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.

Association between treatment-emergent hypertension and survival with lenvatinib treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the REFLECT study.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib is approved as a first-line treatment for patients with unresectable and/or recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Lenvatinib achieved promising clinical benefits in REFLECT but was associated with clinically significant treatment-emergent hypertension (CSTE-HTN, a grouped term), a common class effect of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. This post hoc analysis assessed the impact of CSTE-HTN on the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in HCC. METHODS: Patients from REFLECT who received lenvatinib (n = 476) were stratified according to CSTE-HTN. Tumors were assessed by mRECIST. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using landmark analyses at 4 and 8 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 212 patients in the lenvatinib arm developed CSTE-HTN, and 264 did not. CSTE-HTN first occurred at 3.7 weeks (median); the worst grade CSTE-HTN occurred at 4.1 weeks (median). No patients had life-threatening CSTE-HTN and/or died due to CSTE-HTN. Median OS was numerically longer in patients with versus without CSTE-HTN (at 4 weeks: 16.3 vs. 11.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.621-1.004; at 8 weeks: 13.5 vs. 11.6 months; HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.696-1.089). Median PFS was similar between patients with and without CSTE-HTN (at 4 weeks: 6.6 vs. 6.4 months; HR, 0.887; 95% CI, 0.680-1.157; at 8 weeks: 5.7 vs. 6.4 months; HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.84-1.41). Objective response rate was numerically higher in patients with (48.6%) versus without CSTE-HTN (34.5%). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis, CSTE-HTN was associated with improved OS but not PFS. CSTE-HTN did not impair the outcomes of patients with HCC treated with lenvatinib when detected early and managed appropriately.

Merits and boundaries of the BCLC staging and treatment algorithm: Learning from the past to improve the future with a novel proposal.

In this Expert Opinion, we thoroughly analyse the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging and treatment algorithm for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that, since 1999, has standardised HCC management, offering a structured approach for the prognostic evaluation and treatment of patients with HCC. The first part of the article presents the strengths and evolutionary improvements of the BCLC staging system. Nevertheless, both patient characteristics and available treatments have changed in the last two decades, limiting the role of the BCLC criteria for treatment allocation in a growing number of patients. As therapeutic options expand and become more effective, the stage-linked treatment decision-making algorithm may lead to undertreatment and suboptimal outcomes for patients with disease beyond early-stage HCC. Consequently, strict adherence to BCLC criteria is limited in expert centres, particularly for patients diagnosed beyond early-stage HCC. Although the BCLC system remains the benchmark against which other therapeutic frameworks must be judged, the era of precision medicine calls for patient-tailored therapeutic decision-making (by a multidisciplinary tumour board) rather than stage-dictated treatment allocation. Acknowledging this conceptual difference in clinical management, the second part of the article describes a novel "multiparametric therapeutic hierarchy", which integrates a comprehensive assessment of clinical factors, biomarkers, technical feasibility, and resource availability. Lastly, considering the increasing efficacy of locoregional and systemic treatments, the concept of "converse therapeutic hierarchy" is introduced. These treatments can increase the feasibility (conversion approach) and effectiveness (adjuvant approach of systemic therapy) of potentially curative approaches to greatly improve clinical outcomes.

Characteristics and outcomes of immunotherapy-related liver injury in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma versus other advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is commonly observed in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed to compare the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of irLI between patients receiving ICIs for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) vs. other solid tumours. METHODS: Two separate cohorts were included: 375 patients with advanced/unresectable HCC, Child-Pugh A class treated with first-line atezolizumab+bevacizumab from the AB-real study, and a non-HCC cohort including 459 patients treated with first-line ICI therapy from the INVIDIa-2 multicentre study. IrLI was defined as a treatment-related increase of aminotransferase levels after exclusion of alternative aetiologies of liver injury. The incidence of irLI was adjusted for the duration of treatment exposure. RESULTS: In patients with HCC, the incidence of any grade irLI was 11.4% over a median treatment exposure of 4.4 months (95% CI 3.7-5.2) vs. 2.6% in the INVIDIa-2 cohort over a median treatment exposure of 12.4 months (95% CI 11.1-14.0). Exposure-adjusted-incidence of any grade irLI was 22.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with HCC and 2.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with other solid tumours (p <0.001), with median time-to-irLI of 1.4 and 4.7 months, respectively. Among patients who developed irLI, systemic corticosteroids were administered in 16.3% of patients with HCC and 75.0% of those without HCC (p <0.001), and irLI resolution was observed in 72.1% and 58.3%, respectively (p = 0.362). In patients with HCC, rates of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation due to irLI were 7%. Grade 1-2 irLI was associated with improved overall survival only in patients with HCC (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher incidence and earlier onset, irLI in patients with HCC is characterised by higher rates of remission and lower requirement for corticosteroid therapy (vs. irLI in other solid tumours), low risk of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation, not negatively affecting oncological outcomes. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is common in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but whether irLI is more frequent or it is associated with a worse clinical course in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), compared to other tumours, is not known. Herein, we compared characteristics and outcomes of irLI in two prospective cohorts including patients treated with ICIs for HCC or for other oncological indications. irLI is significantly more common and it occurs earlier in patients with HCC, also after adjustment for duration of treatment exposure. However, outcomes of patients with HCC who developed irLI are not negatively affected in terms of requirement for corticosteroid therapy, hepatic decompensation, treatment discontinuation and overall survival.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with resected or ablated high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (IMbrave050): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after curative-intent resection or ablation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In the global, open-label, phase 3 IMbrave050 study, adult patients with high-risk surgically resected or ablated hepatocellular carcinoma were recruited from 134 hospitals and medical centres in 26 countries in four WHO regions (European region, region of the Americas, South-East Asia region, and Western Pacific region). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio via an interactive voice-web response system using permuted blocks, using a block size of 4, to receive intravenous 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab every 3 weeks for 17 cycles (12 months) or to active surveillance. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by independent review facility assessment in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04102098. FINDINGS: The intention-to-treat population included 668 patients randomly assigned between Dec 31, 2019, and Nov 25, 2021, to either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=334) or to active surveillance (n=334). At the prespecified interim analysis (Oct 21, 2022), median duration of follow-up was 17·4 months (IQR 13·9-22·1). Adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with significantly improved recurrence-free survival (median, not evaluable [NE]; [95% CI 22·1-NE]) compared with active surveillance (median, NE [21·4-NE]; hazard ratio, 0·72 [adjusted 95% CI 0·53-0·98]; p=0·012). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 136 (41%) of 332 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 44 (13%) of 330 patients in the active surveillance group. Grade 5 adverse events occurred in six patients (2%, two of which were treatment related) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group, and one patient (<1%) in the active surveillance group. Both atezolizumab and bevacizumab were discontinued because of adverse events in 29 patients (9%) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. INTERPRETATION: Among patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following curative-intent resection or ablation, recurrence-free survival was improved in those who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance. To our knowledge, IMbrave050 is the first phase 3 study of adjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma to report positive results. However, longer follow-up for both recurrence-free and overall survival is needed to assess the benefit-risk profile more fully. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System Contrast-Enhanced US Nonradiation Treatment Response Assessment Version 2024.

The American College of Radiology Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) standardizes the imaging technique, reporting lexicon, disease categorization, and management for patients with or at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). LI-RADS encompasses HCC surveillance with US; HCC diagnosis with CT, MRI, or contrast-enhanced US (CEUS); and treatment response assessment (TRA) with CT or MRI. LI-RADS was recently expanded to include CEUS TRA after nonradiation locoregional therapy or surgical resection. This report provides an overview of LI-RADS CEUS Nonradiation TRA v2024, including a lexicon of imaging findings, techniques, and imaging criteria for posttreatment tumor viability assessment. LI-RADS CEUS Nonradiation TRA v2024 takes into consideration differences in the CEUS appearance of viable tumor and posttreatment changes within and in close proximity to a treated lesion. Due to the high sensitivity of CEUS to vascular flow, posttreatment reactive changes commonly manifest as areas of abnormal perilesional enhancement without washout, especially in the first 3 months after treatment. To improve the accuracy of CEUS for nonradiation TRA, different diagnostic criteria are used to evaluate tumor viability within and outside of the treated lesion margin. Broader criteria for intralesional enhancement increase sensitivity for tumor viability detection. Stricter criteria for perilesional enhancement limit miscategorization of posttreatment reactive changes as viable tumor. Finally, the TRA algorithm reconciles intralesional and perilesional tumor viability assessment and assigns a single LI-RADS treatment response (LR-TR) category: LR-TR nonviable, LR-TR equivocal, or LR-TR viable.

Activation of nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain 2 by muramyl dipeptide negatively regulates Toll-like receptor 9-mediated colonic inflammation through the induction of deubiquitinating enzyme A expression.

Mutations in nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain 2 (NOD2) are associated with Crohn's disease (CD). Although NOD2 activation contributes to the maintenance of intestinal homeostasis through the negative regulation of pro-inflammatory cytokine responses mediated by Toll-like receptors (TLRs), the effects of NOD2 activation on interferon (IFN)-α responses induced by TLR9 have been poorly defined. To explore the cross-talk between NOD2 and TLR9, human monocytes or dendritic cells (DCs) were stimulated with NOD2 and/or TLR9 ligands to measure IFN-α production. The severity of dextran sodium sulfate (DSS)-induced colitis was compared in mice treated with NOD2 and/or TLR9 ligands. Expression of IFN-α and IFN-stimulated genes (ISGs) was examined in the colonic mucosa of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). NOD2 activation reduced TLR9-induced IFN-α production by monocytes and DCs in a deubiquitinating enzyme A (DUBA)-dependent manner. Activation of DUBA induced by the co-stimulation of TLR9 and NOD2 inhibited Lys63-linked polyubiquitination of TRAF3 and suppressed TLR9-mediated IFN-α production. NOD2 activation in hematopoietic cells protected mice from TLR9-induced exacerbation of DSS-induced colitis by down-regulating IFN-α responses and up-regulating DUBA expression. Colonic mucosa of patients with active and remitted IBD phases was characterized by the enhanced and reduced expression of ISGs, respectively. Expression levels of IFN-α and IL-6 positively correlated in the active colonic mucosa of patients with ulcerative colitis and CD, whereas DUBA expression inversely correlated with that of IFN-α in patients with CD. Collectively, these data suggest that DUBA-dependent negative effect of NOD2 on TLR9-mediated IFN-α responses contributes to the maintenance of intestinal homeostasis.

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.

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.

Combination and Optimal Sequencing of Systemic and Locoregional Therapies in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Proceedings from the Society of Interventional Radiology Foundation Research Consensus Panel.

Hepatocellular carcinoma, historically, has had a poor prognosis with very few systemic options. Furthermore, most patients at diagnosis are not surgical candidates. Therefore, locoregional therapy (LRT) has been widely used, with strong data supporting its use. Over the last 15 years, there has been progress in the available systemic agents. This has led to the updated Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) algorithm's inclusion of these new systemic agents, with advocacy of earlier usage in those who progress on LRT or have tumor characteristics that make them less likely to benefit from LRT. However, neither the adjunct of LRT nor the specific sequencing of combination therapies is addressed directly. This Research Consensus Panel sought to highlight research priorities pertaining to the combination and optimal sequencing of LRT and systemic therapy, assessing the greatest needs across BCLC stages.

Current Trends and Advancements in the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a significant global health burden with a high mortality rate. Over the past 40 years, significant progress has been achieved in the prevention and management of HCC. SUMMARY: Hepatitis B vaccination programs, the development of direct acting antiviral drugs for Hepatitis C, and effective surveillance strategies provide a profound basis for the prevention of HCC. Advanced surgery and liver transplantation along with local ablation techniques potentially offer cure for the disease. Also, just recently, the introduction of immunotherapy opened a new chapter in systemic treatment. Finally, the introduction of the BCLC classification system for HCC, clearly defining patient groups and assigning reasonable treatment options, has standardized treatment and become the basis of almost all clinical trials for HCC. With this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolving landscape of HCC management and also touch on current challenges. KEY MESSAGE: A comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach is crucial for effective HCC management. Continued research and clinical trials are imperative to further enhance treatment options and will ultimately reduce the global burden of this devastating disease.

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.

IMbrave152/SKYSCRAPER-14: a Phase III study of atezolizumab, bevacizumab and tiragolumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is a standard of care, first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Myeloid and T regulatory cells are key immunosuppressive cell types within the hepatic tumor microenvironment associated with clinical resistance to atezolizumab and bevacizumab therapy for HCC and overall poor prognosis. Therapeutic targeting of TIGIT, which is highly expressed in these cells, with tiragolumab may overcome the immunosuppressive environment and improve clinical benefit, a hypothesis supported by positive efficacy signals in the Phase Ib/II MORPHEUS-Liver study. This paper describes the rationale and design of IMbrave152/SKYSCRAPER-14, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III study comparing atezolizumab and bevacizumab with tiragolumab or placebo in patients with HCC and no prior systemic treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05904886 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

This research study is designed to test a new treatment combination for liver cancer, specifically for patients whose cancer cannot be removed with surgery or has spread. The treatment involves three medications: atezolizumab, bevacizumab and tiragolumab.Atezolizumab and bevacizumab are already used together as a standard treatment for liver cancer. Tiragolumab is designed to block the TIGIT receptor, which is normally involved in holding back the immune cells that would attack the tumor. Because tiragolumab may restore the immune response against the tumor, adding tiragolumab might make the treatment more effective.The study is being done worldwide and includes patients who have not received any previous systemic treatment for their advanced liver cancer. Patients participating in the study will be randomly placed into two groups. One group will receive the new combination of three medications, while the other group will receive the standard treatment of two medications plus a placebo (a treatment with no active ingredient). The main goal is to see if the new combination helps patients live longer and slows the cancer's growth compared with the standard treatment. Safety and how patients feel during the treatment are also important parts of the study.

Utility of Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasonography to Diagnose Pancreaticobiliary Maljunction.

BACKGROUND: Detection of a common channel outside the duodenal wall is important in diagnosing pancreaticobiliary maljunction (PBM). The present study evaluated the utility of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography (CH-EUS) in diagnosing PBM. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study enrolled 45 patients who were diagnosed with PBM or high confluence of pancreatobiliary ducts (HCPBD) between January 2007 and December 2021. The diagnostic sensitivities of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and CH-EUS for diagnosing PBM were analyzed. Imaging findings were evaluated by two reviewers blinded to the clinicopathological results. RESULTS: Based on diagnostic criteria, 33 patients were diagnosed with PBM and 12 with HCPBD. Compared with the patients with HCPBD, those with PBM had significantly longer common channel (12.5 mm vs. 8.1 mm, P = 0.018) and common bile duct (13.0 mm vs. 8.6 mm, P = 0.049) lengths. The κ-coefficients for differentiating PBM and HCPBD were 0.871 between CE-CT and MRI, 0.330 between CE-CT and CH-EUS, and 0.611 between MRI and CH-EUS. The diagnostic sensitivity of CH-EUS (95.2%) was higher than that of CE-CT (83.3%) and MRI (82.8%), although the differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: CH-EUS may be useful for the diagnosis of PBM.

Crosstalk between NOD2 and TLR2 suppresses the development of TLR2-mediated experimental colitis.

Nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain 2 (NOD2) is an intracellular sensor for muramyl dipeptide (MDP), a degradation product of bacterial cell wall peptidoglycan (PGN). PGN stimulates cell-surface Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) independently of NOD2, indicating the presence of crosstalk between extracellular TLR2 and intracellular NOD2 upon exposure to PGN. NOD2-deficient mice were sensitive, while TLR2-deficient mice were resistant to experimental colitis induced by intrarectal administration of PGN. Severe colitis in NOD2-deficient mice was accompanied by increased expression of nuclear factor-kappa B-dependent cytokines and decreased expression of autophagy-related 16-like 1 (ATG16L1). MDP activation of NOD2 enhanced autophagy mediated by TLR2 in human dendritic cells. mRNA expression of TLR2 tended to be higher in the colonic mucosa of patients with active ulcerative colitis compared to that of those in remission. Induction of remission was associated with increased mRNA expression of ATG16L1 in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease patients. Conversely, mRNA expression of receptor-interacting serine/threonine-protein kinase 2 was higher in the inflammatory colonic mucosa of patients with active disease than in the non-inflamed mucosa of patients in remission, in both ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. These findings highlight the role of NOD2-TLR2 crosstalk in the immunopathogenesis of colitis.

Cytokine and chemokine profiles in ulcerative colitis relapse after coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are highly effective; however, vaccine-related adverse events, including autoimmunity, have been reported. Case reports describing relapse or new-onset of ulcerative colitis (UC) after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination are available. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of colonic inflammation associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccination are poorly understood. Furthermore, it is unclear whether the relapse of UC after COVID-19 vaccination is driven by unique cytokine responses that differ from those of UC not associated with vaccination. mRNAs derived from COVID-19 vaccines are potent inducers of type I IFN response. We encountered three cases of UC relapse after COVID-19 vaccination. mRNA expressions of IFN-α, IFN-ß, IL-1ß, and IL-12/23p40 showed higher tendency in the colonic mucosa of patients with UC associated with vaccination compared with those not associated with vaccination. In contrast, the expressions of C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 9 (CXCL9) and CXCL10 were comparable. Immunofluorescence analyses also showed higher expression of IFN-α in the colonic mucosa of patients with UC associated with COVID-19 vaccination than in those not associated with vaccination. Taken together, these data suggest that the colonic mucosa of patients with UC who relapsed after COVID-19 vaccination was characterized by enhanced type I IFN responses.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus lenvatinib plus placebo for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (LEAP-002): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Systemic therapies have improved the management of hepatocellular carcinoma, but there is still a need to further enhance overall survival in first-line advanced stages. This study aimed to evaluate the addition of pembrolizumab to lenvatinib versus lenvatinib plus placebo in the first-line setting for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this global, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study (LEAP-002), patients aged 18 years or older with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, Child Pugh class A liver disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and no previous systemic treatment were enrolled at 172 global sites. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a central interactive voice-response system (block size of 4) to receive lenvatinib (bodyweight <60 kg, 8 mg/day; bodyweight ≥60 kg, 12 mg/day) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) or lenvatinib plus placebo. Randomisation was stratified by geographical region, macrovascular portal vein invasion or extrahepatic spread or both, α-fetoprotein concentration, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Dual primary endpoints were overall survival (superiority threshold at final overall survival analysis, one-sided p=0·019; final analysis to occur after 532 events) and progression-free survival (superiority threshold one-sided p=0·002; final analysis to occur after 571 events) in the intention-to-treat population. Results from the final analysis are reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03713593, and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Jan 17, 2019, and April 28, 2020, of 1309 patients assessed, 794 were randomly assigned to lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (n=395) or lenvatinib plus placebo (n=399). Median age was 66·0 years (IQR 57·0-72·0), 644 (81%) of 794 were male, 150 (19%) were female, 345 (43%) were Asian, 345 (43%) were White, 22 (3%) were multiple races, 21 (3%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 21 (3%) were Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, 13 (2%) were Black or African American, and 46 (6%) did not have available race data. Median follow up as of data cutoff for the final analysis (June 21, 2022) was 32·1 months (IQR 29·4-35·3). Median overall survival was 21·2 months (95% CI 19·0-23·6; 252 [64%] of 395 died) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus 19·0 months (17·2-21·7; 282 [71%] of 399 died) with lenvatinib plus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·84; 95% CI 0·71-1·00; stratified log-rank p=0·023). As of data cutoff for the progression-free survival final analysis (April 5, 2021), median progression-free survival was 8·2 months (95% CI 6·4-8·4; 270 events occurred [42 deaths; 228 progressions]) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus 8·0 months (6·3-8·2; 301 events occurred [36 deaths; 265 progressions]) with lenvatinib plus placebo (HR 0·87; 95% CI 0·73-1·02; stratified log-rank p=0·047). The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (69 [17%] of 395 patients in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group vs 68 [17%] of 395 patients) in the lenvatinib plus placebo group), increased aspartate aminotransferase (27 [7%] vs 17 [4%]), and diarrhoea (25 [6%] vs 15 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in four (1%) patients in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group (due to gastrointestinal haemorrhage and hepatorenal syndrome [n=1 each] and hepatic encephalopathy [n=2]) and in three (1%) patients in the lenvatinib plus placebo group (due to gastrointestinal haemorrhage, hepatorenal syndrome, and cerebrovascular accident [n=1 each]). INTERPRETATION: In earlier studies, the addition of pembrolizumab to lenvatinib as first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma has shown promising clinical activity; however, lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab did not meet prespecified significance for improved overall survival and progression-free survival versus lenvatinib plus placebo. Our findings do not support a change in clinical practice. FUNDING: Eisai US, and Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck.

Treatment of portal hypertension in patients with HCC in the era of Baveno VII.

Portal hypertension (PHT) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) often coexist, and their association impairs the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis. The interplay between these two conditions is of major therapeutic significance, both from the perspective of offering adequate treatment for HCC and for preventing or managing the complications of PHT. Recommendations on the management of PHT were heavily revised at the last Baveno VII conference, redefining screening and extending the indications for prophylaxis. PHT can preclude locoregional therapies, and TIPS placement can be discussed in patients with HCC. New systemic therapies for HCC can influence the level of PHT and favour bleeding. Complications of PHT should be prevented and treated adequately in all patients, especially those presenting with advanced HCC. Specific aspects of the management of both conditions will be discussed in the present expert opinion, which considers very recent data in the HCC field.

Overall survival and objective response in advanced unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A subanalysis of the REFLECT study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Validated surrogate endpoints for overall survival (OS) are important for expediting the clinical study and drug-development processes. Herein, we aimed to validate objective response as an independent predictor of OS in individuals with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving systemic anti-angiogenic therapy. METHODS: We investigated the association between objective response (investigator-assessed mRECIST, independent radiologic review [IRR] mRECIST and RECIST v1.1) and OS in REFLECT, a phase III study of lenvatinib vs. sorafenib. We conducted landmark analyses (Simon-Makuch) of OS by objective response at 2, 4, and 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: Median OS was 21.6 months (95% CI 18.6-24.5) for responders (investigator-assessed mRECIST) vs. 11.9 months (95% CI 10.7-12.8) for non-responders (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61; 95% CI 0.49-0.76; p <0.001). Objective response by IRR per mRECIST and RECIST v1.1 supported the association with OS (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.51-0.72; p <0.001 and HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.39-0.65; p <0.001, respectively). OS was significantly prolonged for responders vs. non-responders (investigator-assessed mRECIST) at the 2-month (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.49-0.76; p <0.001), 4-month (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.80; p <0.001), and 6-month (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.54-0.86; p <0.001) landmarks. Results were similar when assessed by IRR, with both mRECIST and RECIST v1.1. An exploratory multivariate Cox regression analysis identified objective response by investigator-assessed mRECIST (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.44-0.68; p <0.0001) and IRR-assessed RECIST v1.1 (HR 0.49; 95% CI, 0.38-0.64; p <0.0001) as independent predictors of OS in individuals with unresectable HCC. CONCLUSIONS: Objective response was an independent predictor of OS in individuals with unresectable HCC in REFLECT; additional studies are needed to confirm surrogacy. Participants achieving a complete or partial response by mRECIST or RECIST v1.1 had significantly longer survival vs. those with stable/progressive/non-evaluable disease. GOV NUMBER: NCT01761266. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: This analysis of data taken from a completed clinical trial (REFLECT) looked for any link between objective response and overall survival time in individuals with unresectable HCC receiving anti-angiogenic treatments. Significantly longer median overall survival was found for responders (21.6 months) vs. non-responders (11.9 months). Overall survival was also significantly longer for responders vs. non-responders (based on objective response status at 2, 4, and 6 months) in the landmark analysis. Our results indicate that objective response is an independent predictor of overall survival in this setting, confirming its validity as a rapid marker of efficacy that can be applied in phase II trials; however, further validation is required to determine is validity for other systemic treatments (e.g. immunotherapies), or as a surrogate of overall survival.

Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab showed encouraging antitumor activity and safety in a phase 1b trial involving patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In a global, open-label, phase 3 trial, patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma who had not previously received systemic treatment were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or sorafenib until unacceptable toxic effects occurred or there was a loss of clinical benefit. The coprimary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, as assessed at an independent review facility according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1). RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 336 patients in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab group and 165 patients in the sorafenib group. At the time of the primary analysis (August 29, 2019), the hazard ratio for death with atezolizumab-bevacizumab as compared with sorafenib was 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42 to 0.79; P<0.001). Overall survival at 12 months was 67.2% (95% CI, 61.3 to 73.1) with atezolizumab-bevacizumab and 54.6% (95% CI, 45.2 to 64.0) with sorafenib. Median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 8.3) and 4.3 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 5.6) in the respective groups (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.76; P<0.001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56.5% of 329 patients who received at least one dose of atezolizumab-bevacizumab and in 55.1% of 156 patients who received at least one dose of sorafenib. Grade 3 or 4 hypertension occurred in 15.2% of patients in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab group; however, other high-grade toxic effects were infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab resulted in better overall and progression-free survival outcomes than sorafenib. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03434379.).