Nivolumab after selective internal radiation therapy for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase 2, single-arm study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) in combination with a PD-1 inhibitor in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) and liver-only disease ineligible for chemoembolization.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

NASIR-HCC is a single-arm, multicenter, open-label, phase 2 trial that recruited from 2017 to 2019 patients who were naïve to immunotherapy and had tumors in the BCLC B2 substage (single or multiple tumors beyond the up-to-7 rule), or unilobar tumors with segmental or lobar portal vein invasion (PVI); no extrahepatic spread; and preserved liver function. Patients received SIRT followed 3 weeks later by nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks) for up to 24 doses or until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Safety was the primary endpoint. Secondary objectives included objective response rate (ORR), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

42 patients received SIRT (31 BCLC-B2, 11 with PVI) and were followed for a median of 22.2 months. 27 patients discontinued and 1 never received Nivolumab. 41 patients had any-grade adverse events (AE) and 21 had serious AEs (SAE). Treatment-related AEs and SAEs grade 3-4 occurred in 8 and 5 patients, respectively. Using RECIST 1.1 criteria, ORR reported by investigators was 41.5% (95% CI 26.3% to 57.9%). Four patients were downstaged to partial hepatectomy. Median TTP was 8.8 months (95% CI 7.0 to 10.5) and median OS was 20.9 months (95% CI 17.7 to 24.1).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of SIRT and nivolumab has shown an acceptable safety profile and signs of antitumor activity in the treatment of patients with uHCC that were fit for SIRT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03380130.

The importance of liver functional reserve in the non-surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

The aim of any oncological treatment is not just to eliminate the tumour, but to maximise patient survival and quality of life. Since the liver has a vital function, any radical treatment that severely compromises liver function will result in a shortening of life expectancy, rather than a prolongation. Furthermore, even non-severe liver damage may prevent the delivery of further effective therapies. This is particularly important in the case of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), as it is associated with underlying cirrhosis in most patients - cirrhosis itself is not only a potentially lethal disease and independent prognostic factor in HCC, but it also makes liver function fragile. Accordingly, some information about liver dysfunction is included in most staging systems for HCC and can be used to guide the selection of treatments that the functional liver reserve can tolerate. Unfortunately, the prediction of functional damage to the liver in the case of antitumor treatments is very challenging and still suboptimal in any given patient. Moreover, while the assessment of functional reserve can now be used to avoid postoperative liver failure in the surgical setting, its use has been less well clarified for non-surgical therapies, which is of particular relevance today, as several lines of effective non-surgical treatments, including systemic therapies, have become available. The present article will a) critically review the implications of the assessment of liver functional reserve in patients with HCC, b) illustrate the available tools to assess liver functional reserve and c) discuss the role of functional assessment for each type of non-surgical therapy for HCC.

Drug Liver Injury Induced by Olmesartan Mediated by Autoimmune-Like Mechanism: A Case Report

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) was the first liver disease for which an effective therapeutic intervention was carried out, using prednisolone; its usefulness was demonstrated in several clinical trials. Nevertheless, AIH still remains a difficult diagnosis in some cases, because it is necessary to dismiss other possible diagnoses, and perhaps due to it being a heterogeneous disease. The relationship between drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and AIH is complex and not fully understood. There are three possible scenarios: (1) DILI with a strong immunoallergic component mimicking AIH; (2) AIH mimicking a DILI due to drug exposure and (3) AIH triggered by exposure to an offending drug (drug-induced AIH). Drug-induced AIH is well described and documented for some drugs such as nitrofurantoin and minocycline. Histologically distinguishing DILI from AIH remains a challenge. We present an interesting case report which met serologic criteria and histological confirmation to establish AIH, but discontinuation of a suspected drug resolved hypertransaminasaemia.