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

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

Characteristics and outcomes of immunotherapy-related liver injury in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma versus other advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is commonly observed in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed to compare the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of irLI between patients receiving ICIs for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) vs. other solid tumours. METHODS: Two separate cohorts were included: 375 patients with advanced/unresectable HCC, Child-Pugh A class treated with first-line atezolizumab+bevacizumab from the AB-real study, and a non-HCC cohort including 459 patients treated with first-line ICI therapy from the INVIDIa-2 multicentre study. IrLI was defined as a treatment-related increase of aminotransferase levels after exclusion of alternative aetiologies of liver injury. The incidence of irLI was adjusted for the duration of treatment exposure. RESULTS: In patients with HCC, the incidence of any grade irLI was 11.4% over a median treatment exposure of 4.4 months (95% CI 3.7-5.2) vs. 2.6% in the INVIDIa-2 cohort over a median treatment exposure of 12.4 months (95% CI 11.1-14.0). Exposure-adjusted-incidence of any grade irLI was 22.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with HCC and 2.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with other solid tumours (p <0.001), with median time-to-irLI of 1.4 and 4.7 months, respectively. Among patients who developed irLI, systemic corticosteroids were administered in 16.3% of patients with HCC and 75.0% of those without HCC (p <0.001), and irLI resolution was observed in 72.1% and 58.3%, respectively (p = 0.362). In patients with HCC, rates of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation due to irLI were 7%. Grade 1-2 irLI was associated with improved overall survival only in patients with HCC (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher incidence and earlier onset, irLI in patients with HCC is characterised by higher rates of remission and lower requirement for corticosteroid therapy (vs. irLI in other solid tumours), low risk of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation, not negatively affecting oncological outcomes. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is common in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but whether irLI is more frequent or it is associated with a worse clinical course in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), compared to other tumours, is not known. Herein, we compared characteristics and outcomes of irLI in two prospective cohorts including patients treated with ICIs for HCC or for other oncological indications. irLI is significantly more common and it occurs earlier in patients with HCC, also after adjustment for duration of treatment exposure. However, outcomes of patients with HCC who developed irLI are not negatively affected in terms of requirement for corticosteroid therapy, hepatic decompensation, treatment discontinuation and overall survival.

Mismatch Repair Deficiency in Biliary Tract Cancer: Prognostic Implications and Correlation with Histology.

INTRODUCTION: Mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency represents a biomarker and therapeutic target in various neoplasms, but its role in biliary tract cancers (BTCs) remains misunderstood. METHODS: MMR status was retrospectively assessed using immunohistochemistry in 163-BTCs patients. We identified MMR proficiency (pMMR)/deficiency (dMMR) according to the loss of MMR proteins (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, MSH6). The primary objective of the study was to assess the incidence of dMMR in BTCs; the secondary purpose was to explore its association with prognosis and clinical features. RESULTS: dMMR was recorded in 9 patients, and it was strongly associated with mucinous histology (p < 0.01). Regarding the prognostic effect, in 122-radically resected patients, disease-free survival (DFS) resulted significantly shorter in dMMR patients compared to pMMR patients (10.7 vs. 31.3 months, p = 0.025) and so did nodal status (48.2 vs. 15.3 months in N0 vs. N+) (p < 0.01). Moreover, dMMR confirmed its prognostic role in terms of DFS at multivariate analysis (p = 0.03), together with nodal status (p = 0.01), and resection margin (p = 0.03). In 103 M+ patients (encompassing 41 metastatic de novo and 62 recurred after surgery patients) there were not differences between dMMR and pMMR regarding survival analyses. CONCLUSIONS: dMMR status is strongly correlated with mucinous histology and represents an independent prognostic factor in terms of disease relapse in patients with resected BTC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: MMR may play an independent role in promoting an aggressive behaviour in patients with radically resected BTC. These results could be useful in improving the selection of patients after resection and, above all, should justify the evaluation of MMR status as a therapeutic target in BTC, especially in patients with atypical histology.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus lenvatinib plus placebo for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (LEAP-002): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Systemic therapies have improved the management of hepatocellular carcinoma, but there is still a need to further enhance overall survival in first-line advanced stages. This study aimed to evaluate the addition of pembrolizumab to lenvatinib versus lenvatinib plus placebo in the first-line setting for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this global, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study (LEAP-002), patients aged 18 years or older with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, Child Pugh class A liver disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and no previous systemic treatment were enrolled at 172 global sites. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a central interactive voice-response system (block size of 4) to receive lenvatinib (bodyweight <60 kg, 8 mg/day; bodyweight ≥60 kg, 12 mg/day) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) or lenvatinib plus placebo. Randomisation was stratified by geographical region, macrovascular portal vein invasion or extrahepatic spread or both, α-fetoprotein concentration, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Dual primary endpoints were overall survival (superiority threshold at final overall survival analysis, one-sided p=0·019; final analysis to occur after 532 events) and progression-free survival (superiority threshold one-sided p=0·002; final analysis to occur after 571 events) in the intention-to-treat population. Results from the final analysis are reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03713593, and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Jan 17, 2019, and April 28, 2020, of 1309 patients assessed, 794 were randomly assigned to lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (n=395) or lenvatinib plus placebo (n=399). Median age was 66·0 years (IQR 57·0-72·0), 644 (81%) of 794 were male, 150 (19%) were female, 345 (43%) were Asian, 345 (43%) were White, 22 (3%) were multiple races, 21 (3%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 21 (3%) were Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, 13 (2%) were Black or African American, and 46 (6%) did not have available race data. Median follow up as of data cutoff for the final analysis (June 21, 2022) was 32·1 months (IQR 29·4-35·3). Median overall survival was 21·2 months (95% CI 19·0-23·6; 252 [64%] of 395 died) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus 19·0 months (17·2-21·7; 282 [71%] of 399 died) with lenvatinib plus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·84; 95% CI 0·71-1·00; stratified log-rank p=0·023). As of data cutoff for the progression-free survival final analysis (April 5, 2021), median progression-free survival was 8·2 months (95% CI 6·4-8·4; 270 events occurred [42 deaths; 228 progressions]) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus 8·0 months (6·3-8·2; 301 events occurred [36 deaths; 265 progressions]) with lenvatinib plus placebo (HR 0·87; 95% CI 0·73-1·02; stratified log-rank p=0·047). The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (69 [17%] of 395 patients in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group vs 68 [17%] of 395 patients) in the lenvatinib plus placebo group), increased aspartate aminotransferase (27 [7%] vs 17 [4%]), and diarrhoea (25 [6%] vs 15 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in four (1%) patients in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group (due to gastrointestinal haemorrhage and hepatorenal syndrome [n=1 each] and hepatic encephalopathy [n=2]) and in three (1%) patients in the lenvatinib plus placebo group (due to gastrointestinal haemorrhage, hepatorenal syndrome, and cerebrovascular accident [n=1 each]). INTERPRETATION: In earlier studies, the addition of pembrolizumab to lenvatinib as first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma has shown promising clinical activity; however, lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab did not meet prespecified significance for improved overall survival and progression-free survival versus lenvatinib plus placebo. Our findings do not support a change in clinical practice. FUNDING: Eisai US, and Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck.

Trop-2 and Nectin-4 immunohistochemical expression in metastatic colorectal cancer: searching for the right population for drugs' development.

BACKGROUND: Trop-2 and Nectin-4 are transmembrane proteins overexpressed in many tumours and targets of antibody-drug conjugates (ADC). In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the role of Trop-2 and Nectin-4 has been poorly investigated. METHODS: Tumour samples of patients randomised in the phase III TRIBE2 were assessed for Trop-2 and Nectin-4 expression. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-six tumours were assessed for Trop-2 expression. 90 (23%), 115 (30%) and 181 (47%) were Trop-2 high, medium and low, respectively. Patients with low Trop-2 tumours achieved longer PFS (12 versus 9.9 months, p = 0.047) and OS (27.3 versus 21.3 months, p = 0.015) than those with high/medium Trop-2 tumours. These findings were confirmed in multivariate analysis (p = 0.022 and p = 0.023, respectively). A greater OS benefit from treatment intensification with FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab was observed in patients with high/medium Trop-2 tumours (p-for-interaction = 0.041). Two hundred fifty-one tumours were assessed for Nectin-4 expression. Fourteen (5%), 67 (27%) and 170 (68%) were high, medium and low, respectively. No prognostic impact was observed based on Nectin-4 expression and no interaction effect was reported between Nectin-4 expression groups and treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: In mCRC, expression levels of Trop-2 and Nectin-4 are heterogeneous, suggesting a target-driven development of anti-Trop2 and anti-Nectin-4 ADCs. Medium/high Trop-2 expression is associated with worse prognosis and higher benefit from chemotherapy intensification.

Dynamic Profiling of the Immune Tumor Microenvironment in Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer Treated with Perioperative Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: In locally advanced gastric cancer (GC), FLOT represents the standard perioperative regimen and combination with immunotherapy is under investigation. However, the role of immune tumor microenvironment (TME) is poorly recognized in this setting. We aimed to study TME characteristics and dynamics during FLOT. METHODS: Paired biopsy (PRE) and surgical (POST) samples of 25 patients treated with FLOT were prospectively analyzed. After collection of clinic-pathological data, NanoString analyses were performed. The primary objective of the study was to assess the changes induced by chemotherapy in POST compared to PRE samples. RESULTS: The unsupervised hierarchical method analysis clearly distinguished PRE and POST samples, even though some cases showed high immune gene expression at baseline. When POST samples were compared with PRE, a differential expression in hyper-expressed gene sets related to cytotoxicity, T-cell functions, complement system, tumor necrosis factor superfamily, cell cycle, and regulation was recognized. Downstaging of the primary tumor (T-regression, measured by pathologic compared to clinical T stage) was the covariate most frequently associated with these changes. Using the immune cell profiling, cases with T-regression reported a significant increase of T, CD8+ T and B cells and a decrease in mast cells, while nonresponders demonstrated an increase of T, B, cytotoxic, and mast cells. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that FLOT significantly influences immune TME of GC. While relevant modifications preferentially occur in tumors showing primary tumor regression, response to treatment seems to be associated with a specific immune profile.

Role of the Prognostic Nutritional Index in Predicting Survival in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab.

INTRODUCTION: The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) is a multiparametric score introduced by Onodera based on the blood levels of lymphocytes and albumin in patients with gastrointestinal neoplasms. Regarding hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), its prognostic role has been shown in patients treated with sorafenib and lenvatinib. The aim of this real-world study was to investigate the association between clinical outcomes and PNI in patients being treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. METHODS: The overall cohort of this multicentric study included 871 consecutive HCC patients from 5 countries treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in first-line therapy. The PNI was calculated as follows: 10 × serum albumin concentration (g/dL) + 0.005 × peripheral lymphocyte count (number/mm3). RESULTS: Data regarding lymphocyte counts and albumin levels were available for 773 patients; therefore, these patients were included in the final analysis. The cut-off point of the PNI was determined to be 41 by receiver operating characteristic analysis. 268 patients (34.7%) were categorized as the PNI-low group, while the remaining 505 (65.3%) patients as the PNI-high group. At the univariate analysis, high PNI was associated with longer overall survival (OS) (22.5 vs. 10.1 months, HR 0.34, p <0.01) and progression-free survival (PFS) (8.7 vs. 5.8 months, HR 0.63, p <0.01) compared to patients with low PNI. At the multivariate analysis, high versus low PNI resulted as an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 0.49, p <0.01) and PFS (HR 0.82, p = 0.01). There was no difference in objective response rate between the two groups (high 26.1% vs. low 19.8%, p = 0.09), while disease control rate was significantly higher in the PNI-high group (76.8% vs. 66.4%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: PNI is an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS in HCC patients on first-line treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

Concordance of microsatellite instability and mismatch repair status in paired biopsies and surgical specimens of resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: time for a call to action.

BACKGROUND: Reliability of mismatch repair proteins and microsatellite instability assessment is essential in order to define treatment strategy and identify candidates to immune checkpoint inhibitors in locally advanced gastroesophageal carcinoma. We evaluated the concordance of deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) status between endoscopic biopsies and surgical specimens. METHODS: Consecutive patients with resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma classified as MSI-H/dMMR by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or immunohistochemistry (IHC) and operated at three referral Institutions were included. The primary endpoint was the rate of concordance between biopsy and surgical samples. If needed, central revision by IHC/PCR was performed by specialized pathologists from coordinating Institutions. RESULTS: Thirteen (19.7%) out of 66 patients showed discordant MSI-H/dMMR results in the original pathology reports. In most cases (11, 16.7%) this was due to the diagnosis of proficient mismatch repair status on biopsies. Among the ten cases available for central review, four were due to sample issues, four were reclassified as dMMR, one case showed dMMR status but was classified as microsatellite stable by PCR, one was linked to misdiagnosis of endoscopic biopsy by the local pathologist. Heterogeneity of mismatch repair proteins staining was observed in two cases. CONCLUSIONS: Available methods can lead to conflicting results in MSI-H/dMMR evaluation between endoscopic biopsies and surgical samples of gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Strategies aiming to improve the reliability of assessment should be primarily focused on the optimization of tissue collection and management during endoscopy and adequate training of dedicated gastrointestinal pathologists within the multidisciplinary team.

Repeated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: induction of high-avidity anti-RBD neutralizing antibodies.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are more vulnerable to COVID-19 and are thus given high priority in vaccination campaigns. In solid cancer patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors, we evaluated the amount of anti-RBD and neutralizing antibodies and antibody avidity after two or three doses of the vaccine. METHODS: Thirty-eight solid cancer patients, 15 untreated hematological patients and 21 healthy subjects were enrolled in the study. Blood was collected before the first dose (T0), 21 days after the second (T2) and in 18 solid cancer patients also 15 days after the third dose of vaccine (T3). IgG, IgM and IgA anti-RBD antibodies were detected by ELISA. Neutralizing antibodies were measured testing the inhibition of RBD binding to ACE2. Antibody avidity was evaluated in 18 patients by a urea avidity ELISA. RESULTS: IgG anti-RBD antibodies were produced in 65.8% of the cancer patients at T2, and in 60% of hematological patients at levels lower than healthy controls. IgM and IgA anti-RBD antibodies were also produced in 5.3% and 21% cancer patients, respectively. At T3, a significant increase in anti-RBD IgG levels was observed. Neutralizing antibodies were produced in 68.4% of cancer patients as compared with 93% of untreated hematological patients and 100% of controls, at titers lower than in healthy subjects. At T3, neutralizing antibodies and avidity of IgG anti-RBD increased; 6/18 patients negative at T2 developed neutralizing antibodies at T3. CONCLUSION: The data indicate that in cancer patients mRNA vaccine induces high avidity anti-RBD antibodies and neutralizing antibodies that increase after the third dose. The process of induction and selection of high-affinity antibodies is apparently unaffected by the treatment with anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 antibodies.

Advances, Challenges, and Future Perspectives of Microwave Reflectometry for Plasma Position and Shape Control on Future Nuclear Fusion Devices.

Providing energy from fusion and finding ways to scale up the fusion process to commercial proportions in an efficient, economical, and environmentally benign way is one of the grand challenges for engineering. Controlling the burning plasma in real-time is one of the critical issues that need to be addressed. Plasma Position Reflectometry (PPR) is expected to have an important role in next-generation fusion machines, such as DEMO, as a diagnostic to monitor the position and shape of the plasma continuously, complementing magnetic diagnostics. The reflectometry diagnostic uses radar science methods in the microwave and millimetre wave frequency ranges and is envisaged to measure the radial edge density profile at several poloidal angles providing data for the feedback control of the plasma position and shape. While significant steps have already been given to accomplish that goal, with proof of concept tested first in ASDEX-Upgrade and afterward in COMPASS, important, ground-breaking work is still ongoing. The Divertor Test Tokamak (DTT) facility presents itself as the appropriate future fusion device to implement, develop, and test a PPR system, thus contributing to building a knowledge database in plasma position reflectometry required for its application in DEMO. At DEMO, the PPR diagnostic's in-vessel antennas and waveguides, as well as the magnetic diagnostics, may be exposed to neutron irradiation fluences 5 to 50 times greater than those experienced by ITER. In the event of failure of either the magnetic or microwave diagnostics, the equilibrium control of the DEMO plasma may be jeopardized. It is, therefore, imperative to ensure that these systems are designed in such a way that they can be replaced if necessary. To perform reflectometry measurements at the 16 envisaged poloidal locations in DEMO, plasma-facing antennas and waveguides are needed to route the microwaves between the plasma through the DEMO upper ports (UPs) to the diagnostic hall. The main integration approach for this diagnostic is to incorporate these groups of antennas and waveguides into a diagnostics slim cassette (DSC), which is a dedicated complete poloidal segment specifically designed to be integrated with the water-cooled lithium lead (WCLL) breeding blanket system. This contribution presents the multiple engineering and physics challenges addressed while designing reflectometry diagnostics using radio science techniques. Namely, short-range dedicated radars for plasma position and shape control in future fusion experiments, the advances enabled by the designs for ITER and DEMO, and the future perspectives. One key development is in electronics, aiming at an advanced compact coherent fast frequency sweeping RF back-end [23-100 GHz in few µs] that is being developed at IPFN-IST using commercial Monolithic Microwave Integrated Circuits (MMIC). The compactness of this back-end design is crucial for the successful integration of many measurement channels in the reduced space available in future fusion machines. Prototype tests of these devices are foreseen to be performed in current nuclear fusion machines.

Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab with or without atezolizumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (AtezoTRIBE): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have not shown clinical benefit to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) or microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours in previous studies. Both an active combination chemotherapy (FOLFOXIRI; fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) and bevacizumab seem able to increase the immunogenicity of pMMR or MSS tumours. We aimed to provide preliminary evidence of benefit from the addition of the anti-PD-L1 agent atezolizumab to first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: AtezoTRIBE was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study of patients (aged 18-70 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] performance status of 0-2 and aged 71-75 years with an ECOG performance status of 0) with histologically confirmed, unresectable, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer and adequate organ function, who were recruited from 22 oncology centres in Italy. Patients were stratified according to centre, ECOG performance status, primary tumour site, and previous adjuvant therapy. A randomisation system incorporating a minimisation algorithm randomly assigned (1:2) patients via a masked web-based allocation procedure to two groups: the control group received first-line FOLFOXIRI (intravenous 165 mg/m2 irinotecan, 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m2 leucovorin, and 3200 mg/m2 fluorouracil as a 48 h infusion) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously), and the atezolizumab group received the same regimen plus atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously). Combination treatments were administered up to eight 14-day cycles followed by maintenance with fluorouracil and leucovorin plus bevacizumab with or without atezolizumab, according to randomisation group, until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed by the intention-to-treat principle. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. The study recruitment is completed. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03721653. FINDINGS: Between Nov 30, 2018, and Feb 26, 2020, 218 patients were randomly assigned and received treatment (73 in the control group and 145 in the atezolizumab group). At the data cutoff (Aug 1, 2021), median follow-up was 19·9 months (IQR 17·3-23·9). Median progression-free survival was 13·1 months (80% CI 12·5-13·8) in the atezolizumab group and 11·5 months (10·0-12·6) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·69 [80% CI 0·56-0·85]; p=0·012; adjusted HR 0·70 [80% CI 0·57-0·87]; log-rank test p=0·018). The most frequent all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (59 [42%] of 142 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 26 [36%] of 72 patients in the control group), diarrhoea (21 [15%] vs nine [13%]), and febrile neutropenia (14 [10%] vs seven [10%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 39 (27%) patients in the atezolizumab group and in 19 (26%) patients in the control group. Two (1%) treatment-related deaths (due to acute myocardial infarction and bronchopulmonary haemorrhage) were reported in the atezolizumab group; none were reported in the control group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of atezolizumab to first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is safe and improved progression-free survival in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: GONO Foundation, ARCO Foundation, F Hoffmann-La Roche, and Roche.

Benefit from upfront FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab in BRAFV600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer patients: does primary tumour location matter?

BACKGROUND: Recent data suggest that BRAFV600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with right-sided tumours and ECOG-PS = 0 may achieve benefit from the triplet regimen differently than those with left-sided tumours and ECOG-PS > 0. METHODS: The predictive impact of primary sidedness and ECOG-PS was evaluated in a large real-life dataset of 296 BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC patients treated with upfront triplet or doublet ± bevacizumab. Biological differences between right- and left-sided BRAFV600E-mutated CRCs were further investigated in an independent cohort of 1162 samples. RESULTS: A significant interaction effect between primary sidedness and treatment intensity was reported in terms of both PFS (p = 0.010) and OS (p = 0.003), with a beneficial effect of the triplet in the right-sided group and a possible detrimental effect in the left-sided. No interaction effect was observed between ECOG-PS and chemo-backbone. In the MSS/pMMR population, a consistent trend for a side-related subgroup effect was observed when FOLFOXIRI ± bevacizumab was compared to oxaliplatin-based doublets±bevacizumab (p = 0.097 and 0.16 for PFS and OS, respectively). Among MSS/pMMR tumours, the BM1 subtype was more prevalent in the right-sided group (p = 0.0019, q = 0.0139). No significant differences were observed according to sidedness in the MSI-H/dMMR population. CONCLUSIONS: Real-life data support the use of FOLFOXIRI ± bevacizumab only in BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC patients with right-sided tumours.

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

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

Regorafenib is standard second-line therapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who show failure to sorafenib treatment, but there is no reliable factor to predict survival. In this multicenter, retrospective study with patients from South Korea and Italy, we have found that both baseline AFP level and on-treatment AFP response have independent predictive value for survival in patients with HCC under regorafenib treatment. We observed similar results when the patients were divided according to their nationality (South Korea vs Italy), despite the fact that the baseline characteristics of the patients from the two cohorts were significantly different.

Upper transversal hepatectomy with double hepatic vein resection and reconstruction to treat colorectal cancer liver metastases at the hepatocaval confluence: a strategy to achieve R0 liver-sparing resection.

BACKGROUND: Repeated hepatectomies in the therapeutic route of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) may improve their long term survival. Hepatic vein (HV) resection and reconstruction allows parenchyma-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) and R0 resections for CRLM in contact with one HV. We aimed at verifying the feasibility of PSH with double HV resection and direct reconstruction for CRLM in contact with two HVs at the hepatocaval confluence. METHODS: Out of 106 consecutive PSH performed for CRLM deep-located in segments I-IVa-VII-VIII, four (3.7%) PSH were performed with resection of CRLM en bloc with two adjacent HVs which were both reconstructed with double direct HV anastomosis: 3 cases between right-HV and middle-HV and 1 case between middle-HV and left-HV. Two patients had previously undergone liver resection. Three patients had one single lesion and one had 5 CRLMs. RESULTS: Median size of CRLMs in contact with HVs was 25 mm (range 22-30 mm). At histological examination, all resections were R0 except one R1-vascular (detachment from glissonean pedicle): in all cases at least one HV and in 1 case both HVs were infiltrated by the tumor cells. After median follow-up of 18 (range 3.5-41.2) months, all HVs were patent. All patients were alive and in good general conditions, and 3 patients were disease free (one of them following a liver re-resection). One patient experienced a grade IIIa complication. Median hospital-stay was 11 (range 9-13) days. CONCLUSION: In patients with CRLMs involving two adjacent HVs at the hepatocaval confluence, liver resection with double HV resection and direct reconstruction is feasible and may be considered to guarantee oncological radicality (R0) and spare health parenchyma.

CEA increase as a marker of disease progression after first-line induction therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. A pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies.

BACKGROUND: In mCRC, CEA is used to monitor response to systemic therapy together with imaging. After the end of induction, no major improvement in tumour shrinkage is expected, and the availability of a marker able to predict progressive disease (PD) versus no-PD might allow avoiding CT scans. METHODS: We pooled data from patients with baseline CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL included in TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies with the aim of identifying a threshold for percent increase of CEA from nadir able to predict PD after the end of the induction therapy. RESULTS: In total, 1178 paired CEA and radiological assessments from 434 patients were included. According to the optimal cut-off determined by ROC, a CEA increase of at least 120% from nadir differentiated between PD and no-PD with a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 78%, excluding PD in the 92% of radiological assessments and allowing to avoid the 67% of CT scans. However, CEA cut-off of 120% was not able to detect radiological PD in 26% of cases. In order to mitigate this issue, a different clinically relevant threshold was evaluated based on the best sensitivity cut-off. Therefore, using any CEA increase from nadir as a threshold, the sensitivity grew to 93% and only in the 7% of cases the radiological PD was not detected. CONCLUSIONS: In mCRC with baseline CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL, CEA values can accurately predict PD versus no-PD after the end of the first-line induction therapy.

Treatments after progression to first-line FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies by GONO.

BACKGROUND: FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab (bev) is a first-line regimen of proven activity and efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer. The upfront exposure to three cytotoxics raises concerns about the efficacy of treatments after progression. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of treatments after progression to upfront FOLFOXIRI/bev in patients enrolled in two randomised Phase 3 studies (TRIBE and TRIBE2) that compared FOLFOXIRI/bev to doublets (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI)/bev. Response rate, progression-free survival (2nd PFS) and overall survival (2nd OS) during treatments after progression were assessed. The RECIST response in first line and the oxaliplatin and irinotecan-free interval (OIFI) were investigated as potential predictors of benefit from FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction. RESULTS: Longer 2nd PFS was reported in patients receiving FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction compared to doublets ± bev or other treatments (6.1 versus 4.4 and 3.9 months, respectively, P = 0.013), and seems limited to patients achieving a response during first line (6.9 versus 4.2 and 4.7 months, respectively, P = 0.005) and an OIFI ≥ 4 months (7.2 versus 6.5 and 4.6 months, respectively, P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: First-line FOLFOXIRI/bev does not impair the administration of effective second-line therapies. First-line response and longer OIFI seem associated with improved response and 2nd PFS from FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction, without impacting 2nd OS.

FOLFOXIRI-Bevacizumab or FOLFOX-Panitumumab in Patients with Left-Sided RAS/BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Doublets plus anti-epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFRs) are the preferred upfront option for patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab is superior to doublets plus bevacizumab independently from primary tumor sidedness and RAS/BRAF status. No randomized comparison between FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab versus doublets plus anti-EGFRs is available in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We selected patients with left-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with first-line FOLFOX-panitumumab or FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab in five randomized trials: Valentino, TRIBE, TRIBE2, STEAM, and CHARTA. A propensity score-based analysis was performed to compare FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab with FOLFOX-panitumumab. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients received FOLFOX-panitumumab and 132 received FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 13.3 and 33.1 months in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group compared with 11.4 and 30.3 months in the FOLFOX-panitumumab group (propensity score-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for PFS, 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-1.04; p = .11; propensity score-adjusted HR for OS, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.59-1.08; p = .14). No significant differences in overall response rate and disease control rate were observed. A statistically nonsignificant difference in favor of FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab was observed for OS after secondary resection of metastases. Chemotherapy-related adverse events were more frequent in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group, with specific regard to grade 3 and 4 neutropenia (48% vs. 26%, adjusted p = .001). CONCLUSION: Although randomized comparison is lacking, both FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab and FOLFOX-panitumumab are valuable treatment options in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A propensity score-based analysis of five trials was performed to compare FOLFOX-panitumumab versus FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No significant differences were observed, but FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab achieved numerically superior survival outcomes versus FOLFOX-panitumumab. Chemotherapy-related adverse events were more frequent in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group. These observations suggest that although doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFRs remains the preferred treatment in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC, FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab is a valuable option able to provide similar, if not better, outcomes at the price of a moderate increase in toxicity and may be adopted based on patients' preference and potential impact on quality of life.

Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: An inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis.

PURPOSE: Data from common clinical practice were used to generate balanced cohorts of patients receiving either sorafenib or lenvatinib, for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, with the final aim to investigate their declared equivalence. METHODS: Clinical features of lenvatinib and sorafenib patients were balanced through inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology, which weights patients' characteristics and measured outcomes of each patient in both treatment arms. Overall survival was the primary endpoint and occurrence of adverse events was the secondary. RESULTS: The analysis included 385 patients who received lenvatinib, and 555 patients who received sorafenib. In the unadjusted cohort, lenvatinib did not show a survival advantage over sorafenib (HR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.70-1.02). After IPTW adjustment, lenvatinib still not returned a survival advantage over sorafenib (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.62-1.07) even in presence of balanced baseline characteristics. Lenvatinib provided longer survival than sorafenib in patients previously submitted to TACE (HR: 0.69), with PS of 0 (HR: 0.73) or without extrahepatic disease (HR: 0.69). CONCLUSION: Present results confirmed randomized controlled trial in the real-life setting, but also suggests that in earlier stages some benefit can be expected.

Adverse events as potential predictive factors of activity in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with lenvatinib.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Lenvatinib is a standard of care option in first-line therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In the present study, we aim to identify, in patients with HCC treated with lenvatinib, a possible association between occurrence and grading of adverse events (AEs) and outcome. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 606 Japanese and Italian patients treated with lenvatinib in first-line setting and investigated the possible correlation between the onset of AEs, toxicity grade (G) and outcome measures such as overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: The appearance of arterial hypertension G ≥ 2 independently predicted prolonged OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.93, P = .0188], whereas decreased appetite G ≥ 2 independently predicted decreased OS (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.25-2.32, P = .0007) by multivariate analysis. Appearance of hand-foot skin reaction independently predicted prolonged PFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56-0.93, P = .0149), whereas decreased appetite G ≥ 2 predicted decreased PFS (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.04-1.77, P = .0277). CONCLUSIONS: Our main findings are that the occurrence of arterial hypertension G ≥ 2 is a predictor of longer survival, whereas decreased appetite G ≥ 2 predicts for a poor prognosis. A careful management of AEs under lenvatinib treatment for HCC is required, to improve patients' quality of life, minimize the need for treatment discontinuation and achieve optimal outcome.

Lenvatinib versus Sorafenib as first-line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma: A multi-institutional matched case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Advanced Hepatocarcinoma (HCC) is an important health problem worldwide. Recently, the REFLECT trial demonstrated the non-inferiority of Lenvatinib compared to Sorafenib in I line setting, thus leading to the approval of new first-line standard of care, along with Sorafenib. AIMS AND METHODS: With aim to evaluate the optimal choice between Sorafenib and Lenvatinib as primary treatment in clinical practice, we performed a multicentric analysis with the propensity score matching on 184 HCC patients. RESULTS: The median overall survival (OS) were 15.2 and 10.5 months for Lenvatinib and Sorafenib arm, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.0 and 4.5 months for Lenvatinib and Sorafenib arm, respectively. Patients treated with Lenvatinib showed a 36% reduction of death risk (p = 0.0156), a 29% reduction of progression risk (p = 0.0446), a higher response rate (p < 0.00001) and a higher disease control rate (p = 0.002). Sorafenib showed to be correlated with more hand-foot skin reaction and Lenvatinib with more hypertension and fatigue. We highlighted the prognostic role of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS), bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase and eosinophils for Sorafenib. Conversely, albumin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alkaline phosphatase and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) resulted prognostic in Lenvatinib arm. Finally, we highlighted the positive predictive role of albumin > Normal Value (NV), ECOG > 0, NLR < 3, absence of Hepatitis C Virus positivity, and presence of portal vein thrombosis in favor of Lenvatinib arm. Eosinophil < 50 and ECOG > 0 negatively predicted the response to Sorafenib. CONCLUSION: SLenvatinib showed to better perform in a real-word setting compared to Sorafenib. More researches are needed to validate the predictor factors of response to Lenvatinib rather than Sorafenib.