Impact of radiological response and pattern of progression in patients with HCC treated by atezolizumab-bevacizumab.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aim to assess the role of radiological response to atezolizumab-bevacizumab in patients with HCC to predict overall survival. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We retrospectively included patients with HCC treated by atezolizumab-bevacizumab in 2 tertiary centers. A retrospective blinded analysis was performed by 2 radiologists to assess Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST 1.1) and modified RECIST (mRECIST) criteria at 12 weeks. Imaging response and treatment decisions in the multidisciplinary tumor board at 12 weeks were registered. Among 125 patients, 9.6% and 20.8% had a response, 39.2% and 35.2% had stable disease, and 51.2% and 44% had progression, according to RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST, respectively, with a substantial interobserver agreement (k coefficient=0.79). Metastasis was independently associated with a higher risk of progression. Patients classified as responders did not reach median survival, which was 16.2 and 15.9 months for patients classified as stable and 9.1 and 9.0 months for patients classified as progressors, in RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST criteria, respectively. We observed a wide variability in the identification of progression in the multidisciplinary tumor board in clinical practice compared with the blind evaluation by radiologists mainly due to discrepancy in the evaluation of the increase in size of intrahepatic lesions. The appearance of new extrahepatic lesions or vascular invasion lesions was associated with a worse overall survival ( p =0.032). CONCLUSIONS: RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST criteria predict overall survival with more responders identified by mRECIST and the appearance of new extrahepatic lesion or vascular invasion was associated with a poor prognosis. A noticeable discrepancy was observed between patients classified as progressors at reviewing and the decision reached during the multidisciplinary tumor board.

Baseline ALBI score and early variation of serum AFP predicts outcomes in patients with HCC treated by atezolizumab-bevacizumab.

BACKGROUND: The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (AtezoBev) is the current first-line treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our aim was to evaluate the prognostic role of alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) early response and its combination with albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) in these patients. METHODS: Patients with HCC under AtezoBev with AFP > 20 ng/ml were included in three centres. The optimal threshold of AFP variation after 3 weeks of treatment was identified for overall survival (OS) and radiological response (RR) using RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST and its ability to predict progression-free survival (PFS) and OS was tested using univariate and multivariate analysis in derivation and validation cohorts. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients with AFP values >20 ng/ml were included. Fifty-eight patients were male with a median age of 63.5 years; 73% had cirrhosis and HCC stage was classified as BCLC B (18.7%) or C (81.3%). In the derivation cohort (n = 38), a decline in AFP ≥ 20% at 3 weeks (AFP early response) was associated with RR using mRECIST criteria (OR: 13.09 95% CI: 1.44-19.34 p = .02), PFS (HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.19-0.93, p = .03) and OS (HR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.15-0.83, p = .01). AFP early response was confirmed as predictor of RR (p = .02 for mRECIST) and OS (p = .03) in the validation cohort (n= 37). In the whole cohort, the combination of ALBI and AFP early response was significantly associated with OS (p = .046) and PFS (p = .012) with a poor prognosis in patients belonging to the ALBI2-AFP non-responders class. CONCLUSION: AFP early response at 3 weeks predicts oncological outcomes in HCC patients treated with AtezoBev and combination with ALBI grade refines prognostic discrimination.

A history of variceal bleeding is associated with further bleeding under atezolizumab-bevacizumab in patients with HCC.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab-bevacizumab is the new standard for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) but its impact on portal hypertension (PHT) is unknown. We aimed to identify predictive factors of acute variceal bleeding (AVB) and to monitor PHT parameters under treatment. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study including all cirrhotic patients treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab since 2020. We performed monitoring of PHT using upper endoscopy at inclusion and at 6 months and hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) at inclusion, 3 and 6 months after the beginning of treatment. We also included a retrospective series of patients treated with sorafenib. Time-to-events data were estimated by Kaplan-Meier with the log-rank test, along with Cox models. RESULTS: Forty-three patients treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab were included (male 79.1%, Child-Pugh A 86%). At baseline, 48.8% were treated with curative anticoagulation, 16.3% already experienced AVB and 25.6% had large oesophageal varices (EV). Sorafenib group characteristics were similar. Vascular invasion was present in 60.5% and median was HVPG 8.5 mm Hg. No significant modification in HVPG and EV size was observed at 6 months in the whole cohort but also when considering vascular invasion and radiological response. 14% presented AVB within a median time of occurrence of 3 months, without bleeding-related death. In multivariate analysis, history of AVB (HR = 10.58, p = .03) was associated with AVB. AVB incidence was higher in atezolizumab-bevacizumab compared to sorafenib group (21% vs. 5% at 1 year, p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Atezolizumab-bevacizumab treatment was associated with a higher risk of AVB compared to sorafenib. A history of AVB was associated with AVB during follow-up, which questions the use of bevacizumab in this setting.

Portal hypertension is associated with poorer outcome and clinical liver decompensation in patients with HCC treated with Atezolizumab-Bevacizumab.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension (PHT) often complicates hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment and prognosis. We aimed to assess PHT's impact on AtezoBev outcomes and identify predictors of acute variceal bleeding (AVB) and clinical ascites occurrence. METHODS: A prospective cohort of 200 HCC patients treated with AtezoBev was studied alongside a retrospective cohort of 123 patients treated with Sorafenib. We assessed factors influencing progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), AVB and clinical ascites development, focusing on PHT parameters, and comparing outcomes within and between the two cohorts (time-dependent Cox model and adjusted survival curves). RESULTS: Among the AtezoBev cohort, 10% experienced AVB, 24% had high-risk esophageal varices (EV) and 46% vascular invasion. Median PFS and OS in the AtezoBev cohort was 5.13 and 12.2 months. AVB (HR=1.81;[95%CI:1.03-3.17]) and clinical ascites occurrence (HR=2.29;[95%CI:1.52-3.45]) were independently associated with mortality. AVB incidence was 12% at 12 months in AtezoBev patients and EV, history of AVB<6months and vascular invasion were independently associated with AVB. The Sorafenib cohort had shorter median PFS and OS, with similar AVB incidence and only EV were associated with AVB. CONCLUSIONS: PHT-related events significantly affect not only liver decompensation but also OS in AtezoBev-treated patients. We suggest a more widespread use of NSBB to prevent liver decompensation, with intensified prophylaxis for high-risk patients.

Nodular Regenerative Hyperplasia Is Not a Rare Condition After Liver Transplantation: Incidence, Predictive Factors, and Impact on Survival.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to evaluate incidence and to identify the risk factors of occurrence and the predictive factors of symptomatic forms of nodular regenerative hyperplasia (NRH) after liver transplantation (LT). METHODS: To identify risk factors of NRH following LT, we included 1648 patients transplanted from 2004 to 2018 and compared the patients developing NRH after LT to those who did not. To identify predictive factors of symptomatic NRH, we selected 115 biopsies displaying NRH and compared symptomatic to asymptomatic forms. Symptomatic NRH was defined as the presence of ascites, esophageal varices, hepatic encephalopathy, portal thrombosis, retransplantation, or death related to NRH. RESULTS: The incidence of NRH following LT was 5.1%. In multivariate analysis, the independent factor of developing NRH after LT was the donor's age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.02; confidence interval, 1.01-1.03; P = 0.02). Symptomatic forms occurred in 29 (25.2%) patients: 19 (16.5%) patients presented with ascites, 13 (11.3%) with esophageal varices, 4 (3.5%) with hepatic encephalopathy, and 8 (7%) with portal thrombosis. The median period before the onset of symptoms was 8.4 (1.5-11.3) y after LT. The spleen size at diagnosis/before LT ratio (OR = 12.5; 114.17-1.37; P = 0.0252) and thrombectomy during transplantation (OR = 11.17; 1.48-84.11; P = 0.0192) were associated with symptomatic NRH in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: NRH following LT is frequent (5.1%) and leads to symptomatic portal hypertension in 25.2% of patients. Using older grafts increases the risk of developing NRH after LT. Clinicians should screen for signs of portal hypertension, particularly in measuring spleen size.