Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: An inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) increases anti-PD-1 antitumor activity by enhancing the tumor immune microenvironment in mice with metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

To explore the effect of radiotherapy on anti-pd-1 anti-tumor activity in metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic HCC treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in combination with immunotherapy (n = 13) were retrospectively analyzed by comparing its efficacy with that of immunotherapy alone (n = 12) as well as untreated (n = 20) patients with metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma. Animal experiment used mouse hepatocellular carcinoma H22 cell metastatic tumor model and were also divided into a control group, a PD-1 antibody group, an SBRT group, and an SBRT combined with a PD-1 antibody group. SBRT treatment is 8 Gy×3 F. The growth curves of body weight, irradiated tumor (the primary tumor), and non-irradiated tumor (secondary tumor) were plotted for each group of tumor-bearing mice. For this study, we used flow cytometry to examine effector CD8 + T cells expression in both irradiated and non-irradiated tumors, the CD4 + T and CD4+/CD8 + T cells ratio in the spleen, and used enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) to analyze the concentrations of IFN-γ and IL-10 in serum. Tumors were additionally stained with immunohistochemistry Ki-67 and TdT-mediated dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL). We used hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining of liver, spleen, lungs, kidneys, and heart to assess the anti-tumor activity of each group of tumor-bearing mice and their tolerance to determine the safety of the approach.

RESULTS

Clinical results: The median survival of IMRT + PD-1 group, PD-1 group, and control group were 17.5 months (95Confidence Interval (CI) 13.2-21.8), 12.5 months (95CI 9.0-16.0), and 5.2 months (95CI 5.5-12.9), respectively (P < 0.001). SBRT combined with PD-1 antibody improved tumor control in both radiated and non-radiated tumors, resulting in a complete cure of the half of mice in animal studies. This was linked to an increased in CD8 + effector T cells infiltration triggered by radiotherapy. HE staining of mice in the SBRT combined with the PD-1 treatment group suggested no damage to the liver, spleen, lungs, kidneys, and heart.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that SBRT, while being well-tolerated, significantly increased anti-PD-1 antitumor activity by enhancing the tumor immune microenvironment in mice with metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma without significant toxic side effects.

DISCLAIMER

This manuscript was previously submitted as a preprint only in Experimental Hematology & Oncology and has no conflict of interest with this submission.

Relationship between skeletal muscle mass and prognosis in patients with liver cancer receiving targeted therapy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many studies have found that sarcopenia is related to the survival of patients with liver cancer, which may lead to worse prognosis.

AIM

To investigate the relationship between skeletal muscle mass and prognosis in patients with liver cancer receiving targeted therapy by meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for clinical studies on the relationship between skeletal muscle index (SMI) and the prognosis of patients with liver cancer receiving targeted therapy from inception to March 1, 2022. Meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis of the data were performed using Stata 16.0 software.

RESULTS

A total of 6877 studies were searched, and finally 12 articles with 1715 cases were included. Meta-analysis result of 8 articles showed that compared with non-low SMI group, the overall survival (OS) of patients with liver cancer in the low SMI group was significantly shorter (hazard ratio = 1.60, 95% confidence interval: 1.44-1.77, P = 0.000). Meta-analysis result of 4 articles showed that, compared with low SMI group, patients in the non-low SMI group had longer OS (hazard ratio = 0.59, 95% confidence interval: 0.38-0.91, P = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Skeletal muscle mass is positively correlated with OS in patients with liver cancer receiving targeted therapy.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: pathogenesis, molecular mechanisms, and treatment advances

Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC), a highly prevalent malignancy, poses a significant global health challenge. Its pathogenesis is intricate and multifactorial, involving a complex interplay of environmental and genetic factors. Viral hepatitis, excessive alcohol consumption, and cirrhosis are known to significantly elevate the risk of developing HCC. The underlying biological processes driving HCC are equally complex, encompassing aberrant activation of molecular signaling pathways, dysregulation of hepatocellular differentiation and angiogenesis, and immune dysfunction. This review delves into the multifaceted nature of HCC, exploring its etiology and the intricate molecular signaling pathways involved in its development. We examine the role of immune dysregulation in HCC progression and discuss the potential of emerging therapeutic strategies, including immune-targeted therapy and tumor-associated macrophage interventions. Additionally, we explore the potential of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) monomers in inhibiting tumor growth. By elucidating the complex interplay of factors contributing to HCC, this review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the disease and highlight promising avenues for future research and therapeutic development.

Recent advancements in improving the efficacy and safety of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

The liver is one of the most frequent sites of primary malignancies in humans. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most prevalent solid tumors with poor prognosis. Current treatments showed limited efficacy in some patients, and, therefore, alternative strategies, such as immunotherapy, cancer vaccines, adoptive cell therapy (ACT), and recently chimeric antigen receptors (CAR)-T cells, are developed to offer better efficacy and safety profile in patients with HCC. Unlike other ACTs like tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), CAR-T cells are equipped with engineered CAR receptors that effectively identify tumor antigens and eliminate cancer cells without major histocompatibility complex (MHC) restriction. This process induces intracellular signaling, leading to T lymphocyte recruitment and subsequent activation of other effector cells in the tumor microenvironment (TME). Until today, novel approaches have been used to develop more potent CAR-T cells with robust persistence, specificity, trafficking, and safety. However, the clinical application of CAR-T cells in solid tumors is still challenging. Therefore, this study aims to review the advancement, prospects, and possible avenues of CAR-T cell application in HCC following an outline of the CAR structure and function.

Autocrine and paracrine LIF signals to collaborate sorafenib-resistance in hepatocellular carcinoma and effects of Kanglaite Injection

BACKGROUND

Sorafenib (SFN) is the first-line medicine for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, Sorafenib resistance is a main challenge of therapeutic efficacy, and the mechanisms have not been fully clarified.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the therapeutic potential and mechanism of action of LIF in modulating the microenvironment of SFN resistance as well as Kanglaite Injection (KLTI) in ameliorating SFN resistance in HCC and to guide future research directions for drug combination for HCC.

METHODS

Established SFN-resistance HCC cell line was used to study the relationship between resistance and immunosuppression in HCC-tumor microenvironment (TME). In vivo macrophage and natural killer (NK) cells depletion were achieved by clodronate liposomes (CL) and anti-NK1.1. In vitro multiple cell co-culture systems were used to determine the effects of KLTI on SFN-resistant. Likewise, flow cytometry, qRT-PCR, Western blot, and immunohistochemistry analysis were performed for further mechanistic investigation.

RESULTS

Tumor associated-macrophages (TAMs) and NK cells mediated SFN-resistance in murine HCC. In the case of SFN resistance, the paracrine-leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) by M2-like TAMs increased and potently suppressed NK cells proliferation and cytotoxicity, which finally inducing NK cells exhaustion and malignancy of HCC metastasis. Meanwhile, SFN resistance led to the increased autocrine-LIF of tumor cells, and further promoted the protective autophagy and activation of the acquired drug-resistant pathway PI3K/Akt/mTOR. KLTI could ameliorate the resistance of tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) and enhance the sensitivity of HCC to SFN by regulating LIF and macrophage-NK cell interaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings verify the therapeutic effects of targeting LIF in SFN-resistance, uncover the potential mechanism for the increased sensitivity to SFN and sought to elucidate how this intervention might contribute to overcoming SFN resistance. KLTI is a promising immunomodulatory drug by regulating LIF and macrophage-NK cell interaction, which could be a potential combination partner for HCC treatment.

Organ-specific response with first-line atezolizumab-bevacizumab versus lenvatinib for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatments have become the mainstay of first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but there has been a concern that intrahepatic HCC lesions may be less responsive to ICI monotherapy. We aimed to investigate the organ-specific response patterns among unresectable HCC patients treated with first-line atezolizumab-bevacizumab or lenvatinib.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 386 patients with Child-Pugh A unresectable HCC who were treated with first-line atezolizumab-bevacizumab (n = 217) or lenvatinib (n = 169). The organ-specific response was separately evaluated according to the site of the lesions: liver, lung, lymph node (LN), and intraabdomen based on a radiological evaluation adopted from RECIST v 1.1.

RESULTS

The median age was 60 years. Hepatitis B infection was the most common etiology (n = 270, 69.9%), and 291 (75.4%) patients had a viral etiology. The proportion of patients achieving a ≥ 30% reduction in the tumor burden for each organ category was overall higher in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab group than that in the lenvatinib group: 20.2% vs. 11.8%, 23.0% vs. 12.2%, 27.9% vs. 17.9% and 33.3% vs. 15.0% for intrahepatic, lung, LN, and intraabdominal lesions, respectively. The corresponding values for the subgroup with a viral etiology were 17.3% vs. 8.1%, 18.8% vs. 13.3%, 28.9% vs. 3.6%, and 36.0% vs. 12.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Compared to lenvatinib, atezolizumab-bevacizumab was associated with a favorable organ-specific response regardless of the site of the tumor lesions. Unlike anti-PD-1 monotherapy, atezolizumab-bevacizumab had a comparable organ-specific response between intrahepatic and extrahepatic lesions, especially for those with viral etiology HCCs.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS AND MATERIAL

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Multidisciplinary treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in 2023: Italian practice Treatment Guidelines of the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF), Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), Italian Association of Hepato-Bilio-Pancreatic Surgery (AICEP), Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists (AIGO), Italian Association of Radiology and Clinical Oncology (AIRO), Italian Society of Pathological Anatomy and Diagnostic Cytology (SIAPeC-IAP), Italian Society of Surgery (SIC), Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), Italian Organ Transplant Society (SITO), and Association of Patients with Hepatitis and Liver Disease (EpaC) - Part II - Non-surgical treatments

Worldwide, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most common cause of cancer-related death. The remarkable improvements in treating HCC achieved in the last years have increased the complexity of its management. Following the need to have updated guidelines on the multidisciplinary treatment management of HCC, the Italian Scientific Societies involved in the management of this cancer have promoted the drafting of a new dedicated document. This document was drawn up according to the GRADE methodology needed to produce guidelines based on evidence. Here is presented the second part of guidelines, focused on the multidisciplinary tumor board of experts and non-surgical treatments of HCC.

Prediction of prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma based on immune-related score

BACKGROUND

Immune-related scores are currently used for prognostic evaluation and as an immunotherapy reference in various cancers. However, the relationship between immune-related score and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis has not yet been investigated. This study aimed to explore the clinical application value of immune-related score for predicting HCC prognosis-related indicators including disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), and to construct a clinical nomogram prediction model related to verification.

METHODS

This study included 284 HCC patients who were selected from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database and linked to the immune-related score downloaded from the public platform. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to estimate the adjusted risk ratio, and a nomogram was constructed based on multivariate analysis results and clinical significance. The model was internally verified by bootstrap. The performance of the prediction model was evaluated using the C-index and calibration curves.

RESULTS

Patients were divided into three subgroups according to the immune-related score level. Compared with patients in the low immune-related score group, the DFS of patients in the medium and high immune-related score groups was significantly prolonged (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87; HR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.21-0.63, respectively). The OS of patients in the medium and high immune-related score groups was also significantly prolonged (HR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20-0.95, p = 0.038; HR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.14-0.58, p < 0.001, respectively). The C-indexes for predicting DFS and OS were 0.687 (95% CI: 0.665-0.700) and 0.743 (95% CI: 0.709-0.776), respectively. The calibration curves of 3-year and 5-year DFS and OS showed that the results predicted by the nomogram were in good agreement with the actual observations.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate/high-grade immune-related score was significantly associated with better DFS and OS in HCC patients. In addition, a nomogram for prognosis estimation can help clinicians predict the survival status of patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Lenvatinib in Very Old Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Data concerning the use of lenvatinib in very old patients (≥ 80 years) are limited, although the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in this patient population is constantly increasing.

OBJECTIVE

This analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in a large cohort of very old patients (≥ 80 years) with unresectable HCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study was conducted on a cohort of 1325 patients from 46 centers in four Western and Eastern countries (Italy, Germany, Japan, and the Republic of Korea) who were undergoing first-line treatment with lenvatinib between July 2010 and February 2022. Patients were stratified according to age as very old (≥ 80 years) and not very old (< 80 years).

RESULTS

The median overall survival (OS) was 15.7 months for patients < 80 years old and 18.4 months for patients ≥ 80 years old [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-1.25, p = 0.8281]. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 6.3 months for patients < 80 years old and 6.5 months for patients ≥ 80 years old (HR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.91-1.25, p = 0.3954). No differences between the two study groups were found in terms of disease control rate (DCR; 80.8% versus 78.8%; p = 0.44) and response rate (RR; 38.2% versus 37.9%; p = 0.88). Patients < 80 years old experienced significantly more hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) grade ≥ 2 and decreased appetite grade ≥ 2. Conversely, patients ≥ 80 years old experienced significantly more fatigue grade ≥ 2. In the very old group, parameters associated with prognosis were AFP, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC), and Child-Pugh score. BCLC stage was the only independent predictor of overall survival (OS; HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.11-2.29, p = 0.01115).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the same efficacy and safety of lenvatinib between very old and not very old patients.

Case Report: Lenvatinib for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma in people living with HIV: a report of two cases

The use and choice of the best systemic treatment is gaining increasing interest in people living with HIV (PLWH) because hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents an increasing cause of morbidity and mortality in this setting and most HCCs are diagnosed in the advanced stage. Ten years ago, the multi-kinase inhibitor lenvatinib was approved in the first-line setting. However, to date, no data on the efficacy and tolerability of lenvatinib in PLWH from clinical trials and real-life studies are available. Case 1 was a gentleman with hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation for HCC and developed peritoneal metastasis several years later. Lenvatinib treatment was selected at HCC recurrence. This participant maintained undetectable HIV viremia and a relatively preserved immune status during 6 months of systemic treatment with lenvatinib. After 6 months, he discontinued lenvatinib for progression of the disease (growing of peritoneal metastasis) and uncontrolled hypertension. Case 2 was a gentleman with hepatitis C-genotype 1a-related cirrhosis who experienced unresectable recurrences after radiofrequency thermal ablation of the tumor. At the first recurrence, HCC was treated with six cycles of trans-catheter arterial chemoembolization; at the second recurrence, the participant underwent trans-catheter arterial radioembolization; and at the third recurrence, he received lenvatinib. A week after the start of lenvatinib, the participant had liver decompensation and discontinued therapy. The presently reported cases showed low tolerability of systemic therapy with lenvatinib in PLWH. Cumulative data are necessary to define the position of lenvatinib in this setting.

Efficacy of lenvatinib versus sorafenib in the primary treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis

Background and Aim

Molecular-targeted agents such as lenvatinib and sorafenib have been approved to treat hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the choice between these two agents in the primary treatment for advanced HCC is still under debate with conflicting results. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of lenvatinib and sorafenib in patients with HCC.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for relevant articles from inception until February 10, 2023. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis was overall survival (OS). The secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression, objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR).

Results

A total of 13 studies with 3705 patients (1635 on lenvatinib and 2070 on sorafenib) were included in our analysis. The mean age of the patients in both groups was comparable (66.81 vs 65.9 years). Pooled analysis of primary outcomes showed that, compared with sorafenib, lenvatinib was associated with significantly better OS in patients treated with these drugs (HR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.69-0.97, P = 0.02). Pooled analysis also showed that PFS (HR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.57-0.78, P < 0.00001) and time to progression (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.31-0.79; P = 0.004) were significantly better in the lenvatinib group compared to the sorafenib group. It also showed that the lenvatinib group had significantly better ORR (odds ratio [OR] 5.43, 95% CI: 3.71-7.97; P < 0.00001) and DCR (OR 2.35, 95% CI: 1.75-3.16; P < 00001) than the sorafenib group.

Conclusion

Our study shows that lenvatinib is superior to sorafenib regarding OS and PFS in patients with advanced HCC.

AHSA1 Regulates Hepatocellular Carcinoma Progression via the TGF-β/Akt-Cyclin D1/CDK6 Pathway

Background

Activator of heat shock protein 90 (HSP90) ATPase Activity 1 (AHSA1) regulates proliferation, apoptosis, migration, and invasion of osteosarcoma and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the novel mechanism of AHSA1 in the tumor biology of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear.

Methods

We analyzed AHSA1 expression in 85 pairs of clinical samples of HCC and the Cancer Genome Atlas database. The role of AHSA1 in HCC was proved by cell proliferation, colony formation, migration, cell cycle analysis in vitro, xenograft models and tumor metastasis assay in vivo, and bioinformatics.

Results

High AHSA1 expression was demonstrated in HCC and associated with invasive depth, clinical stage, and poor overall survival of patients. Univariate Cox analysis confirmed that AHSA1 was an independent prognostic factor for patients with HCC. Meanwhile, AHSA1 upregulation promoted cell proliferation, colony formation, and cell migration in vitro and tumor cell proliferation and metastasis of HCC cells in vivo. AHSA1 upregulation increased the cell cycle transition from G1 to S phase by increasing the expression of cyclinD1, cyclinD3, and cyclin-dependent kinase 6(CD). Transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF-β1)-induced protein kinase B (Akt) signaling regulated the expression of downstream targets, including cyclinD1. AHSA1 expression was closely correlated with the expression of TGF-β, Akt, cyclinD1, cyclinD3, and CDK6 using the Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis database. AHSA1 upregulation participated in HCC progression by regulating TGF-β/Akt-cyclinD1/CDK6 signaling.

Conclusion

AHSA1 might serve as a biomarker for predicting the clinical outcome of patients with HCC. It is vital in tumor metastasis and disease progression of HCC and may facilitate the development of clinical intervention strategies against HCC.

Hepatectomy combined with apatinib and camrelizumab for CNLC stage IIIb hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase II trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Current clinical guidelines recommend systematic antitumour therapy as the primary treatment option for patients with stage IIIb hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) based on the China liver cancer (CNLC) staging criteria. Several different targeted therapeutics have been applied in combination with immunotherapeutic regimens to date in patients with advanced HCC. The present study was developed to evaluate the relative safety and efficacy of hepatectomy of HCC in combination with targeted apatinib treatment and immunotherapeutic camrelizumab treatment CNLC-IIIb stage HCC patients with the goal of providing evidence regarding the potential value of this therapeutic regimen in individuals diagnosed with advanced HCC.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre phase II trial with single-arm in which patients undergo hepatectomy in combination with targeted treatment (apatinib) and immunotherapy (camrelizumab). Patients will undergo follow-up every 2-3 months following treatment initiation to record any evidence of disease progression and adverse event incidence for a minimum of 24 months following the discontinuation of treatment until reaching study endpoint events or trial termination. The primary endpoint for this study is patient mortality.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital (KS2022[124]). The results of this study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05062837.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of adding transarterial chemoembolisation to lenvatinib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the comparative cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib (LEN) plus transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) (LEN-TACE) and LEN alone to treat advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

DESIGN

A three-state partitioned survival model using clinical survival data from a phase III LAUNCH trial, a 5-year time horizon for costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was constructed to analyse the cost-effectiveness of LEN-TACE. Clinical inputs were extracted from the LAUNCH trial, with outcomes extrapolated using standard and flexible parametric survival models. Costs and utilities derived from published literature were discounted at an annual rate of 5%. Sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the model.

SETTING

The Chinese healthcare system perspective.

PARTICIPANTS

A hypothetical Chinese cohort of patients with advanced HCC.

INTERVENTIONS

TACE plus LEN versus LEN.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Costs, QALYs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

Base-case analysis revealed that LEN-TACE would be cost-effective in China at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $37 663 per QALYs, with improved effectiveness of 0.382 QALYs and additional cost of $12 151 (ICER: $31 808 per QALY). The probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that LEN-TACE had a 93.5% probability of cost-effectiveness at WTP threshold of three times gross domestic product per capital ($37 663). One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that the duration of LEN treatment in both two arms, utility of progression-free survival and the cost of TACE had a greater impact on the stability of ICER values. Scenario analyses results were in line with base-case analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

LEN-TACE might be a cost-effective strategy compared with LEN for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced HCC in China.

Global trends of targeted therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A bibliometric and visualized study from 2008 to 2022

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an exceedingly prevalent malignancy with an exceptionally poor prognosis. Targeted therapy is an effective treatment option for patients with advanced HCC. However, there have been no bibliometric analyses of targeted therapies for HCC.

METHODS

This study aimed to assess the current status and future directions of targeted therapy for HCC to provide future scholars with clearer research contents and popular themes. Methods: Literature on targeted therapy for HCC from 2008 to 2022 was obtained from the Web of Science (WoS) and assessed using bibliometric methodology. Additionally, the VOS viewer was applied in the visualization study to conduct bibliographic coupling, co-authorship, co-citation, and co-occurrence analyses of publications.

RESULTS

A total of 10,779 papers were subsequently selected. Over the past 15 years, there has been a progressive increase in the number of publications on an annualized basis. China released the most publications in the field, whereas the United States had the highest H-index. Cancers published the most papers. Fudan University had the greatest sway in this area. Studies could be divided into 5 clusters: "Gene and expression research," "Mechanism study," "Nanoparticle study," "Targeted drug research," and "Clinical study."

CONCLUSIONS

In the upcoming years, more papers on targeted therapy for HCC are expected to be released, demonstrating the potential for this topic to flourish. Particularly, "Clinical study" is the following trendy topic in this field. Other research subfields may likewise exhibit a continuous tendency towards balanced development.

Survival outcomes from atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus Lenvatinib in Child Pugh B unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients

INTRODUCTION

The best first-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and Child-Pugh (CP) class B remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to perform a real-world analysis on a large sample of patients with unresectable HCC with CP B treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab Vs Lenvatinib.

METHODS

The study population included patients affected by advanced (BCLC-C) or intermediate (BCLC-B) HCC patients not suitable for locoregional therapies from both the Western and Eastern world (Italy, Germany, Republic of Korea and Japan), who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or Lenvatinib as first-line treatment. All the study population presented a CP class of B. The primary endpoint of the study was the overall survival (OS) of CP B patients treated with Lenvatinib compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Survival curves were estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan-Meier. The role of stratification factors was analyzed with log-rank tests. Finally, an interaction test was performed for the main baseline clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

217 CP B HCC patients were enrolled in the study: 65 (30%) received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, and 152 (70%) received lenvatinib. The mOS for patients receiving Lenvatinib was 13.8 months (95% CI: 11.6-16.0), compared to 8.2 months (95% CI 6.3-10.2) for patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment (atezolizumab plus bevacizumab Vs Lenvatinib: HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-3.0, p = 0.0050). No statistically significant differences were highlighted in terms of mPFS. The multivariate analysis confirmed that patients receiving Lenvatinib as first-line treatment have a significantly longer OS compared to patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (HR 2.01; 95% CI 1.29-3.25, p = 0.0023). By evaluating the cohort of patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, we found that Child B patients with ECOG PS 0, or BCLC B stage or ALBI grade 1 were those who had benefited from the treatment thus showing survival outcomes no significantly different compared to those receiving Lenvatinib.

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests for the first time a major benefit from Lenvatinib compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in a large cohort of patients with CP B class HCC.

Population Sensitive to Lenvatinib Plus Anti-PD-1 for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Infected with Hepatitis B Virus

Background

We explore the dose-efficacy relationship of lenvatinib plus anti-PD-1 in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC) infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) in real-world practice. Furthermore, we identify the population sensitive to lenvatinib plus anti-PD-1 treatments.

Methods

This retrospective study included 70 patients treated with lenvatinib plus at least 3 cycles of anti-PD-1 and 140 with lenvatinib alone. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) was used to balance clinical features between the two groups. The overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs) were analyzed. Subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) estimated treatment-effect differences between the two groups.

Results

The median age was 54 years, and 189 (90%) cases were male. A total of 180 (85%) patients were infected with HBV. A slowly increasing 12-month survival rate was with the cycles of anti-PD-1, and 5 cycles and more of anti-PD-1 appeared the most beneficial and stable survival rate. The lenvatinib plus at least 3 cycles anti-PD-1 group had better OS (21.4 vs 14 months, p = 0.041), PFS (8.0 vs 6.3 months, p = 0.015) than the lenvatinib alone group in unadjusted cohorts, and the SIPTW adjusted cohorts had confirmed it. For patients with portal vein trunk invasion (PVTI) or extrahepatic spread (EHS) combined with Child-Pugh class B (CPB), lenvatinib plus anti-PD-1 made the 12-month survival rate increase by 38%, while, in the other population, it did only 18%. The two groups had similar AEs (p ≥ 0.05).

Conclusion

The lenvatinib combined with at least 3 cycles of anti-PD-1 was efficacy and safe for u-HCC patients infected with HBV. Especially, patients with PVTI or EHS combined with CPB may benefit most from the combination therapy.

Real-World Data for Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: How Does Adherence to the IMbrave150 Trial Inclusion Criteria Impact Prognosis?

BACKGROUND

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has recently been approved as a new first-line standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

OBJECTIVE

We performed a real-world study to evaluate the impact of the IMbrave150 trial inclusion criteria on the safety and efficacy of treatment outside of clinical trials.

METHODS

We analyzed patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for unresectable HCC from four different countries. No specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, except for the absence of previous systemic therapies for HCC. The entire population was split into two groups according to concordance with the inclusion criteria as reported in the IMbrave150 trial in 'IMbrave150-in' and 'IMbrave150-out' patients, and safety and efficacy in the two groups of patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 766 patients were included in the analysis: 561/766 (73%) in the 'IMbrave150-in' group and 205/766 (27%) in the 'IMbrave150-out' group. Median overall survival (OS) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were 16.3 versus 14.3 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-0.65; p < 0.0001] and 8.3 versus 6.0 months (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99; p = 0.0431) in 'IMbrave150-in' and 'IMbrave150-out' patients, respectively. Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients included in the 'IMbrave150-in' group had significantly longer OS compared with patients included in the 'IMbrave150-out' group (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.47-0.97; p = 0.0195). In 'IMbrave150-in' patients, the albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade was not associated with OS, whereas in 'IMbrave150-out' patients, those with ALBI grade 1 reported a significant benefit in terms of OS compared with those with ALBI grade 2 (16.7 vs. 5.9 months; HR 4.40, 95% CI 2.40-8.08; p > 0.0001). No statistically significant differences were reported in the 'IMbrave150-in' and 'IMbrave150-out' groups in terms of safety profile.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the IMbrave150 trial inclusion criteria favorably impacts the prognosis of patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Among patients who did not meet the IMbrave150 inclusion criteria, those with ALBI grade 1 could benefit from the treatment.

Immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: Current status and future perspectives

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the world’s deadliest and fastest-growing tumors, with a poor prognosis. HCC develops in the context of chronic liver disease. Curative resection, surgery (liver transplantation), trans-arterial chemoembolization, radioembolization, radiofrequency ablation and chemotherapy are common treatment options for HCC, however, they will only assist a limited percentage of patients. Current treatments for advanced HCC are ineffective and aggravate the underlying liver condition. Despite promising preclinical and early-phase clinical trials for some drugs, existing systemic therapeutic methods for advanced tumor stages remain limited, underlining an unmet clinical need. In current years, cancer immunotherapy has made significant progress, opening up new treatment options for HCC. HCC, on the other hand, has a variety of causes and can affects the body’s immune system via a variety of mechanisms. With the speedy advancement of synthetic biology and genetic engineering, a range of innovative immunotherapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors [anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1), anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4, and anti-PD ligand 1 cell death antibodies], therapeutic cancer vaccines, engineered cytokines, and adoptive cell therapy have all been used for the treatment of advanced HCC. In this review, we summarize the present clinical and preclinical landscape of immunotherapies in HCC, critically discuss recent clinical trial outcomes, and address future perspectives in the field of liver cancer.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a large real-life worldwide population

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib have not been compared in a randomised controlled trial. We conducted a retrospective multi-centre study to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and atezolizumab with bevacizumab as a first-line treatment for patients with unresectable HCC in the real-world scenario.

METHODS

Clinical features of lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab patients were balanced through inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology, which weights patients' characteristics and measured outcomes of each patient in both treatment arms. Overall survival (OS) was the primary end-point.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1341 patients who received lenvatinib, and 864 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. After IPTW adjustment, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab did not show a survival advantage over lenvatinib HR 0.97 (p = 0.739). OS was prolonged by atezolizumab plus bevacizumab over lenvatinib in viral patients (HR: 0.76; p = 0.024). Conversely, OS was prolonged by lenvatinib in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis/non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (HR: 1.88; p = 0.014). In the IPTW-adjusted population, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab provided better safety profile for most of the recorded adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Our study did not identify any meaningful difference in OS between atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib. Although some hints are provided suggesting that patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis/non-alcoholic fatty liver disease might benefit more from lenvatinib therapy and patients with viral aetiology more from atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

Current therapeutic modalities and chemopreventive role of natural products in liver cancer: Progress and promise

Liver cancer is a severe concern for public health officials since the clinical cases are increasing each year, with an estimated 5-year survival rate of 30%-35% after diagnosis. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) constitutes a significant subtype of liver cancer (approximate75%) and is considered primary liver cancer. Treatment for liver cancer mainly depends on the stage of its progression, where surgery including, hepatectomy and liver transplantation, and ablation and radiotherapy are the prime choice. For advanced liver cancer, various drugs and immunotherapy are used as first-line treatment, whereas second-line treatment includes chemotherapeutic drugs from natural and synthetic origins. Sorafenib and lenvatinib are first-line therapies, while regorafenib and ramucirumab are second-line therapy. Various metabolic and signaling pathways such as Notch, JAK/ STAT, Hippo, TGF-β, and Wnt have played a critical role during HCC progression. Dysbiosis has also been implicated in liver cancer. Drug-induced toxicity is a key obstacle in the treatment of liver cancer, necessitating the development of effective and safe medications, with natural compounds such as resveratrol, curcumin, diallyl sulfide, and others emerging as promising anticancer agents. This review highlights the current status of liver cancer research, signaling pathways, therapeutic targets, current treatment strategies and the chemopreventive role of various natural products in managing liver cancer.

Lenvatinib Combined With Transarterial Chemoembolization as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Phase III, Randomized Clinical Trial (LAUNCH)

PURPOSE

Lenvatinib (LEN) is a first-line therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, it has shown modest survival benefits. Therefore, we aimed to compare clinical outcomes of LEN combined with transarterial chemoembolization (LEN-TACE) versus LEN monotherapy in patients with advanced HCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel group, phase III trial. Patients with primary treatment-naive or initial recurrent advanced HCC after surgery were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive LEN plus on-demand TACE (LEN-TACE) or LEN monotherapy. LEN was initiated within 3 days after random assignment (initial dose: 12 mg once daily for patients ≥ 60 kg; 8 mg once daily for patients < 60 kg). TACE was initiated one day after LEN initiation. The primary end point was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Between June 2019 and July 2021, a total of 338 patients underwent random assignment at 12 centers in China: 170 to LEN-TACE and 168 to LEN. At a prespecified event-driven interim analysis after a median follow-up of 17.0 months, the median OS was significantly longer in the LEN-TACE group (17.8 v 11.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.45; P < .001). The median progression-free survival was 10.6 months in the LEN-TACE group and 6.4 months in the LEN group (hazard ratio, 0.43; P < .001). Patients in the LEN-TACE group had a higher objective response rate according to the modified RECIST (54.1% v 25.0%, P < .001). Multivariable analysis revealed that portal vein tumor thrombus and treatment allocation were independent risk factors for OS.

CONCLUSION

The addition of TACE to LEN improves clinical outcomes and is a potential first-line treatment for patients with advanced HCC.

Inhibitory Effects of Esculetin on Liver Cancer Through Triggering NCOA4 Pathway-Mediation Ferritinophagy in vivo and in vitro

Objective

To explore the effects of Esculetin on liver cancer and explore potential mechanisms of Esculetin-inducing cells death.

Methods

Esculetin's effects on the proliferation, migration and apoptosis of HUH7 and HCCLM3 cells were detected by using CCK8, crystal violet staining, wound healing, Transwell^TM and Annexin V-FITC/PI. Flow cytometry, fluorescence staining, Western blot, T-AOC, DPPH radical scavenging assay, hydroxyl radical's inhibitory capability and GSH test were used to examine the esculetin's effects on the ROS level, the oxidation-related substances and proteins' expression in hepatoma cells. In vivo experiment was performed by xenograft model. Ferrostatin-1 was used to determine the death way of hepatoma cells induced by esculetin. Live cell probe, Western blot, Fe²⁺ content, MDA, HE staining, Prussian blue staining and immunohistochemistry were used to examine the ferritinophagy-related phenomenon induced by esculetin in hepatoma cells. The relationship between esculetin and NCOA4-mediated ferritinophagy was confirmed through gene silence and overexpression, immunofluorescence staining and Western blot.

Results

Esculetin suppressed the proliferation, migration and apoptosis of HUH7 and HCCLM3 cells significantly, influenced the oxidative stress level, altered the autophagy and iron metabolism levels in cells, and produced a ferritinophagy-related phenomena. Esculetin increased the levels of cellular lipid peroxidation and reactive oxygen species. In vivo, esculetin could decrease tumour volume, promote LC3 and NCOA4 expressions, suppresse hydroxyl radical's inhibiting capacity and GSH, increase Fe²⁺ and MDA levels, decrease antioxidant proteins expression in tumour tissue. In addition, Esculetin could also increase the iron deposition of tumour tissues, promote ferritinophagy, and induce tumours' ferroptosis.

Conclusion

Esculetin has an inhibitory effect on liver cancer in vivo and in vitro through triggering NCOA4 pathway-mediation ferritinophagy.

Oncolytic virus-based hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: Current status, intravenous delivery strategies, and emerging combination therapeutic solutions

Current treatments for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have limited success in improving patients' quality of life and prolonging life expectancy. The clinical need for more efficient and safe therapies has contributed to the exploration of emerging strategies. Recently, there has been increased interest in oncolytic viruses (OVs) as a therapeutic modality for HCC. OVs undergo selective replication in cancerous tissues and kill tumor cells. Strikingly, pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa-Vec) was granted an orphan drug status in HCC by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2013. Meanwhile, dozens of OVs are being tested in HCC-directed clinical and preclinical trials. In this review, the pathogenesis and current therapies of HCC are outlined. Next, we summarize multiple OVs as single therapeutic agents for the treatment of HCC, which have demonstrated certain efficacy and low toxicity. Emerging carrier cell-, bioengineered cell mimetic- or nonbiological vehicle-mediated OV intravenous delivery systems in HCC therapy are described. In addition, we highlight the combination treatments between oncolytic virotherapy and other modalities. Finally, the clinical challenges and prospects of OV-based biotherapy are discussed, with the aim of continuing to develop a fascinating approach in HCC patients.

Comparison of the effects of lenvatinib and sorafenib on survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The first-line systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) involves the use of sorafenib and lenvatinib. The present meta-analysis attempted to compare the therapeutic safety and effectiveness of the two drugs in advanced HCC.

METHODS

The library databases of Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science were systematically searched to identify eligible studies comparing the long-term outcomes of sorafenib and lenvatinib use in advanced HCC patients. Overall survival (OS) was considered the primary endpoint, whereas the progression-free survival (PFS), severe adverse events (AEs), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) were considered the secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

The present systematic review included 8 nonrandomized studies and 1 randomized controlled trial, comprising a total of 1, 914 cases. OS in patients receiving lenvatinib was better than that in patients receiving sorafenib [hazard ratio (HR): 1.23; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-1.45]. Additionally, patients who received lenvatinib exhibited better PFS, ORR, and DCR (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.79-0.99), [odds ratio (OR: 7.50, 95% CI: 4.43-12.69)], (OR: 7.50, 95% CI: 4.43-12.69), but higher incidences of AEs than those receiving sorafenib (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.08-1.53).

CONCLUSION

Lenvatinib is superior to sorafenib in treating unresectable HCC patients.

Transarterial chemoembolization combined with lenvatinib versus transarterial chemoembolization combined with sorafenib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The combination of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) fulfills an important role in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). Among the combination therapies, both lenvatinib and sorafenib combined with TACE are recommended as first-¬line treatments for uHCC. However, at present, limited data are available concerning the efficacy and safety of these two combination therapies in uHCC.

Methods

A detailed systematic search for studies on lenvatinib plus TACE (LEN+TACE) and sorafenib plus TACE (SOR+TACE) was conducted in the online databases PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library. The outcome data including overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), tumor response and adverse events (AEs), were independently extracted by two authors in a standardized way.

Results

One randomized controlled trial and five cohort studies with 598 patients (LEN+TACE: 261, SOR+TACE: 337) were included in the meta-analysis. A higher rate of odds ratio (OR) for the objective response rate (ORR) [OR: 3.63; 95% confidence intervals (95% CI): 1.89-6.95; I squared statistic (I2) = 57%, P < 0.001] and disease control rate (DCR) (OR: 3.78; 95% CI: 2.00-7.16; I2 = 52%, P = 0.0001) were observed in the LEN+SOR group compared with the SOR+TACE group. The LEN+TACE group also had significant longer OS [hazard ratio (HR): 0.67; 95% CI: 0.52-0.85; I2 = 1%, P = 0.001], PFS (HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.38-0.62; I2 = 0%, P? 0.001) and TTP (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.45-0.84; I2 = 0%, P = 0.002) compared with the SOR+TACE group. The incidence of hypertension (OR: 3.05; 95% CI: 1.45-6.39; P = 0.003) and proteinuria (OR: 5.25; 95% CI: 1.73-15.89; P = 0.003) were significantly higher in the LEN+TACE group than SOR+TACE group, while LEN+TACE group exhibited a lower rate of hand-foot-skin reaction (HFSR) (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.27-0.95; P = 0.03) compared with the SOR+TACE group.

Conclusion

The combination therapy of LEN+TACE showed significant superiority compared with SOR+TACE in terms of its efficacy for patients with uHCC. SOR+TACE should be recommended as a replacement therapy when serious AEs occur during the administration of LEN+TACE as the combination therapy.

Efficacy and safety of lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis

Objective

Lenvatinib and sorafenib are first-line oral multikinase inhibitors approved for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the choice of the primary therapeutic agent among these two remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC.

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched for relevant research published up to June 30, 2022. After quality assessment and data extraction of the included studies, RevMan 5.3 software was used for analysis. Odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a fixed-effects or random-effects model.

Results

Fifteen studies containing 3908 patients were included after final scrutiny. Our meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the lenvatinib and sorafenib groups (HR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72-1.02; p = 0.09); however, the progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.53-0.74; p < 0.00001), complete response (CR) (OR = 5.61; 95% CI: 2.71-11.64; p < 0.00001), partial response (PR) (OR = 4.62; 95% CI: 3.06-6.98; p < 0.00001), objective response rate (ORR) (OR = 5.61; 95% CI: 3.90-8.09; p < 0.00001), and disease control rate (DCR) (OR = 2.42; 95% CI: 1.79-3.28; p < 0.00001) in the lenvatinib group were significantly better than those in the sorafenib group. In terms of treatment safety, lenvatinib had similar incidences of any grade adverse events (AEs) (OR = 0.99; 95% CI: 0.47-2.09; p = 0.98) and grade ≥ 3 AEs (OR = 1.17, 95% CI; 1.00-1.37; p = 0.05) compared to sorafenib. Besides, lenvatinib was significantly associated with a higher incidence of hypertension, proteinuria, fatigue, decreased appetite, and weight loss, whereas sorafenib was associated with a higher incidence of diarrhea and hand-foot skin reaction (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Given its potential survival benefit and good tolerability, lenvatinib is an appropriate and promising alternative to sorafenib as first-line systemic therapy in patients with advanced HCC.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD 42022327398.

Similar efficacy and safety between lenvatinib versus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as the first‐line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab(A + B) have been used for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as first-line therapy. Real-world studies comparison of efficacy and safety in these two regimens are limited, we therefore conduct this study to investigate these issues.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients received lenvatinib (n = 46) and A + B (n = 46) as first-line systemic therapy for unresectable HCC in a tertiary medical center. Objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST). Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was performed for baseline clinical features balance.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients with median age of 63.8 year-old, 78.3% male, 85.9% viral hepatitis infected, 67.4% BCLC stage C were enrolled. The median treatment and follow-up duration were 4.7 months and 9.4 months, respectively. There was no significant difference in ORR (26.1% vs. 41.3%, p = 0.1226), PFS (5.9 vs. 5.3 months, p = 0.4066), and OS (not reached vs. not reached, p = 0.7128) between the lenvatinib and A + B groups. After IPW, the results of survival and response rate were also compared. Subgroup analysis suggested that using lenvatinib was not inferior to A + B in regards of PFS, including those with elder, Child-Pugh class B, beyond up-to-seven, or portal vein invasion VP4 patients. Among the lenvatinib treated patients, multivariate analysis showed patients elder than 65-year-old was an independent predictor associated with shorter PFS (adjust HR: 2.085[0.914-4.753], p = 0.0213). The incidence rates of adverse events were similar between two groups (76 vs. 63%, p = 0.1740). Both of two regimens had similarly few impact on liver function by comparison of baseline, third month, and sixth month albumin-bilirubin index and Child-Pugh score.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety of lenvatinib are similar to A + B as a first-line systemic therapy for unresectable HCC.

Validation of the easy-to-use lenvatinib prognostic index to predict prognosis in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with lenvatinib

AIM

The identification of new prognostic factors able to stratify hepatocellular carcinoma patients candidate to first-line therapy is urgent. In the present work we validated the prognostic value of the lenvatinib prognostic index.

METHODS

Data of Eastern and Western patients treated with lenvatinib as first-line for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma were recollected. The lenvatinib prognostic index was composed by three classes of risk according with our previous study. The "low risk" group includes patients with prognostic nutritional index (PNI) >43.3 and with previous transarterial chemoembolization. The "medium risk" group includes patients with PNI >43.3, but without previous transarterial chemoembolization and patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin grade 1 and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B. The "high risk" group includes patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin grade 2, and patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin grade 1 and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C.

RESULTS

A total of 717 patients were included. The median overall survival was 20.7 months (95% CI 16.1-51.6) in patients with low risk (n = 223), 16.7 months (95% CI 13.3-47.0) in patients with medium risk (n = 264), and 10.7 months (95% CI 9.3-12.2) in patients with high risk (n = 230; HR 1, 1.29, and 1.92, respectively; p < 0.0001). Median progression-free survival was 7.3 months (95% CI 6.3-46.5) in patients with low risk, 6.4 months (95% CI 5.3-8.0) in patients with medium risk ,and 4.9 months (95% CI 4.3-5.5) in patients with high risk (HR 1, 1.07, 1.47 respectively; p = 0.0009).

CONCLUSION

The lenvatinib prognostic index confirms its prognostic value on an external cohort of hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with Lenvatinib.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib in non-viral unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: an international propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

A growing body of evidence suggests that non-viral hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) might benefit less from immunotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients with non-viral advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib, or sorafenib, in 36 centers in 4 countries (Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, and UK). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib, and OS and PFS with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib. For the primary and secondary endpoints, we carried out the analysis on the whole population first, and then we divided the cohort into two groups: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) population and non-NAFLD/NASH population.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety patients received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, 569 patients received lenvatinib, and 210 patients received sorafenib. In the whole population, multivariate analysis showed that treatment with lenvatinib was associated with a longer OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.95; P = 0.0268] and PFS (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.51-0.86; P = 0.002) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the NAFLD/NASH population, multivariate analysis confirmed that lenvatinib treatment was associated with a longer OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.84; P = 0.0110) and PFS (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.38-0.82; P = 0.031) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the subgroup of non-NAFLD/NASH patients, no difference in OS or PFS was observed between patients treated with lenvatinib and those treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. All these results were confirmed following propensity score matching analysis. By comparing patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib, no statistically significant difference in survival was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis conducted on a large number of advanced non-viral HCC patients showed for the first time that treatment with lenvatinib is associated with a significant survival benefit compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in particular in patients with NAFLD/NASH-related HCC.

Lenvatinib as First-Line Treatment for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lenvatinib was approved in 2018 as a first-line treatment for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide the most updated evidence about the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib as a first-line treatment for unresectable HCC. An electronic search of the PubMed database, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library was undertaken to identify all relevant studies up to May 2022. The pooled effect sizes were calculated based on the random-effects model. One phase III randomized controlled trial and 23 retrospective studies of 2438 patients were eligible for analysis. For patients treated with lenvatinib as first-line treatment, the pooled median overall survival (OS), median progression-free survival (PFS), 1-year OS rate, 1-year PFS rate, objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) were 11.36 months, 6.68 months, 56.0%, 27.0%, 36.0% and 75.0%, respectively. Lenvatinib showed a significantly superior efficacy compared with sorafenib (HR for OS, 0.85 and HR for PFS, 0.72; OR for ORR, 4.25 and OR for DCR, 2.23). The current study demonstrates that lenvatinib can provide better tumor responses and survival benefits than sorafenib as a first-line treatment for unresectable HCC, with a comparable incidence of adverse events.

Hepatectomy combined with targeted and immunotherapy for CNLC stage IIIb hepatocellular carcinoma: a single-arm clinical trials protocol.. [DOI: 10.1101/2022.07.29.22278175] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Introduction

Current clinical guidelines recommend systematic antitumor therapy as the primary treatment option for patients with stage IIIb hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) based on the China liver cancer staging (CNLC) criteria. Several different targeted therapeutics have been applied in combination with immunotherapeutic regimens to date in patients with advanced HCC. The present study was developed to evaluate the relative safety and efficacy of hepatectomy in combination with targeted apatinib treatment and immunotherapeutic camrelizumab treatment CNLC-IIIb stage HCC patients with the goal of providing evidence regarding the potential value of this therapeutic regimen in individuals diagnosed with advanced HCC.

Methods and analysis

This is a single-arm multicenter clinical trial in which patients undergo hepatectomy in combination with targeted treatment (apatinib) and immunotherapy (camrelizumab). Patients will undergo follow-up every 2-3 months following treatment initiation to record any evidence of disease progression and adverse event incidence for a minimum of 24 months following the discontinuation of treatment until reaching study endpoint events or trial termination. The primary endpoint for this study is patient mortality.

Ethics and dissemination

This study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital for Human Study (reference number KS2022[124]). The results of this study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Trial registration number

NCT05062837.

Strengths and limitations of this study

This study will be the first to assess the relative safety and efficacy of hepatectomy combined with targeted and immunotherapeutic treatment in CNLC-IIIb HCC patients.

As a multicenter study, the results of this analysis will be representative, generalizable, and reliable.

As this study will entail a prolonged follow-up period, it is critical that participants be thoroughly informed prior to enrollment, with individuals exhibiting high compliance being chosen for study inclusion.

Lenvatinib with or without immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in real-world clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Lenvatinib is regarded as the first-line therapy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib with or without immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with unresectable HCC.

METHODS

In this multicentric retrospective study, patients with unresectable HCC who treated with lenvatinib with or without ICIs would be enrolled. Overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rate, and disease control rate were calculated to assess the antitumor response.

RESULTS

Between January 2019 and August 2020, 65 patients received lenvatinib plus ICIs while other 45 patients received lenvatinib. The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Lenvatinib plus ICIs provided significantly higher overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.85; p = 0.013) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.35, 95% CI 0.20-0.63; p < 0.001) than lenvatinib monotherapy. Moreover, patients with lenvatinib plus ICIs had significantly higher objective response rate (41.5% vs 20.0%, p = 0.023) and disease control rate (72.3% vs 46.7%, p = 0.009) per RECIST v1.1 than those with lenvatinib. No treatment-related deaths were observed. Grade 3 or greater adverse events occurring in 10% or more of patients in either treatment group were hypertension [13 (20.0%) of 65 patients treated with lenvatinib plus ICIs vs 8 (17.8%) of 45 patients treated with lenvatinib], and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia [seven (10.8%) vs two (4.4%)].

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world study, lenvatinib combined with ICIs showed significantly promising efficacy and manageable safety than lenvatinib alone in patients with unresectable HCC.

Comparison of the outcomes between sorafenib and lenvatinib as the first-line systemic treatment for HBV-associated hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND/AIM

In a randomized controlled trial, lenvatinib was non-inferior to sorafenib in overall survival (OS) of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). This study aimed to compare the effects of sorafenib and lenvatinib as first-line systemic therapy against uHCC with real-world data in chronic hepatitis B patients.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study involved 132 patients with HBV-related uHCC. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline characteristics, including age, sex, serum alpha-fetoprotein levels, Child-Pugh class, tumor size, and tumor stage. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and tumor response.

RESULTS

After PSM, the final analysis included 44 patients treated with lenvatinib and 88 with sorafenib. The OS (7.0 vs 9.2 months, p = 0.070) and PFS (4.6 vs 2.4 months, p = 0.134) were comparable between the two drugs. Multivariable analysis showed that lenvatinib and sorafenib were not independent prognostic factors of OS (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.41, 95% confidence interval = 0.96-2.08, p = 0.077) after adjustment for baseline alpha-fetoprotein levels, total bilirubin levels, alanine aminotransferase level, performance status, tumor stage, and tumor size. However, the lenvatinib group had a significantly prolonged TTP (5.2 vs 2.5 months, p = 0.018) and a higher objective response rate (18.2% vs 4.5%, p = 0.020) and disease control rate (77.3% vs 47.7%, p = 0.001) than the sorafenib group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that lenvatinib had a comparable OS and PFS but longer TTP and better tumor response compared to sorafenib in patients with HBV-related uHCC.

Why does survival of hepatocellular carcinoma patients remain so low? Key stumbling blocks and questions in preclinical and clinical development

INTRODUCTION

: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a complex disease which involves diverse molecular pathways and etiologies. In recent years, several new systemic treatments have improved survival in advanced stage disease, but numerous significant challenges remain. No significant improvements have been achieved in the intermediate stage disease; this may be attributed to the difficulties in stratification of patients and the broad spectrum of clinical situations in terms of tumor burden and liver function.

AREAS COVERED

: This article considers the recent progress in first- and second-line therapy for advanced HCC. Investigational strategies conducted in intermediate stage HCC, which involve mainly combination therapy with locoregional approaches and systemic drugs, antiangiogenics, immunotherapies (or both), are then examined. Later, the paper offers insights on the questions and challenges that lie ahead for treating HCC.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical and biomolecular markers for the stratification of patients are needed for therapeutic progress. Further molecular profiling data could enhance our knowledge of the molecular pathways underlying this tumor and facilitate the identification of targetable aberrations. This could offer opportunities for precision medicine approaches and improved survival.

Real-Life Clinical Data of Lenvatinib versus Sorafenib for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Italy

Background

Lenvatinib has been approved in Italy since October 2019 as a first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and to date data on effectiveness and safety of lenvatinib are not available in our region. To fill this gap, we performed a multicentric analysis of the real-world treatment outcomes with the propensity score matching in a cohort of Italian patients with unresectable HCC who were treated with either sorafenib or lenvatinib.

Aims and Methods

To evaluate the effectiveness of sorafenib and lenvatinib as primary treatment of advanced HCC in clinical practice we performed a multicentric analysis of the treatment outcomes of 288 such patients recruited in 11 centers in Italy. A propensity score was used to mitigate confounding due to referral biases in the assessment of mortality and progression-free survival.

Results

Over a follow-up period of 11 months the Cox regression model showed 48% reduction of death risk for patients treated with lenvatinib (95% CI: 0.34-0.81; p = 0.0034), compared with those treated with sorafenib. The median PFS was 9.0 and 4.9 months for lenvatinib and sorafenib arm, respectively. Patients treated with lenvatinib showed a higher percentage of response rate (29.4% vs 2.8%; p < 0.00001) compared with patients treated with sorafenib. Sorafenib was shown to be correlated with more HFSR, diarrhea and fatigue, while lenvatinib with more hypertension and fatigue.

Conclusion

Our study highlighted for the first time the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in an Italian cohort of patients.

Lenvatinib versus Sorafenib as first-line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma: A multi-institutional matched case-control study

BACKGROUND

Advanced Hepatocarcinoma (HCC) is an important health problem worldwide. Recently, the REFLECT trial demonstrated the non-inferiority of Lenvatinib compared to Sorafenib in I line setting, thus leading to the approval of new first-line standard of care, along with Sorafenib.

AIMS AND METHODS

With aim to evaluate the optimal choice between Sorafenib and Lenvatinib as primary treatment in clinical practice, we performed a multicentric analysis with the propensity score matching on 184 HCC patients.

RESULTS

The median overall survival (OS) were 15.2 and 10.5 months for Lenvatinib and Sorafenib arm, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.0 and 4.5 months for Lenvatinib and Sorafenib arm, respectively. Patients treated with Lenvatinib showed a 36% reduction of death risk (p = 0.0156), a 29% reduction of progression risk (p = 0.0446), a higher response rate (p < 0.00001) and a higher disease control rate (p = 0.002). Sorafenib showed to be correlated with more hand-foot skin reaction and Lenvatinib with more hypertension and fatigue. We highlighted the prognostic role of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS), bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase and eosinophils for Sorafenib. Conversely, albumin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alkaline phosphatase and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) resulted prognostic in Lenvatinib arm. Finally, we highlighted the positive predictive role of albumin > Normal Value (NV), ECOG > 0, NLR < 3, absence of Hepatitis C Virus positivity, and presence of portal vein thrombosis in favor of Lenvatinib arm. Eosinophil < 50 and ECOG > 0 negatively predicted the response to Sorafenib.

CONCLUSION

SLenvatinib showed to better perform in a real-word setting compared to Sorafenib. More researches are needed to validate the predictor factors of response to Lenvatinib rather than Sorafenib.

Adverse events as potential predictive factors of activity in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with lenvatinib

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Lenvatinib is a standard of care option in first-line therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In the present study, we aim to identify, in patients with HCC treated with lenvatinib, a possible association between occurrence and grading of adverse events (AEs) and outcome.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 606 Japanese and Italian patients treated with lenvatinib in first-line setting and investigated the possible correlation between the onset of AEs, toxicity grade (G) and outcome measures such as overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

The appearance of arterial hypertension G ≥ 2 independently predicted prolonged OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.93, P = .0188], whereas decreased appetite G ≥ 2 independently predicted decreased OS (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.25-2.32, P = .0007) by multivariate analysis. Appearance of hand-foot skin reaction independently predicted prolonged PFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56-0.93, P = .0149), whereas decreased appetite G ≥ 2 predicted decreased PFS (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.04-1.77, P = .0277).

CONCLUSIONS

Our main findings are that the occurrence of arterial hypertension G ≥ 2 is a predictor of longer survival, whereas decreased appetite G ≥ 2 predicts for a poor prognosis. A careful management of AEs under lenvatinib treatment for HCC is required, to improve patients' quality of life, minimize the need for treatment discontinuation and achieve optimal outcome.

CYP2C8 Suppress Proliferation, Migration, Invasion and Sorafenib Resistance of Hepatocellular Carcinoma via PI3K/Akt/p27kip1 Axis

Background

Cytochrome P450 2C8 (CYP2C8) gene is one of the members of the cytochrome P450 enzymes (CYPs) gene family. The aim of this study was to reveal the function of CYP2C8 in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and its effect on the sorafenib resistance.

Methods

Differential expression analysis in multiple HCC datasets all suggested that CYP2C8 expression was significantly decreased in HCC tissues, compared with para-carcinoma liver tissues. The expression level of CYP2C8 was subsequently compared between HCC tissues and para-carcinoma liver tissues of 70 patients form Guangxi, China, with the result consistent with the above. Survival analysis and ROC analysis indicated that CYP2C8 was equipped with satisfactory diagnostic and prognostic value in HCC. To examine the effect of CYP2C8 on the malignant phenotype of HCC cells, stable transcriptional cell lines with CYP2C8 over-expression were established, and then Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK8) assay, colony formation assay, cell cycle assay, cell invasion assay and wound healing assay were performed.

Results

The results of aforementioned assays suggested that CYP2C8 over-expression restricted the proliferation, clonality, migration, invasion and cell cycle of HCC cells but had no significant effect on cell apoptosis. The enrichment analysis in terms of sequencing data of HCC cell lines with stable CYP2C8 over-expression suggested that CYP2C8 might be related to PI3K/Akt/p27^Kip1 axis. The inhibition of CYP2C8 over-expression on PI3K/Akt/p27^Kip1 axis was subsequently demonstrated with Western blot assay. In the rescue experiment, it was observed that both P27 inhibitor and PI3K agonist counteracted the repressed malignant phenotype caused by CYP2C8 over-expression, which further demonstrated that CYP2C8 played a role in HCC cells via PI3K/Akt/p27^Kip1 axis.

Discussion

The results demonstrated that CYP2C8 enhances the anticancer activity of sorafenib in vitro assays and in tumor xenograft model, with Ki-67 down-regulation and PI3K/Akt/p27Kip1 axis inhibition. In conclusion, these findings hinted that CYP2C8 restricted malignant phenotype and sorafenib resistance in HCC via PI3K/Akt/p27^kip1 axis.

Lenvatinib: established and promising drug for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

: The evolving therapeutic landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) includes the increasing implementation of target-therapy and immunotherapy. Lenvatinib, a multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is an emerging first-line therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. Its approval has changed the scenario of first-line therapies for advanced HCC, where just sorafenib proved clinical efficacy for over a decade.

AREAS COVERED

: The current evidence on the role of lenvatinib for patients with advanced HCC is reviewed in this article. Particularly, therapeutic mechanisms and clinical efficacy of lenvatinib are summarized and the management of adverse events is discussed. In addition, future perspectives on the emerging role of combine therapy for HCC are highlighted.

EXPERT OPINION

In the first line, lenvatinib was found to be non-inferior to sorafenib for overall survival, with significantly better progression-free survival and objective response rate. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are now part of HCC treatment, and recently the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has become the recommended standard of care first-line therapy for selected patients. The antitumor and immunomodulatory activities that lenvatinib shows in preclinical studies, and the positive outcomes achieved using a combination of lenvatinib plus ICIs, open new perspectives for advanced HCC treatment.

Immunotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Status and Future Prospects

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most prevalent primary liver cancer with poor prognosis. Surgery, chemotherapy, and radiofrequency ablation are three conventional therapeutic options that will help only a limited percentage of HCC patients. Cancer immunotherapy has achieved dramatic advances in recent years and provides new opportunities to treat HCC. However, HCC has various etiologies and can evade the immune system through multiple mechanisms. With the rapid development of genetic engineering and synthetic biology, a variety of novel immunotherapies have been employed to treat advanced HCC, including immune checkpoint inhibitors, adoptive cell therapy, engineered cytokines, and therapeutic cancer vaccines. In this review, we summarize the current landscape and research progress of different immunotherapy strategies in the treatment of HCC. The challenges and opportunities of this research field are also discussed.

Identification of Regorafenib Prognostic Index (REP Index) via Recursive Partitioning Analysis in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Receiving Systemic Treatment: A Real-World Multi-Institutional Experience

BACKGROUND

The results of the pivotal RESORCE trial led to the approval of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor regorafenib as second-line treatment in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sorafenib failure. Data about prognostic factors in a second-line HCC setting are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to investigate prognostic factors in a cohort of patients with advanced HCC treated with regorafenib after progressing on sorafenib.

METHODS

We retrieved the data of 259 patients affected by advanced HCC treated with regorafenib as second-line treatment from four different Italian institutions and one South Korean institution and performed a recursive partitioning analysis to build a score system.

RESULTS

At the first-step univariate analysis for overall survival (OS), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) was the most significant parameter and was chosen as the first node in our tree model. In the subpopulation of patients presenting with ALP ≤122 U/L (n=155) at baseline, the most statistically significant split was by progression-free survival (PFS) on previous sorafenib treatment, between patients with a PFS ≥ 6 months (n  =  59) and patients with a PFS < 6 months (n = 96). In the subpopulation of patients with ALP ≤ 122 U/L and PFS to sorafenib ≥ 6 months, the final split was determined between patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related liver disease (n = 22) and patients with no HBV-related liver disease (n = 37). In the subpopulation of patients presenting ALP >122 U/L (n = 104) at baseline, the most statistically significant split was by aspartate aminotransferase (AST) value, between patients with AST ≤ 56 U/L (n = 48) and patients with AST > 56 U/L (n = 56). We built the Regorafenib Prognostic Index (REP index) stratifying the population into "low-risk," "medium-risk," and "high-risk" groups. The difference in median OS between the three risk groups was statistically significant, being 20.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.0-46.3) in the "low-risk" group, 8.4 months (95% CI 7.2-1435.8) in the "medium-risk" group, and 5.5 months (95% CI 3.5-13.2) in the "high risk" group. The median PFS was 7.7 months (95% CI 3.7-19.3), 2.5 months (95% CI 2.1-28.8), and 2.4 months (95% CI 1.6-9.1) for the "low-risk," "medium-risk," and "high-risk" groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The REP index is an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS in patients with advanced HCC treated with regorafenib.

Identification of lenvatinib prognostic index via recursive partitioning analysis in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

After the advent of new treatment options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the identification of prognostic factors is crucial for the selection of the most appropriate therapy for each patient.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

With the aim to fill this gap, we applied recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) to a cohort of 404 patients treated with lenvatinib.

RESULTS

The application of RPA resulted in a classification based on five variables that originated a new prognostic score, the lenvatinib prognostic index (LEP) index, identifying three groups: low risk [patients with prognostic nutritional index (PNI) >43.3 and previous trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE)]; medium risk [patients with PNI >43.3 but without previous TACE and patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 1 and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B (BCLC-B)]; high risk [patients with PNI <43.3 and ALBI grade 2 and patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 1 and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C (BCLC-C)]. Median overall survival was 29.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 22.8-29.8 months] in low risk patients (n = 128), 17.0 months (95% CI 15.0-24.0 months) in medium risk (n = 162) and 8.9 months (95% CI 8.0-10.7 months) in high risk (n = 114); low risk hazard ratio (HR) 1 (reference group), medium risk HR 1.95 (95% CI 1.38-2.74), high risk HR 4.84 (95% CI 3.16-7.43); P < 0.0001. The LEP index was validated in a cohort of 127 Italian patients treated with lenvatinib. While the same classification did not show a prognostic value in a cohort of 311 patients treated with sorafenib, we also show a possible predictive role in favor of lenvatinib in the low risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

LEP index is a promising, easy-to-use tool that may be used to stratify patients undergoing systemic treatment of advanced HCC.

Evolving Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Asia-Pacific Region: A Review and Multidisciplinary Expert Opinion

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fourth most common driver of cancer-related death globally, with an estimated 72% of cases in Asia. For more than a decade, first-line systemic treatments for advanced or unresectable HCC were limited to the multi-targeted kinase inhibitors sorafenib and, more recently, lenvatinib. Now, treatment options have expanded to include immunotherapy, as exemplified by the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) atezolizumab combined with the antiangiogenic agent bevacizumab. Additional combinations of ICIs with kinase inhibitors, other ICIs, or antiangiogenic agents are under investigation, further supporting the new era of immunotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced or unresectable HCC. We describe this evolving landscape and provide expert opinion on therapeutic best practices in the Asia-Pacific region, where different costs of, and patient access to, treatment are a challenge. With the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab likely to become the clinical standard of care, optimising treatment sequence and ensuring patient access to newer therapies remain priorities. Cost containment and treatment sequencing may be facilitated by characterisation of predictive positive and negative biomarkers. With these considerations in mind, this review and expert opinion focused on advanced HCC in the Asia-Pacific region offers perspectives of multiple stakeholders, including physicians, payer systems, and patients.

Is Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Superior Even to Lenvatinib? A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison

BACKGROUND

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed superior progression-free and overall survival compared to sorafenib in the IMbrave150 trial. It would therefore be useful to compare the efficacy of lenvatinib and that of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab to determine if a benefit of one therapy against the other exists.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present report was to apply a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to individual participant data (IPD) from patients treated with lenvatinib outside of randomized trials, to aggregate results derived from the IMbrave150 trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from 455 patients who received lenvatinib as first-line systemic therapy for unresectable HCC represented the present IPD. Data inclusion were adapted to those reported in the IMbrave150 trial.

RESULTS

Overall survival on atezolizumab plus bevacizumab proved to be superior to lenvatinib (log-rank: 0.001) with a hazard ratio of 0.59 (95% confidence interval 0.46-0.75). The number needed to treat ranged between seven in the first 12 months and five at the 15th month.

CONCLUSIONS

The present MAIC highlights that the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is superior to lenvatinib. However, updated data or sub-analyses of the IMbrave150 trial would provide more robust estimates for such a treatment comparison.