Circulating levels of PD-L1 and Galectin-9 are associated with patient survival in surgically treated Hepatocellular Carcinoma independent of their intra-tumoral expression levels.

Tumor expression of immune co-inhibitory ligands, such as PD-L1 and Galectin-9, have potential prognostic value in Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC). Circulating levels of these molecules, however, have hardly been studied. This study aims to assess the prognostic significance of circulating PD-L1 and circulating Galectin-9 in patients with resected HCC, and to compare their prognostic significance to the intra-tumoral expression of these same molecules. Archived tissues and stored peripheral blood samples from 81 patients who underwent HCC resection or liver transplantation, with curative intent, were used. Immunohistochemistry was performed to determine intra-tumoral expression of PD-L1 and Galectin-9, while ELISA was used to quantify their respective circulating levels. High circulating PD-L1 (HR 0.12, 95%CI 0.16-0.86, p = 0.011) and high circulating Galectin-9 (HR 0.11, 95%CI 0.15-0.85, p = 0.010) levels were both associated with improved HCC-specific survival. Surprisingly, there was no correlation between circulating levels of PD-L1 and Galectin-9 and their intra-tumoral expression levels. In fact, circulating levels of PD-L1 and Galectin-9 were predictive of HCC-specific survival independently of intra-tumoral levels and baseline clinicopathologic characteristics. Combined analysis of circulating levels and intra-tumoral expression of PD-L1 (HR 0.33, 95%CI 0.16-0.68, p = 0.002) and Galectin-9 (HR 0.27, 95%CI 0.13-0.57, p = 0.001) resulted in more confident prediction of survival. In conclusion, circulating PD-L1 and Galectin-9 levels prognostically differentiate resected HCC patients, independently of their intra-tumoral expression. Combining circulating and intra-tumoral expression levels of PD-L1 or Galectin-9 further improves the prognostic values of these immune biomarkers.

Are we SHARP enough? The importance of adequate patient selection in sorafenib treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Upon FDA/EMEA registration for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), sorafenib received a broader therapeutic indication than the eligibility criteria of the landmark SHARP trial. This allowed treatment of SHARP non-eligible patients in daily clinical practice. AIM: To assess sorafenib efficacy and safety in SHARP eligible and non-eligible patients, and determine the validity of the current therapeutic indication as described by the FDA/EMEA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients treated with sorafenib for advanced HCC at two Dutch tertiary referral centers between 2007 and 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were time to progression (TTP), response rate, adverse events and reasons for discontinuation. Outcomes were compared between SHARP eligible and non-eligible patients. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-three of 257 (75%) patients were SHARP eligible. SHARP eligible patients (9.5 months, 95% CI 7.7-11.3) had a longer median OS than non-eligible patients (5.4 months, 95% CI 3.6-7.1) (log-rank p < .001). SHARP non-eligible patients were more often Child-Pugh B, had higher AST and ALT levels and developed more grade 3-4 liver dysfunction (44 versus 23%, p < .001) during treatment. SHARP ineligibility remained the strongest predictor of OS (HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.32-2.41) and an independent predictor of TTP (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.05-2.00) in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Landmark trial outcomes of sorafenib for HCC are reproducible in daily practice, provided that the SHARP eligibility criteria are respected. Based on the findings of this and previous studies, sorafenib usage should be restricted to Child-Pugh A patients.

An intrahepatic transcriptional signature of enhanced immune activity predicts response to peginterferon in chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Differences in intrahepatic gene expression patterns may be associated with therapy response in peginterferon-treated chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. METHODS: We employed gene expression profiling in baseline liver biopsies of 40 CHB patients (19 HBeAg-positive; 21 HBeAg-negative) treated with peginterferon and adefovir for 48 weeks, and compared expression patterns of combined responders (HBeAg loss, HBV-DNA <2000 IU/ml, alanine aminotransferase normalization after 1 year of treatment-free follow-up) with non-responders. Genes identified by transcriptome analysis in 15 biopsies were confirmed in 25 additional biopsies by RT-qPCR. RESULTS: Transcriptome analysis demonstrated significant differences in expression of 41 genes between responders and non-responders. In responders, pathway analysis showed specific upregulation of genes related to the immune response, including chemotaxis and antigen processing and presentation. Genes upregulated in responders exhibited strongest similarity with a set of genes induced in livers of chimpanzees with acute Hepatitis B infection. Differential expression was confirmed for eight selected genes. A 2-gene subset (HLA-DPB1, SERPIN-E1) was found to predict response most accurately. Incorporation of these genes in a multivariable model with HBeAg status, HBV genotype and baseline HBsAg level correctly classified 90% of all patients, in which HLA-DPB1 and SERPIN-E1 were independent predictors of response. CONCLUSION: We identified an intrahepatic transcriptional signature associated with enhanced immune activation which predicts therapy response. These novel associations could lead to better understanding of responsiveness to peginterferon in CHB patients, and may assist in selecting possible responders to interferon-based treatment.