Using prognostic and predictive clinical features to make personalised survival prediction in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing sorafenib treatment

Development of a Multivariate Prognostic Model for Lenvatinib Treatment in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Lenvatinib is a first-line agent for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but individual responses to treatment are highly heterogeneous. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical parameters that influence the efficacy of Lenvatinib and to develop a prognostic model.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 333 Lenvatinib-treated patients with HCC with a median age of 57 years. Two hundred nd sixty-three of these patients had BCLC (2022) stage C. The median overall survival (mOS) time within the cohort was 12.1 months, and the median progression-free survival (mPFS) time was 4.7 months. Univariate Cox regression, best subset regression, and Lasso regression were used to screen primary variables for possible contribution to OS, multivariate Cox analysis was used to fit selected models, and the final model was selected using the maximum area under the curve (AUC) and minimum AIC. Receiver operating curves (ROC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis were plotted to assess model performance, and 5-fold cross-validation was performed for internal validation. X-tile software was used to select the best cutoff points and to divide the study cohort into 3 different risk groups.

RESULTS

Seven variables were included in the final model: BCLC stage, prior transarterial chemoembolization and immunotherapy history, tumor number, prognostic nutritional index, log (alpha-fetoprotein), and log (platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio). We named this final model the "multivariate prognostic model for Lenvatinib" (MPML), and a nomogram was constructed to predict the probability of survival at 6, 9, and 12 months. The MPML had good discrimination, calibration, and applicability. Cross-validation showed mean AUC values of 0.7779, 0.7738, and 0.7871 at 6, 9, and 12 months, respectively. According to nomogram points, mOS time was 21.57, 8.70, and 5.37 months in the low, medium, and high-risk groups, respectively (P < .001), and these differences were also observed in the PFS survival curve (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The MPML stratified patients according to baseline clinical characteristics had a strong performance in predicting Lenvatinib efficacy and has the potential for use as an auxiliary clinical tool for individualized decision-making.

Prognostic model for predicting outcome and guiding treatment decision for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with lenvatinib monotherapy or lenvatinib plus immunotherapy

Background

Lenvatinib monotherapy and combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) were widely applied for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, many patients failed to benefit from the treatments. A prognostic model was needed to predict the treatment outcomes and guide clinical decisions.

Methods

304 patients receiving lenvatinib monotherapy or lenvatinib plus ICI for uHCC were retrospectively included. The risk factors derived from the multivariate analysis were used to construct the predictive model. The C-index and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated to assess the predictive efficiency.

Results

Multivariate analysis revealed that protein induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist-II (PIVKA-II) (HR, 2.05; P=0.001) and metastasis (HR, 2.07; P<0.001) were independent risk factors of overall survival (OS) in the training cohort. Herein, we constructed a prognostic model called PIMET score and stratified patients into the PIMET-low group (without metastasis and PIVKA-II<600 mAU/mL), PIMET-int group (with metastasis or PIVKA-II>600 mAU/mL) and PIMET-high group (with metastasis and PIVKA-II>600 mAU/mL). The C-index of PIMET score for the survival prediction was 0.63 and 0.67 in the training and validation cohort, respectively. In the training cohort, the AUC of 12-, 18-, and 24-month OS was 0.661, 0.682, and 0.744, respectively. The prognostic performances of the model were subsequently validated. The AUC of 12-, 18-, and 24-month OS was 0.724, 0.726, and 0.762 in the validation cohort. Subgroup analyses showed consistent predictive value for patients receiving lenvatinib monotherapy and patients receiving lenvatinib plus ICI. The PIMET score could also distinguish patients with different treatment responses. Notably, the combination of lenvatinib and ICI conferred survival benefits to patients with PIMET-int or PIMET-high, instead of patients with PIMET-low.

Conclusion

The PIMET score comprising metastasis and PIVKA-II could serve as a helpful prognostic model for uHCC receiving lenvatinib monotherapy or lenvatinib plus ICI. The PIMET score could guide the treatment decision and facilitate precision medicine for uHCC patients.

Circulating immune index predicting the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with lenvatinib and immunotherapy

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combination therapy has opened a new avenue for the treatment of multiple malignancies including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, considering the unsatisfactory efficacy, biomarkers are urgently needed to identify the patients most likely to benefit from ICI-based combination therapy.

Methods

A total of 194 patients undergoing ICI-based combination therapy for unresectable HCC were retrospectively enrolled and divided into a training cohort (n = 129) and a validation cohort (n = 65) randomly. A novel circulating immune index (CII) defined as the ratio of white blood cell count (×10⁹/L) to lymphocyte proportion (%) was constructed and its prognostic value was determined and validated.

Results

Patients with CII ≤ 43.1 reported prolonged overall survival (OS) compared to those with CII > 43.1 (median OS: 24.7 vs 15.1 months; 6-, 12-, 18-month OS: 94.2%, 76.7%, 66.1% vs 86.4%, 68.2%, 22.8%, P = 0.019), and CII was identified as an independent prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio, 2.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-4.31; P = 0.015). These results were subsequently verified in the validation cohort. Additionally, patients with low CII levels had improved best radiological tumor response (complete response, partial response, stable disease, progressive disease: 3%, 36%, 50%, 11% vs 0%, 27%, 46%, 27%; P = 0.037) and disease control rate (89% vs 73%; P = 0.031) in the pooled cohort and better pathologic response (pathologic complete response, major pathologic response, partial pathologic response, no pathologic response: 20%, 44%, 28%, 8% vs 0%, 0%, 40%, 60%; P = 0.005) in the neoadjuvant cohort. Detection of lymphocyte subsets revealed that an elevated proportion of CD4+ T cells was related to better OS, while the proportion of CD8+ T cells was not.

Conclusions

We constructed a novel circulating immune biomarker that was capable of predicting OS and therapeutic efficacy for HCC patients undergoing ICI and lenvatinib combination therapy.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is characterized by low resection and high postoperative recurrence rates, and conventional treatment strategies have failed to meet clinical needs. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is widely employed in the routine management of several solid tumors because it increases resectability and reduces the rate of postoperative recurrence. However, a consensus has not been reached regarding the effects of NAT on HCC. As systemic therapy, particularly targeted therapy and immunotherapy, is given for HCC treatment, accumulating evidence shows that the “spring” of NAT for HCC is imminent. In the future, HCC researchers should focus on identifying biomarkers for treatment response, explore the mechanisms of resistance, and standardize the endpoints of NAT.

Prognostic models for outcome prediction in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated by systemic therapy: a systematic review and critical appraisal

Objective

To describe and analyze the predictive models of the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing systemic treatment.

Design

Systematic review.

Data sources

PubMed and Embase until December 2020 and manually searched references from eligible articles.

Eligibility criteria for study selection

The development, validation, or updating of prognostic models of patients with HCC after systemic treatment.

Results

The systematic search yielded 42 eligible articles: 28 articles described the development of 28 prognostic models of patients with HCC treated with systemic therapy, and 14 articles described the external validation of 32 existing prognostic models of patients with HCC undergoing systemic treatment. Among the 28 prognostic models, six were developed based on genes, of which five were expressed in full equations; the other 22 prognostic models were developed based on common clinical factors. Of the 28 prognostic models, 11 were validated both internally and externally, nine were validated only internally, two were validated only externally, and the remaining six models did not undergo any type of validation. Among the 28 prognostic models, the most common systemic treatment was sorafenib (n = 19); the most prevalent endpoint was overall survival (n = 28); and the most commonly used predictors were alpha-fetoprotein (n = 15), bilirubin (n = 8), albumin (n = 8), Child–Pugh score (n = 8), extrahepatic metastasis (n = 7), and tumor size (n = 7). Further, among 32 externally validated prognostic models, 12 were externally validated > 3 times.

Conclusions

This study describes and analyzes the prognostic models developed and validated for patients with HCC who have undergone systemic treatment. The results show that there are some methodological flaws in the model development process, and that external validation is rarely performed. Future research should focus on validating and updating existing models, and evaluating the effects of these models in clinical practice.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42020200187.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09841-5.

Prognostic significance of cachexia index in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with systemic chemotherapy

Cancer cachexia affects quality of life, response to chemotherapy, and survival in many advanced cancer patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of pretreatment cachexia index (CXI) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with systematic chemotherapy. Patients with advanced HCC treated with lenvatinib therapy between October 2018 and October 2020 were retrospectively studied. The CXI was calculated as (L3 skeletal muscle index) × (serum albumin)/(neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio). The association with treatment response and early adverse events within the first two months of lenvatinib therapy was investigated. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method with log-rank test. Multivariable Cox regression was used to identify the predictors of survival. A total of 116 patients (median age: 60, male: 84.5% ) with calculated CXI. They divided into two groups: high CXI (≥ 53, n = 82) and low CXI (< 53, n = 34). Patients with low CXI had a significantly lower disease control rate (61.8% vs. 89.0%, p = 0.001) and a shorter median OS (8.0 [95% CI 6.2–9.8] vs. 12.3 [95% CI 10.1–14.4] months, p = 0.002) than those with high CXI. In multivariable analysis, low CXI was independently associated with shorter OS (HR: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.17–3.65, p = 0.01) and PFS (HR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.09–3.09, p = 0.02). Of note, during the first two months of lenvatinib therapy, anorexia (41.2% vs. 22.0%, p = 0.04) developed more frequently among patients with low CXI than those with high CXI. The CXI may be a clinically useful index for predicting poor treatment response and prognosis in patients with advanced HCC undergoing lenvatinib treatment.

Development and External Validation of the Munich Sorafenib Evaluation Score for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, increasing options for systemic HCC treatment have become available. The development of therapy-specific prognostic scores has been encouraged. Tailoring therapy to individual patients requires prognostic scores for treatment success in addition to the Barcelona-Clinic-Liver-Cancer (BCLC) classification. We have developed and validated a prognostic score for patients treated with sorafenib.

METHODS

Prognostic factors identified in a multivariate analysis of 108 sorafenib patients were used to construct the Munich Sorafenib Evaluation (M-SE) score. M-SE and 9 established HCC prognostic systems were ranked according to concordance-index and AIC. External M-SE validation was performed in an independent HCC sorafenib cohort (n = 101) derived from the prospective multicenter randomized controlled SORAMIC trial.

RESULTS

Ascites (p < 0.0001; HR 2.923), tumor burden ≥50% of the liver (p = 0.0033; HR 1.946), and GOT (p < 0.0001; HR 1.716) were identified as independent prognostic parameters. All three M-SE stages were characterized by significantly different survival times (p < 0.0001). M-SE stage-A patients had a median OS of 18.7 months (95% CI: 15.6-21.8); patients in stage B and C showed a significantly shorter survival of 5.7 (2.7-8.7) and 2.0 months (1.6-2.4), respectively. M-SE (c-index 0.70; AIC 621) outperformed all other prognostic systems. External validation in a prospective cohort confirmed its superior prognostic performance.

CONCLUSION

The M-SE score allows classification of sorafenib patients in three distinct prognostic stages. Provided that M-SE successfully passes prospective validation, it can help to predict the outcome of patients evaluated for sorafenib treatment.

Early Predictive Value of Circulating Biomarkers for Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Sorafenib is currently the first-line therapeutic regimen for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, many patients did not experience any benefit and suffered extreme adverse events and heavy economic burden. Thus, the early identification of patients who are most likely to benefit from sorafenib is needed.

AREAS COVERED

This review focused on the clinical application of circulating biomarkers (including conventional biomarkers, immune biomarkers, genetic biomarkers, and some novel biomarkers) in advanced HCC patients treated with sorafenib. An online search on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library was conducted from the inception to Aug 15, 2021. Studies investigating the predictive or prognostic value of these biomarkers were included.

EXPERT OPINION

The distinction of patients who may benefit from sorafenib treatment is of utmost importance. The predictive roles of circulating biomarkers could solve this problem. Many biomarkers can be obtained by liquid biopsy, which is a less or non-invasive approach. The short half-life of sorafenib could reflect the dynamic changes of tumor progression and monitor the treatment response. Circulating biomarkers obtained from liquid biopsy resulted as a promising assessment method in HCC, allowing for better treatment decisions in the near future.

Arterial Chemotherapy of Oxaliplatin Plus Fluorouracil Versus Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Biomolecular Exploratory, Randomized, Phase III Trial (FOHAIC-1)

PURPOSE

Interventional hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy of infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (HAIC-FO) displayed an encouraging safety profile and antitumor activity in a previous phase II trial and a propensity-score-matching study involving patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

In this open-label, phase III trial, patients with advanced HCC, previously untreated with systemic therapy, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive HAIC-FO or sorafenib. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. An exploratory model for predicting the efficacy of HAIC-FO on the basis of genomic sequencing was developed.

RESULTS

Between May 2017 and May 2020, 262 patients were randomly assigned. The median tumor size was 11.2 cm (interquartile range, 8.5-13.7 cm). Macrovascular invasion was present in 65.6%, and the percentage of patients with > 50% tumor volume involvement of the liver and/or Vp-4 portal vein tumor thrombosis was 49.2%. At data cutoff (October 31, 2020), median OS was 13.9 months for HAIC-FO and 8.2 for sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.408; 95% CI, 0.301 to 0.552; P < .001). Tumor downstaging occurred in 16 (12.3% of 130) patients receiving HAIC-FO, including 15 receiving curative surgery or ablation, and finally achieving a median OS of 20.8 months, with a 1-year OS rate of 93.8%. In high-risk subpopulations, OS was significantly longer with HAIC-FO than with sorafenib (10.8 months v 5.7 months; HR 0.343; 95% CI, 0.219 to 0.538; P < .001). A newly developed 15-mutant-gene prediction model identified 83% of patients with response to HAIC-FO. HAIC-FO responders had longer OS than HAIC-FO nonresponders (19.3 months v 10.6 months; HR 0.323; 95% CI, 0.186 to 0.560; P = .002).

CONCLUSION

HAIC-FO achieved better survival outcomes than sorafenib in advanced HCC, even in association with a high intrahepatic disease burden.

Predictive factors for long-term survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Sorafenib, used for advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), has an overall survival (OS) of 10 months. However, some patients have better response and long-term survival (LTS). Aims to assess predictive factors for LTS.

METHODS

Retrospectively reviewed 77 advanced HCC patients, starting sorafenib treatment between 2007 and 2016, with LTS (OS ≥24 months) as primary endpoint. Univariate and multivariable analysis of clinical variables were performed in order to identify predictive factors for LTS.

RESULTS

Patients: seventy (90.9%) males; median age: 65 years (39-82). All had cirrhosis mostly HCV infection (n = 32, 41.6%). Majority were Child-Pugh class A (n = 50, 64.9%); median MELD-Na: 11 (6-30). Multinodular HCC: 74% (n = 57); portal vein invasion (PVI): 50.6% (n = 39); extrahepatic spread: 18.2% (n = 14). Median time between HCC diagnosis and sorafenib start: 3.3 months (0-37.6). Median OS: 13 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.2-17.8]. Twenty-five (32.5%) patients were considered LTS, with amedian OS: 52.3 months (95% CI 17.1-87.4). Multivariable analysis identified Child-Pugh class A [odds ratio (OR) 11.1, 95% CI 1.78-69.54] and absence of PVI (OR 7.88, 95% CI 1.56-39.8) as independent predictors of LTS. Sub-analysis of Child-Pugh class A: absence of PVI (OR 7.13, 95% CI 1.69-30.2) and alpha-fetoprotein <400 ng/ml (OR 5.82, 95% CI 1.18-28.75) independently related to LTS.

CONCLUSION

Despite global short median OS, sorafenib treatment is associated with longer than 2-year survival in a sub-group, more likely in compensated liver disease and absence of PVI.

Sorafenib is associated with a reduced rate of tumour growth and liver function deterioration in HCV-induced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Sorafenib has been the standard of care for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and although immunotherapeutic approaches are now challenging this position, it retains an advantage in HCV-seropositive patients. We aimed to quantify the rate of tumour progression in patients receiving sorafenib and relate this figure to survival, both overall, and according to viral status.

METHODS

Using serial data from an international clinical trial we applied a joint model to combine survival and progression over time in order to estimate the rate of tumour growth as assessed by tumour burden and serum alpha-fetoprotein, and the impact of treatment on liver function.

RESULTS

High tumour burden at baseline was associated with an increased risk of death. In patients still alive at the end of the study, the progression in relation to tumour burden was very low compared to those who died within the study. Overall, the change in mean tumour burden was 0.12 mm per day or an absolute growth rate of 3.6 mm/month. Median doubling time was 665 days. For those who progressed above 0.12 mm per day or the 12% rate, median survival was 234 days compared to 384 days if the rate was below 12%. Tumour growth rate and serum alpha-fetoprotein rise were significantly lower in those who were HCV seropositive as was the rate of decline in liver function. These results were replicated in 2 independent patient groups.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis suggests that sorafenib treatment is associated with improved survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma mainly by decreasing the rate of tumour growth and liver function deterioration among patients with HCV infection.

LAY SUMMARY

Among patients receiving sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma the rate of tumour growth (as assessed by changes in tumour size and the biomarker alpha-fetoprotein) and the deterioration of liver function is less in those who have the hepatitis C virus, than in those who do not.

Comparison of prognostic models in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing Sorafenib: A multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Sorafenib is the gold standard therapy for the advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). No scoring/staging is universally accepted to predict the survival of these patients.

AIMS

To evaluate the accuracy of the available prognostic models for HCC to predict the survival of advanced HCC patients treated with Sorafenib included in the Italian Liver Cancer (ITA.LI.CA.) multicenter cohort.

METHODS

The performance of several prognostic scores was assessed through a Cox regression-model evaluating the C-index and the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).

RESULTS

Data of 1129 patients were analyzed. The mean age of patients was 61.6 years, and 80.8% were male. During a median follow-up period of 13 months, 789 patients died. The median period of Sorafenib administration was 4 months. All the prognostic scores were able to predict the overall survival (p<0.001) at univariate analysis, except the Albumin-Bilirubin score. The Italian Liver Cancer score (CLIP) yielded the highest accuracy (C-index 0.604, AIC 9898), followed by the ITA.LI.CA. prognostic score (C-index 0.599, AIC 9915).

CONCLUSIONS

The CLIP score had the highest accuracy in predicting the overall survival of HCC patients treated with Sorafenib, although its performance remained poor. Further studies are needed to refine the current ability to predict the outcome of HCC patients undergoing Sorafenib.

Treatment strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma with extrahepatic metastasis

Extrahepatic metastasis (EHM) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has increasingly been seen due to improved survival with effective management of intrahepatic lesions. The presence of EHM indicates an advanced stage of HCC, for which systemic therapy serves as the standard treatment modality. Since the approval of Sorafenib as the first systemic agent in 2007, it took almost a decade to show its efficacy in both first and further lines of setting until the landscape of systemic drugs was finally expanded. Moreover, with inspiring results from immunotherapy trials in HCC, it appears that the introduction of immunotherapy may lead to an evolution in the portfolio of HCC treatment. Although the locoregional approach in the management of EHM is not recommended for advanced-stage HCC, efforts have been made to demonstrate its efficacy in symptom relief and potential benefit for overall survival. This review provides a summary of recent updates of the systemic agents in the treatment of advanced HCC, with an emphasis on aggressive locoregional management of EHM by various treatment modalities.

Sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma: potential molecular targets and resistance mechanisms

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most widespread typical therapy-resistant, unresectable type of malignant solid tumour with a high death rate constituting huge medical concern. Sorafenib is a small molecule oral multi-target kinase potent inhibitor that acts by suppressing/blocking the multiplication of the tumour cells, angiogenesis, and encouraging apoptosis of the tumour cells. Though, the precise mechanism of tumour cell death induction by sorafenib is yet under exploration. Furthermore, genetic heterogeneity plays a critical role in developing sorafenib resistance, which leads the way to identify the need for predictive biomarkers responsible for drug resistance. Therefore, it is essential to find out the fundamental resistance mechanisms to expand therapeutic plans. The authors summarize the molecular concepts of resistance, progression, potential molecular targets, HCC management therapies, and discussion on the advancements expected in the coming future, inclusive of biomarker-driven treatment strategies, which may provide the prospects to design innovative therapeutically targeted strategies for the HCC treatment and the clinical implementation of emerging targeted agents.

Biomarkers in Hepatobiliary Cancers: What is Useful in Clinical Practice?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and biliary tract cancers (BTC) exhibit a poor prognosis with 5-year overall survival rates around 15%, all stages combined. Most of these primary liver malignancies are metastatic at diagnostic, with only limited therapeutic options, relying mainly on systemic therapies. Treatment modalities are different yet partially overlapping between HCC and BTC. The complex molecular profile of BTC yields to several actionable therapeutic targets, contrary to HCC that remains the field of antiangiogenic drugs in non-molecularly selected patients. Immunotherapy is now validated in the first line in HCC in combination with bevacizumab, while clinical activity of single agent immunotherapy appears limited to a subset of patients in BTC, still poorly characterized, and combinations are currently under investigation. In this review, we provide a critical evaluation and grading of clinical relevance on (i) the main prognostic biomarkers in HCC and BTC, (ii) the main theragnostic biomarkers in both tumors, and lastly (iii) what is recommended in clinical practice.

A Nomogram-Based Prognostic Model for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Treated with Sorafenib: A Multicenter Study

Among scores and staging systems used for HCC, none showed a good prognostic ability in patients with advanced HCC treated with Sorafenib. We aimed to evaluate predictive factors of overall survival (OS) and drug response in HCC patients undergoing Sorafenib included in the Italian Liver Cancer (ITA.LI.CA.) multicenter cohort. Patients in the ITA.LI.CA database treated with Sorafenib and updated on 30 June 2019 were included. Demographic and clinical data before starting Sorafenib treatment were considered. For the evaluation of predictive factors for OS, a time-dependent Cox proportional hazard model was used. A total of 1107 patients were included in our analysis. The mean age was 64.3 years and 81.7% were male. Most patients were staged as BCLC B (205, 18.9%) or C (706, 65.1%). The median time of Sorafenib administration was 4 months (interquartile range (IQR) 2-12), and the median OS was 10 months (IQR: 4-20). A total of 263 patients (33.8%) out of 780 with available evaluation experienced objective tumoral response to Sorafenib. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status (PS) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.284), maximum tumoral diameter (HR 1.100), plasma total bilirubin (HR 1.119), aspartate amino transferase assessed as multiple of the upper normal value (HR 1.032), alpha-fetoprotein ≥200 ng/mL (HR 1.342), hemoglobin (HR 0.903) and platelet count (HR 1.002) were associated with OS at multivariate Cox regression analysis. Drug response was predicted by maximum tumoral diameter and platelet count. A novel prognostic nomogram for patients undergoing Sorafenib is hereby proposed. The novelty introduced is the comprehensive patient's assessment using common markers of patient's general status, liver damage and function and HCC biology. Further studies are required to test its accuracy and provide external validation.

Sequential Treatment of Sorafenib-Regorafenib Versus Sorafenib-Physician's Choice: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Regorafenib has been shown to improve clinical outcomes compared to placebo, becoming a standard second-line therapy for sorafenib-progressed and -tolerated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a multicentre, retrospective study in Italy and Korea to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment sequence sorafenib-regorafenib compared with sorafenib and physician's choice in a real-life setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A propensity score model was developed to control the results for baseline variable imbalances between the arm treated with sorafenib and regorafenib (S-R) and the arm treated with sorafenib and physician's choice (S-P). Survival analysis was conducted on the matched population.

RESULTS

After the application of propensity score matching, we analysed 99 patients in the arm treated with S-R and 99 patients in the arm treated with S-P. For the S-R group, the median overall survival was 22.2 months (95% CI 17.1-27.4), compared to 17.9 months (95% CI 15.1-50.0) for the S-P group. The results of the univariate analysis showed a 31% reduction of death risk for patients treated with S-R (p = 0.0382) compared to patients treated with S-P. Interaction tests highlighted the predictive role of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and extrahepatic spread.

CONCLUSION

This study provides additional proof of the superiority of the S-R treatment over the S-P treatment approach in advanced HCC patients from a real-life setting.

Comparison of Prognostic Scores in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Sorafenib

INTRODUCTION

Prognostic classifications for patients treated with sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) facilitate stratification in trials and inform clinical decision making. Recently, 3 different prognostic models (hepatoma arterial-embolization prognosis [HAP] score, sorafenib advanced HCC prognosis [SAP] score, and Prediction Of Survival in Advanced Sorafenib-treated HCC [PROSASH]-II) have been proposed specifically for patients treated with sorafenib. This study aimed to compare the prognostic performance of different scores.

METHODS

We analyzed a large prospective database gathering data of 552 patients treated with sorafenib from 7 Italian centers. The performance of the HAP, SAP, and PROSASH-II models were compared with those of generic HCC prognostic models (including the Barcelona Clinic for Liver Cancer and Italian Liver Cancer staging systems, albumin-bilirubin grade, and Child-Pugh score) to verify whether they could provide additional information.

RESULTS

The PROSASH-II model improved discrimination (C-index 0.62) compared with existing prognostic scores (C-index ≤0.59). Its stratification significantly discriminated patients, with a median overall survival of 21.5, 15.3, 9.3, and 6.0 months for risk group 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The HAP and SAP score were also validated but with a poorer performance compared with the PROSASH-II.

DISCUSSION

Although suboptimal, PROSASH-II is the most effective prognostic classification model among other available scores in a large Italian population of patients treated with sorafenib.

Systemic therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

For a decade, sorafenib remained the only approved first-line treatment and standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The treatment landscape has been evolving rapidly over the past 2 years with the approval of additional first-and second-line systemic treatments, most of which are targeted therapies. The expected approval of immunotherapies constitutes a paradigm shift: for the first time in years, a checkpoint inhibitor in combination with a VEGF antibody recently outperformed sorafenib with regards to efficacy. The wider availability of systemic therapies increases the chance for longer overall survival but raises new questions concerning the role of local options, treatment choice and sequential treatment. Following an expert discussion at the German Cancer Congress 2020 in Berlin, this article aims to summarize the current evidence on and experience of treatment choice and sequence in first- and second-line therapy.

Neoadjuvant therapy and immunotherapy strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common cancers with high mortality rate worldwide. Due to aggressive and invasive characteristics of HCC, poor prognosis is often displayed at advanced stages while therapeutic options are limited. Liver resection is still an essential curative-intent treatment in HCC management, while locoregional and systematic therapies made promising advances that may improve the proportion and outcomes of patients who are surgical candidates. In this review, we discussed status of currently available neoadjuvant treatments aimed at improving resectability and reducing recurrence rates. More than ever, in order to implement this therapeutic concepts and exploit the full potential of neoadjuvant treatment strategies, it is of utmost importance to use more high-level evidence to guide treatment decision making. Unfortunately, the use of preoperative treatments is not sponsored by tough evidence and consensus guidelines are absent.

Improved survival prediction and comparison of prognostic models for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib

BACKGROUND

The 'Prediction Of Survival in Advanced Sorafenib-treated HCC' (PROSASH) model addressed the heterogeneous survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib in clinical trials but requires validation in daily clinical practice. This study aimed to validate, compare and optimize this model for survival prediction.

METHODS

Patients treated with sorafenib for HCC at five tertiary European centres were retrospectively staged according to the PROSASH model. In addition, the optimized PROSASH-II model was developed using the data of four centres (training set) and tested in an independent dataset. These models for overall survival (OS) were then compared with existing prognostic models.

RESULTS

The PROSASH model was validated in 445 patients, showing clear differences between the four risk groups (OS 16.9-4.6 months). A total of 920 patients (n = 615 in training set, n = 305 in validation set) were available to develop PROSASH-II. This optimized model incorporated fewer and less subjective parameters: the serum albumin, bilirubin and alpha-foetoprotein, and macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic spread and largest tumour size on imaging. Both PROSASH and PROSASH-II showed improved discrimination (C-index 0.62 and 0.63, respectively) compared with existing prognostic scores (C-index ≤0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

In HCC patients treated with sorafenib, individualized prediction of survival and risk group stratification using baseline prognostic and predictive parameters with the PROSASH model was validated. The refined PROSASH-II model performed at least as good with fewer and more objective parameters. PROSASH-II can be used as a tool for tailored treatment of HCC in daily practice and to define pre-planned subgroups for future studies.

The role of PNI to predict survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with Sorafenib

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The present study aims to investigate the role of the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) on survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib.

METHODS

This multicentric study included a training cohort of 194 HCC patients and three external validation cohorts of 129, 76 and 265 HCC patients treated with Sorafenib, respectively. The PNI was calculated as follows: 10 × serum albumin (g/dL) + 0.005 × total lymphocyte count (per mm3). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the association between the covariates and the overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A PNI cut-off value of 31.3 was established using the ROC analysis. In the training cohort, the median OS was 14.8 months (95% CI 12-76.3) and 6.8 months (95% CI 2.7-24.6) for patients with a high (>31.3) and low (<31.3) PNI, respectively. At both the univariate and the multivariate analysis, low PNI value (p = 0.0004), a 1-unit increase of aspartate aminotransferase (p = 0.0001), and age > 70 years (p< 0.0038) were independent prognostic factors for OS. By performing the same multivariate analysis of the training cohort, the PNI <31.3 versus >31.3 was found to be an independent prognostic factor for predicting OS in all the three validation cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

PNI represents a prognostic tool in advanced HCC treated with first-line Sorafenib. It is readily available and low-cost, and it could be implemented in clinical practice in patients with HCC.

Current strategies for the treatment of intermediate and advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ranks among the most common cancers worldwide and remains to be a major global health care problem. Until 2007, no effective therapies were available for patients after failure of locoregional approaches, and the approval of sorafenib as the first systemic agent with efficacy in patients suffering from advanced HCC marked a new era in the treatment of this deadly disease. However, it took nearly 10 years until the portfolio of effective drugs finally expanded and additional substances showed activity in both first and further lines of treatment. Since their recent approval, these novel substances have substantially changed the field of palliative treatment strategies in patients with advanced HCC, and their sequential application has demonstrated their potential to significantly prolong patient survival in the palliative setting. With the recently communicated data from the first positive immuno-oncology trial in HCC, it appears highly likely that the implementation of IO concepts will result in a further improvement of patient prognosis. Although locoregional approaches remain an integral component of meaningful treatment concepts for patients with BCLC-B stage HCC, repetitive interventions bear the risk of a progressive deterioration of liver function. More than ever, in order to implement long-term therapeutic concepts and exploit the full potential of systemic treatment strategies, it is of utmost importance to maintain a fine balance between anti-tumor activity and toxicity. With an emphasis on the systemic treatment options, this review provides a summary of the most recent results from large phase III clinical trials and discusses their clinical implications.

Sorafenib for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Child-Pugh B Liver Cirrhosis: Lessons Learned from a Terminated Study

Lessons Learned

Recruitment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and Child‐Pugh B for sorafenib treatment and additional pharmacokinetic studies is challenging.

Patients with Child‐Pugh B liver cirrhosis have high rates of cirrhosis‐related adverse events.

Background

Few data are available on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and Child‐Pugh B liver cirrhosis. This study aimed to explore the sorafenib PK and its relationship with efficacy and toxicity in these patients.

Methods

Patients with advanced HCC and Child‐Pugh B7‐8 liver function were prospectively recruited at a tertiary center. Adverse events (AEs), progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were recorded. Patients received a starting dose of 200 b.i.d. with toxicity‐adjusted dose escalation to a target dose of 400 mg b.i.d. with PK sampling at fixed time points.

Results

Between May 2014 and March 2017, 12 patients were screened, of whom 7 progressed to a terminal stage during the screening (n = 6) or shortly after recruitment (n = 1). The five included patients had median PFS of 3.8 months (range, 1.7–10.8) and OS of 7.4 months (range, 1.7–25.8). Three patients had severe AEs and one patient had a partial response with an OS of 25.8 months. In 2017, the trial was aborted for lack of accrual.

Conclusion

Because of low accrual, no conclusion can be drawn on the sorafenib PK in patients with advanced HCC and Child‐Pugh B liver cirrhosis. The poor survival and frequent cirrhosis‐related AEs suggest limited benefit for most of these patients.

Prognostic Role of a New Index (RAPID Index) in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Receiving Sorafenib: Training and Validation Cohort

Background and Aims

The aim of the present study is to evaluate a new index influenced by the balance between the immune system, α-fetoprotein (AFP), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (RAPID index) as a prognostic factor in patients treated with sorafenib.

Methods

This study was conducted on a training cohort of 159 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients and a validation cohort of 68 HCC patients treated with sorafenib. The RAPID index was calculated as neutrophil/lymphocyte count × LDH × AFP.

Results

In the training cohort, the median overall survival (OS) was 23.2 months (95% CI 11-25) and 12.1 months (95% CI 9-15) for patients with a low (≤3,226) and high (>3,226) RAPID index, respectively (ref. <3,226, HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.88, p = 0.017). Following adjustment for clinical covariates, multivariate analysis confirmed the RAPID index ≤3,226 versus >3,226 (HR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.18-0.74, p = 0.0054) as an independent prognostic factor for OS. In the validation cohort, the median OS was 26.9 months (95% CI 17.6-26.9) and 7.0 months (95% CI 6.2-9.2) for patients with a low (≤ 3,226) and high (>3,226) RAPID index, respectively (ref. <3,226, HR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.10-0.36, p < 0.0001). Performing the same multivariate analysis of the training cohort (AFP, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, aspartate aminotransferase, neutrophil, platelet, systemic inflammatory index and RAPID index), the RAPID index <3,226 versus >3,226 (HR = 3.86, 95% CI 1.45-10.29, p = 0.007) was found to be an independent prognostic factor for predicting OS.

Conclusion

The low cost, easy assessment, and reproducibility of a full blood count make the RAPID index a promising tool for assessing HCC prognosis in future clinical practice.