Genomic profiling of small bowel adenocarcinoma: a pooled analysis from 3 databases

BACKGROUND

Small bowel adenocarcinoma is a rare disease. The genomic profiling tumours according to clinical characteristics and its impact on the prognosis remains unclear.

METHODS

A pooled analysis of clinical data, genomic profiling and MisMatch Repair (MMR) status from three databases was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 188 tumour samples were analysed. A predisposing disease was reported in 22.3%, mainly Lynch syndrome and Crohn's disease. The tumours were localized in 80.2% and metastatic in 18.8%. The most frequent mutations were KRAS (42.0%) among them 7/79 are G12C, TP53 (40.4%), APC (19.1%), PIK3CA (18.6%), SMAD4 (12.8%) and ERBB2 (9.6%). Mutation distribution differed according to predisposing disease for TP53, ERBB2, IDH1, FGFR3, FGFR1 and KDR. KRAS and SMAD4 mutations were more frequent in metastatic tumour, whereas ERBB2 mutations were absent in metastatic tumour. For localized tumour, APC mutation was independently associated with a poor overall survival (OS) (p = 0.0254). 31.8% of localized tumours and 11.3% of metastatic tumours were dMMR (29.8% of the entire cohort). A dMMR status was associated with a better OS (HR = 0.61 [0.39-0.96], p = 0.0316).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a different genomic profile according to the stage and predisposing disease. dMMR and APC mutation in localized tumour predict a better prognosis.

Durvalumab Plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Biliary Tract Cancer: a Real-World Retrospective, Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

The TOPAZ-1 phase III trial reported a survival benefit with the anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC).

OBJECTIVE

The present study investigated for the first time the impact on survival of adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine compared with cisplatin/gemcitabine in a real-world setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The analyzed population included patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic BTC treated with durvalumab in combination with cisplatin/gemcitabine or with cisplatin/gemcitabine alone. The impact of adding durvalumab to chemotherapy in terms of overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was investigated with univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 563 patients were included in the analysis: 213 received cisplatin/gemcitabine alone, 350 received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab. At the univariate analysis, the addition of durvalumab was found to have an impact on survival, with a median OS of 14.8 months versus 11.2 months [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.80, p = 0.0002] in patients who received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab compared to those who received cisplatin/gemcitabine alone. At the univariate analysis for PFS, the addition of durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine demonstrated a survival impact, with a median PFS of 8.3 months and 6.0 months (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47-0.70, p < 0.0001) in patients who received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab and cisplatin/gemcitabine alone, respectively. The multivariate analysis confirmed that adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine is an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS, with patients > 70 years old and those affected by locally advanced disease experiencing the highest survival benefit. Finally, an exploratory analysis of prognostic factors was performed in the cohort of patients who received durvalumab: neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and disease stage were to be independent prognostic factors in terms of OS. The interaction test highlighted NLR ≤ 3, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) = 0, and locally advanced disease as positive predictive factors for OS on cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab.

CONCLUSION

In line with the results of the TOPAZ-1 trial, adding durvalumab to cisplatin/gemcitabine has been confirmed to confer a survival benefit in terms of OS and PFS in a real-world setting of patients with advanced BTC.

Impact of body mass index on the prognosis of unresectable HCC patients receiving first-line Lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab

INTRODUCTION

Overweight is a negative prognostic factor in the general population in the long term. However, the role of body mass index (BMI) in the short-mid term in advanced tumours is unclear. The present analysis investigates the role of BMI weight classes in a large sample of patients affected by HCC and receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line treatment.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

The cohort included consecutive patients affected by BCLC-c and BCLC-B HCC patients from a multicenter international study group who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line therapy. Population was stratified according to the BMI in under-, over- and normal-weight according to the conventional thresholds. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the prognostic and predictive impact of BMI in patients affected by advanced or intermediate HCC. Survival curves were estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan-Meier. The role of stratification factors was analysed with log-rank tests.

RESULTS

1292 consecutive patients with HCC were analysed. 466 (36%) patients were treated with lenvatinib and 826 (64%) patients were treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab arm, 510 (62%) patients were normal-weight, 52 (6%) underweight and 264 (32%) overweight. At the univariate analysis for OS, underweight patients had significantly shorter OS compared to normal-weight patients, whereas no differences were found between normal-weight versus overweight. Multivariate analysis confirmed that underweight patients had significantly shorter OS compared to normal-weight patients (HR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0-2.8; p = .0323). In the lenvatinib arm, 26 patients (5.6%) were categorized as underweight, 256 (54.9%) as normal-weight, and 184 (39.5%) as overweight. At the univariate analysis for OS, no significant differences were found between normal-weight versus underweight and between normal-weight versus overweight, which was confirmed at multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis highlighted a prognostic role of BMI in a cohort of patients with advanced HCC who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, while no prognostic role for low BMI was apparent in patients who received lenvatinib.

Adverse Events as Potential Predictive Factors of Activity in Patients with Advanced HCC Treated with Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab

BACKGROUND

In the context of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with systemic therapy, the correlation between the appearance of adverse events (AEs) and reported efficacy outcomes is well-known and widely investigated. From other pathological settings, we are aware of the prognostic and predictive value of the occurrence of immune-related AEs in patients treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective multicenter real-world study aims to investigate the potential prognostic value of AEs in patients with HCC treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in the first-line setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study population consisted of 823 patients from five countries (Italy, Germany, Portugal, Japan, and the Republic of Korea).

RESULTS

Of the patients, 73.3% presented at least one AE during the study period. The most common AEs were proteinuria (29.6%), arterial hypertension (27.2%), and fatigue (26.0%). In all, 17.3% of the AEs were grade (G) 3. One death due to bleeding was reported. The multivariate analysis confirmed the appearance of decreased appetite G < 2 [versus G ≥ 2; hazard ratio (HR) 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13-0.90; p < 0.01] and immunotoxicity G < 2 (versus G ≥ 2; HR: 0.70; 95% CI 0.24-0.99; p = 0.04) as independent prognostic factors for overall survival, and the appearance of decreased appetite G < 2 (versus G ≥ 2; HR: 0.73; 95% CI 0.43-0.95; p = 0.01), diarrhea (yes versus no; HR: 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85; p = 0.01), fatigue (yes versus no; HR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.65-0.95; p < 0.01), arterial hypertension G < 2 (versus G ≥ 2; HR: 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.87; p < 0.01), and proteinuria (yes versus no; HR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98; p = 0.03) as independent prognostic factors for progression-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

As demonstrated for other therapies, there is also a correlation between the occurrence of AEs and outcomes for patients with HCC for the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

Incidence and Predictors of Esophagogastric Varices Bleeding in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Lenvatinib

Introduction

Lenvatinib is indicated for the forefront treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC), but its use may be limited by the risk of esophagogastric varices (EGV) bleeding. This study assessed the prevalence, predictors, and complications of EGV in aHCC patients treated with lenvatinib.

Methods

In this multicenter international retrospective study, cirrhotic patients treated with lenvatinib for aHCC, were enrolled if upper-gastrointestinal endoscopy was available within 6 months before treatment. Primary endpoint was the incidence of EGV bleeding during lenvatinib therapy; secondary endpoints were predictors for EGV bleeding, prevalence, and risk factors for the presence of EGV and high-risk EGV at baseline, as well as impact of EGV bleeding on patients' survival.

Results

535 patients were enrolled in the study (median age: 72 years, 78% male, 63% viral etiology, 89% Child-Pugh A, 16% neoplastic portal vein thrombosis [nPVT], 56% Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer-C): 234 had EGV (44%), 70 (30%) were at high risk and 59 were on primary prophylaxis. During lenvatinib treatment, 17 patients bled from EGV (3 grade 5), the 12-month cumulative incidence being 3%. The only baseline independent predictor of EGV bleeding was the presence of baseline high-risk EGV (hazard ratio: 6.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.23-21.57, p = 0.001). In these patients the 12-month risk was 17%. High-risk varices were independently associated with Child-Pugh B score (odds ratio [OR]: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.08-4.17, p = 0.03), nPVT (OR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.40-4.61, p = 0.002), and platelets <150,000/μL (OR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.35-4.50, p = 0.003).

Conclusion

In hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with lenvatinib, the risk of EGV bleeding was mostly low but significant only in patients with high-risk EGV at baseline.

Germline testing and genetic counseling in biliary tract cancer: an operative proposal to improve the state of art

INTRODUCTION

A genetic predisposition seems to be involved in biliary tract cancer, but the prevalence of germline mutations in BTC remains unclear, and the therapeutic role of the germline pathologic variants is still unknown.

AREA COVERED

The aim of the present work is to systematically review the data available on the hereditary predisposition of biliary tract cancer by a specific research on PubMed, in order to highlight the most important critical points and to define the current possible role of germinal testing and genetic counseling in this setting of patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Basing on data already available, we decided to start in our institution a specific genetic protocol focused on biliary tract cancer patients, which includes genetic counseling and, if indicated, germline test. The inclusion criteria are: 1) Patient with personal history of oncologic disease other than BTC, 2) Patient with familiar history of oncologic disease (considering relatives of first and second grade), 3) Patient with ≤ 50 years old, 4) Patient presenting a somatic mutation in genes involved in DNA damage repair pathways and mismatch repair. The aim of the presented protocol is to identify germline pathogenic variants with prophylactic and therapeutic impact, and to collect and integrate a significant amount of clinical, familial, somatic, and genetic data.

α-FAtE: A new predictive score of response to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (AB) and lenvatinib can be alternatively used as first-line systemic treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, no direct comparison of the two regimens has been performed in randomized clinical trials, making the identification of baseline differential predictors of response of major relevance to tailor the best therapeutic option to each patient. Baseline clinical and laboratory characteristics of real-world AB-treated HCC patients were analyzed in uni- and multivariate analyses to find potential prognostic factors of overall survival (OS). Significant variables were incorporated in a composite score (α-FAtE) and it was tested for specificity and sensitivity in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and in multivariate analysis for OS. The score was applied in uni- and multivariate analyses for OS of a comparable lenvatinib-treated HCC population. Finally, comparison between treatments was performed in patients with low and high α-FAtE scores and predictivity estimated by interaction analysis. Time-to-progression (TTP) was a secondary endpoint. OS of AB-treated HCC patients was statistically longer in those with α-fetoprotein <400 ng/mL (HR 0.62, p = .0407), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) <125 IU/L (HR 0.52, p = .0189) and eosinophil count ≥70/μL (HR 0.46, p = .0013). The α-FAtE score was generated by the sum of single points attributed to each variable among the above reported. In ROC curve analysis, superior sensitivity and specificity were achieved by the score compared to individual variables (AUC 0.794, p < .02). Patients with high score had longer OS (HR 0.44, p = .0009) and TTP (HR 0.34, p < .0001) compared to low score if treated with AB, but not with lenvatinib. Overall, AB was superior to lenvatinib in high score patients (HR 0.55, p = .0043) and inferior in low score ones (HR 1.75, p = .0227). At interaction test, low α-FAtE score resulted as negative predictive factor of response to AB (p = .0004). In conclusion, α-FAtE is a novel prognostic and predictive score of response to first-line AB for HCC patients that, if validated in prospective studies, could drive therapeutic choice between lenvatinib and AB.

Pemigatinib for patients with previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements: A joint analysis of the French PEMI-BIL and Italian PEMI-REAL cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Pemigatinib is approved for patients with pretreated, locally advanced or metastatic CCA harboring FGFR2 rearrangements or fusions. We aim to assess the effectiveness and safety of pemigatinib in real-world setting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A joint analysis of two multicentre observational retrospective cohort studies independently conducted in France and Italy was performed. All consecutive FGFR2-positive patients affected by CCA and treated with pemigatinib as second- or further line of systemic treatment in clinical practice, within or outside the European Expanded Access Program, were included.

RESULTS

Between July 2020 and September 2022, 72 patients were treated with pemigatinib in 14 Italian and 25 French Centres. Patients had a median age of 57 years, 76% were female, 81% had ECOG-PS 0-1, 99% had intrahepatic CCA, 74% had ≥ 2 metastatic sites, 67% had metastatic disease at diagnosis, while 38.8% received ≥ 2 previous lines of systemic treatment. At data cut-off analysis (April 2023), ORR and DCR were 45.8% and 84.7%, respectively. Median DoR was 7 months (IQR: 5.8-9.3). Over a median follow-up time of 19.5 months, median PFS and 1-year PFS rate were 8.7 months and 32.8%. Median OS and 1-year OS rate were 17.1 months and 60.6%. Fatigue (69.4%), ocular toxicity (68%), nail toxicities (61.1%), dermatologic toxicity (41.6%) hyperphosphataemia (55.6%), stomatitis (48.6%), and diarrhea (36.1%) were the most frequent, mainly G1-G2 AEs. Overall incidence of G3 AEs was 22.2%, while no patient experienced G4 AE. Dose reduction and temporary discontinuation were needed in 33.3% and 40.3% of cases, with 1 permanent discontinuation due to AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirm the effectiveness and safety of pemigatinib in a real-world setting.

Different Genomic Clusters Impact on Responses in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer Treated with Cisplatin Plus Gemcitabine Plus Durvalumab

BACKGROUND

The results reported in the TOPAZ-1 phase III trial led to the approval of the combination of cisplatin and gemcitabine with durvalumab as the new first-line standard of care for patients with locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a clustering analysis to classify patients into different groups based on their mutation profile, correlating the results of the analysis with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We selected 51 patients with cholangiocarcinoma who were treated with the combination of chemotherapy and durvalumab and who were screened using the next-generation sequencing-based FoundationOne gene panel. We conducted mutation-based clustering of tumors and a survival analysis.

RESULTS

Three main clusters were identified. Cluster 1 is mostly characterized by mutations in genes belonging to the chromatin modification pathway, altered in 100% of patients. Cluster 2 is characterized by the alteration of several pathways, among which DNA damage control, chromatin modification, RTK/RAS, cell-cycle apoptosis, TP53, and PI3K were the most affected. Finally, most altered pathways in cluster 3 were RTK/RAS and cell-cycle apoptosis. Overall response rate was 4/13 (31%), 12/24 (50%), and 0/10 (0%) in cluster 1, cluster 2, and cluster 3, respectively, and the difference between the three clusters was statistically significant (p = 0.0188).

CONCLUSIONS

By grouping patients into three clusters with distinct molecular and genomic alterations, our analysis showed that patients included in cluster 2 had higher overall response rates, whereas patients included in cluster 3 had no objective response. Further investigations on larger and external cohorts are needed in order to validate our results.

Safety and Efficacy of Lenvatinib in Very Old Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Data concerning the use of lenvatinib in very old patients (≥ 80 years) are limited, although the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in this patient population is constantly increasing.

OBJECTIVE

This analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in a large cohort of very old patients (≥ 80 years) with unresectable HCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study was conducted on a cohort of 1325 patients from 46 centers in four Western and Eastern countries (Italy, Germany, Japan, and the Republic of Korea) who were undergoing first-line treatment with lenvatinib between July 2010 and February 2022. Patients were stratified according to age as very old (≥ 80 years) and not very old (< 80 years).

RESULTS

The median overall survival (OS) was 15.7 months for patients < 80 years old and 18.4 months for patients ≥ 80 years old [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-1.25, p = 0.8281]. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 6.3 months for patients < 80 years old and 6.5 months for patients ≥ 80 years old (HR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.91-1.25, p = 0.3954). No differences between the two study groups were found in terms of disease control rate (DCR; 80.8% versus 78.8%; p = 0.44) and response rate (RR; 38.2% versus 37.9%; p = 0.88). Patients < 80 years old experienced significantly more hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) grade ≥ 2 and decreased appetite grade ≥ 2. Conversely, patients ≥ 80 years old experienced significantly more fatigue grade ≥ 2. In the very old group, parameters associated with prognosis were AFP, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC), and Child-Pugh score. BCLC stage was the only independent predictor of overall survival (OS; HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.11-2.29, p = 0.01115).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the same efficacy and safety of lenvatinib between very old and not very old patients.

Artificial intelligence-based pathology as a biomarker of sensitivity to atezolizumab-bevacizumab in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicentre retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Clinical benefits of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezolizumab-bevacizumab) are observed only in a subset of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and the development of biomarkers is needed to improve therapeutic strategies. The atezolizumab-bevacizumab response signature (ABRS), assessed by molecular biology profiling techniques, has been shown to be associated with progression-free survival after treatment initiation. The primary objective of our study was to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model able to estimate ABRS expression directly from histological slides, and to evaluate if model predictions were associated with progression-free survival.

METHODS

In this multicentre retrospective study, we developed a model (ABRS-prediction; ABRS-P), which was derived from the previously published clustering-constrained attention multiple instance learning (or CLAM) pipeline. We trained the model fit for regression analysis using a multicentre dataset from The Cancer Genome Atlas (patients treated by surgical resection, n=336). The ABRS-P model was externally validated on two independent series of samples from patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (a surgical resection series, n=225; and a biopsy series, n=157). The predictive value of the model was further tested in a series of biopsy samples from a multicentre cohort of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab (n=122). All samples in the study were from adults (aged ≥18 years). The validation sets were sampled between Jan 1, 2008, to Jan 1, 2023. For the multicentre validation set, the primary objective was to assess the association of high versus low ABRS-P values, defined relative to cross-validation median split thresholds in the first biopsy series, with progression-free survival after treatment initiation. Finally, we performed spatial transcriptomics and matched prediction heatmaps with in situ expression profiles.

FINDINGS

Of the 840 patients sampled, 641 (76%) were male and 199 (24%) were female. Across the development and validation datasets, hepatocellular carcinoma risk factors included alcohol intake, hepatitis B and C virus infections, and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. Using cross-validation in the development series, the mean Pearson's correlation between ABRS-P values and ABRS score (mean expression of ABRS genes) was r=0·62 (SD 0·09; mean p<0·0001, SD<0·0001). The ABRS-P generalised well on the external validation series (surgical resection series, r=0·60 [95% CI 0·51-0·68], p<0·0001; biopsy series, r=0·53 [0·40-0·63], p<0·0001). In the 122 patients treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab, those with ABRS-P-high tumours (n=74) showed significantly longer median progression-free survival than those with ABRS-P-low tumours (n=48) after treatment initiation (12 months [95% CI 7-not reached] vs 7 months [4-9]; p=0·014). Spatial transcriptomics showed significantly higher ABRS score, along with upregulation of various other immune effectors, in tumour areas with high ABRS-P values versus areas with low ABRS-P values.

INTERPRETATION

Our study indicates that AI applied on hepatocellular carcinoma digital slides is able to serve as a biomarker for progression-free survival in patients treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab. This approach could be used in the development of inexpensive and fast biomarkers for targeted therapies. The combination of AI heatmaps with spatial transcriptomics provides insight on the molecular features associated with predictions. This methodology could be applied to other cancers or diseases and improve understanding of the biological mechanisms that drive responses to treatments.

FUNDING

Institut National du Cancer, Fondation ARC, China Scholarship Council, Ligue Contre le Cancer du Val de Marne, Fondation de l'Avenir, Ipsen, and Fondation Bristol Myers Squibb Pour la Recherche en Immuno-Oncologie.

Radial and longitudinal margins in surgery of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: When R1 definition is associated with different prognosis

BACKGROUND

Infiltrated margins of resection (R1) and lymph node invasion are dominant negative predictors of survival in patients with a resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Less clear is whether survival predictors stratify differently between R0 (tumor-free margins) and R1 patients and whether the prognosis of the latter patients is influenced by the pattern of neoplastic infiltration (ie, radial versus longitudinal infiltration). We retrospectively evaluated a series of reported resected perihilar cholangiocarcinoma to obtain insights on the predictive power of these histologic features.

METHODS

The study includes 264 patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma treated between 2004 and 2019 in our center and followed up for >18 months. There were 176 patients with R0 (66.6%) and 88 patients with R1 (33.3%), 31 with radial infiltration only, 30 with longitudinal infiltration only, and 27 with both infiltration patterns. In all patients, the criteria for resection was the absence of metastatic involvement (ie, distant organ metastases, liver metastases, and lymph node metastases beyond the hepatoduodenal ligament). Histopathologic specimens of the resected tumors were centrally reviewed by a pathologist unaware of the clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Three- and 5-year long-term survival were significantly better in R0 (respectively) compared to R1 patients (55% and 42% vs 42% and 18%, respectively, P < .05). In R1 patients with radial infiltration only and those with radial + longitudinal infiltration, both disease-free and overall survival were worse than those with longitudinal infiltration only (median disease-free survival of 18 and 23 months, respectively, P < .05, median overall survival of 33 and 39 months, respectively, P < .05). At multivariable analysis, nodal status, side of hepatectomy, grading, and presence of radial margin infiltration were associated with long-term outcome.

CONCLUSION

Radial infiltration of resection margins enhances the negative prognostic value of R1 margins in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma patients and should specifically be accounted for in the prediction of the outcome of adjuvant therapy.

Durvalumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced biliary tract cancer: An early exploratory analysis of real-world data

BACKGROUND

The TOPAZ-1 phase III trial reported a survival benefit with the anti-programmed death cell ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. The present study investigated the efficacy and safety of this new standard treatment in a real-world setting.

METHODS

The analysed population included patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the biliary tract treated with durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin at 17 Italian centres. The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS), whereas secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) by baseline characteristics were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

From February 2022 to November 2022, 145 patients were enrolled. After a median follow-up of 8.5 months (95% CI: 7.9-13.6), the median PFS was 8.9 months (95% CI: 7.4-11.7). Median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI: 10.9-12.9). The investigator-assessed confirmed ORR was 34.5%, and the disease control rate was 87.6%. Any grade adverse events (AEs) occurred in 137 patients (94.5%). Grades 3-4 AEs occurred in 51 patients (35.2%). The rate of immune-mediated AEs (imAEs) was 22.7%. Grades 3-4 imAEs occurred in 2.1% of the patients. In univariate analysis, non-viral aetiology, ECOG PS >0 and NLR ≥3 correlated with shorter PFS.

CONCLUSION

The results reported in this first real-world analysis mostly confirmed the results achieved in the TOPAZ-1 trial in terms of PFS, ORR and safety.

Sequential therapies after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib first-line treatments in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this retrospective proof-of-concept study was to compare different second-line treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and progressive disease (PD) after first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1381 patients had PD at first-line therapy. 917 patients received lenvatinib as first-line treatment, and 464 patients atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as first-line.

RESULTS

49.6% of PD patients received a second-line therapy without any statistical difference in overall survival (OS) between lenvatinib (20.6months) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line (15.7months; p = 0.12; hazard ratio [HR]= 0.80). After lenvatinib first-line, there wasn't any statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p = 0.27; sorafenib HR: 1; immunotherapy HR: 0.69; other therapies HR: 0.85). Patients who underwent trans-arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) had a significative longer OS than patients who received sorafenib (24.7 versus 15.8months, p < 0.01; HR=0.64). After atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line, there was a statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p < 0.01; sorafenib HR: 1; lenvatinib HR: 0.50; cabozantinib HR: 1.29; other therapies HR: 0.54). Patients who received lenvatinib (17.0months) and those who underwent TACE (15.9months) had a significative longer OS than patients treated with sorafenib (14.2months; respectively, p = 0.01; HR=0.45, and p < 0.05; HR=0.46).

CONCLUSION

Approximately half of patients receiving first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab access second-line treatment. Our data suggest that in patients progressed to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is lenvatinib, while in patients progressed to lenvatinib, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is immunotherapy.

Clinical outcomes with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter real-world study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to compare response rates of lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in first-line real-world setting.

METHODS

Overall cohort included Western and Eastern hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patient populations from 46 centres in 4 countries (Italy, Germany, Japan, and Republic of Korea).

RESULTS

1312 patients were treated with lenvatinib, and 823 patients were treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Objective response rate (ORR) was 38.6% for patients receiving lenvatinib, and 27.3% for patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (p < 0.01; odds ratio 0.60). For patients who achieved complete response (CR), overall survival (OS) was not reached in both arms, but the result from univariate Cox regression model showed 62% reduction of death risk for patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (p = 0.05). In all multivariate analyses, treatment arm was not found to be an independent factor conditioning OS. Comparing ORR achieved in the two arms, there was a statistically significant difference in favor of lenvatinib compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in all subgroups except for Eastern patients, Child-Pugh B patients, presence of portal vein thrombosis, α-feto-protein ≥ 400 ng/mL, presence of extrahepatic disease, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 2, and no previous locoregional procedures.

CONCLUSION

Lenvatinib achieves higher ORR in all patient subgroups. Patients who achieve CR with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab can achieve OS so far never recorded in HCC patients. This study did not highlight any factors that could identify patient subgroups capable of obtaining CR.

Survival outcomes from atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus Lenvatinib in Child Pugh B unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients

INTRODUCTION

The best first-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and Child-Pugh (CP) class B remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to perform a real-world analysis on a large sample of patients with unresectable HCC with CP B treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab Vs Lenvatinib.

METHODS

The study population included patients affected by advanced (BCLC-C) or intermediate (BCLC-B) HCC patients not suitable for locoregional therapies from both the Western and Eastern world (Italy, Germany, Republic of Korea and Japan), who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or Lenvatinib as first-line treatment. All the study population presented a CP class of B. The primary endpoint of the study was the overall survival (OS) of CP B patients treated with Lenvatinib compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Survival curves were estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan-Meier. The role of stratification factors was analyzed with log-rank tests. Finally, an interaction test was performed for the main baseline clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

217 CP B HCC patients were enrolled in the study: 65 (30%) received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, and 152 (70%) received lenvatinib. The mOS for patients receiving Lenvatinib was 13.8 months (95% CI: 11.6-16.0), compared to 8.2 months (95% CI 6.3-10.2) for patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment (atezolizumab plus bevacizumab Vs Lenvatinib: HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-3.0, p = 0.0050). No statistically significant differences were highlighted in terms of mPFS. The multivariate analysis confirmed that patients receiving Lenvatinib as first-line treatment have a significantly longer OS compared to patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (HR 2.01; 95% CI 1.29-3.25, p = 0.0023). By evaluating the cohort of patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, we found that Child B patients with ECOG PS 0, or BCLC B stage or ALBI grade 1 were those who had benefited from the treatment thus showing survival outcomes no significantly different compared to those receiving Lenvatinib.

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests for the first time a major benefit from Lenvatinib compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in a large cohort of patients with CP B class HCC.

Updated survival outcomes with ivosidenib in patients with previously treated IDH1-mutated intrahepatic-cholangiocarcinoma: an Italian real-world experience

Background

The results of the phase III ClarIDHy trial led to the FDA approval of ivosidenib as a therapeutic option for patients with locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) harboring isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations. We recently published the first data on the use of ivosidenib in a real-world setting.

Objective

Here we report the updated survival results of 11 patients with locally advanced or metastatic IDH1-mutated CCA who received ivosidenib in clinical practice.

Patients and methods

Patients treated with ivosidenib as second- and third-line treatments for advanced CCA have been collected with the aim to evaluate the survival outcomes. A molecular study has been performed by next generation sequencing essay.

Results

Overall, 11 patients were included. After a median follow-up of 13.7 months, median progression-free survival from the start of treatment with ivosidenib was 4.4 months (95% CI: 2.0-5.8), whereas median overall survival was 15 months (95% CI: 6.6-15.0) regardless of treatment line. Disease control rate was 63%, with two patients achieving a partial response (18%). Eighteen percent of patients experienced at least one treatment-related adverse events (AEs), but no grade ⩾3 was reported. The most frequently observed grade 2 AEs were prolonged QT interval and hypomagnesemia. A molecular profiling was performed on 8 out of 11 patients, highlighting TP53, BAP1, CDKN2A, and CDKN2B as the most common co-altered genes in these patients.

Conclusion

The present update confirms the results of our previous real-world experience on the use of ivosidenib in IDH1-mutated CCA. Real-world evidence on larger numbers of patients is needed to confirm our findings.

Past, present, and future of FGFR inhibitors in cholangiocarcinoma: from biological mechanisms to clinical applications

INTRODUCTION

Biliary tract carcinoma (BTC) is a heterogenous group of aggressive hepatic malignancies, second to hepatocellular carcinoma per prevalence. Despite clinical research advancement, the overall 5-year survival rate is just above 2%. With the identification of somatic core mutations in half of cholangiocarcinomas. In the intrahepatic subtype (iCCA), it is possible to target mutational pathways of pharmacological interest.

AREAS COVERED

Major attention has been drawn to fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR), especially the type 2 (FGFR2), found mutated in 10-15% of iCCAs. FGFR2 fusions became the target of novel tyrosine-kinase inhibitors investigated in clinical studies, showing promising results so as to gain regulatory approval by American and European committees in recent years. Such drugs demonstrated a better impact on the quality of life compared to standard chemotherapy; however, side effects including hyperphosphatemia, gastrointestinal, eye, and nail disorders are common although mostly manageable.

EXPERT OPINION

As FGFR inhibitors may soon become the new alternative to standard chemotherapy in FGFR-mutated cholangiocarcinoma, accurate molecular testing and monitoring of acquired resistance mechanisms will be essential. The possible application of FGFR inhibitors in first-line treatment, as well as in combination with current standard treatments, remains the next step to be taken.

The Prognostic Role of Baseline Eosinophils in HPV-Related Cancers: a Multi-institutional Analysis of Anal SCC and OPC Patients Treated with Radical CT-RT

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) are rare tumors associated with HPV infection. Bioumoral predictors of response to chemoradiation (CT-RT) are lacking in these settings. With the aim to find new biomarkers, we investigated the role of eosinophils in both HPV-positive anal SCC and HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer (OPC).

METHODS

We retrieved clinical and laboratory data of patients with HPV-positive anal SCC treated with CT-RT in 5 institutions, and patients with locally advanced OPC SCC treated with CT-RT in 2 institutions. We examined the association between baseline eosinophil count (the best cutoff has been evaluated by ROC curve analysis: 100 × 10^9/L) and disease-free survival (DFS). Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios by baseline characteristics were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Three hundred four patients with HPV-positive anal SCCs and 168 patients with OPCs (122 HPV-positive, 46 HPV-negative diseases) were analyzed. In anal SCC, low eosinophil count (< 100 × 10^9/L) correlates to a better DFS (HR = 0.59; p = 0.0392); likewise, in HPV-positive OPC, low eosinophil count correlates to a better DFS (HR = 0.50; p = 0.0428). In HPV-negative OPC, low eosinophil count confers worse DFS compared to high eosinophil count (HR = 3.53; p = 0.0098). After adjustment for age and sex, eosinophils were confirmed to be independent prognostic factors for DFS (HR = 4.55; p = 0.0139).

CONCLUSION

Eosinophil count could be used as a prognostic factor in anal HPV-positive SCC. The worse prognosis showed in HPV-positive patients with high eosinophil count is likely to derive from an unfavorable interaction between the HPV-induced immunomodulation and eosinophils, which may hamper the curative effect of RT.

Understanding the causes of recurrent HCC after liver resection and radiofrequency ablation

INTRODUCTION

Surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation are preferred options for early-stage disease, with 5-year recurrence rates as high as 70% when patients are treated according to guidelines. With increasing availability of therapeutic options, including but not limited to, immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), tyrosine kinase inhibitors, antiangiogenics, and adoptive cell therapies, understanding the causes of recurrence and identifying its predictors should be priorities in the hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) research agenda.

AREAS COVERED

Current knowledge of HCC predictors of recurrence is reviewed, and recent insights about its underlying mechanisms are presented. In addition, results from recent clinical trials investigating treatment combinations are critically appraised.

EXPERT OPINION

HCC recurrence is either due to progressive growth of microscopic residual disease, or to de novo cancer development in the context of a diseased liver, each occurring in an early (<2years) vs. late (≥2 years) fashion. Collectively, morphological, proteomic, and transcriptomic data suggest vascular invasion and angiogenesis as key drivers of HCC recurrence. Agents aimed at blocking either of these two hallmarks should be prioritized at the moment of early-stage HCC clinical trial design. Emerging results from clinical trials testing ICI in early-stage HCC underscore the importance of defining the best treatment sequence and the most appropriate combination strategies. Lastly, as different responses to systemic therapies are increasingly defined according to the HCC etiology, patient enrolment into clinical trials should take into account the biological characteristics of their inherent disease.

Identification of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab Prognostic Index via Recursive Partitioning Analysis in HCC: The ABE Index

BACKGROUND/AIM

The purpose of this study was to ascertain a novel prognostic index via recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients being treated with the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ABE) in first-line setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 784 patients with HCC were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

RPA identified three groups of patients: high-risk [Child-Pugh B (CP-B) patients; CP-A and Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI)-2 patients; CP-A and ALBI-1 patients with macrovascular invasion (MVI), and alpha-fetoprotein (α-FP) ≥400 ng/ml]; intermediate-risk [CP-A and ALBI-1 patients with aspartate aminotransferase (AST) normal value (NV), and αFP ≥400 ng/ml, but without MVI; CP-A and ALBI-1 patients with AST increased value (IV), and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥3, but without MVI]; low-risk (CP-A and ALBI-1 patients with AST NV, and αFP <400 ng/ml, but without MVI; CP-A and ALBI-1 patients with AST IV, and NLR <3, but without MVI; CP-A and ALBI-1 patients with MVI, and αFP <400 ng/ml). Overall survival was 7.0 months in high-risk patients (20.8%), 14.2 months in intermediate-risk patients (19.1%), and 22.5 months in low-risk patients (60.1%).

CONCLUSION

The ABE index allows for easy stratification of HCC patients treated with the combination of ABE in first-line setting.

Real-World Data for Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: How Does Adherence to the IMbrave150 Trial Inclusion Criteria Impact Prognosis?

BACKGROUND

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has recently been approved as a new first-line standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

OBJECTIVE

We performed a real-world study to evaluate the impact of the IMbrave150 trial inclusion criteria on the safety and efficacy of treatment outside of clinical trials.

METHODS

We analyzed patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for unresectable HCC from four different countries. No specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, except for the absence of previous systemic therapies for HCC. The entire population was split into two groups according to concordance with the inclusion criteria as reported in the IMbrave150 trial in 'IMbrave150-in' and 'IMbrave150-out' patients, and safety and efficacy in the two groups of patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 766 patients were included in the analysis: 561/766 (73%) in the 'IMbrave150-in' group and 205/766 (27%) in the 'IMbrave150-out' group. Median overall survival (OS) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were 16.3 versus 14.3 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-0.65; p < 0.0001] and 8.3 versus 6.0 months (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99; p = 0.0431) in 'IMbrave150-in' and 'IMbrave150-out' patients, respectively. Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients included in the 'IMbrave150-in' group had significantly longer OS compared with patients included in the 'IMbrave150-out' group (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.47-0.97; p = 0.0195). In 'IMbrave150-in' patients, the albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade was not associated with OS, whereas in 'IMbrave150-out' patients, those with ALBI grade 1 reported a significant benefit in terms of OS compared with those with ALBI grade 2 (16.7 vs. 5.9 months; HR 4.40, 95% CI 2.40-8.08; p > 0.0001). No statistically significant differences were reported in the 'IMbrave150-in' and 'IMbrave150-out' groups in terms of safety profile.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the IMbrave150 trial inclusion criteria favorably impacts the prognosis of patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Among patients who did not meet the IMbrave150 inclusion criteria, those with ALBI grade 1 could benefit from the treatment.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a large real-life worldwide population

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib have not been compared in a randomised controlled trial. We conducted a retrospective multi-centre study to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and atezolizumab with bevacizumab as a first-line treatment for patients with unresectable HCC in the real-world scenario.

METHODS

Clinical features of lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab patients were balanced through inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology, which weights patients' characteristics and measured outcomes of each patient in both treatment arms. Overall survival (OS) was the primary end-point.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1341 patients who received lenvatinib, and 864 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. After IPTW adjustment, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab did not show a survival advantage over lenvatinib HR 0.97 (p = 0.739). OS was prolonged by atezolizumab plus bevacizumab over lenvatinib in viral patients (HR: 0.76; p = 0.024). Conversely, OS was prolonged by lenvatinib in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis/non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (HR: 1.88; p = 0.014). In the IPTW-adjusted population, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab provided better safety profile for most of the recorded adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Our study did not identify any meaningful difference in OS between atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib. Although some hints are provided suggesting that patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis/non-alcoholic fatty liver disease might benefit more from lenvatinib therapy and patients with viral aetiology more from atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

The beneficial impact of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease on lenvatinib treatment in patients with non-viral hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

Lenvatinib is used to treat advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) is becoming a major etiology of HCC. We aimed to evaluate the impact of MAFLD on the efficacy of lenvatinib.

METHODS

We enrolled 320 patients with HCC who were treated with lenvatinib. All patients were classified into the MAFLD (n = 155) and non-MAFLD (n = 165) groups. Independent factors for overall survival (OS) were analyzed. In the stratification analysis, HCC was categorized as non-viral (n = 115) or viral HCC (n = 205).

RESULTS

The OS rate was significantly higher in the MAFLD group than in the non-MAFLD group (median 21.1 vs. 15.1 months, p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that, in addition to albumin-bilirubin grade and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage, MAFLD was identified as an independent factor for OS (HR 0.722, 95% CI 0.539-0.966, p = 0.028). In the stratification analysis, the OS rate was significantly higher in the MAFLD group than in the non-MAFLD group among patients with non-viral HCC (median 21.1 vs. 15.1 months, p = 0.002), but not in patients with viral HCC. Furthermore, MAFLD was an independent negative risk factor for OS in patients with non-viral HCC (HR 0.506, 95% CI 0.297-0.864, P < 0.01). However, MAFLD was not an independent factor for OS in patients with viral HCC.

CONCLUSIONS

MAFLD was a beneficial factor for survival in patients with HCC treated with lenvatinib. Moreover, the better OS of the MAFLD group was more pronounced in patients with non-viral HCC. Lenvatinib may be a suitable agent for patients with non-viral HCC and MAFLD.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A large, real-life, worldwide population

579

Background: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib have not been compared in a randomized controlled trial. We conducted a retrospective multi-center study to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and atezolizumab with bevacizumab as a first-line treatment for patients with unresectable HCC in the real-world scenario. Methods: Clinical features of lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab patients were balanced through inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology, which weights patients' characteristics and measured outcomes of each patient in both treatment arms. Overall survival was the primary endpoint. Results: The analysis included 1,341 patients who received lenvatinib, and 864 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. After IPTW adjustment, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab did not show a survival advantage over lenvatinib HR 0.97 (p=0.739). OS was prolonged by atezolizumab plus bevacizumab over lenvatinib in viral patients (HR: 0.76; p=0.024). Conversely, OS was prolonged by lenvatinib in patients with NASH/NAFLD (HR: 1.88; p=0.014). In the IPTW-adjusted population, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab provided better safety profile for most of the recorded adverse events. Conclusions: Our study did not identify any meaningful difference in overall survival between atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib. Although some hints are provided suggesting that patients with NASH/NAFLD might benefit more from lenvatinib therapy and patients with viral etiology more from atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

Role of the prognostic nutritional index in predicting survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab

INTRODUCTION

The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) is a multiparametric score introduced by Onodera based on the blood levels of lymphocytes and albumin in patients with gastrointestinal neoplasms. Regarding hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), its prognostic role has been demonstrated in patients treated with sorafenib and lenvatinib. The aim of this real-world study is to investigate the association between clinical outcomes and PNI in patients being treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

METHODS

The overall cohort of this multicentric study included 871 consecutive HCC patients from 4 countries treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in first-line therapy. The PNI was calculated as follows: 10 × serum albumin concentration (g/dL) + 0.005 × peripheral lymphocyte count (number/mm3).

RESULTS

For only 773 patients, data regarding lymphocyte counts and albumin levels were available, so only these patients were included in the final analysis. The cut-off point of the PNI was determined to be 41 by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. 268 patients (34.7%) were categorized as the PNI-low group, while the remaining 505 (65.3%) patients as the PNI-high group. At the univariate analysis, high PNI was associated with longer overall survival (OS) (22.5 vs. 10.1 months, HR 0.34, p < 0.01) and progression-free survival (PFS) (8.7 vs. 5.8 months, HR 0.63, p < 0.01) compared to patients with low PNI. At the multivariate analysis, high versus low PNI resulted as an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 0.49 , p < 0.01) and PFS (HR 0.82, p = 0.01). There was no difference in objective response rate (ORR) between the two groups (high 26.1% vs. low 19.8%, p = 0.09), while disease control rate (DCR) was significantly higher in the PNI-high group (76.8% vs. 66.4%, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

PNI is an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS in HCC patients on first-line treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

Clinical Outcomes After Progression on First-Line Therapies in IDH1 Mutated Versus Wild-Type Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Patients

BACKGROUND

Isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 (IDH1) mutations occur in a significant proportion of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (iCCAs). No data are available regarding the prognostic impact of IDH1 mutations in advanced iCCA patients after progression on first-line therapies.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the role of IDH1 mutation in advanced iCCA after progression on first-line therapies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After progression on first-line therapies for advanced iCCA, consecutive patients were retrospectively collected. The IDH1 status was tested at baseline. This analysis aimed to examine the association between the presence of IDH1 missense mutations and survival outcomes in patients with advanced iCCA treated with a second-line therapy.

RESULTS

The analysis included 119 patients; 56/119 (47%) were IDH1 mutated (IDH1m) and 63/119 (53%) were IDH1 wild type (IDH1 WT). At univariate analysis for overall survival (OS), the presence of IDH1 mutation was associated with a worse median OS (mOS; 8.2 vs. 14.1 months; hazard ratio [HR] 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.0, p = 0.0047). Patients harboring IDH1 mutations showed a worse objective response rate (ORR) compared with patients without IDH1 mutation, whereas no significant differences in disease control rate (DCR) were found. Multivariate analysis confirmed IDH1 mutations as an independent negative prognostic factor for OS (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.7, p = 0.0256). By evaluating only patients receiving FOLFOX as second-line therapy, no statistically significant differences were found in terms of both OS and PFS between IDH1m and IDH1 WT patients. In this subset of patients, those harboring an IDH1 mutation showed a worse ORR and DCR compared with those without. Finally, at univariate analysis for OS from third-line treatment, the presence of an IDH1 mutation was associated with a trend toward a worse mOS (6.0 vs. 11.9 months; HR 1.6, 95% CI 0.8-3.2, p = 0.25).

CONCLUSION

The present analysis constitutes the first evidence of a negative prognostic impact of IDH1 mutations in a cohort of patients treated after progression on first-line therapies in contrast to IDH1 inhibitors.

Five years of lenvatinib in hepatocellular carcinoma: are there any predictive and/or prognostic factors?

INTRODUCTION

Lenvatinib was the first drug approved in 2017 for first-line treatment of hepatocarcinoma (HCC) after 10 years of Sorafenib as exclusive standard of care. The therapeutic armamentarium has recently expanded following the approval of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

AREAS COVERED

Numerous studies have been conducted during the past 5 years on Lenvatinib use in real-world settings in an effort to determine prognostic and predictive factors of Lenvatinib efficacy. In order to choose the most effective therapeutic approach, it may be helpful to summarize these results in this review.

EXPERT OPINION

A subgroup that appears to benefit most from Lenvatinib therapy are patients with non-viral cirrhosis. This aspect is of great importance today considering the increase in NASH prevalence. Also, a significant proportion of BCLC B patients appear to respond well to Lenvatinib therapy. The biological heterogeneity highlighted in HCC patients, along with the growing number of therapeutic options, makes the identification of stratification tools able to define which patients are more likely to respond to a treatment rather than another one of crucial interest. Further investigation deepening the biological pathways underlying HCC carcinogenesis are of particular interest in order to pave the way for precision medicine even for HCC patients.

Validation of the easy-to-use lenvatinib prognostic index to predict prognosis in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with lenvatinib

AIM

The identification of new prognostic factors able to stratify hepatocellular carcinoma patients candidate to first-line therapy is urgent. In the present work we validated the prognostic value of the lenvatinib prognostic index.

METHODS

Data of Eastern and Western patients treated with lenvatinib as first-line for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma were recollected. The lenvatinib prognostic index was composed by three classes of risk according with our previous study. The "low risk" group includes patients with prognostic nutritional index (PNI) >43.3 and with previous transarterial chemoembolization. The "medium risk" group includes patients with PNI >43.3, but without previous transarterial chemoembolization and patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin grade 1 and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B. The "high risk" group includes patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin grade 2, and patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin grade 1 and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C.

RESULTS

A total of 717 patients were included. The median overall survival was 20.7 months (95% CI 16.1-51.6) in patients with low risk (n = 223), 16.7 months (95% CI 13.3-47.0) in patients with medium risk (n = 264), and 10.7 months (95% CI 9.3-12.2) in patients with high risk (n = 230; HR 1, 1.29, and 1.92, respectively; p < 0.0001). Median progression-free survival was 7.3 months (95% CI 6.3-46.5) in patients with low risk, 6.4 months (95% CI 5.3-8.0) in patients with medium risk ,and 4.9 months (95% CI 4.3-5.5) in patients with high risk (HR 1, 1.07, 1.47 respectively; p = 0.0009).

CONCLUSION

The lenvatinib prognostic index confirms its prognostic value on an external cohort of hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with Lenvatinib.

Molecular profile and its clinical impact of IDH1 mutated versus IDH1 wild type intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

IDH1-mutated cholangiocarcinomas (CCAs) are an interesting group of neoplasia with particular behavior and therapeutic implications. The aim of the present work is to highlight the differences characterizing IDH1m and IDH1wt CCAs in terms of genomic landscape. 284 patients with iCCA treated for resectable, locally advanced or metastatic disease were selected and studied with the FOUNDATION Cdx technology. A comparative genomic analysis and survival analyses for the most relevant altered genes were performed between IDH1m and IDH1wt patients. Overall, 125 patients were IDH1m and 122 IDH1wt. IDH1m patients showed higher mutation rates compared to IDH1wt in CDKN2B and lower mutation rates in several genes including TP53, FGFR2, BRCA2, ATM, MAP3K1, NOTCH2, ZNF703, CCND1, NBN, NF1, MAP3KI3, and RAD21. At the survival analysis, IDH1m and IDH1wt patients showed no statistically differences in terms of survival outcomes, but a trend in favor of IDH1wt patients was observed. Differences in prognostic values of the most common altered genes were reported. In surgical setting, in IDH1m group the presence of CDKN2A and CDKN2B mutations negatively impact DFS, whereas the presence of CDKN2A, CDKN2B, and PBRM1 mutations negatively impact OS. In advanced setting, in the IDH1m group, the presence of KRAS/NRAS and TP53 mutations negatively impact PFS, whereas the presence of TP53 and PIK3CA mutations negatively impact OS; in the IDH1wt group, only the presence of MTAP mutation negatively impact PFS, whereas the presence of TP53 mutation negatively impact OS. We highlighted several molecular differences with distinct prognostic implications between IDH1m and IDH1wt patients.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib in non-viral unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: an international propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

A growing body of evidence suggests that non-viral hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) might benefit less from immunotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients with non-viral advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib, or sorafenib, in 36 centers in 4 countries (Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, and UK). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib, and OS and PFS with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib. For the primary and secondary endpoints, we carried out the analysis on the whole population first, and then we divided the cohort into two groups: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) population and non-NAFLD/NASH population.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety patients received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, 569 patients received lenvatinib, and 210 patients received sorafenib. In the whole population, multivariate analysis showed that treatment with lenvatinib was associated with a longer OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.95; P = 0.0268] and PFS (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.51-0.86; P = 0.002) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the NAFLD/NASH population, multivariate analysis confirmed that lenvatinib treatment was associated with a longer OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.84; P = 0.0110) and PFS (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.38-0.82; P = 0.031) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the subgroup of non-NAFLD/NASH patients, no difference in OS or PFS was observed between patients treated with lenvatinib and those treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. All these results were confirmed following propensity score matching analysis. By comparing patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib, no statistically significant difference in survival was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis conducted on a large number of advanced non-viral HCC patients showed for the first time that treatment with lenvatinib is associated with a significant survival benefit compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in particular in patients with NAFLD/NASH-related HCC.

Prognostic implication of serum AFP in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with regorafenib

Background: This multicenter study investigated the predictive value of baseline AFP and on-treatment AFP response for survival in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with regorafenib. Materials & methods: A total of 578 patients with HCC treated with regorafenib from 12 institutions in South Korea and Italy were included. Baseline AFP (cutoff, 400 ng/ml) and AFP response (20% reduction from baseline) were analyzed for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Baseline AFP below 400 ng/ml was a significant factor that was independently associated with longer OS and PFS. AFP response was also a significant factor independently associated with longer OS and PFS. Conclusion: Baseline AFP and AFP response may be used as prognostic factors for survival in HCC treated with regorafenib.

Real Life Study of Lenvatinib Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: RELEVANT Study

INTRODUCTION

In the REFLECT trial, lenvatinib was found to be noninferior compared to sorafenib in terms of overall survival. Here, we analyze the effects of lenvatinib in the real-life experience of several centers across the world and identify clinical factors that could be significantly associated with survival outcomes.

METHODS

The study population was derived from retrospectively collected data of HCC patients treated with lenvatinib. The overall cohort included western and eastern populations from 23 center in five countries.

RESULTS

We included 1,325 patients with HCC and treated with lenvatinib in our analysis. Median OS was 16.1 months. Overall response rate was 38.5%. Multivariate analysis for OS highlighted that HBsAg positive, NLR >3, and AST >38 were independently associated with poor prognosis in all models. Conversely, NAFLD/NASH-related etiology was independently associated with good prognosis. Median progression-free survival was 6.3 months. Multivariate analysis for progression-free survival revealed that NAFLD/NASH, BCLC, NLR, and AST were independent prognostic factors for progression-free survival. A proportion of 75.2% of patients suffered from at least one adverse effect during the study period. Multivariate analysis exhibited the appearance of decreased appetite grade ≥2 versus grade 0-1 as an independent prognostic factor for worse progression-free survival. 924 patients of 1,325 progressed during lenvatinib (69.7%), and 827 of them had a follow-up over 2 months from the beginning of second-line treatment. From first-line therapy, the longest median OS was obtained with the sequence lenvatinib and immunotherapy (47.0 months), followed by TACE (24.7 months), ramucirumab (21.2 months), sorafenib (15.7 months), regorafenib (12.7 months), and best supportive care (10.8 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms in a large and global population of patients with advanced HCC, not candidates for locoregional treatment the OS reported in the registration study and a high response rate with lenvatinib.

Gene mutational profile of BRCAness and clinical implication in predicting response to platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Biliary tract cancers are rare malignancies with a poor prognosis and scarce therapeutic strategies. The significance of BRCAness in this setting is already unknown.

METHOD

Tissue specimens of BTC patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy have been analyzed through the FOUNDATIONPne assay.

RESULTS

72/150 (48%) BRCAness mutated and 78/150 (52.0%) wild type (WT) patients were included. The most commonly mutated genes in the BRCAness mutated group were: ARID1A (N = 32, 44%), CDKN2A (N = 23, 32%), KRAS/NRAS (N = 16, 22%), CDKN2B (N = 13, 18%), BRCA2 (N = 13, 18%), PBRM1 (N = 12, 17%), ATM (N = 11, 15%), FGFR2 (N = 10, 14%), TP53 (N = 8, 11%), IRS2 (N = 7, 10%), CREBBP (N = 7, 10%) (table 3, figure 1). At the univariate analysis BRCAness mutation was associated with longer median Progression Free Survival (mPFS) (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.49-0.95; p = 0.0254); it was not associated with longer mOS but a trend toward a benefit in survival was found (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.50-1.19; p = 0.2388). Patients with BRCAness mutation showed a higher percentage of disease control rate (77.8 vs 67.9; p = 0.04) compared to patients WT. Multivariate analysis confirmed BRCAness mutation (HR 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45-0.98; p = 0.0422) as independent favorable prognostic factors for PFS and a positive trend was found for OS (HR 0.84; 95% CI: 0.53-1.33; p = 0.3652).

CONCLUSION

BRCAness BTC patients showed a better PFS compared BRCAnessWT patients after exposure to platinum-based chemotherapy. Moreover, the OS curves' trend showed in our analysis suggests that BRCAness mutated patients could benefit from a maintenance therapy with PARPi.

Platinum sensitivity in patients with IDH1/2 mutated versus wild-type intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a propensity score-based study

Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)1/2 mutations are the most frequent druggable alterations in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), reported in ~20% of cases. Preclinical evidence indicates that these mutations are associated with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), which could be exploited as a target for platinum chemotherapy (ChT) and PARP inhibitors. However, the role of IDH1/2 mutations as surrogate biomarkers for platinum efficacy is unknown. We conducted a multicenter, propensity score-matched analysis to investigate the impact of IDH1/2 mutations on progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) in patients with iCCA treated with platinum-based ChT. An exploratory comparison of complex HRD estimates between IDH1/2 mutated and wild-type tumors from TCGA was also performed. A total of 120 cases were matched in a 1:1 ratio (60 IDH1/2 mutant and 60 wild-type). No differences were observed for platinum-based PFS (7.7 vs 7.3 months, p = 0.970), DCR (66.1% vs 74.1%, p = 0.361), ORR (27.8% vs 25.0%, p = 0.741). IDH1/2 mutations showed mutual exclusivity with genomic alterations in ATM, BRCA2, MST1R, NF1, FGFR2 and CDKN2A/B losses, respectively, with no clear survival and response differences. Among TCGA tumors, IDH1/2 mutated CCA did not show higher HRD compared to wild-type cases. IDH1/2 mutations are not associated with increased sensitivity to platinum-based ChT in iCCA patients. Deeper genomic sequencing is needed to elucidate the HRD phenotype in IDH1/2 mutant iCCA and exploit its therapeutic vulnerabilities.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib in non-viral unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: An international study

4069

Background: Recently, several evidences have suggested that patients with a no-viral hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) might be less responsive to immunotherapy and more response to Lenvatinib. Methods: The study population derived from prospectively collected retrospectively analyzed data of patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (AB) or lenvatinib (L) or sorafenib (S) as first-line treatment for advanced HCC or intermediate HCC deemed not eligible for loco-regional therapies. The overall cohort included Western and Eastern patient populations from 36 centers located in 4 countries(Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, and United Kingdom) undergoing treatment with L or AB or with S. The primary endpoint was OS of AB versus L; the secondary endpoints were OS of AB versus S. Results: 569 patients received L, 190 patients received AB and 210 received S. In the whole population OS was 17.8 months (95%CI:15.8-43.8) for patients receiving L, and 12.1 months(95%CI:11.1-16.8)for patients treated with AB (HR 0.71; 95% CI:0.50-1.06; p=0.1028); multivariate analysis for imbalance patients characteristic highlighted that L is an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 0.65; 95% CI:0.44-0.95; p=0.0268), compared AB. In the population affected by NASH/NAFLD, 254 patients were treated with L and 82 patients were treated with AB. OS was 21.2 months (95% CI:18.4-30.6) for patients receiving L, and 12.2 months (95% CI:10.0-16.8) for patients treated with AB (HR 0.46; 95% CI:0.25-0.88; p = 0.0181); multivariate analysis for imbalance patients characteristic highlighted that L is an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI:0.26-0.84; p=0.031),compared AB. In the cohort of no viral and no NASH/NAFLD patients, no statistically significant differences were reported in terms of OS between patients treated with L versus AB. All these results were confirmed following propensity score matching analysis. By comparing patients receiving AB versus S, no significant differences were found in terms of OS in the whole population, in the NASH/NAFLD population and in no viral/no NASH/NAFLD population. Conclusions: The present analysis conducted on a large number of non-viral HCC patients showed for the first time a significant survival benefit from lenvatinib over atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in particular in patients with NAFLD/NASH-related HCC.

Why does survival of hepatocellular carcinoma patients remain so low? Key stumbling blocks and questions in preclinical and clinical development

INTRODUCTION

: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a complex disease which involves diverse molecular pathways and etiologies. In recent years, several new systemic treatments have improved survival in advanced stage disease, but numerous significant challenges remain. No significant improvements have been achieved in the intermediate stage disease; this may be attributed to the difficulties in stratification of patients and the broad spectrum of clinical situations in terms of tumor burden and liver function.

AREAS COVERED

: This article considers the recent progress in first- and second-line therapy for advanced HCC. Investigational strategies conducted in intermediate stage HCC, which involve mainly combination therapy with locoregional approaches and systemic drugs, antiangiogenics, immunotherapies (or both), are then examined. Later, the paper offers insights on the questions and challenges that lie ahead for treating HCC.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical and biomolecular markers for the stratification of patients are needed for therapeutic progress. Further molecular profiling data could enhance our knowledge of the molecular pathways underlying this tumor and facilitate the identification of targetable aberrations. This could offer opportunities for precision medicine approaches and improved survival.

Risk-adjusted analysis of survival variability among hospitals treating biliary malignancy

Biliary tract cancer's (BTC) treatment main stone for advanced stages is constituted by chemotherapy. Surgical centralization and physicians' confidence in the use of new technologies and molecular analysis turned out to be of interest and potentially influencing survival. After applying a random-effect model, the relationship between each clinical variable on the main outcome was investigated through multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression. The risk-standardized outcomes were calculated for each centre involved. In the unadjusted cohort the median survival was 8.6 months (95%C.I.: 7.8-9.3) with a 9-month survival rate of 48.3% (95%C.I.: 45.0-51.5). A substantial heterogeneity across hospitals was found (I²: 70.3%). In multilevel mixed effect logistic regression, male, being treated for gallbladder cancer, higher ECOG, increased NLR, CEA and Ca 19.9 and low value of haemoglobin showed to increase the odds for 9-month mortality. The model estimated that the residual variance observed in 9-month mortality was attributable for the 2.6% to the treating hospital. Through a multilevel mixed effect model, average risk-standardized mortality within 9 months was 50.1%. As noticeable, all hospital's risk-standardized mortality falls within 95%C.I., thus all participating centres provided similar outcomes when adjusted for patient case-mix. Heterogenicity between hospital did not affect the outcome in term of overall survival.