Four-year overall survival update from the phase III HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Combination of radiotherapy and ICIs in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review of current evidence and future prospects (Review)

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a global health concern because of its rising prevalence and high fatality rates. Conventional treatments for advanced HCC (aHCC) have limited success, emphasizing the need for novel treatment options. Radiotherapy (RT) treatments, such as stereotactic body radiation and proton therapy, improve local tumor management via precision targeting. Moreover, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) that target the programmed cell death protein 1(PD-1)/PD ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) pathways have promise for systemic antitumor effectiveness. The combination of RT and ICIs takes advantage of their complementary mechanisms: RT kills immunogenic cells and controls the tumor microenvironment to increase antigen presentation, whereas ICIs enhance and maintain antitumor immune responses. This combination enhances tumor regression and immune response in aHCC, improving response rate and progression-free survival with manageable safety. The present review aimed to summarize the rationale for combining RT + ICIs in patients with aHCC and clinical outcomes, as well as ways to enhance this combination technique. The combination of these models is a promising technique for improving outcomes for patients with aHCC and warrants further investigation.

Outcome and management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who achieved a complete response to immunotherapy-based systemic therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The outcome of patients with HCC who achieved complete response (CR) to immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based systemic therapies is unclear.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Retrospective study of patients with HCC who had CR according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (CR-mRECIST) to ICI-based systemic therapies from 28 centers in Asia, Europe, and the United States. Of 3933 patients with HCC treated with ICI-based noncurative systemic therapies, 174 (4.4%) achieved CR-mRECIST, and 97 (2.5%) had CR according to RECISTv1.1 (CR-RECISTv1.1) as well. The mean age of the total cohort (male, 85%; Barcelona-Clinic Liver Cancer-C, 70%) was 65.9±9.8 years. The majority (83%) received ICI-based combination therapies. Median follow-up was 32.2 (95% CI: 29.9-34.4) months. One- and 3-year overall survival rates were 98% and 86%. One- and 3-year recurrence-free survival rates were excellent in patients with CR-mRECIST-only and CR-RECISTv1.1 (78% and 55%; 70% and 42%). Among patients who discontinued ICIs for reasons other than recurrence, those who received immunotherapy for ≥6 months after the first mRECIST CR had a longer recurrence-free survival than those who discontinued immunotherapy earlier ( p =0.008). Of 9 patients who underwent curative surgical conversion therapy, 8 (89%) had pathological CR (CR-RECISTv1.1, n= 2/2; CR-mRECIST-only, n= 6/7).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall survival and recurrence-free survival of patients with CR-mRECIST-only and CR-RECISTv1.1 were excellent, and 6 of 7 patients with CR-mRECIST-only who underwent surgical conversion therapy had pathological CR. Despite potential limitations, these findings support the use of mRECIST in the context of immunotherapy for clinical decision-making. When considering ICI discontinuation, treatment for at least 6 months beyond CR seems advisable.

Immunosenescence and immunotherapy in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver cancer, more specifically hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is a global health issue and one of the dominant causes of cancer death around the world. In the past few decades, remarkable advances have been achieved in the systemic therapy of HCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become a therapy mainstay for advanced HCC and have shown promise in the neoadjuvant therapy before resection. Despite these significant advancements, the compositions and functions of the immune system occur various alterations with age, called "immunosenescence", which may affect the antitumor effects and safety of ICIs, thus raising concerns that immunosenescence may impair elderly patients' response to ICIs. Therefore, it is important to learn more about the immunosenescence characteristics of elderly patients. However, the real-world elderly HCC patients may be not accurately represented by the elderly patients included in the clinical trials, affecting the generalizability of the efficacy and safety profiles from the clinical trials to the real-world elderly patients. This review summarizes the characteristics of immunosenescence and its influence on HCC progression and immunotherapy efficacy as well as provides the latest progress in ICIs available for HCC and discusses their treatment efficacy and safety on elderly patients. In the future, more studies are needed to clarify the mechanisms of immunosenescence in HCC, and to find sensitive screening tools or biomarkers to identify the patients who may benefit from ICIs.

Anlotinib plus penpulimab versus sorafenib in the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (APOLLO): a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy combinations have revolutionised the therapeutic landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but not all yield a significant overall survival benefit, underscoring the need for novel effective agents. Anlotinib plus penpulimab has demonstrated encouraging activity and safety in a phase 2 study. In this phase 3 trial, we aimed to assess whether the combination of anlotinib plus penpulimab improved survival versus sorafenib in patients with unresectable HCC.

METHODS

APOLLO was a multicentre, open-label, parallel-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial conducted at 79 centres in China. Patients aged 18-75 years with unresectable HCC, no previous systemic therapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (2:1) to anlotinib (10 mg orally once daily on days 1-14) plus penpulimab (200 mg intravenously on day 1), or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) every 3 weeks. Randomisation was done centrally using block randomisation with a fixed block size of 3 and stratified by the presence of macrovascular invasion or extrahepatic metastasis, α-fetoprotein concentration, and ECOG performance status. Sex (male or female) and ethnicity (Chinese or other) were self-reported. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival assessed by masked independent review committee and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had at least one recorded safety assessment. Final progression-free survival and second interim overall survival analyses are presented. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04344158, and follow-up is ongoing.

FINDINGS

From Aug 11, 2020, to June 20, 2023, 940 patients were screened for inclusion in the trial, 291 were excluded, and 649 were randomly assigned to an intervention (433 were assigned to the anlotinib plus penpulimab group and 216 were assigned to the sorafenib group. 551 (85%) of the 649 patients were male and 98 (15%) were female. All patients were Chinese with a median age of 57 years (IQR 50-65). For the final analysis of progression-free survival (June 5, 2023), 636 patients (424 patients in the anlotinib plus penpulimab group vs 212 patients in the sorafenib group) comprised the intention-to-treat population. For the second interim analysis of overall survival (Jan 29, 2024), 649 patients (433 vs 216) comprised the intention-to-treat population. Median follow-up was 6·2 months (IQR 5·5-7·5) for the anlotinib plus penpulimab group and 4·2 months (2·9-7·1) for the sorafenib group for final progression-free survival analysis, and 15·3 months (14·3-17·3) for the anlotinib plus penpulimab group and 14·5 months (11·5-17·0) for the sorafenib group for the second interim overall survival analysis. Median progression-free survival was significantly extended with anlotinib plus penpulimab versus sorafenib (6·9 months [95% CI 5·8-8·0] vs 2·8 months [2·7-4·1]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·52 [95% CI 0·41-0·66]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival was significantly prolonged with anlotinib plus penpulimab compared with sorafenib (16·5 months [95% CI 14·7-19·0] vs 13·2 months [9·7-16·9]; HR 0·69 [95% CI 0·55-0·87]; p=0·0014). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (75 [17%] patients in the anlotinib plus penpulimab group vs 22 [10%] in the sorafenib group) and decrease in platelet count (39 [9%] vs 13 [6%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 90 (21%) and 19 (9%) patients in the respective groups; treatment-related deaths occurred in one (<1%) patient in the anlotinib plus penpulimab group (upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage) and two (1%) patients in the sorafenib group (hepatic failure and death of unknown cause).

INTERPRETATION

Anlotinib plus penpulimab significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival versus sorafenib in unresectable HCC and might be a new first-line option. These findings require verification in other regions of the world.

FUNDING

Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group.

The present and the future of immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma and biliary tract cancers

Hepatobiliary malignancies encompass a spectrum of invasive carcinomas arising in the liver [hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), bile ducts [intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHC)] and the gallbladder. These malignancies represent a growing global health burden, with rising incidence and mortality rates and their overall prognosis remains poor because many patients present with advanced unresectable disease at diagnosis. In recent years, significant advancements in understanding HCC immunogenicity have reshaped the therapeutic scenario of advanced HCC with the immunotherapy revolutionizing the current HCC treatment landscape and patients' prognosis. Moreover, the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy has recently established a new standard of care first-line treatment for patients with biliary tract cancers (BTCs) who had historically few therapeutic options. Currently, immunotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based regimens stand as a valuable and practice-changing options in both HCC and BTC management. The mounting recent evidence supporting immunotherapy's survival benefit demands clinicians to stay updated with a rapidly evolving treatment landscape as well as gain knowledge about patient selection, response rate compared with other systemic treatments and immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) management. A panel of international Experts, comprising hepatologists and oncologists, gathered to explore the challenges in effectively integrating immunotherapy in routine clinical practice. The aim of this review is to present the Experts' insights to inform treatment choice in HCC and BTC with a special emphasis on the role of currently available ICI-based therapies in shifting treatment paradigms and potentially reversing the natural course of these two deadly malignancies.

Precision targeting of β-catenin induces tumor reprogramming and immunity in hepatocellular cancers

First-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations show responses in subsets of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. Nearly half of HCCs are Wnt-active with mutations in CTNNB1 (encoding for β-catenin), AXIN1/2, or APC, and demonstrate heterogeneous and limited benefit to ICI due to an immune excluded tumor microenvironment. We show significant tumor responses in multiple β-catenin-mutated immunocompetent HCC models to a novel siRNA encapsulated in lipid nanoparticle targeting CTNNB1 (LNP-CTNNB1). Both single-cell and spatial transcriptomics reveal cellular and zonal reprogramming, along with activation of immune regulatory transcription factors IRF2 and POU2F1, re-engaged type I/II interferon signaling, and alterations in both innate and adaptive immunity upon β-catenin suppression with LNP-CTNNB1 at early- and advanced-stage disease. Moreover, ICI enhances response to LNP-CTNNB1 in advanced-stage disease by preventing T cell exhaustion and through formation of lymphoid aggregates (LA). In fact, expression of an LA-like gene signature prognosticates survival for patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in the IMbrave150 phase III trial and inversely correlates with CTNNB1-mutatational status in this patient cohort. In conclusion, LNP-CTNNB1 is efficacious as monotherapy and in combination with ICI in CTNNB1-mutated HCCs through impacting tumor cell-intrinsic signaling and remodeling global immune surveillance, providing rationale for clinical investigations.

Gpr109A in TAMs promoted hepatocellular carcinoma via increasing PKA/PPARγ/MerTK/IL-10/TGFβ induced M2c polarization

To delineate Gpr109A's role and mechanisms in modulating the immune microenvironment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Employing Gpr109A-knockout mice and in vitro co-cultures of hepatocellular carcinoma cells with macrophages, this study utilized a suite of techniques, including lentiviral vectors for stable cell line establishment, Western blotting, cell scratch, CCK-8, transwell assays, flow cytometry, immunohistochemistry and phagocytosis assay to assess various cellular behaviors and interactions. Gpr109A deletion markedly reduced the oncogenic potential of H22 cells, both in vivo and when co-cultured with knockout macrophages, impairing their growth, invasion, and migration. In Gpr109A-knockout macrophages, an upregulation of MerTK and a reduction in immunosuppressive cytokine release were observed, indicating a shift towards an M2c macrophage phenotype. This shift is linked to Gpr109A's role in promoting protease overexpression and inhibiting SHP2 phosphorylation, crucial for enhancing cancer cell proliferation and invasiveness. Gpr109A significantly influences macrophage polarization to the M2c type, augmenting hepatocellular carcinoma cell aggressiveness.

A novel approach to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of durvalumab and tremelimumab combination therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of durvalumab + tremelimumab (Dur + Tre) in real-world clinical practice, characterize "stable disease (SD)," and identify SD responders (SD-R) who benefit from Dur + Tre treatment.

METHODS

This multicenter observational study included 212 patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC) treated with Dur + Tre between March 2023 and November 2024. The patients were categorized into 95 first-line and 117 later-line cases, respectively. Sequential cutoff points for depth of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were tested to identify subgroups with survival outcomes comparable to those of responders.

RESULTS

Disease control rate (DCR) and PFS were significantly better in the first-line setting for both response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) and modified RECIST (mRECIST) criteria. Patients who achieved PFS of ≥84 days or RECIST DOR of ≤-10% were classified as SD-R, as they had long-term survival outcomes similar to those with PR or CR. Furthermore, the CR + PR + SD-R group had significantly better survival outcomes than the other groups (p < 0.01), and multivariate analysis confirmed that SD-R was an independent prognostic factor with the strongest impact on survival outcomes (hazard ratio = 0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical practice, Dur + Tre is highly effective as a first-line treatment for u-HCC. Additionally, patients with SD who met the SD-R criteria (PFS ≥84 days or RECIST DOR ≤-10%) showed survival outcomes comparable to those of patients with PR or CR. These findings may help identify patients who are most likely to benefit from treatment and improve their prognoses.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib as first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 9DW): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma have a poor prognosis, and treatments with long-term benefits are needed. We report results from the preplanned interim analysis of the CheckMate 9DW trial assessing nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the first-line setting.

METHODS

This open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma without previous systemic therapy at 163 hospitals and cancer centres across 25 countries in Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, and South America. Patients had at least one measurable untreated lesion per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1, a Child-Pugh score of 5 or 6, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive response technology system to receive nivolumab (1 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) intravenously every 3 weeks for up to four doses, followed by nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks or investigator's choice of either oral lenvatinib (8 mg or 12 mg mg daily depending on bodyweight) or oral sorafenib (400 mg twice daily). Randomisation was stratified by aetiology; the presence of macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; and baseline alpha-fetoprotein concentration. The primary endpoint was overall survival, which was assessed in all randomly assigned patients; safety was an exploratory endpoint and was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04039607 (ongoing).

FINDINGS

Between Jan 6, 2020, and Nov 8, 2021, 668 patients were randomly assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=335) or lenvatinib or sorafenib (n=333). Early crossing of the overall survival Kaplan-Meier curves reflected a higher number of deaths during the first 6 months after randomisation with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (hazard ratio 1·65 [95% CI 1·12-2·43]) but was followed by a sustained separation of the curves thereafter in favour of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (0·61 [0·48-0·77]). After a median follow-up of 35·2 months (IQR 31·1-39·9), overall survival was significantly improved with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib (median 23·7 months [95% CI 18·8-29·4] vs 20·6 months [17·5-22·5]; hazard ratio 0·79 [0·65-0·96]; two-sided stratified log-rank p=0·018); respective overall survival rates were 49% (95% CI 44-55) versus 39% (34-45) at 24 months and 38% (32-43) versus 24% (19-30) at 36 months. Overall, 137 (41%) of 332 patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 138 (42%) of 325 patients receiving lenvatinib or sorafenib had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events. 12 deaths were attributed to treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and three were attributed to treatment with lenvatinib or sorafenib.

INTERPRETATION

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab showed a significant overall survival benefit versus lenvatinib or sorafenib and manageable safety in patients with previously untreated unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. These results support nivolumab plus ipilimumab as a first-line treatment in this setting.

FUNDING

Bristol Myers Squibb.

Advances in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: An overview of the current and evolving therapeutic landscape for clinicians

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Contemporary advances in systemic and locoregional therapies have led to changes in peer-reviewed guidelines regarding systemic therapy as well as the possibility of downstaging disease that may enable some patients with advanced disease to ultimately undergo partial hepatectomy or transplantation with curative intent. This review focuses on all modalities of therapy for HCC, guided by modern-day practice-changing randomized data where available. The surgical management of HCC, including resection and transplantation, both of which have evolving criteria for what is considered biologically resectable and transplantable, as well as locoregional therapy (i.e., therapeutic embolization, ablation, radiation, and hepatic arterial infusion), are discussed. Historical and modern-day practice-changing trials evaluating immunotherapy with targeted therapies for advanced disease, as well as adjuvant systemic therapy, are also summarized. In addition, this article examines the critical dimension of toxicities and patient-oriented considerations to ensure a comprehensive and balanced discourse on treatment implications.

Durvalumab plus chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer: 3-year overall survival update from the phase III TOPAZ-1 study

BACKGROUND

At the TOPAZ-1 (NCT03875235) primary analysis, durvalumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GemCis) significantly improved overall survival (OS) in advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC). We report updated exploratory analyses of OS and safety, characterisation of extended long-term survivors (eLTS), and subsequent anticancer therapy (SAT) use.

METHODS

Participants with aBTC received durvalumab+GemCis or placebo+GemCis every 3 weeks (≤8 cycles), then durvalumab or placebo monotherapy every 4 weeks until progressive disease or other discontinuation criteria were met. OS and serious adverse events (SAEs) were assessed in the full analysis and safety analysis sets (FAS/SAS), respectively. eLTS outcomes were assessed (FAS participants alive ≥30 months after randomisation).

RESULTS

685 participants were randomised: durvalumab+GemCis (n = 341); placebo+GemCis (n = 344). After a median 41.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 39.3-44.1) months' follow-up in all participants, median OS (95% CI) for durvalumab+GemCis versus placebo+GemCis was 12.9 (11.6-14.1) versus 11.3 (10.1-12.5) months (hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI 0.63-0.87]); 36-month OS rate was 14.6% versus 6.9%, respectively. In participants who achieved disease control (566/685; 82.6%), the 36-month OS rate was higher for durvalumab+GemCis (17.0%) versus placebo+GemCis (7.6%). Overall, 12.8% were eLTS, with more eLTS in the durvalumab+GemCis (17.0%) versus placebo+GemCis (8.7%) arms; eLTS included all clinically relevant subgroups. Durvalumab+GemCis improved OS regardless of SAT use. In eLTS, SAEs were comparable between arms and less frequent than in the full SAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival benefit and manageable safety continued with durvalumab+GemCis versus placebo+GemCis approximately 3 years after the last participant was randomised. All clinically relevant subgroups were represented in eLTS, supporting standard-of-care status for durvalumab+GemCis in aBTC.

LAY SUMMARY

The TOPAZ-1 study found that treatment with durvalumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (chemotherapy, also known as GemCis), helped people with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) to live longer on average than those treated with a placebo plus GemCis. The latest results from TOPAZ-1 showed that these benefits continued for over 3 years in participants treated with durvalumab plus GemCis and side effects continued to be manageable. At an updated analysis, carried out 3 years after the last participant started the study, twice as many participants treated with durvalumab plus GemCis were alive compared to those treated with placebo plus GemCis. Results also showed that the positive effect of durvalumab plus GemCis compared with placebo plus GemCis was not affected by the use of other therapies some participants received after they finished the study treatment. These results continue to support durvalumab plus GemCis as a standard first-line treatment for people with advanced BTC.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03875235; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03875235.

A pharmacovigilance analysis of post-marketing safety of durvalumab

Durvalumab has demonstrated significant efficacy in several types of malignancies, while large-scale real-world safety studies remain limited. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the safety of durvalumab through data mining of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). We extracted reports of durvalumab as the primary suspected drug from the FAERS database (January 2017 to June 2024). Four disproportionality analysis algorithms were used to detect signals between durvalumab and adverse events (AEs). Durvalumab was recorded in 10,120 reports as the primary suspected drug. Of these, 43.6% of AEs occurred during the first month of treatment, with a median onset time of 40 days (IQR: 14-99 ). Among 181 potential signals, 64 were unexpected preferred terms not listed in the prescribing information, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS), pulmonary tuberculosis, radiation esophagitis, oesophageal fistula, oesophageal perforation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, cerebral infarction, biliary tract infection, cholecystitis, psoriasiform dermatitis, portal vein thrombosis, acute cholangitis and pericarditis malignant. Serious adverse events accounted for 93.3% of cases. Males exhibited a significantly higher risk of experiencing serious outcomes compared to females (OR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.52-2.19, P < 0.001). Older age groups demonstrated an elevated risk of severe outcomes relative to those under 65 years (65-74 years: OR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.15-2.00, P = 0.003; ≥75 years: OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.02-1.92, P = 0.038). This study comprehensively assessed the safety of durvalumab and discovered potential new adverse event signals, which may provide critical support for risk identification and monitoring of durvalumab.

The clinical implications of trial endpoints in immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Investigative work in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma is rapidly growing with the advent of immunotherapy. Nonetheless, trial endpoints and, more importantly, clinically meaningful endpoints need to be accurately chosen depending on the phase of trial and the patient population studied. We provide a scoping review focusing on trial endpoints on the use of immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

AREAS COVERED

We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for prospective phase II and III trials using immunotherapy, whether in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, bridging, downstaging, or palliative settings, while discussing the clinical implications of trial endpoints.

EXPERT OPINION

The field of immune oncology is rapidly progressing and has become the standard of care in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, the role of immunotherapy in the treatment of early and intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma is yet to be defined. Prospective trials for all stages of disease must strive for endpoints that are not only statistically significant but also clinically consequential. Whereas overall response rate may be a reasonable trial endpoint in phase II trials, phase III trials should rather aim for the improvement of overall survival or quality of life to have clinically meaningful impacts.

Multiomics analysis of immune correlatives in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with tremelimumab plus durvalumab

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. The combination of tremelimumab and durvalumab is now a standard treatment option for advanced HCC.

OBJECTIVE

To study immune responses in HCC patients treated with tremelimumab and durvalumab.

DESIGN

We treated 28 HCC patients with durvalumab, tremelimumab and locoregional therapies. We performed a high-dimensional multiomics analysis including whole exome sequencing, single-cell RNA seq, CO-Detection by indEXing, flow cytometry and multiplex cytokine/chemokine analysis of patients' blood and tumour samples and integrated this data to elucidate immune correlatives and response mechanisms. Mice with syngeneic HCC were treated with anti-PD-L1 plus anti-CTLA4 for hepatic lymphocytes, tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and peripheral blood mononuclear cell analysis.

RESULTS

The median overall survival was 19.2 months. Tumour tissue analysis revealed enhanced interferon responses, with stronger effects in responders. Gene set variation analysis indicated enhanced antigen presentation in responders. Spatial analysis revealed that non-responder tumours had higher numbers of Tregs located in neighbourhoods enriched with immune cells and expressed higher levels of ICOS and PD-1. Conversely, non-responder PD1+CD8+T in these Treg-enriched neighbourhoods expressed lower ICOS. Cell-communication analysis demonstrated that Treg-CD8+T interaction was enhanced in non-responder tissue. Peripheral blood analysis showed increased classical monocytes in responders and Tregs in non-responders. Treg-CD8+T interaction was confirmed in preclinical models. Finally, single-patient computational analysis from the all-across analysis was performed on 860 features, which led to the identification of multiomics feature sets including Treg features.

CONCLUSION

Our study provides a blueprint for in-depth analysis of immune correlates in immunotherapy studies and demonstrates the importance of Treg distribution in HCC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT02821754 and the EudraCT identifier: 2019-002767-98.

Patients with uHCC and Child-Pugh B8/9 also benefit from a combination of antiangiogenic agents and PD-1 inhibitors: a multicenter real-world study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) and Child-Pugh grade B face limited treatment options and poor outcomes. This study aims to evaluate whether the effect and safety of combining tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with progressive disease (PD)-1 inhibitors in uHCC patients with Child-Pugh B7 (CP7) and B8/9 (CP8/9) differ.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study included 179 uHCC patients with Child-Pugh B (CP7 group: n = 106; CP8/9 group: n = 73), receiving a combination of lenvatinib/sorafenib/other TKIs and PD-1 inhibitors between December 2020 and March 2023. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were defined as the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included the objective response rate (ORR) and safety.

RESULTS

The median PFS and OS for the entire cohort were 7.3 months (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 6.3-8.3) and 16.0 months (95% CI: 12.9-19.1), respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between CP7 and CP8/9 groups in PFS (7.8 vs. 6.3 months, p = 0.28), OS (17.8 vs. 14.0 months, p = 0.20), ORR (33.0% vs. 27.4%, p = 0.42), or safety profiles. However, the CP8/9 group had significantly higher rates of TKI dose reductions (46.6% vs. 31.1%, p = 0.04) and discontinuations (57.5% vs. 24.5%, p < 0.001). Notably, 30.2% of patients maintained sustained radiographic responses despite advanced liver dysfunction.

INTERPRETATION

Combining TKIs with PD-1 inhibitors is an effective and well-tolerated option for HCC patients with Child-Pugh B, including those with CP8/9.

Advances in Locoregional and Systemic Treatments for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Significant advances have occurred in the locoregional and systemic therapy landscape for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with the most notable being the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations. ICI combinations have significantly improved the overall survival of patients with unresectable HCC, affording median survival over 2 years and long-term survival exceeding 5 years in a subset of patients. Accordingly, there has been increased interest in the earlier application of systemic therapies, including (neo)adjuvant therapy in the perioperative setting or in combination with intra-arterial therapies. However, recent data failed to demonstrate improved recurrence-free survival with use of adjuvant ICI therapy. Conversely, 2 trials showed improved progression-free survival when ICI therapies were combined with transarterial chemoembolization, although data regarding the impact on overall survival are still immature. These improved outcomes raise several new questions, including which patients with liver-localized HCC should receive systemic therapy, how should this be sequenced or combined with other available therapies, and how to manage those patients with marked responses, including consideration of liver transplantation. These questions are often determined on a case-by-case basis and best made in a multidisciplinary manner considering several factors, including tumor burden, degree of liver dysfunction, performance status, and patient's long-term goals of care.

Clinical development of immuno-oncology therapeutics

Immuno-oncology (IO) is one of the fastest growing therapeutic areas within oncology. IO agents work indirectly via the host's adaptive and innate immune system to recognize and eradicate tumor cells. Despite checkpoint inhibitors being only introduced to the market since 2011, they have become the second most approved product category. Current Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved classes of IO agents include: immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T), bi-specific T-cell engager (BiTE) antibody therapy, T-cell receptor (TCR) engineered T cell therapy, tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy, cytokine therapy, cancer vaccine therapy, and oncolytic virus therapy. Cancer immunotherapy has made progress in multiple cancer types including melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and urothelial carcinoma; however, several cancers remain refractory to immunotherapy. Future directions of IO include exploration in the neoadjuvant/perioperative setting, combination strategies, and optimizing patient selection through improved biomarkers.

Systemic therapy plus HAIC versus systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) exhibits synergistic anticancer effects with systemic therapy in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The approach combining systemic therapy and HAIC is likely to establish a new survival benchmark for advanced HCC. However, related evidence is still lacking.

METHOD

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from January 1990 to July 2024. The extracted data were pooled using fixed- or random-effects models and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) or risk ratios (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-regression, subgroup analysis, prognostic factor analysis, correlation analysis, as well as trial sequential analysis were further conducted.

RESULT

Seventeen trials involving 3070 participants were included. Patients receiving HAIC combined systemic therapy displayed superior overall survival (OS) (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.48-0.58), progression-free survival (PFS) (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.46-0.63), objective response rate (ORR) (RR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.77-2.72) and disease control rate (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.14-1.29) over systemic therapy. Combining HAIC resulted in higher incidences of grade ≥3 manageable adverse events. Subgroup analyses showed that HAIC could bring significant survival improvement for almost all specific populations; however, patients without portal vein tumor thrombosis might not benefit from it (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53-1.03). Prognostic factor analyses found extra HAIC was a protective factor for both OS (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.34-0.51) and PFS (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36-0.53). Correlation analyses demonstrated a robust association between ORR and OS when applying systemic therapy with HAIC ( P -value = 0.031). In addition, trial sequential analyses visually showed the present data were compelling to draw reliable conclusions.

CONCLUSION

With manageable toxicity, integrating HAIC with systemic therapy could bring favorable survival benefits for HCC patients. Further evidence is necessary to standardize the integration of HAIC with first-line systemic therapy.

Hepatic Recompensation Before Systemic Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Yields Comparable Survival to Compensated Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The survival outcomes associated with hepatic recompensation in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with first-line systemic therapies remain unclear. We compared survival from the initiation of first-line systemic treatments for advanced HCC among patients with compensated, decompensated, and recompensated cirrhosis.

METHODS

A Latin American multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted from 2018 to 2024, involving patients with HCC and Child-Pugh class A or B who received systemic therapy. At the time of first-line therapy, patients with cirrhosis were categorised as compensated (never decompensated), decompensated, or recompensated. Cox proportional hazards models were estimated.

RESULTS

Among 306 patients receiving first-line systemic therapy (sorafenib: 60.5%, atezolizumab + bevacizumab: 29.7%, lenvatinib: 9.1%), 240 had cirrhosis, with 30.4% having a history of hepatic decompensation. Of these, 57.5% (95% CI 45.4%-69.0%) achieved hepatic recompensation over a median period of 12 months. At the time of first-line therapy, 69.6% were compensated, 17.5% recompensated, and 12.9% decompensated. Metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) was the most common underlying aetiology in the recompensated group. Median survival was significantly shorter in the decompensated group (8.6 months) compared to the compensated group (17.2 months) [aHR 1.91 (95% CI 1.04-3.5); p = 0.03], without a significant difference between the recompensated and compensated groups [aHR 1.28 (95% CI 0.79-2.1); p = 0.31]. Tumour progression was the primary reason for treatment discontinuation, and similar access to second-line therapies was observed between the compensated and recompensated groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with cirrhosis and advanced HCC who achieved hepatic recompensation might benefit from systemic therapies after a cautious observation period.

Evaluating two rechallenge strategies of immune checkpoint inhibitors: Durvalumab plus tremelimumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of durvalumab plus tremelimumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who have previously received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev). Additionally, it seeks to assess the feasibility of administering immunotherapy after the occurrence of immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed data from patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with durvalumab plus tremelimumab at four Japanese institutions. Clinical outcomes, adverse events, tumor dynamics, and serum cytokine and chemokine levels were evaluated, with a focus on efficacy following prior Atez/Bev treatment.

RESULTS

Durvalumab plus tremelimumab was administered to 68 patients. The objective response rate was 10.3%, and the disease control rate was 58.8%. Median progression-free survival was 3.1 months (95% confidence interval 2.0-4.9). imAEs occurred in 50.0% of patients, with colitis being the most common (22.1%). Durvalumab was safely readministered to 14 patients after imAE resolution, although five experienced recurrence. Among 33 patients (48.5%) previously treated with Atez/Bev, improved responses were noted, including two partial responses. Tumor growth dynamics decreased in 60.0% of patients receiving sequential therapy. Common adverse events included elevated liver enzymes (aspartate aminotransferase 50.0%, alanine aminotransferase 48.5%), pruritus (45.6%), and rash (44.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Durvalumab plus tremelimumab therapy is feasible with proper imAE management and patient selection. Sequential treatment following Atez/Bev offers clinical benefit in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, although some may experience rapid progression. Further biomarker research is needed to optimize immunotherapy strategies.

Role of Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common primary liver tumor and is strongly related to underlying liver cirrhosis. Common etiologies include viral hepatitis, elevated alcohol consumption and metabolic diseases, all of which result in liver inflammation and scarring. Previously, systemic therapies for locally advanced or metastatic disease were limited to tyrosine kinase inhibitors with poor efficacy and rare cures. Recent advances have harnessed the power of the immune system to combat disease, resulting in improved outcomes and occasional cures. Here, we describe the recent clinical trials in immunotherapies for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma as first- and second-line therapies and in combination with other drug classes.

Tremelimumab plus durvalumab versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis from the US payer perspective

OBJECTIVE

In a recently published 4-year overall survival (OS) update from the phase III clinical trial named HIMALAYA (NCT03298451), single tremelimumab plus regular interval durvalumab (a regimen termed STRIDE) demonstrated significantly improved OS compared with sorafenib in the first-line setting of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). Although dual immunotherapy represents a novel treatment option for uHCC, the economic implications of these high-priced drugs require further exploration. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of STRIDE in uHCC to inform first-line treatment decisions and help allocate medical resources most effectively.

DESIGN

Using a partitioned survival model, we conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing STRIDE to sorafenib in the first-line treatment of uHCC. Clinical information was gathered from the phase III HIMALAYA trial. Costs and health state utilities data were derived from previous literature. Uncertainty of the model was assessed through one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Total costs, life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental QALYs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

SETTING

US payer perspective.

PARTICIPANTS

393 participants in the STRIDE group and 389 participants in the sorafenib group who were diagnosed with uHCC and had no previous systemic treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

Single-dose tremelimumab plus monthly durvalumab (STRIDE) versus sorafenib.

RESULTS

Treatment with STRIDE provided an additional 0.51 QALYs at an incremental total cost of United States dollar ($)9812. The ICER of STRIDE was $19 239 per QALY compared with sorafenib, which falls below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses indicated that our results were robust to the variation ranges of key inputs.

CONCLUSION

In this economic evaluation comparing two first-line systemic therapies for uHCC patients, STRIDE was cost-effective compared with sorafenib from a US payer perspective. Our study is the first to demonstrate that immunotherapy can provide both survival benefits and economic viability in uHCC.

Cadonilimab, a PD-1/CTLA-4 bispecific antibody in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a real-world study

OBJECTIVE

This study retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of cadonilimab combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-eight patients who received cadonilimab + TKI were included; 42 and 36 received it as first-line (1 L) and second-line and above (≥ 2 L) systemic treatment, respectively. Besides, ninety-five patients who received PD-1 inhibitor + TKI as first-line treatments were included. Safety was the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR).

RESULTS

Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 84.6% of the patients, with grade ≥ 3 in 20.5%. In patients with a Child-Pugh score of ≥ 8 (CP ≥ 8), any grade TRAEs occurred in 88.2%, and grade ≥ 3 in 20.6%. The overall cohort's median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 3.6 months, whereas the median overall survival (mOS) was 8.8 months. In the 1 L group, mPFS was 6.7 months versus 2.3 months in ≥ 2 L. In the 1 L group, mOS was 13.7 months versus 3.2 months in ≥ 2 L. For CP < 8, 1 L mPFS was 7.6 months, mOS not reached; CP ≥ 8 had mPFS of 5.2 months, mOS of 5.6 months. For CP < 8 in ≥ 2 L, mPFS was 3.1 months, mOS 8.8 months; CP ≥ 8 had mPFS of 1.4 months, mOS of 2.2 months. After propensity score matching (PSM), the incidence of TRAEs of any grade was 77.1%, with grade ≥ 3 accounting for 17.1% in the PD-1 group. In the PD-1/CTLA-4 group, the incidence of TRAEs of any grade was 80.0%, and that of grade ≥ 3 TRAEs was 17.1%. The mPFS was 6.7 months in the PD-1/CTLA-4 group versus 3.3 months in the PD-1 group. The mOS was 13.7 months in the PD-1/CTLA-4 group versus 6.7 months in the PD-1 group.

CONCLUSION

Cadonilimab + TKI showed a favorable trend in safety and efficacy, especially when applied as first-line systemic therapy for uHCC. This study offers a clinical reference for its use in systemic uHCC therapy, particularly in patients with advanced liver dysfunction.

Targeting Metabolism: Innovative Therapies for MASLD Unveiled

The recent introduction of the term metabolic-dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) has highlighted the critical role of metabolism in the disease's pathophysiology. This innovative nomenclature signifies a shift from the previous designation of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), emphasizing the condition's progressive nature. Simultaneously, MASLD has become one of the most prevalent liver diseases worldwide, highlighting the urgent need for research to elucidate its etiology and develop effective treatment strategies. This review examines and delineates the revised definition of MASLD, exploring its epidemiology and the pathological changes occurring at various stages of the disease. Additionally, it identifies metabolically relevant targets within MASLD and provides a summary of the latest metabolically targeted drugs under development, including those in clinical and some preclinical stages. The review finishes with a look ahead to the future of targeted therapy for MASLD, with the goal of summarizing and providing fresh ideas and insights.

Five-year overall survival update from the HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable HCC

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In the phase III HIMALAYA study (NCT03298451), STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus sorafenib in unresectable HCC (uHCC) and demonstrated long-term survival benefits. We report an updated exploratory analysis of OS with 5 years of follow-up, including survival by multiple tumour response measures.

METHODS

Participants were randomised to STRIDE (tremelimumab plus durvalumab), durvalumab or sorafenib. OS, depth of response and serious adverse events (AEs) were assessed. Extended long-term survivors (eLTS; ≥48 months beyond randomisation) were described. Updated data cut-off: 01 March 2024.

RESULTS

Median (95% CI) follow-up durations were 62.49 (59.47-64.79) months (STRIDE) and 59.86 (58.32-61.54) months (sorafenib). The OS HR (95% CI) for STRIDE versus sorafenib was 0.76 (0.65-0.89). OS rates at 60 months for STRIDE versus sorafenib were 19.6% versus 9.4% overall, 28.7% versus 12.7% in participants achieving disease control per RECIST v1.1 and 50.7% versus 26.3% in participants achieving >25% tumour shrinkage. No late-onset treatment-related serious AEs were reported for STRIDE. There were more eLTS with STRIDE (83/393, 21.1%) than sorafenib (45/389, 11.6%), and extended long-term survival occurred across all clinically relevant subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

At 5 years, STRIDE sustained an OS benefit versus sorafenib and maintained a manageable safety profile. OS benefit with STRIDE was improved in participants with disease control. Data suggest that any degree of tumour shrinkage with STRIDE can be associated with improved OS, indicating that conventional response measures may not fully capture STRIDE benefits. Nevertheless, participants experiencing deep responses appear to have the greatest benefit. STRIDE continues to set new benchmarks in uHCC with 1 in 5 patients alive at 5 years.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

The phase III HIMALAYA study showed that STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) improved overall survival (OS) versus sorafenib in participants with unresectable HCC (uHCC), including after 4 years of follow-up. Understanding the efficacy and safety of STRIDE over the longer term is important for healthcare providers; here, we demonstrate that STRIDE sustained an OS benefit versus sorafenib and maintained a manageable safety profile after 5 years of follow-up. OS benefit with STRIDE was improved in participants with disease control and any degree of tumour shrinkage, indicating that conventional response measures may not fully capture the benefits of STRIDE. These findings are important as they set new benchmarks in uHCC and may help guide clinical decisions in the future.

Usefulness of the Early Increase of Peripheral Blood Lymphocyte Count in Predicting Clinical Outcomes for Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Durvalumab Plus Tremelimumab

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab (Dur/Tre) therapy is expected to have good therapeutic efficacy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the predictors of clinical response and prognosis have not been established. Here, we retrospectively investigated the predictors for therapeutic response and clinical prognosis of Dur/Tre therapy.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study, which included 30 patients, aimed to evaluate predictors of treatment efficacy of Dur/Tre therapy for advanced HCC. Factors associated with an objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) were examined. We especially focused on the initial change in peripheral lymphocyte count at 2 weeks after Dur/Tre introduction from baseline (Δlymphocyte).

RESULTS

Seventeen patients (56.7%) diagnosed with HCC BCLC stage C were enrolled. The median observational period was 11 months. The ORR and disease control rate (DCR) were 30.0% and 53.3%, respectively. The median PFS was 3.7 months and OS was not reached. The high Δlymphocyte was an independent predictor of objective response (hazard ratio [HR], 1.004; p = 0.016). The high Δlymphocyte (above +245/µL) was an independent predictive factor for better PFS (HR, 0.308; 95% CI, 0.095-0.998; p = 0.049), and the median PFS was significantly prolonged in the high Δlymphocyte (above +245/µL) compared to low Δlymphocyte (less than +245/µL) (not reached vs. 1.96 months, log-rank p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In Dur/Tre therapy, the early increase in peripheral blood lymphocyte count was useful for predicting clinical response and prognosis.

Immune microenvironment and immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: mechanisms and advances

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally. The tumor microenvironment (TME) plays a pivotal role in HCC progression, characterized by dynamic interactions between stromal components, immune cells, and tumor cells. Key immune players, including tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs), tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs), regulatory T cells (Tregs), MDSCs, dendritic cells (DCs), and natural killer (NK) cells, contribute to immune evasion and tumor progression. Recent advances in immunotherapy, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), cancer vaccines, adoptive cell therapy (ACT), and combination therapies, have shown promise in enhancing anti-tumor responses. Dual ICI combinations, ICIs with molecular targeted drugs, and integration with local treatments or radiotherapy have demonstrated improved outcomes in HCC patients. This review highlights the evolving understanding of the immune microenvironment and the therapeutic potential of immunotherapeutic strategies in HCC management.

New Scenarios in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Despite liver transplantation (LT) is considered the optimal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), particularly in patients with impaired liver function, the shortage of donors has forced the application of very restrictive criteria for selecting ideal candidates for whom LT can offer the best outcome. With the evolving LT landscape due to the advent of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) and the steady increase in donors, major efforts have been made to expand the transplant eligibility criteria for HCC. In addition, the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of HCC, with demonstrated efficacy in earlier stages, has revolutionized the therapeutic approach for these patients, and their integration in the setting of LT is challenging. Management of immunological compromise from ICIs, including the wash-out period before LT and post-LT immunosuppression adjustments, is crucial to balance the risk of graft rejection against HCC recurrence. Additionally, the effects of increased immunosuppression on non-hepatic complications must be understood to prevent them from becoming obstacles to long-term OS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this review, we will evaluate the emerging evidence and its implications for the future of LT in HCC. Addressing these novel challenges and opportunities, while integrating the current clinical evidence with predictive algorithms, would ensure a fair balance between individual patient needs and the overall population benefit in the LT system.

Clinical benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors in elderly cancer patients: Current evidence from immunosenescence pathophysiology to clinical trial results

The age-related decline in immunity appears to be associated not only with cancer development but also with differential responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Despite their increasing utility across various malignancies and therapeutic settings, limited data -derived primarily from subgroup analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), pooled meta-analyses, and retrospective studies- are available on the effects of aging on their efficacy and toxicity. Immunosenescence, characterized by the progressive decline of the function of the immune system, and inflammaging, a state of persistent low-grade sterile inflammation, may influence ICI outcomes. Additionally, the incidence, severity, and subtypes of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) may differ between older and younger individuals due to loss of immunotolerance. In the current review, starting from a a comprehensive discussion of the pathophysiology of immunosenescence, we proceed to critically review age-related retrospective and randomized evidence supporting FDA-approved ICIs. We highlight similarities or differences across age groups and the clinical benefit of ICIs in elderly versus younger cancer patients. The optimal integration of ICIs in geriatric oncology necessitates greater inclusion of this patient demographic in RCTs along with real-world data in order to acquire robust data which will guide evidence-based treatment decisions for this population.

What can real-world data teach us about treating patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma?

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a major global health concern, as it is the most common primary liver cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality.

AREAS COVERED

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly shifted the treatment paradigm, offering promising survival outcomes. However, the controlled conditions of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) often fail to reflect real-world complexities, emphasizing the necessity for strong real-world evidence (RWE). RWE, in most cases derived from observational studies, provides critical insights into the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of systemic therapies across diverse populations and settings. The authors searched MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Scopus for full-text published articles in any language from the inception to 30 June 2024.This review evaluates RWE on systemic therapies for advanced HCC, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) like sorafenib and lenvatinib, ICIs such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, and combination therapies like atezolizumab/bevacizumab and durvalumab/tremelimumab.

EXPERT OPINION

Studies reveal discrepancies in treatment efficacy and adverse event profiles between RCTs and routine clinical practice, underscoring the need for individualized treatment strategies. RWE highlights the influence of liver disease etiology, liver function, and tumor burden on treatment outcomes, guiding therapy selection.

Cancer-associated fibroblasts in hepatocellular carcinoma: heterogeneity, mechanisms and therapeutic targets

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the common malignant cancers worldwide. Although immunotherapy has improved the treatment outcome in HCC, a significant percentage of patients with advanced HCC still cannot benefit from immunotherapy. Therefore, developing new targets or combination therapeutic strategies to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy is urgently needed. A deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying immune regulation may help in this regard. The tumor microenvironment (TME) consists of a diverse set of components modulating the efficacy of immunotherapy. Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) are critical components of the TME and can regulate both tumor and immune cells through secreted cytokines and exosomes that impact various signaling pathways in target cells. CAF-derived cytokines can also participate in extracellular matrix (ECM) remodeling, thereby impacting cancer progression and tumor responsiveness to immunotherapy among other effects. A thorough understanding of the phenotypic and functional profile dynamism of CAFs may lead the way for new treatment strategies and/or better treatment outcomes in HCC patients. In this review, we outline the biomarkers and functional heterogeneity of CAFs in HCC and elaborate on molecular mechanisms of CAFs, including anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunotherapy. We also examine current clinical implications of CAFs-related targets as potential therapeutic candidates in HCC.

Breaking bottlenecks: the future of hepatocellular carcinoma clinical trials and therapeutic targets

BACKGROUND

To provide a reference for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) clinical trials, we analyzed HCC clinical trials and therapeutic targets.

METHODS

Using the Informa database, we analyzed the global and China HCC clinical trials. We then explored TACE, Apatinib, and emerging strategies (CAR T/NK). Additionally, we analyzed the oncogenic biomarkers and therapeutic targets. We conducted a joint analysis of therapeutic target safety using HPA-RNA, HPA-Proteins, and GTEx-RNA datasets. Finally, we analyzed the specificity and prospects of therapeutic targets using HPA pathology data and CPTAC data.

RESULTS

HCC clinical trials have developed rapidly over the past decade but have now reached a bottleneck, with most breakthroughs focusing on combination therapies. China and the USA dominate in the number of trials. TACE combined with systemic therapy has become an effective treatment strategy for intermediate to advanced HCC. Apatinib and TACE combined with systemic therapy are characteristic of China, while the latter is also mainly conducted in Japan and the USA. Currently, targeted immune therapies dominate the field, and CAR T/NK still in the early stages. Most therapeutic targets are related to the VEGF pathway, which indirectly confirms the predominant role of TKI-ICI combination therapy in HCC treatment. Most targets have low safety and poor specificity. However, RRM2, KDR, and AURKA have strong safety and specificity, showing excellent prospects for targeted HCC therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study analyzed and summarized the overview of HCC clinical trials and the safety and specificity of therapeutic targets, providing a reference for HCC clinical research.

Future perspectives on immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

In recent years, several global phase III trials have shown that combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) offer superior efficacy and survival compared to multi-kinase inhibitors, establishing them as the gold standard for treating patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This success has led to investigations into expanding the use of immunotherapy into various other settings and populations, including neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies, patients with decompensated liver function and those awaiting liver transplantation. Despite its proven efficacy, a significant number of patients still develop resistance to immunotherapy, highlighting the need for innovative strategies to address this challenge. Approaches aimed at enhancing tumour immunogenicity, such as combining immunotherapy with transarterial chemoembolization or radiation therapies, show significant promise. Additionally, novel immunotherapeutics - such as triplet therapy, bispecific antibodies, adoptive T-cell therapy and cancer vaccines - are in early development for HCC. These agents have demonstrated potential for synergistic effects with existing ICIs, with initial studies yielding positive outcomes. In this review, we offer our future perspective on immunotherapy, emphasizing emerging indications, novel combination strategies and the development of new immunotherapeutic agents. Overall, the future of immunotherapy in HCC is brimming with extraordinary potential, set to transform the treatment landscape and redefine the possibilities for managing this challenging disease.

Case Report: Successful immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge after sintilimab-induced Guillain-Barré syndrome

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment, while immune-related adverse events (IRAEs) pose significant challenges. We report a 60-year-old male with unresectable HCC who developed Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), a rare but severe neurologic complication, after three cycles of sintilimab plus bevacizumab biosimilar and conventional transarterial chemoembolization (c-TACE). The patient presented with progressive ascending weakness, reaching symmetric quadriparesis with proximal muscle strength of 2/5 in upper limbs and 1/5 in lower limbs. Following sintilimab discontinuation, treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (2 g/kg) and oral prednisone (30 mg/day) achieved complete neurological recovery within one month. Given the patient's favorable initial tumor response and strong request, immunotherapy was cautiously reinstated using tislelizumab after thorough clinical evaluation. Following four cycles of treatment, significant tumor response enabled successful conversion surgery with major pathological response (necrosis rate >70%). With 26-month survival and no evidence of recurrence, this case demonstrates the potential feasibility of ICI rechallenge with an alternative PD-1 inhibitor following sintilimab-induced GBS. Our experience suggests that ICI-related neurological adverse events may be drug-specific rather than class-specific, potentially providing valuable treatment options for patients showing favorable tumor response despite experiencing severe IRAEs, though larger studies are needed for validation.

Current impact in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: The challenge remains

Hepatocellular carcinoma remains a significant cause of mortality worldwide, particularly among patients with liver cirrhosis. In most cases, surveillance in cirrhotic patients is neglected, leading to a diagnosis when the neoplasm is at an advanced stage. Within this context, Zhou et al carried out a network meta-analysis to demonstrate the effectiveness of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy, concluding that it is a superior approach compared to sorafenib and transarterial chemoembolization in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Unfortunately, the meta-analysis in question lacks methodological rigor, preventing the authors from making more definitive assertions. Additionally, we understand that transarterial chemoembolization, when properly indicated, is a highly effective therapeutic option, and that sorafenib, given the results of new therapies based on immune checkpoint inhibitors, is no longer the recommended drug for the treatment of these patients. Therefore, we believe the use of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy is increasingly limited and lacks strong scientific support.

Neoadjuvant therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma-priming precision innovations to transform HCC treatment

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in prevalence globally, and cure remains limited with non-operative treatment. Surgical intervention, through resection or transplantation, offers a potential for cure for select patients. However, many patients present with advanced or unresectable disease, and recurrence rates remain high. Recent advances in systemic therapies, particularly immune checkpoint inhibitors, have demonstrated promise in treating unresectable HCC and as adjuvant therapy. Evidence from adjuvant trials highlights the synergistic potential of combined liver-directed and systemic therapies. These findings have ignited growing interest in neoadjuvant therapy across various scenarios: (1) as a bridging strategy while awaiting transplantation, (2) for downstaging disease to enable transplantation, (3) for converting unresectable disease to a resectable state, or (4) as neoadjuvant treatment in operable cases. Early-stage trials of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable HCC have reported promising outcomes. To realize the potential of neoadjuvant treatment for HCC, thoughtfully designed, adequately powered, multi-center clinical trials are essential.

Determining safe washout period for immune checkpoint inhibitors prior to liver transplantation: An international retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly used in patients with advanced HCC patients awaiting liver transplantation (LT). However, concerns about the risk of posttransplant rejection persist.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We conducted an international retrospective cohort study including 119 HCC patients who received ICIs prior to LT. We analyzed the incidence of allograft rejection, graft loss, and posttransplant recurrence with a particular focus on the washout period between the last ICI dose and LT. In this study, 24 of the 119 (20.2%) patients experienced allograft rejection with a median time to rejection of 9 days (IQR 6-10) post-LT. A linear relationship was observed between shorter washout periods and higher rejection risk. Washout periods <30 days (OR: 21.3, 95% CI: 5.93-103, p< 0.001) and between 30 and 50 days (OR: 9.48, 95% CI 2.47-46.8, p =0.002) were significantly associated with higher rejection rates in the univariate analysis compared to the washout period above 50 days. Graft loss as a result of rejection occurred in 6 patients (25%) with rejection. No factors related to grafts were associated with rejection. A longer washout period was not associated with a lower recurrence-free survival posttransplantation at 36 months (71% vs. 67%, p =0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that a washout period longer than 50 days for ICIs before LT appears to be safe with respect to rejection risk. While these results may help guide clinical decision-making, future prospective studies are essential to establish definitive guidelines.

Cost Effectiveness of Tremelimumab Plus Durvalumab for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the USA

BACKGROUND

Treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) is challenging. Clinical trials have shown that Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab (STRIDE) offers clinical benefits as a first-line treatment for uHCC, but its cost effectiveness remains unknown in the USA.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the cost effectiveness of STRIDE (tremelimumab plus durvalumab) versus sorafenib and durvalumab monotherapy as the first-line treatment for uHCC in the USA.

METHODS

A partitioned survival model was constructed to assess the cost effectiveness of STRIDE compared to sorafenib and durvalumab monotherapy as the first-line treatment for uHCC from the US societal perspective. The time horizon was 48 months with 1-month cycles. Seven parametric survival functions replicated survival curves from clinical trials, with the best-fitting model used to calculate survival probabilities. Costs, health utilities, and adverse events were included, with quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) as the primary effectiveness measure. Both costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3%. In the base-case analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was compared to a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the uncertainty of the model.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, STRIDE was cost effective compared to sorafenib, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $97,995.51 per QALY gained, based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. However, STRIDE was not cost effective compared to durvalumab monotherapy at the same threshold, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $754,408.92 per QALY gained. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were consistent with the base-case analysis. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that STRIDE was more likely to be cost effective than sorafenib and durvalumab monotherapy when the willingness-to-pay exceeded $101,000 and $713,000, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The STRIDE regimen appears to be cost effective compared to sorafenib but not compared to durvalumab for first-line uHCC treatment in the USA. However, durvalumab has not yet been approved for uHCC in the USA. Future research should focus on long-term data and economic evaluations of other recommended biologics.

Early CTLA4 increase in CD45+ blood cells: an emerging biomarker of atezolizumab-bevacizumab resistance and worse survival in advanced hepatocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a dismal prognosis; however, the introduction of atezolizumab-bevacizumab combination has improved overall survival and novel immune checkpoint inhibitors are entering the clinics. Despite more therapeutic options being available, no biomarker guides treatment choice. Indeed, tissue-based analyses and complex analytical procedures hinder clinical translation. We explored the informativeness of a simple, non-invasive, repeatable cytofluorimetric assay on peripheral blood to predict response and survival in HCC patients treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five cirrhotic patients, 50 HCC patients undergoing atezolizumab-bevacizumab and an independent validation cohort of 25 HCC patients were subjected to a cytofluorimetric study of peripheral white blood cells (WBCs) to assess baseline programmed death-ligand 1-positive (PD-L1+) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4-positive (CTLA4+) cell percentage in the different populations and their early on-treatment variations. Immunophenotypes were evaluated against treatment response. RNA sequencing followed by RT-PCR validation were used to elucidate the molecular correlates of immunophenotypic observations.

RESULTS

PD-L1+ cell percentage did not predict response either at baseline or when evaluating treatment-induced early changes. Conversely, the percentage of CTLA4+ lymphocytes at baseline showed a predictive significance (35.37 in responders versus 31.5 in non-responders, P = 0.03). More interestingly, the early CTLA4+ changes during treatment in lymphocytes (responders 0.95 versus non-responders 1.08, P = 0.05), monocytes (responders 0.95 versus non-responders 1.04, P = 0.03), granulocytes (responders 0.94 versus non-responders 1.14, P = 0.001) and, even stronger, the early CTLA4+ percentage change in the whole WBCs displayed a predictive significance in terms of time to progression (TTP) (P < 0.0001) and overall survival (OS) (P = 0.005). The immunophenotypic findings correlated with transcriptional modulation of CTLA4 target genes and genes involved in immune response.

CONCLUSIONS

A repeatable, easy, non-invasive blood test predicts response to immunotherapy in patients with HCC, both in terms of TTP and OS. CTLA4+ cell percentage increase in non-responders suggests a possible resistance mechanism which deserves attention as a druggable target.

Durvalumab and T-DXd Synergistically Promote Apoptosis of Cholangiocarcinoma Cells by Downregulating EGR1 Expression Through Inhibiting P38 MAPK Pathway

Cholangiocarcinoma is a hepatobiliary system tumor with a high mortality rate. Although durvalumab and trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) have shown efficacy in treating cancers such as non-small cell lung cancer, their effects and regulatory mechanisms in cholangiocarcinoma remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate the role and mechanism of durvalumab and T-DXd in inducing apoptosis in cholangiocarcinoma cells. Cholangiocarcinoma cells were treated with varying concentrations of durvalumab and T-DXd, either individually or in combination, to evaluate their effects. Apoptosis was quantified using flow cytometry. Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and Western blotting were used to measure the mRNA expression and protein levels of genes associated with apoptosis and cell cycle regulation. The underlying mechanism was further explored through pathway enrichment analysis of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and corroborated by qPCR and Western blotting. Xenotransplantation models using immune-deficient NOD-SCID/IL2Rγnull (NSG) mice were established to assess the in vivo effects of durvalumab and T-DXd. Our results showed that both durvalumab and T-DXd inhibited cholangiocarcinoma cell proliferation in a dose-dependent manner. Both agents promoted apoptosis and arrested the cell cycle of cholangiocarcinoma cells, with the combination treatment having the most significant effect. Furthermore, treatment with durvalumab, T-DXd, and the combination downregulated the protein levels of early growth response 1 (EGR1) by inactivating the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway. In vivo experiments indicated that durvalumab and T-DXd prolonged the survival of NSG mice bearing cholangiocarcinoma xenografts. In conclusion, our findings demonstrated that durvalumab and T-DXd synergistically promoted apoptosis in cholangiocarcinoma cells by inhibiting EGR1 expression through inactivation of the p38 MAPK pathway. This study confirmed the potential of durvalumab and T-DXd for the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma.

Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy: A resurgence

In this manuscript, we comment on the article by Zhou et al, who assessed the efficacy of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) and its combination strategies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using network meta-analysis methodology. We focus specifically on the potential advantages and role of HAIC in the treatment algorithm for advanced HCC. However, there remains numerous knowledge gaps before the role of HAIC can be established. There is significant heterogeneity of HAIC regimes with difficult interpretation of the clinical outcomes. Additionally, there is a lack of direct comparative data between HAIC, systemic chemotherapy, novel immunotherapies and targeted therapies. The underlying biochemical mechanisms that might explain the efficacy of HAIC and its effect on the HCC microenvironment requires further research. In the developing era of nanotechnology and targeted drug delivery systems, there is potential for integration of HAIC with novel technologies to effectively treat advanced HCC whilst minimising systemic complications.

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Expanding Cornerstone of Care in the Era of Immunotherapy

Liver transplantation (LT) has been accepted as a cornerstone of care in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for almost three decades. In recent years, its role has been evolving to include patients with disease burden beyond the widely used Milan criteria. The integration of dynamic biomarkers such as alpha-fetoprotein together with downstaging approaches and tumor evolution after enlistment has allowed the selection of patients most likely to benefit, resulting in 5-year survival rates greater that 70%. With the increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) across all stages of disease, alone or in combination with locoregional therapies, there is now the potential to further expand the patient population with HCC who may benefit from LT. This brings challenges, given the global shortage of organs and the need to better understand the optimal use of ICIs before transplantation. Furthermore, the field of transplant oncology awaits additional biomarkers that can predict those likely to benefit from ICIs. More than ever, a multidisciplinary approach for liver cancer management is critical to ensure all patients are considered for LT where appropriate, and do not miss the opportunity for long-term survival.

Advancing Immunotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer: A Brief Review of Emerging Adoptive Cell Therapies

Pancreatic cancer has the lowest 5-year survival rate (13%) among major cancers and is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. The high lethality of this cancer is attributed to its insidious onset, late-stage diagnosis, rapid progression, and limited treatment options. Addressing these challenges requires a deeper understanding of the complex tumor microenvironment to identify novel therapeutic targets. Newer approaches like adoptive cell therapy have shown remarkable success in treating hematological malignancies, but their application in solid tumors, particularly pancreatic cancer, is still in the early stages of development. ACT broadly involves isolating immune cells (T lymphocytes, Natural Killer cells, and macrophages) from the patient, followed by genetic engineering to enhance and mount a specific anti-tumor response. Various ACT modalities are under investigation for pancreatic cancer, including chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T), chimeric antigen receptor NK cells (CAR-NK), tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL), T-cell receptor (TCR)-engineered T cells, and cytokine-induced killer cells (CIK). Major hurdles have been identifying actionable tumor antigens and delivering focused cellular therapies to overcome the immunosuppressive and dense fibrotic stroma surrounding the pancreatic cancer. Further studies are needed to explore the limitations faced by cellular therapy in pancreatic cancer and identify novel combination treatment approaches in order to improve clinical outcomes.

Treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma after immunotherapy

Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment landscape for advanced HCC, resulting in prolonged response and improved survival. With these results, a pressing question arises: what is the optimal treatment following first-line immunotherapy? Despite the benefits of immunotherapy, most patients will experience disease progression within six months and will require subsequent therapies. International guidelines recommend second-line multi-kinase inhibitors following progression on immunotherapy; however, this recommendation is primarily based on expert consensus rather than high-quality evidence. Nevertheless, real-world data indicate that these agents demonstrate similar efficacy and safety when used as first-line treatments. Conversely, it remains unclear whether continuing immunotherapy after progression is beneficial. In some cases, adding anti-CTLA-4 as salvage therapy has shown effectiveness. Molecular-directed therapies have also been tested, showing some initial promise, but further data is needed to confirm the benefits of this approach. Emerging evidence suggests that patients experiencing oligoprogression may benefit from local or locoregional therapies while continuing immunotherapy. In this review, we will discuss treatment strategies following progression after first-line immunotherapy.

The anti-PD-L1/CTLA-4 bispecific antibody KN046 plus lenvatinib in advanced unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase II trial

This open-label phase II trial (NCT04542837) aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of KN046 combined with lenvatinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and explore the potential response biomarkers. Participants received KN046 5 mg/kg every 3 weeks and lenvatinib 12 or 8 mg once daily. The primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and objective response rate (ORR) according to RECIST v1.1. A total of fifty-five participants were enrolled. The results meet the pre-specified primary endpoints. No DLT was observed in the safety run-in period. The incidence of serious adverse events and grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was 30.9% and 47.3%, respectively. Grade ≥3 immunotherapy-related adverse events occurred in 3 (5.5%) participants. Five (9.1%) participants discontinued treatment due to TRAEs, all of which were grade 1-2. The ORR was 45.5% (95% CI, 31.97-59.45). The median progression-free survival was 11.0 (95% CI, 8.21-15.24) months. The median overall survival (OS) was 16.4 (95% CI, 11.20-not estimable) months, and 12-month OS rate was 60.0% (95% CI, 45.87-71.55). Circulating tumor DNA status before the third cycle of treatment was associated with prognosis. In conclusion, First-line KN046 plus lenvatinib shows promising efficacy for advanced unresectable or metastatic HCC.