Machine Learning Predictive Model to Guide Treatment Allocation for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Surgery.

Importance: Clear indications on how to select retreatments for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are still lacking. Objective: To create a machine learning predictive model of survival after HCC recurrence to allocate patients to their best potential treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Real-life data were obtained from an Italian registry of hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2008 and December 2019 after a median (IQR) follow-up of 27 (12-51) months. External validation was made on data derived by another Italian cohort and a Japanese cohort. Patients who experienced a recurrent HCC after a first surgical approach were included. Patients were profiled, and factors predicting survival after recurrence under different treatments that acted also as treatment effect modifiers were assessed. The model was then fitted individually to identify the best potential treatment. Analysis took place between January and April 2021. Exposures: Patients were enrolled if treated by reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, chemoembolization, or sorafenib. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival after recurrence was the end point. Results: A total of 701 patients with recurrent HCC were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 71 [9] years; 151 [21.5%] female). Of those, 293 patients (41.8%) received reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, 188 (26.8%) received sorafenib, and 220 (31.4%) received chemoembolization. Treatment, age, cirrhosis, number, size, and lobar localization of the recurrent nodules, extrahepatic spread, and time to recurrence were all treatment effect modifiers and survival after recurrence predictors. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the predictive model was 78.5% (95% CI, 71.7%-85.3%) at 5 years after recurrence. According to the model, 611 patients (87.2%) would have benefited from reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, 37 (5.2%) from sorafenib, and 53 (7.6%) from chemoembolization in terms of potential survival after recurrence. Compared with patients for which the best potential treatment was reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, sorafenib and chemoembolization would be the best potential treatment for older patients (median [IQR] age, 78.5 [75.2-83.4] years, 77.02 [73.89-80.46] years, and 71.59 [64.76-76.06] years for sorafenib, chemoembolization, and reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, respectively), with a lower median (IQR) number of multiple recurrent nodules (1.00 [1.00-2.00] for sorafenib, 1.00 [1.00-2.00] for chemoembolization, and 2.00 [1.00-3.00] for reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation). Extrahepatic recurrence was observed in 43.2% (n = 16) for sorafenib as the best potential treatment vs 14.6% (n = 89) for reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation as the best potential treatment and 0% for chemoembolization as the best potential treatment. Those profiles were used to constitute a patient-tailored algorithm for the best potential treatment allocation. Conclusions and Relevance: The herein presented algorithm should help in allocating patients with recurrent HCC to the best potential treatment according to their specific characteristics in a treatment hierarchy fashion.

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.

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.

Years of Life Lost for Older Patients After Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: An aging population combined with an increased colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in the older population will increase its prevalence in the elderly, questioning how many years of life are lost (YLLs) in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 32,568 Dutch CRC patients ≥ 80 years were used to estimate the number of YLLs after diagnosis, using a reference age-, sex- and year-of-onset-matched cohort derived from national life tables. YLLs were additionally adjusted by comorbidities. Number needed to treat (NNT) was used as measure of surgical effect size. RESULTS: Surgery was applied in 74.9% of patients leading to 1.3 YLLs, being superior in 86.1% of cases with respect to alternative therapies (YLLs 4.8 years) and resulting in a number of two patients needed to operate to achieve one positive outcome. YLLs and NNTs depended on CRC stage, patient' age and comorbidities. For Stage I-II patients in the best clinical conditions (80-85 years without comorbidities), YLLs increased up to 4.1 years after surgery and up to 8.8 years without surgery (NNT 3). For Stage III patients, the NNT of surgery varied between 2 when they were in the best clinical conditions and 4 when they were older with high comorbidities. In Stage IV patients, the NNT ranged between 6 and 31. CONCLUSIONS: YLLs represents a novel approach to evaluate CRC prognosis. Stage I-III surgical patients can have a life expectancy similar to that of general population, being the NNT of surgery reasonably small compared with alternatives. Personalized comorbidity data are needed to confirm present findings.

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.

Multicenter prospective study of angiogenesis polymorphism validation in HCC patients treated with sorafenib. An INNOVATE study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Although sorafenib is the upfront standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), molecular predictors of efficacy have not been identified yet. In the ALICE-1 study, rs2010963 of VEGF-A and VEGF-C proved to be independent predictive factors for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in multivariate analysis. The ALICE-1 study results were confirmed in the ALICE-2 study, in which VEGF and VEGFR SNPs were analyzed. In the ePHAS study we analyzed the SNPs of eNOS. In univariate analysis, patients homozygous for an eNOS haplotype (HT1: T-4b at eNOS-786/eNOS VNTR) had significantly shorter median PFS and OS than those with other haplotypes. These data were confirmed in the validation set. METHODS: This nonpharmacological, interventional, prospective multicenter study aims to determine whether eNOS, HIF-1, VEGF, Ang2 and VEGFR polymorphisms play a role in predicting the objective response rate, PFS, and OS of advanced HCC patients treated with sorafenib. The study will involve 160 advanced HCC patients with Child-Pugh class A disease. The primary aim is to validate the prognostic or predictive roles of eNOS, Ang2, HIF-1, VEGF and VEGFR polymorphisms in relation to the clinical outcome (PFS) of HCC patients treated with sorafenib. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our data may suggest that polymorphism analysis of the VEGF, VEGFR-2, HIF and eNOS genes can identify HCC patients who are more likely to benefit from sorafenib.

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.

Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy after putative curative resection of colorectal liver and lung metastases.

OBJECTIVE: Marginal statistical evidence of efficacy of adjuvant and/or perioperative chemotherapy after resection of colorectal metastases exists, but formal recommendations are still lacking. The present study evaluated the adjuvant systemic chemotherapy after the first resection of liver and lung colorectal cancer metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data of 181 consecutive unselected patients with R0 resection of colorectal metastases treated simultaneously at 2 institutions from 1997 to 2004. Patients > 75 years old, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status Score ≥ 2 or unfit for adjuvant chemotherapy were excluded from the analysis. The decision on chemotherapy after surgery was left to the patient in the absence of conclusive data on the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting. A total of 151 patients (131 with liver metastases, 20 with lung metastases), 78 of whom underwent adjuvant chemotherapy, were evaluable for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival. The main prognostic factors for DFS after resection of colorectal cancer metastases were investigated in univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: At the univariate analysis, the number of resected lesions, lesion volume, disease-free interval and adjuvant systemic chemotherapy were the only significant prognostic factors. At multivariate analysis, only adjuvant chemotherapy and disease-free interval were independent prognostic factors (hazard ratios 1.66 and 1.62, respectively). The median DFS of patients who underwent systemic adjuvant chemotherapy was 16 months compared with 9.7 months for patients with observation alone (hazard ratio 1.56). Estimated 5-year DFS was 17.4% and 10.5% for treated and untreated patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy after metastasectomy in patients with colorectal cancer showed a significant benefit for DFS.

Outcome of right hepatectomies in patients older than 70 years.

HYPOTHESIS: The increasing number of elderly patients undergoing liver resections mandates updating of clinical outcomes on this specific population. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: A tertiary care teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Twenty-three patients older than 70 years who underwent right hepatectomies (including 7 extended right hepatectomies) between January 1, 1995, and October 31, 2001 (group 1) and 99 patients younger than 70 years who underwent 64 right hepatectomies and 35 extended right hepatectomies during the same period (group 2) were included for a total sample population of 122. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative clinicopathological features, intraoperative factors, in-hospital mortality, postoperative complications, intensive care unit requirement, hospital stay, and course of main biochemical liver function test results of groups 1 and 2 were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: The 2 groups were similar for indications for surgery and the presence of underlying liver disease. Group 1 had a higher incidence of associated pulmonary diseases (21.7% vs 5%, P =.02) and patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of III (ie, a patient with severe systemic disease limiting activity, but not incapacitating) (56.5% vs 26.3% of cases, P =.01). There were no differences in intraoperative requirement of packed red blood cells and in operation time. There were no in-hospital deaths in group 1; there were 2 deaths (2%) in group 2. Nine patients (39.1%) in group 1 and 32 patients (32.3%) in group 2 experienced postoperative complications (P =.53), of whom, respectively, 5 (21.7%) and 17 (17.2%) developed transient liver dysfunction (P =.56), and 4 (17.4%) and 5 (5.1%) required a supplementary intesive care unit stay (P =.06). The postoperative stay (mean [SD], 16 [14] days vs 13 [9] days, P =.88) and peak values of the aminotransferase level, total serum bilirubin level, and prothrombin time were similar in the 2 groups. The timing of the peak value of the total serum bilirubin level (mean [SD], 4.1 [4.8] days vs 2.5 [2.5] days, P =.28) and its period of normalization (mean [SD], 9.4 [10.8] days vs 6.7 [5.1] days, P =.67) were also similar for both groups. For patients with malignancies, the 3-year survival rate was 64.2% in group 1 and 53.9% in group 2 (P =.53). CONCLUSION: Being older than 70 years should not be a contraindication for major hepatectomies, provided that liver cirrhosis and severe associated medical conditions are ruled out during the preoperative evaluation.