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

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The Evolving Role of Systemic Therapies as a Bridging Treatment to Liver Transplantation

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths. Classically, liver transplantation (LT) can be curative for HCC tumors within the Milan criteria. Bridging strategies to reduce the dropouts from LT waiting lists and/or to downstage patients who are beyond the Milan criteria are widely utilized. We conducted a literature-based review to evaluate the role of systemic therapies as a bridging treatment to liver transplantation (LT) in HCC patients. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) can be used as a systemic bridging therapy to LT in patients with contraindications for locoregional liver-directed therapies. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment can be utilized either as a monotherapy or as a combination therapy with bevacizumab or TKIs prior to LT. Acute rejection after liver transplantation is a concern in the context of ICI treatment. Thus, a safe ICI washout period before LT and cautious post-LT immunosuppression strategies are required to reduce post-LT rejections and to optimize clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, prospective clinical trials are needed to establish definitive conclusions about the utility of systemic therapy as a bridging modality prior to LT in HCC patients.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

CLINICAL TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

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

KEY POINTS

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

Surrogacy of one-year survival for overall survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The increasing number of sequential treatments complicates the evaluation of overall survival (OS) in clinical trials for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), therefore, reliable surrogate endpoints (SEs) are required. This study aimed to evaluate the surrogacy of progression-free survival (PFS) and one-year (1-yr) milestone survival for OS in HCC trials.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases for randomized clinical trials that evaluated systemic treatments for advanced HCC. Individual patient data were reconstructed to calculate the 1-yr survival rate. We adopted a two-stage meta-analytic validation model to evaluate the correlation between SEs and OS, and the correlation between treatment effects on SEs and OS. The hazard ratio (HR) was calculated to assess the treatment effects on PFS and OS, and the 1-yr survival ratio was calculated to evaluate the treatment effects on the 1-yr milestone survival.

RESULTS

Thirty-two HCC trials involving 13,808 patients were included. A weak correlation was detected between the median PFS and median OS (R2 = 0.32), whereas the correlation improved between PFS HR and OS HR (R2 = 0.58). We identified strong correlations between the 1-yr survival rate and median OS and between the 1-yr survival ratio and OS HR (R2 = 0.74 and 0.65, respectively). In subgroup analyses, PFS HR strongly correlated with OS HR in trials relevant to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Although the correlation remained weak between PFS and OS even in trials with PFS HR ≤ 0.6, the 1-yr survival rate and 1-yr survival ratio were strong surrogates for median OS and OS HR, respectively (R2 = 0.77 and 0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

One-year milestone survival outperformed PFS as a SE for OS in HCC, indicating the application of 1-yr survival as a secondary endpoint. In particular, PFS HR was a potential SE for OS HR in the ICI trials.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Impact of radiological response and pattern of progression in patients with HCC treated by atezolizumab-bevacizumab

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We aim to assess the role of radiological response to atezolizumab-bevacizumab in patients with HCC to predict overall survival.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We retrospectively included patients with HCC treated by atezolizumab-bevacizumab in 2 tertiary centers. A retrospective blinded analysis was performed by 2 radiologists to assess Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST 1.1) and modified RECIST (mRECIST) criteria at 12 weeks. Imaging response and treatment decisions in the multidisciplinary tumor board at 12 weeks were registered. Among 125 patients, 9.6% and 20.8% had a response, 39.2% and 35.2% had stable disease, and 51.2% and 44% had progression, according to RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST, respectively, with a substantial interobserver agreement (k coefficient=0.79). Metastasis was independently associated with a higher risk of progression. Patients classified as responders did not reach median survival, which was 16.2 and 15.9 months for patients classified as stable and 9.1 and 9.0 months for patients classified as progressors, in RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST criteria, respectively. We observed a wide variability in the identification of progression in the multidisciplinary tumor board in clinical practice compared with the blind evaluation by radiologists mainly due to discrepancy in the evaluation of the increase in size of intrahepatic lesions. The appearance of new extrahepatic lesions or vascular invasion lesions was associated with a worse overall survival ( p =0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST criteria predict overall survival with more responders identified by mRECIST and the appearance of new extrahepatic lesion or vascular invasion was associated with a poor prognosis. A noticeable discrepancy was observed between patients classified as progressors at reviewing and the decision reached during the multidisciplinary tumor board.

Surrogate and modified endpoints for immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Immunotherapies have altered the treatment paradigm in HCC. Surrogate and modified endpoints are used to assess early success in clinical studies and guide clinical practice. We sought to determine whether surrogate endpoints and modifications to the conventional criteria for tumor response (RECIST), including modified RECIST (mRECIST) and immune-modified RECIST (imRECIST), are valid measures to predict overall survival (OS) in HCC treated with immunotherapies.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We performed an individual-level post hoc analysis of patients treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab in the IMbrave150 trial (N = 279) and a cross-sectional analysis of a multicenter real-world patient cohort treated with immunotherapy (N = 328). Landmark analyses showed that objective response rates by RECIST were associated with greater OS including among Child-Pugh A and B patients and among patients treated with immunotherapies in the first- or second-line setting (IMbrave150: HR 0.24, 95% CI, 0.17-0.33; RW: HR 0.25, 95% CI, 0.15-0.43). Objective response rates by mRECIST or imRECIST were not associated with the greater predictive power of OS benefit (mRECIST: HR 0.30, 95% CI, 0.22-0.42; imRECIST: HR 0.36, 95% CI, 0.30-0.51). Progression-free survival determined by RECIST was only moderately correlated with OS, and this association was not improved using mRECIST or imRECIST.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results clarify the utility of surrogate and modified endpoints in HCC treated with immunotherapies and support the use of RECIST objective response rates as an appropriate signal-finding measure for the evaluation of emerging treatments. Contrary to their intended purpose, mRECIST and imRECIST did not provide meaningful improvements in predicting OS benefits.

Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab/bevacizumab in patients with HCC after prior systemic therapy: A global, observational study

BACKGROUND

Since the introduction of the combination treatment of anti-programmed death-ligand 1 antibody atezolizumab and anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab (AB), median overall survival in HCC has drastically improved. However, evidence on the efficacy and safety of the novel treatment standard in patients with prior exposure to systemic treatment is scarce. The aim of this global, multicenter, observational study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AB in patients after previous systemic therapy.

METHODS

We screened our global, multicenter, prospectively maintained registry database for patients who received any systemic therapy before AB. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points were time-to-progression, progression-free survival, objective response rate, and safety (rate and severity of adverse events).

RESULTS

Among 493 patients who received AB for unresectable HCC, 61 patients received prior systemic therapy and were included in this analysis. The median age of the study population was 66 years, with 91.8% males. Predominant risk factors for HCC were viral hepatitis (59%) and alcohol (23%). Overall survival for AB was 16.2 (95% CI, 14.5-17.9) months, time-to-progression and progression-free survival were 4.1 (95% CI, 1.5-6.6) and 3.1 (95% CI, 1.1-5.1) months, respectively. The objective response rate was 38.2% (7.3% with complete and 30.9% with partial response). Overall survival was not influenced by treatment line (2nd vs. >2nd) or previous systemic treatment modality (tyrosine kinase inhibitors vs. immune checkpoint inhibitors). Treatment-related adverse events of all grades according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events were documented in 42.6% of patients, with only 13.1% of grade ≥3, including one death.

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, AB emerges as a safe and efficacious treatment option in patients with HCC previously treated with other systemic therapy.

Overall survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sintilimab and disease outcome after treatment discontinuation

BACKGROUND

The use of Anti-PD-1 therapy has yielded promising outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, limited research has been conducted on the overall survival (OS) of patients with varying tumor responses and treatment duration.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed HCC patients who received sintilimab between January 2019 and December 2020 at four centers in China. The evaluation of tumor progression was based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. The study investigated the correlation between tumor response and OS, and the impact of drug use on OS following progressive disease (PD).

RESULTS

Out of 441 treated patients, 159 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Among them, 77 patients with disease control exhibited a significantly longer OS compared to the 82 patients with PD (median OS 26.0 vs. 11.3 months, P < 0.001). Additionally, the OS of patients with objective response (OR) was better than that of patients with stable disease (P = 0.002). Among the 47 patients with PD who continued taking sintilimab, the OS was better than the 35 patients who discontinued treatment (median OS 11.4 vs. 6.9 months, P = 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the tumor response in HCC patients who received sintilimab affects OS, and patients with PD may benefit from continued use of sintilimab.

Stage migration as a surrogate of survival in hepatocellular carcinoma treated with transarterial chemoembolization

BACKGROUND AIMS

Locoregional therapies, including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), are recommended for the treatment of HCC; however, clinical trials evaluating their effectiveness have been complicated by a lack of validated surrogate outcomes. We aimed to evaluate if stage migration could serve as a potential surrogate of overall survival in patients undergoing TACE.

APPROACH

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with HCC who underwent TACE as initial therapy from 3 centers in the US from 2008 to 2019. The primary outcome was overall survival from the date of the first TACE treatment, and the primary exposure of interest was Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage migration to a more advanced stage within 6 months of TACE. Survival analysis was completed using Kaplan-Meier and multiple Cox proportional hazard models adjusted by the site.

RESULTS

Of 651 eligible patients (51.9% Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage A and 39.6% stage B), 129 (19.6%) patients experienced stage migration within 6 months of TACE. Those with stage migration had larger tumors (5.6 vs. 4.2 cm, p < 0.01) and higher AFP levels (median 92 vs. 15 ng/mL, p < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, stage migration was significantly associated with worse survival (HR: 2.82, 95% CI: 2.66-2.98), with a median survival of 8.7 and 15.9 months in those with and without stage migration. Other predictors of worse survival included the White race, higher AFP levels, a higher number of tumors, and a larger maximum HCC diameter.

CONCLUSION

Stage migration is associated with increased mortality after TACE in patients with HCC and could serve as a surrogate end point in clinical trials evaluating locoregional therapies such as TACE.

Therapeutic Modifications without Discontinuation of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab Therapy Are Associated with Favorable Overall Survival and Time to Progression in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

We retrospectively evaluated the impact of therapeutic modifications of atezolizumab (Atezo) plus bevacizumab (Bev) therapy (Atezo/Bev), including the interruption or discontinuation of both Atezo and Bev, and the reduction or discontinuation of Bev, on the outcome of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) (median observation period: 9.40 months). One hundred uHCC from five hospitals were included. Therapeutic modifications without discontinuation of both Atezo and Bev (n = 46) were associated with favorable overall survival (median not reached; hazard ratio (HR): 0.23) and time to progression (median: 10.00 months; HR: 0.23) with no therapeutic modification defined as the reference. In contrast, the discontinuation of both Atezo and Bev without other therapeutic modifications (n = 20) was associated with unfavorable overall survival (median: 9.63 months; HR: 2.72) and time to progression (median: 2.53 months; HR: 2.78). Patients with modified albumin-bilirubin grade 2b liver function (n = 43) or immune-related adverse events (irAEs) (n = 31) discontinued both Atezo and Bev without other therapeutic modifications more frequently (30.2% and 35.5%, respectively) than those with modified albumin-bilirubin grade 1 (10.2%) and without irAEs (13.0%). Patients with objective response (n = 48) experienced irAEs more frequently (n = 21) than those without (n = 10) (p = 0.027). Avoiding the discontinuation of both Atezo and Bev without other therapeutic modifications may be the optimal management of uHCC.

The Evolving Scenario in the Assessment of Radiological Response for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Era of Immunotherapy: Strengths and Weaknesses of Surrogate Endpoints

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a challenging malignancy characterised by clinical and biological heterogeneity, independent of the stage. Despite the application of surveillance programs, a substantial proportion of patients are diagnosed at advanced stages when curative treatments are no longer available. The landscape of systemic therapies has been rapidly growing over the last decade, and the advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has changed the paradigm of systemic treatments. The coexistence of the tumour with underlying cirrhosis exposes patients with HCC to competing events related to tumour progression and/or hepatic decompensation. Therefore, it is relevant to adopt proper clinical endpoints to assess the extent of treatment benefit. While overall survival (OS) is the most accepted endpoint for phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and drug approval, it is affected by many limitations. To overcome these limits, several clinical and radiological outcomes have been used. For instance, progression-free survival (PFS) is a useful endpoint to evaluate the benefit of sequential treatments, since it is not influenced by post-progression treatments, unlike OS. Moreover, radiological endpoints such as time to progression (TTP) and objective response rate (ORR) are frequently adopted. Nevertheless, the surrogacy between these endpoints and OS in the setting of unresectable HCC (uHCC) remains uncertain. Since most of the surrogate endpoints are radiology-based (e.g., PFS, TTP, ORR), the use of standardised tools is crucial for the evaluation of radiological response. The optimal way to assess the radiological response has been widely debated, and many criteria have been proposed over the years. Furthermore, none of the criteria have been validated for immunotherapy in advanced HCC. The coexistence of the underlying chronic liver disease and the access to several lines of treatments highlight the urgent need to capture early clinical benefit and the need for standardised radiological criteria to assess cancer response when using ICIs in mono- or combination therapies. Here, we review the most commonly used clinical and radiological endpoints for trial design, as well as their surrogacy with OS. We also review the criteria for radiological response to treatments for HCC, analysing the major issues and the potential future perspectives.

Second-line treatment options for hepatocellular carcinoma: current state and challenges for the future

INTRODUCTION

Since the approval of sorafenib for systemic treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), many tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown efficacy and tolerability as first-line treatments. On the other hand, these first-line therapies are associated with low objective response and drug resistance. Many drugs have been successfully tested for second-line treatment of advanced HCC. While the rapid proliferation of second-line treatments for advanced HCC brings hope to patients, it also complicates clinical decision-making.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to facilitate decisions by summarizing the latest guidelines for second-line treatment of HCC in various countries or regions. We then review existing second-line treatment options and discuss challenges that should be addressed in the future. A literature search was conducted in April 2022 of PubMed/Medline, Cochrane library, and abstracts of international cancer meetings.

EXPERT OPINION

There is no standard second-line treatment, especially for the case of sequential treatment after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezo+bev) and further studies focused on sequential treatment are warranted in this setting. The design of clinical trials, different etiologies, and complications or quality of life (QoL) are interesting issues in the second-line setting.

Surrogate end points for survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

Aim: The authors investigated surrogacy of radiology-based end points for clinical trials investigating immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: Data were collected from electronic databases reporting median overall survival (OS), median progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). Weighted Pearson correlation coefficients and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: 26 clinical trials (41 treatment arms, 5144 patients) were included. ORR (coefficient: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.52–0.84) and PFS (coefficient: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.21–0.92) were positively correlated with OS. Sensitivity analyses suggested liver function, line of therapy and study phase did not greatly impact results. The COSMIC-312 study negatively impacted the overall weighted correlation. Conclusion: ORR and PFS are positively correlated with OS in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is one of the most common cancers worldwide and represents a major global health-care challenge. Although viral hepatitis and alcohol remain important risk factors, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease is rapidly becoming a dominant cause of hepatocellular carcinoma. A broad range of treatment options are available for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, including liver transplantation, surgical resection, percutaneous ablation, and radiation, as well as transarterial and systemic therapies. As such, clinical decision making requires a multidisciplinary team that longitudinally adapts the individual treatment strategy according to the patient's tumour stage, liver function, and performance status. With the approval of new first-line agents and second-line agents, as well as the establishment of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapies as standard of care, the treatment landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma is more diversified than ever. Consequently, the outlook for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma has improved. However, the optimal sequencing of drugs remains to be defined, and predictive biomarkers are urgently needed to inform treatment selection. In this Seminar, we present an update on the causes, diagnosis, molecular classification, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Assessment and Monitoring of Response to Systemic Treatment in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Insights

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) management has become more complex as novel therapies have been proven effective. After sorafenib, the approval of other multikinase inhibitors (MKIs) and immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) has considerably increased the number of systemic therapies available. Therefore, careful assessment and monitoring of response to systemic treatment are essential to identify surrogate endpoints of overall survival (OS) in clinical trials and reliable tools to gauge treatment benefit in clinical practice. Progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) are early informative parameters of efficacy that are not influenced by further lines of therapy. However, none of them has shown sufficient surrogacy to be recommended in place of OS in phase 3 trials. With such a wealth of therapeutic options, the prime intent of tumor assessments is no longer limited to identifying progressive disease to spare ineffective treatments to non-responders. Indeed, the early detection of responders could also help tailor treatment sequencing. Tumor assessment relies on the Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors (RECIST), which are easy to interpret – being based on dimensional principles – but could misread the activity of targeted agents. The HCC-specific modified RECIST (mRECIST), considering both the MKI-induced biological modifications and some of the cirrhosis-induced liver changes, better capture tumor response. Yet, mRECIST could not be considered a standard in advanced HCC. Further prognosticators including progression patterns, baseline and on-treatment liver function deterioration, and baseline alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels and AFP response have been extensively evaluated for MKIs. However, limited information is available for patients receiving ICIs and regarding their predictive role. Finally, there is increasing interest in incorporating novel imaging techniques which go beyond sizes and novel serum biomarkers in the advanced HCC framework. Hopefully, multiparametric models grouping dimensional and functional radiological parameters with biochemical markers will most precisely reflect treatment response.

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

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

Identification of CT Values That Could Be Predictive of Necrosis (N-CTav) in Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Lenvatinib Treatment

Purpose: To assess the utility of measurement of the computed tomography (CT) attenuation value (CTav) in predicting tumor necrosis in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who achieve a complete response (CR), defined using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST), after lenvatinib treatment. Method: We compared CTav in arterial phase CT images with postoperative histopathology in four patients who underwent HCC resection after lenvatinib treatment, to determine CTav thresholds indicative of histological necrosis (N-CTav). Next, we confirmed the accuracy of the determined N-CTav in 15 cases with histopathologically proven necrosis in surgical specimens. Furthermore, the percentage of the tumor with N-CTav, i.e., the N-CTav occupancy rate, assessed using Image J software in 30 tumors in 12 patients with CR out of 571 HCC patients treated with lenvatinib, and its correlation with local recurrence following CR were examined. Results: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis revealed an optimal cut-off value of CTav of 30.2 HU, with 90.0% specificity and 65.0% sensitivity in discriminating between pathologically identified necrosis and degeneration, with a CTav of less than 30.2 HU indicating necrosis after lenvatinib treatment (N30-CTav). Furthermore, the optimal cut-off value of 30.6% for the N30-CTav occupancy rate by ROC analysis was a significant indicator of local recurrence following CR with 76.9% specificity and sensitivity (area under the ROC curve; 0.939), with the CR group with high N30-CTav occupancy (≥30.6%) after lenvatinib treatment showing significantly lower local recurrence (8.3% at 1 year) compared with the low (<30.6%) N30-CTav group (p < 0.001, 61.5% at 1 year). Conclusion: The cut-off value of 30.2 HU for CTav (N30-CTav) might be appropriate for identifying post-lenvatinib necrosis in HCC, and an N30-CTav occupancy rate of >30.6% might be a predictor of maintenance of CR. Use of these indicators have the potential to impact systemic chemotherapy for HCC.