Non-terminally exhausted tumor-resident memory HBV-specific T cell responses correlate with relapse-free survival in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) often develops following chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and responds poorly to immune checkpoint blockade. Here, we examined the antigen specificities of HCC-infiltrating T cells and their relevance to tumor control. Using highly multiplexed peptide-MHC tetramer staining of unexpanded cells from blood, liver, and tumor tissues from 46 HCC patients, we detected 91 different antigen-specific CD8+ T cell populations targeting HBV, neoantigen, tumor-associated, and disease-unrelated antigens. Parallel high-dimensional analysis delineated five distinct antigen-specific tissue-resident memory T (Trm) cell populations. Intratumoral and intrahepatic HBV-specific T cells were enriched for two Trm cell subsets that were PD-1loTOXlo, despite being clonally expanded. High frequencies of intratumoral terminally exhausted T cells were uncommon. Patients with tumor-infiltrating HBV-specific CD8+ Trm cells exhibited longer-term relapse-free survival. Thus, non-terminally exhausted HBV-specific CD8+ Trm cells show hallmarks of active involvement and effective antitumor response, implying that these cells could be harnessed for therapeutic purposes.

Epigenetic promoter alterations in GI tumour immune-editing and resistance to immune checkpoint inhibition.

OBJECTIVES: Epigenomic alterations in cancer interact with the immune microenvironment to dictate tumour evolution and therapeutic response. We aimed to study the regulation of the tumour immune microenvironment through epigenetic alternate promoter use in gastric cancer and to expand our findings to other gastrointestinal tumours. DESIGN: Alternate promoter burden (APB) was quantified using a novel bioinformatic algorithm (proActiv) to infer promoter activity from short-read RNA sequencing and samples categorised into APBhigh, APBint and APBlow. Single-cell RNA sequencing was performed to analyse the intratumour immune microenvironment. A humanised mouse cancer in vivo model was used to explore dynamic temporal interactions between tumour kinetics, alternate promoter usage and the human immune system. Multiple cohorts of gastrointestinal tumours treated with immunotherapy were assessed for correlation between APB and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: APBhigh gastric cancer tumours expressed decreased levels of T-cell cytolytic activity and exhibited signatures of immune depletion. Single-cell RNAsequencing analysis confirmed distinct immunological populations and lower T-cell proportions in APBhigh tumours. Functional in vivo studies using 'humanised mice' harbouring an active human immune system revealed distinct temporal relationships between APB and tumour growth, with APBhigh tumours having almost no human T-cell infiltration. Analysis of immunotherapy-treated patients with GI cancer confirmed resistance of APBhigh tumours to immune checkpoint inhibition. APBhigh gastric cancer exhibited significantly poorer progression-free survival compared with APBlow (median 55 days vs 121 days, HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.93, p=0.032). CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate an association between alternate promoter use and the tumour microenvironment, leading to immune evasion and immunotherapy resistance.

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.

A phase 1b study of OXIRI in pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients and its immunomodulatory effects.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly lethal and debilitating disease with limited therapeutic options. The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of a novel regimen comprised of metronomic oxaliplatin (O), chronomodulated capecitabine (X) and UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan (IRI) [OXIRI] as well as its immunomodulatory effects. Thirty-six patients were enrolled into either dose-escalation or expansion cohorts. In the dose escalation phase, capecitabine doses (2000, 2650, 3500 and 4500 mg/day) were administered at midnight on days 1 to 14 while oxaliplatin and irinotecan were intravenously infused at fixed doses of 50 and 75 mg/m2 respectively on days 1, 8 in a 21-day cycle. The maximum tolerated dose of capecitabine was 2650 mg/day and the most common grade 3 adverse events were neutropenia (30.6%) and diarrhea (13.9%). No grade 4 toxicity was observed. UGT1A1-genotype directed dosing resulted in similar exposure levels of irinotecan, SN-38 and SN-38G in all patients. Objective response rate was 22.2%. Median overall survival and progression-free survival were 8.1 and 5.2 months, respectively. Exploratory immunoprofiling by flow cytometry and quantitative spatial localization analysis of infiltrated immune cells performed on biopsy and plasma samples revealed significant declines in CCL22, CCL2 and TNFα levels at end of first cycle and an active host immune response. Our study showed that OXIRI was well-tolerated and exhibited good efficacy, with immunomodulatory effects. It may be considered as an alternative to FOLFIRINOX in patients intolerant to the latter.

Uncoupling immune trajectories of response and adverse events from anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: While immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has shown promise in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), it is associated with modest response rates and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are common. In this study, we aimed to decipher immune trajectories and mechanisms of response and/or irAEs in patients with HCC receiving anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) therapy. METHODS: Pre- and on-treatment peripheral blood samples (n = 60) obtained from 32 patients with HCC (Singapore cohort) were analysed by cytometry by time-of-flight and single-cell RNA sequencing, with flow cytometric validation in an independent Korean cohort (n = 29). Mechanistic validation was conducted by bulk RNA sequencing of 20 pre- and on-treatment tumour biopsies and using a murine HCC model treated with different immunotherapeutic combinations. RESULTS: Single-cell analyses identified CXCR3+CD8+ effector memory T (TEM) cells and CD11c+ antigen-presenting cells (APC) as associated with response (p = 0.0004 and 0.0255, respectively), progression-free survival (p = 0.00079 and 0.0015, respectively), and irAEs (p = 0.0034 and 0.0125, respectively) in anti-PD-1-treated patients with HCC. Type-1 conventional dendritic cells were identified as the specific APC associated with response, while 2 immunosuppressive CD14+ myeloid clusters were linked to reduced irAEs. Further analyses of CXCR3+CD8+ TEM cells showed cell-cell interactions specific to response vs. irAEs, from which the anti-PD-1 and anti-TNFR2 combination was harnessed to uncouple these effects, resulting in enhanced response without increased irAEs in a murine HCC model. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies early predictors of clinical response to anti-PD-1 ICB in patients with HCC and offers mechanistic insights into the immune trajectories of these immune subsets at the interface between response and toxicity. We also propose a new combination immunotherapy for HCC to enhance response without exacerbating irAEs. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT03695952. LAY SUMMARY: Response rates to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain modest and adverse events are common. Herein, we identified early predictors of response and gained an in-depth understanding of the immunological mechanisms behind response and adverse events in patients with HCC treated with ICB. We also proposed a new combination immunotherapy for HCC that enhances response without exacerbating adverse events.

CheckMate 040 cohort 5: A phase I/II study of nivolumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) and Child-Pugh B liver function are often excluded from clinical trials. In previous studies, overall survival for these patients treated with sorafenib was ∼3-5 months; thus, new treatments are needed. Nivolumab, alone or in combination with ipilimumab, is conditionally approved in the United States to treat patients with aHCC who previously received sorafenib. We describe nivolumab monotherapy outcomes in patients with Child-Pugh B status. METHODS: This phase I/II, open-label, non-comparative, multicentre trial (27 centres) included patients with Child-Pugh B (B7-B8) aHCC. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) by investigator assessment (using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1) and duration of response. Safety was assessed using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. RESULTS: Twenty-five sorafenib-naive and 24 sorafenib-treated patients began treatment between November 2016 and October 2017 (median follow-up, 16.3 months). Investigator-assessed ORR was 12% (95% CI 5-25%) with 6 patients responding; disease control rate was 55% (95% CI 40-69%). Median time to response was 2.7 months (interquartile range, 1.4-4.2), and median duration of response was 9.9 months (95% CI 9.7-9.9). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 25 patients (51%) and led to discontinuation in 2 patients (4%). The most frequent grade 3/4 TRAEs were hypertransaminasemia (n = 2), amylase increase (n = 2), and aspartate aminotransferase increase (n = 2). The safety of nivolumab was comparable to that in patients with Child-Pugh A aHCC. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab showed clinical activity and favourable safety with manageable toxicities, suggesting it could be suitable for patients with Child-Pugh B aHCC. LAY SUMMARY: In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, almost all systemic therapies require very good liver function, i.e. Child-Pugh A status. The evidence from this study suggests that nivolumab shows clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with Child-Pugh B status who have mild to moderate impairment of liver function or liver decompensation that might rule out other therapies. Further studies are warranted to assess the safety and efficacy of nivolumab in this patient population. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01658878.

Challenges of combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy targeting anti-programmed cell death-1 (anti-PD-1) or its ligand (anti-PD-L1) is the backbone of numerous combination regimens aimed at improving the objective response and survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Clinical trials of immuno-oncology regimens in other cancer types have shed light on issues of study design, including how to choose candidate regimens based on early-phase trial results, statistical considerations in trials with multiple primary endpoints, and the importance of predictive biomarkers. In this review, the updated data from early-phase trials of combination immunotherapy for HCC are summarised. Since the most extensively tested combination regimens for advanced HCC comprise anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 agents plus antiangiogenic agents, the relative benefit and antitumor mechanism of antiangiogenic multikinase inhibitors versus specific VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors are discussed. Other critical issues in the development of combination immunotherapy, including optimal management of immune-related adverse events and the value of ICI therapy in combination with locoregional treatment for HCC, are also explored.

Nivolumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Sorafenib-experienced Asian cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, is approved in several countries to treat sorafenib-experienced patients with HCC, based on results from the CheckMate 040 study (NCT01658878). Marked differences exist in HCC clinical presentation, aetiology, treatment patterns and outcomes across regions. This analysis assessed the safety and efficacy of nivolumab in the Asian cohort of CheckMate 040. METHODS: CheckMate 040 is an international, multicentre, open-label, phase I/II study of nivolumab in adults with advanced HCC, regardless of aetiology, not amenable to curative resection or local treatment and with/without previous sorafenib treatment. This analysis included all sorafenib-experienced patients in the intent-to-treat (ITT) overall population and Asian cohort. The analysis cut-off date was March 2018. RESULTS: There were 182 and 85 patients in the ITT population and Asian cohort, respectively. In both populations, most patients were older than 60 years, had BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) Stage C disease, and had received previous systemic therapy. A higher percentage of Asian patients had HBV infections, extrahepatic metastases and prior therapies. Median follow-up was 31.6 and 31.3 months for the ITT and Asian patients, respectively. Objective response rates were 14% and 15% in the ITT population and Asian cohort, respectively. In the Asian cohort, patients with HBV, HCV or those who were uninfected had objective response rates of 13%, 14% and 21%, respectively. The median duration of response was longer in the ITT (19.4 months) vs. Asian patients (9.7 months). Median overall survival was similar between the ITT (15.1 months) and Asian patients (14.9 months), and unaffected by aetiology in Asian patients. The nivolumab safety profile was similar and manageable across both populations. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab safety and efficacy are comparable between sorafenib-experienced ITT and Asian patients. LAY SUMMARY: The CheckMate 040 study evaluated the safety and efficacy of nivolumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were refractory to previous sorafenib treatment or chemotherapy. This subanalysis of the data showed that treatment responses and safety in patients in Asia were similar to those of the overall treatment population, providing support for nivolumab as a treatment option for these patients. Clinical trial number: NCT01658878.

Nivolumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 040): an open-label, non-comparative, phase 1/2 dose escalation and expansion trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, sorafenib is the only approved drug worldwide, and outcomes remain poor. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of nivolumab, a programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitor, in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with or without chronic viral hepatitis. METHODS: We did a phase 1/2, open-label, non-comparative, dose escalation and expansion trial (CheckMate 040) of nivolumab in adults (≥18 years) with histologically confirmed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with or without hepatitis C or B (HCV or HBV) infection. Previous sorafenib treatment was allowed. A dose-escalation phase was conducted at seven hospitals or academic centres in four countries or territories (USA, Spain, Hong Kong, and Singapore) and a dose-expansion phase was conducted at an additional 39 sites in 11 countries (Canada, UK, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan). At screening, eligible patients had Child-Pugh scores of 7 or less (Child-Pugh A or B7) for the dose-escalation phase and 6 or less (Child-Pugh A) for the dose-expansion phase, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less. Patients with HBV infection had to be receiving effective antiviral therapy (viral load <100 IU/mL); antiviral therapy was not required for patients with HCV infection. We excluded patients previously treated with an agent targeting T-cell costimulation or checkpoint pathways. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 0·1-10 mg/kg every 2 weeks in the dose-escalation phase (3+3 design). Nivolumab 3 mg/kg was given every 2 weeks in the dose-expansion phase to patients in four cohorts: sorafenib untreated or intolerant without viral hepatitis, sorafenib progressor without viral hepatitis, HCV infected, and HBV infected. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability for the escalation phase and objective response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1) for the expansion phase. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01658878. FINDINGS: Between Nov 26, 2012, and Aug 8, 2016, 262 eligible patients were treated (48 patients in the dose-escalation phase and 214 in the dose-expansion phase). 202 (77%) of 262 patients have completed treatment and follow-up is ongoing. During dose escalation, nivolumab showed a manageable safety profile, including acceptable tolerability. In this phase, 46 (96%) of 48 patients discontinued treatment, 42 (88%) due to disease progression. Incidence of treatment-related adverse events did not seem to be associated with dose and no maximum tolerated dose was reached. 12 (25%) of 48 patients had grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events. Three (6%) patients had treatment-related serious adverse events (pemphigoid, adrenal insufficiency, liver disorder). 30 (63%) of 48 patients in the dose-escalation phase died (not determined to be related to nivolumab therapy). Nivolumab 3 mg/kg was chosen for dose expansion. The objective response rate was 20% (95% CI 15-26) in patients treated with nivolumab 3 mg/kg in the dose-expansion phase and 15% (95% CI 6-28) in the dose-escalation phase. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab had a manageable safety profile and no new signals were observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Durable objective responses show the potential of nivolumab for treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

201 consecutive cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) procedures in a single Asian tertiary centre.

INTRODUCTION: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is increasingly being treated with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). We provide a review of a high-volume Asian institute's experience and survival outcomes with this procedure. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected from 201 consecutive CRS and HIPEC procedures performed in a single institution between April 2001 and November 2015. Our primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), and secondary endpoints were morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: 77% of patients were Chinese, 9% were Malay, 6% were Indian and 8% were other ethnicities. Primary tumours were colorectal (30%), ovarian (32%), appendiceal (20%), primary peritoneal (6.5%), mesothelioma (4.5%) and others (5%). The median peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 12, and 92% of patients achieved a completeness of cytoreduction score (CC) of 0. High-grade morbidity occurred in 25.8% of cases, and there were no 30-day mortalities. At 5-years, the OS was 55.1% and DFS was 20.3%. Factors associated with improved OS on multivariate analysis were PCI <15 (p < 0.001) and a CC 0 (p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: The combined treatment of CRS and HIPEC is beneficial and is associated with reasonable morbidity and mortality in Asian patients with PC from colorectal, ovarian, appendiceal, primary peritoneal and mesothelioma primaries. Complete cytoreduction and extent of disease are the most important prognostic factors for survival.

Comparison of health state values derived from patients and individuals from the general population.

PURPOSE: Utility values are critical for cost-utility analyses that guide healthcare decisions. We aimed to compare the utility values of the 5-level EuroQoL-5Dimension (EQ-5D-5L) health states elicited from members of the general public and patients with heart disease or cancer. METHODS: In face-to-face interviews with 157 heart disease patients, 169 cancer patients, and 169 members from the general population, participants valued 10 EQ-5D-5L health states using a composite Time Trade-Off method. RESULTS: Pooling utility values for all health states, heart disease patients and cancer patients had mean utility values lower by 0.11 points (P value = 0.014) and 0.06 points (P value = 0.148), respectively, compared to the general population. Adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, differences in health state utility values between the patient and the general populations were rendered non-significant, except that heart disease patients gave higher utility values (mean difference = 0.08; P value = 0.007) to mild health states than the general population. Difference in utility values, defined as utility value of a better health state minus that of a poorer health state, was higher among heart disease patients compared to the general population, before and after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Patients may differ from members of the general population in the strength of their preferences for hypothetical health states. Using utility values derived from the general population may under-estimate the comparative effectiveness of healthcare interventions for certain diseases, such as heart diseases.

Comparison of hepatocellular carcinoma in Eastern versus Western populations.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a heterogeneous disease that remains highly prevalent in many Asian countries and is the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Significant differences exist between Eastern and Western populations on many key aspects of HCC, contributing to the potential different treatment outcomes and challenges of clinical trial design and data interpretation. In this review, the authors compare HCC in Asia versus the West and highlight 1) differences in terms of epidemiology and trends and their correlation with etiology, 2) differences in genetics and how they relate to underlying etiology, 3) differences in treatment approaches based on existing guidelines and consensus statements, and 4) differences in clinical outcomes for Asian versus non-Asian patients with HCC in clinical trials and the implications for future clinical trial design. Cancer 2016;122:3430-3446. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Single administration of Selective Internal Radiation Therapy versus continuous treatment with sorafeNIB in locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (SIRveNIB): study protocol for a phase iii randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20 % of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients diagnosed in the early stages may benefit from potentially curative ablative therapies such as surgical resection, transplantation or radiofrequency ablation. For patients not eligible for such options, prognosis is poor. Sorafenib and Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (SIRT) are clinically proven treatment options in patients with unresectable HCC, and this study aims to assess overall survival following either SIRT or Sorafenib therapy for locally advanced HCC patients. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, multi-centre, open-label, randomized, controlled trial will enrol 360 patients with locally advanced HCC, as defined by Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or stage C, without distant metastases, and which is not amenable to immediate curative treatment. Exclusion criteria include previous systemic therapy, metastatic disease, complete occlusion of the main portal vein, or a Child-Pugh score of >7. Eligible patients will be randomised 1:1 and stratified by centre and presence or absence of portal vein thrombosis to receive either a single administration of SIRT using yttrium-90 resin microspheres (SIR-Spheres®, Sirtex Medical Limited, Sydney, Australia) targeted at HCC in the liver by the trans-arterial route or continuous oral Sorafenib (Nexavar®, Bayer Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany) at a dose of 400 mg twice daily until disease progression, no further response, complete regression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients for both the Sorafenib and SIRT arms will be followed-up every 4 weeks for the first 3 months and 12 weekly thereafter. Overall survival is the primary endpoint, assessed for the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints are tumour response rate, time-to-tumour progression, progression free survival, quality of life and down-staging to receive potentially curative therapy. DISCUSSION: Definitive data comparing these two therapies will help to determine clinical practice in the large group of patients with locally advanced HCC and improve outcomes for such patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01135056 , first received 24, May 2010.

A systematic review of contralateral liver lobe hypertrophy after unilobar selective internal radiation therapy with Y90.

BACKGROUND: Curative liver resection is the treatment of choice for both primary and secondary liver malignancies. However, an inadequate future liver remnant (FLR) frequently precludes successful surgery. Portal vein embolization is the gold-standard modality for inducing hypertrophy of the FLR. In recent times, unilobar Yttrium-90 selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) has been reported to induce hypertrophy of the contralateral, untreated liver lobe. The aim of this study is to review the current literature reporting on contralateral liver hypertrophy induced by unilobar SIRT. METHODS: A systematic review of the English-language literature between 2000 and 2014 was performed using the search terms "Yttrium 90" OR "selective internal radiation therapy" OR "radioembolization" AND "hypertrophy". RESULTS: Seven studies, reporting on 312 patients, were included. Two hundred and eighty four patients (91.0%) received treatment to the right lobe. Two hundred and fifteen patients had hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), 12 had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and 85 had liver metastases from mixed primaries. Y90 SIRT resulted in contralateral liver hypertrophy which ranged from 26 to 47% at 44 days-9 months. All studies were retrospective in nature, and heterogeneous, with substantial variations relative to pathology treated, underlying liver disease, dosage and delivery of Y90, number of treatment sessions and time to measurement of hypertrophy. CONCLUSION: Unilobar Y90 SIRT results in significant hypertrophy of the contralateral liver lobe. The rate of hypertrophy seems to be slower than that achieved by other methods.

A systematic review of contralateral liver lobe hypertrophy after unilobar selective internal radiation therapy with Y90.

BACKGROUND: A curative liver resection is the treatment of choice for both primary and secondary liver malignancies. However, an inadequate future liver remnant (FLR) frequently precludes successful surgery. Portal vein embolization is the gold-standard modality for inducing hypertrophy of the FLR. In recent times, unilobar Yttrium-90 selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) has been reported to induce hypertrophy of the contralateral, untreated liver lobe. The aim of this study was to review the current literature reporting on contralateral liver hypertrophy induced by unilobar SIRT. METHODS: A systematic review of the English-language literature between 2000 and 2014 was performed using the search terms 'Yttrium 90' OR 'selective internal radiation therapy' OR 'radioembolization' AND 'hypertrophy'. RESULTS: Seven studies, reporting on 312 patients, were included. Two hundred and eighty-four patients (91.0%) received treatment to the right lobe. Two hundred and fifteen patients had hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), 12 had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and 85 had liver metastases from mixed primaries. Y90 SIRT resulted in contralateral liver hypertrophy that ranged from 26% to 47% at 44 days to 9 months. All studies were retrospective in nature, and heterogeneous, with substantial variations relative to pathology treated, underlying liver disease, dosage and delivery of Y90, the number of treatment sessions and time to measurement of hypertrophy. CONCLUSION: Unilobar Y90 SIRT results in significant hypertrophy of the contralateral liver lobe. The rate of hypertrophy seems to be slower than that achieved by other methods.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Does the sequence matter?

INTRODUCTION: Combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) is currently the first line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). However, there are many patients who may not be able to receive combination therapy due to underlying comorbidities or resource limitations. For these patients, systemic treatment options include single agent tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) or ICI monotherapy. However, whether an optimal sequence of systemic therapy exists remains unknown. We aim to explore the impact of sequencing of TKI and ICI therapy in terms of response rates and to examine the safety of their use in sequential order. METHODS: Patients with aHCC treated with both ICI and TKI between December 30, 2013 and June 13, 2018 were retrospectively identified. Patients were classified into two groups: those who received TKI in the first-line (TKI1), followed by ICI (ICI2) and those who received ICI (ICI1) in the first-line followed by TKI (TKI2). The primary objective of the study was to identify differences in objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR), as evaluated based on response evaluation criteria in solid tumor v1.1 for TKI1, TKI2, ICI1, and ICI2. Secondary objectives included comparison of progression free survival (PFS) for each line of therapy, overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Twenty-seven and 23 patients were classified into group 1 and 2, respectively. Objective response rates of TKI1 and TKI2 were 3.8% and 17.6%, respectively (p = .28); DCR to TKI1 versus TKI2 was 23.1% versus 35.3% (p = .49). ORRs of ICI1 and ICI2 were 8.7% and 14.3%, respectively (p = .66); DCR to ICI2 versus ICI1 was 56.5% versus 42.9% (p = .37). Median PFS was not significant between TKI1 and TKI2 (PFS 3.06 versus 1.61 months, p = .097) as well as between ICI2 and ICI1 (PFS 1.84 versus 2.37 month, p = .32). Median OS was also not significantly different between both groups (OS 20.63 versus 13.93 months, p = .20) on univariable and multivariable analysis (OS adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.07, 95% CI .83-5.18, p = .118). The proportion of patients who experienced adverse events of any grade was similar in both groups (TKI1 59.3% versus TKI2 52.2%; ICI1 78.3% versus ICI2 70.4%). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the sequence of TKI versus ICI therapy in patients with aHCC may not matter, given similar efficacy and toxicity profile when either agent is received in the first or second-line setting. This finding is of value in the real-world setting, where patients may be frail or have comorbidities that render them unable to tolerate combination therapy (ICI and TKI/anti-VEGF). For these patients, sequential exposure to both classes of drugs (ICI and TKI) may be a suitable option.

Nivolumab Plus Cabozantinib With or Without Ipilimumab for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results From Cohort 6 of the CheckMate 040 Trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus cabozantinib with or without ipilimumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In cohort 6 of the multicohort, open-label, phase I/II CheckMate 040 study, patients who were treatment-naive, sorafenib-intolerant, or had progressed on sorafenib were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus cabozantinib 40 mg once daily (doublet arm); or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus cabozantinib 40 mg once daily with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks (triplet arm). Primary objectives were safety and tolerability, objective response rate, and duration of response by investigator assessment per RECIST v1.1. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (by blinded independent central review) and overall survival. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were randomly assigned: 36 to the doublet arm and 35 to the triplet arm. After 32.0-month median follow-up, objective response rate (95% CI) was 17% (6 to 33) and 29% (15 to 46) in the doublet and triplet arms, respectively. Median (95% CI) duration of response was 8.3 (6.9 to not estimable) months in the doublet arm and not reached (0.0 to not estimable) in the triplet arm. Median progression-free survival was 5.1 and 4.3 months, and median overall survival was 20.2 and 22.1 months for the doublet and triplet arms, respectively. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 50% and 74% of patients and treatment-related adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported for 11% and 23% in the doublet and triplet arms, respectively. There were no treatment-related deaths in either arm. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib with or without ipilimumab showed encouraging preliminary antitumor activity and had consistent safety profiles with those established for the individual drugs in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Immunohistochemical scoring of LAG-3 in conjunction with CD8 in the tumor microenvironment predicts response to immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Introduction: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is a systemic therapeutic option for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, low patient response rates necessitate the development of robust predictive biomarkers that identify individuals who will benefit from ICB. A 4-gene inflammatory signature, comprising CD8, PD-L1, LAG-3, and STAT1, was recently shown to be associated with a better overall response to ICB in various cancer types. Here, we examined whether tissue protein expression of CD8, PD-L1, LAG-3, and STAT1 predicts response to ICB in HCC. Methods: HCC samples from 191 Asian patients, comprising resection specimens from 124 patients (ICB-naïve) and pre-treatment specimens from 67 advanced HCC patients treated with ICB (ICB-treated), were analyzed for CD8, PD-L1, LAG-3, and STAT1 tissue expression using multiplex immunohistochemistry followed by statistical and survival analyses. Results: Immunohistochemical and survival analyses of ICB-naïve samples showed that high LAG-3 expression was associated with shorter median progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS). Analysis of ICB-treated samples revealed that high proportions of LAG-3+ and LAG-3+CD8+ cells pre-treatment were most closely associated with longer mPFS and mOS. Using a log-likelihood model, adding the total LAG-3+ cell proportion to the total CD8+ cell proportion significantly increased the predictive values for mPFS and mOS, compared with the total CD8+ cell proportion alone. Moreover, levels of CD8 and STAT1, but not PD-L1, were significantly correlated with better responses to ICB. After analyzing viral-related and non-viral HCC samples separately, only the LAG3+CD8+ cell proportion was significantly associated with responses to ICB regardless of viral status. Conclusion: Immunohistochemical scoring of pre-treatment levels of LAG-3 and CD8 in the tumor microenvironment may help predict ICB benefits in HCC patients. Furthermore, immunohistochemistry-based techniques offer the advantage of being readily translatable in the clinical setting.