Health-related quality-of-life impact of pembrolizumab versus best supportive care in previously systemically treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: KEYNOTE-240

Patient-reported symptoms and interest in symptom monitoring in HCC treated with locoregional therapies: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures relevant to domains most important to patients with HCC who received locoregional therapies are needed to advance patient-centered research. Furthermore, electronic PRO monitoring in clinical care has been shown to reduce hospitalizations and deaths in patients with other cancers. We conducted a qualitative study among patients with HCC who recently received locoregional therapies to (1) identify common and distressing posttreatment symptoms to prioritize PRO domain selection and (2) gauge interest in an electronic PRO symptom monitoring system.

METHODS

We performed semi-structured telephone interviews among adult patients who received locoregional therapies (median of 26 days after treatment) for treatment-naïve HCC at a single tertiary care center. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify emerging themes and sub-themes.

RESULTS

Ten of 26 patients (38%) reported at least 1 symptom before treatment. In contrast, all participants (n = 26) with recently treated HCC reported at least 1 posttreatment physical symptom, with the most common being appetite loss (73%), fatigue (58%), abdominal pain (46%), and nausea (35%). Most participants (77%) stated they saw potential benefits in posttreatment ePRO symptom monitoring.

CONCLUSIONS

Posttreatment symptoms after HCC locoregional therapies are common and often severe. These data can inform and prioritize PRO domain selection. Patients are interested in ePRO monitoring to monitor and proactively address posttreatment symptoms. Given the clinical benefits in patients with metastatic cancers, ePRO monitoring warrants investigation in patients with HCC.

Long noncoding RNA HAND2-AS1: A crucial regulator of malignancy

Long non-coding RNAs (LncRNAs) are single-stranded RNAs over 200 nucleotides in length that have no protein-coding function and have long been considered non-functional by-products of transcription. Recent studies have shown that dysregulation of lncRNAs may be involved in the malignant biological behavior of tumors. Targeted regulation of lncRNAs has become a research focus of anti-tumor treatment. LncRNAs heart and neural crest derivatives expressed 2 antisense RNA 1 (HAND2-AS1) was down-regulated in various tumors and can be used as a critical tumor regulator to modulate tumor cells proliferation, apoptosis, metastasis, invasion, metabolism and drug resistance. Additionally, aberrantly expressed HAND2-AS1 was closely related to the clinical pathological characteristics of cancer patients and serve as a promising tumor diagnostic and prognostic biomarker. This article aims to review the roles of HAND2-AS1 in tumorigenesis and development, as well as the underlying molecular mechanisms and clinical significance.

The Current Status and Future Prospects for Conversion Therapy in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. In China, most HCC patients are diagnosed with advanced disease and in these cases surgery is challenging. Conversion therapy can be used to change unresectable HCC into resectable disease and is a potential breakthrough treatment strategy. The resection rate for unresectable advanced HCC has recently improved as a growing number of patients have benefited from conversion therapy. While conversion therapy is at an early stage of development, progress in patient selection, optimum treatment methods, and the timing of surgery have the potential to deliver significant benefits. In this article, we review the current evidence and clinical experience of conversion therapy in HCC. General conversion modalities such as systemic treatments (systemic chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or immunotherapy), locoregional therapy (transarterial chemoembolization, hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy, or selective internal radiation therapy), and combination therapy were summarized. We also discuss the current challenges of conversion therapy and provide identify areas for future research to improve the development of conversion therapy in advanced HCC.

LRPPRC facilitates tumor progression and immune evasion through upregulation of m6A modification of PD-L1 mRNA in hepatocellular carcinoma

Objective

LRPPRC is a newly discovered N⁶-methyladenosine (m⁶A) modification reader, which potentially affects hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progression. PD-L1 in tumor cells is essential for tumor immune evasion. This work investigated the LRPPRC-mediated m⁶A-modification effect on PD-L1 mRNA and immune escape in HCC.

Methods

Expression and clinical implication of LRPPRC and PD-L1 were measured in human HCC cohorts. The influence of LRPPRC on malignant behaviors of HCC cells was investigated through in vitro assays and xenograft tumor murine models. The posttranscriptional mechanism of LRPPRC on PD-L1 and anti-tumor immunity was elucidated in HCC cells via RIP, MeRIP-qPCR, RNA stability, immunohistochemical staining, and so forth.

Results

LRPPRC exhibited the notable upregulated in human HCC tissues, which was in relation to advanced stage and worse overall survival and disease-free survival. Impaired proliferative capacity and G2/M phage arrest were found in LRPPRC-knockout cells, with increased apoptotic level, and attenuated migratory and invasive abilities. In HCC patients and murine models, LRPPRC presented a positive interaction with PD-L1, with negative associations with CD8+, and CD4+ T-cell infiltrations and chemokines CXCL9, and CXCL10. LRPPRC loss downregulated the expression of PD-L1 and its m⁶A level in HCC cells. Moreover, LRPPRC suppression mitigated tumor growth in murine models and improved anti-tumor immunity and immune infiltration in tumors.

Conclusion

This work unveiled that LRPPRC may posttranscriptionally upregulate PD-L1 partially with an m⁶A-dependent manner for heightening mRNA stabilization of PD-L1 and provided a new mechanism for m⁶A regulator-mediated immunosuppression in HCC.

Targeted Therapies for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment: A New Era Ahead-A Systematic Review

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains one of the most common malignancies and the third cause of cancer-related death worldwide, with surgery being the best prognostic tool. Among the well-known causative factors of HCC are chronic liver virus infections, chronic virus hepatitis B (HBV) and chronic hepatitis virus C (HCV), aflatoxins, tobacco consumption, and non-alcoholic liver disease (NAFLD). There is a need for the development of efficient molecular markers and alternative therapeutic targets of great significance. In this review, we describe the general characteristics of HCC and present a variety of targeted therapies that resulted in progress in HCC therapy.

De-escalation or discontinuation of tyrosine kinase inhibitor in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: A multicentral, open-label, prospective trial in China

Background: Long-term treatment-free remission (TFR) represents a new goal for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Optimizing dose of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in the CML treatment maybe a new challenge to maintain effective and improving patients' quality of life. We hypothesized that administration of low-dose TKIs does not compromise major molecular response (MMR) in patients with CML who have a deep molecular response (DMR). Methods: We did an open-label, randomized trial at eight hospitals in China. Eligible CML-CP patients (aged 18-70 years) had shown continuous response to TKI more than 5 years and maintained MR4.5 (BCR-ABLIS ≤ 0.0032%) in recent 18 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the TKI de-escalation group or the discontinuation group. Randomization was done with permuted blocks (block size four) and implemented through an interactive web-based randomization system. Recurrence was defined as the single sample with real time Quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) measurement greater than 0.1% (MMR). The primary endpoint was 12-month MMR rate in patients who received de-escalation or discontinuation of TKIs. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04143087). Results: Around 125 patients were enrolled between October 23, 2019 and October 31, 2020, 62 patients received dose de-escalation of TKIs, while 63 patients in the discontinuation group. In the de-escalation group, molecular recurrence-free survival at 12 months was 88.32% (95% CI 79%-98%), whereas molecular recurrence-free survival in the discontinuation group at 12 months was 59.98% (95% CI 47-73). No progressions occurred at the data cut-off date. All 29 recurrence cases restart TKI treatment returned to MMR. Cytolytic NK cells as a proportion of lymphocyte cells were significantly increased from baseline after 6 months whether in the de-escalation or TKIs cessation group (P = 0.048, 0.001, respectively); compared with the relapsing patients, Tregs proportion was decreased (P = 0.003), and higher proportion of NK cells were found in non-relapsing patients whether in TKI de-escalation or discontinuation group (P = 0.011, 0.007, respectively). We also found that the de-escalation group showed better disease-specific HRQOL in regards to its impact on emotional functioning, fatigue, pain, and financial difficulties. Conclusion: With 88.32% MMR in 12-months follow-up after de-escalation TKIs' treatment, dose-halving could become a new treatment paradigm for CML patients who with DMR under continuing maintenance therapy with TKIs.

Second-line treatment options for hepatocellular carcinoma: current state and challenges for the future

INTRODUCTION

Since the approval of sorafenib for systemic treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), many tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown efficacy and tolerability as first-line treatments. On the other hand, these first-line therapies are associated with low objective response and drug resistance. Many drugs have been successfully tested for second-line treatment of advanced HCC. While the rapid proliferation of second-line treatments for advanced HCC brings hope to patients, it also complicates clinical decision-making.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to facilitate decisions by summarizing the latest guidelines for second-line treatment of HCC in various countries or regions. We then review existing second-line treatment options and discuss challenges that should be addressed in the future. A literature search was conducted in April 2022 of PubMed/Medline, Cochrane library, and abstracts of international cancer meetings.

EXPERT OPINION

There is no standard second-line treatment, especially for the case of sequential treatment after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezo+bev) and further studies focused on sequential treatment are warranted in this setting. The design of clinical trials, different etiologies, and complications or quality of life (QoL) are interesting issues in the second-line setting.

Early Implementation of Palliative and Supportive Care in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Early palliative and supportive care referral is the standard of care for many malignancies. This paradigm results in improvements in patients' symptoms and quality of life and decreases the costs of medical care and unnecessary procedures. Leading oncology guidelines have recommended the integration of early referral to palliative and supportive services to care pathways for advanced malignancies. Currently, early referral to palliative care within the hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) population is not utilized, with gastroenterology guidelines recommending referral of patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage D to these services. This review addresses this topic through analysis of the existing data within the oncology field as well as literature surrounding palliative care intervention in HCC. Early palliative and supportive care in HCC and its impact on patients, caregivers, and health services allow clinicians and researchers to identify management options that improve outcomes within existing service provisions.

Psychosocial Aspects of Living Long Term with Advanced Cancer and Ongoing Systemic Treatment: A Scoping Review

(1) Background: Studies examining the psychosocial impact of living long term on systemic treatment in advanced cancer patients are scarce. This scoping review aimed to answer the research question “What has been reported about psychosocial factors among patients living with advanced cancer receiving life-long systemic treatment?”, by synthesizing psychosocial data, and evaluating the terminology used to address these patients; (2) Methods: This scoping review was conducted following the five stages of the framework of Arksey and O’Malley (2005); (3) Results: 141 articles published between 2000 and 2021 (69% after 2015) were included. A large variety of terms referring to the patient group was observed. Synthesizing qualitative studies identified ongoing uncertainty, anxiety and fear of disease progression or death, hope in treatment results and new treatment options, loss in several aspects of life, and worries about the impact of disease on loved ones and changes in social life to be prominent psychosocial themes. Of 82 quantitative studies included in the review, 76% examined quality of life, 46% fear of disease progression or death, 26% distress or depression, and 4% hope, while few studies reported on adaptation or cognitive aspects. No quantitative studies focused on uncertainty, loss, or social impact; (4) Conclusion and clinical implications: Prominent psychosocial themes reported in qualitative studies were not included in quantitative research using specific validated questionnaires. More robust studies using quantitative research designs should be conducted to further understand these psychological constructs. Furthermore, the diversity of terminology found in the literature calls for a uniform definition to better address this specific patient group in research and in practice.

Suppression of AGTR1 Induces Cellular Senescence in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Through Inactivating ERK Signaling

Objective: Cellular senescence is an effective barrier against tumorigenesis. Hence, it is of significance to characterize key features of cellular senescence and the induction of senescence in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cells via pharmacological interventions. Our study determined the biological roles as well as mechanisms of angiotensin II type I receptor (AGTR1) on cellular senescence in HCC.

Methods: Lentivirus vector-mediated overexpression or knockdown of AGTR1 was conducted in HCC cells, respectively. A volume of 8 μM sorafenib was used to induce cellular senescence, and ERK was activated by 30 ng/ml ERK agonist EGF. Proliferation was evaluated via clone formation assay. HCC cell senescence was examined by flow cytometry for cell cycle, senescence-associated β-galactosidase (SA-β-gal) staining, and senescence-associated heterochromatin foci (SAHF) analysis. AGTR1, p53, p21, extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK), and p-ERK expression were assessed through Western blot or immunofluorescence.

Results: AGTR1-knockout HCC cells displayed the attenuated proliferative capacity, G2-M phase arrest, increased expression of p53 and p21, and elevated percentages of SA-β-gal- and SAHF-positive cells. In sorafenib-exposed HCC cells, overexpressed AGTR1 enhanced the proliferative capacity and alleviated G2-M phase arrest as well as decreased p53 and p21 expression and the proportions of SA-β-gal- and SAHF-positive cells. Moreover, AGTR1 knockdown attenuated the activity of p-ERK in HCC cells, and ERK agonist ameliorated AGTR1 knockdown-induced cellular senescence.

Conclusion: This study demonstrates that suppression of AGTR1 induces cellular senescence in HCC through inactivating ERK signaling. The significant synergistic effect of AGTR1 suppression and sorafenib might represent a potential combination therapy for HCC.

Patient-reported outcomes in HCC: A scoping review by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

HCC is a leading cause of mortality in patients with advanced liver disease and is associated with significant morbidity. Despite multiple available curative and palliative treatments, there is a lack of systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in HCC.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases Practice Metrics Committee conducted a scoping review of PROs in HCC from 1990 to 2021 to (1) synthesize the evidence on PROs in HCC and (2) provide recommendations on incorporating PROs into clinical practice and quality improvement efforts. A total of 63 studies met inclusion criteria investigating factors associated with PROs, the relationship between PROs and survival, and associations between HCC therapy and PROs. Studies recruited heterogeneous populations, and most were cross-sectional. Poor PROs were associated with worse prognosis after adjusting for clinical factors and with more advanced disease stage, although some studies showed better PROs in patients with HCC compared to those with cirrhosis. Locoregional and systemic therapies were generally associated with a high symptom burden; however, some studies showed lower symptom burden for transarterial radiotherapy and radiation therapy. Qualitative studies identified additional symptoms not routinely assessed with structured questionnaires. Gaps in the literature include lack of integration of PROs into clinical care to guide HCC treatment decisions, unknown impact of HCC on caregivers, and the effect of palliative or supportive care quality of life and health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Evidence supports assessment of PROs in HCC; however, clinical implementation and the impact of PRO measurement on quality of care and longitudinal outcomes need future investigation.

Systemic Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Updates and Outlook

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

Patients' Experience of Systemic Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Review of the Impact on Quality of Life

Simple Summary

Hepatocellular carcinoma remains a serious disease for which curative treatment is only available for about 20% of patients. Because of the severity of the disease and the modest benefit of treatment, quality of life is of paramount importance, especially as its impact on the prognosis of the disease has been demonstrated. Systemic treatments have specific side effects for which close monitoring and symptomatic management improve quality of life.

Abstract

Quality of life (QoL) in oncology is an outcome becoming more and more important and relevant to explore. Some studies have demonstrated its prognostic impact in different cancers, such as colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers, but also in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Different tools have been developed for assessing quality of life, some general, such as EORTC QLQ-C30, but also specific tools depending on cancer origin which seem to be more pertinent for patients. Systemic treatments and specific symptoms due to cancer evolution could decrease quality of life. For approval of new systemic treatments, authorities ask for benefit in terms of efficacy but also benefit in quality of life, which is crucial for patients. This review reports data about QoL in HCC, including specific tools used, impact of systemic treatments and prognosis for QoL for HCC patients. Management of adverse events is essential to enhance compliance with treatment and quality of life. Assessing quality of life in clinical trials appears quite systematic, but its application in clinical routine requires development.

Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib with or without hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy in selected populations of patients with treatment-naive unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma exhibiting PD-L1 staining: a multicenter retrospective study

Background

Not all patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) benefit from treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and molecular-targeted agents. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) versus pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib in selected populations of patients with treatment-naive uHCC exhibiting programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) staining.

Methods

Consecutive patients with treatment-naive uHCC exhibiting PD-L1 staining who were treated with pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib plus HAIC (PLH) or pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib (PL) were retrospectively identified from our medical centres from 2018 to 2021. HAIC involved oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX). Follow-up occurred every 3 weeks for 1 year and then every 6 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were the frequency of key adverse events (AEs).

Results

In total, 248 treatment-naive patients were retrospectively reviewed, 78 of whom were ineligible on the basis of the current criteria. Thus, 170 patients (PLH: n = 84, median age 52 years [range, 42–67]; PL: n = 86, 53 years [range, 43–69]) were eligible for the analysis. The median follow-up was 18.6 months (range, 1–26). At the final follow-up, the median OS was 17.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.2–18.3) in the PLH group versus 12.6 months (95% CI, 11.1–13.7) in the PL group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.52; 95% CI, 0.36–0.75; p = 0.001). A significant difference was also detected in the median PFS (10.9 months [95% CI, 8.7–11.4] for PLH vs. 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.2–7.4) for PL; HR 0.61, 95% CI, 0.43–0.85; p = 0.001). Significant differences in the rate of the key AEs were noted between groups (79.8% for PLH vs. 62.8% for PL, p = 0.015), but these AEs were controllable.

Conclusions

Among selected populations of patients with treatment-naive uHCC exhibiting PD-L1 staining, the PLH regimen may substantially improve the survival benefits compared with the PL regimen with a controllable safety profile.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have historically had few options and faced extremely poor prognoses if their disease progressed after standard-of-care tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Recently, the standard of care for HCC has been transformed as a combination of the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) atezolizumab plus the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibody bevacizumab was shown to offer improved overall survival in the first-line setting. Immunotherapy has demonstrated safety and efficacy in later lines of therapy as well, and ongoing trials are investigating novel combinations of ICIs and TKIs, in addition to interventions earlier in the course of disease or in combination with liver-directed therapies. Because HCC usually develops against a background of cirrhosis, immunotherapy for liver tumors is complex and oncologists need to account for both immunological and hepatological considerations when developing a treatment plan for their patients. To provide guidance to the oncology community on important concerns for the immunotherapeutic care of HCC, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop a clinical practice guideline (CPG). The expert panel drew on the published literature as well as their clinical experience to develop recommendations for healthcare professionals on these important aspects of immunotherapeutic treatment for HCC, including diagnosis and staging, treatment planning, immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and patient quality of life (QOL) considerations. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations in this CPG are intended to give guidance to cancer care providers treating patients with HCC.

Patient-reported outcomes with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (IMbrave150): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Understanding patients' experience of cancer treatment is important. We aimed to evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the IMbrave150 trial, which has already shown significant overall survival and progression-free survival benefits with this combination therapy.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial in 111 hospitals and cancer centres across 17 countries or regions. We included patients aged 18 years or older with systemic, treatment-naive, histologically, cytologically, or clinically confirmed unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, with disease that was not amenable to curative surgical or locoregional therapies, or progressive disease after surgical or locoregional therapies. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1; using permuted block randomisation [blocks of six], stratified by geographical region; macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; baseline alpha-fetoprotein concentration; and ECOG performance status) to receive 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab intravenously once every 3 weeks or 400 mg sorafenib orally twice a day, until loss of clinical benefit or unacceptable toxicity. The independent review facility for tumour assessment was masked to the treatment allocation. Previously reported coprimary endpoints were overall survival and independently assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Prespecified secondary and exploratory analyses descriptively evaluated treatment effects on patient-reported quality of life, functioning, and disease symptoms per the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality-of-life questionnaire for cancer (QLQ-C30) and quality-of-life questionnaire for hepatocellular carcinoma (QLQ-HCC18). Time to confirmed deterioration of PROs was analysed in the intention-to-treat population; all other analyses were done in the PRO-evaluable population (patients who had a baseline PRO assessment and at least one assessment after baseline). The trial is ongoing; enrolment is closed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03434379.

FINDINGS

Between March 15, 2018, and Jan 30, 2019, 725 patients were screened and 501 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=336) or sorafenib (n=165). 309 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 145 patients in the sorafenib group were included in the PRO-evaluable population. At data cutoff (Aug 29, 2019) the median follow-up was 8·6 months (IQR 6·2-10·8). EORTC QLQ-C30 completion rates were 90% or greater for 23 of 24 treatment cycles in both groups (range 88-100% in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 80-100% in the sorafenib group). EORTC QLQ-HCC18 completion rates were 90% or greater for 20 of 24 cycles in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group (range 88-100%) and 21 of 24 cycles in the sorafenib group (range 89-100%). Compared with sorafenib, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab reduced the risk of deterioration on all EORTC QLQ-C30 generic cancer symptom scales that were prespecified for analysis (appetite loss [hazard ratio (HR) 0·57, 95% CI 0·40-0·81], diarrhoea [0·23, 0·16-0·34], fatigue [0·61, 0·46-0·81], pain [0·46, 0·34-0·62]), and two of three EORTC QLQ-HCC18 disease-specific symptom scales that were prespecified for analysis (fatigue [0·60, 0·45-0·80] and pain [0·65, 0·46-0·92], but not jaundice [0·76, 0·55-1·07]). At day 1 of treatment cycle five (after which attrition in the sorafenib group was more than 50%), the mean EORTC QLQ-C30 score changes from baseline in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib groups were: -3·29 (SD 17·56) versus -5·83 (20·63) for quality of life, -4·02 (19·42) versus -9·76 (21·33) for role functioning, and -3·77 (12·82) versus -7·60 (15·54) for physical functioning.

INTERPRETATION

Prespecified analyses of PRO data showed clinically meaningful benefits in terms of patient-reported quality of life, functioning, and disease symptoms with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab compared with sorafenib, strengthening the combination therapy's positive benefit-risk profile versus that of sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

The New Immuno-Oncology-Based Therapies and Their Perspectives in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Simple Summary

Hepatocellular carcinoma is a frequent and poor prognosis tumor, with most patients facing up, soon or later, to systemic therapies. So far, systemic therapies based on tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapies have been of modest benefit. The aim of this review article was to characterize the profile of efficacy and safety of immuno-oncology-based monotherapies that failed to demonstrate significant benefit, for comparison with the immuno-oncology-based combinational strategies. One of them has proven its drastic benefit in phase-3, whereas others have only shown promising data in phase-1/2, although the corresponding phase-3 results are pending. We showed that objective response rates and duration of response are important parameters for increased median overall survival and long survivals. We also pointed out that, being aware that there is an urgent unmet need for biomarkers, the pattern of safety and quality of life will guide the physician for the choice on the possible future combinations.

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma is a poor prognosis tumor. Systemic therapies are frequently used due to frequent recurrences after surgical or radiologic treatments. Anti-angiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors have shown efficacy in monotherapy, but with very low rates of long survival and exceptional recovery. Immuno-oncology based on immune checkpoint inhibitors has revolutionized the systemic therapies since showing long survival rates without any tumor progression or recurrence for some patients in partial or complete response, and possibly for some patients in stable disease. However, the rate of responders under immuno-oncology monotherapy is too low to increase significantly the median overall survival of the treated patients. The immuno-oncology-based combinations with different types of immune checkpoint inhibitors (PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors such as nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, tremelimumab), or the association of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents (bevacizumab, lenvatinib, cabozantinib), have led to a breakthrough in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Indeed, the first phase-3 trial, combining atezolizumab with bevacizumab, has dramatically changed the outcome of patients. Data from several other types of combinations assessed in phase-3 trials are pending, and if positive, will drastically arm the physicians to efficiently treat the patients, and disrupt the current algorithm of hepatocellular carcinoma treatment.