A phase Ib/II trial of capmatinib plus spartalizumab vs. spartalizumab alone in patients with pretreated hepatocellular carcinoma.

Background & aims: This phase Ib/II trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of capmatinib in combination with spartalizumab or spartalizumab alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: Eligible patients who had progressed or were intolerant to sorafenib received escalating doses of capmatinib 200 mg, 300 mg, and 400 mg twice a day (bid) plus spartalizumab 300 mg every 3 weeks (q3w) in the phase Ib study. Once the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) was determined, the phase II study commenced with randomised 1:1 treatment with either capmatinib + spartalizumab (n = 32) or spartalizumab alone (n = 30). Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability (phase Ib) and investigator-assessed overall response rate per RECIST v1.1 for combination vs. single-agent arms using a Bayesian logistic regression model (phase II). Results: In phase Ib, the RP2D for capmatinib in combination with spartalizumab was determined to be 400 mg bid. Dose-limiting toxicity consisting of grade 3 diarrhoea was reported in one patient at the capmatinib 400 mg bid + spartalizumab 300 mg q3w dose level. The primary endpoint in the phase II study was not met. The observed overall response rate in the capmatinib + spartalizumab arm was 9.4% vs. 10% in the spartalizumab arm. The most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs, ≥20%) were nausea (37.5%), asthenia and vomiting (28.1% each), diarrhoea, pyrexia, and decreased appetite (25.0% each) in the combination arm; TRAEs ≥10% were pruritus (23.3%), and rash (10.0%) in the spartalizumab-alone arm. Conclusion: Capmatinib at 400 mg bid plus spartalizumab 300 mg q3w was established as the RP2D, with manageable toxicities and no significant safety signals, but the combination did not show superior clinical activity compared with spartalizumab single-agent treatment in patients with advanced HCC who had previously been treated with sorafenib. Impact and implications: Simultaneous targeting of MET and programmed cell death protein 1 may provide synergistic clinical benefit in patients with advanced HCC. This is the first trial to report a combination of capmatinib (MET inhibitor) and spartalizumab (programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor) as second-line treatment after sorafenib for advanced HCC. The combination did not show superior clinical activity compared with spartalizumab single-agent treatment in patients with advanced HCC who had previously been treated with sorafenib. The results indicate that there is a clear need to identify a reliable predictive marker of response for HCC and to identify patients with HCC that would benefit from the combination of checkpoint inhibitor +/- targeted therapy. Clinical trial number: NCT02795429.

Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (COSMIC-312): final results of a randomised phase 3 study.

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.

Dual CTLA-4 and PD-1 checkpoint blockade using CS1002 and CS1003 (nofazinlimab) in patients with advanced solid tumors: A first-in-human, dose-escalation, and dose-expansion study.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the safety and efficacy of an anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody (CS1002) as monotherapy and in combination with an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody (CS1003) in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. METHODS: The phase 1 study involved phase 1a monotherapy dose-escalation (part 1) and phase 1b combination therapy dose escalation (part 2) and expansion (part 3). Various dosing schedules of CS1002 (0.3, 1, or 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks, or 3 mg/kg every 9 weeks) were evaluated with 200 mg CS1003 every 3 weeks in part 3. RESULTS: Parts 1, 2, and 3 included a total of 13, 18, and 61 patients, respectively. No dose-limiting toxicities or maximum tolerated doses were observed. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 30.8%, 83.3%, and 75.0% of patients in parts 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were experienced by 15.4%, 50.0%, and 18.3% of patients in each part. Of 61 patients evaluable for efficacy, 23 (37.7%) achieved objective responses in multiple tumor types. Higher objective response rates were observed with conventional and high-dose CS1002 regimens (1 mg/kg every 3 weeks or 3 mg/kg every 9 weeks) compared to low-dose CS1002 (0.3 mg/kg every 3 weeks) in microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient tumors, melanoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma (50.0% vs. 58.8%, 14.3% vs. 42.9%, and 0% vs. 16.7%). CONCLUSION: CS1002, as monotherapy, and in combination with CS1003, had a manageable safety profile across a broad dosing range. Promising antitumor activities were observed in patients with immune oncology (IO)-naive and IO-refractory tumors across CS1002 dose levels when combined with CS1003, supporting further evaluation of this treatment combination for solid tumors. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: CS1002 is a human immunoglobulin (Ig) G1 monoclonal antibody that blocks the interaction of CTLA-4 with its ligands and increases T-cell activation/proliferation. CS1003, now named nofazinlimab, is a humanized, recombinant IgG4 monoclonal antibody that blocks the interaction between human PD-1 and its ligands. In this original article, we determined the safety profile of CS1002 as monotherapy and in combination with CS1003. Furthermore, we explored the antitumor activity of the combination in anti-programmed cell death protein (ligand)-1 (PD-[L]1)-naive microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) pan tumors, and anti-PD-(L)1-refractory melanoma and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). CS1002 in combination with CS1003 had manageable safety profile across a broad dosing range and showed promising antitumor activities across CS1002 dose levels when combined with CS1003. This supports further assessment of CS1002 in combination with CS1003 for the treatment of solid tumors.

Adverse events associated with the delivery of telerehabilitation: A scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to map the existing research on adverse events during the delivery of telerehabilitation. INTRODUCTION: Telerehabilitation, a subset of telemedicine, has gained traction during the COVID-19 pandemic as a means to deliver rehabilitation services remotely. However, there exists a research gap as there has yet to be any scoping review, systematic review, or meta-analysis published to identify and summarize the current primary research on adverse events related to telerehabilitation as a whole. It is important to understand how adverse events, such as falls during physiotherapy or aspiration pneumonia during speech language pathology sessions, are associated with telerehabilitation delivery. This will help to identify key limitations for optimizing telerehabilitation delivery by allowing for the development of key risk-mitigation measures and quality indicators. It can also help improve the uptake of telerehabilitation among clinicians and patients. This review aims to fill this research gap by conducting a search of published literature on adverse events in telerehabilitation. Anticipated key findings of this scoping review include identifying the characteristics and frequencies of adverse events during telerehabilitation, the patient populations and types of telerehabilitation associated with the most adverse events, and the quality of reporting of adverse events. METHODS: The review follows the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodological framework and adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The review protocol has been registered and published on Open Science Framework. A comprehensive search strategy was implemented across multiple databases (MEDLINE ALL, EMBASE, APA PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and CINAHL). All stages (screening, extraction, and synthesis) will be conducted in duplicate and independently, with data extraction following the TIDieR framework, along with authors, year of publication (before or after COVID), population and sample size, and specific mode/s of telerehabilitation delivery. For synthesis, data will be summarized quantitatively using numerical counts and qualitatively via content analysis. The data will be grouped by intervention type and by type of adverse event. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This scoping review will include qualitative and quantitative studies published between 2013 and 2023, written in English, and conducted in any geographic area. All modes of telerehabilitation delivery (asynchronous, synchronous, or hybrid) will be included. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, commentaries, protocols, opinion pieces, conference abstracts, and case series with fewer than five participants will be excluded.

Multimodal Integrative Genomics and Pathology Analyses in Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Treatment for Intermediate and Locally Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Introduction: Immunotherapy has resulted in pathologic responses in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the benefits and molecular mechanisms of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint blockade are largely unknown. Methods: In this study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of preoperative nivolumab (anti-PD-1) in patients with intermediate and locally advanced HCC and determined the molecular markers for predicting treatment response. Results: Between July 2020 and November 2021, 20 treatment-naive HCC patients with intermediate and locally advanced tumors received preoperative nivolumab at 3 mg/kg for 3 cycles prior to surgical resection. Nineteen patients underwent surgical resection on trial. Seven (36.8%) of the 19 patients had major pathologic tumor necrosis (≥60%) in the post-nivolumab resection specimens, with 3 having almost complete (>90%) tumor necrosis. The tumor necrosis was hemorrhagic and often accompanied by increased or dense immune cell infiltrate at the border of the tumors. None of the patients developed major adverse reactions contradicting hepatectomy. RNA-sequencing analysis on both pre-nivolumab tumor biopsies and post-nivolumab resected specimens showed that, in cases with major pathologic necrosis, the proportion of CD8 T cells in the HCC tissues predominantly increased after treatment. Moreover, to investigate noninvasive biomarker for nivolumab response, we evaluated the copy number variation (CNV) using target-panel sequencing on plasma cell-free DNA of the patients and derived a CNV-based anti-PD-1 score. The score correlated with the extent of tumor necrosis and was validated in a Korean patient cohort with anti-PD-1 treatment. Conclusion: Neoadjuvant nivolumab demonstrated promising clinical activity in intermediate and locally advanced HCC patients. We also identified useful noninvasive biomarker predicting responsiveness.

Phase I/Ib, open-label, multicenter, dose-escalation study of the anti-TGF-ß monoclonal antibody, NIS793, in combination with spartalizumab in adult patients with advanced tumors.

BACKGROUND: NIS793 is a human IgG2 monoclonal antibody that binds to transforming growth factor beta (TGF-ß). This first-in-human study investigated NIS793 plus spartalizumab treatment in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients received NIS793 (0.3-1 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W)) monotherapy; following evaluation of two dose levels, dose escalation continued with NIS793 plus spartalizumab (NIS793 0.3-30 mg/kg Q3W and spartalizumab 300 mg Q3W or NIS793 20-30 mg/kg every 2 weeks [Q2W] and spartalizumab 400 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W)). In dose expansion, patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) resistant to prior anti-programmed death ligand 1 or patients with microsatellite stable colorectal cancer (MSS-CRC) were treated at the recommended dose for expansion (RDE). RESULTS: Sixty patients were treated in dose escalation, 11 with NIS793 monotherapy and 49 with NIS793 plus spartalizumab, and 60 patients were treated in dose expansion (MSS-CRC: n=40; NSCLC: n=20). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The RDE was established as NIS793 30 mg/kg (2100 mg) and spartalizumab 300 mg Q3W. Overall 54 (49.5%) patients experienced ≥1 treatment-related adverse event, most commonly rash (n=16; 13.3%), pruritus (n=10; 8.3%), and fatigue (n=9; 7.5%). Three partial responses were reported: one in renal cell carcinoma (NIS793 30 mg/kg Q2W plus spartalizumab 400 mg Q4W), and two in the MSS-CRC expansion cohort. Biomarker data showed evidence of target engagement through increased TGF-ß/NIS793 complexes and depleted active TGF-ß in peripheral blood. Gene expression analyses in tumor biopsies demonstrated decreased TGF-ß target genes and signatures and increased immune signatures. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced solid tumors, proof of mechanism of NIS793 is supported by evidence of target engagement and TGF-ß pathway inhibition. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02947165.

Pembrolizumab as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Longer Term Follow-Up from the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 Trial.

Introduction: KEYNOTE-240 showed a favorable benefit/risk profile for pembrolizumab versus placebo in patients with sorafenib-treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, prespecified statistical significance criteria for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) superiority were not met at the final analysis. Outcomes based on an additional 18 months of follow-up are reported. Methods: Adults with sorafenib-treated advanced HCC were randomized 2:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or placebo. Dual primary endpoints were OS and PFS assessed per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), assessed per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, and safety. Results: 413 patients were randomized (pembrolizumab, n = 278; placebo, n = 135). As of July 13, 2020, median (range) time from randomization to data cutoff was 39.6 (31.7-48.8) months for pembrolizumab and 39.8 (31.7-47.8) months for placebo. Estimated OS rates (95% CI) were 17.7% (13.4-22.5%) for pembrolizumab and 11.7% (6.8-17.9%) for placebo at 36 months. The estimated PFS rate (95% CI) for pembrolizumab was 8.9% (5.3-13.6%) and 0% for placebo at 36 months. ORR (95% CI) was 18.3% (14.0-23.4%) for pembrolizumab and 4.4% (1.6-9.4%) for placebo. Immune-mediated hepatitis events did not increase with follow-up. No viral hepatitis flare events were reported. Conclusion: With extended follow-up, pembrolizumab continued to maintain improvement in OS and PFS and was associated with a consistent adverse event profile compared with placebo in patients with sorafenib-treated advanced HCC. Although KEYNOTE-240 did not meet prespecified statistical significance criteria at the final analysis, these results together with the antitumor activity of second-line pembrolizumab observed in KEYNOTE-224 and the statistically significant and clinically meaningful OS and PFS benefits of second-line pembrolizumab in patients from Asia observed in KEYNOTE-394 reinforce the clinical activity of pembrolizumab in previously treated patients with advanced HCC.

Survival Trends in Sorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Reconstructed Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Background: Emerging data suggest that outcomes for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib may have improved over time. We aimed to provide robust, time-to-event estimates of survival outcomes for sorafenib in advanced HCC. Summary: In this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs), we searched MEDLINE and Embase from inception till September 2022 for RCTs that provided data for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for sorafenib monotherapy as first-line systemic therapy for advanced HCC. We performed a pooled analysis using reconstructed individual participant data from published Kaplan-Meier curves to obtain robust estimates for OS and PFS. Of 1,599 articles identified, 29 studies (5,525 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the median OS was 10.4 (95% CI: 9.6-11.4) months. Median OS increased over time, from 9.8 (95% CI: 8.8-10.7) months in studies before 2015 to 13.4 (95% CI: 11.03-15.24) months in studies from 2015 onwards (p < 0.001). OS did not differ by trial phase, geographical region, or study design. The overall median PFS was 4.4 (95% CI: 3.9-4.8) months, but PFS did not improve over time. Sensitivity analysis of studies from 2015 and onwards to account for the introduction of direct-acting antivirals determined that hepatitis C virus was associated with reduced mortality (p < 0.001). There was minimal heterogeneity in the estimates for OS (all I2 ≤ 33). Key Messages: Survival outcomes for sorafenib in advanced HCC have improved over time. These data have important implications for clinical trial design.

The Hong Kong consensus recommendations on the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cystic lesions.

Background: The finding of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL) on incidental imaging is becoming increasingly common. International studies report a prevalence of 2.2-44.7% depending on the population, imaging modality and indication for imaging, and the prevalence increases with age. Patients with PCL are at risk of developing pancreatic cancer, a disease with a poor prognosis. This publication summarizes recommendations for the diagnosis and management of PCL and post-operative pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) from a group of local specialists. Methods: Clinical evidence was consolidated from narrative reviews and consensus statements formulated during two online meetings in March 2022. The expert panel included gastroenterologists, hepatobiliary surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, and endocrinologists. Results: Patients with PCL require careful investigation and follow-up due to the risk of malignant transformation of these lesions. They should undergo clinical investigation and pancreas-specific imaging to classify lesions and understand the risk profile of the patient. Where indicated, patients should undergo pancreatectomy to excise PCL. Following pancreatectomy, patients are at risk of PEI, leading to gastrointestinal dysfunction and malnutrition. Therefore, such patients should be monitored for symptoms of PEI, and promptly treated with pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT). Patients with poor response to PERT may require increases in dose, addition of a proton pump inhibitor, and/or further investigation, including tests for pancreatic function. Patients are also at risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus after pancreatectomy; they should be screened and treated with insulin if indicated. Conclusions: These statements are an accurate summary of our approach to the diagnosis and management of patients with PCL and will be of assistance to clinicians treating these patients in a similar clinical landscape.

Predictive and Prognostic Potential of Liver Function Assessment in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Literature Review.

Introduction: We conducted a systematic literature review to assess the utility of liver function assessments for predicting disease prognosis and response to systemic anticancer therapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). Methods: This was a PRISMA-standard review and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021244588). MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched (March 24, 2021) to identify publications reporting the efficacy and/or safety of systemic anticancer therapy (vs. any/no comparator) in liver-function-defined subgroups in phase 2 or 3 aHCC trials. Screening was completed by a single reviewer, with uncertainties resolved by a second reviewer and/or the authors. English-language full-text articles and congress abstracts were eligible for inclusion. Included publications were described and assessed for risk of bias using the GRADE methodology. Results: Twenty (of 2,579) screened publications were eligible; seven categorized liver function using the albumin-bilirubin system, nine using the Child-Pugh system, four using both. GRADE assessment classified ten, nine, and one publication(s) as reporting moderate-quality, low-quality, and very-low-quality evidence, respectively. Analyses of cross-trial trends of within-exposure arm analyses (active and control) reported a positive relationship between baseline liver function and overall survival and progression-free survival, supporting liver function as a prognostic marker in aHCC. There were also signals for a modest relationship between more preserved baseline liver function and extent of systemic treatment benefit, and with more preserved liver function and lower incidence of safety events. Conclusion: This review supports liver function as a prognostic variable in aHCC and highlights the value of a priori stratification of patients by baseline liver function in aHCC trials. The predictive value of liver function warrants further study. Findings were limited by the quality of available data.

Family-Specific Training Improves Linear B Cell Epitope Prediction for Emerging Viruses.

The rational design of vaccines and antibody-based therapeutics against newly emerging viruses relies on B cell epitopes mainly. To predict the B cell epitopes of a novel virus, several algorithms have been developed. While most existing algorithms are trained on a dataset in which B cell epitopes are classified as 'Positive' or 'Negative'. However, we found that training on such data contaminates the target pattern of specific viruses, leading to inaccurate predictions in some cases. In this paper, we introduce a novel framework for predicting linear B cell epitopes of novel viruses by exclusively using highly similar viruses for training data. We employed kernel regression based on seropositive rates, which are the percentages of seropositive samples among the population, to predict the potential epitopes. To assess our method, we conducted simulations and utilized two real-world datasets. Our method significantly outperformed other existing methods on the testing data of four viruses with seropositive rates. Also, our strategy showed a better prediction in a larger dataset from the IEDB. Thus, a novel framework providing better linear B cell prediction of newly emerging viruses is established, which will benefit the rational design of vaccines and antibody-based therapeutics in the future.

Plain language summary of the HIMALAYA study: tremelimumab and durvalumab for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer).

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of results from a phase 3 clinical study called HIMALAYA. HIMALAYA looked at treatment with one dose of a medication called tremelimumab combined with multiple doses of a medication called durvalumab (the STRIDE regimen) or multiple doses of durvalumab alone. These treatments were compared with a medication called sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). HCC is a type of liver cancer that is difficult to treat because it is often diagnosed when it is unresectable, meaning it can no longer be removed with surgery. Sorafenib has been the main treatment for unresectable HCC since 2007. However, people who take sorafenib may experience side effects that can reduce their quality of life, so alternative medicines are being trialed. Tremelimumab and durvalumab are types of drugs called immunotherapies, and they both work in different ways to help the body's immune system fight cancer. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?: Participants who took STRIDE lived longer than participants who took sorafenib, whilst participants who took durvalumab alone lived a similar length of time as participants who took sorafenib. Participants who took STRIDE or durvalumab had a lower relative risk of experiencing worsening in their quality of life than participants who took sorafenib. The side effects that participants who received STRIDE or durvalumab experienced were expected for these types of treatments and could mostly be managed. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Overall, STRIDE is more effective than sorafenib for people with unresectable HCC.

Rational design of a booster vaccine against COVID-19 based on antigenic distance.

Current COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective against symptomatic disease, but repeated booster doses using vaccines based on the ancestral strain offer limited additional protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs). To address this, we used antigenic distance to in silico select optimized booster vaccine seed strains effective against both current and future VOCs. Our model suggests that a SARS-CoV-1-based booster vaccine has the potential to cover a broader range of VOCs. Candidate vaccines including the spike protein from ancestral SARS-CoV-2, Delta, Omicron (BA.1), SARS-CoV-1, or MERS-CoV were experimentally evaluated in mice following two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. The SARS-CoV-1-based booster vaccine outperformed other candidates in terms of neutralizing antibody breadth and duration, as well as protective activity against Omicron (BA.2) challenge. This study suggests a unique strategy for selecting booster vaccines based on antigenic distance, which may be useful in designing future booster vaccines as new SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge.

Trial watch: immunotherapeutic strategies on the horizon for hepatocellular carcinoma.

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting PD-L1/PD-1 and CTLA-4 has transformed the oncology practice of hepatocellular carcinoma. However, only 25-30% of the patients with advanced HCC treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab or tremelimumab-durvalumab (STRIDE) respond initially, and mechanistic biomarkers and novel treatment strategies are urgently needed for patients who present with or acquire resistance to first-line ICI-based therapies. The recent approval of the STRIDE regimen has also engendered new questions, such as patient selection factors (e.g. portal hypertension and history of variceal bleed) and biomarkers, and the optimal combination and sequencing of ICI-based regimens. Triumphs in the setting of advanced HCC have also galvanized considerable interest in the broader application of ICIs to early- and intermediate-stage diseases, including clinical combination of ICIs with locoregional therapies. Among these clinical contexts, the role of ICIs in liver transplantation - which is a potentially curative strategy unique to HCC management - as a bridge to liver transplant in potential candidates or in the setting of post-transplant recurrence, warrants investigation in view of the notable theoretical risk of allograft rejection. In this review, we summarize and chart the landscape of seminal immuno-oncology trials in HCC and envision future clinical developments.

The Hong Kong consensus statements on unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: narrative review and update for 2021.

Background and Objective: Hong Kong, like many parts of Asia, faces a high burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) caused by high endemic rates of hepatitis B virus infection. Hong Kong clinicians have developed a high level of expertise in HCC treatment across surgical, transarterial, ablative, radiotherapeutic and systemic modalities. This publication summarizes the latest evidence-based recommendations on how these modalities should be used. Methods: In two meetings held in 2020, a multidisciplinary panel of surgeons, oncologists and interventional radiologists performed a narrative review of evidence on the management of HCC, with an emphasis on treatment of HCC not amenable to surgical resection. Close attention was paid to new evidence published since the previous version of these statements in 2018. Key Content and Findings: The expert panel has formulated 60 consensus statements to guide the staging and treatment of unresectable HCC. Since the previous version of these statements, considerable additions have been made to the recommendations on use of targeted therapies and immunotherapies because of the large volume of new evidence. Conclusions: Our consensus statements offer guidance on how to select HCC patients for surgical or non-surgical treatment and for choosing among non-surgical modalities for patients who are not candidates for resection. In particular, there is a need for more evidence to aid physicians in the selection of second-line systemic therapies, as currently most data are limited to patients with disease progression on first-line sorafenib.

Exposure-response analysis for nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 040).

This analysis was conducted to inform dose selection of a combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for the treatment of sorafenib-experienced patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). CheckMate 040 is an open-label, multicohort, phase I/II trial in adults with advanced HCC that evaluated nivolumab monotherapy (0.1-10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks [q2w]) and the following three combinations of nivolumab plus ipilimumab: (1) nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks (q3w) for four doses, followed by nivolumab monotherapy 240 mg q2w (arm A); (2) nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg q3w for four doses, followed by nivolumab monotherapy 240 mg q2w (arm B); and (3) nivolumab 3 mg/kg q2w plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks continuously (arm C). Exposure-response relationships (efficacy and safety) were characterized using nivolumab and ipilimumab concentrations after the first dose (Cavg1) as the exposure measure. Objective tumor response (OTR) and overall survival (OS) improvements were associated with increased ipilimumab exposure (OTR: odds ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.86; OS: hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.98), but not nivolumab exposure (OTR: odds ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-1.02; OS: hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.32). Hepatic treatment-related and immune-mediated adverse events were more common in arm A than in arms B or C. Nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg q3w for four doses, followed by nivolumab monotherapy 240 mg q2w had the most favorable benefit:risk profile in patients with advanced HCC.

Pembrolizumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin alone for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (KEYNOTE-966): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers, which arise from the intrahepatic or extrahepatic bile ducts and the gallbladder, generally have a poor prognosis and are rising in incidence worldwide. The standard-of-care treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer is chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Because most biliary tract cancers have an immune-suppressed microenvironment, immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy is associated with a low objective response rate. We aimed to assess whether adding the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin would improve outcomes compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. METHODS: KEYNOTE-966 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done at 175 medical centres globally. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older; had previously untreated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer; had disease measurable per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo, both administered intravenously every 3 weeks (maximum 35 cycles), in combination with gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; no maximum duration) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; maximum 8 cycles). Randomisation was done using a central interactive voice-response system and stratified by geographical region, disease stage, and site of origin in block sizes of four. The primary endpoint of overall survival was evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. The secondary endpoint of safety was evaluated in the as-treated population. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04003636. FINDINGS: Between Oct 4, 2019, and June 8, 2021, 1564 patients were screened for eligibility, 1069 of whom were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (pembrolizumab group; n=533) or placebo plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (placebo group; n=536). Median study follow-up at final analysis was 25·6 months (IQR 21·7-30·4). Median overall survival was 12·7 months (95% CI 11·5-13·6) in the pembrolizumab group versus 10·9 months (9·9-11·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·83 [95% CI 0·72-0·95]; one-sided p=0·0034 [significance threshold, p=0·0200]). In the as-treated population, the maximum adverse event grade was 3 to 4 in 420 (79%) of 529 participants in the pembrolizumab group and 400 (75%) of 534 in the placebo group; 369 (70%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 367 (69%) in the placebo group had treatment-related adverse events with a maximum grade of 3 to 4. 31 (6%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 49 (9%) in the placebo group died due to adverse events, including eight (2%) in the pembrolizumab group and three (1%) in the placebo group who died due to treatment-related adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Based on a statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin without any new safety signals, pembrolizumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin could be a new treatment option for patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable biliary tract cancer. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Recommendations of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology on skin cancer management in older patients.

INTRODUCTION: Non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) is becoming ever more prevalent among older adults. However, older adults with NMSC are often underrepresented in clinical trials and guidelines on effective management is still unclear. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) created a multi-disciplinary task force to explore the potential in developing practical guidelines for the treatment of older patients with basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and skin (cutaneous) squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search to identify relevant and up-to-date literature on treatment of NMSC in older adults was conducted on various databases including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, and PubMed. The resulting papers were discussed by an expert panel, leading to a consensus recommendation. RESULTS: A total of 154 articles were identified for the expert panel to utilise in generating consensus recommendations. A major focus on geriatric assessment and management options including surgery, radiotherapy, systemic therapy, clinical monitoring, and medical/medicophysical therapy were reviewed for recommendations. DISCUSSION: Patient age should not be the sole deciding factor in the management of patients with NMSC. Assessment from a multidisciplinary team (MDT) is crucial, and the decision-making process should consider the patient's lifestyle, needs, and expectations. A comprehensive geriatric assessment should also be considered. Patients should feel empowered to advocate for themselves and have their views considered a part of the MDT discussion.

First-Line Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Patient-Level Network Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: Sorafenib was historically the standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) until it was superseded by the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab. Thereafter, several novel first-line combination therapies have demonstrated favorable outcomes. The efficacies of these treatments in relation to current and previous standards of care are unknown, necessitating an overarching evaluation. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials for phase III randomized controlled trials investigating first-line systemic therapies for aHCC. Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were graphically reconstructed to retrieve individual patient-level data. Derived hazard ratios (HRs) for each study were pooled in a random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA). NMAs were also conducted using study-level HRs for various subgroups, according to viral etiology, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels, macrovascular invasion, and extrahepatic spread. Treatment strategies were ranked using p scores. Results: Among 4,321 articles identified, 12 trials and 9,589 patients were included for analysis. Only two therapies showed OS benefit over sorafenib: combined anti-programmed-death and anti-VEGF pathway inhibitor monoclonal antibodies (Anti-PD-(L)1/VEGF Ab), including atezolizumab-bevacizumab and sintilimab-bevacizumab biosimilar (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.53-0.76) and tremelimumab-durvalumab (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.66-0.92). Anti-PD-(L)1/VEGF Ab showed OS benefit over all other therapies except tremelimumab-durvalumab. Low heterogeneity (I2 = 0%) and inconsistency (Cochran's Q = 0.52, p = 0.773) was observed. p scores for OS ranked Anti-PD-(L)1/VEGF Ab as the best treatment in all subgroups, except hepatitis B where atezolizumab-cabozantinib ranked highest for both OS and PFS, as well as nonviral HCC and AFP ≥400 µg/L where tremelimumab-durvalumab ranked highest for OS. Conclusion: This NMA supports Anti-PD-(L)1/VEGF Ab as the first-line therapy for aHCC and demonstrates a comparable benefit for tremelimumab-durvalumab which also extends to certain subgroups. Results of the subgroup analysis may guide treatment according to baseline characteristics, while pending further studies.