Angiotensin II receptor inhibition ameliorates liver fibrosis and enhances hepatocellular carcinoma infiltration by effector T cells.

Although viral hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is declining, nonviral HCC, which often is the end stage of nonalcoholic or alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH, ASH), is on an upward trajectory. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) that block the T cell inhibitory receptor PD-1 were approved for treatment of all HCC types. However, only a minority of HCC patients show a robust and sustained response to PD-1 blockade, calling for improved understanding of factors that negatively impact response rate and duration and the discovery of new adjuvant treatments that enhance ICI responsiveness. Using a mouse model of NASH-driven HCC, we identified peritumoral fibrosis as a potential obstacle to T cell-mediated tumor regression and postulated that antifibrotic medications may increase ICI responsiveness. We now show that the angiotensin II receptor inhibitor losartan, a commonly prescribed and safe antihypertensive drug, reduced liver and peritumoral fibrosis and substantially enhanced anti-PD-1-induced tumor regression. Although losartan did not potentiate T cell reinvigoration, it substantially enhanced HCC infiltration by effector CD8+ T cells compared to PD-1 blockade alone. The beneficial effects of losartan correlated with blunted TGF-ß receptor signaling, reduced collagen deposition, and depletion of immunosuppressive fibroblasts.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Immunotherapy.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Single-agent anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) demonstrated promising efficacy in early-phase trials, a finding that was not confirmed in phase III studies. The combination of atezolizumab (an anti-PD-L1 ICI) with bevacizumab (an anti-VEGF antibody) was approved as first-line therapy in 2020, however, with significant improvement in response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival in comparison with the previous standard of care, sorafenib. Numerous ongoing clinical trials are assessing ICIs in combination with each other or with targeted agents, and also in earlier stages with local therapies. This review summarizes the latest concepts in the use of ICIs for the management of HCC.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with resected or ablated high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (IMbrave050): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after curative-intent resection or ablation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In the global, open-label, phase 3 IMbrave050 study, adult patients with high-risk surgically resected or ablated hepatocellular carcinoma were recruited from 134 hospitals and medical centres in 26 countries in four WHO regions (European region, region of the Americas, South-East Asia region, and Western Pacific region). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio via an interactive voice-web response system using permuted blocks, using a block size of 4, to receive intravenous 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab every 3 weeks for 17 cycles (12 months) or to active surveillance. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by independent review facility assessment in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04102098. FINDINGS: The intention-to-treat population included 668 patients randomly assigned between Dec 31, 2019, and Nov 25, 2021, to either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=334) or to active surveillance (n=334). At the prespecified interim analysis (Oct 21, 2022), median duration of follow-up was 17·4 months (IQR 13·9-22·1). Adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with significantly improved recurrence-free survival (median, not evaluable [NE]; [95% CI 22·1-NE]) compared with active surveillance (median, NE [21·4-NE]; hazard ratio, 0·72 [adjusted 95% CI 0·53-0·98]; p=0·012). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 136 (41%) of 332 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 44 (13%) of 330 patients in the active surveillance group. Grade 5 adverse events occurred in six patients (2%, two of which were treatment related) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group, and one patient (<1%) in the active surveillance group. Both atezolizumab and bevacizumab were discontinued because of adverse events in 29 patients (9%) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. INTERPRETATION: Among patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following curative-intent resection or ablation, recurrence-free survival was improved in those who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance. To our knowledge, IMbrave050 is the first phase 3 study of adjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma to report positive results. However, longer follow-up for both recurrence-free and overall survival is needed to assess the benefit-risk profile more fully. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (CARES-310): a randomised, open-label, international phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with an anti-angiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) has been shown to improve overall survival versus anti-angiogenic therapy alone in advanced solid tumours, but not in hepatocellular carcinoma. Therefore, a clinical study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of the anti-PD-1 antibody camrelizumab plus the VEGFR2-targeted TKI rivoceranib (also known as apatinib) versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, international phase 3 trial (CARES-310) was done at 95 study sites across 13 countries and regions worldwide. Patients with unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma who had not previously received any systemic treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either camrelizumab 200 mg intravenously every 2 weeks plus rivoceranib 250 mg orally once daily or sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily. Randomisation was done via a centralised interactive response system. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival, as assessed by the blinded independent review committee per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1, and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drugs. We report the findings from the prespecified primary analysis for progression-free survival and interim analysis for overall survival. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03764293). FINDINGS: Between June 28, 2019, and March 24, 2021, 543 patients were randomly assigned to the camrelizumab-rivoceranib (n=272) or sorafenib (n=271) group. At the primary analysis for progression-free survival (May 10, 2021), median follow-up was 7·8 months (IQR 4·1-10·6). Median progression-free survival was significantly improved with camrelizumab-rivoceranib versus sorafenib (5·6 months [95% CI 5·5-6·3] vs 3·7 months [2·8-3·7]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·52 [95% CI 0·41-0·65]; one-sided p<0·0001). At the interim analysis for overall survival (Feb 8, 2022), median follow-up was 14·5 months (IQR 9·1-18·7). Median overall survival was significantly extended with camrelizumab-rivoceranib versus sorafenib (22·1 months [95% CI 19·1-27·2] vs 15·2 months [13·0-18·5]; HR 0·62 [95% CI 0·49-0·80]; one-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (102 [38%] of 272 patients in the camrelizumab-rivoceranib group vs 40 [15%] of 269 patients in the sorafenib group), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (33 [12%] vs 41 [15%]), increased aspartate aminotransferase (45 [17%] vs 14 [5%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase (35 [13%] vs eight [3%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 66 (24%) patients in the camrelizumab-rivoceranib group and 16 (6%) in the sorafenib group. Treatment-related death occurred in two patients: one patient in the camrelizumab-rivoceranib group (ie, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome) and one patient in the sorafenib group (ie, respiratory failure and circulatory collapse). INTERPRETATION: Camrelizumab plus rivoceranib showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful benefit in progression-free survival and overall survival compared with sorafenib for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, presenting as a new and effective first-line treatment option for this population. FUNDING: Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals and Elevar Therapeutics.

Development of a Novel Comprehensive Hepatocellular Carcinoma Outcome Prognostic Scoring System With Integration of Imaging Features.

BACKGROUND: Accurate prognostic stratification of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is vital for clinical trial enrollment and treatment allocation. Multiple scoring systems have been created to predict patient survival, but no standardized scoring systems account for radiologic tumor features. We sought to create a generalizable scoring system for HCC which incorporates standardized radiologic tumor features and more accurately predicts overall survival (OS) than established systems. METHODS: Clinicopathologic parameters were collected from a prospectively collected cohort of patients with HCC treated at a single institution. Imaging studies were evaluated for tumor characteristics. Patients were randomly divided into a training set for identification of covariates that impacted OS and a validation set. Cox models were used to determine the association of various factors with OS and a scoring system was created. RESULTS: We identified 383 patients with HCC with imaging and survival outcomes, n = 255 in the training set and 128 in the validation cohort. Factors associated with OS on multivariate analysis included: tumor margin appearance on CT or MRI (hazard ratio [HR] 1.37, 95% CI, 1.01-1.88) with infiltrative margins portending worse outcomes than encapsulated margins, massive tumor morphology (HR 1.64, 95% CI, 1.06-2.54); >2 lesions (HR 2.06, 95% CI, 1.46-2.88), Child-Turcotte-Pugh class C (HR 3.7, 95% CI, 2.23-6.16), and portal vein thrombus (HR 2.41, 95% CI, 1.71-3.39). A new scoring system was developed and more predictive of OS than other well-established systems. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of standardized imaging characteristics to established clinical and lab predictors of outcome resulted in an improved predictive scoring system for patients with HCC.

Phase 1 trial of navitoclax and sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory solid tumors with hepatocellular carcinoma expansion cohort.

Navitoclax (ABT-263) is an oral BCL2 homology-3 mimetic that binds with high affinity to pro-survival BCL2 proteins, resulting in apoptosis. Sorafenib, an oral multi kinase inhibitor also promotes apoptosis and inhibits tumor angiogenesis. The efficacy of either agent alone is limited; however, preclinical studies demonstrate synergy with the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib. In this phase 1 study, we evaluated the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib in a dose escalation cohort of patients with refractory solid tumors, with an expansion cohort in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined using the continual reassessment method. Navitoclax and sorafenib were administered continuously on days 1 through 21 of 21-day cycles. Ten patients were enrolled in the dose escalation cohort and 15 HCC patients were enrolled in the expansion cohort. Two dose levels were tested, and the MTD was navitoclax 150 mg daily plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Among all patients, the most common grade 3 toxicity was thrombocytopenia (5 patients, 20%): there were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1-36 cycles) and all patients were off study treatment at data cut off. Six patients in the expansion cohort had stable disease, and there were no partial or complete responses. Drug-drug interaction between navitoclax and sorafenib was not observed. The combination of navitoclax and sorafenib did not increase induction of apoptosis compared with navitoclax alone. Navitoclax plus sorafenib is tolerable but showed limited efficacy in the HCC expansion cohort. These findings do not support further development of this combination for the treatment of advanced HCC. This phase I trial was conducted under ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT01364051.

The oncologic burden of hepatitis C virus infection: A clinical perspective.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection affects millions of people worldwide and is associated with cancer. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have changed HCV treatment paradigms, but little is known about the management of HCV infection in patients with cancer. The substantial burden of HCV infection and the inconclusive evidence regarding its detection and management in patients with cancer prompted the authors to review the literature and formulate recommendations. Patients for whom HCV screening is recommended included all patients with hematologic malignancies, hematopoietic cell transplantation candidates, and patients with liver cancer. There is a lack of consensus-based recommendations for the identification of HCV-infected patients with other types of cancer, but physicians may at least consider screening patients who belong to groups at heightened risk of HCV infection, including those born during 1945 through 1965 and those at high risk for infection. Patients with evidence of HCV infection should be assessed by an expert to evaluate liver disease severity, comorbidities associated with HCV infection, and treatment opportunities. DAA therapy should be tailored on the basis of patient prognosis, type of cancer, cancer treatment plan, and hepatic and virologic parameters. HCV-infected patients with cancer who have cirrhosis (or even advanced fibrosis) and those at risk for liver disease progression, especially patients with HCV-associated comorbidities, should have ongoing follow-up, regardless of whether there is a sustained virologic response, to ensure timely detection and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. HCV infection and its treatment should not be considered contraindications to cancer treatment and should not delay the initiation of an urgent cancer therapy. CA Cancer J Clin 2017. © 2017 American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:411-431. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Safety and Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients with Cancer and Viral Hepatitis: The MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Despite the clinical benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), patients with a viral hepatitis have been excluded from clinical trials because of safety concerns. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence rate of adverse events (AEs) in patients with viral hepatitis who received ICIs for cancer treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in patients with cancer and concurrent hepatitis B or C, who had undergone treatment with ICI at MD Anderson Cancer Center from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2019. RESULTS: Of the 1076 patients screened, we identified 33 with concurrent hepatitis. All 10 patients with HBV underwent concomitant antiviral therapy during ICI treatment. Sixteen of the 23 patients with HCV received it before the initiation of ICI. The median follow-up time was 33 months (95% CI, 23-45) and the median duration of ICI therapy was 3 months (IQR, 1.9-6.6). Of the 33 patients, 12 (39%) experienced irAEs (immune-related adverse events) of any grade, with 2 (6%) having grade 3 or higher. None of the patients developed hepatitis toxicities. CONCLUSION: ICIs may be a therapeutic option with an acceptable safety profile in patients with cancer and advanced liver disease.

Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab showed encouraging antitumor activity and safety in a phase 1b trial involving patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In a global, open-label, phase 3 trial, patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma who had not previously received systemic treatment were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or sorafenib until unacceptable toxic effects occurred or there was a loss of clinical benefit. The coprimary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, as assessed at an independent review facility according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1). RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 336 patients in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab group and 165 patients in the sorafenib group. At the time of the primary analysis (August 29, 2019), the hazard ratio for death with atezolizumab-bevacizumab as compared with sorafenib was 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42 to 0.79; P<0.001). Overall survival at 12 months was 67.2% (95% CI, 61.3 to 73.1) with atezolizumab-bevacizumab and 54.6% (95% CI, 45.2 to 64.0) with sorafenib. Median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 8.3) and 4.3 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 5.6) in the respective groups (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.76; P<0.001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56.5% of 329 patients who received at least one dose of atezolizumab-bevacizumab and in 55.1% of 156 patients who received at least one dose of sorafenib. Grade 3 or 4 hypertension occurred in 15.2% of patients in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab group; however, other high-grade toxic effects were infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab resulted in better overall and progression-free survival outcomes than sorafenib. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03434379.).

Prevention of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC). White Paper of the Texas Collaborative Center for Hepatocellular Cancer (TeCH) Multi-stakeholder Conference.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Texas has the highest age-adjusted incidence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the United States. The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas has funded the Texas Collaborative Center for Hepatocellular Cancer (TeCH) to facilitate HCC research, education, and advocacy activities with the overall goal of reducing HCC mortality in Texas through coordination, collaboration, and advocacy. METHODS: On September 17, 2022, TeCH co-sponsored a multi-stakeholder conference on HCC with the Baker Institute Center for Health and Biosciences. This conference was attended by HCC researchers, policy makers, payers, members from pharmaceutical industry and patient advocacy groups in and outside of Texas. This report summarizes the results of the conference. RESULTS: The goal of this meeting was to identify different strategies for preventing HCC and evaluate their readiness for implementation. CONCLUSIONS: We call for a statewide (1) viral hepatitis elimination program; (2) program to increase nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and obesity awareness; (3) research program to develop health care models that integrate alcohol associated liver disease treatment and treatment for alcohol use disorder; and (4) demonstration projects to evaluate the effectiveness of identifying and linking patient with advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis to clinical care.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Suppress Hepatitis C Virus Replication in Infected Patients With Solid Tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Data are scarce regarding the virologic impact and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. We examined the virologic impact of ICI in HCV-infected patients with solid tumors and their safety. METHODS: HCV-infected patients with solid tumor treated with ICI at our institution between April 26, 2016, and January 5, 2022, were enrolled in a prospective observational study. The primary outcomes were ICI-induced changes in HCV viremia (HCV inhibition and HCV reactivation) and safety of ICI. RESULTS: We enrolled 52 consecutive patients with solid tumors treated with ICI. Most were men (41; 79%), White (31; 59%), without cirrhosis (34; 65%), and with HCV genotype 1 (40; 77%). Four patients (7.7%) experienced HCV inhibition while receiving ICI including 1 patient who developed undetectable viremia for 6 months in the absence of direct-acting antivirals (DAA). Two patients (4%) developed HCV reactivation, both while receiving immunosuppressive therapy for ICI-related toxic effects. Adverse events occurred in 36 patients (69%), and 39 of the 47 adverse events (83%) were grade 1-2. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 8 patients (15%), and in all cases, they were related to ICI, not to HCV. No HCV-associated liver failure or death occurred. DISCUSSION: Inhibition of HCV replication with virologic cure can develop in patients receiving ICI without DAA. HCV reactivation occurs primarily in patients receiving immunosuppressants for ICI-related toxic effects. ICI are safe in HCV-infected patients with solid tumors. Chronic HCV infection should not be considered a contraindication for ICI therapy.

Consensus subtypes of hepatocellular carcinoma associated with clinical outcomes and genomic phenotypes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although many studies revealed transcriptomic subtypes of HCC, concordance of the subtypes are not fully examined. We aim to examine a consensus of transcriptomic subtypes and correlate them with clinical outcomes. APPROACH AND RESULTS: By integrating 16 previously established genomic signatures for HCC subtypes, we identified five clinically and molecularly distinct consensus subtypes. STM (STeM) is characterized by high stem cell features, vascular invasion, and poor prognosis. CIN (Chromosomal INstability) has moderate stem cell features, but high genomic instability and low immune activity. IMH (IMmune High) is characterized by high immune activity. BCM (Beta-Catenin with high Male predominance) is characterized by prominent ß-catenin activation, low miRNA expression, hypomethylation, and high sensitivity to sorafenib. DLP (Differentiated and Low Proliferation) is differentiated with high hepatocyte nuclear factor 4A activity. We also developed and validated a robust predictor of consensus subtype with 100 genes and demonstrated that five subtypes were well conserved in patient-derived xenograft models and cell lines. By analyzing serum proteomic data from the same patients, we further identified potential serum biomarkers that can stratify patients into subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: Five HCC subtypes are correlated with genomic phenotypes and clinical outcomes and highly conserved in preclinical models, providing a framework for selecting the most appropriate models for preclinical studies.

Treatment Disparities Partially Mediate Socioeconomic- and Race/Ethnicity-Based Survival Disparities in Stage I-II Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Low socioeconomic status (SES) patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receive procedural treatments less often and have shorter survival. Little is known about the extent to which these survival disparities result from treatment-related disparities versus other causal pathways. We aimed to estimate the proportion of SES-based survival disparities that are mediated by treatment- and facility-related factors among patients with stage I-II HCC. METHODS: We analyzed patients aged 18-75 years diagnosed with stage I-II HCC in 2008-2016 using the National Cancer Database. Inverse odds weighting mediation analysis was used to calculate the proportion mediated by three mediators: procedure type, facility volume, and facility procedural interventions offered. Intersectional analyses were performed to determine whether treatment disparities played a larger role in survival disparities among Black and Hispanic patients. RESULTS: Among 46,003 patients, 15.0% had low SES, 71.6% had middle SES, and 13.4% had high SES. Five-year overall survival was 46.9%, 39.9%, and 35.7% among high, middle, and low SES patients, respectively. Procedure type mediated 45.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31.1-60.7%) and 36.7% (95% CI 25.7-47.7%) of overall survival disparities for low and middle SES patients, respectively, which was more than was mediated by the two facility-level mediators. Procedure type mediated a larger proportion of survival disparities among low-middle SES Black (46.6-48.2%) and Hispanic patients (92.9-93.7%) than in White patients (29.5-29.7%). CONCLUSIONS: SES-based disparities in use of procedural interventions mediate a large proportion of survival disparities, particularly among Black and Hispanic patients. Initiatives aimed at attenuating these treatment disparities should be pursued.

Clinical and Prognostic Biomarker Value of Blood-Circulating Inflammatory Cytokines in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Circulating inflammatory cytokines play critical roles in tumor-associated inflammation and immune responses. Recent data have suggested that several interleukins (ILs) mediate carcinogenesis in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the predictive and prognostic value of circulating ILs is yet to be validated. Our study aimed to evaluate the association of the serum ILs with overall survival (OS) and clinicopathologic features in a large cohort of HCC patients. METHODS: We prospectively collected data and serum samples from 767 HCC patients treated at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between 2001 and 2014, with a median follow-up of 67.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 52.5, 83.3). Biomarker association with OS was evaluated by the log-rank method. RESULTS: The median OS in this cohort was 14.2 months (95% CI: 12, 16.1 months). Clinicopathologic features were more advanced, and OS was significantly inferior in patients with high circulating levels of IL1-R1, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-15, IL-16, and IL-18. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that several serum IL levels are valid prognostic biomarker candidates and potential targets for therapy in HCC.

Progression patterns and therapeutic sequencing following immune checkpoint inhibition for hepatocellular carcinoma: An international observational study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Different approaches are available after the progression of disease (PD) to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including the continuation of ICI, treatment switching to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and cessation of anticancer therapy. We sought to characterise the relationship between radiological patterns of progression and survival post-ICI, also appraising treatment strategies. METHODS: We screened 604 HCC patients treated with ICIs, including only those who experienced PD by data cut-off. We evaluated post-progression survival (PPS) according to the treatment strategy at PD and verified its relationship with radiological patterns of progression: intrahepatic growth (IHG), new intrahepatic lesion (NIH), extrahepatic growth (EHG), new extrahepatic lesion (NEH) and new vascular invasion (nVI). RESULTS: Of 604 patients, 364 (60.3%) experienced PD during observation. Median PPS was 5.3 months (95% CI: 4.4-6.9; 271 events). At the data cut-off, 165 patients (45%) received no post-progression anticancer therapy; 64 patients (17.6%) continued ICI beyond PD. IHG (HR 1.64 [95% CI: 1.21-2.22]; p = .0013) and nVI (HR 2.15 [95% CI: 1.38-3.35]; p = .0007) were associated with shorter PPS. Multivariate models adjusted for progression patterns, treatment line and albumin-bilirubin grade and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at PD confirmed receipt of ICI beyond PD with (HR 0.17, 95% CI: 0.09-0.32; p < .0001) or without subsequent TKI (HR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.26-0.58; p < .0001) as predictors of prolonged PPS versus no anticancer therapy. CONCLUSIONS: ICI-TKI sequencing is a consolidated option in advanced HCC. nVI and IHG predict a poorer prognosis. Despite lack of recommendation, the continuation of ICI beyond progression in HCC is adopted clinically: future efforts should appraise which patients benefit from this approach.

Evaluating the benefit of surgical resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with multifocality or intrahepatic vascular invasion.

BACKGROUND: The role of hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with multifocality or intrahepatic vascular involvement remains ill-defined. Our objective was to evaluate benefits of surgical resection for patients with these high-risk features. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify HCC patients with vascular involvement and/or multifocality (T2/T3, N-/M-) from 2011 to 2015. Propensity score matching (k-nearest neighbors, no replacement, 1:1) grouped patients by treatment: surgical resection versus non-surgical modalities. Groups were matched using patient, clinical, and liver-specific characteristics. Median overall survival (OS) was calculated using Kaplan-Meier, and adjusted analyses were performed using shared frailty models. RESULTS: 14,557 patients met inclusion criteria, including 1892 (9.4%) treated with surgical resection. Median cohort OS was 20.5 months. After adjustment, surgical resection was associated with survival advantage compared to non-surgical treatment (37.8 versus 15.7 months, log-rank P < .001; adjusted hazard ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.54). Patients with minimal comorbidity, unifocal disease, and age <54 had highest probability of survival one year post-surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical resection is associated with a survival advantage in HCC with multifocality and/or intrahepatic vascular involvement. The presence of these features should not contraindicate consideration of hepatectomy in suitable surgical candidates.

Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (COSMIC-312): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib has shown clinical activity in combination with checkpoint inhibitors in solid tumours. The COSMIC-312 trial assessed cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib as first-line systemic treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: COSMIC-312 is an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not amenable to curative or locoregional therapy and previously untreated with systemic anticancer therapy at 178 centres in 32 countries. Patients with fibrolamellar carcinoma, sarcomatoid hepatocellular carcinoma, or combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma were not eligible. Tumours involving major blood vessels, including the main portal vein, were permitted. Patients were required to have measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1), Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, adequate organ and marrow function, and Child-Pugh class A. Previous resection, tumour ablation, radiotherapy, or arterial chemotherapy was allowed if more than 28 days before randomisation. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1) via a web-based interactive response system to cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily plus atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily, or single-agent cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily. Randomisation was stratified by disease aetiology, geographical region, and presence of extrahepatic disease or macrovascular invasion. Dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival per RECIST 1.1 as assessed by a blinded independent radiology committee in the first 372 patients randomly assigned to the combination treatment of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab or sorafenib (progression-free survival intention-to-treat [ITT] population), and overall survival in all patients randomly assigned to cabozantinib plus atezolizumab or sorafenib (ITT population). Final progression-free survival and concurrent interim overall survival analyses are presented. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03755791. FINDINGS: Analyses at data cut-off (March 8, 2021) included the first 837 patients randomly assigned between Dec 7, 2018, and Aug 27, 2020, to combination treatment of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab (n=432), sorafenib (n=217), or single-agent cabozantinib (n=188). Median follow-up was 15·8 months (IQR 14·5-17·2) in the progression-free survival ITT population and 13·3 months (10·5-16·0) in the ITT population. Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (99% CI 5·6-8·3) in the combination treatment group versus 4·2 months (2·8-7·0) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·63, 99% CI 0·44-0·91, p=0·0012). Median overall survival (interim analysis) was 15·4 months (96% CI 13·7-17·7) in the combination treatment group versus 15·5 months (12·1-not estimable) in the sorafenib group (HR 0·90, 96% CI 0·69-1·18; p=0·44). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were alanine aminotransferase increase (38 [9%] of 429 patients in the combination treatment group vs six [3%] of 207 in the sorafenib group vs 12 [6%] of 188 in the single-agent cabozantinib group), hypertension (37 [9%] vs 17 [8%] vs 23 [12%]), aspartate aminotransferase increase (37 [9%] vs eight [4%] vs 18 [10%]), and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (35 [8%] vs 17 [8%] vs 16 [9%]); serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 78 (18%) patients in the combination treatment group, 16 (8%) patients in the sorafenib group, and 24 (13%) in the single-agent cabozantinib group. Treatment-related grade 5 events occurred in six (1%) patients in the combination treatment group (encephalopathy, hepatic failure, drug-induced liver injury, oesophageal varices haemorrhage, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and tumour lysis syndrome), one (<1%) patient in the sorafenib group (general physical health deterioration), and one (<1%) patient in the single-agent cabozantinib group (gastrointestinal haemorrhage). INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab might be a treatment option for select patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but additional studies are needed. FUNDING: Exelixis and Ipsen.

Survival following liver transplantation for locally advanced, unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) has previously been considered a contraindication to liver transplantation (LT). However, recent series showed favorable outcomes for LT after neoadjuvant therapy. Our center developed a protocol for neoadjuvant therapy and LT for patients with locally advanced, unresectable iCCA in 2010. Patients undergoing LT were required to demonstrate disease stability for 6 months on neoadjuvant therapy with no extrahepatic disease. During the study period, 32 patients were listed for LT and 18 patients underwent LT. For transplanted patients, the median number of iCCA tumors was 2, and the median cumulative tumor diameter was 10.4 cm. Patients receiving LT had an overall survival at 1-, 3-, and 5-years of 100%, 71%, and 57%. Recurrences occurred in seven patients and were treated with systemic therapy and resection. The study population had a higher than expected proportion of patients with genetic alterations in fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) and DNA damage repair pathways. These data support LT as a treatment for highly selected patients with locally advanced, unresectable iCCA. Further studies to identify criteria for LT in iCCA and factors predicting survival are warranted.

Updated efficacy and safety data from IMbrave150: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs. sorafenib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: IMbrave150 demonstrated that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab led to significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma at the primary analysis (after a median 8.6 months of follow-up). We present updated data after 12 months of additional follow-up. METHODS: Patients with systemic treatment-naive, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma were randomized 2:1 to receive 1,200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab intravenously every 3 weeks or 400 mg sorafenib orally twice daily in this open-label, phase III study. Co-primary endpoints were OS and PFS by independently assessed RECIST 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary efficacy endpoints included objective response rates and exploratory subgroup efficacy analyses. This is a post hoc updated analysis of efficacy and safety. RESULTS: From March 15, 2018, to January 30, 2019, 501 patients (intention-to-treat population) were randomly allocated to receive atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n = 336) or sorafenib (n = 165). On August 31, 2020, after a median 15.6 (range, 0-28.6) months of follow-up, the median OS was 19.2 months (95% CI 17.0-23.7) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 13.4 months (95% CI 11.4-16.9) with sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66; 95% CI 0.52-0.85; descriptive p <0.001). The median PFS was 6.9 (95% CI 5.7-8.6) and 4.3 (95% CI 4.0-5.6) months in the respective treatment groups (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.53-0.81; descriptive p < 0.001). Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 143 (43%) of 329 and 72 (46%) of 156 safety-evaluable patients in the respective groups, and treatment-related grade 5 events occurred in 6 (2%) and 1 (<1%) patients. CONCLUSION: After longer follow-up, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab maintained clinically meaningful survival benefits over sorafenib and had a safety profile consistent with the primary analysis. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03434379. LAY SUMMARY: The primary analysis of IMbrave150 showed that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab had significantly greater benefits than sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but survival data were not yet mature. At this updated analysis done 12 months later, median overall survival was 5.8 months longer with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab than sorafenib, and the severity profile of treatment-related side effects remained similar. These updated results confirm atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as the first-line standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Dietary N-Nitroso Compounds and Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A USA-Based Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: N-nitroso compounds (NOCs) are among the most potent dietary carcinogens. N-nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), and N-nitrosopiperidine (NPIP) are abundant in foods and carcinogenic to the liver. We investigated the relationship between dietary NOCs and HCC risk. APPROACH AND RESULTS: In this large, hospital-based, case-control study of 827 pathologically or radiologically confirmed HCC cases and 1,013 controls, NOC intake was calculated by linking food frequency questionnaire-derived dietary data with a comprehensive NOC concentration database. Multivariable-adjusted ORs and 95% CIs of HCC by quartiles of NOC consumption were estimated using logistic regression models, with the lowest quartile as the referent. We further investigated joint effects of consuming the highest quartile of NOCs that were associated with increased HCC risk and hepatitis, diabetes, or alcohol drinking on HCC risk. After adjustment for confounding factors, higher intake of NDEA from plant sources (ORQ4 vs. Q1  = 1.58; 95% CI = 1.03-2.41), NDMA from plant sources (ORQ4 vs. Q1  = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.01-2.34), and NPIP (ORQ4 vs. Q1  = 2.52; 95% CI = 1.62-3.94) was associated with increased HCC risk. No association was observed for nitrate or total NOC intake and HCC risk. Higher consumption of HCC-inducing NOCs and positive hepatitis virus status jointly increased the risk of developing HCC. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, though some of our findings may indicate the presence of reverse causation owing to lower meat intake among cases with chronic liver diseases before HCC diagnosis, the potent dietary HCC carcinogens, NDEA, NDMA, and NPIP, and their enhanced carcinogenic effects among chronic carriers of hepatitis virus warrant further prospective investigation.