Congenital myasthenic syndromes in adults: clinical features, diagnosis and long-term prognosis.

Congenital myasthenic syndromes (CMS) are clinically and genetically heterogeneous diseases caused by mutations affecting neuromuscular transmission. Even if the first symptoms mainly occur during childhood, adult neurologists must confront this challenging diagnosis and manage these patients throughout their adulthood. However, long-term follow-up data from large cohorts of CMS patients are lacking and the long-term prognosis of these patients is largely unknown. We report the clinical features, diagnostic difficulties, and long-term prognosis of a French nationwide cohort of 235 adult patients with genetically confirmed CMS followed in 23 specialized neuromuscular centres. Data were retrospectively analysed. Of the 235 patients, 123 were female (52.3%). The diagnosis was made in adulthood in 139 patients, 110 of whom presented their first symptoms before the age of 18. Mean follow-up time between first symptoms and last visit was 34 years (SD = 15.1). Pathogenic variants were found in 19 disease-related genes. CHRNE-low expressor variants were the most common (23.8%), followed by variants in DOK7 (18.7%) and RAPSN (14%). Genotypes were clustered into four groups according to the initial presentation: ocular group (CHRNE-LE, CHRND, FCCMS), distal group (SCCMS), limb-girdle group (RAPSN, COLQ, DOK7, GMPPB, GFPT1), and a variable-phenotype group (MUSK, AGRN). The phenotypical features of CMS did not change throughout life. Only four genotypes had a proportion of patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission that exceeded 20%: RAPSN (54.8%), MUSK (50%), DOK7 (38.6%) and AGRN (25.0%). In RAPSN and MUSK patients most ICU admissions occurred before age 18 years and in DOK7 and AGRN patients at or after 18 years of age. Different patterns of disease course (stability, improvement and progressive worsening) may succeed one another in the same patient throughout life, particularly in AGRN, DOK7 and COLQ. At the last visit, 55% of SCCMS and 36.3% of DOK7 patients required ventilation; 36.3% of DOK7 patients, 25% of GMPPB patients and 20% of GFPT1 patients were wheelchair-bound; most of the patients who were both wheelchair-bound and ventilated were DOK7 patients. Six patients died in this cohort. The positive impact of therapy was striking, even in severely affected patients. In conclusion, even if motor and/or respiratory deterioration could occur in patients with initially moderate disease, particularly in DOK7, SCCMS and GFPT1 patients, the long-term prognosis for most CMS patients was favourable, with neither ventilation nor wheelchair needed at last visit. CHRNE patients did not worsen during adulthood and RAPSN patients, often severely affected in early childhood, subsequently improved.

Long-term oncological results of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (iCCA) remains insufficiently studied. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study including patients with histologically proven iCCA within Milan criteria treated by percutaneous RFA from 2000 to 2022. The primary outcome was overall survival in treatment-naive patients and secondary outcomes included ablation completeness, adverse events, local and distant recurrence. A total of 494 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on cirrhosis treated by RFA were included as a comparison group. Oncological events were analysed using Kaplan-Meier, log-rank and univariate/multivariate Cox models. RESULTS: The main population included 71 patients, mostly cirrhotic (80%) with solitary tumours (66%) of a median size of 24 mm. Local recurrence was 45% at 5 years, lower in multibipolar versus monopolar RFA (22% vs. 55%, p = .007). In treatment-naive patients (n = 45), median overall and recurrence-free survivals were 26 and 11 months, respectively. Tumour size (p = .01) and Child-Pugh B (p = .001) were associated with death. The rate of distant recurrence was 59% at 5 years significantly lower for single tumours of less than 2 (p = .002) or 3 cm (p = .02). In cirrhotic patients naïve of previous treatment (n = 40), overall survival was shorter than in HCC (26 vs 68 months, p < .0001), with more local recurrences (p < .0001). Among distant recurrences, 50% were extrahepatic metastases compared to 12% in HCC (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Multibipolar RFA provides better results in terms of tumour recurrence than monopolar RFA and could be used to treat small iCCA (<3 cm). Adjuvant chemotherapy should be discussed due to the frequent extra-hepatic metastasis at recurrence.

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.

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.).

Hypersensitivity infusion-associated reactions induced by enzyme replacement therapy in a cohort of patients with late-onset Pompe disease: An experience from the French Pompe Registry.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pompe disease is a rare hereditary glycogen storage disorder due to lysosomal acid alpha-glucosidase deficiency. Enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) is the only available treatment. Infusion-associated reactions (IAR) are challenging since there are no guidelines for ERT rechallenge after a drug hypersensitivity reaction (DHR) in Pompe disease. The objective of the present study was to describe IAR and their management in late-onset Pompe disease (LOPD) patients in France, and to discuss the various possibilities of ERT rechallenge. METHODS: An exhaustive screening of LOPD patients receiving ERT between 2006 and 2020 from the 31-participating hospital-based or reference centers was performed. The patients who had presented at least one hypersensitivity IAR (=DHR) episode were included. Demographic characteristics of the patients, IAR onset and timing, were retrospectively collected from the French Pompe Registry. RESULTS: Fifteen patients among 115 treated LOPD patients in France presented at least 1 IAR; 80.0% were women. Twenty-nine IAR were reported; 18 (62.1%) IAR were Grade I reactions, 10 (34.5%) IAR were Grade II, and 1 (3.4%) IAR was Grade III. IgE-mediated hypersensitivity was found in 2/15 patients (13.3%). The median [IQR] time from ERT introduction to the first IAR was 15.0 months [11.0-24.0]. ERT was safely and effectively re-introduced either with premedication alone, or in combination with either modified regimen or desensitization protocol, in all 9 rechallenged patients; including in patients with IgE-mediated hypersensitivity, in the patient with the Grade III reaction, as well as in patients with very high anti-GAA titer. DISCUSSION: Based on the results herein and previous reports, we discuss premedication and modified regimen for Grade I reactions, and desensitization in Grade II and III reactions. In conclusion, ERT-induced IAR can be safely and effectively managed with a modified regimen or desensitization protocol in LOPD patients.

Surgical resection versus transarterial chemoembolization followed by moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the gold standard treatment in intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but long-term disease control rates remain low. Herein, we compared results of TACE followed by hypofractionated radiotherapy (TACE-hRT) to surgical resection (SR) in early single or paucinodular intrahepatic HCC. METHODS: Between June 2004 and November 2016, data on 160 consecutive patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage A Child-Pugh A HCC treated with SR or TACE-hRT in our expert center were retrospectively reviewed. Time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Clinical outcomes were compared using the stabilized-weights inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients underwent SR and 62 were treated by TACE-hRT. Median total dose of RT was 54 Gy (interquartile range [IQR] 54-54) in 3­Gy fractions. Median OS follow-up was 93 months. TTP did not significantly differ between patients following SR and TACE-hRT, with 1­year rates of 68.2% and 82.6% (p = 0.17), respectively. In contrast, PFS and OS were lower in the TACE-hRT group (p = 0.015 and p = 0.006), with a median OS of 37 vs. 63 months for patients with surgery and TACE-hRT, respectively. In multivariate analysis, a significant negative impact on PFS and OS was seen for age at diagnosis, on TTP for alcohol-related liver disease, and on OS for total number of HCC nodules. Symptomatic grade ≥ 3 adverse events were presented by 42 (42.9%) SR and 19 (30.6%) TACE-hRT patients (p = 0.17). CONCLUSION: In patients presenting Child-Pugh A BCLC­A HCC with high risk for surgical complications, TACE-hRT can be an effective and safe treatment. However, surgical management remains the standard of care whenever possible.

Immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: How does underlying liver disease influence therapeutic strategy and outcomes?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide, with up to 90% of HCC cases occurring in the setting of underlying cirrhosis. Therapeutic landscape for advanced HCC has dramatically changed in recent years with the advent of immunotherapy, including several combinations. Data suggest that the surrounding liver milieu may influence tumour response. In addition, different aetiologies of HCC and their effects on the host liver may impact response to immunotherapy. However, to date, guidelines do not take into account this parameter to guide therapeutic selection, and phase III trials are likewise performed in patients irrespective of HCC aetiology. Moreover, most clinical trial data are collected in highly selected patients with preserved liver function (defined as Child-Pugh class A) and controlled portal hypertension, which does not accurately reflect routine clinical practice. In this review, we discuss the influence of liver disease aetiology on the response to immunotherapy in patients with advanced HCC. We also discuss the safety and efficacy of various immunotherapeutic agents in Child-Pugh B patients to determine if these treatments are beneficial in this vulnerable patient population.

RNA helicase DDX5 enables STAT1 mRNA translation and interferon signalling in hepatitis B virus replicating hepatocytes.

OBJECTIVE: RNA helicase DDX5 is downregulated during HBV replication and poor prognosis HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The objective of this study is to investigate the role of DDX5 in interferon (IFN) signalling. We provide evidence of a novel mechanism involving DDX5 that enables translation of transcription factor STAT1 mediating the IFN response. DESIGN AND RESULTS: Molecular, pharmacological and biophysical assays were used together with cellular models of HBV replication, HCC cell lines and liver tumours. We demonstrate that DDX5 regulates STAT1 mRNA translation by resolving a G-quadruplex (rG4) RNA structure, proximal to the 5' end of STAT1 5'UTR. We employed luciferase reporter assays comparing wild type (WT) versus mutant rG4 sequence, rG4-stabilising compounds, CRISPR/Cas9 editing of the STAT1-rG4 sequence and circular dichroism determination of the rG4 structure. STAT1-rG4 edited cell lines were resistant to the effect of rG4-stabilising compounds in response to IFN-α, while HCC cell lines expressing low DDX5 exhibited reduced IFN response. Ribonucleoprotein and electrophoretic mobility assays demonstrated direct and selective binding of RNA helicase-active DDX5 to the WT STAT1-rG4 sequence. Immunohistochemistry of normal liver and liver tumours demonstrated that absence of DDX5 corresponded to absence of STAT1. Significantly, knockdown of DDX5 in HBV infected HepaRG cells reduced the anti-viral effect of IFN-α. CONCLUSION: RNA helicase DDX5 resolves a G-quadruplex structure in 5'UTR of STAT1 mRNA, enabling STAT1 translation. We propose that DDX5 is a key regulator of the dynamic range of IFN response during innate immunity and adjuvant IFN-α therapy.

Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (COSMIC-312): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib has shown clinical activity in combination with checkpoint inhibitors in solid tumours. The COSMIC-312 trial assessed cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib as first-line systemic treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: COSMIC-312 is an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not amenable to curative or locoregional therapy and previously untreated with systemic anticancer therapy at 178 centres in 32 countries. Patients with fibrolamellar carcinoma, sarcomatoid hepatocellular carcinoma, or combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma were not eligible. Tumours involving major blood vessels, including the main portal vein, were permitted. Patients were required to have measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1), Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, adequate organ and marrow function, and Child-Pugh class A. Previous resection, tumour ablation, radiotherapy, or arterial chemotherapy was allowed if more than 28 days before randomisation. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1) via a web-based interactive response system to cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily plus atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily, or single-agent cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily. Randomisation was stratified by disease aetiology, geographical region, and presence of extrahepatic disease or macrovascular invasion. Dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival per RECIST 1.1 as assessed by a blinded independent radiology committee in the first 372 patients randomly assigned to the combination treatment of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab or sorafenib (progression-free survival intention-to-treat [ITT] population), and overall survival in all patients randomly assigned to cabozantinib plus atezolizumab or sorafenib (ITT population). Final progression-free survival and concurrent interim overall survival analyses are presented. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03755791. FINDINGS: Analyses at data cut-off (March 8, 2021) included the first 837 patients randomly assigned between Dec 7, 2018, and Aug 27, 2020, to combination treatment of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab (n=432), sorafenib (n=217), or single-agent cabozantinib (n=188). Median follow-up was 15·8 months (IQR 14·5-17·2) in the progression-free survival ITT population and 13·3 months (10·5-16·0) in the ITT population. Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (99% CI 5·6-8·3) in the combination treatment group versus 4·2 months (2·8-7·0) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·63, 99% CI 0·44-0·91, p=0·0012). Median overall survival (interim analysis) was 15·4 months (96% CI 13·7-17·7) in the combination treatment group versus 15·5 months (12·1-not estimable) in the sorafenib group (HR 0·90, 96% CI 0·69-1·18; p=0·44). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were alanine aminotransferase increase (38 [9%] of 429 patients in the combination treatment group vs six [3%] of 207 in the sorafenib group vs 12 [6%] of 188 in the single-agent cabozantinib group), hypertension (37 [9%] vs 17 [8%] vs 23 [12%]), aspartate aminotransferase increase (37 [9%] vs eight [4%] vs 18 [10%]), and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (35 [8%] vs 17 [8%] vs 16 [9%]); serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 78 (18%) patients in the combination treatment group, 16 (8%) patients in the sorafenib group, and 24 (13%) in the single-agent cabozantinib group. Treatment-related grade 5 events 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%) patient in the sorafenib group (general physical health deterioration), and one (<1%) patient in the single-agent cabozantinib group (gastrointestinal haemorrhage). INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab might be a treatment option for select patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but additional studies are needed. FUNDING: Exelixis and Ipsen.

Nivolumab versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 459): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Single-agent nivolumab showed durable responses, manageable safety, and promising survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the phase 1-2 CheckMate 040 study. We aimed to investigate nivolumab monotherapy compared with sorafenib monotherapy in the first-line setting for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at medical centres across 22 countries and territories in Asia, Australasia, Europe, and North America, patients at least 18 years old with histologically confirmed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for, or whose disease had progressed after, surgery or locoregional treatment; with no previous systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, with Child-Pugh class A and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and regardless of viral hepatitis status were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive nivolumab (240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02576509. FINDINGS: Between Jan 11, 2016, and May 24, 2017, 743 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (nivolumab, n=371; sorafenib, n=372). At the primary analysis, the median follow-up for overall survival was 15·2 months (IQR 5·7-28·0) for the nivolumab group and 13·4 months (5·7-25·9) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 16·4 months (95% CI 13·9-18·4) with nivolumab and 14·7 months (11·9-17·2) with sorafenib (hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·72-1·02]; p=0·075; minimum follow-up 22·8 months); the protocol-defined significance level of p=0·0419 was not reached. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (1 [<1%] of 367 patients in the nivolumab group vs 52 [14%] of patients in the sorafenib group), aspartate aminotransferase increase (22 [6%] vs 13 [4%]), and hypertension (0 vs 26 [7%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 43 (12%) patients receiving nivolumab and 39 (11%) patients receiving sorafenib. Four deaths in the nivolumab group and one death in the sorafenib group were assessed as treatment related. INTERPRETATION: First-line nivolumab treatment did not significantly improve overall survival compared with sorafenib, but clinical activity and a favourable safety profile were observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, nivolumab might be considered a therapeutic option for patients in whom tyrosine kinase inhibitors and antiangiogenic drugs are contraindicated or have substantial risks. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical.

Updated efficacy and safety data from IMbrave150: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs. sorafenib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: IMbrave150 demonstrated that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab led to significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma at the primary analysis (after a median 8.6 months of follow-up). We present updated data after 12 months of additional follow-up. METHODS: Patients with systemic treatment-naive, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma were randomized 2:1 to receive 1,200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab intravenously every 3 weeks or 400 mg sorafenib orally twice daily in this open-label, phase III study. Co-primary endpoints were OS and PFS by independently assessed RECIST 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary efficacy endpoints included objective response rates and exploratory subgroup efficacy analyses. This is a post hoc updated analysis of efficacy and safety. RESULTS: From March 15, 2018, to January 30, 2019, 501 patients (intention-to-treat population) were randomly allocated to receive atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n = 336) or sorafenib (n = 165). On August 31, 2020, after a median 15.6 (range, 0-28.6) months of follow-up, the median OS was 19.2 months (95% CI 17.0-23.7) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 13.4 months (95% CI 11.4-16.9) with sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66; 95% CI 0.52-0.85; descriptive p <0.001). The median PFS was 6.9 (95% CI 5.7-8.6) and 4.3 (95% CI 4.0-5.6) months in the respective treatment groups (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.53-0.81; descriptive p < 0.001). Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 143 (43%) of 329 and 72 (46%) of 156 safety-evaluable patients in the respective groups, and treatment-related grade 5 events occurred in 6 (2%) and 1 (<1%) patients. CONCLUSION: After longer follow-up, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab maintained clinically meaningful survival benefits over sorafenib and had a safety profile consistent with the primary analysis. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03434379. LAY SUMMARY: The primary analysis of IMbrave150 showed that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab had significantly greater benefits than sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but survival data were not yet mature. At this updated analysis done 12 months later, median overall survival was 5.8 months longer with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab than sorafenib, and the severity profile of treatment-related side effects remained similar. These updated results confirm atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as the first-line standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Patient-reported outcomes with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (IMbrave150): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Understanding patients' experience of cancer treatment is important. We aimed to evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the IMbrave150 trial, which has already shown significant overall survival and progression-free survival benefits with this combination therapy. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial in 111 hospitals and cancer centres across 17 countries or regions. We included patients aged 18 years or older with systemic, treatment-naive, histologically, cytologically, or clinically confirmed unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, with disease that was not amenable to curative surgical or locoregional therapies, or progressive disease after surgical or locoregional therapies. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1; using permuted block randomisation [blocks of six], stratified by geographical region; macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; baseline alpha-fetoprotein concentration; and ECOG performance status) to receive 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab intravenously once every 3 weeks or 400 mg sorafenib orally twice a day, until loss of clinical benefit or unacceptable toxicity. The independent review facility for tumour assessment was masked to the treatment allocation. Previously reported coprimary endpoints were overall survival and independently assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Prespecified secondary and exploratory analyses descriptively evaluated treatment effects on patient-reported quality of life, functioning, and disease symptoms per the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality-of-life questionnaire for cancer (QLQ-C30) and quality-of-life questionnaire for hepatocellular carcinoma (QLQ-HCC18). Time to confirmed deterioration of PROs was analysed in the intention-to-treat population; all other analyses were done in the PRO-evaluable population (patients who had a baseline PRO assessment and at least one assessment after baseline). The trial is ongoing; enrolment is closed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03434379. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2018, and Jan 30, 2019, 725 patients were screened and 501 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=336) or sorafenib (n=165). 309 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 145 patients in the sorafenib group were included in the PRO-evaluable population. At data cutoff (Aug 29, 2019) the median follow-up was 8·6 months (IQR 6·2-10·8). EORTC QLQ-C30 completion rates were 90% or greater for 23 of 24 treatment cycles in both groups (range 88-100% in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 80-100% in the sorafenib group). EORTC QLQ-HCC18 completion rates were 90% or greater for 20 of 24 cycles in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group (range 88-100%) and 21 of 24 cycles in the sorafenib group (range 89-100%). Compared with sorafenib, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab reduced the risk of deterioration on all EORTC QLQ-C30 generic cancer symptom scales that were prespecified for analysis (appetite loss [hazard ratio (HR) 0·57, 95% CI 0·40-0·81], diarrhoea [0·23, 0·16-0·34], fatigue [0·61, 0·46-0·81], pain [0·46, 0·34-0·62]), and two of three EORTC QLQ-HCC18 disease-specific symptom scales that were prespecified for analysis (fatigue [0·60, 0·45-0·80] and pain [0·65, 0·46-0·92], but not jaundice [0·76, 0·55-1·07]). At day 1 of treatment cycle five (after which attrition in the sorafenib group was more than 50%), the mean EORTC QLQ-C30 score changes from baseline in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib groups were: -3·29 (SD 17·56) versus -5·83 (20·63) for quality of life, -4·02 (19·42) versus -9·76 (21·33) for role functioning, and -3·77 (12·82) versus -7·60 (15·54) for physical functioning. INTERPRETATION: Prespecified analyses of PRO data showed clinically meaningful benefits in terms of patient-reported quality of life, functioning, and disease symptoms with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab compared with sorafenib, strengthening the combination therapy's positive benefit-risk profile versus that of sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Health-related quality-of-life impact of pembrolizumab versus best supportive care in previously systemically treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: KEYNOTE-240.

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an important outcome measure and prognostic indicator in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). KEYNOTE-240 (NCT02702401) assessed the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (BSC) versus placebo plus BSC in patients with HCC who previously received sorafenib. This study presents the results of a prespecified exploratory analysis of patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and its HCC supplement (EORTC QLQ-HCC18) electronically at baseline; at weeks 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, and 18; and then every 9 weeks until 1 year or end of treatment, and at the 30-day safety follow-up visit. RESULTS: The HRQoL population included 271 and 127 patients randomly assigned to pembrolizumab and placebo, respectively. From baseline to week 12, changes in both scores were similar between pembrolizumab and placebo; global health status/QoL scores were stable. The proportions of patients who improved, remained stable, or deteriorated across all functional domain and symptom scores were generally similar between pembrolizumab and placebo. Time to deterioration was similar between the 2 arms based on the prespecified analysis of EORTC QLQ-HCC18 domains of abdominal swelling, fatigue, and pain. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab preserved HRQoL during treatment for advanced HCC. Combined with efficacy and safety results from KEYNOTE-240, these findings support a positive benefit/risk profile for pembrolizumab in a second-line treatment setting for patients with HCC who previously received sorafenib.

Phase 1b/2 trial of tepotinib in sorafenib pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with MET overexpression.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 1b/2 study evaluated tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, in US/European patients with sorafenib pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) with MET overexpression. METHODS: Eligible adults had aHCC, progression after ≥4 weeks of sorafenib, and, for Phase 2 only, MET overexpression. Tepotinib was administered once daily at 300 or 500 mg in Phase 1b ('3 + 3' design), and at the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) in Phase 2. Primary endpoints were dose-liming toxicities (DLTs; Phase 1b) and 12-week investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; Phase 2). RESULTS: In Phase 1b (n = 17), no DLTs occurred and the RP2D was confirmed as 500 mg. In Phase 2 (n = 49), the primary endpoint was met: 12-week PFS was 63.3% (90% CI: 50.5-74.7), which was significantly greater than the predefined null hypothesis of ≤15% (one-sided binomial exact test: P < 0.0001). Median time to progression was 4 months. In Phase 2, 28.6% of patients had treatment-related Grade ≥3 adverse events, including peripheral oedema and lipase increase (both 6.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Tepotinib was generally well tolerated and the RP2D (500 mg) showed promising efficacy and, therefore, a positive benefit-risk balance in sorafenib pretreated aHCC with MET overexpression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02115373.

Cabozantinib in Patients with Advanced and Progressing Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib inhibits tyrosine kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3, MET, and AXL, which are implicated in the progression of hepatocellular carcinoma and the development of resistance to sorafenib, the standard initial treatment for advanced disease. This randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial evaluated cabozantinib as compared with placebo in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 707 patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive cabozantinib (60 mg once daily) or matching placebo. Eligible patients had received previous treatment with sorafenib, had disease progression after at least one systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, and may have received up to two previous systemic regimens for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival and the objective response rate. RESULTS: At the second planned interim analysis, the trial showed significantly longer overall survival with cabozantinib than with placebo. Median overall survival was 10.2 months with cabozantinib and 8.0 months with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.92; P=0.005). Median progression-free survival was 5.2 months with cabozantinib and 1.9 months with placebo (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.52; P<0.001), and the objective response rates were 4% and less than 1%, respectively (P=0.009). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 68% of patients in the cabozantinib group and in 36% in the placebo group. The most common high-grade events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (17% with cabozantinib vs. 0% with placebo), hypertension (16% vs. 2%), increased aspartate aminotransferase level (12% vs. 7%), fatigue (10% vs. 4%), and diarrhea (10% vs. 2%). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, treatment with cabozantinib resulted in longer overall survival and progression-free survival than placebo. The rate of high-grade adverse events in the cabozantinib group was approximately twice that observed in the placebo group. (Funded by Exelixis; CELESTIAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01908426 .).

Deep phenotyping of an international series of patients with late-onset dysferlinopathy.

BACKGROUND: To describe the clinical, pathological, and molecular characteristics of late-onset (LO) dysferlinopathy patients. METHODS: Retrospective series of patients with LO dysferlinopathy, defined by an age at onset of symptoms ≥30 years, from neuromuscular centers in France and the International Clinical Outcome Study for dysferlinopathy (COS). Patients with early-onset (EO) dysferlinopathy (<30 years) were randomly selected from the COS study as a control group, and the North Star Assessment for Dysferlinopathy (NSAD) and Activity Limitation (ACTIVLIM) scores were used to assess functionality. Muscle biopsies obtained from 11 LO and 11 EO patients were revisited. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients with LO dysferlinopathy were included (28 females). Median age at onset of symptoms was 37 (range 30-57) years and most patients showed a limb-girdle (n = 26) or distal (n = 10) phenotype. However, compared with EO dysferlinopathy patients (n = 48), LO patients more frequently showed atypical phenotypes (7 vs. 1; p = 0.014), including camptocormia, lower creatine kinase levels (2855 vs. 4394 U/L; p = 0.01), and higher NSAD (p = 0.008) and ACTIVLIM scores (p = 0.016). Loss of ambulation in LO patients tended to occur later (23 ± 4.4 years after disease onset vs. 16.3 ± 6.8 years; p = 0.064). Muscle biopsy of LO patients more frequently showed an atypical pattern (unspecific myopathic changes) as well as significantly less necrosis regeneration and inflammation. Although LO patients more frequently showed missense variants (39.8% vs. 23.9%; p = 0.021), no differences in dysferlin protein expression were found on Western blot. CONCLUSIONS: Late-onset dysferlinopathy patients show a higher frequency of atypical presentations, are less severely affected, and show milder dystrophic changes in muscle biopsy.

External validation of the French alpha-fetoprotein model for hepatocellular carcinoma liver transplantation in a recent unicentric cohort - a retrospective study.

Prognostic models of liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) mainly derive from LT cohorts with numerous hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients. The AFP model, which is currently used in France to select LT candidates, was derived from a cohort of LT performed between 1988 and 2001, including a majority of HCV-positive recipients. The emergence of new direct-acting antiviral therapies and subsequent decrease of HCV incidence may change the generalizability of such models. We performed an external validation of the AFP model in a cohort of recipients transplanted between 2005 and 2018. Although multivariable analysis identified all three model's factors (AFP level, largest tumor size, number of nodules) as predictors of tumor recurrence, the AFP model showed poor discrimination and calibration in the present cohort. This poor performance could be related to significant differences between the derivation and the present cohort in terms of etiology, severity of underlying liver disease, tumor burden and differentiation, and use of neoadjuvant treatments. The present findings suggest that the decline of HCV-induced HCC among LT candidates may compromise the generalizability of the AFP model in more recent LT cohorts. Further studies are required for updating or building more robust prognostic models.

Impact of 2016 Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Recommendations on Outcomes after Hepatectomy in Cirrhotic and Non-Cirrhotic Patients.

BACKGROUND: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) society published new recommendations for hepatectomy in 2016. Few studies have assessed their clinical impact. The aim of this monocentric study was to assess the impact of those guidelines on outcomes after liver surgery with a special focus on cirrhotic patients. METHOD: Postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing hepatectomy 30 months before and after ERAS implementation according to the 2016 ERAS guidelines were compared after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Primary endpoint was 90-day morbidity. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2020, 430 patients underwent hepatectomy including 226 procedures performed before and 204 after ERAS implementation. After IPTW, overall morbidity (42.5% vs. 64.7%, p < 0.001), Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) score (14.3 vs. 20.8, p = 0.004), length of stay (10.4 vs. 13.7 days, p = 0.001) and textbook outcome (50% vs. 40.2%, p = 0.022) were significantly improved in the ERAS group, while mortality and severe complications were similar in both groups. In the non-cirrhosis subgroup (n = 321), these results were confirmed. However, in the cirrhosis subgroup (n = 105), no difference appeared on outcomes after hepatectomy with an overall morbidity (47.5% vs. 65.2%, p = 0.069) and a length of stay (8 vs. 9 days, p = 0.310) which were not significantly different. The compliance rate to ERAS guidelines was 60% in both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic subgroups. CONCLUSION: Perioperative ERAS program for hepatectomy results in improved outcomes with decreased rate of non-severe morbidity. Although those guidelines are not deleterious for cirrhotic patients, they probably require revisions to be more effective in this patient population.

Ramucirumab in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and elevated alpha-fetoprotein after sorafenib in REACH and REACH-2.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Limited data on treatment of elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) increase the unmet need. REACH and REACH-2 were global phase III studies of ramucirumab in patients with HCC after prior sorafenib, where patients with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL showed an overall ssurvival (OS) benefit for ramucirumab. These post-hoc analyses examined efficacy and safety of ramucirumab in patients with HCC and baseline AFP ≥ 400 ng/mL by three prespecified age subgroups (<65, ≥65 to <75 and ≥75 years). METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from REACH (baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL) and REACH-2. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression methods (stratified by study) assessed OS, progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP) and patient-reported outcomes (Functional Hepatobiliary System Index-8 [FHSI-8] score). RESULTS: A total of 542 patients (<65 years: n = 302; ≥65 to <75 years: n = 160; ≥75 years: n = 80) showed similar baseline characteristics between ramucirumab and placebo. Older subgroups had higher hepatitis C and steatohepatitis incidences, and lower AFP levels, than the <65 years subgroup. Ramucirumab prolonged OS in patients <65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.753; 95% CI 0.581-0.975), ≥65 to <75 years (0.602; 0.419-0.866) and ≥75 years (0.709; 0.420-1.199), PFS and TTP irrespective of age. Ramucirumab showed similar overall safety profiles across subgroups, with a consistent median relative dose intensity ≥97.8%. A trend towards a delay in symptom deterioration in FHSI-8 with ramucirumab was observed in all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc analysis, ramucirumab showed a survival benefit across age subgroups with a tolerable safety profile, supporting its use in advanced HCC with elevated AFP, irrespective of age, including ≥75 years.

In vitro transformation of primary human hepatocytes: Epigenetic changes and stemness properties.

Human hepatocarcinogenesis is a complex process with many unresolved issues, including the cell of origin (differentiated and/or progenitor/stem cells) and the initial steps leading to tumor development. With the aim of providing new tools for studying hepatocellular carcinoma initiation and progression, we developed an innovative model based on primary human hepatocytes (PHHs) lentivirus-transduced with SV40LT+ST, HRASV12 with or without hTERT. The differentiation status of these transduced-PHHs was characterized by RNA sequencing (including lncRNAs), and the expression of some differentiation markers confirmed by RT-qPCR and immunofluorescence. In addition, their transformation capacity was assessed by colony formation in soft agar and tumorigenicity evaluated in immune-deficient mice. The co-expression of SV40LT+ST and HRASV12 in PHHs, in association or not with hTERT, led to the emergence of transformed clones. These clones exhibited a poorly differentiated cell phenotype with expression of stemness and mesenchymal-epithelial transition markers and gave rise to cancer stem cell subpopulations. In vivo, they resulted in poorly differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas with a reactivation of endogenous hTERT. These experiments demonstrate for the first time that non-cycling human mature hepatocytes can be permissive to in vitro transformation. This cellular tool provides the first comprehensive in vitro model for identifying genetic/epigenetic changes driving human hepatocarcinogenesis.