particular, combination trials on atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab have shown encouraging efficacy. Hence, international societies have revamped their guidelines to incorporate new recommendations for these novel systemic agents. Aside from treatment in advanced HCC, the indications for systemic therapy are expanding. For example, the combination of systemic therapeutics with locoregional therapy (trans-arterial chemoembolization or stereotactic body radiation therapy) has demonstrated promising early results in downstaging HCC. Recent trials have also explored the role of systemic therapy as neoadjuvant treatment for borderline-resectable HCC or as adjuvant treatment to reduce recurrence risk after curative resection. Despite encouraging results from clinical trials, the real-world efficacy of systemic agents in specific patient subgroups (such as patients with advanced cirrhosis, high bleeding risk, renal impairment, or cardiometabolic diseases) remains uncertain. The effect of liver disease etiology on systemic treatment efficacy warrants further research. With an increased understanding of the pathophysiological pathways and accumulation of clinical data, personalized treatment decisions will be possible, and the field of systemic treatment for HCC will continue to evolve.

Impact of body mass index on the prognosis of unresectable HCC patients receiving first-line Lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab

INTRODUCTION

Overweight is a negative prognostic factor in the general population in the long term. However, the role of body mass index (BMI) in the short-mid term in advanced tumours is unclear. The present analysis investigates the role of BMI weight classes in a large sample of patients affected by HCC and receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line treatment.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

The cohort included consecutive patients affected by BCLC-c and BCLC-B HCC patients from a multicenter international study group who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line therapy. Population was stratified according to the BMI in under-, over- and normal-weight according to the conventional thresholds. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the prognostic and predictive impact of BMI in patients affected by advanced or intermediate HCC. Survival curves were estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan-Meier. The role of stratification factors was analysed with log-rank tests.

RESULTS

1292 consecutive patients with HCC were analysed. 466 (36%) patients were treated with lenvatinib and 826 (64%) patients were treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab arm, 510 (62%) patients were normal-weight, 52 (6%) underweight and 264 (32%) overweight. At the univariate analysis for OS, underweight patients had significantly shorter OS compared to normal-weight patients, whereas no differences were found between normal-weight versus overweight. Multivariate analysis confirmed that underweight patients had significantly shorter OS compared to normal-weight patients (HR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0-2.8; p = .0323). In the lenvatinib arm, 26 patients (5.6%) were categorized as underweight, 256 (54.9%) as normal-weight, and 184 (39.5%) as overweight. At the univariate analysis for OS, no significant differences were found between normal-weight versus underweight and between normal-weight versus overweight, which was confirmed at multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis highlighted a prognostic role of BMI in a cohort of patients with advanced HCC who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, while no prognostic role for low BMI was apparent in patients who received lenvatinib.

Efficacy of immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: Does liver disease etiology have a role?

The systemic treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is changing rapidly. After a decade of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), as the only therapeutic option for the treatment of advanced HCC, in the last few years several phase III trials demonstrated the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The combination of the anti-PD-L1 atezolizumab and the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) bevacizumab demonstrated the superiority over sorafenib and currently represents the standard of care treatment for advanced HCC. In addition, the combination of durvalumab (an anti-PD-L1) and tremelimumab (an anti-CTLA4) proved to be superior to sorafenib, and in the same trial durvalumab monotherapy showed non-inferiority compared to sorafenib. However, early reports suggest an influence of HCC etiology in modulating the response to these drugs. In particular, a lower effectiveness of ICIs has been suggested in patients with non-viral HCC (in particular non-alcoholic fatty liver disease). Nevertheless, randomized controlled trials available to date have not been stratified for etiology and data suggesting a possible impact of etiology in the outcome of patients managed with ICIs derive from subgroup not pre-specified analyses. In this review, we aim to examine the potential impact of HCC etiology on the response to immunotherapy regimens for HCC.

The more the merrier? Evidence and efficacy of immune checkpoint- and tyrosine kinase inhibitor combinations in advanced solid cancers

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have gained therapeutical significance in cancer therapy over the last years. Due to the high efficacy of each substance group, additive or complementary effects are considered, and combinations are the subject of multiple prospective trials in different tumor entities. The majority of available data results from clinical phase I and II trials. Although regarded as well-tolerated therapies ICI-TKI combinations have higher toxicities compared to monotherapies of one of the substance classes and some combinations were shown to be excessively toxic leading to discontinuation of trials. So far, ICI-TKI combinations with nivolumab + cabozantinib, pembrolizumab + axitinib, avelumab + axitinib, pembrolizumab + lenvatinib have been approved in advanced renal cell (RCC), with pembrolizumab + lenvatinib in endometrial carcinoma and with camrelizumab + rivoceranib in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Several ICI-TKI combinations are currently investigated in phase I to III trials in various other cancer entities. Further, the optimal sequence of ICI-TKI combinations is an important subject of investigation, as cross-resistances between the substance classes were observed. This review reports on clinical trials with ICI-TKI combinations in different cancer entities, their efficacy and toxicity.

Reclassification of therapeutic response of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma to anti-angiogenic therapy and immunotherapy using alpha RECIST

OBJECTIVES

To assess the therapeutic response of HCC to antiangiogenic therapy plus immunotherapy by integrating RECIST 1.1 and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) response at the 6th week to predict overall survival (OS).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 150 and 214 patients with HCC who received combination therapy in training and validation cohorts. The medical images and AFP levels obtained at baseline and 6th week were collected. AFP response stratification: partial response (PR): AFP% ≥ 75% decline; stable disease (SD): AFP% < 75% decline and  ≤ 10% elevation; progressive disease (PD): AFP% > 10% elevation. The alpha-RECIST was: PR: RECIST 1.1-PR or AFP-PR; PD: AFP-PD or RECIST 1.1-PD and does not satisfy AFP-PR; SD: neither PR nor PD. OS was compared using Kaplan-Meier curves. The predictive ability of various criteria was evaluated using the concordance index and time-dependent area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

RECIST 1.1 achieved significant OS stratification (p = 0.020) for AFP < 20 ng/mL. For AFP ≥ 20 ng/mL, alpha-RECIST showed better performance than RECIST 1.1, mRECIST, and AFP response according to C-index (0.73 vs 0.66 vs 0.68 vs 0.69). The National Cancer Center (NCC) strategy utilized RECIST 1.1 for AFP < 20 ng/mL and alpha-RECIST for AFP ≥ 20 ng/mL and showed better performance than RECIST 1.1, mRECIST and AFP response according to C-index (0.73 vs 0.67 vs 0.69 vs 0.64). The performances of alpha-RECIST and NCC Strategy were confirmed in the validation cohort (C-index = 0.77 and 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

The alpha-RECIST and NCC Strategy achieved better survival stratification in patients with HCC under combination therapy in the AFP ≥ 20 ng/mL group and the whole cohort compared to the RECIST 1.1, mRECIST, and AFP response.

CLINICAL TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

The alpha-RECIST and National Cancer Center strategy are optimal methods for determining therapeutic response to a combination of anti-angiogenic therapy plus immunotherapy and facilitating accurate prognostic stratification for HCC in the AFP ≥ 20 ng/mL group and the whole cohort, which may help oncologists for early identification of responders and progression at 6 weeks and clinical decision-making.

KEY POINTS

• RECIST 1.1 is indicated for patients with baseline alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) < 20 ng/mL. • For patients with baseline AFP ≥ 20 ng/mL, integrating RECIST 1.1 and AFP response (alpha-RECIST) may aid in the early identification of survival benefits and progression definition prior to the administration of additional efficacious drugs. • The National Cancer Center strategy is an optimal stratified strategy for determining therapeutic response to a combination of anti-angiogenic therapy and immunotherapy for HCC based on baseline AFP levels.

MASLD-Related HCC-Update on Pathogenesis and Current Treatment Options

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common complication of chronic liver diseases and remains a relevant cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. The global prevalence of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) as a risk factor for hepatocarcinogenesis is on the rise. Early detection of HCC has been crucial in improving the survival outcomes of patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), even in the absence of cirrhosis. Understanding how hepatocarcinogenesis develops in MASH is increasingly becoming a current research focus. Additive risk factors such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), genetic polymorphisms, and intestinal microbiota may have specific impacts. Pathophysiological and epidemiological associations between MASH and HCC will be discussed in this review. We will additionally review the available tumor therapies concerning their efficacy in MASH-associated HCC treatment.

Systemic therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma: A revolution?

The evolution in systemic therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) signifies a strategy of high-cost, high-gain innovation that originated with sorafenib, despite its limited impact on tumor response. This strategic approach paved the way for the emergence of a second wave of the short-lived competitive advantage, exemplified by the incorporation of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and tremelimumab plus durvalumab. In the context of safety concerns within the liver cancer domain, the IMBRAVE150 and HIMALAYA trials boldly incorporated bevacizumab and tremelimumab, respectively, demonstrating the continuation of the high-risk, high-reward innovation paradigm. This review delves into the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis of systemic therapies in the field of HCC.

Critical Appraisal of Guideline Recommendations on Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Review

Importance

The combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors with antiangiogenic agents has revolutionized the treatment landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, due to rapid publication of new studies that attained their predefined primary end points, a lack of robust cross-trial comparison of first-line therapies, and diverging clinical guidelines, no clear-cut treatment flowchart and sequence of therapies are available. This critical analysis of the recommendations for the management of advanced HCC from the main scientific societies in the US and Europe adopted an integrated approach to provide information on the clinical benefit (overall survival and progression-free survival) and safety profile of these therapies using the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) score and an ad hoc network meta-analysis.

Observations

There is a major consensus among guidelines that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has a primacy as the recommended first-line treatment of choice in advanced HCC. On progression after immunotherapy-containing regimens and for patients with contraindications for immunotherapies, most guidelines maintain the established treatment hierarchy, recommending lenvatinib or sorafenib as the preferred options, followed by either regorafenib, cabozantinib, or ramucirumab. Thus far, the first-line immune-based regimen of tremelimumab plus durvalumab has been integrated only in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidance document and the latest National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and has particular utility for patients with a high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. Overall, in the first-line setting, both atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and sintilimab plus IBI305 (a bevacizumab biosimilar) and durvalumab plus tremelimumab received the highest ESMO-MCBS score of 5, indicating a substantial magnitude of clinical benefit. In a network meta-analysis, no significant differences in overall survival were found among the various combination regimens. However, the newly reported combination of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib was associated with a significantly higher risk of treatment-related adverse events compared with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (relative risk, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.25-2.03; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

This narrative review found that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is regarded as the primary standard of care for advanced HCC in the first-line setting. These findings from integrating the recommendations from scientific societies' guidelines for managing advanced HCC along with new data from cross-trial comparisons may aid clinicians in decision-making and guide them through a rapidly evolving and complex treatment landscape.

Lenvatinib Versus Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab in the First-Line Treatment for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of Real-World Studies

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, whether adding immunotherapy to antiangiogenic therapy benefits patients with unresectable HCC (uHCC) more in the first-line setting remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

In this analysis, we compared the clinical outcomes of lenvatinib monotherapy with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination therapy in advanced uHCC in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were systematically searched on 23 April 2023. The "metaSurvival" and "meta" packages of the R software (version 4.2.2) were used to summarize the survival curves and meta-analyze the survival data. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were defined as dual primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints included the objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR).

RESULTS

Overall, the pooled median OS was 18.4 months in the lenvatinib group versus 18.5 months in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group; the pooled median PFS was 6.9 months in the lenvatinib group versus 7.3 months in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group. Lenvatinib therapy showed similar OS [hazard ratio (HR): 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55-1.52, p = 0.72] and PFS (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.56-1.12, p = 0.19) compared with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab therapy. In addition, a comparable ORR [odds ratio (OR): 0.89, 95% CI: 0.65-1.20, p = 0.44) was observed between lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive analysis suggested that lenvatinib monotherapy exhibited survival outcomes comparable to those of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination therapy, which may provide useful insights for clinicians in future clinical practice.

Regorafenib plus nivolumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: the phase 2 RENOBATE trial

Regorafenib has anti-tumor activity in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) with potential immunomodulatory effects, suggesting that its combination with immune checkpoint inhibitor may have clinically meaningful benefits in patients with uHCC. The multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 RENOBATE trial tested regorafenib-nivolumab as front-line treatment for uHCC. Forty-two patients received nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks and regorafenib 80 mg daily (3-weeks-on/1-week-off schedule). The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. The secondary endpoints included safety, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). ORR per RECIST version 1.1 was 31.0%, meeting the primary endpoint. The most common adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (38.1%), alopecia (26.2%) and skin rash (23.8%). Median PFS was 7.38 months. The 1-year OS rate was 80.5%, and the median OS was not reached. Exploratory single-cell RNA sequencing analyses of peripheral blood mononuclear cells showed that long-term responders exhibited T cell receptor repertoire diversification, enrichment of genes representing immunotherapy responsiveness in MKI67+ proliferating CD8+ T cells and a higher probability of M1-directed monocyte polarization. Our data support further clinical development of the regorafenib-nivolumab combination as front-line treatment for uHCC and provide preliminary insights on immune biomarkers of response. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04310709 .

Systemic Drugs for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: What Do Recent Clinical Trials Reveal About Sequencing and the Emerging Complexities of Clinical Decisions?

Liver cancer was the fourth leading cause of cancer death in 2015 with increasing incidence between 1990 and 2015. Orthotopic liver transplantation, surgical resection and ablation comprise the only curative therapy options. However, due to the late manifestation of clinical symptoms, many patients present with intermediate or advanced disease, resulting in no curative treatment option being available. Whereas intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is usually still addressable by transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), advanced-stage HCC is amenable only to pharmacological treatments. Conventional cytotoxic agents failed demonstrating relevant effect on survival also because their use was severely limited by the mostly underlying insufficient liver function. For a decade, tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) sorafenib was the only systemic therapy that proved to have a clinically relevant effect in the treatment of advanced HCC. In recent years, the number of substances for systemic treatment of advanced HCC has increased enormously. In addition to tyrosine kinase inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and antiangiogenic drugs are increasingly being applied. The combination of anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody atezolizumab and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibody bevacizumab has become the new standard of care for advanced HCC due to its remarkable response rates. This requires more and more complex clinical decisions regarding tumor therapy. This review aims at summarizing recent developments in systemic therapy, considering data on first- and second-line treatment, use in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting and combination with locoregional procedures.

Progress in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with immune combination therapy

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a severe malignancy that poses a serious threat to human health. Owing to challenges in early diagnosis, most patients lose the opportunity for radical treatment when diagnosed. Nonetheless, recent advancements in cancer immunotherapy provide new directions for the treatment of HCC. For instance, monoclonal antibodies against immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) such as programmed cell death protein 1/death ligand-1 inhibitors and cytotoxic t-lymphocyte associated antigen-4 significantly improved the prognosis of patients with HCC. However, tumor cells can evade the immune system through various mechanisms. With the rapid development of genetic engineering and molecular biology, various new immunotherapies have been used to treat HCC, including ICIs, chimeric antigen receptor T cells, engineered cytokines, and certain cancer vaccines. This review summarizes the current status, research progress, and future directions of different immunotherapy strategies in the treatment of HCC.

Biomarkers and prognostic factors of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor-based therapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Systemic therapies using programmed death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have demonstrated commendable efficacy in some patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, other individuals do not respond favorably. Hence, identifying the biomarkers, the prognostic factors, and their underlying mechanisms is crucial. In this review, we summarized the latest advancements in this field. Within the tumor microenvironment, PD-L1 expression is commonly utilized to predict response. Moreover, the characteristics of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are associated with the effectiveness of immunotherapy. Preclinical studies have identified stimulatory dendritic cells, conventional dendritic cells, and macrophages as potential biomarkers. The emergence of single-cell sequencing and spatial transcriptomics has provided invaluable insights into tumor heterogeneity through the lens of single-cell profiling and spatial distribution. With the widespread adoption of next-generation sequencing, certain genomic characteristics, including tumor mutational burden, copy number alterations, specific genes (TP53, CTNNB1, and GZMB), and signaling pathways (WNT/β-catenin) have been found to correlate with prognosis. Furthermore, clinical features such as tumor size, number, and metastasis status have demonstrated prognostic value. Notably, common indicators such as the Child-Pugh score and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, which are used in patients with liver diseases, have shown potential. Similarly, commonly employed laboratory parameters such as baseline transforming growth factor beta, lactate dehydrogenase, dynamic changes in alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and abnormal prothrombin, CRAFITY score (composed of C-reactive protein and AFP), and immune adverse events have been identified as predictive biomarkers. Novel imaging techniques such as EOB-MRI and PET/CT employing innovative tracers also have potential. Moreover, liquid biopsy has gained widespread use in biomarker studies owing to its non-invasive, convenient, and highly reproducible nature, as well as its dynamic monitoring capabilities. Research on the gut microbiome, including its composition, dynamic changes, and metabolomic analysis, has gained considerable attention. Efficient biomarker discovery relies on continuous updating of treatment strategies. Next, we summarized recent advancements in clinical research on HCC immunotherapy and provided an overview of ongoing clinical trials for contributing to the understanding and improvement of HCC immunotherapy.

Approved immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma: a large-scale meta-analysis and systematic review

A meta-analysis was performed to assess the benefits and safety profile of approved immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Eligible studies were searched from Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed databases based on a well-established strategy. Following the exclusion of ineligible studies, 12 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with control group, immune checkpoint inhibitors were associated with improved ORR (OR 3.03, 95% CI 2.26-4.05, P < 0.00001), SD (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.95, P = 0.02), OS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.83, P < 0.00001), and PFS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.87, P < 0.0003). However, no significant differences were observed in DCR (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.97-1.81, P = 0.07), PD (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67-1.21, P = 0.48), and all caused any-grade adverse events (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.62-2.39, P = 0. 57), all caused ≥ grade 3 adverse events (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.97-1.25, P = 0.14), treatment-related any-grade adverse events (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.55-2.32, P = 0.73), and treatment-related ≥ grade 3 events (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.34-1.97, P = 0.65) between the two groups. After subgroup analysis conducted, patients in the immune checkpoint inhibitor group compared with targeted drug group showed significant improvements in OS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.84, P < 0.00001) and PFS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.91, P = 0.004). Immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated peculiar benefits in the treatment of HCC with an acceptable safety profile. Compared to targeted drugs, immune checkpoint inhibitors still offer advantages in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. However, there is still considerable room for further improvement.

Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in 2024: The Multidisciplinary Paradigm in an Evolving Treatment Landscape

Liver cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) makes up the majority of liver cancer cases. Despite the stabilization of incidence rates in recent years due to effective viral hepatitis treatments, as well as improved outcomes from early detection and treatment advances, the burden of HCC is anticipated to rise again due to increasing rates of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease and alcohol-related liver disease. The treatment landscape is evolving and requires a multidisciplinary approach, often involving multi-modal treatments that include surgical resection, transplantation, local regional therapies, and systemic treatments. The optimal approach to the care of the HCC patient requires a multidisciplinary team involving hepatology, medical oncology, diagnostic and interventional radiology, radiation oncology, and surgery. In order to determine which approach is best, an individualized treatment plan should consider the patient's liver function, functional status, comorbidities, cancer stage, and preferences. In this review, we provide an overview of the current treatment options and key trials that have revolutionized the management of HCC. We also discuss evolving treatment paradigms for the future.

The GRAPHS-CRAFITY score: a novel efficacy predictive tool for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with immunotherapy

OBJECTIVES

To investigate MR features associated with prognosis of unresectable HCC receiving immunotherapy and establish a MR feature-based scoring system to predict efficacy of immunotherapy.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients with unresectable HCC who received immunotherapy at 2 hospitals between August 2018 and February 2022. The last follow-up was October 2022. Clinical variables and MR features were assessed using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. A new scoring system was constructed based on independent risk factors and the CRAFITY score consisting of AFP (≥ 100 ng/ml) and CRP (≥ 1 mg/dl). And the predictive performance of CRAFITY core and new score were compared by receiver-operating-characteristics curves (ROCs), area under ROCs (AUCs), and calibration curves.

RESULTS

A total of 166 patients (55.6 ± 10.4 years) were included in training cohort and 77 patients (55.4 ± 10.7 years) were included in validation cohort. There were significant differences in BCLC stage, max size, macrovascular invasion, intratumoral artery, and enhancing capsule between the 2 groups. Based on independent risk factors (gross GRowtH type, intratumoral fAt, enhancing tumor caPsule, Sex and CRAFITY score), a novel efficacy predictive tool named the GRAPHS-CRAFITY score was developed to predict OS. The OS was significantly different among the 3 groups according to GRAPHS-CRAFITY score (p value < 0.001). The GRAPHS-CRAFITY score could predict tumor response and disease control (p value < 0.001, p value < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The GRAPHS-CRAFITY score is a reliable and easily applicable tool to predict the efficacy of unresectable HCC receiving immunotherapy.

Act Local, Think Global: IR and Its Role in Immuno-Oncology in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Interventional oncology (IO) is evolving rapidly. The treatment landscape of liver cancer is changing rapidly, and immunotherapy combinations have become the standard of care for most patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The higher response rates and improved outcomes observed with these agents are leading to initiatives for their earlier incorporation in the course of the disease, including in combination with ablative and transarterial treatment options. The intersectionality of systemic therapies and liver-directed approaches has allowed IO to be at the center stage of a rapidly evolving dynamic field across all stages of HCC. This review article will address the current state of treatment for advanced HCC and the incorporation of these options in both localized and advanced stages along with IO to further enhance the observed benefits.

A meta-analysis and real-world cohort study on the sex-related differences in efficacy and safety of immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

Background & Aims

Sex-related differences in the immune pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), particularly related to oestrogen-dependent secretion of pro-tumourigenic cytokines, are well-known. Whether sex influences the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy is not known.

Methods

We performed a restricted maximum likelihood random effects meta-analysis of five phase III trials that evaluated immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced HCC and reported overall survival (OS) hazard ratios (HRs) stratified by sex to evaluate sex-related differences in OS. In a real-world cohort of 840 patients with HCC from 22 centres included between 2018 and 2023, we directly compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab (A+B) between sexes. Radiological response was reported according to RECIST v1.1. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed for OS and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

In the meta-analysis, immunotherapy was associated with a significant OS benefit only in male (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86) but not in female (pooled HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.70-1.03) patients with HCC. When directly comparing model estimates, no differences in the treatment effect between sexes were observed. Among 840 patients, 677 (81%) were male (mean age 66 ± 11 years), and 163 (19%) were female (mean age 67 ± 12 years). Type and severity of adverse events were similar between the two groups. OS and PFS were comparable between males and females upon uni- and multivariable analyses (aHR for OS and PFS: 0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.04; 1.02, 95% CI 0.80-1.30, respectively). Objective response rates (24%/22%) and disease control rates (59%/59%) were also similar between sexes.

Conclusion

Female phase III trial participants experienced smaller OS benefit following ICI therapy for advanced HCC, while outcomes following A+B treatment were comparable between sexes in a large real-world database. Based on the ambiguous sex-related differences in survival observed here, further investigation of sex-specific clinical and biologic determinants of responsiveness and survival following ICIs are warranted.

Impact and implications

While immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as standard of care for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma, there are conflicting reports on whether the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy differs between females and males. Our study suggests ambiguous sex-related differences in outcomes from immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma. Further investigation of sex-specific clustering in clinicopathologic and immunologic determinants of responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy should be prioritised.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42023429625.

Phase I/II trial of BMS-986,205 and nivolumab as first line therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) helps orchestrate immune suppression and checkpoint inhibitor resistance in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). BMS-986,205 is a novel oral drug that potently and selectively inhibits IDO. This Phase I/II study evaluated the safety and tolerability of BMS-986,205 in combination with nivolumab as first-line therapy in advanced HCC.

METHODS

Adults with untreated, unresectable/metastatic HCC received BMS-986,205 at two dose levels (50-100 mg orally daily) in combination with fixed dose nivolumab (240mg/m2 IV on Day 1 of each 14-day cycle). The primary objective was to determine the safety and tolerability of this combination; secondary objectives were to obtain preliminary efficacy.

RESULTS

Eight patients received a total of 91 treatment cycles in the dose escalation phase. All patients were Child Pugh A and 6 patients had underlying viral hepatitis. In the 6 evaluable patients, no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were aspartate transaminase (AST) and alanine transaminase (ALT) elevation (3 patients) and diarrhea, maculopapular rash and increased alkaline phosphatase (2 patients each). Grade 3 events were diarrhea and AST elevation (1 patient), and hyperglycemia and pancreatitis requiring treatment discontinuation (1 patient). No grade 4-5 events occurred. Partial response was observed in 1 patient (12.5%) and stable disease in 3 patients (37.5%), yielding a disease control rate of 50%. Median PFS was 8.5 weeks; median OS was not reached.

CONCLUSION

Combination BMS-986,205 and nivolumab showed a manageable safety profile with durable benefit as first-line therapy in a meaningful subset of advanced HCC patients.

Impact of underlying liver disease on unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard therapy for unresectable HCC, but many patients do not respond. Non-viral HCC, particularly non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), have been implicated in ICI resistance.

METHODS

We reviewed 288 patients with unresectable HCC who received ICI from 1/2017 to 12/2021. The overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) between patients with viral HCC and non-viral HCC were compared using the full and Child Pugh (CP) class A only cohorts.

RESULTS

In total, 206 patients (71.5%) had viral HCC (most HCV), and 82 patients had non-viral HCC. Non-viral HCC was associated with worse OS (HR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.1, P = 0.006) and PFS (HR 1.5, 95% CI: 1.2-2, P = 0.002) in univariate but not multivariate analyses. For the CP class A cohort, non-viral HCC was independently associated with worse OS (HR 1.8, 95% CI: 1.2-2.7, P = 0.005) and PFS (HR 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3-2.7, P < 0.001). Viral HCC and CP class A liver disease was associated with better ORR than non-viral HCC (38% vs. 16%, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Following ICI treatment, non-viral HCC correlated with worse OS, PFS, and ORR than viral HCC, particularly in patients with preserved liver function.

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with anti-angiogenesis agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) has been proven to be an ideal choice for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). HAIC-based treatment showed great potential for treating uHCC. However, large-scale studies on HAIC-based treatments and meta-analyses of first-line treatments for uHCC are lacking.

AIM

To investigate better first-line treatment options for uHCC and to assess the safety and efficacy of HAIC combined with angiogenesis inhibitors, programmed cell death of protein 1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) blockers (triple therapy) under real-world conditions.

METHODS

Several electronic databases were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials for this meta-analysis. Study-level pooled analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were performed. This was a retrospective single-center study involving 442 patients with uHCC who received triple therapy or angiogenesis inhibitors plus PD-1/PD-L1 blockades (AIPB) at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from January 2018 to April 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance the bias between the groups. The Kaplan-Meier method and cox regression were used to analyse the survival data, and the log-rank test was used to compare the suvival time between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 13 randomized controlled trials were included. HAIC alone and in combination with sorafenib were found to be effective treatments (P values for ORs: HAIC, 0.95; for HRs: HAIC + sorafenib, 0.04). After PSM, 176 HCC patients were included in the analysis. The triple therapy group (n = 88) had a longer median overall survival than the AIPB group (n = 88) (31.6 months vs 14.6 months, P < 0.001) and a greater incidence of adverse events (94.3% vs 75.4%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that HAIC-based treatments are likely to be the best choice for uHCC. Our findings confirm that triple therapy is more effective for uHCC patients than AIPB.

New First-line Immunotherapy-based Therapies for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Living Network Meta-analysis

Background and Aims

Several first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combination therapies have been identified for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to provide the most updated evidence about the preferred first-line ICI-based regimens for uHCC.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was performed in various databases from database inception to May 2022. The phase 3 trials evaluating first-line single-agent ICIs, molecular-target agents (MTAs), or their combinations in uHCC were included. The main endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Pooled effect estimates were calculated using a random effects model within the frequentist framework. Subgroup analyses based on etiology were also conducted.

Results

Twelve trials at low risk of bias with 8,275 patients comparing 13 treatments were included. OS with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was comparable to sintilimab plus IBI305 [hazard ratio (HR): 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.80-1.68] and camrelizumab plus apatinib (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.75-1.51). The combination therapies, apart from atezolizumab plus cabozantinib in OS and durvalumab plus tremelimumab in PFS, had higher P-score than single-agent MTAs or ICIs. The survival benefits were associated with a high risk of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation. The proportion of patients with hepatitis B virus-related HCC receiving ICIs combinations might positively correlate with survival advantages (R2=0.8039, p=0.0155).

Conclusion

This NMA demonstrated that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab remains the stand of care and confers comparable survival benefits to sintilimab plus IBI305 and camrelizumab plus apatinib in first-line therapy for uHCC. The optimal treatment algorithms should consider efficacy, safety, and etiology.

Recent Progress in Systemic Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have several systemic treatment options. There are many known risk factors for HCC, and although some, such as hepatitis C, are now treatable, others are not. For example, metabolic dysfunction-related chronic liver disease is increasing in incidence and has no specific treatment. Underlying liver disease, drug resistance, and an increasing number of treatment options without specific biomarkers are all challenges in selecting the best treatment for each patient. Conventional chemotherapy is almost never used for advanced-stage disease, which instead is treated with immunotherapy, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and VEGF inhibitors. Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting various receptors have been or are currently undergoing clinical evaluation. Ongoing trials with three-drug regimens may be the future of advanced-stage HCC treatment. Other immune-modulatory approaches of chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells, bispecific antibodies, cytokine-induced killer cells, natural killer cells, and vaccines are in early-stage clinical trials. Targeted therapies remain limited for HCC but represent an area of potential growth. As we shift away from first-line sorafenib for advanced HCC, clinical trial control arms should comprise a standard treatment other than sorafenib, one that is a better comparator for advancing therapies.

First-Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Three-Armed Real-World Comparison

Background and Aim

There are several existing systemic 1st- line therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including atezolizumab/bevacizumab (Atez/Bev), sorafenib and lenvatinib. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of these three 1st-line systemic treatments in a real-world setting for HCC, focusing on specific patient subgroups analysis.

Methods

A total of 177 patients with advanced HCC treated with Atez/Bev (n = 38), lenvatinib (n = 21) or sorafenib (n = 118) as 1st line systemic therapy were retrospectively analyzed and compared. Primary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and 15-month overall survival (15-mo OS). Subgroups regarding liver function, etiology, previous therapy and toxicity were analyzed.

Results

Atez/Bev demonstrated significantly longer median 15-month OS with 15.03 months compared to sorafenib with 9.43 months (p = 0.04) and lenvatinib with 8.93 months (p = 0.05). Similarly, it had highest ORR of 31.6% and longest median PFS with 7.97 months, independent of etiology. However, significantly superiority was observed only compared to sorafenib (ORR: 4.2% (p < 0.001); PFS: 4.57 months (p = 0.03)), but not comparing to lenvatinib (ORR: 28.6% (p = 0.87); PFS: 3.77 months (p = 0.10)). Atez/Bev also resulted in the longest PFS in patients with Child-Pugh A and ALBI 1 score and interestingly in those previously treated with SIRT. Contrary, sorafenib was non inferior in patients with impaired liver function.

Conclusion

Atez/Bev achieved longest median PFS and 15-mo OS independent of etiology and particularly in patients with stable liver function or prior SIRT treatment. Regarding therapy response lenvatinib was non-inferior to Atez/Bev. Finally, sorafenib seemed to perform best for patients with deteriorated liver function.

Recent advances in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver cancer remains a challenge of global health, being the 4th leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of primary liver cancer, and is usually precipitated by chronic viral infections (hepatitis B and C), non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, heavy alcohol use, and other factors which may lead to chronic inflammation and cirrhosis of the liver. There have been significant advances in the systemic treatment options for HCC over the past decades, with several approvals of both immune checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with preserved liver function. These advances have led to improvement in survival outcomes, with expected survival of greater than 18 months, in those with sensitive tumors, adequate liver function, and those functionally fit to receive sequential therapies. Several ongoing and promising trials are now evaluating combinational strategies with novel systemic agents and combinations of systemic therapy with locoregional therapy. In view of these trials, further advances in the treatment of HCC are foreseen in the near future.