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.

ALBI score predicts morphological changes in esophageal varices following direct-acting antiviral-induced sustained virological response in patients with liver cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to clarify the morphological changes in esophageal varices after achieving sustained virological response (SVR) with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: A total of 243 patients underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy before DAA treatment and after achieving SVR. Morphological changes in esophageal varices were investigated using esophagogastroduodenoscopy. RESULTS: This study comprised 125 males and 118 females with a median age of 68 years. Esophageal varices at baseline were classified into no varix in 155 (63.8%), F1 in 59 (24.3%), F2 in 25 (10.3%) and F3 in 4 (1.6%) patients. The improvement, unchanged, and aggravation rates of esophageal varices after SVR were 11.9%, 73.3%, and 14.8%, respectively. High ALBI score at SVR12 was an independent factor associated with post-SVR esophageal varices aggravation (p = 0.045). Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis revealed a cut-off value of - 2.33 for ALBI score at SVR12 in predicting post-SVR esophageal varices aggravation. Of the 155 patients without esophageal varices at baseline, 17 developed de novo post-SVR esophageal varices. High ALBI score at SVR12 was a significant independent factor associated with de novo post-SVR esophageal varices (p = 0.046). ROC curve analysis revealed a cut-off value of - 2.65 for ALBI score at SVR12 in predicting de novo post-SVR esophageal varices. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cirrhosis can experience esophageal varices aggravation or de novo esophageal varices, despite achieving SVR. In particular, patients with high ALBI score at SVR12 have a high likelihood of developing post-SVR esophageal varices aggravation or de novo post-SVR esophageal varices.

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.

Kinetics of the hepatitis B core-related antigen and treatment responses in chronic hepatitis B patients treated with tenofovir alafenamide.

AIM: An association between hepatitis B core-related antigen (HBcrAg) kinetics and hepatocarcinogenesis during nucleoside (t)id analog (NA) treatment has recently been reported. HBcrAg kinetics and factors associated with HBcrAg response during tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) administration remain unclear. In this multicenter retrospective study, we aimed to clarify the efficacy and safety of TAF in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B, focusing on the reduction in HBcrAg levels. METHODS: Patients were treated with TAF monotherapy for 96 weeks, and the kinetics of HBcrAg during treatment and the factors associated with HBcrAg response (defined as a change in HBcrAg of -1 log IU/mL from baseline) were evaluated. RESULTS: The study population comprised 241 patients, 36.9% of whom were HBeAg-positive. The median baseline HBcrAg level was 4.7 log IU/mL. The median change in HBcrAg from baseline was -1.1 log IU/mL at 96 weeks after treatment. The HBcrAg response rate at 96 weeks was 56.6% (43/76). Multivariate analysis revealed high alanine transaminase level as an independent baseline factor associated with HBcrAg response at 96 weeks of treatment (p = 4.53 × 10-6). No correlation was found between the HBcrAg and hepatitis B surface antigen kinetics in patients treated with TAF monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In TAF monotherapy for patients with chronic hepatitis B, HBcrAg levels were significantly decreased and baseline alanine transaminase level is an important factor associated with HBcrAg reduction. As no correlation was found between HBcrAg and reduced hepatitis B surface antigen levels in this study, HBcrAg kinetics in addition to hepatitis B surface antigen may need to be monitored during TAF treatment.

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.

Mortality in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with tenofovir or entecavir: A multinational study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The benefits of entecavir (ETV) versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in reducing the development of chronic hepatitis B (CHB)-related hepatocellular carcinoma remain controversial. Whether mortality rates differ between patients with CHB treated with ETV and those treated with TDF is unclear. METHODS: A total of 2542 patients with CHB treated with either ETV or TDF were recruited from a multinational cohort. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed to balance the differences in baseline characteristics between the two patient groups. We aimed to compare the all-cause, liver-related, and non-liver-related mortality between patients receiving ETV and those receiving TDF. RESULTS: The annual incidence of all-cause mortality in the entire cohort was 1.0/100 person-years (follow-up, 15 757.5 person-years). Patients who received TDF were younger and had a higher body mass index, platelet count, hepatitis B virus deoxyribonucleic acid levels, and proportion of hepatitis B e-antigen seropositivity than those who received ETV. The factors associated with all-cause mortality were fibrosis-4 index > 6.5 (hazard ratio [HR]/confidence interval [CI]: 3.13/2.15-4.54, P < 0.001), age per year increase (HR/CI: 1.05/1.04-1.07, P < 0.001), alanine aminotransferase level per U/L increase (HR/CI: 0.997/0.996-0.999, P = 0.003), and γ-glutamyl transferase level per U/L increase (HR/CI: 1.002/1.001-1.003, P < 0.001). No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the ETV and TDF groups (log-rank test, P = 0.69). After propensity score matching, no significant differences in all-cause, liver-related, or non-liver-related mortality were observed between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes of all-cause mortality and liver-related and non-liver-related mortality did not differ between patients treated with ETV and those receiving TDF.

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.

Comparison of six hepatocellular carcinoma prediction models in Japanese patients after sustained virologic response undergoing rigorous surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: While several predictive models for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been proposed, including those for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection who have achieved sustained virologic response (SVR), the best model may differ between regions. We compared the ability of six reported models to stratify the risk of post-SVR HCC in Japan, where rigorous surveillance and early detection of HCC is common. METHODS: A total of 6048 patients with no history of HCC who achieved SVR by oral direct-acting antiviral drugs were enrolled in this nationwide study. Patients continued HCC surveillance every 6 months after SVR. The incidence of post-SVR HCC was compared between risk groups using the aMAP score, FIB-4 index, Tahata model, GAF4 criteria, GES score, and ADRES score. RESULTS: During the observation period with a median duration of 4.0 years after SVR, post-SVR HCC developed in 332 patients (5.5%). All six models performed significantly at stratifying the incidence of HCC. However, Harrell's C-index was below 0.8 for all models (range, 0.660-0.748), indicating insufficient stratification ability. CONCLUSION: Although all six proposed models demonstrated a good ability to predict the development of post-SVR HCC, their ability to stratify the risk of post-SVRHCC was unsatisfactory. Further studies are necessary to identify the best model for assessing the risk of post-SVR HCC in regions where early detection of HCC is common.

Regional Differences in Clinical Presentation and Prognosis of Patients With Post-Sustained Virologic Response Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Widespread use of direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus infection has been paralleled with increased numbers of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after achieving sustained virologic response (post-SVR HCC) worldwide. Few data compare regional differences in the presentation and prognosis of patients with post-SVR HCC. METHODS: We identified patients with advanced fibrosis (F3/F4) who developed incident post-SVR HCC between March 2015 and October 2021 from 30 sites in Europe, North America, South America, the Middle East, South Asia, East Asia, and Southeast Asia. We compared patient demographics, liver dysfunction, and tumor burden by region. We compared overall survival by region using Kaplan-Meier analysis and identified factors associated with survival using multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 8796 patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis who achieved SVR, 583 (6.6%) developed incident HCC. There was marked regional variation in the proportion of patients detected by surveillance (range: 59.5%-100%), median maximum tumor diameter (range, 1.8-5.0 cm), and the proportion with multinodular HCC (range, 15.4%-60.8%). The prognosis of patients highly varied by region (hazard ratio range, 1.82-9.92), with the highest survival rates in East Asia, North America, and South America, and the lowest survival rates in the Middle East and South Asia. After adjusting for geographic region, HCC surveillance was associated with early stage detection (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0/A, 71.0% vs 21.3%; P < .0001) and lower mortality rates (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.18-0.46). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical characteristics, including early stage detection, and prognosis of post-SVR HCC differed significantly across geographic regions. Surveillance utilization appears to be a high-yield intervention target to improve prognosis among patients with post-SVR HCC globally.

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.

Treatment options for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma ≤5 cm: surgery vs. ablation: a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic efficacy of ablation and surgery in solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) measuring ≤5 cm with a large HCC cohort database. METHODS: The study included consecutive 2,067 patients with solitary HCC who were treated with either ablation (n=1,248) or surgery (n=819). Th e patients were divided into three groups based on the tumor size and compared the outcomes of the two therapies using propensity score matching. RESULTS: No significant difference in recurrence-free survival (RFS) or overall survival (OS) was found between surgery and ablation groups for tumors measuring ≤2 cm or >2 cm but ≤3 cm. For tumors measuring >3 cm but ≤5 cm, RFS was significantly better with surgery than with ablation (3.6 and 2.0 years, respectively, P=0.0297). However, no significant difference in OS was found between surgery and ablation in this group (6.7 and 6.0 years, respectively, P=0.668). CONCLUSION: The study suggests that surgery and ablation can be equally used as a treatment for solitary HCC no more than 3 cm in diameter. For HCCs measuring 3-5 cm, the OS was not different between therapies; thus, ablation and less invasive therapy can be considered a treatment option; however, special caution should be taken to prevent recurrence.

Pretreatment gamma-glutamyl transferase predicts mortality in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with nucleotide/nucleoside analogs.

Elevated serum gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) levels are associated with chronic hepatitis B (CHB)-related hepatocellular carcinoma. However, their role in predicting mortality in patients with CHB treated with nucleotide/nucleoside analogs (NAs) remains elusive. Altogether, 2843 patients with CHB treated with NAs were recruited from a multinational cohort. Serum GGT levels before and 6 months (Month-6) after initiating NAs were measured to explore their association with all-cause, liver-related, and non-liver-related mortality. The annual incidence of all-cause mortality was 0.9/100 person-years over a follow-up period of 17,436.3 person-years. Compared with patients who survived, those who died had a significantly higher pretreatment (89.3 vs. 67.4 U/L, p = 0.002) and Month-6-GGT levels (62.1 vs. 38.4 U/L, p < 0.001). The factors associated with all-cause mortality included cirrhosis (hazard ratio [HR]/95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.66/1.92-3.70, p < 0.001), pretreatment GGT levels (HR/CI: 1.004/1.003-1.006, p < 0.001), alanine aminotransferase level (HR/CI: 0.996/0.994-0.998, p = 0.001), and age (HR/CI: 1.06/1.04-1.07, p < 0.001). Regarding liver-related mortality, the independent factors included cirrhosis (HR/CI: 4.36/2.79-6.89, p < 0.001), pretreatment GGT levels (HR/CI: 1.006/1.004-1.008, p < 0.001), alanine aminotransferase level (HR/CI: 0.993/0.990-0.997, p = 0.001), age (HR/CI: 1.03/1.01-1.05, p < 0.001), and fatty liver disease (HR/CI: 0.30/0.15-0.59, p = 0.001). Pretreatment GGT levels were also independently predictive of non-liver-related mortality (HR/CI: 1.003/1.000-1.005, p = 0.03). The results remained consistent after excluding the patients with a history of alcohol use. A dose-dependent manner of <25, 25-75, and >75 percentile of pretreatment GGT levels was observed with respect to the all-cause mortality (trend p < 0.001). Pretreatment serum GGT levels predicted all-cause, liver-related, and non-liver-related mortality in patients with CHB treated with NAs.

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.

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.