Outcomes in the Asian subgroup of the phase III randomised HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In the global, phase III HIMALAYA study in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) improved overall survival (OS) vs. sorafenib; durvalumab was noninferior to sorafenib. HBV is the predominant HCC aetiology in most of Asia vs. HCV or nonviral aetiologies in Western countries and Japan. This analysis evaluated safety and efficacy outcomes for STRIDE and durvalumab monotherapy vs. sorafenib, in HIMALAYA participants enrolled in Asia, excluding Japan. METHODS: In HIMALAYA, participants were randomised to STRIDE, durvalumab, or sorafenib. The Asian subgroup in this analysis included participants enrolled in Hong Kong, India, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. OS, objective response rate (ORR; per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1), and safety were assessed in the Asian subgroup and in an exploratory subgroup of participants in Hong Kong and Taiwan. RESULTS: The Asian subgroup included 479 participants randomised to STRIDE (n=156), durvalumab (n=167), or sorafenib (n=156). OS was improved for STRIDE vs. sorafenib (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.52-0.89]). The OS HR for durvalumab vs. sorafenib was 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.06). In Hong Kong and Taiwan (n=141), OS HRs for STRIDE vs. sorafenib and durvalumab vs. sorafenib were 0.44 (95% CI 0.26-0.77) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.37-1.08), respectively. In the Asian subgroup, ORR (including unconfirmed responses) was numerically higher for STRIDE (28.2%) and durvalumab (18.6%) vs. sorafenib (9.0%), and Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were numerically lower for STRIDE (19.9%) and durvalumab (13.3%) vs. sorafenib (30.5%). CONCLUSIONS: STRIDE improved outcomes vs. sorafenib in the Asian subgroup. These results support the benefits of STRIDE for participants with uHCC globally, including the Asia-Pacific region. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT03298451 IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: The global, phase III HIMALAYA study found that the STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) regimen improved overall survival (OS), including long-term OS, vs. sorafenib, and that durvalumab monotherapy was noninferior to sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, there are differences in the aetiology and clinical practices related to HCC in parts of Asia, compared to Western countries and Japan, which could lead to differences in treatment outcomes between these regions. The results of this analysis demonstrate the benefits of STRIDE for participants in the Asia-Pacific region, consistent with the full, global study population. Overall, these findings continue to support the use of STRIDE in a diverse population, reflective of uHCC globally.

Clinicogenomic predictors of outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with immunotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations extend overall survival (OS) while anti-PD-1/L1 monotherapy is non-inferior to sorafenib in treatment-naïve, patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Clinicogenomic features are posited to influence patient outcomes. METHODS: The primary objective of this retrospective study was to define the clinical, pathologic, and genomic factors associated with outcomes to ICI therapy in patients with HCC. Patients with histologically confirmed advanced HCC treated with ICI at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2012 to 2022 were included. Association between clinical, pathological, and genomic characteristics were assessed with univariable and multivariable Cox regression model for progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. RESULTS: Two-hundred and forty-two patients were treated with ICI-based therapy. Patients were predominantly male (82%) with virally mediated HCC (53%) and Child Pugh A score (70%). Median follow-up was 28 months (0.5-78.4). Median PFS for those treated in 1st line, 2nd line and ≥ 3rd line was 4.9 (range: 2.9-6.2), 3.1 (2.3-4.0), and 2.5 (2.1-4.0) months, respectively. Median OS for those treated in 1st line, 2nd line, and ≥ 3rd line was 16 (11-22), 7.5 (6.4-11), and 6.4 (4.6-26) months, respectively. Poor liver function and performance status associated with worse PFS and OS, while viral hepatitis C was associated with favorable outcome. Genetic alterations were not associated with outcomes. CONCLUSION: Clinicopathologic factors were the major determinates of outcomes for patients with advanced HCC treated with ICI. Molecular profiling did not aid in stratification of ICI outcomes. Future studies should explore alternative biomarkers such as the level of immune activation or the pretreatment composition of the immune tumor microenvironment.

Has Management of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Evolved with the Evidence? Trends and Practice Patterns from the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC) has advanced in recent decades, including randomized trial evidence supporting systemic therapy in the palliative and adjuvant setting. Mounting observational evidence suggests resection of IHC with multifocal disease (IHC-MF) or lymph node metastasis (IHC-LNM) should be limited. It is unknown how real-world practice has evolved in light of research advances. This study characterizes trends in management and outcomes of IHC without distant metastasis. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients treated for IHC without distant metastasis (M0) and identified subgroups with lymph node (cN1) or multifocal hepatic involvement (cT2b). Two-sided Cochran-Armitage tests evaluated trends in initial treating modality and perioperative chemotherapy. Logistic regression evaluated associations with choice of initial treating modality. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated by using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2020, 11,368 patients were treated for IHC without extrahepatic metastasis. Forty-three percent underwent resection. Initial management shifted from resection towards radiation or systemic therapy in IHC-MF and IHC-LNM. Use of perioperative chemotherapy increased from 39% pre-2010 to 70% in 2018-2020 (p < 0.001), most often delivered postoperatively. Across the entire cohort, median OS improved from 16 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15-18) to 27 months (95% CI 26-29). More modest improvements were observed in IHC-MF and IHC-LNM. CONCLUSIONS: Use of perioperative chemotherapy has been widely adopted, predating randomized trial evidence in the adjuvant setting. Initial management of IHC-MF and IHC-LNM has shifted from resection to systemic and/or radiation therapy. While OS has improved overall, outcomes of IHC-MF and IHC-LNM remain poor, warranting further investigation.

Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of ivosidenib in advanced IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma: findings from the phase III ClarIDHy study.

PURPOSE: Report pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) findings from the phase III ClarIDHy study and any association between PK/PD parameters and treatment outcomes in this population. METHODS: Patients with mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) advanced cholangiocarcinoma were randomized at a 2:1 ratio to receive ivosidenib or matched placebo. Crossover from placebo to ivosidenib was permitted at radiographic disease progression. Blood samples for PK/PD analyses, a secondary endpoint, were collected pre-dose and up to 4 h post-dose on day (D) 1 of cycles (C) 1 - 2, pre-dose and 2 h post-dose on D15 of C1 - 2, and pre-dose on D1 from C3 onwards. Plasma ivosidenib and D-2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG) were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. All clinical responses were centrally reviewed previously. RESULTS: PK/PD analysis was available for samples from 156 ivosidenib-treated patients. Ivosidenib was absorbed rapidly following single and multiple oral doses (time of maximum observed plasma concentration [Tmax] of 2.63 and 2.07 h, respectively). Ivosidenib exposure was higher at C2D1 than after a single dose, with low accumulation. In ivosidenib-treated patients, mean plasma 2-HG concentration was reduced from 1108 ng/mL at baseline to 97.7 ng/mL at C2D1, close to levels previously observed in healthy individuals. An average 2-HG inhibition of 75.0% was observed at steady state. No plasma 2-HG decreases were seen with placebo. Plasma 2-HG reductions were observed in ivosidenib-treated patients irrespective of best overall response (progressive disease, or partial response and stable disease). CONCLUSION: Once-daily ivosidenib 500 mg has a favorable PK/PD profile, attesting the 2-HG reduction mechanism of action and, thus, positive outcomes in treated patients with advanced mIDH1 cholangiocarcinoma. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02989857 Registered February 20, 2017.

MEK Inhibitor-Associated Ocular Hypertension.

Introduction: Mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitors are targeted anticancer agents that are prescribed to treat a broad range of cancers. Despite their strong efficacy profile, MEK inhibitors have been associated with ocular toxicities, most notably, self-limited serous detachments of the neurosensory retina. In this report, we outline 3 cases of a rarely documented toxicity, MEK inhibitor-associated ocular hypertension. Case Presentations: In the first case, a 69-year-old female with metastatic cholangiocarcinoma presented with an intraocular pressure (IOP) of 25 mm Hg right eye (OD) and 27 mm Hg left eye (OS) 2 months after starting trametinib therapy. Similarly, in the second case, a 26-year-old female with Langerhans cell histiocytosis presented with an elevated IOP of 24 mm Hg bilaterally (OU) 13 months after beginning treatment with an investigational MEK inhibitor. In the third case, a 46-year-old male with Langerhans cell histiocytosis presented with a new onset of elevated IOP of 24 mm Hg 21 days after initiating treatment with cobimetinib. All 3 patients' IOP returned to normal following dorzolamide/timolol administration and continued their cancer therapy. Discussion/Conclusion: This report presents 3 cases of elevated IOP in patients taking three distinct MEK inhibitors which would suggest that IOP-elevating effects exist across the class of MEK inhibitors. All 3 patients had a satisfactory response to topical pressure-lowering drops while continuing their life-preserving MEK inhibitor drug dose, indicating that discontinuation of therapy may not be necessary. Due to the increasing use of MEK inhibitors, it is important that ophthalmologists familiarize themselves with the broad range of potential adverse ocular effects of MEK inhibitors.

PHOCUS: A Phase 3, Randomized, Open-Label Study of Sequential Treatment with Pexa-Vec (JX-594) and Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Introduction: Intratumoral administration of pexa-vec (pexastimogene devacirepvec), an oncolytic and immunotherapeutic vaccinia virus, given to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is associated with both local and distant tumor responses. We hypothesized subsequent treatment with sorafenib could demonstrate superior efficacy. Methods: This random phase III open-label study evaluated the sequential treatment with pexa-vec followed by sorafenib compared to sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC and no prior systemic treatment. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Key secondary endpoints included time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival, overall response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR). Safety was assessed in all patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment. Results: The study was conducted at 142 sites in 16 countries. From December 30, 2015, to the interim analysis on August 2, 2019, 459 patients were randomly assigned (pexa-vec plus sorafenib: 234, sorafenib: 225). At the interim analysis, the median OS was 12.7 months (95% CI: 9.89, 14.95) in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib arm and 14.0 months (95% CI: 11.01, 18.00) in the sorafenib arm. This led to the early termination of the study. The median TTP was 2.0 months (95% CI: 1.77, 2.96) and 4.2 months (95% CI: 2.92, 4.63); ORR was 19.2% (45 patients) and 20.9% (47 patients); and DCR was 50.0% (117 patients) and 57.3% (129 patients) in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib and sorafenib arms, respectively. Serious adverse events were reported in 117 (53.7%) patients in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib and 77 (35.5%) patients in the sorafenib arm. Liver failure was the most frequently reported in both groups. Conclusion: Sequential pexa-vec plus sorafenib treatment did not demonstrate increased clinical benefit in advanced HCC and fared worse compared to sorafenib alone. The advent of the added value of checkpoint inhibitors should direct any further development of oncolytic virus therapy strategies.

Patient-Reported Outcomes From the Phase III HIMALAYA Study of Tremelimumab Plus Durvalumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: In the phase III HIMALAYA study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03298451) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), the Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab (STRIDE) regimen significantly improved overall survival versus sorafenib, and durvalumab monotherapy was noninferior to sorafenib. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), a secondary outcome from HIMALAYA, are reported here. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to receive STRIDE, durvalumab, or sorafenib. PROs were assessed (preplanned secondary outcome) using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item Quality of Life Questionnaire and the 18-item HCC module. Time to deterioration (TTD), change from baseline and improvement rate in global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL), functioning, and disease-related symptoms were analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 1,171 participants were randomly assigned to STRIDE (n = 393), durvalumab (n = 389), or sorafenib (n = 389) and were evaluable for PRO assessments. Across treatment arms, compliance rates for PROs were >77% at baseline and >70% overall. Baseline scores were comparable across treatment arms. TTD in GHS/QoL, physical functioning, fatigue, appetite loss, and abdominal pain was numerically longer for both STRIDE and durvalumab versus sorafenib. Clinically meaningful deterioration in PROs was not observed in any treatment arm. However, TTD in nausea and abdominal swelling was numerically longer for STRIDE versus sorafenib, and the likelihood of clinically meaningful improvement in GHS/QoL, role, emotional and social functioning, and disease-related symptoms was greater with STRIDE and durvalumab versus sorafenib. PROs with STRIDE and durvalumab were generally similar. CONCLUSION: Compared with sorafenib, STRIDE and durvalumab were associated with clinically meaningful, patient-centered GHS/QoL, functioning, and symptom benefits in people with uHCC. These findings support the benefits of the STRIDE regimen compared with sorafenib for a diverse population reflective of the global uHCC population.

Concordance in Oncogenic Alterations Between the Primary Tumor and Advanced Disease: Insights Into the Heterogeneity of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCA) is characterized by significant phenotypic and clinical heterogeneities and poor response to systemic therapy, potentially related to underlying heterogeneity in oncogenic alterations. We aimed to characterize the genomic heterogeneity between primary tumors and advanced disease in patients with ICCA. METHODS: Biopsy-proven CCA specimens (primary tumor and paired advanced disease [metastatic disease, progressive disease on systemic therapy, or postoperative recurrence]) from two institutions were subjected to targeted next-generation sequencing. Overall concordance (oncogenic driver mutations, copy number alterations, and fusion events) and mutational concordance (only oncogenic mutations) were compared across paired samples. A subgroup analysis was performed on the basis of exposure to systemic therapy. Patients with extrahepatic CCA (ECCA) were included as a comparison group. RESULTS: Sample pairs from 65 patients with ICCA (n = 54) and ECCA (n = 11) were analyzed. The median time between sample collection was 19.6 months (range, 2.7-122.9). For the entire cohort, the overall oncogenic concordance was 49% and the mutational concordance was 62% between primary and advanced disease samples. Subgroup analyses of ICCA and ECCA revealed overall/mutational concordance rates of 47%/58% and 60%/84%, respectively. Oncogenic concordance was similarly low for pairs exposed to systemic therapy between sample collections (n = 50, 53% overall, 68% mutational). In patients treated with targeted therapy for IDH1/2 alterations (n = 6) or FGFR2 fusions (n = 3), there was 100% concordance between the primary and advanced disease specimens. In two patients, FGFR2 (n = 1) and IDH1 (n = 1) alterations were detected de novo in the advanced disease specimens. CONCLUSION: The results reflect a high degree of heterogeneity in ICCA and argue for reassessment of the dominant driver mutations with change in disease status.

CALGB 80802 (Alliance): Impact of Sorafenib with and without Doxorubicin on Hepatitis C Infection in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Sorafenib blocks nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A)-recruited c-Raf-mediated hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication and gene expression. Release of Raf-1-Ask-1 dimer and inhibition of Raf-1 via sorafenib putatively differ in the presence or absence of doxorubicin. Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80802 (Alliance) randomized phase III trial of doxorubicin plus sorafenib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), showed no improvement in median overall survival (OS). Whether HCV viral load impacts therapy and whether any correlation between HCV titers and outcome based on HCV was studied. In patients with HCV, HCV titer levels were evaluated at baseline and at multiple postbaseline timepoints until disease progression or treatment discontinuation. HCV titer levels were evaluated in relation to OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Among 53 patients with baseline HCV data, 12 patients had undetectable HCV (HCV-UN). Postbaseline HCV titer levels did not significantly differ between treatment arms. One patient in each arm went from detectable to HCV-UN with greater than 2 log-fold titer levels reduction. Aside from these 2 HCV-UN patients, HCV titers remained stable on treatment. Patients who had HCV-UN at baseline were 3.5 times more likely to progress and/or die from HCC compared with HCV detectable (HR = 3.51; 95% confidence interval: 1.58-7.78; P = 0.002). HCV titer levels remained unchanged, negating any sorafenib impact onto HCV titer levels. Although an overall negative phase III study, patients treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib and sorafenib only, on CALGB 80802 had worse PFS if HCV-UN. Higher levels of HCV titers at baseline were associated with significantly improved PFS. SIGNIFICANCE: Sorafenib therapy for HCC may impact HCV replication and viral gene expression. In HCV-positive patients accrued to CLAGB 80802 phase III study evaluating the addition of doxorubicin to sorafenib, HCV titer levels were evaluated at baseline and different timepoints. Sorafenib did not impact HCV titer levels. Despite an improved PFS in patients with detectable higher level HCV titers at baseline, no difference in OS was noted.

Systemic Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: ASCO Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To update an evidence-based guideline to assist in clinical decision-making for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel to update the 2020 guideline on systemic therapy for HCC. The panel updated the systematic review to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through October 2023 and updated recommendations. RESULTS: Ten new RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were added to the evidence base. RECOMMENDATIONS: Atezolizumab + bevacizumab (atezo + bev) or durvalumab + tremelimumab (durva + treme) may be offered first-line for patients with advanced HCC, Child-Pugh class A liver disease, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1. Where there are contraindications to these therapies, sorafenib, lenvatinib, or durvalumab may be offered first-line. Following first-line treatment with atezo + bev, second-line therapy with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), ramucirumab (for patients with alpha-fetoprotein [AFP] ≥400 ng/mL), durva + treme, or nivolumab + ipilimumab (nivo + ipi) may be recommended for appropriate candidates. Following first-line therapy with durva + treme, second-line therapy with a TKI is recommended. Following first-line treatment with sorafenib or lenvatinib, second-line therapy options include cabozantinib, regorafenib for patients who previously tolerated sorafenib, ramucirumab (AFP ≥400 ng/mL), nivo + ipi, or durvalumab; atezo + bev or durva + treme may be considered for patients who did not have access to these therapies in the first-line setting, and do not have contraindications. Pembrolizumab or nivolumab are also options for appropriate patients following sorafenib or lenvatinib. Third-line therapy may be considered in Child-Pugh class A patients with good PS, using one of the agents listed previously that has a nonidentical mechanism of action with previously received therapy. A cautious approach to systemic therapy is recommended for patients with Child-Pugh class B advanced HCC. Further guidance on choosing between options is included within the guideline.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

Botensilimab plus balstilimab in relapsed/refractory microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase 1 trial.

Microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer (MSS mCRC; mismatch repair proficient) has previously responded poorly to immune checkpoint blockade. Botensilimab (BOT) is an Fc-enhanced multifunctional anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) antibody designed to expand therapy to cold/poorly immunogenic solid tumors, such as MSS mCRC. BOT with or without balstilimab (BAL; anti-PD-1 antibody) is being evaluated in an ongoing expanded phase 1 study. The primary endpoint is safety and tolerability, which was evaluated separately in the dose-escalation portion of the study and in patients with MSS mCRC (using combined dose-escalation/dose-expansion data). Secondary endpoints include investigator-assessed RECIST version 1.1-confirmed objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Here we present outcomes in 148 heavily pre-treated patients with MSS mCRC (six from the dose-escalation cohort; 142 from the dose-expansion cohort) treated with BOT and BAL, 101 of whom were considered response evaluable with at least 6 months of follow-up. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 89% of patients with MSS mCRC (131/148), most commonly fatigue (35%, 52/148), diarrhea (32%, 47/148) and pyrexia (24%, 36/148), with no grade 5 TRAEs reported and a 12% discontinuation rate due to a TRAE (18/148; data fully mature). In the response-evaluable population (n = 101), ORR was 17% (17/101; 95% confidence interval (CI), 10-26%), and DCR was 61% (62/101; 95% CI, 51-71%). Median DOR was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 5.7 months-NR), and median PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.7-4.1 months), at a median follow-up of 10.3 months (range, 0.5-42.6 months; data continuing to mature). The combination of BOT plus BAL demonstrated a manageable safety profile with no new immune-mediated safety signals and encouraging clinical activity with durable responses. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03860272 .

Tremelimumab plus Durvalumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: A single, high priming dose of tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte­associated antigen 4) plus durvalumab (anti­programmed cell death ligand-1), an infusion regimen termed STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab), showed encouraging clinical activity and safety in a phase 2 trial of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this global, open-label, phase 3 trial, the majority of the patients we enrolled with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and no previous systemic treatment were randomly assigned to receive one of three regimens: tremelimumab (300 mg, one dose) plus durvalumab (1500 mg every 4 weeks; STRIDE), durvalumab (1500 mg every 4 weeks), or sorafenib (400 mg twice daily). The primary objective was overall survival for STRIDE versus sorafenib. Noninferiority for overall survival for durvalumab versus sorafenib was a secondary objective. RESULTS: In total, 1171 patients were randomly assigned to STRIDE (n=393), durvalumab (n=389), or sorafenib (n=389). The median overall survival was 16.43 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.16 to 19.58) with STRIDE, 16.56 months (95% CI, 14.06 to 19.12) with durvalumab, and 13.77 months (95% CI, 12.25 to 16.13) with sorafenib. Overall survival at 36 months was 30.7%, 24.7%, and 20.2%, respectively. The overall survival hazard ratio for STRIDE versus sorafenib was 0.78 (96.02% CI, 0.65 to 0.93; P=0.0035). Overall survival with durvalumab monotherapy was noninferior to sorafenib (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95.67% CI, 0.73 to 1.03; noninferiority margin, 1.08). Median progression-free survival was not significantly different among all three groups. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred for 50.5% of patients with STRIDE, 37.1% with durvalumab, and 52.4% with sorafenib. CONCLUSIONS: STRIDE significantly improved overall survival versus sorafenib. Durvalumab monotherapy was noninferior to sorafenib for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03298451.)