ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Elevated microRNA-155 (miR-155) expression in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) promotes cisplatin resistance and negatively impacts treatment outcomes. However, miR-155 can also boost anti-tumor immunity by suppressing PD-L1 expression. Therapeutic targeting of miR-155 through its antagonist, anti-miR-155, has proven challenging due to its dual molecular effects. METHODS: We developed a multiscale mechanistic model, calibrated with in vivo data and then extrapolated to humans, to investigate the therapeutic effects of nanoparticle-delivered anti-miR-155 in NSCLC, alone or in combination with standard-of-care drugs. RESULTS: Model simulations and analyses of the clinical scenario revealed that monotherapy with anti-miR-155 at a dose of 2.5 mg/kg administered once every three weeks has substantial anti-cancer activity. It led to a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 6.7 months, which compared favorably to cisplatin and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Further, we explored the combinations of anti-miR-155 with standard-of-care drugs, and found strongly synergistic two- and three-drug combinations. A three-drug combination of anti-miR-155, cisplatin, and pembrolizumab resulted in a median PFS of 13.1 months, while a two-drug combination of anti-miR-155 and cisplatin resulted in a median PFS of 11.3 months, which emerged as a more practical option due to its simple design and cost-effectiveness. Our analyses also provided valuable insights into unfavorable dose ratios for drug combinations, highlighting the need for optimizing dose regimens to prevent antagonistic effects. CONCLUSIONS: This work bridges the gap between preclinical development and clinical translation of anti-miR-155 and unravels the potential of anti-miR-155 combination therapies in NSCLC.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , MicroRNAs , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/mortality , MicroRNAs/genetics , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Lung Neoplasms/mortality , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Standard of Care , Translational Research, BiomedicalABSTRACT
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), agents that stimulate T-cell function, have become the standard first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, they may also cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which are rare and have not been extensively reported. Here, we describe a case of severe febrile neutropenia and pancytopenia after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezo/bev) therapy and its treatment course. Case Description: The combination of atezo/bev was initiated as the first-line treatment for a man in his early 50s, who was diagnosed with unresectable HCC. The first treatment cycle was administered in the outpatient setting, and the patient developed a fever of 39.0 â 10 days after therapy initiation. He presented 5 days later with persistent fever as well as a headache, vomiting, chills, generalized pain, fatigue, mild abdominal discomfort, and a burning rash present on his neck and face. Complete blood counts showed severe neutropenia [absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of 90 cells/µL], leukopenia [white blood cell (WBC) count 500 cells/µL], thrombocytopenia [platelet count (PC) 18,000 cells/µL], and mild anemia (hemoglobin level 12.6 gm/dL). Imaging findings showed colitis on computed tomography (CT). Atezo/bev therapy was discontinued. Treatment plan constituted of cefepime and filgrastim, a recombinant form of the naturally occurring granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for febrile neutropenia, metronidazole for colitis, and intravenous methylprednisolone for immune-related toxicities. The patient fully recovered after 4 days of admission. Conclusions: In conclusion, we observed temporary severe febrile neutropenia and pancytopenia during systemic immunotherapy in a patient with unresectable HCC. Healthcare providers should consider hematological irAEs (hem-irAEs) in patients after the administration of ICIs.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Combination immunotherapy, exemplified by atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, has become the standard of care for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the lack of predictive biomarkers and limited understanding of response mechanisms remain a challenge. Methods: Using data from the IMbrave150plus cohort, we applied an immune signature score (ISS) predictor to stratify HCC patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or with sorafenib alone into potential high and low response groups. By applying multiple statistical approaches including a Bayesian covariate prediction algorithm, we refined the signature to 10 key genes (ISS10) for clinical use while maintaining similar predictive power to the full model. We further validated ISS10 in an independent HCC cohort treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Results: The study identified a significant association between the ISS and treatment response. Among patients classified as high responders, those treated with the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination exhibited improved overall and progression-free survival as well as better objective response rate compared to those treated with sorafenib. We also observed a significant correlation between ISS10 and response to nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment. Analysis of immune cell subpopulations revealed distinct characteristics associated with ISS subtypes. In particular, the ISS10 high subtype displayed a more favorable immune environment with higher proportions of anti-tumor macrophages and activated T-cells, potentially explaining its better response. Conclusions: Our study suggests that ISS and ISS10 are promising predictive biomarkers for enhanced therapeutic outcomes in HCC patients undergoing combination immunotherapy. These markers are crucial for refining patient stratification and personalized treatment approaches to advance the effectiveness of standard-of-care regimens.
ABSTRACT
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most prevalent liver tumor, is usually linked with chronic liver diseases, particularly cirrhosis. As per the 2020 statistics, this cancer ranks 6th in the list of most common cancers worldwide and is the third primary source of cancer-related deaths. Asia holds the record for the highest occurrence of HCC. HCC is found three times more frequently in men than in women. The primary risk factors for HCC include chronic viral infections, excessive alcohol intake, steatotic liver disease conditions, as well as genetic and family predispositions. Roughly 40-50% of patients are identified in the late stages of the disease. Recently, there have been significant advancements in the treatment methods for advanced HCC. The selection of treatment for HCC hinges on the stage of the disease and the patient's medical status. Factors such as pre-existing liver conditions, etiology, portal hypertension, and portal vein thrombosis need critical evaluation, monitoring, and appropriate treatment. Depending on the patient and the characteristics of the disease, liver resection, ablation, or transplantation may be deemed potentially curative. For inoperable lesions, arterially directed therapy might be an option, or systemic treatment might be deemed more suitable. In specific cases, the recommendation might extend to external beam radiation therapy. For all individuals, a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach should be adopted when considering HCC treatment options. The main treatment strategies for advanced HCC patients are typically combination treatments such as immunotherapy and anti-VEGFR inhibitor, or a combination of immunotherapy and immunotherapy where appropriate, as a first-line treatment. Furthermore, some TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors may be used as single agents in cases where patients are not fit for the combination therapies. As second-line treatments, some treatment agents have been reported and can be considered.
ABSTRACT
Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is widely recognized as the predominant type of primary liver malignancy. Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has emerged as a highly effective treatment option for unresectable HCC. Immunotherapies as neoadjuvant options are now being actively investigated in the transplant oncology era to enhance outcomes in patients with HCC. Here, we report our experience with patients with HCC who had received Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICPI) prior to curative OLT. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort that included patients with HCC who received ICPI prior to OLT at a single institution from January 2019 to August 2023. Graft rejection was assessed and reported along with the type of ICPI, malignancy treated, and the timing of ICPI in association with OLT. Results: During this cohort period, six patients with HCC underwent OLT after neoadjuvant ICPI. All patients were male with a median age of 61 (interquartile range: 59-64) years at OLT. Etiology associated with HCC was viral (N = 4) or Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, NASH (N = 2). Tumor focality was multifocal (N = 4) and unifocal (N = 2). Lymphovascular invasion was identified in four patients. No perineural invasion was identified in any of the patients. All patients received ICPI including atezolizumab/bevacizumab (N = 4), nivolumab/ipilimumab (N = 1), and nivolumab as monotherapy (N = 1). All patients received either single or combined liver-directed/locoregional therapy, including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), Yttrium-90 (Y90), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). The median washout period was 5 months. All patients responded to ICPI and achieved a safe and successful OLT. All patients received tacrolimus plus mycophenolate as immunosuppressant (IS) therapy post-OLT and one patient received prednisone as additional IS. No patient had clinical evidence of rejection. Conclusions: This cohort emphasizes the success of tumor downstaging by ICPI for OLT when employed as the neoadjuvant therapy strategy. In addition, this study illustrated the importance of timing for the administration of ICPI before OLT. Given the lack of conclusive evidence in this therapeutic area, we believe that our study lays the groundwork for prospective trials to further examine the impact of ICPI prior to OLT.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Traditional constraints specify that 700 cc of liver should be spared a hepatotoxic dose when delivering liver-directed radiotherapy to reduce the risk of inducing liver failure. We investigated the role of single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) to identify and preferentially avoid functional liver during liver-directed radiation treatment planning in patients with preserved liver function but limited functional liver volume after receiving prior hepatotoxic chemotherapy or surgical resection. METHODS: This phase I trial with a 3 + 3 design evaluated the safety of liver-directed radiotherapy using escalating functional liver radiation dose constraints in patients with liver metastases. Dose-limiting toxicities were assessed 6-8 weeks and 6 months after completing radiotherapy. RESULTS: All 12 patients had colorectal liver metastases and received prior hepatotoxic chemotherapy; 8 patients underwent prior liver resection. Median computed tomography anatomical nontumor liver volume was 1584 cc (range = 764-2699 cc). Median SPECT functional liver volume was 1117 cc (range = 570-1928 cc). Median nontarget computed tomography and SPECT liver volumes below the volumetric dose constraint were 997 cc (range = 544-1576 cc) and 684 cc (range = 429-1244 cc), respectively. The prescription dose was 67.5-75 Gy in 15 fractions or 75-100 Gy in 25 fractions. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed during follow-up. One-year in-field control was 57%. One-year overall survival was 73%. CONCLUSION: Liver-directed radiotherapy can be safely delivered to high doses when incorporating functional SPECT into the radiation treatment planning process, which may enable sparing of lower volumes of liver than traditionally accepted in patients with preserved liver function. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02626312.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Liver Neoplasms , Liver , Radiotherapy, Image-Guided , Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon , Humans , Male , Female , Liver Neoplasms/secondary , Liver Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Liver Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Middle Aged , Aged , Liver/diagnostic imaging , Liver/radiation effects , Radiotherapy, Image-Guided/methods , Colorectal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Organ Size , Radiotherapy Dosage , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods , AdultABSTRACT
Elevated microRNA-155 (miR-155) expression in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) promotes cisplatin resistance and negatively impacts treatment outcomes. However, miR-155 can also boost anti-tumor immunity by suppressing PD-L1 expression. We developed a multiscale mechanistic model, calibrated with in vivo data and then extrapolated to humans, to investigate the therapeutic effects of nanoparticle-delivered anti-miR-155 in NSCLC, alone or in combination with standard-of-care drugs. Model simulations and analyses of the clinical scenario revealed that monotherapy with anti-miR-155 at a dose of 2.5 mg/kg administered once every three weeks has substantial anti-cancer activity. It led to a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 6.7 months, which compared favorably to cisplatin and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Further, we explored the combinations of anti-miR-155 with standard-of-care drugs, and found strongly synergistic two- and three-drug combinations. A three-drug combination of anti-miR-155, cisplatin, and pembrolizumab resulted in a median PFS of 13.1 months, while a two-drug combination of anti-miR-155 and cisplatin resulted in a median PFS of 11.3 months, which emerged as a more practical option due to its simple design and cost-effectiveness. Our analyses also provided valuable insights into unfavorable dose ratios for drug combinations, highlighting the need for optimizing dose regimen to prevent antagonistic effects. Thus, this work bridges the gap between preclinical development and clinical translation of anti-miR-155 and unravels the potential of anti-miR-155 combination therapies in NSCLC.
ABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/pathology , Liver Neoplasms/drug therapy , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
Introduction: In this study, we explored the potential of plasma growth hormone (GH) as a prognostic biomarker in patients with advanced HCC treated with durvalumab plus tremelimumab (D+T). Methods: In this study, we included 16 patients with advanced HCC who received D+T at MD Anderson Cancer Center between 2022 and 2023 and had plasma GH measurements recorded before treatment. Plasma GH levels were measured from prospectively collected blood samples and were correlated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The cutoff for normal GH levels in women and men was defined as ≤3.7 µg/L and ≤0.9 µg/L, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier method was employed to compute the median OS and PFS, while the Log rank test was applied to compare the survival outcomes between the GH-high and GH-low groups. Results: Sixteen patients were included in this analysis, two female and fourteen male, with a median age of 65.5 years. At the time of the analysis, the 6-month OS rate was 100% among GH-low patients (6 patients) and 30% among GH-high patients (10 patients). OS was significantly longer in GH-low patients (not evaluable) compared to GH-high patients (3.94 months) (p = 0.030). PFS was also significantly longer in GH-low patients (not evaluable) compared to the GH-high patients (1.87 months) (p = 0.036). Conclusion: Plasma GH is a prognostic biomarker in patients with advanced HCC treated with D+T. Given the relatively small patient cohort size, this finding should be further validated in larger randomized clinical trials in advanced HCC patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The aim of the COSMIC-312 trial was to evaluate cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib in patients with previously untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. In the initial analysis, cabozantinib plus atezolizumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus sorafenib. Here, we report the pre-planned final overall survival analysis and updated safety and efficacy results following longer follow-up. METHODS: COSMIC-312 was an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study done across 178 centres in 32 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma were eligible. Patients must have had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1), and adequate marrow and organ function, including Child-Pugh class A liver function; those with fibrolamellar carcinoma, sarcomatoid hepatocellular carcinoma, or combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma were ineligible. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1) using a web-based interactive response system to a combination of oral cabozantinib 40 mg once daily plus intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks, oral sorafenib 400 mg twice daily, or oral single-agent cabozantinib 60 mg once daily. Randomisation was stratified by disease aetiology, geographical region, and presence of extrahepatic disease or macrovascular invasion. Dual primary endpoints were for cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib: progression-free survival per RECIST 1.1, as assessed by a blinded independent radiology committee, in the first 372 randomly assigned patients (previously reported) and overall survival in all patients randomly assigned to cabozantinib plus atezolizumab or sorafenib. The secondary endpoint was progression-free survival in all patients randomly assigned to cabozantinib versus sorafenib. Outcomes in all randomly assigned patients, including final overall survival, are presented. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03755791. FINDINGS: Between Dec 7, 2018, and Aug 27, 2020, 432 patients were randomly assigned to combination treatment, 217 to sorafenib, and 188 to single-agent cabozantinib, and included in all efficacy analyses. 704 (84%) patients were male and 133 (16%) were female. 824 of these patients received at least one dose of study treatment and were included in the safety population. Median follow-up was 22·1 months (IQR 19·3-24·8). Median overall survival was 16·5 months (96% CI 14·5-18·7) for the combination treatment group and 15·5 months (12·2-20·0) for the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·98 [0·78-1·24]; stratified log-rank p=0·87). Median progression-free survival was 6·9 months (99% CI 5·7-8·2) for the combination treatment group, 4·3 months (2·9-6·1) for the sorafenib group, and 5·8 months (99% CI 5·4-8·2) for the single-agent cabozantinib group (HR 0·74 [0·56-0·97] for combination treatment vs sorafenib; HR 0·78 [99% CI 0·56-1·09], p=0·05, for single-agent cabozantinib vs sorafenib). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 281 (66%) of 429 patients in the combination treatment group, 100 (48%) of 207 patients in the sorafenib group, and 108 (57%) of 188 patients in the single-agent cabozantinib group; the most common were hypertension (37 [9%] vs 17 [8%] vs 23 [12%]), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (36 [8%] vs 18 [9%] vs 16 [9%]), aspartate aminotransferase increased (42 [10%] vs eight [4%] vs 17 [9%]), and alanine aminotransferase increased (40 [9%] vs six [3%] vs 13 [7%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 223 (52%) patients in the combination treatment group, 84 (41%) patients in the sorafenib group, and 87 (46%) patients in the single agent cabozantinib group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in six (1%) patients in the combination treatment group (encephalopathy, hepatic failure, drug-induced liver injury, oesophageal varices haemorrhage, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and tumour lysis syndrome), one (<1%) in the sorafenib group (general physical health deterioration), and four (2%) in the single-agent cabozantinib group (asthenia, gastrointestinal haemorrhage, sepsis, and gastric perforation). INTERPRETATION: First-line cabozantinib plus atezolizumab did not improve overall survival versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The progression-free survival benefit of the combination versus sorafenib was maintained, with no new safety signals. FUNDING: Exelixis and Ipsen.
Subject(s)
Anilides , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Pyridines , Humans , Male , Female , Sorafenib/adverse effects , Liver Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
Thymoquinone TQ, an active ingredient of Nigella Sativa, has been shown to inhibit COVID-19 symptoms in clinical trials. Thymoquinone Formulation (TQF or NP-101) is developed as a novel enteric-coated medication derivative from Nigella Sativa. TQF consists of TQ with a favorable concentration and fatty acids, including palmitic, oleic, and linoleic acids. In this study, we aimed to investigate the roles of individual ingredients of TQF on infection of SARS-CoV-2 variants in-vitro, by utilizing Murine Leukemia Virus (MLV) based pseudovirus particles. We demonstrated that NP-101, TQ, and other individual ingredients, including oleic, linoleic, and palmitic acids inhibited SARS-CoV-2 infection in the MLV-based pseudovirus model. A large, randomized phase 2 study of NP-101 is planned in outpatient COVID-19 patients.
ABSTRACT
Navitoclax (ABT-263) is an oral BCL2 homology-3 mimetic that binds with high affinity to pro-survival BCL2 proteins, resulting in apoptosis. Sorafenib, an oral multi kinase inhibitor also promotes apoptosis and inhibits tumor angiogenesis. The efficacy of either agent alone is limited; however, preclinical studies demonstrate synergy with the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib. In this phase 1 study, we evaluated the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib in a dose escalation cohort of patients with refractory solid tumors, with an expansion cohort in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined using the continual reassessment method. Navitoclax and sorafenib were administered continuously on days 1 through 21 of 21-day cycles. Ten patients were enrolled in the dose escalation cohort and 15 HCC patients were enrolled in the expansion cohort. Two dose levels were tested, and the MTD was navitoclax 150 mg daily plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Among all patients, the most common grade 3 toxicity was thrombocytopenia (5 patients, 20%): there were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1-36 cycles) and all patients were off study treatment at data cut off. Six patients in the expansion cohort had stable disease, and there were no partial or complete responses. Drug-drug interaction between navitoclax and sorafenib was not observed. The combination of navitoclax and sorafenib did not increase induction of apoptosis compared with navitoclax alone. Navitoclax plus sorafenib is tolerable but showed limited efficacy in the HCC expansion cohort. These findings do not support further development of this combination for the treatment of advanced HCC. This phase I trial was conducted under ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT01364051.
Subject(s)
Aniline Compounds , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Sorafenib , Humans , Aniline Compounds/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/drug therapy , Liver Neoplasms/drug therapy , Sorafenib/therapeutic use , Sulfonamides/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Background & Aims: Sex-related differences in the immune pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), particularly related to oestrogen-dependent secretion of pro-tumourigenic cytokines, are well-known. Whether sex influences the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy is not known. Methods: We performed a restricted maximum likelihood random effects meta-analysis of five phase III trials that evaluated immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced HCC and reported overall survival (OS) hazard ratios (HRs) stratified by sex to evaluate sex-related differences in OS. In a real-world cohort of 840 patients with HCC from 22 centres included between 2018 and 2023, we directly compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab (A+B) between sexes. Radiological response was reported according to RECIST v1.1. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed for OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: In the meta-analysis, immunotherapy was associated with a significant OS benefit only in male (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86) but not in female (pooled HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.70-1.03) patients with HCC. When directly comparing model estimates, no differences in the treatment effect between sexes were observed. Among 840 patients, 677 (81%) were male (mean age 66 ± 11 years), and 163 (19%) were female (mean age 67 ± 12 years). Type and severity of adverse events were similar between the two groups. OS and PFS were comparable between males and females upon uni- and multivariable analyses (aHR for OS and PFS: 0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.04; 1.02, 95% CI 0.80-1.30, respectively). Objective response rates (24%/22%) and disease control rates (59%/59%) were also similar between sexes. Conclusion: Female phase III trial participants experienced smaller OS benefit following ICI therapy for advanced HCC, while outcomes following A+B treatment were comparable between sexes in a large real-world database. Based on the ambiguous sex-related differences in survival observed here, further investigation of sex-specific clinical and biologic determinants of responsiveness and survival following ICIs are warranted. Impact and implications: While immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as standard of care for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma, there are conflicting reports on whether the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy differs between females and males. Our study suggests ambiguous sex-related differences in outcomes from immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma. Further investigation of sex-specific clustering in clinicopathologic and immunologic determinants of responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy should be prioritised. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023429625.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Accurate prognostic stratification of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is vital for clinical trial enrollment and treatment allocation. Multiple scoring systems have been created to predict patient survival, but no standardized scoring systems account for radiologic tumor features. We sought to create a generalizable scoring system for HCC which incorporates standardized radiologic tumor features and more accurately predicts overall survival (OS) than established systems. METHODS: Clinicopathologic parameters were collected from a prospectively collected cohort of patients with HCC treated at a single institution. Imaging studies were evaluated for tumor characteristics. Patients were randomly divided into a training set for identification of covariates that impacted OS and a validation set. Cox models were used to determine the association of various factors with OS and a scoring system was created. RESULTS: We identified 383 patients with HCC with imaging and survival outcomes, nâ =â 255 in the training set and 128 in the validation cohort. Factors associated with OS on multivariate analysis included: tumor margin appearance on CT or MRI (hazard ratio [HR] 1.37, 95% CI, 1.01-1.88) with infiltrative margins portending worse outcomes than encapsulated margins, massive tumor morphology (HR 1.64, 95% CI, 1.06-2.54); >2 lesions (HR 2.06, 95% CI, 1.46-2.88), Child-Turcotte-Pugh class C (HR 3.7, 95% CI, 2.23-6.16), and portal vein thrombus (HR 2.41, 95% CI, 1.71-3.39). A new scoring system was developed and more predictive of OS than other well-established systems. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of standardized imaging characteristics to established clinical and lab predictors of outcome resulted in an improved predictive scoring system for patients with HCC.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/pathology , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/mortality , Liver Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Liver Neoplasms/mortality , Male , Female , Prognosis , Middle Aged , Aged , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Adult , Proportional Hazards Models , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A well-recognized class effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) ranging from low grade toxicities to life-threatening end organ damage requiring permanent discontinuation of ICI. Deaths are reported in < 5% of patients treated with ICI. There are, however, no reliable markers to predict the onset and severity of IrAEs. We tested the association between neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) at baseline with development of clinically significant IrAEs (grade ≥ 2) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with ICI. AIM: To test the association between NLR and PLR at baseline with development of clinically significant IrAEs (grade ≥ 2) in HCC patients treated with ICI. METHODS: Data was extracted from an international database from a consortium of 11 tertiary-care referral centers. NLR = absolute neutrophil count/absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) and PLR = platelet count/ALC. Cutoff of 5 was used for NLR and 300 for PLR based on literature. We also tested the association between antibiotic and steroid exposure to IrAEs. RESULTS: Data was collected from 361 patients treated between 2016-2020 across the United States (67%), Asia (14%) and Europe (19%). Most patients received Nivolumab (n = 255, 71%). One hundred sixty-seven (46%) patients developed at least one IrAE, highest grade 1 in 80 (48%), grade ≥ 2 in 87 (52%) patients. In a univariable regression model PLR > 300 was significantly associated with a lower incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.40; P = 0.044). Similarly, a trend was observed between NLR > 5 and lower incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.58; P = 0.097). Multivariate analyses confirmed PLR > 300 as an independent predictive marker of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.26; P = 0.011), in addition to treatment with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1)/cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein-4 (OR = 2.57; P = 0.037) and PD-1/tyrosine kinase inhibitor (OR = 3.39; P = 0.01) combinations. Antibiotic use was not associated with IrAE incidence (OR = 1.02; P = 0.954). Patients treated with steroids had a > 2-fold higher incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 2.74; P < 0.001), although 74% were prescribed steroids for the treatment of IrAEs. CONCLUSION: Given that high baseline NLR and PLR are associated with a decreased incidence of IrAEs, lower baseline NLR and PLR may be predictive biomarkers for the appearance of IrAEs in HCC treated with ICI. This finding is in keeping with several studies in solid tumors that have shown that baseline NLR and PLR appear predictive of IrAEs.
ABSTRACT
Transplant oncology is an emerging concept of cancer treatment with a promising prospective outcome. The applications of oncology, transplant medicine, and surgery are the core of transplant oncology to improve patients' survival and quality of life. The main concept of transplant oncology is to radically cure cancer by removing the diseased organ and replacing it with a healthy one, aiming to improve the survival outcomes and quality of life of cancer patients. Subsequently, it seeks to expand the treatment options and research for hepatobiliary malignancies, which have seen significantly improved survival outcomes after the implementation of liver transplantation (LT). In the case of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the transplant setting, where the liver is the most common site of metastasis of patients who are considered to have unresectable disease, initial studies have shown improved survival for LT treatment compared to palliative therapy interventions. The indications of LT for hepatobiliary malignancies have been slowly expanded over the years beyond Milan criteria in a stepwise manner. However, the outcome improvements and overall patient survival are limited to the specifics of the setting and systematic intervention options. This review aims to illustrate the representative concepts and history of transplant oncology as an emerging discipline for the management of hepatobiliary malignancies, in addition to other emerging concepts, such as the uses of immunotherapy in a peri-transplant setting as well as the use of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for surveillance post-transplantation.
ABSTRACT
The microbiome is pivotal in maintaining health and influencing disease by modulating essential inflammatory and immune responses. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), ranking as the third most common cause of cancer-related fatalities globally, is influenced by the gut microbiome through bidirectional interactions between the gut and liver, as evidenced in both mouse models and human studies. Consequently, biomarkers based on gut microbiota represent promising non-invasive tools for the early detection of HCC. There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that the composition of the gut microbiota may play a role in the efficacy of immunotherapy in different types of cancer; thus, it could be used as a predictive biomarker. In this review, we will dissect the gut microbiome's role as a potential predictive and diagnostic marker in HCC and evaluate the latest progress in leveraging the gut microbiome as a novel therapeutic avenue for HCC patients, with a special emphasis on immunotherapy.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after curative-intent resection or ablation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In the global, open-label, phase 3 IMbrave050 study, adult patients with high-risk surgically resected or ablated hepatocellular carcinoma were recruited from 134 hospitals and medical centres in 26 countries in four WHO regions (European region, region of the Americas, South-East Asia region, and Western Pacific region). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio via an interactive voice-web response system using permuted blocks, using a block size of 4, to receive intravenous 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab every 3 weeks for 17 cycles (12 months) or to active surveillance. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by independent review facility assessment in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04102098. FINDINGS: The intention-to-treat population included 668 patients randomly assigned between Dec 31, 2019, and Nov 25, 2021, to either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=334) or to active surveillance (n=334). At the prespecified interim analysis (Oct 21, 2022), median duration of follow-up was 17·4 months (IQR 13·9-22·1). Adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with significantly improved recurrence-free survival (median, not evaluable [NE]; [95% CI 22·1-NE]) compared with active surveillance (median, NE [21·4-NE]; hazard ratio, 0·72 [adjusted 95% CI 0·53-0·98]; p=0·012). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 136 (41%) of 332 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 44 (13%) of 330 patients in the active surveillance group. Grade 5 adverse events occurred in six patients (2%, two of which were treatment related) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group, and one patient (<1%) in the active surveillance group. Both atezolizumab and bevacizumab were discontinued because of adverse events in 29 patients (9%) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. INTERPRETATION: Among patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following curative-intent resection or ablation, recurrence-free survival was improved in those who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance. To our knowledge, IMbrave050 is the first phase 3 study of adjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma to report positive results. However, longer follow-up for both recurrence-free and overall survival is needed to assess the benefit-risk profile more fully. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.