Efficacy and safety of frontline systemic therapy for advanced HCC: A network meta-analysis of landmark phase III trials.

Background & Aims: Direct comparisons across first-line regimens for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma are not available. We performed a network metanalysis of phase III of trials to compare first-line systemic treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, disease control rate, and incidence of adverse events (AEs). Methods: After performing a literature review from January 2008 to September 2022, we screened 6,329 studies and reviewed 3,009 studies, leading to identification of 15 phase III trials for analysis. We extracted odds ratios for objective response rate and disease control rate, relative risks for AEs, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for OS and PFS, and used a frequentist network metanalysis, with fixed-effect multivariable meta-regression models to estimate the indirect pooled HRs, odds ratios, relative risks, and corresponding 95% CIs, considering sorafenib as reference. Results: Of 10,820 included patients, 10,444 received active treatment and 376 placebo. Sintilimab + IBI350, camrelizumab + rivoceranib, and atezolizumab + bevacizumab provided the greatest reduction in the risk of death compared with sorafenib, with HRs of 0.57 (95% CI 0.43-0.75), 0.62 (95% CI 0.49-0.79), and 0.66 (95% CI 0.52-0.84), respectively. Considering PFS, camrelizumab + rivoceranib and pembrolizumab + lenvatinib were associated with the greatest reduction in the risk of PFS events compared with sorafenib, with HRs of 0.52 (95% CI 0.41-0.65) and 0.52 (95% CI 0.35-0.77), respectively. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapies carried the lowest risk for all-grade and grade ≥3 AEs. Conclusions: The combinations of ICI + anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, and double ICIs lead to the greatest OS benefit compared with sorafenib, whereas ICI + kinase inhibitor regimens are associated with greater PFS benefit at the cost of higher toxicity rates. Impact and Implications: In the last few years, many different therapies have been studied for patients with primary liver cancer that cannot be treated with surgery. In these cases, anticancer drugs (alone or in combination) are given with the intent to keep the cancer at bay and, ultimately, to prolong survival. Among all the therapies that have been investigated, the combination of immunotherapy (drugs that boost the immune system against the cancer) and anti-angiogenic agents (drugs that act on tumoural vessels) has appeared the best to improve survival. Similarly, the combination of two types of immunotherapies that activate the immune system at different levels has also shown positive results. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022366330.

Sequential systemic treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most lethal cancers. After many years of stagnation, there are now several systemic treatments available for patients with HCC. AIM: To analyse the feasibility and efficacy of sequential systemic treatments in patients with HCC in clinical practice. METHODS: In this multicentre study, patients who were treated with novel systemic therapies for HCC between 2014 and 2019 at two referral centres, Hannover Medical School, Germany, and Medical University of Vienna, Austria, were included. RESULTS: Overall, 85 patients were included of which 76 patients (89.4%) received more than one and a maximum of five systemic treatment lines. The most common therapy sequence was sorafenib (n = 72; 84.7%) followed by regorafenib (n = 37; 48.7%), whereas 11 patients were initially treated with lenvatinib (12.9%). Other second-line treatments included pembrolizumab, nivolumab, cabozantinib and ramucirumab. Hepatic function deteriorated during sequential systemic treatment in 48.6% of the patients as defined by an increase in at least one Child-Pugh point. Median overall survival (mOS) from the start of first systemic treatment was 35 months for patients with sequential systemic treatment compared to 9 months for patients with one systemic treatment line (P < 0.001). Patients previously treated with surgical/locoregional therapies had a longer mOS compared to patients with initial systemic treatment (66 vs 25 months; P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Sequential systemic treatment is feasible and effective in selected patients with HCC in clinical practice. Our study underlines the critical importance of well-preserved liver function for successful administration of sequential systemic therapy.

Treatment with metformin is associated with a prolonged survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most lethal cancers. Nutrition- and life style-associated risk factors are increasingly prevalent. Metformin, the mainstay of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)-treatment, reduces the risk of hepatocarcinogenesis. However, its influence on the prognosis of patients with HCC has not been investigated on a large scale, yet. METHODS: Five thousand and ninety-three patients treated for HCC between 2000 and 2016 at three referral centres were included in this retrospective multicentre study. The aim of this study was to assess whether treatment with metformin for T2DM is associated with a prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients diagnosed with HCC. RESULTS: Among 5093 patients with HCC, 1917 patients (37.6%) were diagnosed with T2DM, of which 338 (17.6%) received treatment with metformin. Compared to diabetic patients not treated with metformin, patients on metformin had a significantly better hepatic function (Child-Pugh-Score A: 69.2% vs 47.4%, P < 0.001) and underwent significantly more often tumour resection (22.1% vs 16.5%, P = 0.024). Patients on metformin had a significantly longer median OS (mOS) compared to diabetic patients not treated with metformin (22 vs 15 months, P = 0.019). The prolongation of survival was most significant in patients treated with surgery. Using a propensity score match (PSM), patients were adjusted for hepatic function and initial therapy. In the matched cohorts, mOS remained significantly longer in metformin-treated patients (22 vs 16 months, P = 0.021). Co-treatment of metformin and sorafenib was associated with a survival disadvantage. CONCLUSION: Treatment with metformin was associated with an improved survival in patients with T2DM and HCC. This effect was most pronounced in patients at potentially curative tumour stages.