Second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy versus active symptom control for advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC-06): a phase 3, open-label, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Advanced biliary tract cancer has a poor prognosis. Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen, but no robust evidence is available for second-line chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to determine the benefit derived from second-line FOLFOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. METHODS: The ABC-06 clinical trial was a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial done in 20 sites with expertise in managing biliary tract cancer across the UK. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had histologically or cytologically verified locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (including cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder or ampullary carcinoma) with documented radiological disease progression to first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally to active symptom control (ASC) and FOLFOX or ASC alone. FOLFOX chemotherapy was administered intravenously every 2 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, L-folinic acid 175 mg [or folinic acid 350 mg], fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 [bolus], and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 as a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion). Randomisation was done following a minimisation algorithm using platinum sensitivity, serum albumin concentration, and stage as stratification factors. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was also assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is complete and the final results are reported. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01926236, and EudraCT, 2013-001812-30. FINDINGS: Between March 27, 2014, and Jan 4, 2018, 162 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ASC plus FOLFOX (n=81) or ASC alone (n=81). Median follow-up was 21·7 months (IQR 17·2-30·8). Overall survival was significantly longer in the ASC plus FOLFOX group than in the ASC alone group, with a median overall survival of 6·2 months (95% CI 5·4-7·6) in the ASC plus FOLFOX group versus 5·3 months (4·1-5·8) in the ASC alone group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·50-0·97]; p=0·031). The overall survival rate in the ASC alone group was 35·5% (95% CI 25·2-46·0) at 6 months and 11·4% (5·6-19·5) at 12 months, compared with 50·6% (39·3-60·9) at 6 months and 25·9% (17·0-35·8) at 12 months in the ASC plus FOLFOX group. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported in 42 (52%) of 81 patients in the ASC alone group and 56 (69%) of 81 patients in the ASC plus FOLFOX group, including three chemotherapy-related deaths (one each due to infection, acute kidney injury, and febrile neutropenia). The most frequently reported grade 3-5 FOLFOX-related adverse events were neutropenia (ten [12%] patients), fatigue or lethargy (nine [11%] patients), and infection (eight [10%] patients). INTERPRETATION: The addition of FOLFOX to ASC improved median overall survival in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer after progression on cisplatin and gemcitabine, with a clinically meaningful increase in 6-month and 12-month overall survival rates. To our knowledge, this trial is the first prospective, randomised study providing reliable, high-quality evidence to allow an informed discussion with patients of the potential benefits and risks from second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. Based on these findings, FOLFOX should become standard-of-care chemotherapy in second-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer and the reference regimen for further clinical trials. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, StandUpToCancer, AMMF (The UK Cholangiocarcinoma Charity), and The Christie Charity, with additional funding from The Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation and the Conquer Cancer Foundation Young Investigator Award for translational research.

The prognostic and diagnostic significance of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a presumed measure of the balance between neutrophil-associated pro-tumour inflammation and lymphocyte-dependent antitumour immune function, has been suggested as a prognostic factor for several cancers, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: In this study, a prospectively accrued cohort of 781 patients (493 HCC and 288 chronic liver disease (CLD) without HCC) were followed-up for more than 6 years. NLR levels between HCC and CLD patients were compared, and the effect of baseline NLR on overall survival amongst HCC patients was assessed via multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: On entry into the study ('baseline'), there was no clinically significant difference in the NLR values between CLD and HCC patients. Amongst HCC patients, NLR levels closest to last visit/death were significantly higher compared to baseline. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that NLR was an independent prognostic factor, even after adjustment for the HCC stage. CONCLUSION: NLR is a significant independent factor influencing survival in HCC patients, hence offering an additional dimension in prognostic models.

Biopsy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: results of a multicentre UK audit.

BACKGROUND: Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is commonly diagnosed using non-invasive radiological criteria (NIRC) defined by the European Association for the Study of the Liver or the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. In 2017, The National Institute for Clinical Excellence mandated histological confirmation of disease to authorise the use of sorafenib in the UK. METHODS: This was a prospective multicentre audit in which patients suitable for sorafenib were identified at multidisciplinary meetings. The primary analysis cohort (PAC) was defined by the presence of Child-Pugh class A liver disease and performance status 0-2. Clinical, radiological and histological data were reported locally and collected on a standardised case report form. RESULTS: Eleven centres reported 418 cases, of which 361 comprised the PAC. Overall, 76% had chronic liver disease and 66% were cirrhotic. The diagnostic imaging was computed tomography in 71%, magnetic resonance imaging in 27% and 2% had both. Pre-existing histology was available in 45 patients and 270 underwent a new biopsy, which confirmed HCC in 93.4%. Alternative histological diagnoses included cholangiocarcinoma (CC) and combined HCC-CC. In cirrhotic patients, NIRC criteria had a sensitivity of 65.4% and a positive predictive value of 91.4% to detect HCC. Two patients (0.7%) experienced mild post-biopsy bleeding. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic biopsy is safe and feasible for most patients eligible for systemic therapy.

Association of Gastric Acid Suppression and Sorafenib Efficacy in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have revealed that coadministration of gastric acid suppressants reduces the efficacy of the tyrosine kinase inhibitors erlotinib and sunitinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer and renal cell carcinoma, respectively. The authors have therefore assessed if the concurrent use of gastric acid suppressants and sorafenib impairs outcomes in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on all patients treated with sorafenib for advanced HCC at a single tertiary referral unit in the United Kingdom, between January 2008 and January 2014. A multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the effect of the concomitant use of gastric acid suppression and sorafenib on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Data were collected from 197 patients, of which 182 could be assessed for this study; 77 (42%) were on concurrent gastric acid suppression therapy. After adjusting for imbalances between the groups, a Cox regression analysis gave an adjusted hazard ratio for the concurrent acid suppression group compared with the no acid suppression group of 5.4 (95% confidence interval, 3.6-7.9) for PFS and 1.85 (95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.6) for OS. CONCLUSIONS: This single-center experience shows that patients with advanced HCC taking sorafenib and concomitant gastric acid suppression therapy have significantly inferior PFS and OS. This is the first time that this negative interaction has been reported and further prospective validation is warranted.

TG01/GM-CSF and adjuvant gemcitabine in patients with resected RAS-mutant adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (CT TG01-01): a single-arm, phase 1/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: TG01 is the first cancer immunotherapy targeting KRAS oncogenic mutations. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of TG01/GM-CSF in patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Patients with stage I or II pancreatic adenocarcinoma who had undergone surgical resection (R0 or R1) received adjuvant gemcitabine with TG01/GM-CSF using two schedules of vaccination. Immune response was defined as a positive delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) response and/or positive T-cell proliferation assay. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were enrolled between February 2013 and May 2016. Nineteen were treated with the high antigen burden, with four serious adverse reactions considered possibly related to TG01 treatment, including three allergic reactions. On this basis, a further 13 patients received a modified vaccination schedule with reduced antigen burden, with no serious adverse events related to TG01. Ninety-five percent patients in the main cohort and 92% in the modified cohort had a positive immune response. Median overall survival (OS) was 33.1 months, and median disease-free survival (DFS) was 13.9 months for the main cohort. For the modified cohort, the median OS was 34.3 months and median DFS was 19.5 months. CONCLUSIONS: TG01/GM-CSF with gemcitabine was well tolerated, with high levels of immune activation. OS and DFS compare favourably with published data for adjuvant gemcitabine. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02261714).

Capecitabine compared with observation in resected biliary tract cancer (BILCAP): a randomised, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in multidisciplinary management, patients with biliary tract cancer have a poor outcome. Only 20% of patients are eligible for surgical resection with curative intent, with 5-year overall survival of less than 10% for all patients. To our knowledge, no studies have described a benefit of adjuvant therapy. We aimed to determine whether adjuvant capecitabine improved overall survival compared with observation following surgery for biliary tract cancer. METHODS: This randomised, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study was done across 44 specialist hepatopancreatobiliary centres in the UK. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had histologically confirmed cholangiocarcinoma or muscle-invasive gallbladder cancer who had undergone a macroscopically complete resection (which includes liver resection, pancreatic resection, or, less commonly, both) with curative intent, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of less than 2. Patients who had not completely recovered from previous surgery or who had previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy for biliary tract cancer were also excluded. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral capecitabine (1250 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle, for eight cycles) or observation commencing within 16 weeks of surgery. Treatment was not masked, and allocation concealment was achieved with a computerised minimisation algorithm that stratified patients by surgical centre, site of disease, resection status, and performance status. The primary outcome was overall survival. As prespecified, analyses were done by intention to treat and per protocol. This study is registered with EudraCT, number 2005-003318-13. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2006, and Dec 4, 2014, 447 patients were enrolled; 223 patients with biliary tract cancer resected with curative intent were randomly assigned to the capecitabine group and 224 to the observation group. The data cutoff for this analysis was March 6, 2017. The median follow-up for all patients was 60 months (IQR 37-60). In the intention-to-treat analysis, median overall survival was 51·1 months (95% CI 34·6-59·1) in the capecitabine group compared with 36·4 months (29·7-44·5) in the observation group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·63-1·04; p=0·097). In a protocol-specified sensitivity analysis, adjusting for minimisation factors and nodal status, grade, and gender, the overall survival HR was 0·71 (95% CI 0·55-0·92; p=0·010). In the prespecified per-protocol analysis (210 patients in the capecitabine group and 220 in the observation group), median overall survival was 53 months (95% CI 40 to not reached) in the capecitabine group and 36 months (30-44) in the observation group (adjusted HR 0·75, 95% CI 0·58-0·97; p=0·028). In the intention-to-treat analysis, median recurrence-free survival was 24·4 months (95% CI 18·6-35·9) in the capecitabine group and 17·5 months (12·0-23·8) in the observation group. In the per-protocol analysis, median recurrence-free survival was 25·9 months (95% CI 19·8-46·3) in the capecitabine group and 17·4 months (12·0-23·7) in the observation group. Adverse events were measured in the capecitabine group only, and of the 213 patients who received at least one cycle, 94 (44%) had at least one grade 3 toxicity, the most frequent of which were hand-foot syndrome in 43 (20%) patients, diarrhoea in 16 (8%) patients, and fatigue in 16 (8%) patients. One (<1%) patient had grade 4 cardiac ischaemia or infarction. Serious adverse events were observed in 47 (21%) of 223 patients in the capecitabine group and 22 (10%) of 224 patients in the observation group. No deaths were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: Although this study did not meet its primary endpoint of improving overall survival in the intention-to-treat population, the prespecified sensitivity and per-protocol analyses suggest that capecitabine can improve overall survival in patients with resected biliary tract cancer when used as adjuvant chemotherapy following surgery and could be considered as standard of care. Furthermore, the safety profile is manageable, supporting the use of capecitabine in this setting. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and Roche.

Impact of intensified chemotherapy in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in clinical routine in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with poor prognosis. Gemcitabine is the standard chemotherapy for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA). Randomized clinical trials evaluating intensified chemotherapies including FOLFIRINOX and nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (NAB+GEM) have shown improvement in survival. Here, we have evaluated the efficacy of intensified chemotherapy versus gemcitabine monotherapy in real-life settings across Europe. METHODS: A retrospective multi-center study including 1056 MPA patients, between 2012 and 2015, from nine centers in UK, Germany, Italy, Hungary and the Swedish registry was performed. Follow-up was at least 12 months. Cox proportional Harzards regression was used for uni- and multivariable evaluation of prognostic factors. RESULTS: Of 1056 MPA patients, 1030 (98.7%) were assessable for survival analysis. Gemcitabine monotherapy was the most commonly used regimen (41.3%), compared to FOLFIRINOX (n = 204, 19.3%), NAB+GEM (n = 81, 7.7%) and other gemcitabine- or 5-FU-based regimens (n = 335, 31.7%). The median overall survival (OS) was: FOLFIRINOX 9.9 months (95%CI 8.4-12.6), NAB+GEM 7.9 months (95%CI 6.2-10.0), other combinations 8.5 months (95%CI 7.7-9.3) and gemcitabine monotherapy 4.9 months (95%CI 4.4-5.6). Compared to gemcitabine monotherapy, any combination of chemotherapeutics improved the survival with no significant difference between the intensified regimens. Multivariable analysis showed an association between treatment center, male gender, inoperability at diagnosis and performance status (ECOG 1-3) with poor prognosis. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine monotherapy was predominantly used in 2012-2015. Intensified chemotherapy improved OS in comparison to gemcitabine monotherapy. In real-life settings, the OS rates of different treatment approaches are lower than shown in randomized phase III trials.

Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. FINDINGS: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

The impact of transarterial chemoembolization induced complications on outcomes after liver transplantation: A propensity-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Loco-regional complications of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) may adversely affect technical aspects of the liver transplantation (LT). This study reviewed the impact of those complications on postoperative outcomes encompassing implications on graft selection. METHODS: A retrospective, propensity score matching (1:1) analysis accounting for donor and recipient confounders was performed on a dataset of patients undergoing LT for hepatocellular carcinoma. Outcomes of patients who had TACE (TACE-group) were compared with those who did not (NoTACE-group). RESULTS: A total of 57 matched pairs were analyzed. TACE achieved effective tumor control (Pre-TACE vs Post-TACE; Median: 44 mm [interquartile range: 43-50] vs 17 mm [0-36]; P = .002) on imaging follow-up. TACE group had, at the hepatectomy, higher incidence of ischemia-related complications (adhesions of the necrotic tumor, cholecystitis, and/or bile duct necrosis) (40.4% vs 10.5%; P = .001). Overall major post-LT complications rate (Dindo-Clavien ≥3) were similar (P = .134). Those in the TACE group with donors after circulatory death (DCD) had 4.6% 90-day mortality and 54.3% major complication rate compared to 6.9% and 77.3% (P = .380 and P = .112, respectively). CONCLUSION: TACE was an effective bridging procedure that may complicate LT inducing ischemic-related complications; nevertheless, it has not shown repercussions on mortality or morbidity after the procedure, even using donors after circulatory death.

Exceptional serological and radiological response to sorafenib in 2 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and chronic hepatitis C viral infection: case report and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib is the only systemic treatment that has been shown to increase overall survival. However, similar to other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, most patients achieve disease stabilisation radiologically, and only 2-3% of patients achieve a partial response. Recent exploratory subgroup analyses of the large phase 3 trials have demonstrated that patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection associated HCC survive longer than those who are negative for HCV. The mechanism underlying this currently remains unknown. A small number of cases of complete response to sorafenib treatment have now been reported worldwide, however a prolonged response has only been reported in 2 cases, both of whom had HCV-related HCC. CASE PRESENTATION: A 55 year old gentleman was diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma and concomitant chronic hepatitis C viral infection. He progressed following transarterial chemoemoblisation treatment and was commenced on sorafenib treatment. His serum alphafetoprotein level normalised within 2 months of treatment and he achieved an almost complete radiological response. This response was maintained for 20 months before the patient progressed. A 75 year old lady was diagnosed with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and concomitant chronic hepatitis C viral infection. She was commenced on sorafenib treatment but required early dose reductions due to palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia, and liver decompensation. Despite this she achieved an excellent serological and radiological response that was maintained for 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our two cases show that patients with HCV-associated HCC can attain excellent responses to sorafenib treatment that is durable. Furthermore, such exceptional responses can be achieved even with dose reductions and treatment breaks.

A multicentre comparison between Child Pugh and Albumin-Bilirubin scores in patients treated with sorafenib for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI) grade was proposed as an objective means to evaluate liver function in patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC). ALBI grade 1 vs 2 were proposed as stratification factors within the Child Pugh (CP) A class. However, the original publication did not provide comparison with the subclassification by points (5-15) within the CP classification. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed data from patients treated with sorafenib for HCC from 17 centres in United Kingdom and France. Overall survival (OS) was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier method and a Cox regression model. Discriminatory abilities of the classifications were assessed with the log likelihood ratio, Harrell's C statistics and Akaike information criterion. RESULTS: Data from 1019 patients were collected, of which 905 could be assessed for both scores. 92% of ALBI grade 1 were CP A5 while ALBI 2 included a broad range of CP scores of which 44% were CP A6. Median OS was 10.2, 7.0 and 3.6 months for CP scores A5, A6 and >A6, respectively (P < 0.001), Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.60 (95%CI: 1.35-1.89, P < 0.001) for A6 vs A5. Median OS was 10.9, 6.6 and 3.0 months for ALBI grade 1, 2 and 3, respectively (P < 0.001), HR = 1.68 (1.43-1.97, P < 0.001) for grade 2 vs 1. Discriminatory abilities of CP and ALBI were similar in the CP A population, but better for CP in the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the use CP class A as an inclusion criterion, and ALBI as a stratification factor in trials of systemic therapy.

SIMAP500: A novel risk score to identify recipients at higher risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following liver transplantation (LT) has a devastating influence on recipients' survival; however, the risk of recurrence is not routinely stratified. Risk stratification is vital with a long LT waiting time, as that could influence the recurrence despite strict listing criteria. AIM: This study aims to identify predictors of recurrence and develop a novel risk prediction score to forecast HCC recurrence following LT. METHODS: A retrospective review of LT for HCC recipients at University Hospitals Birmingham between July 2011 and February 2020. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify recurrence predictors, based on which the novel SIMAP500 (satellite nodules, increase in size, microvascular invasion, AFP > 500, poor differentiation) risk score was proposed. RESULTS: 234 LTs for HCC were performed with a median follow-up of 5.3 years. Recurrence developed in 25 patients (10.7%). On univariate analyses, RETREAT score > 3, α-fetoprotein (AFP) at listing 100-500 and > 500, bridging, increased tumour size between imaging at the listing time and explant histology, increase in the size of viable tumour between listing and explant, presence of satellite nodules, micro- and macrovascular invasion on explant and poor differentiation of tumours were significantly associated with recurrence, based on which, the SIMAP500 risk score is proposed. The SIMAP500 demonstrated an excellent predictive ability (c-index = 0.803) and outperformed the RETREAT score (c-index = 0.73). SIMAP500 is indicative of the time to disease recurrence. CONCLUSION: SIMAP500 risk score identifies the LT recipients at risk of HCC recurrence. Risk stratification allows patient-centric post-transplant surveillance programs. Further validation of the score is recommended.

Outcomes of Transarterial Embolisation (TAE) vs. Transarterial Chemoembolisation (TACE) for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Although hepatocellular carcinoma is increasingly common, debate exists surrounding the management of patients with unresectable disease comparing transarterial embolisation (TAE) or transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients receiving TAE and TACE. A systematic review was performed using PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) until August 2021. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and the secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events. Five studies with 609 patients were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in the OS (p = 0.36) and PFS (p = 0.81). There was no difference in OS among patients treated with a single TACE/TAE versus repeat treatments. Post-procedural adverse effects were higher in the TACE group but were not statistically significant. TACE has comparable long-term survival and complications profile to TAE for patients with HCC. However, the low-to-moderate quality of current RCTs warrants high-quality RCTs are necessary to provide enough evidence to give a definitive answer and inform treatment plans for the future.

Textbook Outcome After Trans-arterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Textbook Outcome (TO) is inclusive of quality indicators and it not been provided for trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on treatment-naïve HCC patients receiving TACE from 10 centers were reviewed. TO was defined as "no post-TACE grade 3-4 complications, no prolonged hospital stay (defined as a post-procedure stay ≤ 75th percentile of the median values from the total cohort), no 30-day mortality/readmission and the achievement of an objective response (OR) at post-TACE imaging." Grade of adverse event was classified according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and short-term efficacy was assessed by response. Pooled estimates were calculated to account for hospital's effect and risk-adjustment was applied to allow for diversity of patients in each center. RESULTS: A total of 1124 patients (2014-2018) fulfilling specific inclusion criteria were included. Baseline clinical features showed considerable heterogeneity (I2 > 0.75) across centers. TACE-related mortality was absent in 97.6%, readmission was not required after 94.9% of procedures, 91.5% of patients had no complication graded 3-4, 71.8% of patients did not require prolonged hospitalization, OR of the target lesion was achieved in 68.5%. Risk-adjustment showed that all indicators were achieved in 43.1% of patients, and this figure was similar across centers. The median overall survival for patients who achieved all indicators was 33.1 months, 11.9 months longer than for patients who did not. CONCLUSIONS: A useful benchmark for TACE in HCC patients has been developed, which provides an indication of survival and allows for a comparison of treatment quality across different hospitals.

Bexmarilimab-induced macrophage activation leads to treatment benefit in solid tumors: The phase I/II first-in-human MATINS trial.

Macrophage Clever-1 contributes to impaired antigen presentation and suppression of anti-tumor immunity. This first-in-human trial investigates the safety and tolerability of Clever-1 blockade with bexmarilimab in patients with treatment-refractory solid tumors and assesses preliminary anti-tumor efficacy, pharmacodynamics, and immunologic correlates. Bexmarilimab shows no dose-limiting toxicities in part I (n = 30) and no additional safety signals in part II (n = 108). Disease control (DC) rates of 25%-40% are observed in cutaneous melanoma, gastric, hepatocellular, estrogen receptor-positive breast, and biliary tract cancers. DC associates with improved survival in a landmark analysis and correlates with high pre-treatment intratumoral Clever-1 positivity and increasing on-treatment serum interferon γ (IFNγ) levels. Spatial transcriptomics profiling of DC and non-DC tumors demonstrates bexmarilimab-induced macrophage activation and stimulation of IFNγ and T cell receptor signaling selectively in DC patients. These data suggest that bexmarilimab therapy is well tolerated and show that macrophage targeting can promote immune activation and tumor control in late-stage cancer.

Immediate surgery compared with short-course neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus capecitabine, FOLFIRINOX, or chemoradiotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (ESPAC5): a four-arm, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma have relatively low resection rates and poor survival despite the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. The aim of our study was to establish the feasibility and efficacy of three different types of short-course neoadjuvant therapy compared with immediate surgery. METHODS: ESPAC5 (formerly known as ESPAC-5f) was a multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial done in 16 pancreatic centres in two countries (UK and Germany). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, biopsy proven pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the pancreatic head, and were staged as having a borderline resectable tumour by contrast-enhanced CT criteria following central review. Participants were randomly assigned by means of minimisation to one of four groups: immediate surgery; neoadjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15, and oral capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice a day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle for two cycles); neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, folinic acid given according to local practice, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus injection on days 1 and 15 followed by 2400 mg/m2 46 h intravenous infusion given on days 1 and 15, repeated every 2 weeks for four cycles); or neoadjuvant capecitabine-based chemoradiation (total dose 50·4 Gy in 28 daily fractions over 5·5 weeks [1·8 Gy per fraction, Monday to Friday] with capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily [Monday to Friday] throughout radiotherapy). Patients underwent restaging contrast-enhanced CT at 4-6 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy and underwent surgical exploration if the tumour was still at least borderline resectable. All patients who had their tumour resected received adjuvant therapy at the oncologist's discretion. Primary endpoints were recruitment rate and resection rate. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 89500674, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2014, and Dec 20, 2018, from 478 patients screened, 90 were randomly assigned to a group (33 to immediate surgery, 20 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 20 to FOLFIRINOX, and 17 to capecitabine-based chemoradiation); four patients were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis (one in the capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy withdrew consent before starting therapy and three [two in the immediate surgery group and one in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group] were found to be ineligible after randomisation). 44 (80%) of 55 patients completed neoadjuvant therapy. The recruitment rate was 25·92 patients per year from 16 sites; 21 (68%) of 31 patients in the immediate surgery and 30 (55%) of 55 patients in the combined neoadjuvant therapy groups underwent resection (p=0·33). R0 resection was achieved in three (14%) of 21 patients in the immediate surgery group and seven (23%) of 30 in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined (p=0·49). Surgical complications were observed in 29 (43%) of 68 patients who underwent surgery; no patients died within 30 days. 46 (84%) of 55 patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy were available for restaging. Six (13%) of 46 had a partial response. Median follow-up time was 12·2 months (95% CI 12·0-12·4). 1-year overall survival was 39% (95% CI 24-61) for immediate surgery, 78% (60-100) for gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 84% (70-100) for FOLFIRINOX, and 60% (37-97) for capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy (p=0·0028). 1-year disease-free survival from surgery was 33% (95% CI 19-58) for immediate surgery and 59% (46-74) for the combined neoadjuvant therapies (hazard ratio 0·53 [95% CI 0·28-0·98], p=0·016). Three patients reported local disease recurrence (two in the immediate surgery group and one in the FOLFIRINOX group). 78 (91%) patients were included in the safety set and assessed for toxicity events. 19 (24%) of 78 patients reported a grade 3 or worse adverse event (two [7%] of 28 patients in the immediate surgery group and 17 [34%] of 50 patients in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined), the most common of which were neutropenia, infection, and hyperglycaemia. INTERPRETATION: Recruitment was challenging. There was no significant difference in resection rates between patients who underwent immediate surgery and those who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Short-course (8 week) neoadjuvant therapy had a significant survival benefit compared with immediate surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with either gemcitabine plus capecitabine or FOLFIRINOX had the best survival compared with immediate surgery. These findings support the use of short-course neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Long-Term Outcomes and Exploratory Analyses of the Randomized Phase III BILCAP Study.

PURPOSE: The BILCAP study described a modest benefit for capecitabine as adjuvant therapy for curatively resected biliary tract cancer (BTC), and capecitabine has become the standard of care. We present the long-term data and novel exploratory subgroup analyses. METHODS: This randomized, controlled, multicenter, phase III study recruited patients age 18 years or older with histologically confirmed cholangiocarcinoma or muscle-invasive gallbladder cancer after resection with curative intent and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of < 2. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral capecitabine (1,250 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle, for eight cycles) or observation. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). This study is registered with EudraCT 2005-003318-13. RESULTS: Between March 15, 2006, and December 4, 2014, 447 patients were enrolled; 223 patients with BTC resected with curative intent were randomly assigned to the capecitabine group and 224 to the observation group. At the data cutoff of January 21, 2021, the median follow-up for all patients was 106 months (95% CI, 98 to 108). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the median OS was 49.6 months (95% CI, 35.1 to 59.1) in the capecitabine group compared with 36.1 months (95% CI, 29.7 to 44.2) in the observation group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.06). In a protocol-specified sensitivity analysis, adjusting for minimization factors, nodal status, grade, and sex, the OS hazard ratio was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.94). We further describe the prognostic impact of R status, grade, nodal status, and sex. CONCLUSION: This long-term analysis supports the previous analysis, suggesting that capecitabine can improve OS in patients with resected BTC when used as adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery and should be considered as the standard of care.

Phase I/II Multicenter Trial of a Novel Therapeutic Cancer Vaccine, HepaVac-101, for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) shows considerable promise in improving clinical outcomes. HepaVac-101 represents a single-arm, first-in-human phase I/II multicenter cancer vaccine trial for HCC (NCT03203005). It combines multipeptide antigens (IMA970A) with the TLR7/8/RIG I agonist CV8102. IMA970A includes 5 HLA-A*24 and 7 HLA-A*02 as well as 4 HLA-DR restricted peptides selected after mass spectrometric identification in human HCC tissues or cell lines. CV8102 is an RNA-based immunostimulator inducing a balanced Th1/Th2 immune response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 82 patients with very early- to intermediate-stage HCCs were enrolled and screened for suitable HLA haplotypes and 22 put on study treatment. This consisted in a single infusion of low-dose cyclophosphamide followed by nine intradermal coadministrations of IMA970A and CV8102. Only patients with no disease relapse after standard-of-care treatments were vaccinated. The primary endpoints of the HepaVac-101 clinical trial were safety, tolerability, and antigen-specific T-cell responses. Secondary or exploratory endpoints included additional immunologic parameters and survival endpoints. RESULTS: The vaccination showed a good safety profile. Transient mild-to-moderate injection-site reactions were the most frequent IMA970A/CV8102-related side effects. Immune responses against ≥1 vaccinated HLA class I tumor-associated peptide (TAA) and ≥1 vaccinated HLA class II TAA were respectively induced in 37% and 53% of the vaccinees. CONCLUSIONS: Immunotherapy may provide a great improvement in treatment options for HCC. HepaVac-101 is a first-in-human clinical vaccine trial with multiple novel HLA class I- and class II-restricted TAAs against HCC. The results are initial evidence for the safety and immunogenicity of the vaccine. Further clinical evaluations are warranted.

The potential of PIVKA-II as a treatment response biomarker in hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective United Kingdom cohort study.

Prothrombin induced by vitamin K absence II (PIVKA-II) has recently been validated internationally as a diagnostic biomarker for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), as part of the GALAD model. However, its role as a treatment response biomarker has been less well explored. We, therefore, undertook a prospective study at a tertiary centre in the UK to evaluate the role of PIVKA-II as a treatment response biomarker in patients with early, intermediate and advanced stage HCC. In a cohort of 141 patients, we found that PIVKA-II levels tracked concordantly with treatment response in the majority of patients, across a range of different treatment modalities. We also found that rises in PIVKA-II levels almost always predated radiological progression. Among AFP non-secretors, PIVKA-II was found to be informative in 60% of cases. In a small cohort of patients undergoing liver transplantation, pre-transplant PIVKA-II levels predicted for microvascular invasion and poorer differentiation. Our results demonstrate the potential utility of PIVKA-II as a treatment response biomarker and in predicting microvascular invasion, in a Western population. PIVKA-II demonstrated improved performance over AFP but, as a single biomarker, its performance was still limited. Further larger prospective studies are recommended to evaluate PIVKA-II as a treatment response biomarker, within the GALAD model.