DNA methylation-activated full-length EMX1 facilitates metastasis through EMX1-EGFR-ERK axis in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Altered DNA methylation is a crucial epigenetic event in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development and progression. Through methylation-transcriptomic analysis, we identified a set of sixty potential DNA methylation-based epidriver genes. In this set of genes, we focused on the hypermethylation of EMX1, which is frequently observed in hepatobiliary tumors. Despite of its frequent occurrence, the function of EMX1 remains largely unknown. By utilizing bisulfite-next-generation sequencing, we have detected EMX1 DNA hypermethylation on the gene body, which is positively correlated with EMX1 mRNA expression. Further analysis revealed that EMX1 mRNA terminal exon splicing in HCC generated two protein isoforms: EMX1 full length (EMX1-FL) and alternative terminal exon splicing isoform (EMX1-X1). Cellular functional assays demonstrated that gain-of-function EMX1-FL, but not EMX1-X1, induced HCC cells migration and invasion while silencing EMX1-FL inhibited HCC cells motility. This result was further validated by in vivo tumor metastasis models. Mechanistically, EMX1-FL bound to EGFR promoter, promoting EGFR transcription and activating EGFR-ERK signaling to trigger tumor metastasis. Therefore, EGFR may be a potential therapeutic target for EMX1-high expression HCC. Our work illuminated the crucial role of gene body hypermethylation-activated EMX1-FL in promoting tumorigenesis and metastasis in HCC. These findings pave the way for targeting the EMX1-EGFR axis in HCC tumorigenicity and metastasis.

Toripalimab Combined With Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy Versus Lenvatinib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Purpose: Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy have synergistic effects in multiple malignancies. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of toripalimab plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus lenvatinib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods: We conducted this retrospective study at 3 hospitals in China and eligible patients were 18 years or older and had a primary diagnosis of unresectable HCC with macroscopic vascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread. These patients were treated with toripalimab plus HAIC or lenvatinib monotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease control rate per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) 1.1, and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1. The results were compared by Student's test or the chi-square test, and the survival curves were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and propensity-score matching (PSM) was used to reduce bias. Results: A total of 118 patients were recruited for this study: 53 in the TorHAIC group and 65 in the lenvatinib group. We found that the TorHAIC group showed a longer PFS (9.3 [95% CI, 7.81-10.8] vs 4.8 months [95% CI, 3.31-6.29]; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.57, 95% CI, 0.38-0.85; p = .006), a longer OS (17.13 [95% CI, 13.99-20.27] vs 10.1 months [95% CI, 8.14-12.06]; HR = 0.5, 95% CI, 0.31 - 0.81; p = .005), a higher disease control rate (86.8% vs 69.2%, p = .002) and a higher ORR (47.2% vs 9.2%, p < .001) by RECIST criteria than the lenvatinib group. Both toripalimab plus HAIC and lenvatinib had acceptable safety profiles. No treatment-related deaths occurred in this study. In the propensity score-matched cohorts (47 pairs), the outcomes in the TorHAIC group were also better than those in the lenvatinib group (p < .05). Conclusion: Toripalimab plus HAIC was tolerable and effective in advanced HCC and the result needs to be confirmed in the phase III trial.

Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy of Oxaliplatin, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin With or Without Sorafenib as Initial Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Our previous study showed that hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) using oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX) plus sorafenib provided a significant survival benefit over sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, it is unclear whether the survival benefit should be attributed to the synergism between HAIC and sorafenib or just HAIC alone. We aim to compare HAIC using FOLFOX plus sorafenib with HAIC alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study including 225 eligible patients treated with HAIC using FOLFOX (HAIC alone group, n=126, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², leucovorin 400 mg/m², fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m² and 2400 mg/m² for 46 hours, every 3 weeks) alone or HAIC plus sorafenib (soraHAIC group, n=99, sorafenib 400 mg twice daily). Survival curves were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and propensity-score matching was used to reduce bias. RESULTS: The soraHAIC group showed a longer overall survival (12.9 [95% CI, 10.4-15.4] vs. 10.5 [95% CI, 9.5-11.5] months, HR=0.71 [95% CI, 0.53-0.96]; P=0.025), a better progression free survival (7.0 [95% CI, 5.3-8.8] vs. 5.3 [95% CI, 3.5-7.1] months, HR=0.76 [95% CI, 0.58-0.99]; P=0.046), and a higher disease control rate (RECIST 1.1: 74.8% vs. 61.1%, P=0.030) than the HAIC alone group. In multivariate analysis, soraHAIC was an independent favor factor for survival. In terms of the grade 3/4 adverse event, hand-foot skin reaction was more frequent in the soraHAIC group than the HAIC alone group. In the propensity-score matched cohorts (93 pairs), the overall survival, the progression free survival and disease control rates in the soraHAIC group were also better than those in the HAIC group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: HAIC plus sorafenib may improve overall survival and progression free survival compared with HAIC alone as initial treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Lenvatinib, toripalimab, plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus lenvatinib alone for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib is the first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but prognosis is still unsatisfactory. Recently, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), and immune checkpoint inhibitors showed promising results for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Considering different anti-malignancy mechanisms, combining these three treatments may improve outcomes. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib, toripalimab, plus HAIC versus lenvatinib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: This was a retrospective study including patients treated with lenvatinib [8 mg (⩽60 kg) or 12 mg (>60 kg) once daily] or lenvatinib, toripalimab plus HAIC [LeToHAIC group, lenvatinib 0-1 week prior to initial HAIC, 240 mg toripalimab 0-1 day prior to every HAIC cycle, and HAIC with FOLFOX regimen (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 on day 1, and 5-fluorouracil infusion 2400 mg/m2 for 46 h, every 3 weeks)]. Progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and treatment-related adverse events were compared. RESULTS: From February 2019 to August 2019, 157 patients were included in this study: 71 in the LeToHAIC group and 86 in the lenvatinib group. The LeToHAIC group showed longer progression-free survival (11.1 versus 5.1 months, p < 0.001), longer overall survival (not reached versus 11 months, p < 0.001), and a higher objective response rate (RECIST: 59.2% versus 9.3%, p < 0.001; modified RECIST: 67.6% versus 16.3%, p < 0.001) than the lenvatinib group. In addition, 14.1% and 21.1% of patients in the LeToHAIC group achieved complete response of all lesions and complete response of the intrahepatic target lesions per modified RECIST criteria, respectively. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events that were more frequent in the LeToHAIC group than in the lenvatinib group included neutropenia (8.5% versus 1.2%), thrombocytopenia (5.6% versus 0), and nausea (5.6% versus 0). CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib, toripalimab, plus HAIC had acceptable toxic effects and might improve survival compared with lenvatinib alone in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Comparison of HBV reactivation between patients with high HBV-DNA and low HBV-DNA loads undergoing PD-1 inhibitor and concurrent antiviral prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor is recommended to treat advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the safety of PD-1 inhibitor in patients with high HBV-DNA load is unknown because of the potential risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. This study was to compare the HBV reactivation between patients with low HBV-DNA loads and high HBV-DNA loads undergoing antiviral prophylaxis and PD-1 inhibitor. METHODS: This was a retrospective study including consecutive hepatitis B surface antigen-positive HCC patients who received PD-1 inhibitor and concurrent antiviral prophylaxis for prevention of clinical hepatitis. Patients were divided into low HBV-DNA group (low group, ≤ 500 IU/ml) and high HBV-DNA group (high group, > 500 IU/ml) according to the baseline HBV-DNA level. The incidences of HBV reactivation, HBV-associated hepatitis, and PD-1 inhibitor disruption were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Two hundred two eligible patients were included: 94 in the low group and 108 in the high group. Seven patients (5 in the low group and 2 in the high group) developed HBV reactivation, and all recovered from HBV reactivation and HBV-associated hepatitis. The incidence of HBV reactivation in the two groups was low (5.3% vs 1.9%, P = 0.34). There was also no difference in the incidence of HBV-associated hepatitis (P = 0.56), or PD-1 inhibitor disruption (P = 0.82). The multivariable analysis showed PD-1 inhibitor with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy was the only significant risk factor for HBV reactivation (P = 0.04) and hepatitis (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: With concurrent antiviral prophylaxis, HBV-DNA load higher than 500 IU/ml should not be a contraindication for PD-1 inhibitor.

Do hepatocellular carcinomas located in subcapsular space or in proximity to vessels increase the rate of local tumor progression? A meta-analysis.

AIMS: To determine if tumors located in the subcapsular space or in proximity to vessels would be a risk factor of local tumor progression (LTP2) in hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) after radiofrequency ablation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases from 1998 to 2017 was performed to identify studies examining the risk factors of LTP after radiofrequency ablation (RFA3) in HCC. No language or other restrictions were imposed. Summary estimates of risk factors of LTP were obtained by using a random-effects model with further exploration with meta-regression and sub-group analyses. KEY FINDINGS: There were 16 studies included, of which 7 were focused on the association of LTP with tumors abutting vessels, and 15 focused on tumors of subcapsular location. In total, 2870 patients were included. Tumors that were located in the subcapsular area had a higher occurrence of LTP (P = 0.04) with a high heterogeneity (I2 = 65%), which could not be explained by the results of the meta-regression. However, tumor that were in close to vessels had contrary results (P = 0.54) with a high heterogeneity (I2 = 77%). SIGNIFICANCE: The findings of the present meta-analysis indicate that the subscapsular location is a possible risk factor of LTP. Nevertheless, a clear definition or classification of the subcapsular location should be highlighted in future studies. Whether tumor location adjacent to a vessel has an influence on the incidence of LTP remains controversial, and more relevant research should be performed.

A non-smooth tumor margin on preoperative imaging assesses microvascular invasion of hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Microvascular invasion (MVI) is rarely diagnosed preoperatively in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the diagnostic power of a non-smooth tumor margin on preoperative imaging for MVI. We performed a literature search using the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases, and 11 studies were included involving 618 MVI-positive cases and 1030 MVI-negative cases. Considerable heterogeneity was found, and was indicated to be attributable to the mean patient ages in the included studies. In subgroups of studies with a mean patient age older than 60 years and studies with computed tomography (CT) as the imaging method (as opposed to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)), heterogeneity was low, and the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the single two-dimensional imaging feature for MVI was 21.30 (95% CI [12.52, 36.23]) and 28.78 (95% CI [13.92, 59.36]), respectively; this power was equivalent to or greater than that of certain multivariable-based scoring systems. In conclusion, a non-smooth tumor margin on preoperative imaging is of great value for MVI assessment and should be considered for inclusion in future scoring systems.