S-1 versus placebo in patients with sorafenib-refractory advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (S-CUBE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial

Anticancer Drugs Compared to No Anticancer Drugs in Patients with Advanced Hepatobiliary Cancer: A Mapping Review and Evidence Gap Map

Introduction

Despite being commonly recommended, the impact of anticancer drugs (ACDs) on patient-important outcomes beyond survival for advanced hepatobiliary cancers (HBCs) may not have been sufficiently assessed. We aim to identify and map the evidence regarding ACDs versus best supportive care (BSC) for advanced HBCs, considering patient-centered outcomes.

Methods

In this mapping review, we included systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and observational studies comparing ACDs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, biological/targeted therapy) versus BSC for advanced HBCs. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible studies. Two reviewers performed the screening and data extraction processes. We developed evidence maps for each type of cancer.

Results

We included 87 studies (60 for advanced liver cancer and 27 for gallbladder or bile duct cancers). Most of the evidence favored ACDs for survival outcomes, and BSC for toxicity. We identified several evidence gaps for non-survival outcomes, including quality of life or quality of end-of-life care.

Discussion

Patient-important outcomes beyond survival in advanced HBCs are insufficiently assessed by the available evidence. Future studies need to address these gaps to better inform decision-making processes.

Systemic Oncological Treatments versus Supportive Care for Patients with Advanced Hepatobiliary Cancers: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

The trade-off between systemic oncological treatments (SOTs) and UPSC in patients with primary advanced hepatobiliary cancers (HBCs) is not clear in terms of patient-centred outcomes beyond survival. This overview aims to assess the effectiveness of SOTs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted/biological therapies) versus UPSC in advanced HBCs.

METHODS

We searched for systematic reviews (SRs) in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos and PROSPERO. Two authors assessed eligibility independently and performed data extraction. We estimated the quality of SRs and the overlap of primary studies, performed de novo meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

RESULTS

We included 18 SRs, most of which were of low quality and highly overlapped. For advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, SOTs showed better overall survival (HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.55-0.77, high certainty for first-line therapy; HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.92, moderate certainty for second-line therapy) with higher toxicity (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 0.87-1.60, very low certainty for first-line therapy; RR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.28-1.96, low certainty for second-line therapy). Survival was also better for SOTs in advanced gallbladder cancer. No outcomes beyond survival and toxicity could be meta-analysed.

CONCLUSION

SOTs in advanced HBCs tend to improve survival at the expense of greater toxicity. Future research should inform other patient-important outcomes to guide clinical decision making.

Changes in therapeutic options for hepatocellular carcinoma in Asia

The incidence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is expected to increase, with most cases occurring in Asia. In some parts of Asia, the occurrence of HCC developing from metabolic-related liver disease has markedly increased in recent years, whereas the occurrence of HCC developing from viral-hepatitis-related liver disease has decreased. Advancements in the treatment of HCC over the past few decades has been remarkable, with most treatment strategies to remove or control liver tumours (hepatic resection, local ablation, radiation therapy, transarterial chemoembolisation, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy) primarily developing in Asia. In addition, recent progress in systemic therapies has prolonged the prognosis of advanced HCC. Nowadays, six regimens of systemic therapies have become available in most countries, according to phase III trials (atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, cabozantinib and ramucirumab). In a global randomised phase III trial (IMbrave 150 trial), the most effective of the latest drug designs was newly emerged combination immunotherapy (atezolizumab plus bevacizumab), which has shown significantly prolonged overall survival compared with sorafenib, which was the first-line systemic therapy for more than a decade. Now, the treatment dynamics for HCC are undergoing a major transition as a result of two important changes: the replacement of viral-related HCC by metabolic-related HCC and the emergence of combination immune therapy.

New treatment paradigm with systemic therapy in intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma

Since the approval of sorafenib for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in 2007 (in 2009 in Japan), five more regimens have been approved: lenvatinib, and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for first-line treatment, and regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab for second-line treatment, which are currently available for clinical use. The positive results of durvalumab, a programmed cell death ligand 1 antibody, plus tremelimumab, an anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 antibody, were also presented at the 2022 American Society Clinical Oncology Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium as superior to sorafenib in prolonging the overall survival; this combination is expected to be approved by the end of 2022. These systemic therapies are changing the treatment paradigm not only for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma but also for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. This review focuses on the role of systemic therapy in intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

Experimental drug treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma: Clinical trial failures 2015 to 2021

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major health problem worldwide with limited systemic therapy options. Since the approval of sorafenib in 2008, no systemic therapy has provided a sustained/robust/survival benefit for patients with advanced HCC until recently. Many initially promising therapies have been trialed, but survival outcomes remained stagnant. As such, knowledge concerning previous treatment failures may help guide further areas of study, as well inform future therapeutic approaches.

AREA COVERED

This article reviews recent advances in the treatment of HCC. Despite some recent success, many systemic and locoregional therapies have failed to produce significant improvements in outcome. These treatment failures are examined and insight into pathways for future success are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Combination atezolizumab and bevacizumab has changed the landscape of systemic treatment for patients with HCC when it became the first therapy after demonstrating improve outcomes over sorafenib. Clinical trials in patients with advanced HCC have inherent difficulty with challenges to determine if a patient's declining liver function is secondary to disease progression, worsening cirrhosis, or drug toxicity, which may skew results. As we gain more knowledge of underlying genetic alterations behind the pathophysiology of the development of HCC, molecular markers may be identified to assist in predicting which patients would respond to a specific therapy.

Treatments of Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Portal Vein Tumor Thrombus: Current Status and Controversy

The proportions of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) involving portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) varies greatly in different countries or regions, ranging from 13% to 45%. The treatment regimens for PVTT recommended by HCC guidelines in different countries or regions also vary greatly. In recent years, with the progress and development of surgical concepts, radiotherapy techniques, systematic therapies (for example, VEGF inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors), patients with HCC involving PVTT have more treatment options and their prognoses have been significantly improved. To achieve the maximum benefit, both clinicians and patients need to think rationally about the indications of treatment modalities, the occurrence of severe adverse events, and the optimal fit for the population. In this review, we provide an update on the treatment modalities available for patients with HCC involving PVTT. Trials with large sample size for patients with advanced or unresectable HCC are also reviewed.

Efficacy and Safety of Second-line Treatments in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Sorafenib Failure: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In the last decade, several second-line therapies followed by sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been reported. But the outcomes were different from each other. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the second-line therapies followed by sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC.

METHODS

Embase (1974 to October 2019) and Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to October 2019) were searched for randomized clinical trials on second-line therapies followed by sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC. The quality of each study was assessed by the modified Jadad scale. Statistical analysis was carried out by RevMan5.3 software. Efficacy and safety were analyzed. Efficacy included overall survival (OS), disease control rate, time to progression, and progression-free survival.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 3,173 patients were eligible. No difference in OS was found between the second-line treatment group and the control group (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.74-1.01, p=0.06). Disease control rate (relative risk (RR)=1.36, 95% CI: 1.16-1.60, p=0.0002), time to progression (HR=0.64, 95% CI: 0.51-0.81, p=0.0002) and progression-free survival (HR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.46-0.77, p<0.0001) were significantly improved by the second-line therapies. There was a slight difference in adverse events of any grade (RR=1.07, 95% CI: 1.00-1.14, p=0.03) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

These second-line therapies followed by sorafenib may potentially improve the prognosis in patients with advanced HCC. Compared with other second-line therapies, regorafenib seemed to be more effective.

Objective Response Predicts Survival in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma treated with Systemic Therapies

PURPOSE

Due to the increased number of sequential treatments used for advanced HCC, there is a need for surrogate endpoints of overall survival (OS). We analyze if objective response (OR) is an independent predictor and surrogate endpoint of OS.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

A systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in advanced HCC published between 2010 and 2020 was conducted to explore OS surrogacy of OR by RECIST and mRECIST. In parallel, RCTs exploring the impact of OR on OS in a time-dependent multivariate analysis were integrated in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 65 RCTs identified in advanced HCC, we analyzed 34 studies including 14,056 patients that reported OS and OR by either RECIST (n=23), mRECIST (n=5) or both (n=6). When exploring surrogacy, the trial-level correlation between OR odds ratio and OS hazard ratio was R=0.677 by mRECIST and R=0.532 by RECIST. Meta-analysis of five RCT assessing predictors of survival in multivariate analysis found that patients with OR by mRECIST presented a pooled HR for OS of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.27-0.70, p<0.001) compared with non-responders. Responses to atezolizumab-bevacizumab had a greater impact on OS than tyrosine-kinase inhibitor responses.

CONCLUSIONS

OR-mRECIST is an independent predictor of OS in patients with advanced HCC. Although correlation of OR-mRECIST and OS is better than with OR-RECIST, the level of surrogacy is modest. Thus, it can be used as endpoint in proof-of-concept phase II trials, but the data does not support its use as a primary endpoint of phase III investigations assessing systemic therapies.

Comparative efficacy and safety for second-line treatment with ramucirumab, regorafenib, and cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma progressed on sorafenib treatment: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The present network meta-analysis was conducted to perform an indirect comparison among ramucirumab, regorafenib, and cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progressed on sorafenib treatment.

METHODS

A systematic review through Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library was developed, with eligible randomized clinical trials been included. Hazard ratios (HRs) including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), odds ratios of disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events were compared indirectly with network meta-analysis using random model in software STATA version 13.0.

RESULTS

A total of 4 randomized clinical trials including 2137 patients met the eligibility criteria and enrolled. Indirect comparisons showed that there was no statistical difference observed in the indirect comparison of PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR among agents of regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab in advanced HCC patients with elevated α-fetoprotein (AFP) (400 ng/mL or higher). However, in patients with low-level AFP (lower than 400 ng/mL), regorafenib was the only agent associated with significant superiority in OS, compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI, 0.50-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

The present network meta-analysis revealed that there might be no statistical difference observed in the indirect comparison of PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR among regorafenib, cabozantinib, or ramucirumab in advanced HCC patients with elevated AFP (400 ng/mL or higher). However, in patients with low-level AFP (lower than 400 ng/mL), regorafenib might be associated with significant superiority in OS, compared to placebo, which need further investigation in clinical practice.

Evidence-Based Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (2002-2020)

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality, with a rapidly changing landscape of treatments. In the past 20 years, numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have aimed at improving outcomes across disease stages. We aimed to analyze the current evidence and identify potential factors influencing response to therapies.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of phase III RCTs (2002-2020) across disease stages. A meta-analysis was designed to examine the relationship between etiology and outcome after systemic therapies with either tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI)/antiangiogenic or immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy.

RESULTS

Out of 10,100 studies identified, 76 were phase III RCTs. Among them, a rigorous screening algorithm identified 49 with high quality including a total of 22,113 patients undergoing adjuvant (n = 7) and primary treatment for early (n = 2), intermediate (n = 7), and advanced (first-line, n = 21; second-line, n = 12) stages of disease. Nine of these trials were positive, 6 treatments have been adopted in guidelines (sorafenib [2 RCTs], lenvatinib, atezolizumab+bevacizumab, regorafenib, cabozantinib and ramucirumab), but 2 were not (adjuvant CIK cells and sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion with FOLFOX). Meta-analysis of 8 trials including 3739 patients revealed ICI therapy to be significantly more effective in patients with viral hepatitis compared with nonviral-related HCC, whereas no differences related to etiology were observed in patients treated with TKI/anti-vascular endothelial growth factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Among 49 high-quality RCTs conducted in HCC during 2002-2020, 9 resulted in positive results. A meta-analysis of systemic therapies suggests that immunotherapies may be more effective in viral etiologies.

Efficacy and tolerability of Sorafenib plus metronomic chemotherapy S-1 for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in preclinical and clinical assessments

OBJECTIVE

Although sorafenib, a molecular targeted agent, has survival benefits for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, its disease control rate remains limited. To explore the potential for augmenting its antitumor effect, we assessed the preclinical and clinical efficacy and tolerability of S-1 metronomic chemotherapy (MC) plus sorafenib.

METHODS

Antitumor effects and toxicity of this combination were tested with HAK-1B xenograft and spontaneous HCC mouse models, and a prospective pilot study was performed to compare therapeutic effects and safety between sorafenib plus MC S-1 for 12 advanced HCC cases and the historical control of 363 sorafenib-treated advanced HCC patients at our hospital from July 2011 to June 2015.

RESULTS

In mice, the combination chemotherapy enhanced anti-angiogenic effects, resulting in a stronger tumor hypoxic environment and increased tumor cell apoptosis. Clinically, the objective response rate of the combination chemotherapy was higher than that of sorafenib mono therapy (16.7%; 2/12 vs 5.2%; 19/363, p < 0.05); however, there were no significant differences in overall survival and time to progression. Adverse events including alopecia, thrombocytopenia, and pancreatic enzymes elevation in the combination chemotherapy were higher than those of sorafenib. No patient treated with the combination chemotherapy discontinued treatment due to severe adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Sorafenib plus MC S-1 seems to be effective and tolerable for patients with advanced HCC and could be considered a treatment option for these patients.

Non-surgical management of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review by Cancer Care Ontario

Background

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a global health problem, accounting for 4.7% of all new cancer cases and 8.2% of all cancer deaths worldwide in 2018. Resection and transplantation are the only modalities that offer a cure for HCC; however, most patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage, precluding these curative treatments. A number of local (ie, ablative therapies) and/or local-regional therapies (ie, chemo-embolization) are used and followed by systemic therapy for advanced or progressive disease. Other treatments are available, but their efficacy compared with these standards is not well known.

Methods

Literature searches (1/2000 to 1/2020 or 1/2005 to 1/2020, depending on the specific systematic review question) were conducted, including MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

Results

Over 30,000 articles were identified. In total, 49 studies were included in the systematic review.

Conclusions

There is no evidence to support the addition of sorafenib to any local or regional therapy. First-line systemic therapy options for unresectable or metastatic HCC include sorafenib, lenvatinib, and atezolizumab + bevacizumab. Regorafenib or cabozantinib provide survival benefits when given as second-line treatment.

Long-term survival of 11 years with multidisciplinary therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma metastasis to the ovary and peritoneum: a case report

We herein report a rare case of HCC metastases to the ovary and peritoneum in a 61-year-old female patient who has achieved 11-year survival with multidisciplinary therapy. The patient was diagnosed with HCC during balloon angioplasty performed for Budd-Chiari syndrome in 1994 and underwent partial hepatectomy twice. Five years after the second hepatectomy, allochronic recurrence of a single nodule detected in S8 was treated by radiofrequency ablation, followed by percutaneous ethanol injection therapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy. However, her α-fetoprotein level rose to 1862 ng/mL within one year and computed tomography revealed a large pelvic tumor suggesting HCC metastasis to the ovary. The subsequent laparotomy revealed one 11-cm left ovarian tumor, one small right ovarian nodule, and numerous peritoneal nodules. Bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and peritoneal resection of as many nodules as possible were performed. Combination therapy with intravenous 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin and ramucirumab monotherapy effectively suppressed tumor progression with maintenance of hepatic functional reserve, and she has achieved long-term survival of 11 years, illustrating that multidisciplinary therapy with favorable hepatic functional reserve maintenance can contribute to long-term survival in HCC with extrahepatic spread.

Systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: current status and future perspectives

Since sorafenib was established as the standard of care for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, various tyrosine kinase inhibitors, targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and other molecular growth factors, have been developed. Lenvatinib demonstrated non-inferiority to sorafenib in terms of the overall survival, and it has also become confirmed as another standard of care for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Recently, various immune checkpoint inhibitors have been investigated, either as monotherapy or in combination with another agent, and superiority of the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in terms of the overall survival and progression-free survival, has been demonstrated over sorafenib, which is recognized as the treatment regimen of first choice for first-line systemic therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Regorafenib, cabozantinib and ramucirumab have been demonstrated to show survival benefits as second-line treatment agents for progressive disease after first-line sorafenib treatment. There are still various medical requirements in systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. To date, no evidence has been established for the selection of sequential treatment after immune checkpoint inhibitor-containing treatments, especially atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. A promising treatment for Child-Pugh class B hepatocellular carcinoma patients is also an urgent medical need that has not yet been met. Although there are some difficulties in establishing the needed evidence, well-designed clinical trials are warranted.

Evolution of systemic treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was considered an inherently refractory tumor in the chemotherapy era (1950-2000). However, systemic therapy has evolved to molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy, and nine treatment regimens have been approved worldwide during the past 20 years. The approved regimens target tumor angiogenesis or tumor immunity, the two cancer hallmarks. Recently, the combination of atezolizumab (antiprogrammed cell death ligand 1) and bevacizumab (anti-vascular endothelial growth factor) has improved the efficacy of systemic therapy in treating advanced HCC without excessive toxicities or deterioration of quality of life. This review summarizes the major advances in systemic therapy and provides future perspectives on the next-generation systemic therapy for advanced HCC.

Second-line treatments for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A plethora of second-line therapies have been recently introduced for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment with promising results. A meta-analysis of second-line treatments for HCC has been performed to better tailor their use based on improved patient stratification and to identify the best available option.

METHODS

Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating second-line treatment for advanced HCC in patients already treated with sorafenib. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and drug withdrawal due to adverse events. Network meta-analyses were performed considering placebo as the basis for comparison in efficacy and safety analyses. Subgroup stratification considered gender, age, sorafenib-responsiveness and drug tolerability, viral infection, macrovascular invasion, HCC extrahepatic spread, performance status, and alpha-fetoprotein levels.

RESULTS

Fourteen phase II or III randomized controlled trials, involving 5,488 patients and 12 regimens, were included in the analysis. Regorafenib (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.50-0.79), cabozantinib (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.63-0.92), and ramucirumab (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.70-0.76) significantly prolonged OS compared with placebo. Cabozantinib (HR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.36-0.52), regorafenib (HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.37-0.56), ramucirumab (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.43-0.68), brivanib (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.42-0.76), S-1 (HR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.46-0.77), axitinib (HR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.44-0.87), and pembrolizumab (HR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.57-0.90) significantly improved PFS compared with placebo. None of the compared drugs deemed undoubtedly superior after having performed a patients' stratification.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this network meta-analysis suggest the use of regorafenib and cabozantinib as second-line treatments in HCC.

Diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Update of the consensus document of the AEEH, AEC, SEOM, SERAM, SERVEI, and SETH

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver neoplasm and one of the most common causes of death in patients with cirrhosis of the liver. In parallel, with recognition of the clinical relevance of this cancer, major new developments have recently appeared in its diagnosis, prognostic assessment and in particular, in its treatment. Therefore, the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver (AEEH) has driven the need to update the clinical practice guidelines, once again inviting all the societies involved in the diagnosis and treatment of this disease to participate in the drafting and approval of the document: Spanish Society for Liver Transplantation (SETH), Spanish Society of Diagnostic Radiology (SERAM), Spanish Society of Vascular and Interventional Radiology (SERVEI), Spanish Association of Surgeons (AEC) and Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM). The clinical practice guidelines published in 2016 and accepted as National Health System Clinical Practice Guidelines were taken as the reference documents, incorporating the most important recent advances. The scientific evidence and the strength of the recommendation is based on the GRADE system.

Posttreatment after Lenvatinib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

There is no standard posttreatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in whom lenvatinib therapy has failed. This study aimed to investigate rates of migration to posttreatment after lenvatinib and to explore candidates for second-line agents in the patients with failed lenvatinib therapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data on patients with advanced HCC who received lenvatinib as the first-line agent in 7 institutions.

RESULTS

Overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) of 178 patients who received lenvatinib as the first-line agent were 13.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.5-15.2) and 6.7 months (95% CI, 5.6-7.8), respectively. Sixty-nine of 151 patients (45.7%) who discontinued lenvatinib moved on to posttreatment. The migration rates from lenvatinib to the second-line agent and from the second-line agent to the third-line agent were 41.7 and 44.4%, respectively. Based on multivariate analysis, response to lenvatinib (complete or partial response according to modified RECIST) and discontinuation of lenvatinib due to radiological progression, as well as male were associated with a significantly higher probability of migration to posttreatment after lenvatinib. On the other hand, alpha-fetoprotein levels of 400 ng/mL or higher was correlated with a significantly lower probability of migration to posttreatment after lenvatinib. Of 63 patients who received second-line systemic therapy, 53 (84.2%) were administered sorafenib. PFS, objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) for sorafenib treatment were 1.8 months (95% CI, 0.6-3.0), 1.8%, and 20.8%, respectively. According to the Cox regression hazard model, Child-Pugh class B significantly contributed to shorter PFS. PFS, ORR, and DCR of 22 patients who received regorafenib after lenvatinib in any lines were 3.2 months (range, 1.5-4.9 months), 13.6%, and 36.3%, respectively. Similarly, PFS, ORR, and DCR of 17 patients who received regorafenib after lenvatinib in the third-line (after sorafenib) were 3.8 months (range, 1.1-6.5 months), 17.6%, and 41.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Sorafenib may not be a candidate for use as a posttreatment agent after lenvatinib, according to the results of the present study. Regorafenib has the potential to become an appropriate posttreatment agent after lenvatinib.

Emerging immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major challenge in oncology. It ranks fourth in most common causes of cancer death worldwide. Despite advancements in cancer treatment, limited effective treatment options exist for advanced HCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become an irreplaceable tool in the treatment of many metastatic cancers. Early phase trials have demonstrated superior efficacy and good safety profile of immune checkpoint inhibitors and its combination with other drugs in the treatment of advanced HCC.

AREAS COVERED

The scientific rationale and the current state-of-the-art of treatment in HCC involving immune checkpoint inhibitors, either as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs are reviewed and discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown clinically relevant benefits as monotherapy in advanced HCC. These agents have shown superior survival benefits, durable response and manageable safety profiles in advanced HCC. Recent triumph of combination strategy with immune checkpoint inhibitor and anti-VEGF agent will likely bring a paradigm shift in systemic treatment of advanced HCC. Further research are needed to identify predictive biomarkers for response and best treatment sequence prioritization. Financial cost remains a major impediment for the widespread use of these novel treatments.

Recent Advances in Systemic Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in an Aging Society: 2020 Update

Systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has changed markedly since the introduction of the molecular targeted agent sorafenib in 2007. Sorafenib increased the available treatment options for patients with extrahepatic spread and vascular invasion and improved survival in patients with advanced HCC; however, various shortcomings such as low response rates and relatively high toxicity (e.g., hand-foot skin reaction) prompted concerted efforts aimed at developing new molecular targeted agents to provide more treatment options and second-line agents for patients with disease progression or intolerance to sorafenib. Despite many attempts to develop new drugs between 2007 and 2016, all first-line and second-line clinical trials conducted during this period failed. However, between 2017 and 2019, 4 drugs (lenvatinib as a first-line agent and regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab as second-line agents) emerged in quick succession from clinical trials and became available for clinical use. In addition, nivolumab and pembrolizumab were approved as second-line agents after sorafenib. A recent phase III trial (IMbrave150) showed that combination immunotherapy with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab increases overall survival compared with sorafenib therapy; Food and Drug Agency already approved this combination therapy, and worldwide approval is expected soon. This review describes the recent advances in systemic therapy and the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, and cabozantinib), monoclonal antibodies (ramucirumab and bevacizumab), and immune checkpoint inhibitors (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and atezolizumab) in elderly patients and the similarity of their efficacy and safety profiles to those in the general population.

Navigating the new landscape of second-line treatment in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Sorafenib and lenvatinib are approved for first-line treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and the efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has been demonstrated versus sorafenib. Over time, first-line treatment frequently fails, and regorafenib, cabozantinib, ramucirumab (for patients with alpha fetoprotein ≥400 ng/mL), nivolumab, pembrolizumab and ipilimumab plus nivolumab are approved for use after sorafenib (but not lenvatinib) treatment in advanced HCC. Given the considerable complexity in the therapeutic landscape, the objective of this review was to summarize the clinical evidence for second-line agents and provide practical guidance for selecting the best sequential treatment approach. The timing and sequencing of treatment switches are key to optimizing patient outcomes in advanced HCC, and decisions should be informed by reasons for discontinuation of previous therapy and disease progression. It is important not to switch too soon, because sequential treatment benefit may then be lost, nor should switching be delayed too long. Effectiveness, safety and tolerability, patient quality of life, route of administration, dosing regimen, drug class, molecular target and individual patients' characteristics, including comorbidities, inform the selection of second-line systemic treatment, independently of the aetiology of HCC, tumour stage and the response to previous treatment. Biomarkers predictive of treatment effectiveness are of great value, but currently biomarker-driven patient selection is possible only in the case of ramucirumab. The approval of new combination therapies for advanced HCC in the first-line setting will further increase the complexity of decision-making. However, the important factors will remain the individual patient's characteristics and preferences.

Potential of Lenvatinib for an Expanded Indication from the REFLECT Trial in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and verify the possibility of lenvatinib for the expanded indication from the REFLECT trial in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in real-world practice, primarily focusing on the population that was excluded in the REFLECT trial.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data on patients with advanced HCC who were administered lenvatinib in 7 institutions in Japan.

RESULTS

Of 152 advanced HCC patients, 95 and 57 patients received lenvatinib in first-line and second- or later-line systemic therapies, respectively. The median progression-free survival in Child-Pugh class A patients was nearly equal between first- and second- or later-line therapies (5.2 months; 95% CI 3.7-6.9 for first line, 4.8 months; 95% CI 3.8-5.9 for second or later line, p = 0.933). According to the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the objective response rate of 27 patients (18%) who showed a high burden of intrahepatic lesions (i.e., main portal vein and/or bile duct invasion or 50% or higher liver occupation) at baseline radiological assessment was 41% and similar with that of other population. The present study included 20 patients (13%) with Child-Pugh class B. These patients observed high frequency rates of liver function-related adverse events due to lenvatinib. The 8-week dose intensity of lenvatinib had a strong correlation with liver function according to both the Child-Pugh and albumin - bilirubin scores.

CONCLUSION

Lenvatinib had potential benefits for patients with advanced HCC with second- or later-line therapies and a high burden of intrahepatic lesions. Dose modification should be paid increased attention among patients with poor liver function, such as Child-Pugh class B patients.

Nonsurgical management of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a clinical practice guideline

Background

Practice guidelines based on a systematic review of the literature regarding the nonsurgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma (hcc) in North America are lacking. Resection and transplantation are the foundations for cure of hcc; however, most patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage, precluding those curative treatments. A number of local or regional therapies are used and are followed by systemic therapy for advanced or progressive disease. Other treatments are available, but their efficacy, compared with those standards, is not well known.

Methods

First, systematic review questions were developed. Literature searches of the medline, embase, and Cochrane library databases (January 2000 to July 2018 or January 2005 to July 2018 depending on the question) were conducted; in addition, abstracts from the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology were reviewed. A practice guideline was drafted that was then scrutinized by internal and external reviewers.

Results

Seventy-seven studies were included in the guideline: no guidelines, two systematic reviews, and seventy-five primary studies published in full (including one pooled analysis). Five recommendations were developed.

Conclusions

There is no evidence for or against the use of local or regional interventions other than transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of intermediate- or advanced-stage hcc. Furthermore, there is no evidence to support the addition of sorafenib to any local or regional therapy. Sorafenib or lenvatinib are recommended for first-line systemic treatment of intermediate-stage hcc. Regorafenib or cabozantinib provide survival benefits when given as second-line treatment. Antiviral treatment is recommended in individuals with advanced hcc who are positive for the hepatitis B surface antigen.

Scientific Rationale for Combined Immunotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 Antibodies and VEGF Inhibitors in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

A successful phase III trial for the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (the IMbrave150 trial) in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma has recently been reported. This is groundbreaking because nivolumab and pembrolizumab, both programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) antibodies, have failed to show efficacy as first- and second-line therapeutics, respectively, in phase III clinical trials. Immunotherapy with a combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab resulted in better survival than treatment with sorafenib for the first time since sorafenib was approved in 2007. The high efficacy of the combination of PD-1/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibodies is not only due to their additive effects on tumor growth, but also to their reprogramming of the immunosuppressive microenvironment into an immunostimulatory microenvironment. These results were confirmed in a phase Ib trial that showed significantly longer progression-free survival in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group than in patients that received atezolizumab alone. These results demonstrate that immunotherapy with a combination of PD-1/PD-L1 and VEGF inhibitors is effective and may result in a reprogramming of the tumor microenvironment. The results of an ongoing phase III trial of a PD-1 antibody in combination with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) are highly anticipated.

Systemic Treatment Options in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) typically have poor survival outcomes. Until recently, sorafenib was the only systemic therapy option available and no agents were approved after sorafenib failure. However, rapid changes are beginning to emerge in the treatment landscape of advanced HCC, with approvals of regorafenib, nivolu-mab, lenvatinib, pembrolizumab, and cabozantinib and positive phase II/III clinical trial results with other agents.

SUMMARY

Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the clinical trial data of systemic agents that are currently approved for advanced HCC (sorafenib, regorafenib, and nivolumab), including agents recently approved in 2018 (lenvatinib, pembrolizumab, and cabozantinib) and those with recent positive phase II/III results (ramucirumab). Key features of the clinical trial design, including patient selection criteria, the use of biomarkers in HCC, and criteria for efficacy assessment, and their implications in real-world practice are discussed. Important ongoing and planned trials in advanced HCC are summarized to provide a glimpse into the future of advanced HCC treatment. From a physician's viewpoint, the treatment algorithms for advanced HCC are undergoing significant changes, as additional and imminent approvals impact the choices of first- and second-line treatment and decisions regarding the timing of therapy initiation. With these additional choices at hand, treatment sequencing remains a complex task and should take patient selection and tolerance profiles into account.

KEY MESSAGES

The treatment of advanced HCC remains challenging and complex. The rapid developments in systemic therapy for advanced HCC should be considered when determining the best choice and sequence of treatment for patients with advanced HCC.

Emerging agents and regimens for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver cancer, mostly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is the second leading cause of cancer mortality globally. Most patients need at least one systemic therapy at different phases of their treatment for HCC. Sorafenib was the first agent shown to improve the survival of patients with advanced HCC. A decade after the approval of sorafenib, most agents failed to improve patient survival more than sorafenib. In recent years, treatment practices have changed, with lenvatinib as another first-line treatment choice and regorafenib, ramucirumab, and cabozantinib as second-line treatment options. Anti-PD-1 antibodies, including nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and camrelizumab, have demonstrated promising anti-tumor effects as monotherapy for advanced HCC in phase II clinical trials. The combination of an anti-PD-1 antibody and an anti-angiogenesis agent has shown more potent anti-tumor effects in early phase clinical trials and is now the hotspot in clinical studies. Furthermore, these agents are investigated in combination treatment with surgery or other loco-regional therapies in patients with early or intermediate-stage HCC.

Systemic Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

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

SUMMARY

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

KEY MESSAGES

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

Cabozantinib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma failing previous treatment with sorafenib

Over the past 10 years, sorafenib has been the only systemic agent approved for the treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Recently, lenvatinib was demonstrated noninferior to sorafenib, and regorafenib and ramucirumab were demonstrated superior to placebo in patients progressing on sorafenib and in patients with elevated α-fetoprotein-failing sorafenib, respectively. Phase I–II trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors reported promising efficacy signals. Recently, the randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase III CELESTIAL trial demonstrated statistically and clinically significant increase in overall survival from 8 months with placebo to 10.2 months with cabozantinib in patients failing sorafenib. Furthermore, the study showed a significant improvement in all the efficacy end points. Main adverse events were palmar–plantar erythrodysesthesia, hypertension, increased aspartate aminotransferase, fatigue and diarrhea.

Sequential therapy with sorafenib and regorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective study in Japan

Background Conversion from sorafenib to regorafenib is primarily an evidence-based treatment strategy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of sequential therapy with sorafenib and regorafenib in patients with advanced HCC by analysis of outcomes in clinical practice with the aim to complement phase III findings. Methods The medical records of patients with advanced HCC receiving regorafenib were retrieved to collect data on sorafenib administration at seven Japanese institutions. Radiological responses and adverse events were evaluated using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0, respectively. Results Before March 2018, 44 patients were administered regorafenib for advanced HCC. The median sorafenib treatment duration was 8.4 months. The most common adverse events were similar to those reported by the RESORCE trial. The median overall survival (OS) was 17.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.4-22.9), and 17 of 37 patients (45.9%) discontinued regorafenib and received sequential systemic therapy after regorafenib. These patients had significantly longer OS than those who were treated by the best supportive care or sub-optimal therapy (not reached versus 8.7 months [95% CI 5.8-11.7]; P < 0.001). Conclusion The results based on Japanese clinical practices verified the tolerability of regorafenib in advanced HCC. Major regorafenib-associated adverse events were similar to those related to sorafenib. OS was significantly longer than expected, which might be associated with the sequential systemic therapies after regorafenib, mainly lenvatinib.

Second-line Treatments of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) constitutes the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. First-line therapy is either sorafenib or lenvatinib. Several treatment options have been recently added to the second-line treatment of advanced HCC. The aim of this network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was to compare the second-line treatments of advanced HCC.

METHODS

Network meta-analyses were computed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, rates of grade 3 to 5 adverse events, and for treatment discontinuation due to adverse events. OS was considered to be the primary outcome of this study, and everolimus was chosen to be the common comparator for efficacy analyses and placebo for safety analyses. Subgroup analyses were computed for OS in patients with hepatitis B, patients with hepatitis C, Asian patients, patients with macrovascular invasion, and patients with extrahepatic metastases.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized controlled trials including 5076 patients and evaluating 11 agents were found to be eligible. Regorafenib [hazard ratio (HR)=0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.44-0.81] and cabozantinib (HR=0.72, 95% CI=0.55-0.95) were found to significantly prolong OS compared with everolimus. The effect of regorafenib on OS tended to be conserved across patient subgroups. Regorafenib was also found to significantly prolong progression-free survival (HR=0.46, 95% CI=0.35-0.62) and significantly increase the rates of grade 3 to 5 adverse events (odds ratios=3.18, 95% CI=2.22-4.54) and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (odds ratios=2.67, 95% CI=1.21-5.87).

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis concludes that, based on current evidence, regorafenib could be the agent of choice in the second-line treatment of HCC, with cabozantinib as a possible alternative for sorafenib-intolerant patients.

Surrogacy of Time to Progression for Overall Survival in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Systemic Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Time to progression (TTP) is widely used as the endpoint in early-phase trials of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the relevance of using TTP as a surrogate marker for overall survival (OS) in pivotal trials remains uncertain. The PubMed database and ASCO Meeting Library were searched for reports of randomized controlled trials that investigated patients with advanced HCC, included data for both OS and TTP, and were launched between 2009 and 2016. The correlation between hazard ratios (HRs) for TTP and OS was determined using weighted linear regression. Correlations between median OS and TTP, and between median OS and postprogression survival (PPS), defined as the period obtained by subtracting the median TTP from the median OS, were also evaluated. The database search yielded 24 trials with 50 arms. Overall, TTP HR correlated with OS HR (R = 0.73); however, the coefficient in the regression equation was 0.48. The correlation between median OS and median TTP was not so strong (R = 0.50), whereas the correlation between median OS and median PPS was strong (R = 0.78). In advanced HCC, the OS HR can be predicted from the TTP HR, which is useful when considering whether to proceed to a pivotal trial based on the results of early-phase trials. TTP may be a better endpoint than OS for evaluating a novel agent in a pivotal trial, because an improvement in antitumor effect cannot fully reflect an improvement in OS due to the strong impact of PPS on OS.

Targeted and immune therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma: Predictions for 2019 and beyond

Systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has markedly advanced since the survival benefit of a molecular targeted agent, sorafenib, were demonstrated in the SHARP and Asia Pacific trials in 2007. Treatment options for patients with advanced HCC increased by sorafenib, and long-term survival for patients with advanced stage HCC has become possible to some extent. However, development of a more potent first-line novel molecular targeted agent replacing sorafenib and a potent second-line agent after disease progression on or intolerant to sorafenib has been warranted because sorafenib lacks tumor shrinking/necrotizing effects and induces relatively severe adverse events such as hand foot skin reaction. Many agents in the 1st line and 2nd line setting were attempted to develop between 2007 and 2016, but all of these clinical trials failed. On the other hand, clinical trials of 4 agents (regorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab) succeeded in succession in 2017 and 2018, and their use in clinical practice is possible (regorafenib and lenvatinib) or underway (cabozantinib and ramucirumab). Furthermore, all of 5 clinical trials of combination therapy with transcatheter chemoembolization (TACE) plus a molecular targeted agent failed to date, however, the combination of TACE and sorafenib (TACTICS trials) was reported to be successful and presented at ASCO in 2018. Phase 3 clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors and a combination therapy of immune checkpoint inhibitors and molecular targeted agents are also ongoing, which suggests treatment paradigm of HCC in all stages from early, intermediate and advanced stage, is expected to be changed drastically in the very near future.

Targeted and Immune-Based Therapies for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Treatment options for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma are rapidly changing based on positive results from phase 3 trials of targeted and immune-based therapies. More agents designed to target specific pathways and immune checkpoints are in clinical development. Some agents have already been shown to improve outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, as first- and second-line therapies, and are awaiting approval by the Food and Drug Administration or have been recently approved. We summarize the targeted and immune-based agents in trials of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and discuss the future of these strategies for liver cancer.

Systemic Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Latest Advances

Systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has changed drastically since the introduction of the molecular targeted agent sorafenib in 2007. Although sorafenib expanded the treatment options for extrahepatic spread (EHS) and vascular invasion, making long-term survival of patients with advanced disease achievable to a certain extent, new molecular-targeted agents are being developed as alternatives to sorafenib due to shortcomings such as its low response rate and high toxicity. Every single one of the many drugs developed during the 10-year period from 2007 to 2016 was a failure. However, during the two-year period from 2017 through 2018, four drugs—regorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab—emerged successfully from clinical trials in quick succession and became available for clinical use. The efficacy of combination therapy with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus sorafenib was also first demonstrated in 2018. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors have been applied to HCC treatment and many phase III clinical trials are ongoing, not only on monotherapy with nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and tislelizumab, but also on combination therapy with checkpoint inhibitors, programmed death-1 (PD-1) or PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody plus a molecular targeted agent (bevacizumab) or the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibody, tremelimumab. These combination therapies have shown higher response rates than PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy alone, suggesting a synergistic effect by combination therapy in early phases; therefore, further results are eagerly awaited.

Overexpression of KDM5B/JARID1B is associated with poor prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma

Background & aims

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has high potential for recurrence, even in curative operative cases. Although several molecular-targeting drugs have been applied to recurrent HCC, their effectiveness has been limited. This study therefore aims to develop novel cancer drugs through protein methylation.

Methods

We investigated the role of KDM5B/JARID1B, a member of JmjC histone demethylase, in HCC. Expression profiles of KDM5B were examined by immunohistochemical analysis in 105 HCC clinical tissue samples. To examine functional effects of KDM5B using HCC cell lines, we performed loss-of-function analysis treated with KDM5B-specific small interfering RNAs (siKDM5B).

Results

All HCC cases were divided into KDM5B-positive expression group (n=54) and negative expression group (n=51). In five-year overall survival, KDM5B-positive group had poorer prognosis than KDM5B-negative (61% vs 77%, p=0.047). KDM5B-positive group had much poorer prognosis than that of the negative group, especially in HCC derived from persistent infection of hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) (54% vs 78%, p=0.015). Multivariate analysis indicated that KDM5B was the strongest risk factor for poor prognosis, especially in HCC derived from HBV/HCV. Inhibition of KDM5B could significantly suppress HCC cell proliferation through no promotion from G1 to S phase. Real-time PCR and Western blotting demonstrated that E2F1/E2F2 were downstream genes of KDM5B.

Conclusions

Overexpression of KDM5B results in poor prognosis in HCC that especially derived from HBV/HCV. KDM5B appears to be an ideal target for the development of anti-cancer drugs.

Review article: systemic treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The approval of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib in 2007 marked a milestone in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma, as sorafenib was the first systemic therapy to show a survival benefit in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Since then many drugs failed in the first- and second-line setting and it took almost another decade until further tyrosine kinase inhibitors succeeded in phase III trials.

AIM

To summarise the evolving field of systemic therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

We reviewed recently published studies identified from PubMed and data presented at recent meetings. Main search terms included hepatocellular carcinoma, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, immunotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, sorafenib, regorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, ramucirumab, and nivolumab.

RESULTS

We discuss the evolution of targeted therapies since the approval of sorafenib including failures and recent advances. We also elaborate the unmet need of biomarkers to guide treatment decisions and discuss the emerging field of immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

The tyrosine kinase inhibitors sorafenib (first line) and regorafenib (second line) have been approved for hepatocellular carcinoma, and the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab obtained conditional approval for sorafenib-experienced patients in the United States. With lenvatinib in the first line, and cabozantinib and ramucirumab in sorafenib-experienced patients, three more targeted therapies reached their primary endpoint in phase III trials and may soon be added to the treatment armamentarium.

Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of S-1 monotherapy versus S-1 and interferon-α combination therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with extrahepatic metastases

AIM

No effective therapies for extrahepatic metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have yet been identified. Previous studies suggested a potentially promising antitumor effect of combination therapy of S-1, a novel oral dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitor, and interferon (IFN)-α. The present study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy of single agent S-1 and S-1/IFN-α for HCC patients with extrahepatic metastases in a randomized, open-label, multicenter trial.

METHODS

A total of 103 patients with HCC with extrahepatic metastases were randomly assigned to the S-1/IFN-α group, receiving the combination of S-1 and IFN-α, or the S-1 group, receiving the single agent of S-1. Clinical efficacy and adverse events were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 49 patients in the S-1/IFN-α group and 51 patients in the S-1 group were included in the efficacy analysis. The response rate was 22.4% (11/49) in the S-1/IFN-α group and 13.7% (7/51) in the S-1 group; there was no significant difference. Overall and progression-free survival in the two groups were also not significantly different (1-year overall survival 50.8% vs. 72.4%, median progression-free survival 127 days vs. 157 days). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events in the S-1/IFN-α group was 62.7% (32/51), which tended to be higher than in the S-1 group (43.1% [22/51]).

CONCLUSIONS

Oncological outcomes in both treatment groups were favorable compared with previous reports, though there was no significant beneficial effect of adding IFN-α to S-1 for the treatment of HCC patients with extrahepatic metastases.

Characteristics of patients with sorafenib-treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma eligible for second-line treatment

Background Regorafenib has been investigated for its efficacy and safety as a second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We assessed the characteristics of patients with HCC treated with sorafenib who might be eligible for second-line treatment in general and regorafenib in particular. Methods Patients with HCC treated with sorafenib were retrospectively analyzed. We defined second-line candidate patients as maintaining Child-Pugh A and ECOG-PS ≤1 at the time of sorafenib failure. We also defined regorafenib candidate patients as follows: 1) continuing sorafenib at the time of radiological progression, 2) maintaining Child-Pugh A and ECOG-PS ≤ 1 at the time of sorafenib failure, and 3) continuing sorafenib 400 mg or more without intolerable adverse events at least 20 days of the last 28 days of treatment. Results Of 185 patients, 130 (70%) and 69 (37%) were candidates for second-line treatment and regorafenib. Child-Pugh score 6 and ECOG-PS 1 at the time of starting sorafenib were significantly lower in both second-line treatment and regorafenib candidate patients. Moreover, hand-foot skin reaction and liver failure during sorafenib treatment were associated with significantly low and high probabilities, respectively, of both Child-Pugh score > 6 and ECOG-PS > 1 at the time of sorafenib failure. Conclusion Regorafenib candidate patients after sorafenib failure are limited, and generally fewer than those who are candidates for second-line treatment. A lower Child-Pugh score and a better ECOG-PS were predictors of eligibility for second-line therapy and regorafenib treatment in sorafenib-treated patients with advanced HCC patients.