First-Line Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Patient-Level Network Meta-Analysis

The ADAM17 inhibitor ZLDI-8 sensitized hepatocellular carcinoma cells to sorafenib through Notch1-integrin β-talk

ZLDI-8 is an A disintegrin and metalloproteinase domain 17 (ADAM17) inhibitor that suppresses the shedding of Notch1 to the Notch1 intracellular domain (NICD). In previous studies, we found that ZLDI-8 was able to sensitize HCC to sorafenib, but the mechanism of action remains unclear. The sensitizing effects of ZLDI-8 were tested both in vitro and in vivo. EMT-related factors, sorafenib sensitivity-related proteins and ECM-related gene expression were assessed using immunohistochemistry, RTPCR and Western blotting. Knockdown assays were conducted to determine the relationship between the Notch and Integrin pathways. CoIP assays, nuclear and cytoplasmic fractionation and immunofluorescence colocalization were applied to explore the interaction between the Notch and Integrin pathways. Appropriate statistical analysis methods were used to assess the significance of the experimental results and to ensure the scientific validity and reliability of the experimental design. We found that ECM- and EMT-related proteins were downregulated after ZLDI-8 treatment (P<0.05). ZLDI-8 significantly downregulated Integrinβ1 and Integrinβ3 in HCC in vitro and in vivo (P<0.05), possibly through Foxc2-dependent regulation. Mechanistically, interfering with the expression of both Integrin-linked kinase (ILK) and the NICD may downregulate the expression of proteins targeted by sorafenib, thereby sensitizing cells to sorafenib. The retroregulation of Integrinβ by ILK may occur through the interaction between the NICD and ILK and may be the result of the translocation of the complexus. Our study indicates that blocking the Notch pathway may affect Integrinβ through crosstalk between the Notch1 and Integrinβ/ILK signaling pathways, thus providing a potential therapeutic strategy for HCC.

Approved immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma: a large-scale meta-analysis and systematic review

A meta-analysis was performed to assess the benefits and safety profile of approved immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Eligible studies were searched from Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed databases based on a well-established strategy. Following the exclusion of ineligible studies, 12 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with control group, immune checkpoint inhibitors were associated with improved ORR (OR 3.03, 95% CI 2.26-4.05, P < 0.00001), SD (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.95, P = 0.02), OS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.83, P < 0.00001), and PFS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.87, P < 0.0003). However, no significant differences were observed in DCR (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.97-1.81, P = 0.07), PD (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67-1.21, P = 0.48), and all caused any-grade adverse events (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.62-2.39, P = 0. 57), all caused ≥ grade 3 adverse events (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.97-1.25, P = 0.14), treatment-related any-grade adverse events (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.55-2.32, P = 0.73), and treatment-related ≥ grade 3 events (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.34-1.97, P = 0.65) between the two groups. After subgroup analysis conducted, patients in the immune checkpoint inhibitor group compared with targeted drug group showed significant improvements in OS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.84, P < 0.00001) and PFS (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.91, P = 0.004). Immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated peculiar benefits in the treatment of HCC with an acceptable safety profile. Compared to targeted drugs, immune checkpoint inhibitors still offer advantages in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. However, there is still considerable room for further improvement.

Atezolizumab in Combination with Bevacizumab for the Management of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the First-Line Setting: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

In 2020, atezolizumab-bevacizumab became the new standard of care (SOC) for first-line unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, following a decade where sorafenib was the preferred first-line treatment. In the last few years, a number of novel systemic treatments with non-inferiority and superiority to sorafenib have been approved as first-line treatments.

Objectives

The objective of this systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare randomised controlled trial evidence for atezolizumab-bevacizumab with globally relevant pharmacological comparators for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable HCC.

Methods

Randomised controlled trials investigating first-line treatment of HCC in adults with no prior systemic treatment were eligible for inclusion into the SLR and were retrieved from Embase, MEDLINE, and Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) Reviews. Interventions of interest for the NMA included atezolizumab-bevacizumab, sorafenib, lenvatinib, durvalumab (including in combination with tremelimumab), cabozantinib (including in combination with atezolizumab), camrelizumab (including in combination with rivoceranib), pembrolizumab (including in combination with lenvatinib), and tislelizumab. Random effects NMA was conducted for survival endpoints within a Bayesian framework with an informative prior distribution for between-study heterogeneity. The hazard ratios for relative treatment effect were estimated with 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

Results

The SLR identified 49 studies, of which eight formed a connected evidence network permitting the indirect treatment comparison of atezolizumab-bevacizumab with comparators of interest. The indirect comparisons suggested an improved overall survival (OS) with atezolizumab-bevacizumab versus most comparators. All indirect treatment comparison results for atezolizumab-bevacizumab included the null value within the 95% CrI (n = 1) for OS and progression-free survival (PFS).

Conclusions

The results of the NMA indicate atezolizumab-bevacizumab is associated with superior or comparable OS and PFS together with a manageable safety profile compared with globally relevant comparators in the unresected HCC indication. The findings support that atezolizumab-bevacizumab remains SOC for the management of first-line unresectable HCC patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab Combination as a First Line Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common leading causes of cancer death worldwide. As most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease, systemic therapy remains the backbone of treatment. In recent years, we have witnessed the transformation of advanced HCC treatment landscapes from single-agent targeted therapies to immunotherapy combinations, with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab becoming the new first-line standard of care with an increase in overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate compared to sorafenib, and a positive impact on quality of life. Although the efficacy and safety of this combination have been confirmed regardless of ethnicity, age, and etiology, only a subgroup of patients seems to benefit the most from this treatment. Currently, predictive serum and tissue biomarkers to select patients who are most likely to respond to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab are lacking. Moreover, the optimal subsequent therapy for patients who progress on first-line atezolizumab plus bevacizumab remains unknown, clinical trials are ongoing, and real-world data are needed to determine the most effective treatment sequence. Importantly, careful evaluation of bleeding risk and preservation of adequate liver function are fundamental to improve patients' prognosis, especially when subsequent treatments are administered.

Indirect Treatment Comparison of First-Line CDK4/6-Inhibitors in Post-Menopausal Patients with HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer

Background: CDK4/6-inhibitors have demonstrated similar efficacy and are considered an effective first-line endocrine treatment of patients with hormone-receptor positive (HR+)/human-epidermal-growth-factor-receptor-2 negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in the endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS). Amongst these, palbociclib was first to achieve regulatory approval, followed subsequently by ribociclib and abemaciclib. However, recent updates of overall survival (OS) showed inconsistencies in the OS benefit for palbociclib compared with the other two CDK4/6-inhibitors. With the lack of head-to-head comparison studies, our study sought to compare indirect survival outcomes between CDK4/6-inhibitors in this setting using a novel reconstructive algorithm. Methods: Phase III randomized trials comparing first-line aromatase inhibitor with/without a CDK4/6-inhibitor in post-menopausal patients with HR+/HER2- MBC were identified through systemic review and literature search of online archives of published manuscripts and conference proceedings. A graphical reconstructive algorithm was utilized to retrieve time-to-event data from reported Kaplan-Meier OS and PFS plots to allow for comparison of survival outcomes. Survival analyses were conducted with Cox proportional-hazards model with a shared-frailty term. Results: Three randomized phase III trials-PALOMA-2, MONALEESA-2 and MONARCH-3-comprising 1827 patients were included. Indirect pairwise comparisons of all CDK4/6-inhibitors showed no significant PFS differences (all p > 0.05). Likewise, indirect treatment comparison between ribociclib vs. palbociclib (one-stage: HR = 0.903, 95%-CI: 0.746-1.094, p = 0.297), abemaciclib vs. palbociclib (one-stage: HR = 0.843, 95%-CI: 0.690-1.030, p = 0.094) and abemaciclib vs. ribociclib (one-stage: HR = 0.933, 95%-CI: 0.753-1.157, p = 0.528) failed to demonstrate a significant OS difference. Conclusions: Findings from this indirect treatment comparison suggest no significant PFS or OS differences between CDK4/6-inhibitors in post-menopausal patients with HR+/HER2- MBC.

Molecular and immune landscape of hepatocellular carcinoma to guide therapeutic decision-making

Liver cancer, primarily HCC, exhibits highly heterogeneous histological and molecular aberrations across tumors and within individual tumor nodules. Such intertumor and intratumor heterogeneities may lead to diversity in the natural history of disease progression and various clinical disparities across the patients. Recently developed multimodality, single-cell, and spatial omics profiling technologies have enabled interrogation of the intertumor/intratumor heterogeneity in the cancer cells and the tumor immune microenvironment. These features may influence the natural history and efficacy of emerging therapies targeting novel molecular and immune pathways, some of which had been deemed undruggable. Thus, comprehensive characterization of the heterogeneities at various levels may facilitate the discovery of biomarkers that enable personalized and rational treatment decisions, and optimize treatment efficacy while minimizing the risk of adverse effects. Such companion biomarkers will also refine HCC treatment algorithms across disease stages for cost-effective patient management by optimizing the allocation of limited medical resources. Despite this promise, the complexity of the intertumor/intratumor heterogeneity and ever-expanding inventory of therapeutic agents and regimens have made clinical evaluation and translation of biomarkers increasingly challenging. To address this issue, novel clinical trial designs have been proposed and incorporated into recent studies. In this review, we discuss the latest findings in the molecular and immune landscape of HCC for their potential and utility as biomarkers, the framework of evaluation and clinical application of predictive/prognostic biomarkers, and ongoing biomarker-guided therapeutic clinical trials. These new developments may revolutionize patient care and substantially impact the still dismal HCC mortality.

Progression-Free and Overall Survival of First-Line Treatments for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Indirect Comparison of Six Combination Regimens

Background: Recently, numerous combination therapies based on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors have been proposed as first-line treatments for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Our study aimed to compare the efficacy of these combination regimens by the application of an innovative method that reconstructs individual patient data. Methods: Six phase III studies describing different combination regimens for aRCC were selected. Individual patient data were reconstructed from Kaplan–Meier (KM) curves through the “Shiny method”. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared among combination treatments and sunitinib. Results were summarized as multi-treatment KM curves. Standard statistical testing was used, including hazard ratio and likelihood ratio tests for heterogeneity. Results: In the overall population of aRCC patients, pembrolizumab + lenvatinib showed the longest median PFS and was expected to determine the longest OS. Pembrolizumab + axitinib, nivolumab + cabozantinib and nivolumab + ipilimumab were similar in terms of PFS, but pembrolizumab + axitinib also demonstrated a better OS. Our subgroup analysis showed that sunitinib is still a valuable option, whereas, in intermediate-poor risk patients, pembrolizumab + axitinib and nivolumab + ipilimumab significantly improve OS compared to sunitinib. Conclusion: The Shiny method allowed us to perform all head-to-head indirect comparisons between these agents in a context in which “real” comparative trials have not been performed.