A meta-analysis and real-world cohort study on the sex-related differences in efficacy and safety of immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Background & Aims: Sex-related differences in the immune pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), particularly related to oestrogen-dependent secretion of pro-tumourigenic cytokines, are well-known. Whether sex influences the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy is not known. Methods: We performed a restricted maximum likelihood random effects meta-analysis of five phase III trials that evaluated immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced HCC and reported overall survival (OS) hazard ratios (HRs) stratified by sex to evaluate sex-related differences in OS. In a real-world cohort of 840 patients with HCC from 22 centres included between 2018 and 2023, we directly compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab (A+B) between sexes. Radiological response was reported according to RECIST v1.1. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed for OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: In the meta-analysis, immunotherapy was associated with a significant OS benefit only in male (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86) but not in female (pooled HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.70-1.03) patients with HCC. When directly comparing model estimates, no differences in the treatment effect between sexes were observed. Among 840 patients, 677 (81%) were male (mean age 66 ± 11 years), and 163 (19%) were female (mean age 67 ± 12 years). Type and severity of adverse events were similar between the two groups. OS and PFS were comparable between males and females upon uni- and multivariable analyses (aHR for OS and PFS: 0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.04; 1.02, 95% CI 0.80-1.30, respectively). Objective response rates (24%/22%) and disease control rates (59%/59%) were also similar between sexes. Conclusion: Female phase III trial participants experienced smaller OS benefit following ICI therapy for advanced HCC, while outcomes following A+B treatment were comparable between sexes in a large real-world database. Based on the ambiguous sex-related differences in survival observed here, further investigation of sex-specific clinical and biologic determinants of responsiveness and survival following ICIs are warranted. Impact and implications: While immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as standard of care for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma, there are conflicting reports on whether the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy differs between females and males. Our study suggests ambiguous sex-related differences in outcomes from immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma. Further investigation of sex-specific clustering in clinicopathologic and immunologic determinants of responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy should be prioritised. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023429625.

Baseline neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-lymphocyte ratio appear predictive of immune treatment related toxicity in hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: A well-recognized class effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) ranging from low grade toxicities to life-threatening end organ damage requiring permanent discontinuation of ICI. Deaths are reported in < 5% of patients treated with ICI. There are, however, no reliable markers to predict the onset and severity of IrAEs. We tested the association between neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) at baseline with development of clinically significant IrAEs (grade ≥ 2) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with ICI. AIM: To test the association between NLR and PLR at baseline with development of clinically significant IrAEs (grade ≥ 2) in HCC patients treated with ICI. METHODS: Data was extracted from an international database from a consortium of 11 tertiary-care referral centers. NLR = absolute neutrophil count/absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) and PLR = platelet count/ALC. Cutoff of 5 was used for NLR and 300 for PLR based on literature. We also tested the association between antibiotic and steroid exposure to IrAEs. RESULTS: Data was collected from 361 patients treated between 2016-2020 across the United States (67%), Asia (14%) and Europe (19%). Most patients received Nivolumab (n = 255, 71%). One hundred sixty-seven (46%) patients developed at least one IrAE, highest grade 1 in 80 (48%), grade ≥ 2 in 87 (52%) patients. In a univariable regression model PLR > 300 was significantly associated with a lower incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.40; P = 0.044). Similarly, a trend was observed between NLR > 5 and lower incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.58; P = 0.097). Multivariate analyses confirmed PLR > 300 as an independent predictive marker of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.26; P = 0.011), in addition to treatment with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1)/cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein-4 (OR = 2.57; P = 0.037) and PD-1/tyrosine kinase inhibitor (OR = 3.39; P = 0.01) combinations. Antibiotic use was not associated with IrAE incidence (OR = 1.02; P = 0.954). Patients treated with steroids had a > 2-fold higher incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 2.74; P < 0.001), although 74% were prescribed steroids for the treatment of IrAEs. CONCLUSION: Given that high baseline NLR and PLR are associated with a decreased incidence of IrAEs, lower baseline NLR and PLR may be predictive biomarkers for the appearance of IrAEs in HCC treated with ICI. This finding is in keeping with several studies in solid tumors that have shown that baseline NLR and PLR appear predictive of IrAEs.

Impact of body mass index in patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) is first line-treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Body mass index (BMI) has demonstrated predictive value for response to immunotherapy in non-HCC cancer types. Our study investigated the effect of BMI on safety and efficacy of real-life use of Atezo/Bev for unresectable HCC. METHODS: 191 consecutive patients from seven centres receiving Atezo/Bev were included in the retrospective study. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) defined by RECIST v1.1 were measured in overweight (BMI ≥ 25) and non-overweight (BMI < 25) patients. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were evaluated. RESULTS: Patients in the overweight cohort (n = 94) had higher rates of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and lower rates of Hepatitis B compared to non-overweight cohort (n = 97). Baseline Child-Pugh class and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage were similar between cohorts, with lower rates of extrahepatic spread in the overweight group. Overweight patients had similar OS compared to non-overweight (median OS 15.1 vs. 14.9 months; p = 0.99). BMI did not influence median PFS (7.1 vs. 6.1 months; p = 0.42), ORR (27.2% vs. 22.0%; p = 0.44) and DCR (74.1% vs. 71.9%; p = 0.46). There were higher rates of atezolizumab-related fatigue (22.3% vs. 10.3%; p = 0.02) and bevacizumab-related thrombosis (8.5% vs. 2.1%; p = 0.045) in the overweight patients, but overall trAEs and treatment discontinuation were comparable between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Atezo/Bev has comparable efficacy in overweight HCC patients, with an increase in treatment-related fatigue and thrombosis. Combination therapy is safe and efficacious to use in overweight patients, including those with underlying NAFLD.

Immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: how will it reshape treatment sequencing?

The treatment landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has broadened with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) setting a novel standard of care. With the increased number of therapies either in first or in further line, disentangling the possible treatment sequences has become much more complex. Yet, all the second-line therapies have been evaluated after sorafenib. After ICIs, offering multikinase inhibitors is a widespread approach, either shifting forward sorafenib or lenvatinib, or choosing among regorafenib or cabozantinib, already approved in the refractory setting. Under specific circumstances, ICIs could be maintained beyond disease progression in patients with proven clinical benefit, as supported by some data emerging from phase III clinical trials with immunotherapy in HCC. Rechallenge with ICIs is an additional attractive alternative, although requiring careful and individual evaluation as efficacy and safety of such a strategy have not been yet clarified. Still, a considerable number of patients displays primary resistance to ICIs and might benefit from antiangiogenics either alone or in addition to ICIs instead. Hopefully, the ongoing clinical trials will enlighten regarding the most effective treatment pathways. The identification of predictive correlates of response to immunotherapy will help treatment allocation at each stage, thus representing an urgent matter to address in HCC research. With programmed death ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, and microsatellite status being inadequate biomarkers in HCC, patient characteristics, drug safety profile, and regulatory approval remain key elements to acknowledge in routine practice. Despite the tissue remaining a preferred source, biomarkers discovery could take advantage of liquid biopsy to overcome the matter of tissue availability and track tumor changes. Lastly, tumor genetic phenotypes, tumor microenvironment features, gut microbiome, and markers of immune response and systemic inflammation are all potential emergent predictors of response to ICIs, pending validation in the clinical setting.

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge in individuals with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Background & Aims: We investigated the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) rechallenge in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received ICI-based therapies in a previous systemic line. Methods: In this international, retrospective multicenter study, patients with HCC who received at least two lines of ICI-based therapies (ICI-1, ICI-2) at 14 institutions were eligible. The main outcomes included best overall response and treatment-related adverse events. Results: Of 994 ICI-treated patients screened, a total of 58 patients (male, n = 41; 71%) with a mean age of 65.0±9.0 years were included. Median systemic treatment lines of ICI-1 and ICI-2 were 1 (range, 1-4) and 3 (range, 2-9), respectively. ICI-based therapies used at ICI-1 and ICI-2 included ICI alone (ICI-1, n = 26, 45%; ICI-2, n = 4, 7%), dual ICI regimens (n = 1, 2%; n = 12, 21%), or ICI combined with targeted therapies/anti-VEGF (n = 31, 53%; n = 42, 72%). Most patients discontinued ICI-1 due to progression (n = 52, 90%). Objective response rate was 22% at ICI-1 and 26% at ICI-2. Responses at ICI-2 were also seen in patients who had progressive disease as best overall response at ICI-1 (n = 11/21; 52%). Median time-to-progression at ICI-1 and ICI-2 was 5.4 (95% CI 3.0-7.7) months and 5.2 (95% CI 3.3-7.0) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3-4 at ICI-1 and ICI-2 were observed in 9 (16%) and 10 (17%) patients, respectively. Conclusions: ICI rechallenge was safe and resulted in a treatment benefit in a meaningful proportion of patients with HCC. These data provide a rationale for investigating ICI-based regimens in patients who progressed on first-line immunotherapy in prospective trials. Impact and implications: Therapeutic sequencing after first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a challenge as no available second-line treatment options have been studied in immunotherapy-pretreated patients. Particularly, the role of ICI rechallenge in patients with HCC is unclear, as data from prospective trials are lacking. We investigated the efficacy and safety of ICI-based regimens in patients with HCC pretreated with immunotherapy in a retrospective, international, multicenter study. Our data provide the rationale for prospective trials investigating the role of ICI-based regimens in patients who have progressed on first-line immunotherapy.

Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratios as Prognostic Biomarkers in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab.

Systemic inflammation is a key risk factor for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progression and poor outcomes. Inflammatory markers such as the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) may have prognostic value in HCC treated with standard of care atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo-Bev). We conducted a multicenter, international retrospective cohort study of patients with unresectable HCC treated with Atezo-Bev to assess the association of NLR and PLR with overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rates. Patients with NLR ≥ 5 had a significantly shorter OS (9.38 vs. 16.79 months, p < 0.001) and PFS (4.90 vs. 7.58 months, p = 0.03) compared to patients with NLR < 5. NLR ≥ 5 was an independent prognosticator of worse OS (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.22−3.56, p = 0.007) but not PFS. PLR ≥ 300 was also significantly associated with decreased OS (9.38 vs. 15.72 months, p = 0.007) and PFS (3.45 vs. 7.11 months, p = 0.04) compared to PLR < 300, but it was not an independent prognosticator of OS or PFS. NLR and PLR were not associated with objective response or disease control rates. NLR ≥ 5 independently prognosticated worse survival outcomes and is worthy of further study and validation.

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.

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.

Impact of older age in patients receiving atezolizumab and bevacizumab for hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Combination atezolizumab/bevacizumab is the gold standard for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our study investigated the efficacy and safety of combination therapy in older patients with HCC. METHODS: 191 consecutive patients from eight centres receiving atezolizumab and bevacizumab were included. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) defined by RECIST v1.1 were measured in older (age ≥ 65 years) and younger (age < 65 years) age patients. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were evaluated. RESULTS: The elderly (n = 116) had higher rates of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (19.8% vs. 2.7%; p < .001), presenting with smaller tumours (6.2 cm vs 7.9 cm, p = .02) with less portal vein thrombosis (31.9 vs. 54.7%, p = .002), with fewer patients presenting with BCLC-C stage disease (50.9 vs. 74.3%, p = .002). There was no significant difference in OS (median 14.9 vs. 15.1 months; HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.65-2.02 p = .63) and PFS (median 7.1 vs. 5.5 months; HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.54-1.92; p = .72) between older age and younger age. Older patients had similar ORR (27.6% vs. 20.0%; p = .27) and DCR (77.5% vs. 66.1%; p = .11) compared to younger patients. Atezolizumab-related (40.5% vs. 48.0%; p = .31) and bevacizumab-related (44.8% vs. 41.3%; p = .63) trAEs were comparable between groups. Rates of grade ≥3 trAEs and toxicity-related treatment discontinuation were similar between older and younger age patients. Patients 75 years and older had similar survival and safety outcomes compared to younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Atezolizumab and bevacizumab therapy is associated with comparable efficacy and tolerability in older age patients with unresectable HCC.

Preliminary evidence of safety and tolerability of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh A and B cirrhosis: A real-world study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (AtezoBev) is the standard of care for first-line treatment of unresectable HCC. No evidence exists as to its use in routine clinical practice in patients with impaired liver function. APPROACH AND RESULTS: In 216 patients with HCC who were consecutively treated with AtezoBev across 11 tertiary centers, we retrospectively evaluated treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) graded (G) according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0, including in the analysis all patients treated according to label (n = 202, 94%). We also assessed overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response (ORR), and disease control rates (DCR) defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Disease was mostly secondary to viral hepatitis, namely hepatitis C (n = 72; 36%) and hepatitis B infection (n = 35, 17%). Liver function was graded as Child-Pugh (CP)-A in 154 patients (76%) and CP-B in 48 (24%). Any grade trAEs were reported by 143 patients (71%), of which 53 (26%) were G3 and 3 (2%) G4. Compared with CP-A, patients with CP-B showed comparable rates of trAEs. Presence and grade of varices at pretreatment esophagogastroduodenoscopy did not correlate with bleeding events. After a median follow-up of 9.0 months (95% CI, 7.8-10.1), median OS was 14.9 months (95% CI, 13.6-16.3), whereas median PFS was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.2-8.5). ORR and DCR were respectively 25% and 73%, with no difference across CP classes. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms reproducible safety and efficacy of AtezoBev in routine practice. Patients with CP-B reported similar tolerability compared with CP-A, warranting prospective evaluation of AtezoBev in this treatment-deprived population.

Implementing Pre-Therapeutic UGT1A1 Genotyping in Clinical Practice: A Real-Life Study.

Current guidelines recommend pre-therapeutic UGT1A1 genotyping to guide irinotecan dosing, but the usefulness of this approach remains to be clarified. In 247 patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancers undergoing irinotecan-based chemotherapy, we prospectively performed UGT1A1*28 genotyping and we analyzed the incidence of severe neutropenia according to genotype-guided dose reductions. Overall, 28 (11.3%) and 92 (37.2%) patients were homozygous or heterozygous UGT1A1*28 carriers, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was reported in 39% of homozygous patients receiving an upfront dose reduction of irinotecan (median 40%, range 22-58%), in 20% of heterozygous or wild-type patients receiving full dose (ORvs*28/*28 genotype = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.14-1.03; p = 0.058), and in 15.3% of those receiving a reduced dose for clinical reasons (OR vs*28/*28 genotype = 0.28, 95% IC: 0.12-0.67; p = 0.004). Occurrence of severe neutropenia was inversely associated with dose reduction in UGT1A1*28 homozygous carriers (ORx10 unit = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.27-1.40, p = 0.249) and UGT1A1 heterozygous or wild-type patients (ORx10 unit = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.59-1.28, p = 0.478). Incidence of severe neutropenia was related to irinotecan doses and UGT1A1 polymorphisms. Upfront irinotecan dose reductions do not reduce the burden of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia in UGT1A1*28 homozygous carriers.

The dual checkpoint blockade in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: opportunities emerging in clinical trials.

INTRODUCTION: To prevent damage from an immune response against autoantigens and toxins originating from the gut, the liver promotes an immune-tolerant milieu providing fertile ground for immune escape of cancer cells. Therefore, the use and evaluation of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a treatment rationale. AREA COVERED: In this article, we discuss the role of the dual ICIs blockade in advanced HCC, covering the biological basis for their combination, their mechanism of action, and the results of the early-phase studies testing nivolumab plus ipilimumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab. Furthermore, we provide the results of the phase III HIMALAYA trial and an overview of the ongoing trials investigating the dual ICIs in different disease stages. EXPERT OPINION: The potential approval of the dual ICIs blockade strategies for advanced HCC will set the entry of antiangiogenic-free options, expanding the proportion of patients eligible for a first-line treatment. However, it will pose a series of clinical challenges with a sizable proportion of patients, namely Child-Pugh B, elderly, and immunocompromised patients, still marginalized. Also, given the rate of disease progression, identifying reliable predictive biomarkers is crucial to inform treatment choice and sequences. Finally, the compelling response rate of such combinations is paving the way for their evaluation in earlier stages.

Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: shedding light on the preclinical rationale and clinical trials.

INTRODUCTION: Combining multikinase inhibitors (MKIs) with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a strong biological rationale. Among MKIs, cabozantinib seems an ideal partner for ICIs, playing a potentially synergistic role via a spectrum of immunomodulatory actions. AREA COVERED: This paper discusses the preclinical rationale for combining cabozantinib and atezolizumab in advanced HCC. It examines the mechanism of action of these agents and highlights their synergistic activities in vitro. Other MKI plus ICI combinations under investigation are evaluated. The results of the phase 1b COSMIC-021 study testing cabozantinib plus atezolizumab across numerous tumor types are presented along with the study design and the recent results of the phase 3 COSMIC-312 trial evaluating this combination as a front-line option for advanced HCC. EXPERT OPINION: The eventual approval of novel combinations for advanced HCC will require careful patient selection and a refinement of study design for future trials. Regarding the search for predictive biomarkers, etiology and extent of disease may predict response to therapy. Moving cabozantinib to first-line, treatment sequencing should consider possible cross-resistance not only to ICIs but also to other MKIs. Finally, the response rates of such combinations may pave the way for their evaluation as peri-operative therapies.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma.

Introduction: The treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has radically changed after the approval of the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment. A strong preclinical rationale exists to support the combination of bevacizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monoclonal antibody (mAb), and atezolizumab, an anti-programmed death ligand 1 mAb. The efficacy of the combination was first assessed in the phase Ib GO30140 study, and the combination was then proven superior to the prior standard of care, sorafenib, in the phase III IMbrave150 trial.Areas covered: This article focuses on the mechanism of action of atezolizumab and bevacizumab, their synergistic action, and the two clinical trials leading to approval. We also collected the body of post-hoc analyses and meta-analyses to help guide the decision-making process in terms of patient selection and subsequent treatments.Expert opinion: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab are the current standard of care for first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic HCC and treatment-naïve patient should be treated with the combination, unless contraindications to the drugs. Since all the available agents for further lines of treatment have been approved for sorafenib-pretreated patients, prospective trials, post-hoc analyses, and real-world data assessing valid treatment sequencing are strongly needed.

Systemic Treatment for Older Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

The incidence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma is growing and age at diagnosis is increasing; however, despite the unprecedented wealth of therapeutic options for advanced HCC, its optimal management in some categories, such as older adults, is yet to be defined. Even though age is not an exclusion criterion per se, most of the landmark trials enrolled a limited number of senior patients, raising some concerns on the potential benefit of active treatments in this group. The identification of more vulnerable patients remains a crucial issue in clinical practice. In fact, the suitability assessment for systemic therapy through performance status metrics might underestimate or conversely overestimate the fitness of older patients, failing to detect other relevant impairments. Thus, the assessment of frailty through geriatric screening scales is largely necessary. In addition, most of the available data relate to the use of sorafenib, while very little is known about the most recent therapeutic agents. Age subgroup analyses provided by many of the pivotal trials did not find significant efficacy or safety differences across ages; however, the most widely used cut-off age of 65 years may not be very informative for the current older population. Regarding immunotherapy, the clinical benefit reported with immune checkpoint inhibitors reassures their safe use in senior patients and supports further investigations to assess their efficacy in this population.

The evolving treatment paradigm of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: putting all the pieces back together.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The therapeutic landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has become notably complex in recent years. With this review, we aimed to put the most recent findings in perspective and tried to delineate the rapidly changing treatment algorithm. RECENT FINDINGS: The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab has become the new first-line standard of care treatment for unresectable HCC after the positive results of the phase 3 IMbrave150 study. Nivolumab monotherapy failed to demonstrate advantage versus sorafenib in the CheckMate 459 trial, while two different therapeutic strategies (sintilimab and bevacizumab biosimilar and donafenib) outperformed sorafenib in two phase 2/3 studies conducted in the Chinese population. Several immunotherapy combinations are currently under study in large phase 3 trials after promising results in earlier phase studies. About further lines of treatment, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab was approved for sorafenib-pretreated patients after the positive results of the phase 1/2 CheckMate 040 study and apatinib was proven effective in the Chinese population in a phase 2/3 study, while pembrolizumab as monotherapy did not show statistically significant superiority when compared with placebo in the KEYNOTE-240 study. SUMMARY: Because of the growing complexity of advanced HCC treatment, the implementation of predictive biomarkers of response is eagerly needed.

The Role of Cabozantinib as a Therapeutic Option for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Landscape and Future Challenges.

The systemic treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has significantly changed over the last years, with the introduction of two new standard-of-care first-line treatments (lenvatinib and the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab) and the success of several new agents in second line. In particular, after the approval of regorafenib, ramucirumab and cabozantinib, the landscape of second-line treatment has become notably complex, providing a serious challenge in clinical practice. In this review, we focus on cabozantinib, a multikinase inhibitor which was proven effective in improving overall and progression-free survival of patients previously treated with sorafenib in the randomized Phase III CELESTIAL trial. CELESTIAL is the only phase III study to have included patients in the third-line setting and cabozantinib efficacy was confirmed in several post hoc analyses, irrespective of alpha-fetoprotein levels, albumin-bilirubin score, age, and duration of previous sorafenib treatment. The safety profile of cabozantinib in the CELESTIAL trial was comparable with other multikinase inhibitors used for HCC and the most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events were diarrhea, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, fatigue, hypertension, and aspartate aminotransferase increase. Tolerability did not differ between younger and older patients and quality of life was significantly improved compared to placebo during the treatment. In this review, we also make a particular mention to the use of cabozantinib in populations which are normally excluded from clinical trials, such as older patients and Child-Pugh B patients. Finally, we present the new treatment strategies in which cabozantinib is being tested, most notably the combination of cabozantinib and atezolizumab in the first-line setting in the phase III COSMIC-312 trial and the use of cabozantinib after progression on immune-checkpoint inhibitors.

Current options and future directions of systemic therapy for advanced biliary tract cancer.

Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are aggressive tumors arising from different portions of the biliary tree and classified according to the anatomical location in intrahepatic (i) cholangiocarcinoma (CCA, iCCA), perihilar CCA (pCCA), and distal CCA (dCCA), gallbladder cancer (GBC), and ampulla of Vater cancer (AVC). Due to their silent behavior, BTCs are frequently diagnosed at advanced stages when the prognosis is poor. The available chemotherapeutic options are palliative and unfortunately, most patients will die from their disease between 6 and 18 months from diagnosis. However, over the last decade, amounting interest has been posed on the genomic landscape of BTCs and deep-sequencing studies have identified different potentially actionable driver mutations. Hence, the promising results of the early phase clinical studies with targeted agents against isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) 1 mutation or fibroblast growth factor (FGF) receptor (FGFR) 2 aberrations inintrahepatic tumors, and other agents against humanepidermal growth factor receptor (HER) 2 overexpression/mutations, neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) fusions or B-type Raf kinase (BRAF) mutations across different subtypes of BTCs, have paved the way for a "precision medicine" strategy for BTCs. Moreover, despite the modest results when used as monotherapy, beyond microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors, immune checkpoint inhibitors are being evaluated in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy, possibly further expanding the therapeutic landscape of advanced BTCs. This review aims to provide an overview of the approved systemic therapies, the promising results, and the ongoing studies to explore the current and future directions of advanced BTC systemic treatment.