Adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy and surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer. A systematic review of literature with a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

HIGHLIGHTS: Although no definitive data exist in literature, adjuvant chemotherapy is usually recommended in patients with radically resected stage III rectal cancer treated with neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. We performed a systematic review of literature with direct and indirect comparisons to assess the role of adjuvant mono- or poli-chemotherapy in radically resected rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. Neither chemotherapy (mono-or poli-chemotherapy) nor polichemotherapy with oxaliplatin-containing regimens seems to improve Overall Survival and Disease-Free Survival in patients with radically resected rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemo-adiotherapy. Neither the entire population of patients radically resected after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, nor high risk patients seem to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Our data seem to suggest the need of review the actual international guidelines that suggest the need of adjuvant chemotherapy at least in high risk rectal cancer treated with surgery and neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy.

Lenvatinib: established and promising drug for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: : The evolving therapeutic landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) includes the increasing implementation of target-therapy and immunotherapy. Lenvatinib, a multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is an emerging first-line therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. Its approval has changed the scenario of first-line therapies for advanced HCC, where just sorafenib proved clinical efficacy for over a decade. AREAS COVERED: : The current evidence on the role of lenvatinib for patients with advanced HCC is reviewed in this article. Particularly, therapeutic mechanisms and clinical efficacy of lenvatinib are summarized and the management of adverse events is discussed. In addition, future perspectives on the emerging role of combine therapy for HCC are highlighted. EXPERT OPINION: In the first line, lenvatinib was found to be non-inferior to sorafenib for overall survival, with significantly better progression-free survival and objective response rate. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are now part of HCC treatment, and recently the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has become the recommended standard of care first-line therapy for selected patients. The antitumor and immunomodulatory activities that lenvatinib shows in preclinical studies, and the positive outcomes achieved using a combination of lenvatinib plus ICIs, open new perspectives for advanced HCC treatment.

Regorafenib versus cabozantinb as second-line treatment after sorafenib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: matching-adjusted indirect comparison analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recently, three published phase III trials highlighted the superiority of investigational drugs compared to placebo, thus leading to their approval in the second-line setting. We report here a MAIC of second-line MKI options for patients with HCC previously treated with sorafenib using individual real-world data of regorafenib and aggregate data of second-line cabozantinib from the CELESTIAL trial. METHODS: Data from 278 patients who received regorafenib as second-line therapy after sorafenib failure for unresectable HCC were used as IPD. Data inclusion were adapted to those reported in the CELESTIAL trial in the subset of patients who received sorafenib as the only prior therapy. Survival medians and rates were obtained from Kaplan-Meier curves, and differences between regorafenib and cabozantinib groups were explored through Cox regression adjusted for weights originating from MAIC. RESULTS: The median OS of the weighted regorafenib group was 11.1 months (IQR: 5.6-16.4) and 11.3 (IQR: 6.7-22.4) for cabozantinib; HR 0.83 (95%CI 0.62-1.09). The median PFS of the weighted regorafenib group was 3.0 months (IQR: 1.9-4.8) and 5.5 (IQR: 2.3-9.3) for cabozantinib; HR 0.50 (95%CI 0.41-0.62). In the subgroup who received prior sorafenib for < 3 months, the median OS of the regorafenib group was 6.5 months (IQR: 4.7-10.9) and 9.5 months (IQR: 5.9-18.2) for cabozantinib; HR 0.68 (95%CI 0.39-1.16). In the subgroup receiving prior sorafenib for 3 to < 6 months, the median OS of the regorafenib group was 8.0 months (IQR: 4.2-15.2) and 11.5 (IQR: 6.5-23.9) for cabozantinib; HR 0.66 (95%CI 0.42-1.02). In the subgroup receiving prior sorafenib for ≥ 6 months, the median OS of the regorafenib group was 13.4 (IQR: 8.1-46.5) and 12.3 (IQR: 6.6-22.9) for cabozantinib; HR 0.89 (95%CI 0.52-1.51). CONCLUSION: Our results confirmed no differences between regorafenib and cabozantinib in terms of OS. However, in earlier progressors on prior sorafenib a larger benefit might be expected from cabozantinib treatment.

Sequential Treatment of Sorafenib-Regorafenib Versus Sorafenib-Physician's Choice: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib has been shown to improve clinical outcomes compared to placebo, becoming a standard second-line therapy for sorafenib-progressed and -tolerated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. OBJECTIVE: We performed a multicentre, retrospective study in Italy and Korea to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment sequence sorafenib-regorafenib compared with sorafenib and physician's choice in a real-life setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A propensity score model was developed to control the results for baseline variable imbalances between the arm treated with sorafenib and regorafenib (S-R) and the arm treated with sorafenib and physician's choice (S-P). Survival analysis was conducted on the matched population. RESULTS: After the application of propensity score matching, we analysed 99 patients in the arm treated with S-R and 99 patients in the arm treated with S-P. For the S-R group, the median overall survival was 22.2 months (95% CI 17.1-27.4), compared to 17.9 months (95% CI 15.1-50.0) for the S-P group. The results of the univariate analysis showed a 31% reduction of death risk for patients treated with S-R (p = 0.0382) compared to patients treated with S-P. Interaction tests highlighted the predictive role of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and extrahepatic spread. CONCLUSION: This study provides additional proof of the superiority of the S-R treatment over the S-P treatment approach in advanced HCC patients from a real-life setting.

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.

Comparison of Prognostic Scores in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Sorafenib.

INTRODUCTION: Prognostic classifications for patients treated with sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) facilitate stratification in trials and inform clinical decision making. Recently, 3 different prognostic models (hepatoma arterial-embolization prognosis [HAP] score, sorafenib advanced HCC prognosis [SAP] score, and Prediction Of Survival in Advanced Sorafenib-treated HCC [PROSASH]-II) have been proposed specifically for patients treated with sorafenib. This study aimed to compare the prognostic performance of different scores. METHODS: We analyzed a large prospective database gathering data of 552 patients treated with sorafenib from 7 Italian centers. The performance of the HAP, SAP, and PROSASH-II models were compared with those of generic HCC prognostic models (including the Barcelona Clinic for Liver Cancer and Italian Liver Cancer staging systems, albumin-bilirubin grade, and Child-Pugh score) to verify whether they could provide additional information. RESULTS: The PROSASH-II model improved discrimination (C-index 0.62) compared with existing prognostic scores (C-index ≤0.59). Its stratification significantly discriminated patients, with a median overall survival of 21.5, 15.3, 9.3, and 6.0 months for risk group 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The HAP and SAP score were also validated but with a poorer performance compared with the PROSASH-II. DISCUSSION: Although suboptimal, PROSASH-II is the most effective prognostic classification model among other available scores in a large Italian population of patients treated with sorafenib.

Prognostic Role of Blood Eosinophil Count in Patients with Sorafenib-Treated Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Inflammation is a long-established hallmark of liver fibrosis and carcinogenesis. Eosinophils are emerging as crucial components of the inflammatory process influencing cancer development. The role of blood eosinophils in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving systemic treatment is an unexplored field. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyse the prognostic role of the baseline eosinophil count in patients with sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A training cohort of 92 patients with advanced- or intermediate-stage sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma and two validation cohorts of 65 and 180 patients were analysed. Overall survival and progression-free survival in relation to baseline eosinophil counts were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: A negative prognostic impact of low baseline eosinophil counts (< 50*109/L) was demonstrated in all cohorts (training cohort: hazard ratio = 50.1, 95% confidence interval 11.6-216.5, p < 0.0001 for low vs high eosinophil counts; first validation cohort: hazard ratio = 4.55, 95% confidence interval 1.24-16.65, p = 0.022; second validation cohort: hazard ratio = 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.83-5.64, p < 0.0001). Moreover, low eosinophil counts had a negative prognostic role in patients progressing on or intolerant to sorafenib who received second-line regorafenib, but not capecitabine or best supportive care. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis identified baseline blood eosinophil counts as a new prognostic factor in patients with sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma. Concerning second-line therapies, eosinophil counts were associated with survival outcomes only in regorafenib-treated patients, suggesting a possible predictive role in this setting.

Utility of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio to identify long-term survivors among HCC patients treated with sorafenib.

Sorafenib is the first multikinase inhibitor demonstrating a survival benefit for patients suffering from advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, 1 issue remains open: what is the factor able to predict which patients will be long survivors?In the present study, we harnessed the potential of conditional survival, aiming at estimating the probability that a patient receiving sorafenib survives for more than 3 years.The present multicentric study was conducted on a cohort of 438 HCC patients. The primary end point was conditional overall survival. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to calculate conditional overall survival probabilities at 3 years.The 3-year conditional survival of patients without disease progression highlights that NLR and ECOG are the factors that most accurately predict the probability of long survival. The 3-year conditional survival of patients with disease progression showed a medium effect size for HCV status, alpha-fetoprotein and NLR at all time-points. Macro-vascular portal vein invasion, extra hepatic disease, and BCLC we have a large effect size at 6 months and a medium effect size at 12 and 24 months.Our findings support the use of baseline NLR for the identification of patients with a higher probability of long-survival. NLR should be used as a stratification factor in the forthcoming clinical trials on the drugs for the advanced HCC now in pipeline.

The role of PNI to predict survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with Sorafenib.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The present study aims to investigate the role of the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) on survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib. METHODS: This multicentric study included a training cohort of 194 HCC patients and three external validation cohorts of 129, 76 and 265 HCC patients treated with Sorafenib, respectively. The PNI was calculated as follows: 10 × serum albumin (g/dL) + 0.005 × total lymphocyte count (per mm3). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the association between the covariates and the overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A PNI cut-off value of 31.3 was established using the ROC analysis. In the training cohort, the median OS was 14.8 months (95% CI 12-76.3) and 6.8 months (95% CI 2.7-24.6) for patients with a high (>31.3) and low (<31.3) PNI, respectively. At both the univariate and the multivariate analysis, low PNI value (p = 0.0004), a 1-unit increase of aspartate aminotransferase (p = 0.0001), and age > 70 years (p< 0.0038) were independent prognostic factors for OS. By performing the same multivariate analysis of the training cohort, the PNI <31.3 versus >31.3 was found to be an independent prognostic factor for predicting OS in all the three validation cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: PNI represents a prognostic tool in advanced HCC treated with first-line Sorafenib. It is readily available and low-cost, and it could be implemented in clinical practice in patients with HCC.

Angiogenesis Genotyping and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Receiving Sorafenib: The ALICE-2 Study.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib represents one of the therapeutic strongholds for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but unfortunately, predictive factors are lacking. We previously reported that the VEGF single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) rs2010963 and rs4604006 might correlate with clinical outcomes in sorafenib-treated HCC patients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the ALICE-2 study is to define a prognostic angiogenesis profile to better identify HCC patients who are more likely to benefit from sorafenib treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 2008 to 2015, all consecutive HCC patients receiving sorafenib according to the Italian label were tested for specific HIF-1α, VEGF, and VEGFR SNPs. Results from angiogenesis genotyping were then correlated with clinical outcome parameters. RESULTS: Globally, a total of 210 patients were enrolled. At multivariate analysis rs12434438 of HIF1α, rs2010963 of VEGF-A, and rs4604006 of VEGF-C were confirmed as independent predictive factors. At the combined analysis of significant SNPs, the presence of two favourable alleles of rs2010963 and rs4604006 of VEGF compared to only one or to none favourable alleles, was able to identify three separate patients populations with different time-to-progression (TTP) (10.8 vs. 5.6 vs. 3.7 months, respectively; p < 0.0001) and overall survival (OS) (19.0 vs. 13.5 vs. 7.5 months, respectively; p < 0.0001). Furthermore, the presence of the GG genotype of rs12434438 (HIF-1α) seemed able to select a population with a particularly poor outcome, independently from the clinical effect of the two VEGF SNPs (TTP: 2.6 months, HR: 0.54, p = 0.0374; OS: 6.6 months, p = 0.0061, HR: 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that polymorphism analysis of HIF-1α, VEGF, and VEGFR genes may represent a prognostic panel to better identify HCC patients who are more likely to benefit from sorafenib treatment.

Outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib: a meta-analysis of Phase III trials.

Aim: To benchmark overall survival (OS) and time to radiological progression (TTP) of patients enrolled in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma using individual participant survival data, and to meta-analyze prognostic factors for OS and TTP. Methods: RCTs were identified through literature search until December 2018. Individual participant survival was reconstructed with an algorithm from published Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: Ten RCTs were included. Median OS was 10.0 months (95% CI: 9.6-10.5), and median TTP was 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.8-4.3). Multivariable analyses showed HCV positivity, absence of macrovascular invasion and extra-hepatic disease as predictors of longer OS. Conclusion: We provided a benchmark for future studies on sorafenib. The present results can be used in the decision making for the early shift to second-line strategy.

Predictive and Prognostic Factors in HCC Patients Treated with Sorafenib.

Sorafenib is an oral kinase inhibitor that enhances survival in patients affected by advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). According to the results of two registrative trials, this drug represents a gold quality standard in the first line treatment of advanced HCC. Recently, lenvatinib showed similar results in terms of survival in a non-inferiority randomized trial study considering the same subset of patients. Unlike other targeted therapies, predictive and prognostic markers in HCC patients treated with sorafenib are lacking. Their identification could help clinicians in the daily management of these patients, mostly in light of the new therapeutic options available in the first.

Doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after sorafenib treatment failure (RELIVE): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cytotoxic chemotherapy is generally ineffective in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. We assessed the intravenous perfusion of doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in whom previous sorafenib therapy had failed. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial at 70 sites in 11 countries. Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with one or more previous systemic therapies, including sorafenib, were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg/m2 doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles (30 mg/m2 group), 20 mg/m2 doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles (20 mg/m2 group), or standard care using a computer-generated randomisation list prepared by the funder and stratified by geographic region. Patients in the experimental groups received perfusion of the drug every 4 weeks and those in the control group received any systemic anticancer therapy (except sorafenib) as per investigator decision. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the population of patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01655693. FINDINGS: Between June 15, 2012, and Jan 27, 2017, 541 patients were screened, of whom 144 were excluded and 397 were randomly assigned to one of the groups (133 to the 30 mg/m2 group; 130 to the 20 mg/m2 group; and 134 to the control group). Median follow-up was 22·7 months (IQR 11·2-34·9). After pooling the doxorubicin groups for the efficacy analysis, median overall survival was 9·1 months (95% CI 8·1-10·4) in the pooled doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles group and 9·0 months (7·1-11·8) in the control group (HR 1·00 [95% CI 0·78-1·28], two-sided p=0·99). 227 (94%) of 242 patients who received doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles and 100 (75%) of 134 patients in the control group had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event. The most common drug-related grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (25 [10%] of 242 treated with doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles and eight [6%] of 134 in the control group), asthenia (six [2%] and four [3%]), and thrombocytopenia (three [1%] and ten [7%]). Six (2%) patients treated with doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles and one (1%) of those in the control group were deemed by investigators to have had a drug-related death. Serious adverse events occurred in 74 (31%) patients who received doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles and 48 (36%) in the control group. INTERPRETATION: Doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles did not improve overall survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in whom previous sorafenib treatment had failed. FUNDING: Onxeo.

Cytoreduction plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis in colorectal cancer patients: a single-center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we report our experience of cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from colorectal cancer (CRC), focusing on the factors affecting survival. METHODS: All patients with surgically treated PC from colorectal cancer and with no involvement of other organs referred to our institute from March 2005 to December 2017 were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients underwent CRS-HIPEC, and all had a completeness of cytoreduction score of 0 (CC0). The median operating time was 645 min (interquartile range [IQR] 565-710). Five patients (13.1%) had Clavien-Dindo grade > 2 postoperative complications. Median overall survival (OS) was 60 months. In the Cox regression for OS, calculated on the CRS-HIPEC group, the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) > 6 (hazard ratio [HR] 4.48, IQR 1.68-11.9, P = 0.003) and significant nodal involvement (N2) (HR 3.89, IQR 1.50-10.1, P = 0.005) were independent prognostic factors. Median disease-free survival (DFS) was 16 months. Only N2 (HR 2.44, IQR 1.11-5.36, P = 0.027) was a significantly negative prognostic factor for DFS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: CRS-HIPEC can substantially improve survival. However, patients with high PCI (PCI > 6) and significant nodal involvement (N2) may not benefit from the procedure.

Ten years of sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: Are there any predictive and/or prognostic markers?

Sorafenib has been considered the standard of care for patients with advanced unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since 2007 and numerous studies have investigated the role of markers involved in the angiogenesis process at both the expression and genetic level and clinical aspect. What results have ten years of research produced? Several clinical and biological markers are associated with prognosis. The most interesting clinical parameters are adverse events, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage, and macroscopic vascular invasion, while several single nucleotide polymorphisms and plasma angiopoietin-2 levels represent the most promising biological biomarkers. A recent pooled analysis of two phase III randomized trials showed that the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, etiology and extra-hepatic spread are predictive factors of response to sorafenib, but did not identify any predictive biological markers. After 10 years of research into sorafenib there are still no validated prognostic or predictive factors of response to the drug in HCC. The aim of the present review was to summarize 10 years of research into sorafenib, looking in particular at the potential of associated clinical and biological markers to predict its efficacy in patients with advanced HCC.

Metronomic capecitabine as second-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma after sorafenib discontinuation.

PURPOSE: Metronomic capecitabine (MC) is a well-tolerated systemic treatment showing promising results in one retrospective study, as second-line therapy after sorafenib failure, in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: 117 patients undergoing MC were compared to 112 patients, eligible for this treatment, but undergoing best supportive care (BSC) after sorafenib discontinuation for toxicity or HCC progression. The two groups were compared for demographic and clinical features. A multivariate regression analysis was conducted to detect independent prognostic factors. To balance confounding factors between the two groups, a propensity score model based on independent prognosticators (performance status, neoplastic thrombosis, causes of sorafenib discontinuation and pre-sorafenib treatment) was performed. RESULTS: Patients undergoing MC showed better performance status, lower tumor burden, lower prevalence of portal vein thrombosis, and better cancer stage. Median (95% CI) post-sorafenib survival (PSS) was longer in MC than in BSC patients [9.5 (7.5-11.6) vs 5.0 (4.2-5.7) months (p < 0.001)]. Neoplastic thrombosis, cause of sorafenib discontinuation, pre-sorafenib treatment and MC were independent prognosticators. The benefit of capecitabine was confirmed in patients after matching with propensity score [PSS: 9.9 (6.8-12.9) vs. 5.8 (4.8-6.8) months, (p = 0.001)]. MC lowered the mortality risk by about 40%. MC achieved better results in patients who stopped sorafenib for adverse events than in those who progressed during it [PSS: 17.3 (10.5-24.1) vs. 7.8 (5.2-10.1) months, (p = 0.035)]. Treatment toxicity was low and easily manageable with dose modulation. CONCLUSIONS: MC may be an efficient and safe second-line systemic therapy for HCC patients who discontinued sorafenib for toxicity or tumor progression.

Metformin and insulin impact on clinical outcome in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma receiving sorafenib: Validation study and biological rationale.

PURPOSE: In 2015, we published a study on a small series of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated chronically with metformin for type II diabetes mellitus (DM2) who showed a poorer response to sorafenib. The aim of the present study was to validate the prognostic significance of metformin in HCC patients treated with sorafenib, providing a biological rationale for the mechanism of resistance to sorafenib in patients on chronic metformin therapy, and to clarify the role of sirtuin-3 (SIRT-3), a protein involved in metabolic diseases and acknowledged as a tumour suppressor in HCC, in this resistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed 279 patients consecutively treated with sorafenib for the clinical analysis. Of the 86 (30%) patients with DM2, 52 (19%) were on chronic treatment with metformin and 34 (12%) with insulin. We included 43 patients with HCC for the biological study: 19 (44.1%) were diabetic and 14 (73.7%) of these received metformin for DM2. SIRT-3 expression was investigated by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. RESULTS: In HCC patients undergoing chronic treatment with metformin, the use of sorafenib was associated with poor progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) (1.9 and 6.6 months, respectively) compared to 3.7 months and 10.8 months, respectively, for patients without DM2 and 8.4 months and 16.6 months, respectively, for patients on insulin (P < .0001). We also observed that SIRT-3 protein expression was significantly higher in patients treated with metformin than in those not taking this medication (65% versus 25%, respectively) (P = .013). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings could be attributed to increased tumour aggressiveness and resistance to sorafenib caused by chronic treatment with metformin.

Validation of a Simple Scoring System to Predict Sorafenib Effectiveness in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is recommended for the treatment of advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Nonetheless, it is expensive, effective in few patients, and may cause significant adverse effects. Therefore, accurate selection of patients is needed. In a previous study, we constructed a simple scoring system to predict patients' outcomes based on the occurrence of sorafenib adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to validate this scoring system in a real-life cohort of HCC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical records of 279 outpatients treated with sorafenib in eight Italian centers were retrospectively analyzed. Adverse effects considered to calculate the score were skin toxicity, diarrhea, and arterial hypertension, occurring during the first month of therapy. For each adverse effect, 1 point was assigned if present; and 0 points if absent (resulting in a total score between 0 and 3). RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) was 10.8 months and median time to progression (TTP) was 5.1 months. At multivariate analysis, performance status, α-fetoprotein (AFP), and Child-Pugh score were independently associated with TTP and OS. A progressive increase of OS and TTP was observed in patients with scores from 0 to 3 (p < 0.001). Six-, 12-, and 24-month survival probabilities were 55.1, 24.5, and 7.9% in score 0 patients, and 100, 80.9, and 46.2% in score 3 patients, respectively. Complete response was observed in one patient (0.4%), partial responses in 41 (15.2%), and stable disease in 117 (43.5%). The disease control rate in patients with scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 was 34.3, 51.6, 80.9, and 96.3%, respectively (p < 0.001). Complete or partial responses were not observed in score 0 patients. CONCLUSIONS: We have validated a useful scoring system to predict outcomes in sorafenib-treated HCC patients. This score is easy to calculate and suitable for implementation in daily clinical practice.

Immune inflammation indicators and implication for immune modulation strategies in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving sorafenib.

We evalueted a systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) with the aim to explored their prognostic value in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib. 56 advanced HCC patients receiving sorafenib were available for our analysis. Lymphocyte, neutrophil and platelet were measured before beginning of treatment and after one month. Patient with SII ≥ 360 showed lower median PFS (2.6 vs. 3.9 months, P < 0.026) and OS (5.6 vs. 13.9 months, P = 0.027) with respect to patients with SII < 360.NLR ≥ 3 had a lower median PFS (2.6 vs. 3.3 months, P < 0.049) but not OS (5.6 vs. 13.9 months, P = 0.062) than those with NLR < 3. After adjusting for clinical covariates SII and NLR remained an independent prognostic factor for OS. The SII and NLR represent potential prognostic indicator in patients with advanced HCC treated with sorafenib.