Genomic characterization of metastatic patterns from prospective clinical sequencing of 25,000 patients.

Metastatic progression is the main cause of death in cancer patients, whereas the underlying genomic mechanisms driving metastasis remain largely unknown. Here, we assembled MSK-MET, a pan-cancer cohort of over 25,000 patients with metastatic diseases. By analyzing genomic and clinical data from this cohort, we identified associations between genomic alterations and patterns of metastatic dissemination across 50 tumor types. We found that chromosomal instability is strongly correlated with metastatic burden in some tumor types, including prostate adenocarcinoma, lung adenocarcinoma, and HR+/HER2+ breast ductal carcinoma, but not in others, including colorectal cancer and high-grade serous ovarian cancer, where copy-number alteration patterns may be established early in tumor development. We also identified somatic alterations associated with metastatic burden and specific target organs. Our data offer a valuable resource for the investigation of the biological basis for metastatic spread and highlight the complex role of chromosomal instability in cancer progression.

Truncated FGFR2 is a clinically actionable oncogene in multiple cancers.

Somatic hotspot mutations and structural amplifications and fusions that affect fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (encoded by FGFR2) occur in multiple types of cancer1. However, clinical responses to FGFR inhibitors have remained variable1-9, emphasizing the need to better understand which FGFR2 alterations are oncogenic and therapeutically targetable. Here we apply transposon-based screening10,11 and tumour modelling in mice12,13, and find that the truncation of exon 18 (E18) of Fgfr2 is a potent driver mutation. Human oncogenomic datasets revealed a diverse set of FGFR2 alterations, including rearrangements, E1-E17 partial amplifications, and E18 nonsense and frameshift mutations, each causing the transcription of E18-truncated FGFR2 (FGFR2ΔE18). Functional in vitro and in vivo examination of a compendium of FGFR2ΔE18 and full-length variants pinpointed FGFR2-E18 truncation as single-driver alteration in cancer. By contrast, the oncogenic competence of FGFR2 full-length amplifications depended on a distinct landscape of cooperating driver genes. This suggests that genomic alterations that generate stable FGFR2ΔE18 variants are actionable therapeutic targets, which we confirmed in preclinical mouse and human tumour models, and in a clinical trial. We propose that cancers containing any FGFR2 variant with a truncated E18 should be considered for FGFR-targeted therapies.

Outcomes in the Asian subgroup of the phase III randomised HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In the global, phase III HIMALAYA study in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) improved overall survival (OS) vs. sorafenib; durvalumab was non-inferior to sorafenib. HBV is the predominant HCC aetiology in most of Asia vs. HCV or non-viral aetiologies in Western countries and Japan. This analysis evaluated safety and efficacy outcomes for STRIDE and durvalumab monotherapy vs. sorafenib, in HIMALAYA participants enrolled in Asia, excluding Japan. METHODS: In HIMALAYA, participants were randomised to STRIDE, durvalumab, or sorafenib. The Asian subgroup in this analysis included participants enrolled in Hong Kong, India, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. OS, objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST, version 1.1), and safety were assessed in the Asian subgroup and in an exploratory subgroup of participants in Hong Kong and Taiwan. RESULTS: The Asian subgroup included 479 participants randomised to STRIDE (n = 156), durvalumab (n = 167), or sorafenib (n = 156). OS was improved for STRIDE vs. sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% CI 0.52-0.89). The OS HR for durvalumab vs. sorafenib was 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.06). In Hong Kong and Taiwan (n = 141), OS HRs for STRIDE vs. sorafenib and durvalumab vs. sorafenib were 0.44 (95% CI 0.26-0.77) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.37-1.08), respectively. In the Asian subgroup, ORR (including unconfirmed responses) was numerically higher for STRIDE (28.2%) and durvalumab (18.6%) vs. sorafenib (9.0%), and Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were numerically lower for STRIDE (19.9%) and durvalumab (13.3%) vs. sorafenib (30.5%). CONCLUSIONS: STRIDE improved outcomes vs. sorafenib in the Asian subgroup. These results support the benefits of STRIDE for participants with uHCC globally, including in the Asia-Pacific region. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT03298451. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: The global, phase III HIMALAYA study found that the STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) regimen improved overall survival (OS), including long-term OS vs. sorafenib, and that durvalumab monotherapy was non-inferior to sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, there are differences in the aetiology and clinical practices related to HCC in parts of Asia, compared to Western countries and Japan, which could lead to differences in treatment outcomes between these regions. The results of this analysis demonstrate the benefits of STRIDE for participants in the Asia-Pacific region, consistent with the full, global study population. Overall, these findings continue to support the use of STRIDE in a diverse population, reflective of uHCC globally.

Clinicogenomic predictors of outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with immunotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations extend overall survival (OS) while anti-PD-1/L1 monotherapy is non-inferior to sorafenib in treatment-naïve, patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Clinicogenomic features are posited to influence patient outcomes. METHODS: The primary objective of this retrospective study was to define the clinical, pathologic, and genomic factors associated with outcomes to ICI therapy in patients with HCC. Patients with histologically confirmed advanced HCC treated with ICI at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2012 to 2022 were included. Association between clinical, pathological, and genomic characteristics were assessed with univariable and multivariable Cox regression model for progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. RESULTS: Two-hundred and forty-two patients were treated with ICI-based therapy. Patients were predominantly male (82%) with virally mediated HCC (53%) and Child Pugh A score (70%). Median follow-up was 28 months (0.5-78.4). Median PFS for those treated in 1st line, 2nd line and ≥ 3rd line was 4.9 (range: 2.9-6.2), 3.1 (2.3-4.0), and 2.5 (2.1-4.0) months, respectively. Median OS for those treated in 1st line, 2nd line, and ≥ 3rd line was 16 (11-22), 7.5 (6.4-11), and 6.4 (4.6-26) months, respectively. Poor liver function and performance status associated with worse PFS and OS, while viral hepatitis C was associated with favorable outcome. Genetic alterations were not associated with outcomes. CONCLUSION: Clinicopathologic factors were the major determinates of outcomes for patients with advanced HCC treated with ICI. Molecular profiling did not aid in stratification of ICI outcomes. Future studies should explore alternative biomarkers such as the level of immune activation or the pretreatment composition of the immune tumor microenvironment.

Has Management of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Evolved with the Evidence? Trends and Practice Patterns from the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC) has advanced in recent decades, including randomized trial evidence supporting systemic therapy in the palliative and adjuvant setting. Mounting observational evidence suggests resection of IHC with multifocal disease (IHC-MF) or lymph node metastasis (IHC-LNM) should be limited. It is unknown how real-world practice has evolved in light of research advances. This study characterizes trends in management and outcomes of IHC without distant metastasis. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients treated for IHC without distant metastasis (M0) and identified subgroups with lymph node (cN1) or multifocal hepatic involvement (cT2b). Two-sided Cochran-Armitage tests evaluated trends in initial treating modality and perioperative chemotherapy. Logistic regression evaluated associations with choice of initial treating modality. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated by using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2020, 11,368 patients were treated for IHC without extrahepatic metastasis. Forty-three percent underwent resection. Initial management shifted from resection towards radiation or systemic therapy in IHC-MF and IHC-LNM. Use of perioperative chemotherapy increased from 39% pre-2010 to 70% in 2018-2020 (p < 0.001), most often delivered postoperatively. Across the entire cohort, median OS improved from 16 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15-18) to 27 months (95% CI 26-29). More modest improvements were observed in IHC-MF and IHC-LNM. CONCLUSIONS: Use of perioperative chemotherapy has been widely adopted, predating randomized trial evidence in the adjuvant setting. Initial management of IHC-MF and IHC-LNM has shifted from resection to systemic and/or radiation therapy. While OS has improved overall, outcomes of IHC-MF and IHC-LNM remain poor, warranting further investigation.

Association between posttreatment α-fetoprotein reduction and outcomes in real-world US patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials suggest α-fetoprotein (AFP) reduction may be prognostic among patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, the association of AFP reduction with outcomes in real-world settings is unclear. METHODS: Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2021, first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor, and baseline and posttreatment AFP values (closest to 8 ± 2 weeks after first-line initiation) were included. AFP reduction was defined as ≥20% decrease from baseline vs <20% or no decrease. Real-world overall survival and progression-free survival (rwPFS) were defined as time from posttreatment AFP measurement to death, and the first progression event or death, respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for potential confounders and baseline AFP. Effect modification by baseline AFP and hepatocellular carcinoma risk factors was assessed. RESULTS: Among 533 patients, median baseline AFP was higher in those with AFP reduction than those without (N = 166, 210 µg/L vs N = 367, 150 µg/L). There was a 35% decrease in hazard of death for patients with reduction vs without (aHR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.52-0.81; median, 10.3 vs 5.9 months). Results were similar for rwPFS (aHR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.81; median, 4.6 vs 2.6 months). AFP reduction was associated with better outcomes among patients with baseline AFP ≥400 µg/L or with history of hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, or alcohol use. Only the interaction between baseline AFP and reduction in association with rwPFS was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: For certain etiologies, posttreatment AFP change may be more important than baseline AFP for prognosis. Further work should characterize the prognostic implications of longitudinal AFP changes during treatment. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The prognostic value of the change in α-fetoprotein (AFP) concentration after treatment initiation is less established, particularly in real-world settings. Longitudinal data from a large nationwide cohort of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor in routine practice revealed that ≥20% reduction in posttreatment AFP levels was associated with better real-world overall survival and progression-free survival after adjusting for baseline AFP levels and other factors. The results also suggested that the associations may be stronger among patients with a history of HCC risk factors (e.g., hepatitis C virus, alcohol) or with higher baseline AFP levels.

Rational development of combination therapies for biliary tract cancers.

Biliary tract cancers are an uncommon set of gastrointestinal malignancies that are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Most patients present with incurable locally advanced or metastatic disease. The pathophysiology of biliary tract cancer can be exploited for direct therapeutic benefit, and indeed, chemotherapy, precision medicine, immunotherapy and combination treatments are now applied as both standard-of-care and investigational therapies. In the first-line setting, the immune-based chemotherapy combination of durvalumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin has recently been shown to improve survival compared to chemotherapy alone. In the second-line, precision medicine can be employed in those with select genetic alterations in IDH1/2 (isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2), FGFR2 (fibroblast growth factor receptor 2), KRAS, BRAF, ERBB2, NTRK (neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase), ROS, RET, and/or deficiencies in mismatch repair enzymes. In those patients without targetable genetic alterations, fluoropyridine doublets lead to modest improvements in outcomes. Next-generation sequencing is critical for direct patient care and to help elucidate genomic mechanisms of resistance in a research context. Currently, multiple clinical trials are ongoing - hence, this review seeks to provide an update on evolving standards of care and ongoing investigational agents, limitations to current treatments, and a framework for effective combination drug development for the future.

Immunotherapy and Transarterial Radioembolization Combination Treatment for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of combined immunotherapy and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) were suggested in preclinical and early-phase trials, but these were limited by small sample sizes. We sought to compare the efficacy of combined therapy and immunotherapy alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with advanced HCC diagnosed between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019. We included patients who received combined therapy or immunotherapy alone as first-line treatment. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to determine predictors of combined therapy. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression approaches were used to identify predictors of overall survival and to compare hazards of mortality between the patients who received combined therapy and immunotherapy alone. RESULTS: Of 1,664 eligible patients with advanced-stage HCC, 142 received combined TARE/immunotherapy and 1,522 received immunotherapy alone. Receipt of combination therapy was associated with care at an academic center and inversely associated with racial/ethnic minority status (Hispanic and Black individuals). The median overall survival was significantly higher in the combination group than in the immunotherapy alone group (19.8 vs 9.5 months). In multivariable analysis, combined therapy was independently associated with reduced mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval: 0.36-0.68, P < 0.001). Results were consistent across subgroups and in sensitivity analyses using propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting. DISCUSSION: The combination of TARE and immunotherapy was associated with improved survival compared with immunotherapy alone in patients with advanced-stage HCC. Our findings underly the importance of large clinical trials evaluating combination therapy in these patients.

Racial and ethnic disparities in early treatment with immunotherapy for advanced HCC in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Immunotherapy has emerged as an effective treatment for patients with advanced-stage HCC. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of immunotherapy for advanced HCC in a nationwide cohort and racial and ethnic disparities in access to immunotherapy. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We used the US National Cancer Database to identify patients with tumor-node-metastasis stage 3 or 4 HCC between 2017 and 2018. We performed multivariable Cox regression to identify factors associated with overall survival (OS) and logistic regression to identify factors associated with receipt of immunotherapy. Of the 3,990 patients treated for advanced HCC, 3,248 (81.4%) patients received chemotherapy and 742 (18.6%) patients received immunotherapy as a first-line treatment. Immunotherapy was associated with improved OS compared with chemotherapy (adjusted HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.65-0.88) after adjusting for covariates. There were racial and ethnic disparities in access to immunotherapy, with Hispanic (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.46-0.83) and Black patients (aOR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.89) less likely to receive immunotherapy compared with White patients. There was a significant interaction between race-ethnicity and facility type, with higher disparity observed in nonacademic centers (interaction p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Immunotherapy was associated with improved OS compared with chemotherapy in advanced HCC. There are significant disparities in early access to immunotherapy, likely due to differential access to clinical trials and experimental therapies. A comprehensive approach to monitoring and eliminating racial-ethnic disparities in the management of advanced HCC is urgently needed.

Plain language summary of the HIMALAYA study: tremelimumab and durvalumab for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer).

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of results from a phase 3 clinical study called HIMALAYA. HIMALAYA looked at treatment with one dose of a medication called tremelimumab combined with multiple doses of a medication called durvalumab (the STRIDE regimen) or multiple doses of durvalumab alone. These treatments were compared with a medication called sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). HCC is a type of liver cancer that is difficult to treat because it is often diagnosed when it is unresectable, meaning it can no longer be removed with surgery. Sorafenib has been the main treatment for unresectable HCC since 2007. However, people who take sorafenib may experience side effects that can reduce their quality of life, so alternative medicines are being trialed. Tremelimumab and durvalumab are types of drugs called immunotherapies, and they both work in different ways to help the body's immune system fight cancer. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?: Participants who took STRIDE lived longer than participants who took sorafenib, whilst participants who took durvalumab alone lived a similar length of time as participants who took sorafenib. Participants who took STRIDE or durvalumab had a lower relative risk of experiencing worsening in their quality of life than participants who took sorafenib. The side effects that participants who received STRIDE or durvalumab experienced were expected for these types of treatments and could mostly be managed. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Overall, STRIDE is more effective than sorafenib for people with unresectable HCC.

Predictive Biomarkers for Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitor Treatment Response in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has one of the highest mortality rates among solid cancers. Late diagnosis and a lack of efficacious treatment options contribute to the dismal prognosis of HCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based immunotherapy has presented a new milestone in the treatment of cancer. Immunotherapy has yielded remarkable treatment responses in a range of cancer types including HCC. Based on the therapeutic effect of ICI alone (programmed cell death (PD)-1/programmed death-ligand1 (PD-L)1 antibody), investigators have developed combined ICI therapies including ICI + ICI, ICI + tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and ICI + locoregional treatment or novel immunotherapy. Although these regimens have demonstrated increasing treatment efficacy with the addition of novel drugs, the development of biomarkers to predict toxicity and treatment response in patients receiving ICI is in urgent need. PD-L1 expression in tumor cells received the most attention in early studies among various predictive biomarkers. However, PD-L1 expression alone has limited utility as a predictive biomarker in HCC. Accordingly, subsequent studies have evaluated the utility of tumor mutational burden (TMB), gene signatures, and multiplex immunohistochemistry (IHC) as predictive biomarkers. In this review, we aim to discuss the current state of immunotherapy for HCC, the results of the predictive biomarker studies, and future direction.

Radiation and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Combination Therapy for Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

The liver tumor immune microenvironment has been thought to possess a critical role in the development and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Despite the approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), such as programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, for several types of cancers, including HCC, liver metastases have shown evidence of resistance or poor response to immunotherapies. Radiation therapy (RT) has displayed evidence of immunosuppressive effects through the upregulation of immune checkpoint molecules post-treatment. However, it was revealed that the limitations of ICIs can be overcome through the use of RT, as it can reshape the liver immune microenvironment. Moreover, ICIs are able to overcome the RT-induced inhibitory signals, effectively restoring anti-tumor activity. Owing to the synergetic effect believed to arise from the combination of ICIs with RT, several clinical trials are currently ongoing to assess the efficacy and safety of this treatment for patients with HCC.

Nivolumab versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 459): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Single-agent nivolumab showed durable responses, manageable safety, and promising survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the phase 1-2 CheckMate 040 study. We aimed to investigate nivolumab monotherapy compared with sorafenib monotherapy in the first-line setting for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at medical centres across 22 countries and territories in Asia, Australasia, Europe, and North America, patients at least 18 years old with histologically confirmed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for, or whose disease had progressed after, surgery or locoregional treatment; with no previous systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, with Child-Pugh class A and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and regardless of viral hepatitis status were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive nivolumab (240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02576509. FINDINGS: Between Jan 11, 2016, and May 24, 2017, 743 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (nivolumab, n=371; sorafenib, n=372). At the primary analysis, the median follow-up for overall survival was 15·2 months (IQR 5·7-28·0) for the nivolumab group and 13·4 months (5·7-25·9) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 16·4 months (95% CI 13·9-18·4) with nivolumab and 14·7 months (11·9-17·2) with sorafenib (hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·72-1·02]; p=0·075; minimum follow-up 22·8 months); the protocol-defined significance level of p=0·0419 was not reached. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (1 [<1%] of 367 patients in the nivolumab group vs 52 [14%] of patients in the sorafenib group), aspartate aminotransferase increase (22 [6%] vs 13 [4%]), and hypertension (0 vs 26 [7%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 43 (12%) patients receiving nivolumab and 39 (11%) patients receiving sorafenib. Four deaths in the nivolumab group and one death in the sorafenib group were assessed as treatment related. INTERPRETATION: First-line nivolumab treatment did not significantly improve overall survival compared with sorafenib, but clinical activity and a favourable safety profile were observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, nivolumab might be considered a therapeutic option for patients in whom tyrosine kinase inhibitors and antiangiogenic drugs are contraindicated or have substantial risks. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical.

Circulating tumor and invasive cell expression profiling predicts effective therapy in pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a refractory disease; however, modern cytotoxic chemotherapeutics can induce tumor regression and extend life. A blood-based, pharmacogenomic, chemosensitivity assay using gene expression profiling of circulating tumor and invasive cells (CTICs) to predict treatment response was previously developed. The combination regimen of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (G/nab-P) are established frontline approaches for treating advanced PDAC; however, there are no validated biomarkers for treatment selection. A similar unmet need exists for choosing second-line therapy. METHODS: The chemosensitivity assay was evaluated in metastatic PDAC patients presenting for frontline treatment. A prospective study enrolled patients (n = 70) before receiving either FOLFIRINOX or G/nab-P at a 1:1 ratio. Six milliliters of peripheral blood was collected at baseline and at time of disease progression. CTICs were isolated, gene-expression profiling was performed, and the assay was used to predict effective and ineffective chemotherapeutic agents. Treating physicians were blinded to the assay prediction results. RESULTS: Patients receiving an effective regimen as predicted by the chemosensitivity assay experienced significantly longer median progression-free survival (mPFS; 7.8 months vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; p = .0002) and median overall survival (mOS; 21.0 months vs. 9.7 months; HR, 0.40; p = .005), compared with an ineffective regimen. Assay prediction for effective second-line therapy was explored. The entire study cohort experienced favorable outcomes compared with historical controls, 7.1-month mPFS and 12.3-month mOS. CONCLUSIONS: Chemosensitivity assay profiling is a promising tool for guiding therapy in advanced PDAC. Further prospective validation is under way (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03033927).

Efficacy and safety of cabozantinib for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma based on albumin-bilirubin grade.

BACKGROUND: Albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade is an objective measure of liver function for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib is approved for patients with advanced HCC who have received prior sorafenib based on the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial (NCT01908426). Cabozantinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with previously treated HCC. METHODS: Patients were randomised 2:1 to receive cabozantinib 60 mg or placebo orally every day. Clinical outcomes in patients with ALBI grade 1 or 2 at baseline were evaluated in CELESTIAL. ALBI scores were retrospectively calculated based on baseline serum albumin and total bilirubin, with an ALBI grade of 1 defined as ≤ -2.60 score and a grade of 2 as a score of > -2.60 to ≤ -1.39. RESULTS: Cabozantinib improved OS and PFS versus placebo in both ALBI grade 1 (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI]: 0.63 [0.46-0.86] and 0.42 [0.32-0.56]) and ALBI grade 2 (HR [95% CI]: 0.84 [0.66-1.06] and 0.46 [0.37-0.58]) subgroups. Adverse events were consistent with those in the overall population. Rates of grade 3/4 adverse events associated with hepatic decompensation were generally low and were more common among patients in the ALBI grade 2 subgroup. DISCUSSION: These results provide initial support of cabozantinib in patients with advanced HCC irrespective of ALBI grade 1 or 2. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01908426.

KDR genetic predictor of toxicities induced by sorafenib and regorafenib.

No biomarkers are available to predict toxicities induced by VEGFR TKIs. This study aimed to identify markers of toxicities induced by these drugs using a discovery-validation approach. The discovery set included 140 sorafenib-treated cancer patients (TARGET study) genotyped for SNPs in 56 genes. The most significant SNPs associated with grade ≥2 hypertension, diarrhea, dermatologic toxicities, and composite toxicity (any one of the toxicities) were tested for association with grade ≥2 toxicity in a validation set of 201 sorafenib-treated patients (Alliance/CALGB 80802). The validated SNP was tested for association with grade ≥2 toxicity in 107 (LCCC 1029) and 82 (Italian cohort) regorafenib-treated patients. SNP-toxicity associations were evaluated using logistic regression, and a meta-analysis between the studies was performed by inverse variance. Variant rs4864950 in KDR increased the risk of grade ≥2 composite toxicity in TARGET, Alliance/CALGB 80802, and the Italian cohort (meta-analysis p = 6.79 × 10-4, OR = 2.01, 95% CI 1.34-3.01). We identified a predictor of toxicities induced by VEGFR TKIs. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00073307 (TARGET), NCT01015833 (Alliance/CALGB 80802), and NCT01298570 (LCCC 1029).

Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Complete Radiologic Response to Trans-Arterial Embolization: A Retrospective Study on Patterns, Treatments, and Prognoses.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information about the long-term outcomes and patterns of progression in patients who have unresectable, liver-confined hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with complete response (CR) to transarterial embolization and do not undergo resection or transplantation (LT). METHODS: A retrospective review analyzed participants in a randomized trial comparing hepatic artery embolization (HAE) and drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) with doxorubicin who had CR according to modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (mRECIST). The overall survival (OS), incidence and patterns of progression, and factors associated with progression were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 101 patients in the trial, 37 with CR were included in this study. This cohort had 17 patients treated with HAE (46 %), and 20 patients managed with DEB-TACE (54 %). The median age was 67 years (range, 42-82 years). Most of the cohort were male (86.5 %) and Caucasian (78 %). The median pre-treatment Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 10, and 70 % of the cohort had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B or C. The median follow-up period was 49 months (95 % confidence interval [CI], 9-108 months), and the median OS was 25 months (95 % CI, 18.9-30.9 months). The 3- and 5-year survival rates were respectively 31 % (95 % CI, 16.7-45.9 %) and 18 % (95 % CI, 6.8-32.1 %). The 1- and 2-year cumulative incidences of progression were respectively 76 % (95 % CI, 57.7-86.8 %) and 92 % (95 % CI, 74.5-97.6 %). The most common first site of progression was the previously treated hepatic site or local site (32 %, 12/37). The 3-year cumulative incidence of progression was 65 % (95 % CI, 46.4-78.4 %) for the local site. CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced-stage HCC and CR to embolization do not have durable responses and experience inevitable disease progression. Most patients with progression have liver-confined disease and should be evaluated for additional consolidative treatments.

Safety and efficacy of cabozantinib for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who advanced to Child-Pugh B liver function at study week 8: a retrospective analysis of the CELESTIAL randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and Child-Pugh B liver cirrhosis have poor prognosis and are underrepresented in clinical trials. The CELESTIAL trial, in which cabozantinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with HCC and Child-Pugh A liver cirrhosis at baseline, was evaluated for outcomes in patients who had Child-Pugh B cirrhosis at Week 8. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of adult patients with previously treated advanced HCC. Child-Pugh B status was assessed by the investigator. Patients were randomised 2:1 to cabozantinib (60 mg once daily) or placebo. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients receiving cabozantinib and 22 receiving placebo had Child-Pugh B cirrhosis at Week 8. Safety and tolerability of cabozantinib for the Child-Pugh B subgroup were consistent with the overall population. For cabozantinib- versus placebo-treated patients, median OS from randomisation was 8.5 versus 3.8 months (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18-0.58), median PFS was 3.7 versus 1.9 months (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25-0.76), and best response was stable disease in 57% versus 23% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: These encouraging results with cabozantinib support the initiation of prospective studies in patients with advanced HCC and Child-Pugh B liver function. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01908426.

Reconciling the prospect of disease progression with goals and expectations: Development and validation of a measurement model in advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Among patients living with advanced, life-limiting illness, reconciling the prospect of disease progression with future goals and expectations is a key psychological task, integral to treatment decision-making and emotional well-being. To date, this psychological process remains poorly understood with no available measurement tools. The present paper develops and validates a measurement model for operationalizing this psychological process. METHODS: In Phase 1, concept elicitation interviews were conducted among Stage IV lung, gastrointestinal, and gynecologic cancer patients, their caregivers, and experts (N = 19), to further develop our conceptual framework centered on assimilation and accommodation coping. In Phase 2, draft self-report items of common assimilation and accommodation coping strategies were evaluated via patient cognitive interviews (N = 11). RESULTS: Phase 1 interviews identified several coping strategies, some of which aimed to reduce the perceived likelihood of disease progression (assimilation), and others aimed to integrate the likelihood into new goals and expectations (accommodation). The coping strategies appeared to manifest in patients' daily lives, and integrally related to their emotional well-being and how they think about treatments. Phase 2 cognitive interviews identified items to remove and modify, resulting in a 31-item measure assessing 10 assimilation and accommodation coping strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The present work derived a content-valid measure of the psychological process by which patients reconcile the prospect of disease progression with their goals and expectations. Further psychometric validation and use of the scale could identify intervention targets for enhancing patient decision-making and well-being.