Search

Background and Aims: Despite liver transplantation (LT) is considered the optimal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), particularly in patients with impaired liver function, the shortage of donors has forced the application of very restrictive criteria for selecting ideal candidates for whom LT can offer the best outcome. With the evolving LT landscape due to the advent of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) and the steady increase in donors, major efforts have been made to expand the transplant eligibility criteria for HCC. In addition, the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of HCC, with demonstrated efficacy in earlier stages, has revolutionized the therapeutic approach for these patients, and their integration in the setting of LT is challenging. Management of immunological compromise from ICIs, including the wash-out period before LT and post-LT immunosuppression adjustments, is crucial to balance the risk of graft rejection against HCC recurrence. Additionally, the effects of increased immunosuppression on non-hepatic complications must be understood to prevent them from becoming obstacles to long-term OS., Methods and Results: In this review, we will evaluate the emerging evidence and its implications for the future of LT in HCC. Addressing these novel challenges and opportunities, while integrating the current clinical evidence with predictive algorithms, would ensure a fair balance between individual patient needs and the overall population benefit in the LT system., (© 2024 The Author(s). Liver International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Importance: Whether patients with Child-Pugh class B (CP-B) cancer with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) benefit from active anticancer treatment vs best supportive care (BSC) is debated., Objective: To evaluate the association of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapies vs BSC with overall survival (OS) of patients with uHCC and CP-B liver dysfunction., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, multicenter, international clinical case series examined data of patients with CP-B with uHCC who were receiving first-line ICI-based regimens from September 2017 to December 2022 whose data were extracted from an international consortium and compared with a cohort of patients with CP-B receiving BSC. Patients were treated in tertiary care centers across Europe, US, and Asia in routine clinical practice. After applying the inclusion criteria, 187 and 156 patients were left in the ICI and BSC groups, respectively. The propensity score was calculated for the following variables: age, alpha-fetoprotein levels, Child-Pugh score, extrahepatic spread, portal vein tumor thrombosis, cirrhosis, ascites, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status., Exposures: Patients in the ICI group received first-line systemic therapy with either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A+B) (n = 141) or nivolumab (n = 46)., Main Outcomes and Measures: OS in the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) populations was the main outcome, and it was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method; univariable Cox regression test was used to make comparisons between the 2 groups., Results: The median age was 66 (IQR, 61-72) and 73 (IQR, 66-81) years in the ICI (33 women [18%]) and BSC groups (41 women [26%]), respectively. In the IPTW populations, median OS was significantly longer in the ICI group (7.50 months; 95% CI, 5.62-11.15) compared with BSC (4.04 months; 95% CI, 3.03-5.03; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.80; P < .001). Multivariable analysis confirmed that ICI exposure was associated with a reduction of approximately 50% in the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35-0.86; P < .001), and the presence of portal vein tumor thrombosis, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of greater than 1, and alpha-fetoprotein levels of 400 ng/mL or greater were associated with increased risk of death., Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this case series provide comparative evidence of improved survival in association with ICI treatment compared with BSC in patients with uHCC with CP-B liver dysfunction.

Background and Aims: Unlike other malignancies, hepatic functional reserve competes with tumor progression in determining the risk of mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the relative contribution of hepatic decompensation over tumor progression in influencing overall survival (OS) has not been assessed in combination immunotherapy recipients., Approach and Results: From the AB-real observational study (n = 898), we accrued 571 patients with advanced/unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, Child-Pugh A class treated with frontline atezolizumab + bevacizumab (AB). Hepatic decompensation and tumor progression during follow-up were studied in relationship to patients' OS using a time-dependent Cox model. Baseline characteristics were evaluated as predictors of decompensation in competing risks analysis. During a median follow-up of 11.0 months (95% CI: 5.1-19.7), 293 patients (51.3%) developed tumor progression without decompensation, and 94 (16.5%) developed decompensation. In multivariable time-dependent analysis, decompensation (HR: 19.04, 95% CI: 9.75-37.19), hepatocellular carcinoma progression (HR: 9.91, 95% CI: 5.85-16.78), albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 2/3 (HR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.69-2.77), and number of nodules >3(HR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.28-2.08) were independently associated with OS. Pretreatment ALBI grade 2/3 (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR]: 3.35, 95% CI: 1.98-5.67) was independently associated with decompensation, whereas viral etiology was protective (sHR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.34-0.87). Among patients with viral etiology, effective antiviral treatment was significantly associated with a lower risk of decompensation (sHR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.93)., Conclusions: Hepatic decompensation identifies patients with the worst prognosis following AB and is more common in patients with baseline ALBI >1 and nonviral etiology. Effective antiviral treatment may protect from decompensation, highlighting the prognostic disadvantage of patients with nonviral etiologies and the importance of multidisciplinary management to maximize OS., (Copyright © 2024 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: Clinical benefits of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezolizumab-bevacizumab) are observed only in a subset of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and the development of biomarkers is needed to improve therapeutic strategies. The atezolizumab-bevacizumab response signature (ABRS), assessed by molecular biology profiling techniques, has been shown to be associated with progression-free survival after treatment initiation. The primary objective of our study was to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model able to estimate ABRS expression directly from histological slides, and to evaluate if model predictions were associated with progression-free survival., Methods: In this multicentre retrospective study, we developed a model (ABRS-prediction; ABRS-P), which was derived from the previously published clustering-constrained attention multiple instance learning (or CLAM) pipeline. We trained the model fit for regression analysis using a multicentre dataset from The Cancer Genome Atlas (patients treated by surgical resection, n=336). The ABRS-P model was externally validated on two independent series of samples from patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (a surgical resection series, n=225; and a biopsy series, n=157). The predictive value of the model was further tested in a series of biopsy samples from a multicentre cohort of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab (n=122). All samples in the study were from adults (aged ≥18 years). The validation sets were sampled between Jan 1, 2008, to Jan 1, 2023. For the multicentre validation set, the primary objective was to assess the association of high versus low ABRS-P values, defined relative to cross-validation median split thresholds in the first biopsy series, with progression-free survival after treatment initiation. Finally, we performed spatial transcriptomics and matched prediction heatmaps with in situ expression profiles., Findings: Of the 840 patients sampled, 641 (76%) were male and 199 (24%) were female. Across the development and validation datasets, hepatocellular carcinoma risk factors included alcohol intake, hepatitis B and C virus infections, and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. Using cross-validation in the development series, the mean Pearson's correlation between ABRS-P values and ABRS score (mean expression of ABRS genes) was r=0·62 (SD 0·09; mean p<0·0001, SD<0·0001). The ABRS-P generalised well on the external validation series (surgical resection series, r=0·60 [95% CI 0·51-0·68], p<0·0001; biopsy series, r=0·53 [0·40-0·63], p<0·0001). In the 122 patients treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab, those with ABRS-P-high tumours (n=74) showed significantly longer median progression-free survival than those with ABRS-P-low tumours (n=48) after treatment initiation (12 months [95% CI 7-not reached] vs 7 months [4-9]; p=0·014). Spatial transcriptomics showed significantly higher ABRS score, along with upregulation of various other immune effectors, in tumour areas with high ABRS-P values versus areas with low ABRS-P values., Interpretation: Our study indicates that AI applied on hepatocellular carcinoma digital slides is able to serve as a biomarker for progression-free survival in patients treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab. This approach could be used in the development of inexpensive and fast biomarkers for targeted therapies. The combination of AI heatmaps with spatial transcriptomics provides insight on the molecular features associated with predictions. This methodology could be applied to other cancers or diseases and improve understanding of the biological mechanisms that drive responses to treatments., Funding: Institut National du Cancer, Fondation ARC, China Scholarship Council, Ligue Contre le Cancer du Val de Marne, Fondation de l'Avenir, Ipsen, and Fondation Bristol Myers Squibb Pour la Recherche en Immuno-Oncologie., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests LR reports grants from Agios, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, and Zymeworks; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Servier, Taiho Oncology, and Zymeworks; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck Serono, Roche, and Servier; support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca; is Treasurer for the International Liver Cancer Association and member of the Executive Council of the International Liver Cancer Association; and is Co-chair of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer task force on hepatobiliary and neuroendocrine tumours. SL reports grants from Institut National du Cancer, Fondation ARC, Ligue Contre le Cancer du Val de Marne, Fondation de l'Avenir, Ipsen, and Fondation Bristol Myers Squibb. MP reports consulting fees from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Roche, AstraZeneca, Ipsen, Lilly, and MSD; honoraria from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Roche, and MSD; and support for attending meetings from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, and Roche. VP reports honoraria from Servier and participation in an advisory board for Bristol Myers Squibb. FP reports grants from Institut National du Cancer, Fondation ARC, Ligue Contre le Cancer du Val de Marne, Fondation de l'Avenir, Ipsen, and Fondation Bristol Myers Squibb. JB reports grants from Diafir, Echosens, Intercept, Inventiva, and Siemens; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Echosens, Intercept, and Siemens; speaker fees from AbbVie, Gilead, Intercept, and Siemens; and participation in advisory boards for Bristol Myers Squibb, Intercept, Pfizer, MSD, and NovoNordisk. MM reports grants from Institut National du Cancer, Fondation ARC, Ligue Contre le Cancer du Val de Marne, Fondation de l'Avenir, Ipsen, and Fondation Bristol Myers Squibb. AV reports consulting fees from Astra Zeneca, Amgen, Beigene, Böhringer Mannheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, BTG, Daichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Incyte, Ipsen, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Servier, Sirtex, Tah, and Terumo; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Amgen, BeiGene, Böhringer Mannheim, BMS, BTG, Daichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GSK, Imaging Equipment (acquired by AAA), Incyte, Ipsen, Jiangsu Hengrui Medicines, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Servier, Sirtex, Tahio, and Terumo; and participation in advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Amgen, BeiGene, Böhringer Mannheim, BMS, BTG, Daichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Incyte, Ipsen, MSD, PierreFabre, Roche, Servier, Sirtex, Tahio, and Terumo. DJP reports grants from Associazone Per la Ricerca sul Cancro; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, MiNa Therapeutics, Avamune, Roche, Mursla, LiFt Biosciences, and Boeringher Ingelheim; honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, and Ipsen; and participation in advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, and Roche. BM reports competitive grants from Instituto de Salud Carlos III (grant numbers PI18/00961 and PI21/00714), cofounded by the EU; grants from Laboratorios Viñas; honoraria from Bayer, Roche, Eisai, and AstraZeneca; support for attending meetings from Roche and Eisai; and participation in advisory boards for Bayer, Eisai, and Roche. JC reports grants from Institut National du Cancer, Fondation ARC, Ligue Contre le Cancer du Val de Marne, Fondation de l'Avenir, Ipsen, and Fondation Bristol Myers Squibb; honoraria from Servier, AstraZeneca, and Ipsen; participation in an advisory board for Bristol Myers Squibb; and owning stock in Clarapath. BrS reports grants from Instituto de Salud Carlos III and Bristol Myers Squibb; consulting fees from Adaptimmune, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boston Scientific, Eisai, Incyte, Ipsen, MSD, Roche, Sanofi, Sirtex Medical, and Terumo; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Incyte, Ipsen, Roche, Sirtex Medical, and Terumo; advisory board participation for the GOING and ACTION trials; and support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca. BeS reports grants from Eisai and travel grants from AbbVie, Ipsen, Gilead, and AstraZeneca. MN reports honoraria from Astellas, Ipsen, and Roche. J-CN reports grants from Ipsen and Bayer. DSA reports grants from Ventana Medical Systems, Novo Nordisk, Hamni, Pfizer, Viking Therapeutics, and the US National Institutes of Health (grant numbers NIAA P50 and NIDDK U01); and is Secretary/Treasurer for the Hans Popper Hepatopathology Society. AD'A reports consulting fees, honoraria, and support to attend meetings from Roche. JA reports honoraria from Pfizer and Roche; and participation in a steering committee for Roche. MI reports grant funding from the Italian Ministry of Health; honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, Ipsen, Bayer, Gilead, Eisai, and MSD; support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca and Roche; and participation in advisory boards for AstraZeneca and Roche. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A well-recognized class effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) ranging from low grade toxicities to life-threatening end organ damage requiring permanent discontinuation of ICI. Deaths are reported in < 5% of patients treated with ICI. There are, however, no reliable markers to predict the onset and severity of IrAEs. We tested the association between neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) at baseline with development of clinically significant IrAEs (grade ≥ 2) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with ICI., Aim: To test the association between NLR and PLR at baseline with development of clinically significant IrAEs (grade ≥ 2) in HCC patients treated with ICI., Methods: Data was extracted from an international database from a consortium of 11 tertiary-care referral centers. NLR = absolute neutrophil count/absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) and PLR = platelet count/ALC. Cutoff of 5 was used for NLR and 300 for PLR based on literature. We also tested the association between antibiotic and steroid exposure to IrAEs., Results: Data was collected from 361 patients treated between 2016-2020 across the United States (67%), Asia (14%) and Europe (19%). Most patients received Nivolumab ( n = 255, 71%). One hundred sixty-seven (46%) patients developed at least one IrAE, highest grade 1 in 80 (48%), grade ≥ 2 in 87 (52%) patients. In a univariable regression model PLR > 300 was significantly associated with a lower incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.40; P = 0.044). Similarly, a trend was observed between NLR > 5 and lower incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.58; P = 0.097). Multivariate analyses confirmed PLR > 300 as an independent predictive marker of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 0.26; P = 0.011), in addition to treatment with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1)/cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein-4 (OR = 2.57; P = 0.037) and PD-1/tyrosine kinase inhibitor (OR = 3.39; P = 0.01) combinations. Antibiotic use was not associated with IrAE incidence (OR = 1.02; P = 0.954). Patients treated with steroids had a > 2-fold higher incidence of grade ≥ 2 IrAEs (OR = 2.74; P < 0.001), although 74% were prescribed steroids for the treatment of IrAEs., Conclusion: Given that high baseline NLR and PLR are associated with a decreased incidence of IrAEs, lower baseline NLR and PLR may be predictive biomarkers for the appearance of IrAEs in HCC treated with ICI. This finding is in keeping with several studies in solid tumors that have shown that baseline NLR and PLR appear predictive of IrAEs., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: Rimassa L report consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Elevar Therapeutics, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Servier, Taiho Oncology, Zymeworks; lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck Serono, Roche, Servier; travel expenses from AstraZeneca; research grants (to institution) from Agios, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Zymeworks. Pressiani T reports consulting fees from Bayer, Ipsen, AstraZeneca; travel expenses from Roche; research grants (to institution) from Roche, Bayer, Astra Zeneca. Personeni N reports consulting fees from Amgen, Merck KGaA, Boehringer Ingelheim, IQVIA, Servier, Sanofi Aventis; lecture fees from Janssens, Astra Zeneca, Incyte; research grants (to institution) from Servier, Basilea; travel expenses from Amgen, Servier. Pinter M is an investigator for Bayer, BMS, Lilly, and Roche, he received speaker honoraria from Bayer, BMS, Eisai, and MSD, he is a consultant for Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Eisai, Lilly, Roche, and MSD, and he received travel support from Bayer, BMS, and Roche. Scheiner B received travel support from AbbVie, Ipsen and Gilead. Bettinger D received consulting fees from Bayer Healthcare, Boston Scientific, and Shionogi. Lectures: Falk Foundation. A.C. received consulting fees from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, and Roche; speakers’ fee from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, and Astellas. Pinato DJ received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare and Bayer Healthcare, and travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, and Astra Zeneca; and received research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. Saeed A receives consulting fee from AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca; Exelixis; Five Prime Therapeutics; Pfize, speakers fee from Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca and research funding from Actuate Therapeutics (Inst); Astellas Pharma (Inst); AstraZeneca/MedImmune (Inst); Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst); Clovis Oncology (Inst); Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan (Inst); Exelixis (Inst); Five Prime Therapeutics (Inst); KAHR Medical (Inst); Merck Sharp and Dohme (Inst); Seattle Genetics (Inst). Khan U receives honoraria from Cardinal Health, consulting fee from Bard Peripheral Vascular and travel expenses paid for by Bard Peripheral Vascular; Cardinal Health. Huang YH is a consultant for Bayer; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eisai; Gilead Sciences; Lilly; MSD; Roche and received speaker honoraria from Bayer; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eisai; Gilead Sciences; Lilly; MSD; Roche. Kesab AO receives honoraria from AstraZeneca; Bayer Health; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eisai; Exelixis; Genentech/Roche; Merck and research funding from Adaptimmune (Inst); Bayer/Onyx (Inst); Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst); Genentech (Inst); Hengrui Pharmaceutical (Inst); Merck (Inst). Pillai A received consulting fee from AstraZeneca; Eisai; Exelixis; Genentech; Replimune, research funding from Target Pharmasolutions and speaker honoraria from Simply Speaking PAH. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (©The Author(s) 2023. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Systemic treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been revolutionized over the last few years following the approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Despite the promising survival extension seen with ICI combination regimens, responses are not universally seen and the optimal partner for programmed cell death 1 pathway inhibitors remains to be identified. Even fewer encouraging results have been demonstrated with ICI used for monotherapy. Several mechanisms of resistance have been described so far, involving characteristics of cancer cells (intrinsic mechanisms) and of the surrounding tumor microenvironment (extrinsic mechanisms). Factors related to therapy may also contribute to the development of resistance. Increasing research efforts are being dedicated to the discovery of novel approaches and targets to overcome resistance, some of which may be introduced into clinic in the future. Herein we describe a selection of resistance mechanisms that have been involved in impairing response to ICI and propose potential therapeutic approaches to overcome resistance., Competing Interests: CC received speaker fees from Eisai, MSD, and Ipsen. BS received travel support from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Ipsen, and Gilead. JK received travel grant funds from Boehringer Ingelheim. MP received speaker honoraria from Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Lilly, MSD, and Roche; he is a consultant for AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, and Roche; he received travel support from Bayer, BMS, and Roche. GC has served as a consultant or on advisory boards for Bayer, Eisai, Ipsen, MSD, AstraZeneca, and Roche. AD received educational support for congress attendance and consultancy fees from Roche. DJP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare and Bayer Healthcare; travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, and Astra Zeneca; and received research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript., (© 2023 Manfredi et al.)

Emerging evidence highlights the potential prognostic relevance of circulating lipids in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), with a proposed 3-lipid signature. This study aims to analyze the lipidomic profiles of individuals with mCRPC to identify lipid species that could serve as predictive indicators of prognosis and therapeutic response. Plasma samples were collected from mCRPC patients initiating first-line treatment (1 L) (n = 29) and those previously treated with at least two lines of therapy (> 2 L) (n = 19), including an androgen-receptor signaling inhibitor and a taxane. Employing an untargeted lipidomic approach, lipids were extracted from the plasma samples and subjected to analysis. A comprehensive identification and quantification of 789 plasma lipids was achieved. Notably, 75 species displayed significant dysregulation in > 2 L patients in comparison to the 1 L group. Among these, 63 species exhibited elevated levels, while 12 were reduced. Patients included in > 2 L cohort showed elevated levels of acylcarnitines (CAR), diacylglycerols (DG), phosphatidylethanolamines (PE), triacylglycerols (TG), and ceramides (Cer). Notably, some upregulated lipids, including CAR 14:0, CAR 24:1, Cer d18:1/16:0, Cer d18:1/18:0 (C18 Cer), Cer d18:2/18:0, Cer d18:1/24:1, and Cer d20:1/24:1, showed significant associations with overall survival (OS) in univariate models. Specifically, increased levels of C18 Cer remained significantly associated with poorer OS in the multivariate model, even after adjusting for treatment line and PSA levels (Hazard Ratio: 3.59 [95% Confidence Interval 1.51-8.52], p = 0.004). Employing quantitative mass spectrometry, our findings underscore the independent prognostic significance of C18 Cer in individuals with mCRPC. This discovery opens avenues for further studies within this field., (© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Atezolizumab + bevacizumab represent the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) + tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are lacking., Objectives: This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable advanced HCC., Method: A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to October 31, 2022. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing TKIs, including sorafenib and lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time. A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy (15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade ≥3 (severe) adverse events (SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAE probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments., Results: Nine RCTs enrolling 6,600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability (88%) of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to durvalumab plus tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was favoured in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, lenvatinib was favoured in 76% of cases., Conclusions: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity., Competing Interests: Giuseppe Cabibbo participated in advisory board for Bayer, Eisai, Ipsen, and AstraZeneca. Ciro Celsa received speaker fees from Eisai, Ipsen, and MSD. David James Pinato received lecture fees from BMS, Roche, and EISAI; travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees from Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, Da Volterra, Ewopharma, and AstraZeneca; research funding (to the institution) from MSD, GSK, and BMS; grant funding from the Wellcome Trust Strategic Fund (PS3416) and from the Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC MFAG Grant ID 25697); and support from the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, the Imperial Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (ECMC), and the Imperial College Tissue Bank. Calogero Cammà participated in the advisory board for Bayer, MSD/Merck, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Eisai. The other authors have no disclosure to declare., (© 2023 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Hyponatremia has prognostic implications in patients with cirrhosis, and thus, has been incorporated in the 2016 MELD-UNOS update. Changes in serum chloride are commonly perceived as 'just' parallel to changes in serum sodium. However, these are less well studied in the context of cirrhosis., Aims: To investigate whether serum chloride independently predicts outcomes in patients with advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) and stable clinical course or with critical illness., Methods: 891 patients with ACLD (defined by hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] ≥6 mm Hg) were followed after HVPG measurement between 2003 and 2020 (ACLD cohort). 181 critically ill patients with cirrhosis admitted to the ICU between 2004 and 2007 were recruited for the ICU cohort. Hypo-/hypernatremia (normal: 136-145 mmol/L) and hypo-/hyperchloremia (normal: 98-107 mmol/L) at baseline were assessed., Results: ACLD cohort: 68% of male patients with a median MELD (adjusted for Na) of 11 (9-17) were included (Child-Pugh-stages-A/B/C: 46%/38%/16%) and followed for a median of 60 months. Lower serum chloride (adjusted average HR per mmol/L: 0.965 [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.945-0.986], p = 0.001) showed a significant association with hepatic decompensation/liver-related mortality on multivariable Cox regression analysis adjusted for age, HVPG, albumin and MELD. In line, hypochloremia was significantly associated with hepatic decompensation/liver-related mortality (adjusted average HR: 1.656 [95% CI:1.267-2.163], p < 0.001). ICU cohort: 70% of patients were male, median MELD was 31(22-39) at ICU admission (92% with Child-Pugh-stage-C). After adjusting for hypo-/hypernatremia, MELD, and blood pH, hypochloremia remained independently associated with ICU-mortality (aOR Cl: 3.200 [95%CI: 1.209-8.829], p = 0.021)., Conclusion: Hypochloremia is associated with increased mortality in clinically stable and critically ill patients with cirrhosis independently of MELD including serum sodium., (© 2023 The Authors. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Nearly 1% to 2% of NSCLCs harbor RET fusions. Characterization of this rare population is still incomplete., Methods: This retrospective multicenter study included patients with any-stage RET positive (RET+) NSCLC from 31 cancer centers. Molecular profiling included DNA/RNA sequencing or fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses. Clinicobiological features and treatment outcomes (per investigator) with surgery, chemotherapy (CT), immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs), CT-ICB, multityrosine kinase inhibitors, and RET inhibitors (RETis) were evaluated., Results: For 218 patients included between February 2012 and April 2022, median age was 63 years, 56% were females, 93% had adenocarcinoma, and 41% were smokers. The most frequent fusion partner was KIF5B (72%). Median tumor mutational burden was 2.5 (range: 1-4) mutations per megabase, and median programmed death-ligand 1 expression was 10% (range: 0%-55%). The most common metastatic sites were the lung (50%), bone (43%), and pleura (40%). Central nervous system metastases were found at diagnosis of advanced NSCLC in 21% of the patients and at last follow-up or death in 31%. Overall response rate and median progression-free survival were 55% and 8.7 months with platinum doublet, 26% and 3.6 months with single-agent CT, 46% and 9.6 months with CT-ICB, 23% and 3.1 months with ICB, 37% and 3 months with multityrosine kinase inhibitor, and 76% and 16.2 months with RETi, respectively. Median overall survival was longer in patients treated with RETi versus no RETi (50.6 mo [37.7-72.1] versus 16.3 mo [12.7-28.8], p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Patients with RET+ NSCLC have mainly thoracic and bone disease and low tumor mutational burden and programmed death-ligand 1 expression. RETi markedly improved survival, whereas ICB may be active in selected patients., (Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The treatment landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has broadened with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) setting a novel standard of care. With the increased number of therapies either in first or in further line, disentangling the possible treatment sequences has become much more complex. Yet, all the second-line therapies have been evaluated after sorafenib. After ICIs, offering multikinase inhibitors is a widespread approach, either shifting forward sorafenib or lenvatinib, or choosing among regorafenib or cabozantinib, already approved in the refractory setting. Under specific circumstances, ICIs could be maintained beyond disease progression in patients with proven clinical benefit, as supported by some data emerging from phase III clinical trials with immunotherapy in HCC. Rechallenge with ICIs is an additional attractive alternative, although requiring careful and individual evaluation as efficacy and safety of such a strategy have not been yet clarified. Still, a considerable number of patients displays primary resistance to ICIs and might benefit from antiangiogenics either alone or in addition to ICIs instead. Hopefully, the ongoing clinical trials will enlighten regarding the most effective treatment pathways. The identification of predictive correlates of response to immunotherapy will help treatment allocation at each stage, thus representing an urgent matter to address in HCC research. With programmed death ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, and microsatellite status being inadequate biomarkers in HCC, patient characteristics, drug safety profile, and regulatory approval remain key elements to acknowledge in routine practice. Despite the tissue remaining a preferred source, biomarkers discovery could take advantage of liquid biopsy to overcome the matter of tissue availability and track tumor changes. Lastly, tumor genetic phenotypes, tumor microenvironment features, gut microbiome, and markers of immune response and systemic inflammation are all potential emergent predictors of response to ICIs, pending validation in the clinical setting., Competing Interests: DJ Pinato has received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare and Bayer HealthCare; payments or honoraria from BMS, Roche, Eisai, and the Falk Foundation; travel expenses from BMS and Bayer HealthCare; consulting fees from Mina Therapeutics, Eisai, Roche, AstraZeneca, Da Volterra, and BMS; and research funding (to his institution) from MSD and BMS. L Rimassa has received consulting fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BMS, Celgene, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Taiho Oncology, Zymeworks; lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi, Servier; travel expenses from AstraZeneca; and research funding (to her institution) from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Zymeworks. The other authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Rationale: Factors associated with long-term sequelae emerging after the acute phase of COVID-19 (so called "long COVID") are unclear. Here, we aimed to identify risk factors for the development of COVID-19 sequelae in a prospective cohort of subjects hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 infection and followed up one year after discharge., Methods: A total of 324 subjects underwent a comprehensive and multidisciplinary evaluation one year after hospital discharge for COVID-19. A subgroup of 247/324 who consented to donate a blood sample were tested for a panel of circulating cytokines., Results: In 122 patients (37.8%) there was evidence of at least one persisting physical symptom. After correcting for comorbidities and COVID-19 severity, the risk of developing long COVID was lower in the 109 subjects admitted to the hospital in the third wave of the pandemic than in the 215 admitted during the first wave, (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.51-0.93, p=0.01). Univariable analysis revealed female sex, diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO) value, body mass index, anxiety and depressive symptoms to be positively associated with COVID-19 sequelae at 1 year. Following logistic regression analysis, DLCO was the only independent predictor of residual symptoms (OR 0.98 CI 95% (0.96-0.99), p=0.01). In the subgroup of subjects with normal DLCO (> 80%), for whom residual lung damage was an unlikely explanation for long COVID, the presence of anxiety and depressive symptoms was significantly associated to persistent symptoms, together with increased levels of a set of pro-inflammatory cytokines: interferon-gamma, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin (IL)-2, IL-12, IL-1β, IL-17. In logistic regression analysis, depressive symptoms (p=0.02, OR 4.57 [1.21-17.21]) and IL-12 levels (p=0.03, OR 1.06 [1.00-1.11]) 1-year after hospital discharge were independently associated with persistence of symptoms., Conclusions: Long COVID appears mainly related to respiratory sequelae, prevalently observed during the first pandemic wave. Among patients with little or no residual lung damage, a cytokine pattern consistent with systemic inflammation is in place., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Bellan, Apostolo, Albè, Crevola, Errica, Ratano, Tonello, Minisini, D’Onghia, Baricich, Patrucco, Zeppegno, Gramaglia, Balbo, Cappellano, Casella, Chiocchetti, Clivati, Giordano, Manfredi, Patti, Pinato, Puricelli, Raineri, Rolla, Sainaghi, Pirisi and the No-More COVID study group.)

Background: IMbrave150 has established the superiority of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab over sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)., Methods: We generated a prospectively maintained database including patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for unresectable HCC across Europe, Asia and USA. Clinico-pathologic characteristics were assessed for their prognostic influence on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in univariable and multivariate analyses. Overall response rate by RECIST v1.1 and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) per CTCAE v.5.0 were reported., Results: Out of 433 patients, 296 Child-Pugh A and ECOG performance status01 patients received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in first line and were included. Patients were mostly male (82.7%), cirrhotic (75%) with history of viral hepatitis (65.9%). Overall, 68.9% had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer C-stage HCC with portal vein tumour thrombosis (PVTT, 35%) and extrahepatic spread (EHS, 51.7%). After a median follow-up of 10.0 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 9.4-10.4), median OS and PFS were 15.7 (95% CI: 14.5-NE) and 6.9 months (95% CI: 6.1-8.3), respectively. In the response-evaluable patients (n = 273), overall response rate was 30.8%. Overall, 221 patients (74.6%) developed TRAEs, with 70 (23.6%) reporting grade 3 or higher TRAEs; 25 (8.4%) patients had bleeding events. OS was independently associated with baseline Albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade and PVTT. Shorter PFS was associated with AFP≥ 400 ng/ml, worse ALBI and presence of EHS., Conclusion: This global observational study confirms the reproducible safety and efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in routine clinical practice. Within Child-Pugh-A criteria, the presence of PVTT and higher ALBI grade identify patients with poorer survival., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement AD received educational support for congress attend-ance from Roche. JvF received advisory board fees from Roche. HW received lecture fees and advisory board honoraria from Roche, Bayer, Ipsen, Eisai, BMS. VEG is employee and shareholder of F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd. AS received research grants (to institution) from AstraZeneca, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Exelixis, Clovis, KAHR medical, Actuate therapeutics, Incyte Corp. and Advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Exelixis, and Pfizer. PRG reports a consulting or advisory role and received honoraria from AdaptImmune, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Sirtex; has been on a speakers bureau for straZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Sirtex; has received research funding from Bayer and Roche; has provided expert testimony for Lilly; and has received travel or accommodation expenses from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, and Roche. DB has received lecture and speaker fees from Bayer Healthcare, the Falk Foundation Germany and consulting fees from Boston Scientific. AV reports honoraria for speaker, consultancy and advisory role from Roche, AstraZeneca, EISAI, Bayer, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Incyte, PierreFabre, Ipsen, and Sanofi. BS received travel support from Gilead, Ipsen and AbbVie. NP received consulting fees from Amgen, Merck Serono, Servier; lectures fees from AbbVie, Gilead, Lilly, Sanofi; travel expenses from Amgen, ArQule; and institutional research funding from Basilea, Merck Serono, Servier. TP received consulting fees from Bayer; and institutional research funding from Bayer, Lilly, Roche. RS received consulting fees for EISAI, Roche, Bayer, SIRTEX, Novartis; research funding (to institution) from Incyte, Novartis, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Bayer and Boston Scientific. MP is an investigator for Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Lilly, and Roche; he received speaker honoraria fromBayer, BMS, Eisai, Lilly, MSD, and Roche; he is a consultant for Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, and Roche; he received travel support from Bayer and BMS. AC received con-sulting fees from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche; speakers' fee from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis and Astellas. LR received consulting fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BMS, Celgene, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Taiho Oncology, Zymeworks; lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi; travel expenses from Ipsen; and institutional research funding from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Zymeworks. AGS has served on advisory boards or as consultant for Genentech, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Bayer, Exelixis, BMS, Roche, Glycotest, Exact Sciences, FujiFilm Medical Sciences, GRAIL. DJP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare, BMS, Roche, Eisai, Falk Foundation, travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, DaVolterra, Mursla, Exact Sciences and Astra Zeneca; research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. VEG is employed by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organisation or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. No writing assistance was utilised in the production of this manuscript., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Few studies have investigated the long-term effects of COVID-19 on cancer patients. Materials & methods: The authors conducted a telephone survey on the long-term symptoms of cancer patients from Guy's Cancer Centre. They compared patients whose symptoms occurred/got worse over 4 weeks after COVID-19 diagnosis (classified as long COVID) with patients who did not develop symptoms or whose symptoms occurred/got worse in the first 4 weeks after diagnosis. Results: The authors analyzed responses from 80 patients with a previous COVID-19 diagnosis; 51.3% (n = 41) developed long COVID. The most common symptoms were fatigue, breathlessness and cognitive impairment. Conclusion: Findings suggest that over half of the cancer population will experience long-term effects after their initial COVID-19 diagnosis. Further studies are required to validate the findings of this study.

Background: A proinflammatory diathesis, as measured by the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), heralds an adverse disease course for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: This post hoc analysis used data from the phase 3 OAK trial (NCT02008227), which randomized previously treated patients with NSCLC to atezolizumab or docetaxel. The main objective was assessing the differential impact of the pretreatment NLR on overall survival according to the treatment modality. In addition, patients' genomic characteristics were assessed according to their inflammatory status with a circulating free DNA (cfDNA) next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis., Results: In all, 600 and 575 patients with NLR data were included in the atezolizumab and docetaxel cohorts, respectively, with a median NLR of 4 (interquartile range, 2.6-6.7) for the pooled population. An NLR ≥4 was associated with a positive smoking status (88.6% vs. 78.1%; p < .01), male sex (66.4% vs. 57.6%; p = .01), a worse performance status (71.3% vs. 55.2%; p < .01), a higher number of metastatic sites (63.2% vs. 51.6%; p = .01), squamous histology (32.1% vs. 21.4%; p < .01), and tissue KRAS mutations (30% vs. 18.7%; p = .02) but not with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression or the tissue epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)/anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) status. A pretreatment NLR ≥4 was more strongly associated with mortality after atezolizumab (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-2.01) versus docetaxel (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.08-1.60; multivariable [MVA] interaction p = .08). The HR for an increased risk of death for PD-L1-negative/NLR ≥4 patients (compared with PD-L1-positive/NLR <4 patients) was significantly higher in the atezolizumab cohort (MVA interaction p = .01). The exclusion of EGFR/ALK-positive patients further increased the prognostic ability of the baseline NLR in favor of atezolizumab (MVA interaction p = .02). Pretreatment cfDNA data from NGS showed that patients with a high blood tumor mutation burden (cutoff, 16 mut/Mb) had a higher median NLR (4.6 vs. 3.7; p = .01). After adjustments for multiple comparisons, none of the selected variants of interest (EGFR, KRAS, TP53, KEAP1, STK11, SMARCA4, ARID1A, and targeted DNA damage response and repair genes) were significantly associated with the NLR., Conclusions: A low baseline NLR identified patients with NSCLC who derived a greater survival benefit from atezolizumab in comparison with those identified in the docetaxel cohort. The NLR could complement PD-L1 expression in tailoring treatment in this setting., (© 2022 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Introduction: Underlying liver disease and the intrinsic chemoresistance have historically hampered the development of efficacious treatments in HCC. However, in the last few years, immunotherapy-based combinations have emerged as efficacious therapeutic strategy in this setting. This paper critically summarizes the recent therapeutic progress in the systemic treatment of HCC., Area Covered: This paper examines the preclinical rationale of the following combinations in HCC: dual checkpoint inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents, and immune checkpoint inhibitors plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Results of recent clinical studies are presented, along with a brief overview of ongoing and future trials., Expert Opinion: The approval of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and the positive results of the HIMALAYA trial have broadened the therapeutic scenario for advanced HCC, opening, at the same time, new challenges. First of all, predictive biomarkers to allocate patients to the best treatment are eagerly required; second, specific studies are urgently needed to define the use of new combinations in patients usually excluded from clinical trials, e.g. those with deranged liver function and HIV or transplant recipients. Finally, with new combinations being translated into earlier stages, profound changes are soon expected in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant setting.

The availability of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the management of advanced hepatocellular cancer (HCC) has changed the treatment paradigm. There are emerging questions regarding the efficacy of subsequent anticancer therapies. The primary aim of this retrospective, multicenter study was to examine the types of anticancer treatment received after ICIs and to assess the impact on post-ICI survival. We established an international consortium of 11 tertiary-care referral centers located in the USA (n = 249), Europe (n = 74), and Asia (n = 97), and described patterns of care following ICI therapy. The impact of subsequent therapy on overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and presented with a 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 420 patients were treated with ICIs for advanced HCC after one line of systemic therapy (n = 371, 88.8%): 31 (8.8%) had died, 152 (36.2%) received best supportive care (BSC) following ICIs, and 163 patients (38.8%) received subsequent anticancer therapy. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs, n = 132, 80.9%), in particular sorafenib (n = 49, 30.0%), were the most common post-ICI therapy followed by external beam radiotherapy (n = 28, 17.2%), further immunotherapy (n = 21, 12.9%), locoregional therapy (n = 23, 14.1%), chemotherapy (n = 9, 5.5%), and surgery (n = 6, 3.6%). Receipt of post-ICI therapy was associated with longer median OS compared with those who had received BSC (12.1 vs. 3.3 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.4 (95% CI: 2.7-5.0). No difference in OS was noted in those patients who received TKI before ICIs compared with those who received ICIs followed by TKI. Conclusion: Post-ICI therapy is associated with OS in excess of 12 months, suggesting a role for therapeutic sequencing. OS from TKI therapy was similar to that reported in registration studies, suggesting preserved efficacy following ICIs., (© 2022 The Authors. Hepatology Communications published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

De novo malignancies (DNMs) following liver transplantation (LT) have been reported as 1 of the major causes of late mortality, being the most common cause of death in the second decade after LT. The overall incidence of DNMs is reported to be in the range of 3.1% to 14.4%, and the incidence is 2- to 3-fold higher in transplant recipients than in age- and sex-matched healthy controls. Long-term immunosuppressive therapy, which is the key in maintaining host tolerance and achieving good long-term outcomes, is known to contribute to a higher risk of DNMs. However, the incidence and type of DNM also depends on different risk factors, including patient demographics, cause of the underlying chronic liver disease, behavior (smoking and alcohol abuse), and pre-existing premalignant conditions. The estimated standardized incidence ratio for different DNMs is also variable. The International Liver Transplantation Society-Spanish Society of Liver Transplantation Consensus Conference working group on DNM has summarized and discussed the current available literature on epidemiology, risk factors, management, and survival after DNMs. Recommendations for screening and surveillance for specific tumors, as well as immunosuppression and cancer-specific management in patients with DNM, are summarized., Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Despite advances in supportive care, cancer-related symptoms tend to be persistent regardless of cancer type, stage of disease, or treatment received. There is an increasing prescription for complementary and alternative medicines, such as medical cannabis (MC). Knowledge and attitudes of Italian medical oncologists and palliative care physicians toward medical cannabis in cancer care remain unknown., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study to investigate the knowledge and attitude toward MC prescription among cancer care professionals in Italy. All invited participants received an email with the electronic questionnaire accessible through a direct link., Results: Among the 2616 members who received the invitation, 475 replied to the questionnaire and were considered for the survey analysis. The most prescribed formulations among those available in Italy were cannabis FM2. The most frequent clinical indications for the use of MC were pain, gastrointestinal, and mood disorders. Only 9 responders reported MC-related side effects like anxiety insomnia and muscle spasms. The question regarding the normative references for MC prescription and use in Italy had conflicting results: only 14% indicated the exact legislative reference., Conclusion: Our study highlights a significant discrepancy between personal attitudes, prescription levels, and actual knowledge on MC. This represent a critical issue that should be systemically faced, building educational programs and national guidelines that sublimate personal physicians' beliefs and predispositions, resulting in a robust science-based MC practice. Only through coordinated interventions on science and health policy of MC, there will be success of safety and efficacy, ensuring the best knowledge for the best outcomes., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Many coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) survivors show symptoms months after acute illness. The aim of this work is to describe the clinical evolution of Covid-19, one year after discharge. We performed a prospective cohort study on 238 patients previously hospitalized for Covid-19 pneumonia in 2020 who already underwent clinical follow-up 4 months post-Covid-19. 200 consented to participate to a 12-months clinical assessment, including: pulmonary function tests with diffusing lung capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO); post-traumatic stress (PTS) symptoms evaluation by the Impact of Event Scale (IES); motor function evaluation (by Short Physical Performance Battery and 2 min walking test); chest Computed Tomography (CT). After 366 [363-369] days, 79 patients (39.5%) reported at least one symptom. A DLCO < 80% was observed in 96 patients (49.0%). Severe DLCO impairment (< 60%) was reported in 20 patients (10.2%), related to extent of CT scan abnormalities. Some degree of motor impairment was observed in 25.8% of subjects. 37/200 patients (18.5%) showed moderate-to-severe PTS symptoms. In the time elapsed from 4 to 12 months after hospital discharge, motor function improves, while respiratory function does not, being accompanied by evidence of lung structural damage. Symptoms remain highly prevalent one year after acute illness., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Anthracyclines are among the most active chemotherapies (CT) in breast cancer (BC). However, cardiotoxicity is a risk and peculiar side effect that has been limiting their use in clinical practice, especially after the introduction of taxanes. Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD) has been developed to optimize the toxicity profile induced by anthracyclines, while maintaining its unquestionable therapeutic index, thanks to its delivering characteristics that increase its diffusion in tumor tissues and reduce it in normal tissues. This feature allows NPLD to be safely administered beyond the standard doxorubicin maximum cumulative dose of 450-480 mg/m 2 . Following three pivotal first-line phase III trials in HER2-negative metastatic BC (MBC), this drug was finally approved in combination with cyclophosphamide in this specific setting. Given the increasing complexity of the therapeutic scenario of HER2-negative MBC, we have carefully revised the most updated literature on the topic and dissected the potential role of NPLD in the evolving therapeutic algorithms.

The treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has witnessed radical changes over the last few years, with the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in clinical practice, namely the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as the standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced HCC. The immunosuppressive microenvironment of the chronically inflamed liver makes HCC a fertile ground for the use of ICI. This review focuses on anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies (mAb), which have been extensively studied, as monotherapy, in combination with other ICI or with antiangiogenic agents. Currently, anti-PD-1 agents are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for second-line treatment in advanced HCC: nivolumab, alone or in combination with ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab. Lack of demonstration of survival benefit in first and second line led to the investigation of PD-1 agents in combination with multi-kinase inhibitors, with a number of first-line treatment regimens being actively investigated. Mounting evidence suggests a potential role of PD-1 blockade as adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapies. A key challenge remains the identification of biomarkers of response, since only a minority of patients appear to benefit from ICI., Competing Interests: AD is supported by grant funding from the European Association for the Study of the Liver (Andrew Burroughs Fellowship). DJP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare and Bayer Healthcare and travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for H3B, Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, and Astra Zeneca; received research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. DJP is also supported by grant funding from the Wellcome Trust Strategic Fund (PS3416) and acknowledges grant support from the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust (CTRT) and infrastructural support by the Cancer Research UK Imperial Centre and the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre. AC received consulting fees from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Roche; speakers’ fee from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis and Astellas. LR received consulting fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BMS, Celgene, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Sanofi, Zymeworks; lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi; travel expenses from Ipsen; and institutional research funding from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Zymeworks. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript. The authors are fully responsible for all content and editorial decisions., (© 2021 D’Alessio et al.)

Immunotherapy has led to a paradigm shift in the treatment of several cancers. There have been significant efforts to identify biomarkers that can predict response and toxicities related to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICPI) therapy. Despite these advances, it has been challenging to tease out why a subset of patients benefit more than others or why certain patients experience immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Although the immune-modulating properties of the human gut bacterial ecosystem are yet to be fully elucidated, there has been growing interest in evaluating the role of the gut microbiome in shaping the therapeutic response to cancer immunotherapy. Considerable research efforts are currently directed to utilizing metagenomic and metabolic profiling of stool microbiota in patients on ICPI-based therapies. Dysbiosis or loss of microbial diversity has been associated with a poor treatment response to ICPIs and worse survival outcomes in cancer patients. Emerging data have shown that certain bacterial strains, such as Faecalibacterium that confer sensitivity to ICPI, also have a higher propensity to increase the risk of irAEs. Additionally, the microbiome can modulate the local immune response at the intestinal interface and influence the trafficking of bacterial peptide primed T-cells distally, influencing the toxicity patterns to ICPI. Antibiotic or diet induced alterations in composition of the microbiome can also indirectly alter the production of certain bacterial metabolites such as deoxycholate and short chain fatty acids that can influence the anti-tumor tolerogenesis. Gaining sufficient understanding of the exact mechanisms underpinning the interplay between ICPI induced anti-tumor immunity and the immune modulatory role gut microbiome can be vital in identifying potential avenues of improving outcomes to cancer immunotherapy. In the current review, we have summarized and highlighted the key emerging data supporting the role of gut microbiome in regulating response to ICPIs in cancer., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-6427). The series “Cancer Immunotherapy: Recent Advances and Challenges” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. Dr. DJP reports grants and personal fees from BMS, grants and personal fees from MSD, personal fees from EISAI, personal fees from ROCHE, personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, personal fees from H3B, personal fees from DaVolterra, personal fees from Falk, personal fees from MiNa Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. Dr. DJP also reports grant support from the NIHR Imperial BRC (Push for Impact 2019 Grant). Dr. SP reports that she is Advisory Board of AstraZeneca, Consultant of G1 therapeutics, and reports research funding from 5 for the Fight. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Most patients with biliary tract cancer (BTC) are diagnosed with advanced disease, relapse rates are high in those undergoing surgery and prognosis remains poor, while the incidence is increasing. Treatment options are limited, and chemotherapy is still the standard of care in both adjuvant and advanced disease setting. In recent years, different subtypes of BTC have been defined depending on the anatomical location and genetic and/or epigenetic aberrations. Especially for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) novel therapeutic targets have been identified, including fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 gene fusions and isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 mutations, with molecularly targeted agents having shown evidence of activity in this subgroup of patients. Additionally, other pathways are being evaluated in both iCCA and other subtypes of BTC, alongside targeting of the immune microenvironment. The growing knowledge of BTC biology and molecular heterogeneity has paved the way for the development of new therapeutic approaches that will completely change the treatment paradigm for this disease in the near future. This review provides an overview of the molecular heterogeneity of BTC and summarizes new targets and emerging therapies in development. We also discuss resistance mechanisms, open issues, and future perspectives in the management of BTC.

Background: Concomitant medications, such as steroids, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and antibiotics, might affect clinical outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitors., Methods: We conducted a multicenter observational retrospective study aimed at evaluating the impact of concomitant medications on clinical outcomes, by weighing their associations with baseline clinical characteristics (including performance status, burden of disease and body mass index) and the underlying causes for their prescription. This analysis included consecutive stage IV patients with cancer, who underwent treatment with single agent antiprogrammed death-1/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) with standard doses and schedules at the medical oncology departments of 20 Italian institutions. Each medication taken at the immunotherapy initiation was screened and collected into key categories as follows: corticosteroids, antibiotics, gastric acid suppressants (including proton pump inhibitors - PPIs), statins and other lipid-lowering agents, aspirin, anticoagulants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), ACE inhibitors/Angiotensin II receptor blockers, calcium antagonists, β-blockers, metformin and other oral antidiabetics, opioids., Results: From June 2014 to March 2020, 1012 patients were included in the analysis. Primary tumors were: non-small cell lung cancer (52.2%), melanoma (26%), renal cell carcinoma (18.3%) and others (3.6%). Baseline statins (HR 1.60 (95% CI 1.14 to 2.25), p=0.0064), aspirin (HR 1.47 (95% CI 1.04 to 2.08, p=0.0267) and β-blockers (HR 1.76 (95% CI 1.16 to 2.69), p=0.0080) were confirmed to be independently related to an increased objective response rate. Patients receiving cancer-related steroids (HR 1.72 (95% CI 1.43 to 2.07), p<0.0001), prophylactic systemic antibiotics (HR 1.85 (95% CI 1.23 to 2.78), p=0.0030), prophylactic gastric acid suppressants (HR 1.29 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.53), p=0.0021), PPIs (HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.48), p=0.0050), anticoagulants (HR 1.43 (95% CI: 1.16 to 1.77), p=0.0007) and opioids (HR 1.71 (95% CI 1.28 to 2.28), p=0.0002) were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of disease progression. Patients receiving cancer-related steroids (HR 2.16 (95% CI 1.76 to 2.65), p<0.0001), prophylactic systemic antibiotics (HR 1.93 (95% CI 1.25 to 2.98), p=0.0030), prophylactic gastric acid suppressants (HR 1.29 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.57), p=0.0091), PPI (HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.52), p=0.0172), anticoagulants (HR 1.45 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.84), p=0.0024) and opioids (HR 1.53 (95% CI 1.11 to 2.11), p=0.0098) were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of death., Conclusion: We confirmed the association between baseline steroids administered for cancer-related indication, systemic antibiotics, PPIs and worse clinical outcomes with PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors, which can be assumed to have immune-modulating detrimental effects., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AC received speaker fees and grant consultancies from Roche, MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Astellas. RG received speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and Roche. MGV received speaker fees, grant consultancies and travel support from BMS, Ipsen, Novartis, Pfizer, Astellas, Jansen and Pierre-Fabre. AR received grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and MSD. RM received grant consultancies from Pierre-Fabre, MSD, Incyte, BMS, and Roche. FS received speaker fees and grant consultancies from Roche, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Pierre-Fabre, Sanofi, Merck and Sunpharma. DP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare and travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, Astra Zeneca; received research funding (to institution) from MSD, BMS. PAA received speaker fees and grant consultancies from BMS, Roche-Genentech, MSD, Dohme, Array, Novartis, Merck-Serono, Pierre-Fabre, Incyte, New Link Genetics, Genmab, Medimmune, AstraZeneca, Syndax, SunPharma, Sanofi, Idera, Ultimovacs, Sandoz, Immunocore, 4SC, Alkermes, Italfarmaco, Nektar, Boehringer-Ingelheim; he also received research funds from BMS, Roche-Genentech, Array., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Level I evidence supports the use of sorafenib in patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C hepatocellular carcinoma, where heterogeneity in efficacy exists due to varying clinicopathologic features of the disease., Aim: We evaluated whether prior treatment with curative or locoregional therapies influences sorafenib-specific survival., Methods: From a prospective data set of 785 consecutive patients from international specialist centres, 264 patients (34%) were treatment naïve (TN) and 521 (66%) were pre-treated (PT), most frequently with transarterial chemoembolization ( n = 413; 79%). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) from sorafenib initiation with prognostic factors tested on uni- and multivariate analyses., Results: Median OS for the entire cohort was 9 months; the median sorafenib duration was 2.8 months, with discontinuation being secondary to progression ( n = 454; 58%) or toxicity ( n = 149; 19%). PT patients had significantly longer OS than TN patients (10.5 vs. 6.6 months; p < 0.001). Compared to TN patients, PT patients had a better Child-Pugh (CP) class (CP A: 57 vs. 47%; p < 0.001) and a lower BCLC stage (BCLC A-B, 40 vs. 30%; p = 0.007). PT status preserved an independent prognostic role ( p = 0.002) following adjustment for BCLC stage, α-fetoprotein, CP class, aetiology, and post-sorafenib treatment status. PT patients were more likely to receive further anticancer treatment after sorafenib (31 vs. 9%; p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Patients receiving sorafenib after having failed curative or locoregional therapies survive longer and are more likely to receive further treatment after sorafenib. This suggests an incremental benefit to OS from sequential exposure to multiple lines of therapy, justifying treatment stage migration in eligible patients.

Introduction: Chronic inflammation plays a key role in the pathogenesis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) as a result of asbestos exposure. Biomarkers of systemic inflammation have been shown to predict the natural history of MPM; however, this observation lacks independent validation. Our aim was to compare the prognostic performance of three inflammation-based biomarkers in predicting overall survival (OS) in MPM., Methods: In patients with histologically proven MPM, the inflammation-based prognostic scores modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio were studied and compared with the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Prognostic Score (EPS) and other known potential prognostic factors such as gender, histologic subtype, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and baseline blood parameters., Results: A total of 171 MPM patients presenting to Imperial College NHS Trust were studied. In univariate analyses, the following parameters were predictors of OS: female gender (p = 0.03), epithelioid histology (p = 0.03), normal C-reactive protein (p = 0.03), baseline white blood cell count <8.3 × 10/liter (p = 0.04), EPS (p = 0.003), mGPS (p < 0.001), NLR (p = 0.006), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (p = 0.03). Multivariate survival analysis confirmed the mGPS (hazard ratio = 2.6; p < 0.001) and NLR (hazard ratio = 2.0; p = 0.008), but not the EPS, as independent predictors of OS. Tissue expression of Ki-67 (p < 0.001) and vascular endothelial growth factor (p < 0.001) was higher in a subgroup of patients with high-risk inflammatory scores., Conclusions: The mGPS and NLR are externally validated prognostic indices in patients with MPM and correlate with sustained neoangiogenesis and increased proliferative index.

Atypical patterns of metastatic spread from colorectal primary tumors are often misdiagnosed, with potential implications for the clinical outcome. Metastatic diffusion to the splanchnocranium is extremely rare in colorectal cancer. A histological proof of diagnosis is rarely obtained and therapeutic management is a challenge. We describe the case of a 46-year-old patient who presented with a radiologically proven sphenoid wing metastasis. The patient presented with left-sided exophthalmos while receiving systemic chemotherapy for relapsed high-risk colorectal cancer. A left sphenoid wing metastasis was proven by a head computed tomography scan. A metastatic spread to the sino-nasal tract is regarded as a poor prognosis determinant in colorectal cancer and presents a unique set of diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. The compression of noble structures such as the optic nerve holds serious implications in terms of quality of life but there is insufficient evidence clarifying whether radiotherapy or surgery represent the best option for these patients, leaving the therapeutic plan to be decided case by case., (© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.)