Incidence and Predictors of Esophagogastric Varices Bleeding in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Lenvatinib.

Introduction: Lenvatinib is indicated for the forefront treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC), but its use may be limited by the risk of esophagogastric varices (EGV) bleeding. This study assessed the prevalence, predictors, and complications of EGV in aHCC patients treated with lenvatinib. Methods: In this multicenter international retrospective study, cirrhotic patients treated with lenvatinib for aHCC, were enrolled if upper-gastrointestinal endoscopy was available within 6 months before treatment. Primary endpoint was the incidence of EGV bleeding during lenvatinib therapy; secondary endpoints were predictors for EGV bleeding, prevalence, and risk factors for the presence of EGV and high-risk EGV at baseline, as well as impact of EGV bleeding on patients' survival. Results: 535 patients were enrolled in the study (median age: 72 years, 78% male, 63% viral etiology, 89% Child-Pugh A, 16% neoplastic portal vein thrombosis [nPVT], 56% Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer-C): 234 had EGV (44%), 70 (30%) were at high risk and 59 were on primary prophylaxis. During lenvatinib treatment, 17 patients bled from EGV (3 grade 5), the 12-month cumulative incidence being 3%. The only baseline independent predictor of EGV bleeding was the presence of baseline high-risk EGV (hazard ratio: 6.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.23-21.57, p = 0.001). In these patients the 12-month risk was 17%. High-risk varices were independently associated with Child-Pugh B score (odds ratio [OR]: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.08-4.17, p = 0.03), nPVT (OR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.40-4.61, p = 0.002), and platelets <150,000/µL (OR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.35-4.50, p = 0.003). Conclusion: In hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with lenvatinib, the risk of EGV bleeding was mostly low but significant only in patients with high-risk EGV at baseline.

Outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in real-world clinical practice who met or did not meet the inclusion criteria for the phase 3 IMbrave150 trial.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) is frequently selected as the primary systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). AIMS: To investigate the outcomes of patients with HCC treated with Atezo/Bev in a real-world setting based on whether they met the inclusion criteria for the phase 3 IMbrave150 trial. METHODS: A total of 936 patients were enrolled. There were 404 patients who met the inclusion criteria of the phase 3 IMbrave150 trial (IMbrave150 group) and 532 who did not (non-IMbrave150 group). RESULTS: Median progression-free survival (PFS) in the IMbrave150 and non-IMbrave150 groups was 7.4 months and 5.6 months (p = 0.002). Multivariable analysis revealed that non-B, non-C HCC aetiology (hazard ratio [HR], 1.173), α-fetoprotein ≥100 ng/mL (HR, 1.472), Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage ≥ C (HR, 1.318), and modified albumin-bilirubin (mALBI) grade 2b or 3 (HR, 1.476) are independently associated with PFS. Median overall survival (OS) in the IMbrave150 and non-Imbrave150 groups was 26.5 and 18.8 months (p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2 (HR, 1.986), α-fetoprotein ≥100 ng/mL (HR, 1.481), and mALBI grade 2b or 3 (HR, 2.037) are independently associated with OS. In subgroup analysis, there were no significant differences in PFS or OS between these groups among patients with mALBI grade 1 or 2a. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who are treated with Atezo/Bev and meet the inclusion criteria for the phase 3 IMbrave150 trial, as well as those who do not meet the inclusion criteria but have good liver function, have a good prognosis for survival.

Clinical usefulness of newly developed prognostic predictive score for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for hepatocellular carcinoma.

AIMS: The aim of the present study was to elucidate detailed parameters for prediction of prognosis for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) treatment. METHODS: A total of 719 patients (males 577, median age 74 years) treated with Atez/Bev between September 2020 and January 2023 were enrolled. Factors related to overall survival (OS) were extracted and a prognostic scoring system based on hazard ratio (HR) was created. OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were retrospectively examined, and the prognostic ability of the newly developed system was compared to CRAFITY score using concordance index (c-index) and Akaike information criterion (AIC) results. RESULTS: Cox-hazards multivariate analysis showed BCLC classification C/D (HR 1.4; 1 point), AFP ≥100 ng/mL (HR 1.4; 1 point), mALBI 2a (HR 1.7; 1 point), mALBI 2b/3 (HR 2.8; 2 points), and DCP ≥100 mAU/mL (HR 1.6; 1 point) as significant factors. The assigned points were added and used to develop the IMmunotherapy with AFP, BCLC staging, mALBI, and DCP evaluation (IMABALI-De) scoring system. For IMABALI-De scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, OS was not applicable (NA), NA, 26.11, 18.79, 14.07, and 8.32 months, respectively (p < .001; AIC 2788.67, c-index 0.699), while for CRAFITY scores of 0, 1, and 2, OS was 26.11, 20.29, and 11.32 months, respectively (p < .001; AIC 2864.54, c-index 0.606). PFS periods for those IMABALI-De scores were 21.75, 12.89, 9.18, 8.0, 5.0, and 3.75 months, respectively (p < .001; AIC 5203.32, c-index 0.623) and for the CRAFITY scores were 10.32, 7.68, and 3.57 months, respectively (p < .001; AIC 5246.61, c-index 0.574). As compared with CRAFITY score, IMABALI-De score had better AIC and c-index results for both OS and PFS. CONCLUSION: The present results indicated that the proposed IMABALI-De score may be favorable for predicting prognosis of uHCC patients receiving Atez/Bev therapy.

Adverse Events as Potential Predictive Factors of Activity in Patients with Advanced HCC Treated with Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab.

BACKGROUND: In the context of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with systemic therapy, the correlation between the appearance of adverse events (AEs) and reported efficacy outcomes is well-known and widely investigated. From other pathological settings, we are aware of the prognostic and predictive value of the occurrence of immune-related AEs in patients treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective multicenter real-world study aims to investigate the potential prognostic value of AEs in patients with HCC treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in the first-line setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 823 patients from five countries (Italy, Germany, Portugal, Japan, and the Republic of Korea). RESULTS: Of the patients, 73.3% presented at least one AE during the study period. The most common AEs were proteinuria (29.6%), arterial hypertension (27.2%), and fatigue (26.0%). In all, 17.3% of the AEs were grade (G) 3. One death due to bleeding was reported. The multivariate analysis confirmed the appearance of decreased appetite G < 2 [versus G ≥ 2; hazard ratio (HR) 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13-0.90; p < 0.01] and immunotoxicity G < 2 (versus G ≥ 2; HR: 0.70; 95% CI 0.24-0.99; p = 0.04) as independent prognostic factors for overall survival, and the appearance of decreased appetite G < 2 (versus G ≥ 2; HR: 0.73; 95% CI 0.43-0.95; p = 0.01), diarrhea (yes versus no; HR: 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85; p = 0.01), fatigue (yes versus no; HR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.65-0.95; p < 0.01), arterial hypertension G < 2 (versus G ≥ 2; HR: 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.87; p < 0.01), and proteinuria (yes versus no; HR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98; p = 0.03) as independent prognostic factors for progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: As demonstrated for other therapies, there is also a correlation between the occurrence of AEs and outcomes for patients with HCC for the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

Impact of body mass index on the prognosis of unresectable HCC patients receiving first-line Lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

INTRODUCTION: Overweight is a negative prognostic factor in the general population in the long term. However, the role of body mass index (BMI) in the short-mid term in advanced tumours is unclear. The present analysis investigates the role of BMI weight classes in a large sample of patients affected by HCC and receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line treatment. METHODS AND MATERIAL: The cohort included consecutive patients affected by BCLC-c and BCLC-B HCC patients from a multicenter international study group who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line therapy. Population was stratified according to the BMI in under-, over- and normal-weight according to the conventional thresholds. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the prognostic and predictive impact of BMI in patients affected by advanced or intermediate HCC. Survival curves were estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan-Meier. The role of stratification factors was analysed with log-rank tests. RESULTS: 1292 consecutive patients with HCC were analysed. 466 (36%) patients were treated with lenvatinib and 826 (64%) patients were treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab arm, 510 (62%) patients were normal-weight, 52 (6%) underweight and 264 (32%) overweight. At the univariate analysis for OS, underweight patients had significantly shorter OS compared to normal-weight patients, whereas no differences were found between normal-weight versus overweight. Multivariate analysis confirmed that underweight patients had significantly shorter OS compared to normal-weight patients (HR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0-2.8; p = .0323). In the lenvatinib arm, 26 patients (5.6%) were categorized as underweight, 256 (54.9%) as normal-weight, and 184 (39.5%) as overweight. At the univariate analysis for OS, no significant differences were found between normal-weight versus underweight and between normal-weight versus overweight, which was confirmed at multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Our analysis highlighted a prognostic role of BMI in a cohort of patients with advanced HCC who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, while no prognostic role for low BMI was apparent in patients who received lenvatinib.

Safety and Efficacy of Lenvatinib in Very Old Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Data concerning the use of lenvatinib in very old patients (≥ 80 years) are limited, although the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in this patient population is constantly increasing. OBJECTIVE: This analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in a large cohort of very old patients (≥ 80 years) with unresectable HCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was conducted on a cohort of 1325 patients from 46 centers in four Western and Eastern countries (Italy, Germany, Japan, and the Republic of Korea) who were undergoing first-line treatment with lenvatinib between July 2010 and February 2022. Patients were stratified according to age as very old (≥ 80 years) and not very old (< 80 years). RESULTS: The median overall survival (OS) was 15.7 months for patients < 80 years old and 18.4 months for patients ≥ 80 years old [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-1.25, p = 0.8281]. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 6.3 months for patients < 80 years old and 6.5 months for patients ≥ 80 years old (HR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.91-1.25, p = 0.3954). No differences between the two study groups were found in terms of disease control rate (DCR; 80.8% versus 78.8%; p = 0.44) and response rate (RR; 38.2% versus 37.9%; p = 0.88). Patients < 80 years old experienced significantly more hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) grade ≥ 2 and decreased appetite grade ≥ 2. Conversely, patients ≥ 80 years old experienced significantly more fatigue grade ≥ 2. In the very old group, parameters associated with prognosis were AFP, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC), and Child-Pugh score. BCLC stage was the only independent predictor of overall survival (OS; HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.11-2.29, p = 0.01115). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the same efficacy and safety of lenvatinib between very old and not very old patients.

Comparative analysis of the therapeutic outcomes of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib for hepatocellular carcinoma patients aged 80 years and older: Multicenter study.

AIM: Elderly patients are believed to have a reduced immune capacity, which may make immunotherapy less effective. The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic outcome of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) and lenvatinib (LEN) for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients aged 80 years and older. METHODS: From March 2018 to July 2022, 170 and 92 elderly patients who received LEN and Atez/Bev as first-line treatment, respectively, were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The median ages of the Atez/Bev and LEN groups were 83.0 (8.01-86.0) and 83.0 (82.0-86.0) years (p = 0.3), respectively. Men accounted for approximately 70% of the patients in both groups. The objective response rate was 35.9% in the LEN group and 33.7% in the Atez/Bev group (p = 0.8), whereas the disease control rates in the LEN and Atez/Bev groups were 62.9% and 63.0%, respectively (p = 1.0). The median progression-free survival (PFS) in the LEN and Atez/Bev groups was 6.3 and 7.2 months, respectively, which were not significantly different (p = 0.2). The median overall survival (OS) was 17.9 months in the LEN group and 14.0 months in the Atez/Bev group. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.7). In multivariate analyses, the choice of treatment (LEN vs. Atez/Bev) showed no association with PFS or OS. The Atez/Bev group had a significantly higher rate of postprogression treatment (59.0% vs. 35.7%, p = 0.01) and a lower rate of discontinuation due to adverse events (69 [40.6%] vs. 19 [20.7%], p < 0.001) compared to the LEN group. CONCLUSIONS: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed comparable effectiveness to LEN in HCC patients aged 80 years and older. Given the results of postprogression treatment and discontinuation due to adverse events, Atez/Bev could serve as a first-line treatment even for elderly HCC patients.

α-FAtE: A new predictive score of response to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (AB) and lenvatinib can be alternatively used as first-line systemic treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, no direct comparison of the two regimens has been performed in randomized clinical trials, making the identification of baseline differential predictors of response of major relevance to tailor the best therapeutic option to each patient. Baseline clinical and laboratory characteristics of real-world AB-treated HCC patients were analyzed in uni- and multivariate analyses to find potential prognostic factors of overall survival (OS). Significant variables were incorporated in a composite score (α-FAtE) and it was tested for specificity and sensitivity in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and in multivariate analysis for OS. The score was applied in uni- and multivariate analyses for OS of a comparable lenvatinib-treated HCC population. Finally, comparison between treatments was performed in patients with low and high α-FAtE scores and predictivity estimated by interaction analysis. Time-to-progression (TTP) was a secondary endpoint. OS of AB-treated HCC patients was statistically longer in those with α-fetoprotein <400 ng/mL (HR 0.62, p = .0407), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) <125 IU/L (HR 0.52, p = .0189) and eosinophil count ≥70/µL (HR 0.46, p = .0013). The α-FAtE score was generated by the sum of single points attributed to each variable among the above reported. In ROC curve analysis, superior sensitivity and specificity were achieved by the score compared to individual variables (AUC 0.794, p < .02). Patients with high score had longer OS (HR 0.44, p = .0009) and TTP (HR 0.34, p < .0001) compared to low score if treated with AB, but not with lenvatinib. Overall, AB was superior to lenvatinib in high score patients (HR 0.55, p = .0043) and inferior in low score ones (HR 1.75, p = .0227). At interaction test, low α-FAtE score resulted as negative predictive factor of response to AB (p = .0004). In conclusion, α-FAtE is a novel prognostic and predictive score of response to first-line AB for HCC patients that, if validated in prospective studies, could drive therapeutic choice between lenvatinib and AB.

Comparison of prognostic impact of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib in patients with intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The study goal was to compare the outcomes of patients with intermediate-stage (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC]-B) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) or lenvatinib (LEN) as first-line systemic therapy. METHODS: A total of 358 patients with BCLC-B HCC treated with Atezo/Bev (n = 177) or LEN (n = 181) as first-line systemic therapy were included. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival (PFS) times in the Atezo/Bev and LEN groups were 10.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.8-12.6) and 7.3 months (95% CI, 6.3-8.5), respectively (p = .019). In the propensity score-matched cohort, the median PFS times in the Atezo/Bev (n = 151) and LEN (n = 151) groups were 10.2 months (95% CI, 7.0-12.3) and 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.9-8.1), respectively (p = .020). Restricted mean survival times of PFS were significantly higher in the Atezo/Bev group than in the LEN group at landmarks of 12 and 18 months (p = .031 and .012, respectively). In a subgroup analysis of patients with HCC beyond the up-to-seven criteria, the median PFS times in the Atezo/Bev (n = 134) and LEN (n = 117) groups were 10.5 months (95% CI, 7.0-11.8) and 6.3 months (95% CI, 5.5-7.3), respectively (p = .044). CONCLUSIONS: The use of Atezo/Bev as first-line systemic therapy in patients with BCLC-B HCC is expected to result in good PFS.

A Low Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index Is Associated with Low Muscle Volume and a Poor Prognosis among Cirrhotic Patients.

Background and Objectives: The geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) is an easily calculable index that can be determined using three common clinical variables. The GNRI is suggested to be related to sarcopenia in cirrhotic patients. However, the relationship between the GNRI and the prognosis in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) has not been reported. The aim of the present research is to study the association of the GNRI with the nutritional status, hepatic function reserve, and prognosis in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC). Materials and Methods: A total of 370 cirrhotic patients whose nutritional statuses were evaluated using anthropometric measurements and bioimpedance analysis were studied. The associations between the GNRI and nutritional status and the GNRI and hepatic function reserve were analyzed. We also investigated the GNRI and prognosis of patients with LC. Results: The median age of the enrolled patients was 66 years old, and 266 (71.9%) patients had viral hepatitis-related LC. The GNRI was shown to decrease with the progression of chronic liver disease, represented by an increased FIB-4 index and severe Child-Pugh and mALBI grades. In addition, a low GNRI (<92) was associated with severe cirrhosis-related metabolic disorders, including a low branched-chain amino acid-to-tyrosine ratio (BTR) and a low zinc value. The GNRI was positively correlated with two nutrition-related anthropometric variables (% arm circumference and % arm muscle circumference), and a low GNRI was related to a low skeletal muscle mass index (SMI) (<7.0 kg/m2 for men or <5.7 kg/m2 for women), as determined by using bioimpedance analysis. In addition, patients with a low GNRI (<92) had a poorer prognosis than those with a high GNRI (≥92) (log-rank test: p = 0.0161, and generalized Wilcoxon test, p = 0.01261). Conclusions: Our results suggest that a low GNRI is related to severe chronic liver disease, low muscle volume, and a poor prognosis of patients with cirrhosis.

Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease criteria may underestimate the number of lean female nonalcoholic fatty liver disease patients with significant liver fibrosis.

AIM: It remains unclear whether the newly defined concept of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) appropriately includes patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease with significant liver fibrosis. METHODS: A total of 4112 patients in whom nonalcoholic fatty liver disease was diagnosed by ultrasonography during medical checkups were enrolled. We defined a fibrosis-4 index ≥1.3 in patients aged <65 years and ≥2.0 in patients aged ≥65 years as significant liver fibrosis. RESULTS: The numbers of patients with a low, intermediate, and high probability of advanced fibrosis based on the fibrosis-4 index were 3360 (81.7%), 668 (16.2%), and 84 (2.0%). There were 3828 (93.1%) and 284 (6.9%) patients diagnosed with MASLD and non-MASLD. The non-MASLD group, compared with the MASLD group, was significantly younger (44 vs. 55 years) and had a higher percentage of women (62.3% vs. 27.7%). Significant fibrosis, defined based on the fibrosis-4 index, was present in 18.5% of the MASLD group and 15.5% of the non-MASLD group. In a multivariable analysis, female sex (OR 6.170, 95% CI 3.180-12.000; p < 0.001) was independently associated with non-MASLD in patients with a significant fibrosis. Among non-MASLD patients with a significant fibrosis (n = 44), body mass index was significantly lower in females than in males (p < 0.001). In a multivariable analysis of patients aged <65 years, female sex (OR, 7.700; 95% CI, 3.750-15.800; p < 0.001) remained independently associated with non-MASLD in patients with a significant fibrosis. CONCLUSIONS: MASLD may inappropriately exclude patients with significant fibrosis, especially lean females with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Comparing the impact of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib on the liver function in hepatocellular carcinoma patients: A mixed-effects regression model approach.

AIM: This retrospective study compared the impact of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) and lenvatinib (LEN) on the liver function in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: We included 526 patients who received Atez/Bev and 731 who received LEN March 2018 and July 2022 in this study. We conducted a 1:1 propensity-score-matched analysis and identified 324 patients in each group for inclusion in the present analysis. Nonlinear mixed-effects regression models were employed, allowing for the evaluation and inclusion of cases where treatment was interrupted due to disease progression, adverse events, or loss to follow-up. These models were used to compare the ALBI score between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups. RESULTS: Following propensity score matching, the mean ALBI scores in the Atez/Bev and LEN groups were -2.41 ± 0.40 and -2.44 ± 0.42 at baseline, and -2.17 ± 0.56 and -2.19 ± 0.58 at 12 weeks, respectively. Although the ALBI score significantly worsened during treatment in both groups (p < 0.001), there was no significant difference in the rate of ALBI score deterioration between the groups (p = 0.06). Subgroup analyses showed that LEN-treated patients with BCLC advanced stage (p = 0.02) and those who initially received the full dose (p < 0.001) had a significantly greater worsening of ALBI score compared to Atez/Bev. CONCLUSIONS: Using a nonlinear mixed-effects regression approach, which allowed for the inclusion of cases with treatment interruption, we found no significant difference in the trend of liver function deterioration between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups. Caution should be exercised for LEN-treated patients with BCLC advanced stage or those receiving the full dose of LEN.

Usefulness of Tumor Marker Score for Predicting the Prognosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Treated with Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the ability of a previously reported tumor marker (TM) score involving alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), fucosylated AFP (AFP-L3), and des gamma-carboxy prothrombin (DCP) as TMs in predicting the prognosis and therapeutic efficacy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients administered atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) as first-line treatment. MATERIALS/METHODS: The study period covered September 2020 to December 2022 and involved 371 HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev. The values of the TMs AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP were measured upon introducing Atez/Bev. Elevations in the values of AFP (≥100 ng/mL), AFP-L3 (≥10%), and DCP (≥100 mAU/mL) were considered to indicate a positive TM. The number of positive TMs was summed up and used as the TM score, as previously proposed. Hepatic reserve function was assessed using the modified albumin-bilirubin grade (mALBI). Predictive values for prognosis were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: A TM score of 0 was shown in 81 HCC patients (21.8%), 1 in 110 (29.6%), 2 in 112 (29.9%), and 3 in 68 (18.3%). The median overall survival (OS) times for TM scores 0, 1, 2, and 3 were not applicable [NA] (95% CI NA-NA), 24.0 months (95% CI 17.8-NA), 16.7 months (95% CI 17.8-NA), and NA (95% CI 8.3-NA), respectively (p < 0.001). The median progression-free survival (PFS) times for TM scores 0, 1, 2, and 3 were 16.5 months (95% CI 8.0-not applicable [NA]), 13.8 months (95% CI 10.6-21.3), 7.7 months (95% CI 5.3-8.9), and 5.8 months (95% CI 3.0-7.6), respectively (p < 0.001). OS was well stratified in mALBI 1/2a and mALBI 2a/2b. PFS was well stratified in mALBI 2a/2b, but not in mALBI 1/2a. CONCLUSIONS: The TM score involving AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP as TMs was useful in predicting the prognosis and therapeutic efficacy in terms of OS and PFS in HCC patients administered Atez/Bev as first-line treatment.

Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients with esophageal-gastric varices.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A), though is known to increase bleeding risk as an adverse event (AE). This study examined whether atezolizumab/bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) can be used for patients with esophageal-gastric varices (EGV). METHODS: From October 2020 to December 2022, 506 uHCC patients (median 74 years) underwent an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy examination were enrolled, after exclusion of those with portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Patients with EGV (≧ F1) were defined as EGV positive, and the cohort was divided into non-EGV (n = 355) and EGV (n = 151). Before introducing Atez/Bev, endoscopic treatment was performed, when necessary. Prognosis was evaluated, retrospectively. RESULTS: The EGV group had significantly worse hepatic function, lower platelet count, elevated alpha-fetoprotein, and lower rate of extrahepatic metastasis, and lower rate of first-line use (each P < 0.05) than the other. However, progression-free survival (PFS) was also not a significantly difference between the EGV and non-EGV groups in analyses with (PFS rate at 6/12/18 months: 60%/38%/30% vs. 65%/46%/34%, P = 0.29) or without inverse probability weighting adjustment [median: 10.6 months (95% CI 8.3-14.0) vs. 10.5 months (95% CI 7.8-13.7), P = 0.79]. As for AEs, diarrhea was more frequent in the EGV group (≧ G3: 2.0% vs. 0.3%, P = 0.036), while no significant difference was noted for EGV hemorrhage (≧ G3: 1.3% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.345). Of 28 patients who underwent endoscopic treatments before introducing Atez/Bev, none showed EGV-associated hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: Atez/Bev might be an effective therapeutic option in patients with EGV, when appropriate endoscopic treatment for EGV is performed.

Relationship of Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab Treatment with Muscle Volume Loss in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients: Multicenter Analysis.

Background/Aim: There is no known report regarding the relationship of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) treatment with muscle volume loss (MVL) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC) patients. This study aimed to elucidate the clinical relationship between MVL and Atez/Bev. Materials/Methods: From September 2020 to December 2021, 229 u-HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev and with muscle volume data obtained by computed tomography at the baseline available were analyzed (median age, 74 years; males, 186 (81.2%); ECOG PS 0/1, 221 (96.5%); HCV:HBV:alcohol:others = 81:33:40:75; Child-Pugh A, 212 (92.6%); modified albumin-bilirubin (mALBI) grade 1:2a:2b = 79:60:90; BCLC 0:A:B:C = 1:24:87:117; median observation period, 6.8 months). Japan Society of Hepatology criteria were used for definition of MVL and prognostic factors were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Multivariate Cox-hazard analysis of prognostic factors for progression-free survival (PFS) showed elevated alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) (≥100 ng/mL) (HR 1.848, 95% CI 1.264-2.702, p = 0.002), mALBI grade (≥2a) (HR 1.563, 95% CI 1.035-2.359, p = 0.034), and MVL (HR 1.479, 95% CI 1.020-2.144, p = 0.039) as significant factors. For overall survival (OS), significant factors included elevated AFP (≥100 ng/mL) (HR 3.564, 95% CI 1.856-6.844, p < 0.001), mALBI grade (≥2a) (HR 3.451, 95% CI 1.580-7.538, p = 0.002), and MVL (HR 2.119, 95% CI 1.150-3.904, p = 0.016). Patients with MVL (MVL group, n = 91) showed worse PFS than those without (non-MVL group, n = 138) (median PFS 5.3 vs. 7.6 months, p = 0.025), while the MVL group showed worse OS (p = 0.038), though neither reached the median survival time. Conclusion: MVL may be a clinical factor related to poor prognosis in patients receiving Atez/Bev treatment for u-HCC.

Effect of butyrate-producing enterobacteria on advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treatment with atezolizumab and bevacizumab.

AIM: Multiple studies have revealed the correlation between gut microbiome and the response to checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in patients with cancer, and oral administration of butyrate-producing enterobacteria has been reported to enhance the efficacy of CPIs. However, the effects of enterobacteria on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not well understood. METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter study, we enrolled 747 patients with advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab combination therapy. Tumor response, survival, and adverse effects were compared between 99 patients who ingested drugs containing butyric acid-producing enterobacteria (butyric acid group) and the remaining patients (control group). RESULTS: Objective response and disease control rates in butyric acid group (29.7% and 77.8%, respectively) were higher than those in the control group (26.4% and 72.7%, respectively). However, the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.543 and p = 0.222, respectively). No difference in median survival time was observed between the two groups (20.0 months and 21.4 months, respectively; p = 0.789), even after matching the backgrounds of the patients with propensity scores (p = 0.714). No adverse effects occurred upon the administration of butyrate-producing bacteria. However, proteinuria (41.4% vs. 30.9%; p = 0.041), fever (17.2% vs. 10.2%, p = 0.036), and diarrhea (15.2% vs. 6.2%; p = 0.001) occurred more frequently in the butyric acid group. CONCLUSION: Butyrate-producing bacteria does not enhance the efficacy of atezolizumab-bevacizumab combination therapy in patients with HCC.

Comparison between Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Lenvatinib for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients with Child-Pugh Class B in Real-World Clinical Settings.

INTRODUCTION: Systemic treatment is generally recommended for Child-Pugh (CP) A status patients with an unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). This study aimed to elucidate differences regarding therapeutic efficacy between lenvatinib (LEN), a multi-molecular target agent, and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev), a newly developed immune-combined therapeutic regimen for CP-B patients affected by uHCC. METHODS: From April 2018 to July 2022, 128 patients with uHCC treated with Atez/Bev (n = 29) or LEN (n = 99) as the initial systemic treatment were enrolled (median age 71 years; males 97; CP score 7:8:9 = 94:28:6; median albumin-bilirubin score -1.71). Therapeutic response was evaluated using RECIST, version 1.1. Clinical features and prognosis were retrospectively examined. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups in regard to best response (CR:PR:SD:PD = 0:5:12:7 vs. 5:22:25:20, p = 0.415), progression-free survival (PFS) (median 5.0 [95% CI: 2.4-7] vs. 5.5 [95% CI: 3.4-7.9] months, p = 0.332), or overall survival (OS) (5.8 [95% CI: 4.3-11] vs. 8.8 [95% CI: 6.1-12.9] months, p = 0.178). Adverse events (any grade/≥ grade 3) were observed in 72.4%/17.2% (n = 21/5) of patients treated with Atez/Bev and 78.8%/25.3% (n = 78/25) of those treated with LEN (p = 0.46/0.46). DISCUSSION: This retrospective study found no significant differences regarding PFS or OS between CP-B patients given Atez/Bev or LEN as initial systemic treatment for uHCC.

Geriatric nutritional risk index as an easy-to-use assessment tool for nutritional status in hepatocellular carcinoma treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

AIM: The present study focused on Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), which is based on bodyweight and serum albumin, and known as an easy-to-use nutritional assessment tool in clinical settings, to elucidate the prognostic predictive ability of GNRI in patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: A total of 525 HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev, based on their classification of unsuitable status for curative treatments and/or transarterial catheter chemoembolization, were enrolled (Child-Pugh A:B:C = 484:40:1, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0:A:B:C:D = 7:25:192:283:18). Prognosis was evaluated retrospectively using GNRI. RESULTS: Atez/Bev was used in 338 of the present cohort as first-line systemic chemotherapy (64.4%). Median progression-free survival based on GNRI indicating normal, mild decline, moderate decline, and severe decline was 8.3, 6.7, 5.3, and 2.4 months, respectively, whereas median overall survival was 21.4, 17.0, 11.5. and 7.3 months, respectively (both p < 0.001). The concordance index (c-index) values of GNRI for predicting prognosis (progression-free survival/overall survival) were superior to those of Child-Pugh class and albumin-bilirubin grade (0.574/0.632 vs. 0.527/0.570 vs. 0.565/0.629). As a subanalysis, muscle volume loss was observed in 37.5% of 256 patients with computed tomography data available. Along with GNRI decline, frequency of muscle volume loss became progressively larger (normal vs. mild vs. moderate vs. severe = 17.6% vs. 29.2% vs. 41.2% vs. 57.9%, p < 0.001), and a GNRI value of 97.8 was predictive of its occurrence (AUC 0.715, 95% CI 0.649-0.781; specificity/sensitivity = 0.644/0.688). CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that GNRI is an effective nutritional prognostic tool for predicting prognosis and muscle volume loss complication in HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev.

Sequential therapies after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib first-line treatments in hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this retrospective proof-of-concept study was to compare different second-line treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and progressive disease (PD) after first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1381 patients had PD at first-line therapy. 917 patients received lenvatinib as first-line treatment, and 464 patients atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as first-line. RESULTS: 49.6% of PD patients received a second-line therapy without any statistical difference in overall survival (OS) between lenvatinib (20.6months) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line (15.7months; p = 0.12; hazard ratio [HR]= 0.80). After lenvatinib first-line, there wasn't any statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p = 0.27; sorafenib HR: 1; immunotherapy HR: 0.69; other therapies HR: 0.85). Patients who underwent trans-arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) had a significative longer OS than patients who received sorafenib (24.7 versus 15.8months, p < 0.01; HR=0.64). After atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line, there was a statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p < 0.01; sorafenib HR: 1; lenvatinib HR: 0.50; cabozantinib HR: 1.29; other therapies HR: 0.54). Patients who received lenvatinib (17.0months) and those who underwent TACE (15.9months) had a significative longer OS than patients treated with sorafenib (14.2months; respectively, p = 0.01; HR=0.45, and p < 0.05; HR=0.46). CONCLUSION: Approximately half of patients receiving first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab access second-line treatment. Our data suggest that in patients progressed to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is lenvatinib, while in patients progressed to lenvatinib, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is immunotherapy.

Lenvatinib as Second-Line Treatment after Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Clinical Results Show Importance of Hepatic Reserve Function.

INTRODUCTION: Lack of an established methodology for post-progression systemic treatment following atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) administration is an important clinical issue. The present study aimed to elucidate the potential of lenvatinib as a second-line treatment option after Atez/Bev failure. METHODS: From 2020 to 2022, 101 patients who received lenvatinib as second-line treatment were enrolled (median 72 years, males 77, Child-Pugh A 82, BCLC-A:B:C:D = 1:35:61:4), while 29 treated with another molecular targeting agent (MTA) during the period as second-line treatment were enrolled as controls. The therapeutic efficacy of lenvatinib given as second-line treatment was retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Median progression-free survival/median overall survival for all patients was 4.4/15.7 months and for those with Child-Pugh A was 4.7 months/not-reached. When prognosis was compared with patients who received another MTA, there was no significant difference for PFS (3.5 months, p = 0.557) or OS (13.6 months, p = 0.992), and also no significant differences regarding clinical background factors. mRECIST findings showed that objective response and disease control rates in patients treated with lenvatinib were 23.9% and 70.4%, respectively (CR:PR:SD:PD = 3:14:33:21), while those shown by RECIST, ver. 1.1, were 15.4% and 66.2%, respectively (CR:PR:SD:PD = 1:10:36:24). Adverse events (any grade ≥10%) were appetite loss (26.7%) (grade 1:2:3 = 2:15:10), general fatigue (21.8%) (grade 1:2:3 = 3:13:6), protein in urine (16.8%) (grade 1:2:3 = 0:4:13), and hypertension (13.9%) (grade 1:2:3 = 1:8:5). CONCLUSION: Although lenvatinib treatment might not provide a pseudo-combination immunotherapy effect following Atez/Bev failure, lenvatinib when used as second-line treatment after Atez/Bev failure might be expected to be comparable as compared to its use as first-line treatment.