Case Report: Exacerbation of varices following atezolizumab plus bevacizumab treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: A case series and literature review

Variceal bleeding following treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in two patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Bleeding-related adverse events may occur due to anti-vascular endothelial growth factors. Here, we report two cases of variceal rupture during atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ATZ/BV) treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC).Case 1 involved a man in his 60 s with alcoholic liver cirrhosis (LC) and u-HCC. Seventy-four days after ATZ/BV administration, the patient was admitted for hematemesis. Upper esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed worsening of the esophageal varices (EVs) to F2 grade with active bleeding. Endoscopic variceal ligation successfully achieved hemostasis.Case 2 involved a man in his 70 s with alcoholic LC and u-HCC. The patient was admitted with hematemesis 114 days after ATZ/BV administration. During EGD, the EVs deteriorated to F3 grade, although hemostasis had already been achieved. The evaluation was discontinued during the observation stage because of the worsening hepatic reserve.Neither patient had EVs warranting prophylactic treatment before ATZ/BV administration, showed a partial tumor response, or had portal vein tumor thrombus. Both patients demonstrated increased total diameters of the collateral veins and splenic volume compared to those before treatment. These findings suggest that ATZ/BV treatment may increase portal pressure. In conclusion, the administration of ATZ/BV to patients with LC and u-HCC necessitates careful management of EVs aggravation and rupture.

Progression of portal hypertension after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for hepatocellular carcinoma-report a case and literature review

BACKGROUND

Atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy became the first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Gastroesophageal varices should be monitored and managed before treatment. The progression of portal hypertension during bevacizumab-containing therapy is unclear.

METHOD

A case of new development of esophageal varices, ascites, and hepatic hydrothorax during atezolizumab/bevacizumab therapy at National Taiwan University Hospital was reported, and relevant literature was reviewed.

RESULTS

We presented an 83-year-old male with resolved hepatitis B without cirrhosis. He had BCLC stage C HCC and received tri-weekly atezolizumab/bevacizumab therapy for 34 cycles with sustained partial response. Progressive ascites, esophageal varices, and hepatic hydrothorax developed, though his portal vein was patent and the tumor was under control. Five similar cases of HCC (BCLC B/C: n = 3/2) had been reported previously. Among them, three had cirrhosis with pre-existing small esophageal varices before treatment. After the administration of 1-15 cycles of atezolizumab/bevacizumab therapy, one patient had a progression of varices, and the other four developed variceal bleeding. The association between atezolizumab/bevacizumab and portal hypertension was possible, which might relate to the VEGF pathway and immune-related adverse events with progressive hepatic fibrosis.

CONCLUSION

Atezolizumab/bevacizumab treatment might exacerbate portal hypertension. Careful monitoring and management should be considered during treatment.

Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in patients with portal hypertension for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination therapy (Atezo + Beva) is used as the first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC). Serious adverse events (AEs), including rupture of esophagogastric varices, have been seen during treatment. Therefore, the relationships of efficacy, safety, and portal hypertension (PH) were analyzed.

METHODS

A total of 146 patients with u-HCC and Child-Pugh Scores of 5-7 received Atezo + Beva. Prophylactic treatment for varices was performed for patients with the risk of rupture of varices before the start of Atezo + Beva. A propensity score-matched cohort was created to minimize the risk of potential confounders. Efficacy was assessed in 41 propensity score-matched pairs. AEs were assessed between patients without PH (n = 80) and with PH (n = 66).

RESULTS

In patients without PH and with PH, median overall survival was 18.4 months and 18.8 months (p = 0.71), and median progression-free survival was 8.6 months and 5.8 months (p = 0.92), respectively. On the best radiological response evaluation for Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the objective response rate was 31.7% and 26.8% (p = 0.81), respectively. Variceal rupture occurred in three patients with PH, but there were no significant differences in the occurrence of variceal rupture (p = 0.090) and Grade 3-4 AEs between patients without and with PH.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in efficacy and safety were observed with PH. Prophylactic treatment for varices before the start of Atezo + Beva would allow treatment to continue relatively safely.

Comparison of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis

BACKGROUND/AIM

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib are currently available as first-line therapy for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, comparative efficacy studies are still limited. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of these treatments in HCC patients with portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT).

METHODS

We retrospectively included patients who received either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line systemic therapy for HCC with PVTT. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included progressionfree survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR) determined by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors, version 1.1.

RESULTS

A total of 52 patients were included: 30 received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 22 received lenvatinib. The median follow-up duration was 6.4 months (interquartile range, 3.9-9.8). The median OS was 10.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.7 to not estimated) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 5.8 months (95% CI, 4.8 to not estimated) with lenvatinib (P=0.26 by log-rank test). There was no statistically significant difference in OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.34-1.49; P=0.37). The median PFS was similar (P=0.63 by log-rank test), with 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.3-7.7) for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 4.3 months (95% CI, 2.6-5.8) for lenvatinib (aHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.51-1.69; P=0.80). HRs were similar after inverse probability treatment weighting. The DCRs were 23.3% and 18.2% in patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib, respectively (P=0.74).

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib was comparable for the treatment of HCC with PVTT.

Complications of immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are highly effective in cancer treatment. However, the risks associated with the treatment must be carefully balanced against the therapeutic benefits. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are generally unpredictable and may persist over an extended period. In this review, we analyzed common irAEs reported in highly cited original articles and systematic reviews. The prevalent adverse reactions include fatigue, pyrexia, rash, pruritus, diarrhea, decreased appetite, nausea, abdominal pain, constipation, hepatitis, and hypothyroidism. Therefore, it is crucial to conduct evaluations not only of gastrointestinal organs but also of cardiac, neurologic, endocrine (including the frequently affected thyroid), and ophthalmic systems before commencing ICIs. This review further explores commonly reported types of irAEs, specific irAEs associated with each ICI agent, rare yet potentially fatal irAEs, and available treatment options for managing them.

Reduced-Dose or Discontinuation of Bevacizumab Might Be Considered after Variceal Bleeding in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Receiving Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab: Case Reports

Background and Objectives: Variceal bleeding (VB) is the most concerning condition that is difficult to treat after atezolizumab/bevacizumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods: We would like to introduce the cases of two patients who underwent bevacizumab reduction or discontinuation when VB occurred after atezolizumab/bevacizumab. Results: VB occurred in two patients who showed good tumor response after atezolizumab/bevacizumab treatment, and all VBs were successfully treated with endoscopic variceal ligations. In the first patient, VB did not occur as the tumor response decreased after a 50% reduction in bevacizumab. In the second patient, VB occurred again after a 50% bevacizumab reduction, so bevacizumab was discontinued and treatment with atezolizumab alone has been successfully maintained. Conclusions: Accordingly, we would like to suggest that considering bevacizumab dose reduction instead of changing to tyrosine kinase inhibitor may be a good clinical choice in atezolizumab/bevacizumab patients who develop VB.

Factors associated with the response to atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

Background and Aim

The purpose of this study was to analyze factors associated with the overall survival (OS) of atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). We also assessed the OS of patients with ineffective therapy and those who discontinued treatment owing to adverse events (AEs).

Methods

This retrospective multicenter study involved 139 patients with aHCC who received atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy between November 2020 and September 2022.

Results

The median duration of treatment was 136.5 days, and the median observation period was 316 days. The overall response rate was 40%, and the disease control rate was 78% according to mRECIST criteria. Grade ≥2 AEs occurred in 63 patients (43%) and led to treatment discontinuation in 16 patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that treatment response and occurrence of grade ≥2 AEs after therapy, as well as low level of albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade and low level of des-gamma carboxy prothrombin (DCP) before therapy, were extracted as factors that contributed to OS. Log-rank tests with the Kaplan-Meier method showed significant differences in OS among these factors. The OS of patients who discontinued owing to AEs was significantly shorter than that of other patients.

Conclusion

Not only factors before therapy but also treatment response and the appearance of AEs are involved in OS for atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination therapy. Although the development of AEs also contributed to OS, appropriate management of AEs is important to avoid discontinuing treatment with this combination.

Massive bleeding from a gastric artery pseudoaneurysm in hepatocellular carcinoma treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab: A case report

BACKGROUND

The combination of atezolizumab (ATZ) and bevacizumab (BVZ) was approved as first-line systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) owing to its superior rates of response and patient survival. However, ATZ + BVZ is associated with increased risk of upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, including arterial bleeding, which is rare and potentially fatal. We present a case of massive upper GI bleeding from a gastric pseudoaneurysm in a patient with advanced HCC who had been treated with ATZ + BVZ.

CASE SUMMARY

A 67-year-old man presented with severe upper GI bleeding after atezolizumab (ATZ) + bevacizumab (BVZ) therapy for HCC. Endoscopy failed to detect the bleeding site. Digital subtraction angiography revealed a gastric artery pseudoaneurysm and contrast extravasation from the inferior splenic artery and a branch of the left gastric artery. Successful hemostasis was achieved with embolization.

CONCLUSION

HCC patients who have been treated with ATZ + BVZ should be followed for 3 to 6 mo to monitor for development of massive GI bleeding. Diagnosis may require angiography. Embolization is an effective treatment.