Paradigm shift in the treatment options of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is prevalent worldwide with suboptimal therapeutic outcomes. The advancement of therapeutic options and the development of new systemic therapies expand the armamentarium to tackle HCC. Treatment options should be provided based on the hierarchy of efficacy in a multidisciplinary perspective, instead of the traditional stage-guided scheme. In advanced HCC, lenvatinib has a comparable efficacy as sorafenib for the first-line therapy of HCC; while regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab have been approved as second-line therapy after the failure of sorafenib. Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy prolongs response rate and survival and enables long-term cure. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is superior to sorafenib as the first-line therapy for advanced HCC. Several emerging regimens by the combination of various systemic therapies are currently under clinical trials. Systemic therapy may be used in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant or even as initial therapy for intermediate-stage HCC. The paradigm shift of HCC treatment will improve patient outcomes.

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease-related hepatocellular carcinoma: Is there a role for immunotherapy?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is among the most common cancers and it is a major cause of cancer-related deaths. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) affects approximately one fourth of individuals worldwide and it is becoming one of the most important causes of HCC. The pathogenic mechanisms leading to NAFLD-related HCC are complex and not completely understood. However, metabolic, fibrogenic, oncogenic, inflammatory and immunological pathways seem to be involved. First-line therapy of advanced HCC has recently undergone major changes, since the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab was proven to increase survival when compared to sorafenib. Other immune-oncology drugs are also demonstrating promising results in patients with advanced HCC when compared to traditional systemic therapy. However, initial studies raised concerns that the advantages of immunotherapy might depend on the underlying liver disease, which seems to be particularly important in NAFLD-related HCC, as these tumors might not benefit from it. This article will review the mechanisms of NAFLD-related hepatocarcinogenesis, with an emphasis on its immune aspects, the efficacy of traditional systemic therapy for advanced NAFLD-related HCC, and the most recent data on the role of immunotherapy for this specific group of patients, showing that the management of this condition should be individualized and that a general recommendation cannot be made at this time.

Monocarboxylate transporter upregulation in induced regulatory T cells promotes resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

Background

Programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitors are not effective in treating all patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and regulatory T cells (Tregs) may determine the resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy.

Methods

Patients were divided into two groups based on the clinical efficacy of anti-PD-1 therapy. Flow cytometry was used to determine the phenotype of CD4+, CD8+, and Tregs in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). CD4+CD45RA+T cells were sorted to analyze Treg differentiation and function.

Results

No significant differences were found between resistant and sensitive patients in the percentage of CD4+ T cells and Tregs in PBMCs or the differentiation and function of induced Tregs (iTregs). However, iTregs from resistant patients presented higher monocarboxylate transporter (MCT) expression. Lactate induced more iTregs and improved OXPHOS levels in the resistant group. MCT1 and MCT2 were highly expressed in tumor-infiltrating Tregs, and patients with higher MCT1 expression had worse clinical outcomes. Combinatorial therapy with MCT antibody and anti-PD-1 therapy effectively inhibited tumor growth.

Conclusion

MCT and its downstream lactate signal in Tregs can confer anti-PD-1 resistance and may be a marker of poor prognosis in HCC.

The presence and size of intrahepatic tumors determine the therapeutic efficacy of nivolumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Purpose:

Inter-tumoral heterogeneity at the differential lesion level raises the possibility of distinct organ-specific responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed to comprehensively examine the clinicopathological factors to predict and assess the efficacy of nivolumab, programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade at an individual tumor site-specific level in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC).

Patients and Methods:

We enrolled 261 aHCC patients treated with nivolumab between 2012 and 2018. Eighty-one clinicopathological factors were comprehensively collected and analyzed. The association between all variables and survival outcomes was evaluated. According to tumor site, the organ-specific responses were assessed based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1.

Results:

The liver was the most commonly involved organ (75.1%), followed by the lungs (37.5%) and lymph nodes (LNs, 11.5%). The liver of nonresponders was more frequently the organ of progression, while the lungs of responders were more frequently the organs of response. Among the 455 individual lesions (liver, n = 248; lung, n = 124; LN, n = 35; others including bone or soft tissues, n = 48), intrahepatic tumors showed the least response (10.1%), followed by lung (24.2%) and LN tumors (37.1%), indicating the presence of distinct organ-specific responses to nivolumab. In intrahepatic tumors, the organ-specific response rate decreased as the size increased (13% for ⩽50 mm, 8.1% for 50–100 mm, and 5.5% for >100 mm). In the subgroup analysis according to tumor location, patients with lung only metastasis (⩾30 mm) showed the best progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). In contrast, primary HCC (⩾100 mm) without lung metastasis had the worst PFS and OS. Comprehensive analyses also revealed that liver function and systemic inflammatory indices, such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), were significantly associated with PFS and OS.

Conclusion:

The presence and size of liver tumors, liver function, and NLR are key factors determining the response to nivolumab in aHCC. These clinical factors should be considered when treating patients with advanced HCC with PD-1 blockade.

Intraarterial Therapies for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Image-guided locoregional therapies play a crucial role in the management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Transarterial therapies consist of a group of catheter-based treatments where embolic agents are delivered directly into the tumor via their supplying arteries. Some of the transarterial therapies available include bland embolization (TAE), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), drug-eluting beads-transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE), selective internal radioembolization therapy (SIRT), and hepatic artery infusion (HAI). This article provides a review of pre-procedural, intra-procedural, and post-procedural aspects of each therapy, along with a review of the literature. Newer embolotherapy options and future directions are also briefly discussed.

Computational Characterizing Necroptosis Reveals Implications for Immune Infiltration and Immunotherapy of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Necroptosis is a programmed form of necrotic cell death in regulating cancer ontogenesis, progression, and tumor microenvironment (TME) and could drive tumor-infiltrating cells to release pro-inflammatory cytokines, incurring strong immune responses. Nowadays, there are few identified biomarkers applied in clinical immunotherapy, and it is increasingly recognized that high levels of tumor necroptosis could enhance the response to immunotherapy. However, comprehensive characterization of necroptosis associated with TME and immunotherapy in Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unexplored. Here, we computationally characterized necroptosis landscape in HCC samples from TCGA and ICGA cohorts and stratified them into two necroptosis clusters (A or B) with significantly different characteristics in clinical prognosis, immune cell function, and TME-landscapes. Additionally, to further evaluate the necroptosis levels of each sample, we established a novel necroptosis-related gene score (NRGscore). We further investigated the TME, tumor mutational burden (TMB), clinical response to immunotherapy, and chemotherapeutic drug sensitivity of HCC subgroups stratified by the necroptosis landscapes. The NRGscore is robust and highly predictive of HCC clinical outcomes. Further analysis indicated that the high NRGscore group resembles the immune-inflamed phenotype while the low score group is analogous to the immune-exclusion or metabolism phenotype. Additionally, the high NRGscore group is more sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade-based immunotherapy, which was further validated using an external HCC cohort, metastatic melanoma cohort, and advanced urothelial cancer cohort. Besides, the NRGscore was demonstrated as a potential biomarker for chemotherapy, wherein the high NRGscore patients with more tumor stem cell composition could be more sensitive to Cisplatin, Doxorubicin, Paclitaxel-based chemotherapy, and Sorafenib therapy. Collectively, a comprehensive characterization of the necroptosis in HCC suggested its implications for predicting immune infiltration and response to immunotherapy of HCC, providing promising strategies for treatment.

TKIs beyond immunotherapy predict improved survival in advanced HCC

PURPOSE

For patients with advanced HCC, predictors of immunotherapy response are scarce, and the benefits of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment after immunotherapy are unclear. We explored whether clinical features, such as target lesion response, immune-mediated toxicity, or subsequent TKI therapy predict immunotherapy response.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 77 patients with advanced HCC receiving immunotherapy. Patient characteristics and outcomes were assessed using various statistical methods, including the log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used for multivariable survival analysis.

RESULTS

For all patients, median overall survival (mOS) was 13 months (95% CI 8-19), and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 6 months (95% CI 4-10). Patients with partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD) compared to progressive disease (PD) had prolonged mPFS (27 vs. 5 vs. 1 month(s), p < 0.0001) and mOS (not met vs. 11 vs. 3 months, p < 0.0001). Patients with vs. without immune-mediated toxicities trended towards longer mPFS (9 vs. 4 months p = 0.133) and mOS (17 vs. 9 months; p = 0.095). Patients who did vs. did not receive a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) after immunotherapy had a significantly improved mOS (19 vs. 5 months, p = 0.0024)). Based on multivariate modeling, the hazard ratio (HR) of overall survival (OS) of patients receiving TKI vs. no TKI was 0.412 (p = 0.0043).

CONCLUSION

We show that disease control predicts prolonged mOS and mPFS. Furthermore, TKI therapy administered after immunotherapy predicts prolonged mOS in patients with advanced HCC.

Second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Time for more individualized treatment options?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most frequently diagnosed primary tumor of the liver and is usually detected as advanced disease. It is an aggressive disease that often progresses rapidly when it fails to respond to treatment. As such, patients have limited opportunities to try different subsequent-line treatment regimens. In the last 5 years, the number of agents and/or regimens available for the treatment of advanced HCC has significantly increased, which has made treatment choices for this patient population increasingly complex. In the second-line setting, several phase III trials of regorafenib (RESORCE), ramucirumab (REACH/REACH-2), and cabozantinib (CELESTIAL) have demonstrated clinically meaningful survival benefits in patients with the disease. However, the median overall survival of patients with advanced HCC remains unchanged at approximately 12 mo from the start of systemic second-line therapy, with a limited duration of response. Evidence from the REACH/REACH-2 trials demonstrated for the first time that baseline alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels can be used as an identification factor to select those who are likely to benefit the most from ramucirumab treatment. Ramucirumab is both well tolerated and efficacious and has a clinically acceptable safety profile. Therefore, it should be considered an option for patients with AFP levels ≥ 400 ng/mL.

Towards Immunotherapy-Induced Normalization of the Tumor Microenvironment

Immunotherapies modulate the function of immune cells to eradicate cancer cells through various mechanisms. These therapies are successful across a spectrum of cancers, but they are curative only in a subset of patients. Indeed, a major obstacle to the success of immunotherapies is the immunosuppressive nature of the tumor microenvironment (TME), comprising the stromal component and immune infiltrate of tumors. Importantly, the TME in most solid cancers is characterized by sparsely perfused blood vessels resulting from so-called pathological angiogenesis. In brief, dysregulated development of new vessels results in leaky tumor blood vessels that inefficiently deliver oxygen and other nutrients. Moreover, the occurrence of dysregulated fibrosis around the lesion, known as pathological desmoplasia, further compresses tumor blood vessels and impairs blood flow. TME normalization is a clinically tested treatment strategy to reverse these tumor blood vessel abnormalities resulting in stimulated antitumor immunity and enhanced immunotherapy efficacy. TME normalization includes vascular normalization to reduce vessel leakiness and reprogramming of cancer-associated fibroblast to decompress vessels. How immunotherapies themselves normalize the TME is poorly understood. In this review, we summarize current concepts and progress in TME normalization. Then, we review observations of immunotherapy-induced TME normalization and discuss the considerations for combining vascular normalizing and immunotherapies. If TME could be more completely normalized, immunotherapies could be more effective in more patients.

Hepatotropic Peptides Grafted onto Maleimide-Decorated Nanoparticles: Preparation, Characterization and In Vitro Uptake by Human HepaRG Hepatoma Cells

We recently demonstrated the strong tropism of George Baker (GB) Virus A (GBVA10-9) and Plasmodium circumsporozoite protein (CPB) derived synthetic peptides towards hepatoma cells. In a first approach, these peptides were covalently bound to poly(benzyl malate) (PMLABe73) and poly(ethylene glycol)-block-PMLABe73 (PEG62-b-PMLABe73) (co)polymers, and corresponding peptide-decorated nanoparticles (NPs) were prepared by nanoprecipitation. We showed that peptide enhanced NPs internalization by hepatoma cells. In the present work, we set up a second strategy to functionalize NPs prepared from PMLABe73 derivates. First, maleimide-functionalized PMLABe73 (Mal-PMLABe73) and PEG62-b-PMLABe73 (Mal-PEG62-b-PMLABe73) were synthesized and corresponding NPs were prepared by nanoprecipitation. Then, peptides (GBVA10-9, CPB and their scramble controls GBVA10-9scr and CPBscr) with a thiol group were engrafted onto the NPs' maleimide groups using the Michael addition to obtain peptide functionalized NPs by post-formulation procedure. These peptide-modified NPs varied in diameter and dispersity depending on the considered peptides and/or (co)polymers but kept their spherical shape. The peptide-functionalized NPs were more efficiently internalized by HepaRG hepatoma cells than native and maleimide-NPs with various levels relying on the peptide's nature and the presence of PEG. We also observed important differences in internalization of NPs functionalized by the maleimide-thiol-peptide reaction compared to that of NPs prepared from peptide-functionalized PMLABe73 derivatives.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Monotherapies and Combined Therapies

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an important cause of cancer death and is considered the 3rd most lethal around the world. Hepatectomy, liver transplantation, and ablation therapy are considered curative treatments for early-stage HCC. Transarterial chemoembolization is the preferred therapy for intermediate stage HCC. Ssystemic therapy is recommended for advanced HCC. For more than a decade, sorafenib and lenvatinib were used as the first-line treatment for the advanced HCC. For the great success of immunotherapy in melanoma and lung cancer, some immune-based treatments, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), have been applied in the treatment of HCC. The anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) antibodies, including nivolumab and pembrolizumab, have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for sorafenib-pretreated patients. Moreover, due to the results of durable antitumor responses attained from the phase 3 trials, atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab is now the standard therapy for advanced HCC. Recently, there are a lot of clinical trials involving the ICIs, as monotherapy or combination therapy, with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, antiangiogenic drugs, cytotoxic agents, and locoregional treatments, providing a promising outcome for advanced HCC. Thus, this review summarized the role of ICIs for HCC patients with monotherapy or combination therapy. The success and failures of monotherapy and combination therapy involving ICIs have provided advanced insights into HCC treatment and led to novel avenues to improve therapy efficacy in HCC.

Clinically approved combination immunotherapy: Current status, limitations, and future perspective

Immune-checkpoint inhibitor-based combination immunotherapy has become a first-line treatment for several major types of cancer including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), renal cell carcinoma, lung cancer, cervical cancer, and gastric cancer. Combination immunotherapy counters several immunosuppressive elements in the tumor microenvironment and activates multiple steps of the cancer-immunity cycle. The anti-PD-L1 antibody, atezolizumab, plus the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibody, bevacizumab, represents a promising class of combination immunotherapy. This combination has produced unprecedented clinical efficacy in unresectable HCC and become a landmark in HCC therapy. Advanced HCC patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab demonstrated impressive improvements in multiple clinical endpoints including overall survival, progress-free survival, objective response rate, and patient-reported quality of life when compared to current first-line treatment with sorafenib. However, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line therapy has limitations. First, cancer patients falling into the criteria for the combination therapy may need to be further selected to reap benefits while avoiding some potential pitfalls. Second, the treatment regimen of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab at a fixed dose may require adjustment for optimal normalization of the tumor microenvironment to obtain maximum efficacy and reduce adverse events. Third, utilization of predictive biomarkers is urgently needed to guide the entire treatment process. Here we review the current status of clinically approved combination immunotherapies and the underlying immune mechanisms. We further provide a perspective analysis of the limitations for combination immunotherapies and potential approaches to overcome the limitations.

Integrated use of PD-1 inhibition and transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation of safety and efficacy in a retrospective, propensity score-matched study

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Integrated use of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), a locoregional inducer of immunogenic cell death, with ICI has not been formally assessed for safety and efficacy outcomes.

Methods

From a retrospective multicenter dataset of 323 patients treated with ICI, we identified 31 patients who underwent >1 TACE 60 days before or concurrently, with nivolumab at a single center. We derived a propensity score-matched cohort of 104 patients based on Child-Pugh Score, portal vein thrombosis, extrahepatic metastasis and alpha fetoprotein (AFP) who received nivolumab monotherapy. We described overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective responses according to modified RECIST criteria and safety in the multimodal arm in comparison to monotherapy.

Results

Over a median follow-up of 9.3 (IQR 4.0–16.4) months, patients undergoing multimodal immunotherapy with TACE achieved a significantly longer median (95% CI) PFS of 8.8 (6.2–23.2) vs 3.7 (2.7–5.4) months (log-rank 0.15, p<0.01) in the monotherapy group. Multimodal immunotherapy with TACE demonstrated a numerically longer OS compared with ICI monotherapy with a median 35.1 (16.1–Not Evaluable) vs 16.6 (15.7–32.6) months (log-rank 0.41, p=0.12). In the multimodal treatment group, there were three (10%) grade 3 or higher adverse events (AEs) attributed to immunotherapy compared with seven (6.7%) in the matched ICI monotherapy arm. There were no AEs grade 3 or higher attributed to TACE in the multimodal treatment arm. At 3 months following each TACE in the multimodal arm, there was an overall objective response rate of 84%. There were no significant changes in liver functional reserve 1 month following each TACE. Four patients undergoing multimodal treatment were successfully bridged to transplant.

Conclusions

TACE can be safely integrated with programmed cell death 1 blockade and may lead to a significant delay in tumor progression and disease downstaging in selected patients.

Emerging immunotherapy for HCC: A guide for hepatologists

HCC is one of the most common cancers worldwide, and the third leading cause of cancer-related death globally. HCC comprises nearly 90% of all cases of primary liver cancer. Approximately half of all patients with HCC receive systemic therapy during their disease course, particularly in the advanced stages of disease. Immuno-oncology has been paradigm shifting for the treatment of human cancers, with strong and durable antitumor activity in a subset of patients across a variety of malignancies including HCC. Immune checkpoint inhibition with atezolizumab and bevacizumab, an antivascular endothelial growth factor neutralizing antibody, has become first-line therapy for patients with advanced HCC. Beyond immune checkpoint inhibition, immunotherapeutic strategies such as oncolytic viroimmunotherapy and adoptive T-cell transfer are currently under investigation. The tumor immune microenvironment of HCC has significant immunosuppressive elements that may affect response to immunotherapy. Major unmet challenges include defining the role of immunotherapy in earlier stages of HCC, evaluating combinatorial strategies that use targeting of the immune microenvironment plus immune checkpoint inhibition, and identifying treatment strategies for patients who do not respond to the currently available immunotherapies. Herein, we review the rationale, mechanistic basis and supporting preclinical evidence, and available clinical evidence for immunotherapies in HCC as well as ongoing clinical trials of immunotherapy.

Emerging drugs for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a leading cause of liver related mortality. Cirrhosis of any etiology is the major risk factor although HCC can develop in its absence in patients with Hepatitis B and increasingly in those with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. When detected at an early stage, curative options include surgical resection, liver transplantation and/or ablative therapies. Unfortunately, most cases of HCC are recognized at an advanced state when options are limited and non-curative. However new systemic therapies with tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapy have expanded therapeutic options in advanced HCC. Advances in systemic therapy have given patients with advanced HCC hope and prolonged their survival. Ongoing trials addressing different combination therapies with checkpoint inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) or anti-VEGF therapies are expected to further enhance the management of advanced HCC.

AREAS COVERED

We discuss recent data and ongoing research efforsts to improve the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with discussion of current and upcoming systemic therapy combining agents of different classes.

EXPERT OPINION

Sustemic therapy for HCC is in evolution. The inclusion of immunotherapy to systemic therapy has revolutionalized the field of HCC treatment. Identificantion of the appropriate combination and sequence of systemic therapy coupled with discovery of reliable HCC biomarkers will lead to improved survival and inidividulized HCC therapy.

The Safety Profile of Hepatectomy Following Preoperative Systemic Therapy with Lenvatinib Plus Anti-PD-1 Antibodies Versus Hepatectomy Alone in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Objective

To determine the safety of hepatectomy after combined lenvatinib and anti-PD-1 preoperative systemic therapy (PST) in patients with marginally resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Background

PST followed by hepatectomy (PSTH) is an emerging treatment for HCC. However, the impact of PST with lenvatinib plus anti-PD-1 antibodies on surgical safety is unknown.

Methods

Medical records from consecutive patients with marginally resectable advanced HCC who underwent hepatectomy after PST with lenvatinib and anti-PD-1 antibodies between January 2018 and August 2021 were retrieved from a prospectively designed database. Propensity score matching (1:2) was performed with a further 2318 HCC patients who underwent upfront hepatectomy (UH) without initial antitumor treatment during the same period.

Results

In total, 49 and 98 matched patients were included in the PSTH and UH groups, respectively. Compared to the UH group, individuals in the PSTH group experienced more intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusions, and longer postoperative hospital stays. Moreover, posthepatectomy liver failure was more common in the PSTH group, who also had worse albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) scores on postoperative days 1-7. A significantly greater amount of drainage was also required in the PSTH group. However, the 30-day morbidity and 90-day mortality were similar among the two groups. Additionally, the duration of surgery, use of hepatic inflow occlusion during surgery, and the levels of postoperative inflammation-based markers were not statistically different between the two groups.

Conclusions

Despite more intraoperative and postoperative adverse events, PSTH had comparable 30-day morbidity and 90-day mortality as UH. Thus, PSTH appears to be a viable treatment option for marginally resectable HCC patients with careful preoperative evaluation.

Prognostic and Predictive Factors in Patients with Advanced HCC and Elevated Alpha-Fetoprotein Treated with Ramucirumab in Two Randomized Phase III Trials

PURPOSE

Ramucirumab is an effective treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) and baseline alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL. We aimed to identify prognostic and predictive factors of response to ramucirumab in patients with aHCC with AFP ≥400 ng/mL from the phase III REACH and REACH-2 randomized trials.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with aHCC, Child-Pugh class A with prior sorafenib treatment were randomized in REACH and REACH-2 (ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo, biweekly). Meta-analysis of individual patient-level data (pooled population) from REACH (AFP ≥400 ng/mL) and REACH-2 was performed. A drug exposure analysis was conducted for those with evaluable pharmacokinetic data. To identify potential prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), multivariate analyses were performed using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. To define predictors of ramucirumab benefit, subgroup-by-treatment interaction terms were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 542 patients (316 ramucirumab, 226 placebo) analyzed, eight variables had independent prognostic value associated with poor outcome (geographical region, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score ≥1, AFP >1,000 ng/mL, Child-Pugh >A5, extrahepatic spread, high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, high alkaline phosphatase and aspartate aminotransferase). Ramucirumab survival benefit was present across all subgroups, including patients with very aggressive HCC [above median AFP; HR: 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49-0.84] and nonviral aHCC (HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.40-0.79). While no baseline factor was predictive of a differential OS benefit with ramucirumab, analyses demonstrated an association between high drug exposure, treatment-emergent hypertension (grade ≥3), and increased ramucirumab benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Ramucirumab provided a survival benefit irrespective of baseline prognostic covariates, and this benefit was greatest in patients with high ramucirumab drug exposure and/or those with treatment-related hypertension.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Health-Resource Utilization in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Following Failure of Sorafenib: A Retrospective Chart Review of 127 Patients in South Korea

BACKGROUND

European, US, Asian and Korean treatment guidelines all recommend sorafenib as first-line systemic therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, due to the emergence of several new treatments, post-sorafenib treatment patterns in real-world clinical practice are less well understood.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to characterize current treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in patients with HCC following the failure of first-line sorafenib in a real-world setting in Korea.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A chart review was conducted in 127 HCC patients who received systemic therapy or best supportive care following failure of first-line systemic treatment with sorafenib (2016-2018). Anonymized data on patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival were abstracted by 37 physicians in Korea.

RESULTS

The mean (range) age of patients was 60 (37-79) years; 63 patients had low alpha-fetoprotein (AFP < 400 ng/mL), 64 patients had high alpha-fetoprotein (AFP ≥ 400 ng/mL). Post-sorafenib, 64 (50%) patients had systemic therapy. Regorafenib, used by 54 (84%) patients in second-line, and nivolumab monotherapy, by ten (56%) patients in third-line, were the most common therapies. Hepatologist visits and hospitalizations, at an average rate of 6.89 (95% CI 6.37-7.45) and 2.24 (95% CI 1.95-2.57) per patient-year, respectively, were the key contributors of HRU. The median overall survival (95% CI) from discontinuation of sorafenib was 13.0 (9.8-20.7), 6.5 (5.0-9.5) and 9.5 (6.7-12.3) months in the low AFP, high AFP and overall group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This real-world evidence research on treatment patterns reflected current clinical guidelines and highlighted fast progressing nature and continuing high mortality in HCC, especially among the high AFP group, underlying a need for new treatments that can lengthen survival. Results from this real-world chart review, together with existing clinical trial data, can inform future evaluations of new HCC treatments that estimate their health economic impact in Korea.

Safety and Efficacy of Sintilimab and Anlotinib as First Line Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (KEEP-G04): A Single-Arm Phase 2 Study

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors plus antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors may offer a first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this phase 2 trial [registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04052152)], we investigated the safety and efficacy of first-line anti-PD-1 antibody sintilimab plus antiangiogenic TKI anlotinib for advanced HCC.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Pathologically-proven advanced HCC patients received sintilimab (200 mg) on day 1 and anlotinib (12 mg) once daily on days 1 to 14 every 3 weeks, with a safety run-in for the first six participants to assess dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). The primary endpoints were safety and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1.

RESULTS

Twenty advanced HCC patients were enrolled. No DLTs occurred in the safety run-in. All patients had treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Grade 3 TRAEs occurred in 8 (40.0%) patients, the most common being decreased platelet count (10.0%) and increased γ-glutamyl transferase (10.0%). No grade 4/5 TRAEs occurred. Five (25%) patients developed immune-related AEs. The ORR was 35.0% (95%CI 15.4%-59.2%) per RECIST v1.1 and 55.0% (95%CI 31.5%-76.9%) per modified RECIST. At data cutoff (March 31, 2021), the median progression-free survival was 12.2 months (95%CI, 3.8 to not reached). The median PFS was significantly longer in patients with lower LDH levels (not reached [NR], 95% CI, 8.7 to NR vs. higher LDH levels 5.2 months, 95% CI 3.4 to NR; P=0.020) and a CONUT score ≤2 (NR, 95% CI 5.1 to NR vs. CONUT score >2 6.2 months, 95% CI 1.8 to NR; P=0.020). Furthermore, patients showing tumor response had a significantly higher median proportion of CD16+CD56+ NK cells than patients who had stable or progressive disease (21.6% vs. 14.6%; P=0.026).

CONCLUSION

Sintilimab plus anlotinib showed promising clinical activities with manageable toxicity as first-line treatment of advanced HCC.

An exploratory clinical trial of apatinib combined with intensity-modulated radiation therapy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of apatinib combined with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Open-label, single-arm, exploratory clinical trial of apatinib combined with IMRT for uHCC patients. Patients aged 18-75 years with adequate hematological, liver, and renal functions and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of ≤2 were enrolled in this study from March 2017 to September 2020. Patients were received IMRT (biological effective dose: 46-60 Gy) and continuous apatinib (250-500 mg/day) oral administration until HCC progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. The trial registration number is ChiCTR-OPC-17011890.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients have taken part in the study. The median age was 58 years old (range 32-77), 27 (81.9%) patients were ECOG PS 0-1, and 28 (84.9%) patients were male. In addition, 25 (75.7%) patients suffered from hepatitis B, 32 cases (97.0%) were in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) Stages B-C, and eight (24.2%) had portal vein involvement. Moreover, 12 (36.4%) and 21 (63.6%) patients received apatinib as first-line and second or later-line therapy, respectively. The average follow-up was 11.4 months, the median PFS was 7.8 months (95% confidence interval: 3.9-11.7). The OS rates at 6 and 12 months were 96.7% and 66.2%. The ORR and DCR were 15.1% and 81.8%, respectively. Hepatic toxicity was the most common treatment-related adverse events in Grades 3-4 (12.1%). No radiation-induced liver disease and Grade 5 toxicity were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Apatinib combined with IMRT is a safe and effective method to improve PFS and DCR and has good anti-tumor activity in patients with uHCC.

Cardiovascular toxicity following immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors may be associated with multiple immune-related toxicities. Cardiovascular adverse effects are underreported in clinical trials.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate cardiovascular adverse effects incidence among patients with solid tumors receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors in randomized clinical trials and the relative risk of presenting these effects compared to placebo or best supportive care. The search was conducted through MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases from January 1st, 2010 until July 1st, 2020. Outcomes were reported following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

57 randomized clinical trials including 12,118 patients were included. All grade CV AEs incidence rate was 8.32% (95% CI = 6.35%-10.53%). When only grade 3-5 CV AEs were considered, ICIs were significantly associated with increased risk than placebo or BSC (RR = 1.36; 95% CI = 1.06-1.73; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis corroborates the hypothesis of increased CV risk related to immune checkpoint inhibitors.

An appraisal of FDA approvals for adult solid tumours in 2017-2021: has the eagle landed?

In 2016, the then US President Barack Obama announced the Cancer Moonshot with a view to making 10 years' worth of progress in cancer prevention, diagnosis and treatment in only 5 years. This Perspective evaluates the FDA approvals of therapeutic agents for use in solid tumour oncology for the period 2017-2021 against the aspirations of the Cancer Moonshot. In the past 5 years, the FDA issued an unprecedented 161 new approvals of therapeutic agents for various indications in adult patients with solid tumours. However, less than a third (27%) of the newly approved medicines are supported by unequivocal evidence of an overall survival benefit; most are supported by positive signals from surrogate end points. Herein, the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 was used to evaluate the clinical value of the therapies granted FDA approval during the period 2017-2021. The results of this appraisal indicate a low level of clinical benefit for a substantial proportion (~20%) of the new indications, with most (~44%) providing intermediate benefit. The data suggest that, beyond increases in the sheer quantity of approvals, considerable improvement in the quality of the approved treatments is required to more confidently ensure that the clinical benefits are real and substantial enough to clearly justify the risks to patients.

Phase I/II multicenter trial of a novel therapeutic cancer vaccine, HepaVac-101, for hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE

Immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) shows considerable promise in improving clinical outcomes. HepaVac-101 represents a single-arm, first-in-man Phase I/II multicenter cancer vaccine trial for HCC (NCT03203005). It combines multi-peptide antigens (IMA970A) with the TLR7/8/RIG I agonist CV8102. IMA970A includes 5 HLA-A*24 and 7 HLA-A*02 as well as 4 HLA-DR restricted peptides selected after mass spectrometric identification in human HCC tissues or cell lines. CV8102 is an RNA-based immunostimulator inducing a balanced Th1/Th2 immune response.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

82 patients with very early to intermediate stage HCCs were enrolled and screened for suitable HLA haplotypes and 22 put on study treatment. This consisted in a single infusion of low-dose cyclophosphamide followed by 9 intradermal coadministrations of IMA970A and CV8102. Only patients with no disease relapse after standard of care treatments were vaccinated. Primary endpoints of HepaVac-101 clinical trial were safety, tolerability and antigen-specific T-cell responses. Secondary or exploratory endpoints included additional immunological parameters and survival endpoints.

RESULTS

The vaccination showed a good safety profile. Transient mild-to-moderate injection-site reactions were the most frequent IMA970A/CV8102-related side effects. Immune responses against {greater than or equal to}1 vaccinated HLA class I tumor-associated peptide (TAA) and {greater than or equal to}1 vaccinated HLA class II TAA were respectively induced in 37% and 53% of the vaccinees.

CONCLUSION

Immunotherapy may provide a great improvement in treatment options for HCC. HepaVac-101 is a first-in-man clinical vaccine trial with multiple novel HLA class I- and class II-restricted TAAs against HCC. The results are initial evidence for safety and immunogenicity of the vaccine. Further clinical evaluations are warranted.

Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multiple new tyrosine kinase inhibitors, immunotherapies and anti-angiogenic therapies are now available for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this article, we reviewed the evidence supporting these new therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab has become a new standard of care for initial systemic therapy in eligible patients, replacing sorafenib in the first line for many patients. Lenvatinib, a multikinase inhibitor, is also a new first line treatment option for patients who are not eligible for immunotherapy. Several additional options for second line treatment were also reviewed in detail in this paper. New systemic therapies for advanced HCC have prolonged overall survival. However, these new therapies are primarily approved for patients with Child-Pugh A classification with few options for patients with Child-Pugh B disease. Further work is needed to expand options for patients with more advanced liver disease and to optimize the sequencing of these new therapies.

Sorafenib Versus Lenvatinib-Based Sequential Systemic Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Real-World Analysis

The optimal treatment sequence of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-based therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. Therefore, sequential systemic therapy after first-line therapy with sorafenib or lenvatinib was compared in a retrospective real-world cohort. In total, 164 patients with HCC were included. Child B cirrhosis was present in 26 patients (16.5%), whereas 132 patients (83.5%) had preserved liver function. In total, 72 patients (44%) discontinued systemic therapy after first-line therapy while 51 (31%) and 31 (19%) patients received 2 or more treatment lines. Most notably, median overall survival (mOS) was influenced by liver functional status and patient performance status at the beginning of first-line therapy. Patients receiving a sequential therapy regimen had significantly longer mOS compared to patients that discontinued systemic therapy after omitting first-line treatment. The choice of the initial TKI did not impact mOS. A clear deterioration of liver function could be observed during the course of TKI-based treatment.

Frontline therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: an update

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fastest increasing cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States and is projected to be the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States by 2030. Main risk factors include alcoholic cirrhosis, chronic hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). More than half of the patients have advanced-stage disease at presentation. Currently approved frontline systemic therapy options include sorafenib, lenvatinib, and atezolizumab/bevacizumab. Over the past decade, there has been a significant improvement in survival with a median overall survival of 19.2 months reported with first-line treatment with atezolizumab/bevacizumab. Based on positive results of randomized phase III HIMALAYA trial, durvalumab and tremelimumab combination could become another frontline option. Multiple frontline clinical trials with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) or ICI combined with other novel agents are underway. In the frontline setting, identifying predictive biomarkers for ICI-based or tyrosine kinase (TKI)-based therapy is an unmet need. Subsequent treatment is poorly defined in patients with prior ICI-based therapy since all the available second-line and beyond therapy was studied after first-line sorafenib. Frontline systemic therapy is poorly defined in certain subgroups of HCC such as Child-Pugh B and post-transplant recurrent HCC. The landscape of frontline HCC treatment is rapidly changing, and this article reviews the most recent treatment approaches to frontline therapy for advanced HCC.

Outcomes and Toxicities of Modern Combined Modality Therapy with Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Radiation Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has become frontline therapy for unresectable HCC. The compatibility of atezolizumab/bevacizumab with liver-directed RT has not been reported. Methods: HCC patients treated with liver-directed RT and atezolizumab/bevacizumab between 1/2020−11/2021 were included. Toxicity and outcomes were retrospectively recorded. For ALCs, we matched the analysis to a previously cohort of RT-treated HCC patients who did not receive atezolizumab/bevacizumab. Survival and time-to-liver-failure were analyzed using Kaplan−Meier. Results: Of 21 patients, with a median follow-up of 9.5 months, the median OS was 16.1 months. Post-RT, all patients had reduced tumors or treatment response. There were no ≥Grade 3 RT-related toxicities. Autoimmune complications occurred in two patients (9.5%), and GI bleeding in three patients (14.3%). Liver function remained stable post-RT. There was a marked decrease in ALCs immediately post-RT (post-RT/pre-RT ratio 47.3%, p < 0.0001), restored by 1 month to pre-treatment baseline (1-month post-RT/pre-RT ratio 95.1%, n.s.). Compared to HCC patients treated with RT alone, post-RT ALC recovery was faster with atezolizumab/bevacizumab (p = 0.009). Conclusion: In this first reported experience of RT with modern systemic therapy for HCC, combination therapy is safe and well-tolerated. As a favorable prognosticator, there appears to be faster recovery of ALC among patients who received RT with atezolizumab/bevacizumab.

Is hepatocellular carcinoma complicated with portal vein tumor thrombosis potentially curable by radiotherapy in the form of stereotactic body radiation therapy?

PURPOSE

The prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) is dismal. Despite best treatment and care, the patients with this malignancy only showed 2.7-4 months of overall survival. It is debatable whether liver transplantation helps PVTT sufferers. The effectiveness of radiation therapy in treating HCC patients with PVTT should not be undervalued. By limiting the high dosage region to a small planning target volume, stereotactic radiation delivery has shifted toward hypofractionation, limiting the radiation exposure to healthy organs and tissues. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has a local control rate of 75-100%, depending on the treatment. The major limitation in SBRT for hepatocellular carcinoma with PVTT is the paucity of prospective evidence for longer periods beyond the first two years after treatment. More prospective studies/randomized clinical trials with a longer follow-up, larger sample size, and adequate statistical power are the dire need of the present situation to ascertain the curative effect of SBRT as primary therapy for advanced HCC with PVTT.

CONCLUSION

SBRT can improve survival, particularly for patients receiving multidisciplinary treatment. This review sums up our most current understanding of how radiation therapy, notably SBRT, can be used to treat hepatocellular carcinoma when combined with PVTT. Recent research has led us to believe that irradiation in the form of SBRT may cure hepatocellular carcinoma complicated by PVTT.

Atezolizumab and bevacizumab with transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma: the DEMAND trial protocol

The combination of the anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab and the anti-VEGF bevacizumab is the first approved immunotherapeutic regimen for first-line therapy in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), currently approved in more than 80 countries. The efficacy and tolerability of this regimen suggest that the use of atezolizumab + bevacizumab could be extended to the treatment of patients with intermediate-stage HCC in combination with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). The authors describe the rationale and design of the DEMAND study. This investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized phase II study is the first trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab + bevacizumab prior to or in combination with TACE in patients with intermediate-stage HCC. The primary end point is the 24-month survival rate; secondary end points include objective response rate, progression-free survival, safety and quality of life. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04224636 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Molecular pathogenesis and systemic therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains one of the most prevalent and deadliest cancers. The poor outcome associated with HCC is dramatically changing due to the advent of effective systemic therapies. Here we discuss the molecular pathogenesis of HCC, molecular classes and determinants of heterogeneity. In addition, effective single-agent and combination systemic therapies involving immunotherapies as standard of care are analyzed. Finally, we propose a flowchart of sequential therapies, explore mechanisms of resistance and address the need for predictive biomarkers.

Which role for predictors of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma?

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a frequently diagnosed malignancy worldwide, still representing an important cause of cancer-related death. Recent years have seen the emergence of novel systemic treatments for HCC patients, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Nonetheless, several questions regarding HCC immunotherapy remain unanswered, especially in terms of biochemical predictors of response.

AREAS COVERED

In the current paper, we will discuss available evidence regarding predictive biomarkers of response to HCC immunotherapy. A literature search was conducted in January 2022 of Pubmed/Medline, Cochrane library, and Scopus databases.

EXPERT OPINION

The identification of predictive biomarkers represents an unmet need in HCC patients receiving ICIs. The HCC medical community is called to further efforts aimed to elucidate the effective role of PD-L1 expression, TMB, MSI, gut microbiota, and other emerging biomarkers.

Rapidly Evolving Landscape and Future Horizons in Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Era of Immuno-Oncology

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a serious global health problem as one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Systemic therapy for advanced HCC has progressed with the development of molecular targeted agents, however survival benefits remain modest. More recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have emerged and exhibited promising therapeutic benefits in a subset of patients. Physiologically, the intrinsic microenvironment in the liver is immunosuppressive, which represents a major obstacle for effective immune therapies in primary and secondary liver malignancies. For this reason, combination therapies that can overcome immune inhibitory mechanisms and enhance the immune response are a rationale approach for drug development in HCC. A recent example is the combination of the anti-PD-L1 antibody (atezolizumab) and anti-VEGF-A antibody (bevacizumab), which has shown significant improvement in survival as compared to standard of care in the first-line treatment for HCC. Other immunotherapy approaches including cancer vaccines and adoptive cell therapy are also under investigation. This review summarizes the key trials leading to our current HCC treatment options and provides an overview of future immune-based strategies in development.

Immunotherapy and Transarterial therapy of HCC: What the interventional radiologist needs to know about the changing landscape of HCC treatment?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fourth most common cancer worldwide and its incidence is increasing in Australia. Transarterial therapy, predominantly transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) but increasingly transarterial radioembolization (TARE), plays an important role in patients with intermediate‐stage disease and preserved liver function. However, despite advances in TACE, TARE and adjunctive procedures, overall survival has only modestly increased over the last 20 years. Immunotherapy has emerged as a newer cancer treatment and uses antibodies directed at checkpoint inhibitors to upregulate T‐cell mediated tumour‐specific death. These drugs have been shown to increase survival in patients with HCC and have changed the landscape for advanced disease. Trials are now ongoing combining transarterial therapy and immunotherapy. This manuscript introduces these trials and interventional radiologists should be aware of the changing landscape so that they can partner with immunotherapy and remain relevant in the HCC multidisciplinary group as immunotherapy use increases.

Utilization of Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Peri-Transplant Setting: Transplant Oncology View

Simple Summary

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths and accounts for over eighty percent of primary liver cancers worldwide. Regarding the Milan Criteria, only a small portion of HCC patients are eligible for liver transplantation due to advanced-stage disease and large tumor size preventing/delaying organ allocation. Recently, the use of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1 and PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of cancers have evolved rapidly and these therapies have been approved for the treatment of HCC, however, the main concerns about organ rejection in liver transplant patients who will be treated with ICPIs are still the same in both pre-and post-transplant setting. To alleviate those concerns, more global collaborations to explore the safety and efficacy of ICPIs in both the pre-and post-organ transplantation settings are required. The decision to administer ICPI treatment in liver transplant patients should be made on a case-by-case basis according to the goal of care and the availability and efficacy of other treatment options.

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths and accounts for over eighty percent of primary liver cancers worldwide. Surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation in small tumors are included in the treatment options for HCC patients with good liver function profiles. According to the Milan Criteria, only a small portion of HCC patients are eligible for liver transplantation due to advanced-stage disease and large tumor size preventing/delaying organ allocation. Recently, the use of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1 and PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of cancers have evolved rapidly and these therapies have been approved for the treatment of HCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have resulted in good clinical outcomes in pre-and post-transplant HCC patients, although, some reports showed that certain recipients may face rejection and graft loss. In this review, we aim to illustrate and summarize the utilization of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies in pre-and post-liver transplants for HCC patients and discuss the assessment of immune checkpoint inhibitor regulators that might determine liver transplant outcomes.

Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab vs. Lenvatinib as First-Line Therapy for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Real-World, Multi-Center Study

Lenvatinib (LENV) and atezolizumab/bevacizumab (ATE/BEV) have been approved as first-line regimens for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare their clinical efficacy and safety. Patients receiving ATE/BEV (n = 86) or LENV (n = 146) as first-line treatment were recruited from three academic hospitals in Korea. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and radiological response were assessed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Clinical features of the two groups were balanced through propensity score (PS) matching with a 1:1 ratio and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses. The median age was 62 years, with male predominance (83.6%). There was no significant difference in the objective response rate between the ATE/BEV and LENV groups (32.6% vs. 31.5%; p = 0.868). Neither median OS (not reached vs. 12.8 months; p = 0.357) nor PFS (5.7 vs. 6.0 months; p = 0.738) was different between ATE/BEV and LENV groups. PS-matched and IPTW analyses yielded comparable results in terms of OS and PFS (all p > 0.05). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in 42.8% and 21.9% of patients in the ATE/BEV and LENV groups, respectively (p = 0.141). The two first-line therapy regimens for unresectable HCC had comparable clinical efficacy and safety in real-world practice settings. Further studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to validate these results.

Efficacy and Safety of Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab in the Real-World Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Experience from Four Tertiary Centers

The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (A + B) is the new standard of care for the systemic first-line treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, up to now there are only few data on the safety and efficacy of A + B in real life. We included patients with advanced HCC treated with A + B as first-line therapy at four cancer centers in Germany and Austria between December 2018 and August 2021. Demographics, overall survival (OS), and adverse events were assessed until 15 September 2021. We included 66 patients. Most patients had compensated cirrhosis (n = 34; 52%), while Child-Pugh class B cirrhosis was observed in 23 patients (35%), and class C cirrhosis in 5 patients (8%). The best responses included a complete response (CR) in 7 patients (11%), a partial response (PR) in 12 patients (18%), stable disease (SD) in 22 patients (33%), and progressive disease in 11 patients (17%). The median progression-free (PFS) survival was 6.5 months, while the median overall survival (OS) was not reached in this cohort (6-month OS: 69%, 12-month OS: 60%, 18-month OS: 58%). Patients with viral hepatitis seemed to have a better prognosis than patients with HCC of non-viral etiology. The real-world PFS and OS were comparable to those of the pivotal IMBRAVE trial, despite including patients with worse liver function in this study. We conclude that A + B is also highly effective in a real-life setting, with manageable toxicity, especially in patients with compensated liver disease. In patients with compromised liver function (Child B and C), the treatment showed low efficacy and, therefore, it should be well considered before administration to these patients.

Transarterial chemoembolization combined with camrelizumab for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with camrelizumab (hereafter, TACE-camrelizumab) in the treatment of patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (R-HCC) after curative resection.

Patients and methods

R-HCC patients who underwent TACE plus camrelizumab or TACE-alone from January 2016 to August 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were assessed for tumor response, progression-free survival, survival rates and adverse events.

Results

Seventy-one patients were included in this study, including 20 patients in the TACE- camrelizumab group and 51 patients in the TACE-alone group. The objective response rate was 56.9% in the TACE-alone group and 40% in the TACE-camrelizumab group at 3 months (P = 0.201). The disease control rates were 84.3% in TACE-alone group and 80% in TACE-camrelizumab group at 3 months (P = 0.663). The progression-free survival (PFS) of the TACE-alone group was slightly longer than those of the TACE- camrelizumab group (9 months vs. 6 months). However, there were no statistically significant differences in the median PFS (P = 0.586). Similarly, there were no significant differences in the half-year and one-year survival rates (P = 0.304, P = 0.430). Multivariate analysis revealed that Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was associated with PFS significantly. 75% patients developed at least one type of AEs related to camrelizumab in TACE-camrelizumab group, and no patients developed severe AEs.

Conclusion

Comparing with TACE-Alone, the efficacy of TACE-camrelizumab for patients with R-HCC was similar. Meanwhile, the results of this study also indicated that TACE is still a better choice for patients with R-HCC.

Safety and Efficacy of Sorafenib and Lenvatinib in Patients Who Underwent Surgery or Whole-Brain Radiotherapy for Brain Metastasis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Surgery or whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for the management of brain metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is associated with improved survival. However, the efficacy of multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and possible bleeding complications have not been studied in these patients. Therefore, this study aimed at investigating TKI safety and efficacy in these patients. We retrospectively reviewed 39 patients who underwent surgery or WBRT for brain metastasis of HCC. Intracranial tumor bleeding rates were compared between patients who did and did not receive TKIs. Survival outcomes were analyzed using the log-rank and Cox regression tests. A total of 22 and 7 patients received sorafenib and lenvatinib, respectively. The intracranial tumor bleeding rates were 61.5% and 70% in patients who did and did not receive TKIs, respectively (p > 0.99). Survival analysis revealed craniotomy (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 0.45, p = 0.04), a higher Karnofsky Performance Score (AOR: 0.97, p < 0.01), and TKI use (AOR: 0.26, p < 0.01) were positive prognostic factors for overall survival. TKIs were associated with better survival outcomes in patients who underwent surgery or WBRT for brain metastasis of HCC and did not increase intracranial bleeding. Therefore, TKIs are efficacious and safe for treating brain metastasis of HCC.

Predictive biomarkers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer and fourth leading cause of cancer death. While drug discovery to improve disease survival was historically poor, there is now evidence of significant potential for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) in treatment of the disease, and indeed such drug approvals are beginning to emerge.

AREAS COVERED

HCC typically arises in the context of cirrhosis and chronic liver disease (CLD), and HCC exhibits significant biological heterogeneity, in part reflecting the broad range of aetiologies of CLD. Different classes and combinations of ICPI-based therapy exist, but not all patients will respond and predictive biomarkers are not yet available to guide clinician decision making, unlike some other cancer types. In this review, we discuss the emerging biomarkers for ICPI sensitivity in HCC, including tumour genomic features, perturbation of the gut microbiome and systemic inflammatory markers.

EXPERT OPINION

Additional profiling studies are required to appreciate existing trends with clinical outcome and to further drive clinical studies in disease stratification by response. This will only be possible within collaborative and international efforts, especially regarding biopsy collection. A close collaboration between basic scientists and clinicians will be the key to shape the next future of HCC biomarker research.

Systemic Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Updates and Outlook

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has emerged the culprit of cancer-related mortality worldwide with its dismal prognosis climbing. In recent years, ground-breaking progress has been made in systemic therapy for HCC. Targeted therapy based on specific signaling molecules, including sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab, has been widely used for advanced HCC (aHCC). Immunotherapies such as pembrolizumab and nivolumab greatly improve the survival of aHCC patients. More recently, synergistic combination therapy has boosted first-line (atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab) and second-line (ipilimumab in combination with nivolumab) therapeutic modalities for aHCC. This review aims to summarize recent updates of systemic therapy relying on the biological mechanisms of HCC, particularly highlighting the approved agents for aHCC. Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy, as well as a combination with locoregional therapies (LRTs), are also discussed. Additionally, we describe the promising effect of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) as systemic therapy on HCC. In this setting, the challenges and future directions of systemic therapy for HCC are also explored.

Immunotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver cancer, more specifically hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is the second leading cause of cancer-related death and its incidence is increasing globally. Around 50% of patients with HCC receive systemic therapies, traditionally sorafenib or lenvatinib in the first line and regorafenib, cabozantinib or ramucirumab in the second line. In the past 5 years, immune-checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the management of HCC. The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab has been shown to improve overall survival relative to sorafenib, resulting in FDA approval of this regimen. More recently, durvalumab plus tremelimumab yielded superior overall survival versus sorafenib and atezolizumab plus cabozantinib yielded superior progression-free survival. In addition, pembrolizumab monotherapy and the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab have received FDA Accelerated Approval in the second-line setting based on early efficacy data. Despite these major advances, the molecular underpinnings governing immune responses and evasion remain unclear. The immune microenvironment has crucial roles in the development and progression of HCC and distinct aetiology-dependent immune features have been defined. Inflamed and non-inflamed classes of HCC and genomic signatures have been associated with response to immune-checkpoint inhibitors, yet no validated biomarker is available to guide clinical decision-making. This Review provides information on the immune microenvironments underlying the response or resistance of HCC to immunotherapies. In addition, current evidence from phase III trials on the efficacy, immune-related adverse events and aetiology-dependent mechanisms of response are described. Finally, we discuss emerging trials assessing immunotherapies across all stages of HCC that might change the management of this disease in the near future.

Systematic literature review of trials assessing recommended systemic treatments in hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

To identify and evaluate the similarity of all trials assessing recommended treatments for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Single arm and randomized trials from any phase and published any time up to February 2021 were systematically searched.

RESULTS

From 5677 records reviewed, 50 trials were included in the review, and 24 for assessed for similarity. In the first-line (1L) setting, several trials assessing sorafenib were noted for enrolling patients with more severe disease and/or performance status than other 1L trials; trials within the second-line (2L) setting were generally similar. Median survival was <2 years in all trial arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Trials assessing recommended treatments are largely similar and appropriate for quantitative comparisons of several efficacy and safety outcomes.

Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined With Lenvatinib Plus PD-1 Inhibitor for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with lenvatinib plus PD-1 inhibitor (TACE-L-P) versus TACE combined with lenvatinib (TACE-L) for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of advanced HCC patients treated with TACE-L-P (TACE-L-P group) or TACE-L (TACE-L group) from January 2019 to December 2020 were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. The differences in overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), tumor responses (based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) and adverse events (AEs) were compared between the two groups. Potential factors affecting OS and PFS were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 81 patients were included in this study. Among them, 41 received TACE-L-P and 40 received TACE-L. The patients in TACE-L-P group had prolonged OS (median, 16.9 vs. 12.1 months, P=0.009), longer PFS (median, 7.3 vs. 4.0 months, P=0.002) and higher objective response rate (56.1% vs. 32.5%, P=0.033) and disease control rate (85.4% vs. 62.5%, P=0.019) than those in TACE-L group. Multivariate analyses revealed that the treatment option of TACE-L, main portal vein invasion and extrahepatic metastasis were the independent risk factors for OS, while TACE-L and extrahepatic metastasis were the independent risk factors for PFS. In subgroup analyses, a superior survival benefit was achieved with TACE-L-P in patients with extrahepatic metastasis or tumor number >3 but not in those with main portal vein invasion. The incidence and severity of AEs in TACE-L-P group were comparable to those in TACE-L group (any grade, 92.7% vs. 95.0%, P=1.000; grade 3, 36.6% vs. 32.5%, P=0.699).

CONCLUSION

TACE-L-P significantly improved survival over TACE-L with an acceptable safety profile in advanced HCC patients, especially those with extrahepatic metastasis or tumor number >3 but without main portal vein invasion.