Impact of metformin, statin, aspirin and insulin on the prognosis of uHCC patients receiving first line Lenvatinib or Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab.

Recently, in Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) setting, the use of metformin has been associated to a trend toward worse response rate, overall survival and progression free survival in patients who received immunotherapy. The study population included individuals from both Eastern and Western regions with a confirmed diagnosis of HCC and receiving first line treatment with Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or Lenvatinib. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed by Cox proportional. For the analysis, patients were stratified based on their use of concomitant medication or not. At the time of database lock, 319 deaths were observed: 209 in the Lenvatinib cohort, 110 in the Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab cohort. In the Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab arm, 50 (16.5%) patients were on chronic metformin use. At the univariate analysis for OS, patients who used metformin showed significantly shorter OS compared to patients who did not use metformin (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients in metformin group had significantly shorter OS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.9; 95% CI 1.1-3.1). At the univariate analysis for PFS, patients in metformin group had significantly shorter PFS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.6). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients in metformin group had significantly shorter PFS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.7; p = 0.0147). No differences were reported in terms of ORR and DCR between patients in metformin group and those in no-metformin group. In the Lenvatinib cohort, 65 (15%) patients were recorded to chronically use metformin. No statistically significant differences in terms of both OS and PFS were found between patients in metformin group and patients in no-metformin group. This analysis unveils a negative prognostic role associated with metformin use specifically within the Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab group.

Regorafenib for patients with progression of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab: a case series.

Background: Immunotherapy has reshaped the systemic treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (TA) regimen and regorafenib being the first-line and second-line treatment options for advanced HCC, respectively. However, the efficacy of using the second-line therapeutic agent regorafenib in patients with HCC that has progressed after TA regimen treatment is unknown, and there is a lack of supporting clinical data. The purpose of this case series was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the second-line therapeutic agent regorafenib in patients with advanced HCC who progressed after treatment with a first-line TA regimen. Case Description: This case series included five patients with intermediate to advanced HCC treated with regorafenib after progression on a TA regimen. We retrospectively report the clinical data, clinical outcomes, and adverse events of these five patients. According to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST), one patient achieved partial response (PR), three patients achieved stable disease (SD), and one patient experienced progressive disease (PD); the disease control rate (DCR) reached 80%, and the objective response rate (ORR) reached 20%. Conclusions: In patients with intermediate to advanced HCC who experience disease progression after TA therapy, second-line treatment with regorafenib may be effective in delaying progression and may be associated with better disease control. However, these findings need to be further confirmed in prospective studies with larger cohorts.

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.

Biomimetic Responsive Nanoconverters with Immune Checkpoint Blockade Plus Antiangiogenesis for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment.

The first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) combines immune checkpoint inhibitors and antiangiogenesis agents to prolong patient survival. Nonetheless, this approach has several limitations, including stringent inclusion criteria and suboptimal response rates that stem from the severe off-tumor side effects and the unfavorable pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of different drugs delivered systemically. Herein, we propose a single-agent smart nanomedicine-based approach that mimics the therapeutic schedule in a targeted and biocompatible manner to elicit robust antitumor immunity in advanced HCC. Our strategy employed pH-responsive carriers, poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(ß-amino esters) amphiphilic block copolymer (PEG-PAEs), for delivering apatinib (an angiogenesis inhibitor), that were surface-coated with plasma membrane derived from engineered cells overexpressing PD-1 proteins (an immune checkpoint inhibitor to block PD-L1). In an advanced HCC mouse model with metastasis, these biomimetic responsive nanoconverters induced significant tumor regression (5/9), liver function recovery, and complete suppression of lung metastasis. Examination of the tumor microenvironment revealed an increased infiltration of immune effector cells (CD8+ and CD4+ T cells) and reduced immunosuppressive cells (myeloid-derived suppressor cells and T regulatory cells) in treated tumors. Importantly, our nanomedicine selectively accumulated in both small and large HCC occupying >50% of the liver volume to exert therapeutic effects with minimal systemic side effects. Overall, these findings highlight the potential of such multifunctional nanoconverters to effectively reshape the tumor microenvironment for advanced HCC treatment.

Recent Progress in Systemic Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have several systemic treatment options. There are many known risk factors for HCC, and although some, such as hepatitis C, are now treatable, others are not. For example, metabolic dysfunction-related chronic liver disease is increasing in incidence and has no specific treatment. Underlying liver disease, drug resistance, and an increasing number of treatment options without specific biomarkers are all challenges in selecting the best treatment for each patient. Conventional chemotherapy is almost never used for advanced-stage disease, which instead is treated with immunotherapy, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and VEGF inhibitors. Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting various receptors have been or are currently undergoing clinical evaluation. Ongoing trials with three-drug regimens may be the future of advanced-stage HCC treatment. Other immune-modulatory approaches of chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells, bispecific antibodies, cytokine-induced killer cells, natural killer cells, and vaccines are in early-stage clinical trials. Targeted therapies remain limited for HCC but represent an area of potential growth. As we shift away from first-line sorafenib for advanced HCC, clinical trial control arms should comprise a standard treatment other than sorafenib, one that is a better comparator for advancing therapies.

Systemic therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma: A revolution?

The evolution in systemic therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) signifies a strategy of high-cost, high-gain innovation that originated with sorafenib, despite its limited impact on tumor response. This strategic approach paved the way for the emergence of a second wave of the short-lived competitive advantage, exemplified by the incorporation of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and tremelimumab plus durvalumab. In the context of safety concerns within the liver cancer domain, the IMBRAVE150 and HIMALAYA trials boldly incorporated bevacizumab and tremelimumab, respectively, demonstrating the continuation of the high-risk, high-reward innovation paradigm. This review delves into the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis of systemic therapies in the field of HCC.

RUNX-3-expressing CAR T cells targeting glypican-3 in patients with heavily pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase I trial.

Background: Glypican-3 (GPC3) is a well-characterized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-associated antigen and a promising target for HCC treatment. CT017 CAR T cells were engineered to co-express CAR-GPC3 and runt-related transcription factor 3 (RUNX3), which triggers CD8+ T-cell infiltration into the cancer microenvironment. Methods: This single-center, single-arm, open-label, phase I clinical study enrolled heavily pretreated patients with GPC3-positive HCC between August 2019 and December 2020 (NCT03980288). Patients were treated with CT017 CAR T cells at a dose of 250 × 106 cells. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of this first-in-human product. Findings: Six patients received 7 infusions (one patient received 2 infusions) at the 250 × 106 cells dose. Three patients received CT017 monotherapy, and three patients received CT017-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) combination therapy at the first infusion. One patient received CT017-TKI combination therapy at the second infusion after CT017 monotherapy. All patients experienced cytokine release syndrome (CRS), with 50% (3/6) at Grade 2, 50% (3/6) at Grade 3, and all events resolved after treatment. No immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome was observed. Dose escalation was not performed due to the investigator's decision regarding safety. Of six evaluable patients, one achieved partial response and two had stable disease for a 16.7% objective response rate, 50% disease control rate, 3.5-month median progression-free survival, 3.2-month median duration of disease control, and 7.9-month median overall survival (OS) with 7.87-month median follow-up. The longest OS was 18.2 months after CT017 infusion. Interpretation: Current preliminary phase I data showed a manageable safety profile and promising antitumor activities of CT017 for patients with advanced HCC. These results need to be confirmed in a robust clinical trial. Funding: This study was funded by CARsgen Therapeutics Co., Ltd.

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.

Ovatodiolide and antrocin synergistically inhibit the stemness and metastatic potential of hepatocellular carcinoma via impairing ribosome biogenesis and modulating ERK/Akt-mTOR signaling axis.

Activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and PI3K signaling confers resistance against sorafenib, a mainstay treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Antrocin and ovatodiolide constitute as the most potent secondary metabolites isolated from Antrodia camphorata and Anisomeles indica, respectively. Both natural compounds have recently gained a lot of attention due to their putative inhibition of MAPK and PI3K signaling in various solid cancers. However, whether their combination is effective in HCC remains unknown. Here, we investigated their effect, alone or in various combinations, on MAPK and PI3K signaling pathways in HCC cells. An array of in vitro study were used to investigate anticancer and stemness effects to treat HCC, such as cytotoxicity, drug combination index, migration, invasion, colony formation, and tumor sphere formation. Drug effect in vivo was evaluated using mouse xenograft models. In this study, antrocin and ovatodiolide synergistically inhibited the SNU387, Hep3B, Mahlavu, and Huh7 cell lines. Sequential combination treatment of Huh7 and Mahlavu with ovatodiolide followed by antrocin resulted stronger cytotoxic effect than did treatment with antrocin followed by ovatodiolide, their simultaneous administration, antrocin alone, or ovatodiolide alone. In the Huh7 and Mahlavu cell lines, ovatodiolide→antrocin significantly suppressed colony formation and proliferation as well as markedly downregulated ERK1/2, Akt, and mTOR expression. Inhibition of ERK1/2 and Akt/mTOR signaling by ovatodiolide→antrocin suppressed ribosomal biogenesis, autophagy, and cancer stem cell-like phenotypes and promoted apoptosis in Huh7 and Mahlavu cells. The sorafenib-resistant clone of Huh7 was effectively inhibited by synergistic combination of both compound in vitro. Eventually, the ovatodiolide→antrocin combination synergistically suppressed the growth of HCC xenografts. Taken together, our findings suggested that ovatodiolide→antrocin combination may represent potential therapeutic approach for patients with advanced HCC.

Clinical outcomes with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter real-world study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare response rates of lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in first-line real-world setting. METHODS: Overall cohort included Western and Eastern hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patient populations from 46 centres in 4 countries (Italy, Germany, Japan, and Republic of Korea). RESULTS: 1312 patients were treated with lenvatinib, and 823 patients were treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Objective response rate (ORR) was 38.6% for patients receiving lenvatinib, and 27.3% for patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (p < 0.01; odds ratio 0.60). For patients who achieved complete response (CR), overall survival (OS) was not reached in both arms, but the result from univariate Cox regression model showed 62% reduction of death risk for patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (p = 0.05). In all multivariate analyses, treatment arm was not found to be an independent factor conditioning OS. Comparing ORR achieved in the two arms, there was a statistically significant difference in favor of lenvatinib compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in all subgroups except for Eastern patients, Child-Pugh B patients, presence of portal vein thrombosis, α-feto-protein ≥ 400 ng/mL, presence of extrahepatic disease, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 2, and no previous locoregional procedures. CONCLUSION: Lenvatinib achieves higher ORR in all patient subgroups. Patients who achieve CR with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab can achieve OS so far never recorded in HCC patients. This study did not highlight any factors that could identify patient subgroups capable of obtaining CR.

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.

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy as second-line and third-line regimen for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study.

Background: Despite the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), there is an unmet need regarding subsequent treatments in patients that fail ICI. Regorafenib is a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor, which could increase programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in tumors and increase intra-tumoral CD8+ T-cell infiltration by normalizing the cancer vasculature and improving the efficacy of the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibody. Thus, we evaluated the combination of regorafenib and a PD-1 inhibitor for advanced HCC patients that had failed combined tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) plus ICI. Methods: Data of patients with advanced HCC who had failed combined TKIs plus ICI treatment and were afterwards treated with combined regorafenib plus a PD-1 inhibitor were reviewed. All patients had received PD-1 inhibitors as part of the first-line treatment and regorafenib every 4 weeks until disease progression, intolerable toxicities, or physician/patient withdrawal. The clinical data, previous treatment strategies, follow-up imaging results, and adverse events (AEs) during follow-ups were recorded. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v. 5.0 was used to evaluate AEs and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v. 1.1 was used to evaluate response. The primary endpoint was safety, and the secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DOR). Results: From November 15, 2020, to January 31, 2022, data of 17 patients with advanced HCC that met the criteria were reviewed. The cohort included 16 men and 1 woman with a median age of 54 years (interquartile range, 46 to 63 years). Sixteen patients had Child-Pugh class A (n=16, 94.12%) and one with class B (n=1, 15.9%) liver disease. Thirteen patients received second-line treatment, and the remaining patients received third-line treatment. All patients received at least 1 dose of PD-1 inhibitors. The median follow-up duration was 7.62 months. Twelve recipients experienced treatment-related AEs. The most frequent AE (≥5%) included fatigue (17.64%), diarrhea (17.65%), proteinuria (5.88%), bleeding gums (11.76%), and hypertension (11.76%). No grade-4 AE or new safety signals were identified. The ORR and DCR were 41.2% and 64.7%, respectively, and the median PFS was 5.09 months. Conclusions: Regorafenib combined with PD-1 inhibitor is a promising regimen in treating patients with advanced HCC owing to its safety and effectiveness as well as low incidence of serious AEs with its use.

WWOX-rs13338697 genotype predicts therapeutic efficacy of ADI-PEG 20 for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Background: Previous studies have identified three single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs): GALNT14-rs9679162, WWOX-rs13338697 and rs6025211. Their genotypes are associated with therapeutic outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Herein, we examined whether these SNP genotypes could predict the clinical outcome of HCC patients treated with ADI-PEG 20. Methods: Totally 160 patients with advanced HCC, who had previously been enrolled in clinical trials, including 113 receiving ADI-PEG 20 monotherapy (cohort-1) and 47 receiving FOLFOX/ADI-PEG 20 combination treatment (cohort-2), were included retrospectively. Results: The WWOX-rs13338697-GG genotype was associated with favorable overall survival in cohort-1 patients (P = 0.025), whereas the rs6025211-TT genotype was associated with unfavorable time-to-tumor progression in cohort-1 (P = 0.021) and cohort-1 plus 2 patients (P = 0.008). As ADI-PEG 20 can reduce plasma arginine levels, we examined its pretreatment levels in relation to the WWOX-rs13338697 genotypes. Pretreatment plasma arginine levels were found to be significantly higher in patients carrying the WWOX-rs13338697-GG genotype (P = 0.006). We next examined the association of the WWOX-rs13338697 genotypes with WWOX tissue protein levels in 214 paired (cancerous/noncancerous) surgically resected HCC tissues (cohort-3). The WWOX-rs13338697-GG genotype was associated with decreased tissue levels of WWOX and ASS1. Mechanistic studies showed that WWOX and ASS1 levels were downregulated in hypoxic HCC cells. Silencing WWOX to mimic low WWOX protein expression in HCC in patients with the WWOX-rs13338697-GG genotype, enhanced HIF1A increment under hypoxia, further decreased ASS1, and increased cell susceptibility to ADI-PEG 20. Comclusion: In summary, the WWOX-rs13338697 and rs6025211 genotypes predicted treatment outcomes in ADI-PEG 20-treated advanced HCC patients. The WWOX-rs13338697-GG genotype was associated with lower tissue WWOX and ASS1 levels and higher pretreatment plasma arginine levels, resembling an arginine auxotrophic phenotype requires excessive extracellular arginine supply. Silencing WWOX to mimic HCC with the WWOX-rs13338697-GG genotype further stimulated HCC cell response to hypoxia through increased HIF1A expression, leading to further reduction of ASS1 and thus increased cell susceptibility to ADI-PEG 20.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy as an effective local treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients with inferior vena cava and right atrial tumor thrombus.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to evaluate the curative effect and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with inferior vena cava (IVCTT) and right atrial tumor thrombus (RATT). METHODS: This retrospective study included fifteen advanced HCC patients with IVCTT and RATT who were treated with SBRT between 2013 and 2020. The prescribed dose delivered to the tumor was 45-50 Gy/7-10 fx. We report their treatment responses according to survival time and toxicities. RESULTS: For these patients, the median follow-up time was 15 months (2-52 months). Local tumor control rates of the treated area were 80% at the time of death or at the last follow-up. The 6-month, 12-month, 18-month and 24-month OS rates were 80.0%, 60.0%, 33.3% and 26.7%, respectively. None of these patients died from the toxicity outcomes and complications of SBRT. CONCLUSION: SBRT is an effective option for advanced HCC patients with IVCTT and RATT.

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.

Identifying optimal therapies in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: Recently, increasing literature has been reported on optimal therapies in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and many therapeutic modalities have been proposed to improve the survival rate. However, the results are not consistent due to different research protocols, small sample sizes and different study endpoints and there is no standard treatment protocol has been defined. Therefore, it is very important to explore the optimal bonding mode and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the optimal sequential therapy for those patients. Methods: We searched available databases through January 2020 for relevant studies. The main outcome measure was 1-year overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR); the secondary outcome measure was a composite of toxic effects retrieved grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs) from all included studies. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA version 15 and GeMTC package in the R statistical software. Results: After a detailed review, 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 20 retrospective studies involving 3,675 advanced HCC patients were included for network meta-analysis. Indirect comparisons showed that hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) plus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) was highest probability of obtaining the best OS rate of 1 year [surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA), 0.95] and ORR (SUCRA, 0.86) when compared with other potential optimal therapies and which had ranked the first in all treatment regimens, followed by HAIC (SUCRA, 0.75). Direct and indirect comparison of 1-year OS and ORR with all treatment regimens each other showed that for all treatment regimens, patients showed significant clinical benefit when compared with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) or sorafenib alone. However, the incidence of treatment-related AEs of grade 3 or 4 occurred in patients who have received targeted drug sorafenib therapy (SUCRA, 0.51) compared with other interesting regimens. Conclusions: HAIC may be a valuable therapeutic strategy for advanced HCC patients to prevent recurrence and metastasis after RFA, as well as in improving patient prognosis and quality of life. Meanwhile, HAIC combined with RFA is a safe and effective treatment in patients with advanced HCC, and this combination therapy can significantly prolong 1-year survival rate when compared with other optimal sequential therapies. Trial registration: This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42020176149.

Differential Response to Sorafenib Administration for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Sorafenib has been used to treat advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). However, there is no evidence for a response of different target lesions to sorafenib administration. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effect of sorafenib on various aHCC target lesions. The outcomes of sorafenib treatment on aHCC, i.e., treatment response for all Child A status patients receiving the drug, were analyzed. Of 377 aHCC patients, 73 (19.3%) had complete/partial response to sorafenib, while 134 (35.4%) and 171 (45.2) had a stable or progressive disease, respectively, in the first six months. Of the evaluated metastatic lesions, 149 (39.4%), 48 (12.7%), 123 (32.5%), 98 (25.9%), 83 (22.0%), and 45 (11.9%) were present in liver, bone, lung, portal/hepatic vein thrombus, lymph nodes, and peritoneum, respectively. The overall survival and duration of treatment were 16.9 ± 18.3 and 8.1 ± 10.5 months (with median times of 11.4 and 4.6, respectively). Our analysis showed poor outcomes in macroscopic venous thrombus and bone, higher AFP, and multiple target lesions. ALBI grade A had a better outcome. Sorafenib administration showed good treatment outcomes in selected situations. PD patients with thrombus or multiple metastases should be considered for sorafenib second-line treatment. The ALBI liver function test should be selected as a treatment criterion.

Reproducible safety and efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for HCC in clinical practice: Results of the AB-real study.

BACKGROUND: IMbrave150 has established the superiority of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab over sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: We generated a prospectively maintained database including patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for unresectable HCC across Europe, Asia and USA. Clinico-pathologic characteristics were assessed for their prognostic influence on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in univariable and multivariate analyses. Overall response rate by RECIST v1.1 and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) per CTCAE v.5.0 were reported. RESULTS: Out of 433 patients, 296 Child-Pugh A and ECOG performance status01 patients received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in first line and were included. Patients were mostly male (82.7%), cirrhotic (75%) with history of viral hepatitis (65.9%). Overall, 68.9% had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer C-stage HCC with portal vein tumour thrombosis (PVTT, 35%) and extrahepatic spread (EHS, 51.7%). After a median follow-up of 10.0 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 9.4-10.4), median OS and PFS were 15.7 (95% CI: 14.5-NE) and 6.9 months (95% CI: 6.1-8.3), respectively. In the response-evaluable patients (n = 273), overall response rate was 30.8%. Overall, 221 patients (74.6%) developed TRAEs, with 70 (23.6%) reporting grade 3 or higher TRAEs; 25 (8.4%) patients had bleeding events. OS was independently associated with baseline Albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade and PVTT. Shorter PFS was associated with AFP≥ 400 ng/ml, worse ALBI and presence of EHS. CONCLUSION: This global observational study confirms the reproducible safety and efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in routine clinical practice. Within Child-Pugh-A criteria, the presence of PVTT and higher ALBI grade identify patients with poorer survival.