Survival Outcome Analysis of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy and Immunotherapy (SBRT-IO) versus SBRT-Alone in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Introduction: While combination of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and immunotherapy are promising, their efficacy and safety have not been compared with SBRT-alone in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: This retrospective study included 100 patients with nonmetastatic, unresectable HCC in two hospitals. Eligible patients had tumor nodules ≤3 and Child-Pugh liver function score of A5 to B7. Seventy patients received SBRT-alone, and 30 patients underwent combined SBRT and immunotherapy (SBRT-IO). Overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), overall response rate (ORR), and toxicity were analyzed. We adjusted for the potential confounding factors using propensity score matching. Results: The median tumor size was 7.3 cm (range, 2.6-18 cm). Twenty-five (25%) of patients had vascular invasion. Before propensity score matching, the 1-year and 3-year OS rate was 89.9% and 59.8% in the SBRT-IO group and 75.7% and 42.3% in SBRT-alone group (p = 0.039). After propensity score matching (1:2), 25 and 50 patients were selected from the SBRT-IO and SBRT-alone group. The 1-year and 3-year OS was 92.0% and 63.9% in the SBRT-IO group versus 74.0% and 43.3% in the SBRT-alone group (p = 0.034). The 1-year and 3-year TTP was better in SBRT-IO group (1-year: 68.9% vs. 58.9% and 3-year: 61.3% vs. 32.5%, p = 0.057). The ORR of 88% (complete response [CR]: 56%, partial response [PR]: 22%) in SBRT-IO arm was significantly better than 50% (CR: 20%, PR: 30%) in the SBRT-alone arm (p = 0.006). Three patients (12%) developed ≥grade 3 immune-related treatment adverse events (n = 2 hepatitis, n = 1 dermatitis) leading to permanent treatment discontinuation. Conclusion: Adding immunotherapy to SBRT resulted in better survival with manageable toxicities. Prospective randomized trial is warranted.

Sequential transarterial chemoembolisation and stereotactic body radiotherapy followed by immunotherapy as conversion therapy for patients with locally advanced, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (START-FIT): a single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The synergy between locoregional therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors has not been investigated as conversion therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to investigate the activity of sequential transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) and stereotactic body radiotherapy followed by avelumab (an anti-PD-L1 drug) for locally advanced, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: START-FIT was a single-arm, phase 2 trial in patients with locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were not suitable for curative treatment, conducted in two hospitals in Hong Kong and one in Shenzhen, China. Eligible patients were those aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, Child-Pugh liver function score A5 to B7, tumour size of at least 5 cm, a maximum of three tumour lesions, and adequate hepatic, renal, and bone marrow function. Participants received TACE on day 1, followed by stereotactic body radiotherapy (27·5-40·0 Gy in five fractions) at day 28. Avelumab (10 mg/kg) was administered 14 days following stereotactic body radiotherapy and every 2 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients deemed amenable to curative treatment, defined as those who had a sustained complete or partial treatment response for at least 2 months and if curative treatment could be performed (ie, resection, radiofrequency ablation, or transplantation), analysed by intention to treat. Safety was also analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03817736) and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between March 18, 2019, and Jan 27, 2021, 33 patients (32 [97%] men and one [3%] woman) were enrolled. The median sum of the largest diameters of lesions was 15·1 cm (IQR 8·3-14·9). 21 (64%) patients had macrovascular invasion (hepatic vein [n=13], branched portal vein [n=3], or both [n=5]). Median follow-up was 17·2 months (IQR 7·8-25·8). 18 (55%) patients were deemed amenable to curative treatment: four (12%) of 33 patients had curative treatment (resection [n=2] or radiofrequency ablation [n=2]), and 14 (42%) had a radiological complete response and opted for close surveillance. 11 (33%) of 33 patients had treatment-related adverse events that were grade 3 or worse. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse event was transient increase in alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase (five [15%]) after TACE. Five (15%) patients developed immune-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse (three had hepatitis, two had dermatitis). INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first prospective trial using the combination of immunotherapy and locoregional treatment as conversion therapy for locally advanced unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, with promising results. Future randomised trials with larger cohorts of patients are warranted. FUNDING: Merck.

Throwing the dart blind-folded: comparison of computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer with regard to dose received by the 'actual' targets and organs at risk.

PURPOSE: Computed tomography (CT) is inferior to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in cervical tumor delineation, but similar in identification of organs at risk (OAR). The trend to over-estimate high-risk and low-risk clinical target volume (HRCTV, IRCTV) on CT can lead to under-estimation of dose received by 90% (D90) of the 'actual' CTV. This study aims to evaluate whether CT-guided planning delivers adequate dose to the 'actual' targets while spares the OAR similarly. MATERIAL AND METHODS: MRI-guided high-dose-rate image-guided brachytherapy (IGBT) was performed in 11 patients. The pre-brachytherapy CTs were retrospectively contoured to generate CT-guided plans. MRI-based contours (HRCTVmri, IRCTVmri, bladdermri, rectummri, and sigmoidmri) were fused to CT plans for dosimetric comparison with MRI-guided plans. Paired 2-tailed t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to analyze data. RESULTS: 63.6% of CT plans achieved the HRCTVmriD90 constraint (≥ 7.2 Gy in one fraction), compared with 90.9% for MRI plans. > 90% of both modalities achieved the OAR's constraints (EMBRACE). The percentage of CT and MRI plans that achieved the aims (EMBRACE II) for bladder, rectum, and sigmoid were 36.4% vs. 81.8%, 63.6% vs. 63.6%, and 72.7% vs. 72.7%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in HRCTVmriD90, IRCTVmriD90, or dose received by the most exposed 2 cm3 (D2cc) of OARmri between the modalities. Excluding the CT plans not achieving HRCTVmriD90 constraint, there were significant increase in bladdermriD2cc, rectummriD2cc, and sigmoidmriD2cc, compared with MRI plans (0.9 Gy/Fr, 95% CI 0.2-1.5, p = 0.018; 0.9 Gy/Fr, 95% CI 0.3-1.4, p = 0.009; 0.5 Gy/Fr, 95% CI 0.2-0.9, p = 0.027, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: MRI-based IGBT remains the gold standard. CT planning may compromise HRCTVmriD90 or increase OARmriD2cc, which could decrease local control or increase treatment toxicity.