Atezolizumab/bevacizumab or lenvatinib in hepatocellular carcinoma: Multicenter real-world study with focus on bleeding and thromboembolic events.

Background & Aims: Atezolizumab/bevacizumab (atezo/bev) and lenvatinib have demonstrated efficacy as first-line therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibition with these therapies may be associated with the risk of bleeding and thromboembolic events. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety with focus on the bleeding and thromboembolic events of atezo/bev vs. lenvatinib in a large, multicenter real-world population. Methods: This study is based on HCC cohorts from seven centers in Germany and Austria. Incidences of bleeding or thromboembolic events and efficacy outcomes were assessed and compared. Results: In total, 464 patients treated with atezo/bev (n = 325) or lenvatinib (n = 139) were analyzed. Both groups were balanced with respect to demographics, presence of liver cirrhosis, and variceal status. Duration of therapy did not differ between groups. Within 3 months of therapy, bleeding episodes were described in 57 (18%) patients receiving atezo/bev compared with 15 (11%) patients receiving lenvatinib (p = 0.07). Variceal hemorrhage occurred in 11 (3%) patients treated with atezo/bev compared with 4 (3%) patients treated with lenvatinib (p = 0.99). Thromboembolic events were reported in 19 (6%) of patients in the atezo/bev cohort compared with 5 (4%) patients in the lenvatinib cohort (p = 0.37). In addition, incidence of overall bleeding, variceal hemorrhage, and thromboembolic events did not differ significantly in patients who received either atezo/bev or lenvantinib for 6 months. Conclusions: Safety considerations related to bleeding and thromboembolic events may not be helpful in guiding clinical decision-making when choosing between atezo/bev and lenvatinib. Impact and implications: The inhibition of VEGF by current first-line therapies for HCC, such as atezolizumab/bevacizumab or lenvatinib, may be associated with the risk of bleeding and thromboembolic events. Studies comparing the incidence of these side effects between atezolizumab/bevacizumab and lenvatinib, which are preferred treatments over sorafenib for HCC, are needed. Differences in this side effect profile may influence the choice of first-line therapy by treating physicians. Because no significant differences were observed regarding bleeding or thromboembolic events between both therapies in the present study, we conclude that safety considerations related to these events may not be helpful in guiding clinical decision-making when choosing between atezolizumab/bevacizumab and lenvatinib.

Predictive value of platelet-to-lymphocyte and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in HCC treated with sorafenib and radioembolization.

Background & Aims: Herein we used data derived from the SORAMIC trial to explore the predictive value of systemic inflammatory markers (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR] and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio [PLR]) in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib monotherapy or the combination of selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT)/sorafenib. Methods: Patients randomized to sorafenib monotherapy or SIRT/sorafenib within the per-protocol population of the SORAMIC trial were evaluated in this exploratory post hoc analysis. The median baseline values of NLR and PLR were used as cut-off values to describe subgroups. Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests were used to evaluate median survival in the sorafenib and SIRT/sorafenib arms in each subgroup. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was applied to eliminate the effect of confounding factors. Results: A total of 275 patients with a median overall survival of 12.4 months were included in this analysis. The median NLR value of the cohort was 2.77 and the median PLR was 26.5. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the sorafenib and SIRT/sorafenib arms in patients with low NLR (p = 0.72) and PLR (p = 0.35) values. In patients with high NLR values, there was no statistically significant difference in median overall survival between SIRT/sorafenib and sorafenib cohorts (12.1 vs. 9.2 months, p = 0.21). In patients with high PLR values, overall survival in the SIRT/sorafenib arm was significantly longer than in the sorafenib arm (15.9 vs. 11.0 months, p = 0.029). This significant difference was preserved in the multivariable analysis (SIRT/sorafenib arm: hazard ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.96, p = 0.03) incorporating age, Child-Pugh grade, and alpha-fetoprotein levels. Conclusions: PLR is a potential predictive factor of benefit from additional SIRT in patients with HCC receiving sorafenib therapy. The potential predictive value of PLR should be further evaluated in future trials. Impact and implications: Systemic therapies are the mainstay of treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma at advanced stages. However, not all patients respond well to these treatments. In our analysis, using blood test parameters showing systemic inflammation status, we were able to identify patients who would benefit more from combined treatment with a locoregional treatment of radioembolization (or selective internal radiation therapy).

Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma: Biology, Diagnosis, and Management.

Background: Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-iCCA) is a rare type of primary liver cancer displaying characteristics of both hepatocytic and cholangiocytic differentiation. Summary: Because of its aggressive nature, patients with cHCC-iCCA exhibit a poorer prognosis than those with HCC. Surgical resection and liver transplantation may be considered curative treatment approaches; however, only a minority of patients are eligible at the time of diagnosis, and postoperative recurrence rates are high. For cases that are not eligible for surgery, locoregional and systemic therapy are often administered based on treatment protocols applied for HCC or iCCA. Owing to the rarity of this cancer, there are still no established standard treatment protocols; therefore, the choice of therapy is often personalized and guided by the suspected predominant component. Further, the genomic and molecular heterogeneity of cHCC-iCCA can severely compromise the efficacy of the available therapies. Key Messages: In the present review, we summarize the latest advances in cHCC-iCCA and attempt to clarify its terminology and molecular biology. We provide an overview of the etiology of cHCC-iCCA and present new insights into the molecular pathology of this disease that could contribute to further studies aiming to improve the patient outcomes through new systemic therapies.

CT-guided high dose rate brachytherapy can induce multiple systemic proteins of proliferation and angiogenesis predicting outcome in HCC.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To determine the potential prognostic value of proliferation and angiogenesis plasma proteins following CT-guided high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this prospective study, HDR-BT (1 × 15 Gy) was administered to 24 HCC patients. Plasma was obtained and analyzed using an Olink proteomics Target-96 immuno-oncology-panel that included multiple markers of angiogenesis and proliferation. Fold-change (FC) ratios were calculated by comparing baseline and 48 h post HDR-BT paired samples. Patients were classified as responders (n = 12) if they had no local progression within 6 months or systemic progression within 2 years. Non-responders (n = 12) had recurrence within 6 months and/or tumor progression or extrahepatic disease within 2 years. RESULTS: Proliferation marker EGF was significantly elevated in non-responders compared to responders (p = 0.0410) while FGF-2, HGF, and PlGF showed no significant differences. Angiogenesis markers Angiopoietin-1 and PDGF-B were likewise significantly elevated in non-responders compared to responders (p = 0.0171, p = 0.0462, respectively) while Angiopoietin-2, VEGF-A, and VEGFR-2 did not differ significantly. Kaplan-Meier analyses demonstrated significantly shorter time to systemic progression in patients with increased EGF and Angiopoietin-1 (p = 0.0185, both), but not in patients with one of the remaining proteins elevated (all p > 0.1). Pooled analysis for these 9 proteins showed significantly shorter time to systemic progression for FC ≥1.3 and ≥1.5 for at least 3 proteins elevated (p = 0.0415, p = 0.0193, respectively). CONCLUSION: Increased plasma levels of EGF and Angiopoietin-1 after HDR-BT for HCC are associated with poor response and may therefore function as predictive biomarkers of outcome.

Nonradiology Health-Care Professionals Significantly Benefit From AI Assistance in Emergency-Related Chest Radiography Interpretation.

BACKGROUND: Chest radiographs (CXRs) are still of crucial importance in primary diagnostics, but their interpretation poses difficulties at times. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can a convolutional neural network-based artificial intelligence (AI) system that interprets CXRs add value in an emergency unit setting? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 563 CXRs acquired in the emergency unit of a major university hospital were retrospectively assessed twice by three board-certified radiologists, three radiology residents, and three emergency unit-experienced nonradiology residents (NRRs). They used a two-step reading process: (1) without AI support (woAI); and (2) with AI support (wAI) providing additional images with AI overlays. Suspicion of four suspected pathologies (pleural effusion, pneumothorax, consolidations suspicious for pneumonia, and nodules) was reported on a five-point confidence scale. Confidence scores of the board-certified radiologists were converted into four binary reference standards (RFS I-IV) of different sensitivities. Performance by radiology residents and NRRs woAI/wAI were statistically compared by using receiver-operating characteristics (ROCs), Youden statistics, and operating point metrics derived from fitted ROC curves. RESULTS: NRRs could significantly improve performance, sensitivity, and accuracy wAI in all four pathologies tested. In the most sensitive RFS IV, NRR consensus improved the area under the ROC curve (mean, 95% CI) in the detection of the time-critical pathology pneumothorax from 0.846 (0.785-0.907) woAI to 0.974 (0.947-1.000) wAI (P < .001), which represented a gain of 30% in sensitivity and 2% in accuracy (while maintaining an optimized specificity). The most pronounced effect was observed in nodule detection, with NRR wAI improving sensitivity by 53% and accuracy by 7% (area under the ROC curve woAI, 0.723 [0.661-0.785]; wAI, 0.890 [0.848-0.931]; P < .001). The RR consensus wAI showed smaller, mostly nonsignificant gains in performance, sensitivity, and accuracy. INTERPRETATION: In an emergency unit setting without 24/7 radiology coverage, the presented AI solution features an excellent clinical support tool to nonradiologists, similar to a second reader, and allows for a more accurate primary diagnosis and thus earlier therapy initiation.

Concomitant Irradiation to Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients: A Systematic Retrospective, Single-Center Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Immunotherapy has been established as the standard treatment option for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). Despite the increased efficacy, disease progression occurs in a relevant proportion of patients even after an objective response. Combination concepts with locoregional therapy are currently under investigation for hepatic disease but are also in discussion for the control of distant metastasis. Radiotherapy is a highly effective treatment modality for local tumor control. It is also thought to increase the efficacy of checkpoint inhibition and sensitize distant lesions to the effects of immunotherapy, but may potentially increase adverse effects. In our center, few patients with aHCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) received concomitant radiotherapy for symptom or disease control. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze adverse effects and efficacy of concomitant radiotherapy in patients with aHCC treated with checkpoint inhibition. METHODS: To this aim, patients who received a combination of ICI and radiotherapy in our institution were retrospectively considered for analysis. The predefined inclusion criterion was radiotherapy after initiated checkpoint inhibition and continuation of ICI therapy for at least 8 weeks. Adverse effects and efficacy measurements were performed according to local standards. RESULTS: The database search of 2016-2021 revealed six consecutive patients fulfilling the predefined criteria for concomitant ICI and radiotherapy. Three patients received high-dose-rate brachytherapy (15 Gy) to treat progredient hepatic lesions. Two patients received stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) (25-30 Gy) for symptom control, and 1 patient received brachytherapy and SBRT to treat metastases. No severe adverse events were reported in the period (<6 months) after concomitant radiotherapy. In 5 out of 6 cases, long-term tumor control could be achieved by this therapeutic combination. CONCLUSION: A good efficacy of concomitant radiotherapy and checkpoint inhibition has been achieved with no safety concerns. Further investigations should evaluate the safety, appropriate clinical context, and efficacy of this promising approach.

Changing treatment landscape associated with improved survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a nationwide, population-based study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is undergoing a historic transformation with the approval of several new systemic therapies in the last few years. This study aimed to examine the impact of this changing landscape on survival and costs in a Western nationwide, real-world cohort. METHODS: A nationwide representative claims database (InGef) was screened for HCC cases between 2015 and 2020. Survival in an era with only sorafenib (period A, January 2015 to July 2018) and after approval of lenvatinib and other systemic treatments (period B, August 2018 to December 2020) was analysed. Health care costs were assessed. RESULTS: We identified 2876 individuals with HCC in the study period. The proportion of patients receiving systemic therapy increased significantly over time, from 11.8% in 2015 to 15.1% in 2020 (p < 0.0001). The median overall survival in period B was 6.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.9-8.9) and in period A was 5.3 months (95% CI: 4.5-6.3; p = 0.046). In period B, the median overall survival with lenvatinib was 9.7 months (95% CI: 6.3-18.4) versus 4.8 months with sorafenib (95% CI: 4.0-7.1, p = 0.008). Costs for prescription drugs per patient increased from €6150 in 2015 to €9049 in 2020 (p < 0.0001), and costs for outpatient care per patient increased from €1646 to €2149 (p = 0.0240). CONCLUSION: The approval of new systemic therapies resulted in a survival benefit in patients with HCC. The magnitude of the effect is modest and associated with a moderate increase in health costs.

Circulating miR-21 as a prognostic biomarker in HCC treated by CT-guided high-dose rate brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prognostic biomarkers identifying patients with early tumor progression after local ablative therapy remain an unmet clinical need. The aim of this study was to investigate circulating miR-21 and miR-210 levels as prognostic biomarkers of HCC treated by CT-guided high-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 24 consecutive HCC patients (BCLC A and B) treated with CT-guided HDR-BT (1 × 15 Gy) were included in this prospective IRB-approved study. RT-PCR was performed to quantify miR-21 and miR-210 levels in blood samples acquired prior to and 2 d after HDR-BT. Follow-up imaging (contrast-enhanced liver MRI and whole-body CT) was performed in 3 months follow-up intervals. Therapy response was assessed with patients classified as either responders or non-responders (12 each). Responders were defined as having no local or diffuse systemic progression within 6 months and no diffuse systemic progression exceeding 3 nodules/nodule diameter > 3 cm from 6 months to 2 years. Non-responders had recurrence within 6 months and/or tumor progression with > 3 nodules or individual lesion diameter > 3 cm or extrahepatic disease within two years, respectively. Biostatistics included parametric and non-parametric testing (Mann-Whitney-U-test), as well as Kaplan-Meier curve construction. RESULTS: The responder group demonstrated significantly decreasing miR-21 values 2 d post therapy compared to non-responders (median miR-21 2-ΔΔCт: responders 0.73 [IQR 0.34], non-responders 1.53 [IQR 1.48]; p = 0.0102). miR-210 did not show any significant difference between responders and non-responders (median miR-210 2-ΔΔCт: responders 0.74 [IQR 0.45], non-responders 0.99 [IQR 1.13]; p = 0.8399). Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated significantly shorter time to systemic progression for increased miR-21 (p = 0.0095) but not miR-210 (p = 0.7412), with events accumulating > 1 year post therapy in non-responders (median time to systemic progression 397 days). CONCLUSION: Increasing circulating miR-21 levels are associated with poor response and shorter time to systemic progression in HDR-BT-treated HCC. This proof-of-concept study provides a basis for further investigation of miR-21 as a prognostic biomarker and potential stratifier in future clinical trials of interventional oncology therapies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: In this monocentric clinical study, we analyzed prospectively acquired data of 24 patients from the "ESTIMATE" patient cohort (Studiennummer: DRKS00010587, Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien). Ethical approval was provided by the ethics committee "Ethikkommission bei der LMU München" (reference number "17-346") on June 20, 2017 and August 26, 2020.

Patterns of pseudoprogression across different cancer entities treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Pseudoprogression (PsPD) is a rare response pattern to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in oncology. This study aims to reveal imaging features of PsPD, and their association to other relevant findings. METHODS: Patients with PsPD who had at least three consecutive cross-sectional imaging studies at our comprehensive cancer center were retrospectively analyzed. Treatment response was assessed according to immune Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (iRECIST). PsPD was defined as the occurrence of immune unconfirmed progressive disease (iUPD) without follow-up confirmation. Target lesions (TL), non-target lesions (NTL), new lesions (NL) were analyzed over time. Tumor markers and immune-related adverse events (irAE) were correlated. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included (mean age: 66.7 ± 13.6 years, 21.9% female) with mean baseline STL of 69.7 mm ± 55.6 mm. PsPD was observed in twenty-six patients (81.3%) at FU1, and no cases occurred after FU4. Patients with iUPD exhibited the following: TL increase in twelve patients, (37.5%), NTL increase in seven patients (21.9%), NL appearance in six patients (18.8%), and combinations thereof in four patients (12.5%). The mean and maximum increase for first iUPD in sum of TL was 19.8 and 96.8 mm (+ 700.8%). The mean and maximum decrease in sum of TL between iUPD and consecutive follow-up was - 19.1 mm and - 114.8 mm (-60.9%) respectively. The mean and maximum sum of new TL at first iUPD timepoint were 7.6 and 82.0 mm respectively. In two patients (10.5%), tumor-specific serologic markers were elevated at first iUPD, while the rest were stable or decreased among the other PsPD cases (89.5%). In fourteen patients (43.8%), irAE were observed. CONCLUSIONS: PsPD occurred most frequently at FU1 after initiation of ICI treatment. The two most prevalent reasons for PsPD were TL und NTL progression, with an increase in TL diameter commonly below + 100%. In few cases, PsPD was observed even if tumor markers were rising compared to baseline. Our findings also suggest a correlation between PsPD and irAE. These findings may guide decision-making of ICI continuation in suspected PsPD.

An integrated cellular and molecular model of gastric neuroendocrine cancer evolution highlights therapeutic targets.

Gastric neuroendocrine carcinomas (G-NEC) are aggressive malignancies with poorly understood biology and a lack of disease models. Here, we use genome sequencing to characterize the genomic landscapes of human G-NEC and its histologic variants. We identify global and subtype-specific alterations and expose hitherto unappreciated gains of MYC family members in a large part of cases. Genetic engineering and lineage tracing in mice delineate a model of G-NEC evolution, which defines MYC as a critical driver and positions the cancer cell of origin to the neuroendocrine compartment. MYC-driven tumors have pronounced metastatic competence and display defined signaling addictions, as revealed by large-scale genetic and pharmacologic screening of cell lines and organoid resources. We create global maps of G-NEC dependencies, highlight critical vulnerabilities, and validate therapeutic targets, including candidates for clinical drug repurposing. Our study gives comprehensive insights into G-NEC biology.

IL12/23 Blockade for Refractory Immune-Mediated Colitis: 2-Center Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor-mediated colitis (IMC) is commonly managed with steroids and biologics. We evaluated the efficacy of ustekinumab (UST) in treating IMC refractory to steroids plus infliximab and/or vedolizumab. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were treated with UST for IMC refractory to steroids plus infliximab (57.9%) and/or vedolizumab (94.7%). Most of them had grade ≥3 diarrhea (84.2%), and colitis with ulceration was present in 42.1%. Thirteen patients (68.4%) attained clinical remission with UST, and mean fecal calprotectin levels dropped significantly after treatment (629 ± 101.5 mcg/mg to 92.0 ± 21.7 mcg/mg, P = 0.0004). DISCUSSION: UST is a promising therapy for the treatment of refractory IMC.

Impact of adjuvant sorafenib treatment after local ablation for HCC in the phase II SORAMIC trial.

Background & Aims: The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjuvant sorafenib treatment compared with placebo in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent local ablation. Methods: The SORAMIC trial is a randomised controlled trial with diagnostic, local ablation, and palliative sub-study arms. After initial imaging within the diagnostic study, patients were assigned to local ablation or palliative arms. In the local ablation cohort, patients were randomised 1:1 to local ablation + sorafenib vs. local ablation + placebo. The primary endpoint was time-to-recurrence (TTR). Secondary endpoints were local control rate and safety in terms of adverse events and quality-of-life. Results: The recruitment was terminated prematurely after 104 patients owing to slow recruitment. One patient was excluded because of a technical failure. Fifty-four patients were randomised to local ablation + sorafenib and 49 to local ablation + placebo. Eighty-eight patients who underwent standardised follow-up imaging comprised the per-protocol population. The median TTR was 15.2 months in the sorafenib arm and 16.4 months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio 1.1; 95% CI 0.53-2.2; p = 0.82). Out of 136 lesions ablated within the trial, there was no difference in local recurrence rate between sorafenib (6/69, 8.6%) and placebo groups (5/67, 5.9%; p = 0.792).Overall (92.5% vs. 71.4%, p = 0.008) and drug-related (81.4% vs. 55.1%, p = 0.003) adverse events were more common in the sorafenib arm compared with the placebo arm. Dose reduction because of adverse events were common in the sorafenib arm (79.6% vs. 30.6%, p <0.001). Conclusions: Adjuvant sorafenib did not improve in TTR or local control rate after local ablation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma within the limitations of an early terminated trial. Impact and implications: Local ablation is the standard of care treatment in patients with early stages of hepatocellular carcinoma, along with surgical therapies. However, there is a risk of disease recurrence during follow-up. Sorafenib, an oral medication, is a routinely used treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. This study found that sorafenib treatment after local ablation in people with early hepatocellular carcinoma did not significantly improve the disease-free period compared with placebo. Clinical trial number: EudraCT 2009-012576-27, NCT01126645.

Ipilimumab and nivolumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after failure of prior immune checkpoint inhibitor-based combination therapies: a multicenter retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based regimens are transforming the landscape of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment. We describe the effect of combined ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with advanced HCC after the failure of prior ICI-based combination treatments. METHODS: The clinical course of patients with advanced HCC who received combined ipilimumab and nivolumab after prior ICI-based combination therapies was assessed. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) per RECIST v1.1 and mRECIST, overall survival (OS), and safety were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 109 patients treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab or other ICI-based combination treatments, ten patients received subsequent therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab. The majority of patients had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) Stage C (80%) HCC and a preserved liver function as defined by Child-Pugh A (80%). At a median follow-up of 15.3 months, ORR for ipilimumab and nivolumab was 30% with a DCR of 40%. Median PFS was 2.9 months and the median OS was 7.4 months. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study demonstrates that combined ipilimumab and nivolumab can be effective and tolerable after prior ICI-based combination therapies and provides a rationale for the prospective clinical evaluation of this treatment sequencing.

Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab in Patients with Advanced and Progressing Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Retrospective Multicenter Experience.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is the standard of care for first-line systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). Data on the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in patients with aHCC who have received prior systemic therapy are not available. Methods: Patients with aHCC who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab after at least one systemic treatment between December 2018 and March 2022 were retrospectively identified in 13 centers in Germany and Austria. Patient characteristics, tumor response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AE) were analyzed. Results: A total of 50 patients were identified; 41 (82%) were male. The median age at initiation of treatment with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was 65 years, 41 (82%) patients had cirrhosis, 30 (73%) Child A, 9 (22%) B, and 2 (5%) C. A total of 34 patients (68%) received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in the second-line setting and 16 (32%) in later lines. The best radiologic tumor responses were complete remission (2%), partial remission (30%), stable disease (36%), and progressive disease (18%), resulting in an objective response rate of 32% and a disease control rate of 68%. Median OS was 16.0 months (95% confidence interval 5.6-26.4 months), and median PFS was 7.1 months (95% confidence interval 4.4-9.8 months). AE grades 3-4 were observed in seven (14%) and resulted in death in three patients (6%). There were five (10%) bleeding events with a grade ≥ 3, including one (2%) with a fatal outcome. Conclusions: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is effective in patients with aHCC who did not have access to this option as first-line therapy. The safety profile was consistent with previous reports.

TRAIL Receptor Targeting Agents Potentiate PARP Inhibitor Efficacy in Pancreatic Cancer Independently of BRCA2 Mutation Status.

Chemotherapy, the standard treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), has only a modest effect on the outcome of patients with late-stage disease. Investigations of the genetic features of PDAC have demonstrated a frequent occurrence of mutations in genes involved in homologous recombination (HR), especially in the breast cancer susceptibility gene 2 (BRCA2). Olaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, is approved as a maintenance treatment for patients with advanced PDAC with germline BRCA1/2 mutations following a platinum-containing first-line regimen. Limitations to the use of PARP inhibitors are represented by the relatively small proportion of patients with mutations in BRCA1/2 genes and the modest capability of these substances of inducing objective response. We have previously shown that pancreatic cancer with BRCA2 mutations exhibits a remarkably enhanced sensitivity towards tumor-necrosis-factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) receptor-stimulating agents. We thus aimed to investigate the effect of combined treatment with PARP inhibitors and TRAIL receptor-stimulating agents in pancreatic cancer and its dependency on the BRCA2 gene status. The respective effects of TRAIL-targeting agents and the PARP inhibitor olaparib or of their combination were assessed in pancreatic cancer cell lines and patient-derived organoids. In addition, BRCA2-knockout and -complementation models were investigated. The effects of these agents on apoptosis, DNA damage, cell cycle, and receptor surface expression were assessed by immunofluorescence, Western blot, and flow cytometry. PARP inhibition and TRAIL synergized to cause cell death in pancreatic cancer cell lines and PDAC organoids. This effect proved independent of BRCA2 gene status in three independent models. Olaparib and TRAIL in combination caused a detectable increase in DNA damage and a concentration-dependent cell cycle arrest in the G2/M and S cell cycle phases. Olaparib also significantly increased the proportion of membrane-bound death receptor 5. Our results provide a preclinical rationale for the combination of PARP inhibitors and TRAIL receptor agonists for the treatment of pancreatic cancer and suggest that the use of PARP inhibitors could be extended to patients without BRCA2 mutations if used in combination with TRAIL agonists.

Clinically focused multi-cohort benchmarking as a tool for external validation of artificial intelligence algorithm performance in basic chest radiography analysis.

Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms evaluating [supine] chest radiographs ([S]CXRs) have remarkably increased in number recently. Since training and validation are often performed on subsets of the same overall dataset, external validation is mandatory to reproduce results and reveal potential training errors. We applied a multicohort benchmarking to the publicly accessible (S)CXR analyzing AI algorithm CheXNet, comprising three clinically relevant study cohorts which differ in patient positioning ([S]CXRs), the applied reference standards (CT-/[S]CXR-based) and the possibility to also compare algorithm classification with different medical experts' reading performance. The study cohorts include [1] a cohort, characterized by 563 CXRs acquired in the emergency unit that were evaluated by 9 readers (radiologists and non-radiologists) in terms of 4 common pathologies, [2] a collection of 6,248 SCXRs annotated by radiologists in terms of pneumothorax presence, its size and presence of inserted thoracic tube material which allowed for subgroup and confounding bias analysis and [3] a cohort consisting of 166 patients with SCXRs that were evaluated by radiologists for underlying causes of basal lung opacities, all of those cases having been correlated to a timely acquired computed tomography scan (SCXR and CT within < 90 min). CheXNet non-significantly exceeded the radiology resident (RR) consensus in the detection of suspicious lung nodules (cohort [1], AUC AI/RR: 0.851/0.839, p = 0.793) and the radiological readers in the detection of basal pneumonia (cohort [3], AUC AI/reader consensus: 0.825/0.782, p = 0.390) and basal pleural effusion (cohort [3], AUC AI/reader consensus: 0.762/0.710, p = 0.336) in SCXR, partly with AUC values higher than originally published ("Nodule": 0.780, "Infiltration": 0.735, "Effusion": 0.864). The classifier "Infiltration" turned out to be very dependent on patient positioning (best in CXR, worst in SCXR). The pneumothorax SCXR cohort [2] revealed poor algorithm performance in CXRs without inserted thoracic material and in the detection of small pneumothoraces, which can be explained by a known systematic confounding error in the algorithm training process. The benefit of clinically relevant external validation is demonstrated by the differences in algorithm performance as compared to the original publication. Our multi-cohort benchmarking finally enables the consideration of confounders, different reference standards and patient positioning as well as the AI performance comparison with differentially qualified medical readers.

Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis.

Introduction: Although the treatment paradigm for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has recently shifted in favour of checkpoint inhibitor (CPI)-based treatment options, the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) currently approved for the treatment of HCC are expected to remain the cornerstone of HCC treatment alone or in combination with CPIs. Despite considerable research efforts, no biomarker capable of predicting the response to specific TKIs has been validated. Thus, personalized approaches to HCC may aid in determining optimal treatment lines for 2nd and 3rd lines. To identify new biomarkers, we examined differential sensitivity and investigated potential transcriptomic predictors. Methods: To this aim, the sensitivity of nine HCC cell lines to sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, and cabozantinib was evaluated by a prolonged treatment scheme to determine their respective growth rate inhibition concentrations (GR50). Subgroups discriminated by GR50 values underwent differential expression and gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA). Results: The nine cell lines showed broadly different sensitivities to different TKIs. GR50 values of sorafenib and regorafenib clustered closer in all cell lines, whereas treatments with lenvatinib and cabozantinib showed diversified GR50 values. GSEA showed the activation of specific pathways in sensitive vs non-sensitive cell lines. A signature consisting of 14 biomarkers (GAGE12H, GJB6, PTCHD3, PRH1-PRR4, C6orf222, HBB, C17orf99, GOLGA6A, CRYAA, CCL23, RP11-347C12.3, RP11-514O12.4, FAM180B, and TMPRSS4) discriminates the cell lines' response into three distinct treatment profiles: 1) equally sensible to sorafenib, regorafenib and cabozantinib, 2) sensible to lenvatinib, and 3) more sensible to regorafenib than sorafenib. Conclusion: We observed diverse responses to either of the four TKIs. Subgroup analysis of TKI effectiveness showed distinct transcriptomic profiles and signaling pathways associated with responsiveness. This prompts more extensive studies to explore and validate pharmacogenomic and transcriptomic strategies for a personalized treatment approach, particularly after the failure of CPI treatment.

Atezolizumab and bevacizumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with impaired liver function and prior systemic therapy: a real-world experience.

Objective: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab/bevacizumab in a real-world HCC cohort, including patients with impaired liver function and prior systemic therapy. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 147 HCC patients treated with atezolizumab/bevacizumab at six sites in Germany and Austria. Results: The overall response rate and disease control rate were 20.4% and 51.7%, respectively. Seventy-three patients (49.7%) met at least one major exclusion criterion of the IMbrave150 trial (IMbrave-OUT), whereas 74 patients (50.3%) were eligible (IMbrave-IN). Median overall survival (mOS) as well as median progression-free survival (mPFS) was significantly longer in IMbrave-IN versus IMbrave-OUT patients [mOS: 15.0 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 10.7-19.3] versus 6.0 months (95% CI: 3.2-8.9; p < 0.001) and mPFS: 8.7 months (95% CI: 5.9-11.5) versus 3.7 months (95% CI: 2.7-4.7; p < 0.001)]. Prior systemic treatment did not significantly affect mOS [hazard ratio (HR): 1.32 (95% CI: 0.78-2.23; p = 0.305)]. mOS according to ALBI grades 1/2/3 were 15.0 months (95% CI: not estimable), 8.6 months (95% CI: 5.4-11.7), and 3.2 months (95% CI: 0.3-6.1), respectively. ALBI grade and ECOG score were identified as independent prognostic factors [ALBI grade 2 versus 1; HR: 2.40 (95% CI: 1.34 - 4.30; p = 0.003), ALBI grade 3 versus 1; HR: 7.28 (95% CI: 3.30-16.08; p < 0.001), and ECOG ⩾2 versus 0; HR: 2.09 (95% CI: 1.03 - 4.23; p = 0.042)], respectively. Sixty-seven patients (45.6%) experienced an adverse event classified as CTCAE grade ⩾3. Patients in the IMbrave-OUT group were at increased risk of hepatic decompensation with encephalopathy (13.7% versus 1.4%, p = 0.004) and/or ascites (39.7% versus 9.5%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: In this real-world cohort, efficacy was comparable to the results of the IMbrave150 study and not affected by prior systemic treatment. ALBI grade and ECOG score were independently associated with survival. IMbrave-OUT patients were more likely to experience hepatic decompensation.

Atezolizumab and bevacizumab with transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma: the DEMAND trial protocol.

The combination of the anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab and the anti-VEGF bevacizumab is the first approved immunotherapeutic regimen for first-line therapy in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), currently approved in more than 80 countries. The efficacy and tolerability of this regimen suggest that the use of atezolizumab + bevacizumab could be extended to the treatment of patients with intermediate-stage HCC in combination with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). The authors describe the rationale and design of the DEMAND study. This investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized phase II study is the first trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab + bevacizumab prior to or in combination with TACE in patients with intermediate-stage HCC. The primary end point is the 24-month survival rate; secondary end points include objective response rate, progression-free survival, safety and quality of life. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04224636 (ClinicalTrials.gov).