Search

Summary: Aim: This study aims to investigate the predictive factors for conversion therapy in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) and to evaluate the prognosis of conversion cases by comparing them with partial response (PR) and complete response (CR) cases. Methods: In this retrospective multicentre study, we included a total of 946 uHCC patients treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) from September 2020 to September 2023. Results: Out of the patients, 43 (4.5%) received conversion therapy following Atez/Bev treatment. The overall response rate was 65.1% and 23.7% in the conversion and non‐conversion group, respectively, with a statistical significance (p < 0.001). Multivariate analyses identified that BCLC stage B or an earlier stage (p = 0.045), absence of macrovascular invasion and extrahepatic spread (p = 0.045), and a low value of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (p = 0.04) were significantly favourable predictive factors associated with conversion therapy. The conversion group showed significantly better survival compared to the non‐conversion group (p < 0.001). In the landmark analysis at 6, 12 and 18 months, the conversion group exhibited better survival compared to PR patients in the non‐conversion group (p = 0.04, 0.01 and 0.03, respectively) and there were no significant differences in the overall survival (OS) between the conversion group and patients who achieved a CR (p = 0.7, 1.0 and 0.3, respectively). Conclusions: Patients with low tumour burden and low value of NLR were more likely to undergo conversion therapy. The OS of patients undergoing conversion therapy showed better survival compared to those achieving PR and was comparable to those with CR patients. Conversion therapy could be considered if feasible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) is frequently selected as the primary systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Aims: To investigate the outcomes of patients with HCC treated with Atezo/Bev in a real‐world setting based on whether they met the inclusion criteria for the phase 3 IMbrave150 trial. Methods: A total of 936 patients were enrolled. There were 404 patients who met the inclusion criteria of the phase 3 IMbrave150 trial (IMbrave150 group) and 532 who did not (non‐IMbrave150 group). Results: Median progression‐free survival (PFS) in the IMbrave150 and non‐IMbrave150 groups was 7.4 months and 5.6 months (p = 0.002). Multivariable analysis revealed that non‐B, non‐C HCC aetiology (hazard ratio [HR], 1.173), α‐fetoprotein ≥100 ng/mL (HR, 1.472), Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage ≥ C (HR, 1.318), and modified albumin–bilirubin (mALBI) grade 2b or 3 (HR, 1.476) are independently associated with PFS. Median overall survival (OS) in the IMbrave150 and non‐Imbrave150 groups was 26.5 and 18.8 months (p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2 (HR, 1.986), α‐fetoprotein ≥100 ng/mL (HR, 1.481), and mALBI grade 2b or 3 (HR, 2.037) are independently associated with OS. In subgroup analysis, there were no significant differences in PFS or OS between these groups among patients with mALBI grade 1 or 2a. Conclusions: Patients who are treated with Atezo/Bev and meet the inclusion criteria for the phase 3 IMbrave150 trial, as well as those who do not meet the inclusion criteria but have good liver function, have a good prognosis for survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Direct‐acting antivirals (DAAs) have been accessible in Japan since 2014. The aim of this study is to compare how the prognosis of patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCV‐HCC) changed before and after DAA development. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 1949 Japanese HCV‐HCC patients from January 2000 to January 2023 categorized them into pre‐DAA (before 2013, n = 1169) and post‐DAA (after 2014, n = 780) groups. Changes in clinical features and prognosis were assessed. Results: Despite no significant differences in BCLC stage between groups, the post‐DAA group exhibited higher rates of sustained virological response (SVR) (45.6% vs. 9.8%), older age (73 vs 69 years), lower levels of AST (40 vs 56 IU/L), ALT (31 vs 46 IU/L), and AFP (11.7 vs 23.6 ng/mL), higher platelet count (13.5 vs 10.8 × 104/μL), better prothrombin time (88.0% vs 81.9%), and better ALBI score (−2.54 vs −2.36) (all P < 0.001). The post‐DAA group also showed higher rates of curative treatments (74.1% vs 65.2%) and significantly improved recurrence‐free survival (median 2.8 vs 2.1 years). Adjusted for inverse probability weighting, overall survival was superior in the post‐DAA group (median 7.4 vs 5.6 years, P < 0.001). Subanalysis within the post‐DAA group revealed significantly shorter overall survival for patients without SVR (median 4.8 years vs NA vs NA) compared to pre‐SVR or post‐SVR patients (both P < 0.001). No significant difference in OS was observed between the pre‐SVR and post‐SVR groups (P = 1.0). Conclusion: The development of DAA therapy has dramatically improved the prognosis of HCV‐HCC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: While several predictive models for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been proposed, including those for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection who have achieved sustained virologic response (SVR), the best model may differ between regions. We compared the ability of six reported models to stratify the risk of post‐SVR HCC in Japan, where rigorous surveillance and early detection of HCC is common. Methods: A total of 6048 patients with no history of HCC who achieved SVR by oral direct‐acting antiviral drugs were enrolled in this nationwide study. Patients continued HCC surveillance every 6 months after SVR. The incidence of post‐SVR HCC was compared between risk groups using the aMAP score, FIB‐4 index, Tahata model, GAF4 criteria, GES score, and ADRES score. Results: During the observation period with a median duration of 4.0 years after SVR, post‐SVR HCC developed in 332 patients (5.5%). All six models performed significantly at stratifying the incidence of HCC. However, Harrell's C‐index was below 0.8 for all models (range, 0.660–0.748), indicating insufficient stratification ability. Conclusion: Although all six proposed models demonstrated a good ability to predict the development of post‐SVR HCC, their ability to stratify the risk of post‐SVRHCC was unsatisfactory. Further studies are necessary to identify the best model for assessing the risk of post‐SVR HCC in regions where early detection of HCC is common. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Elderly patients are believed to have a reduced immune capacity, which may make immunotherapy less effective. The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic outcome of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) and lenvatinib (LEN) for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients aged 80 years and older. Methods: From March 2018 to July 2022, 170 and 92 elderly patients who received LEN and Atez/Bev as first‐line treatment, respectively, were retrospectively analyzed. Results: The median ages of the Atez/Bev and LEN groups were 83.0 (8.01–86.0) and 83.0 (82.0–86.0) years (p = 0.3), respectively. Men accounted for approximately 70% of the patients in both groups. The objective response rate was 35.9% in the LEN group and 33.7% in the Atez/Bev group (p = 0.8), whereas the disease control rates in the LEN and Atez/Bev groups were 62.9% and 63.0%, respectively (p = 1.0). The median progression‐free survival (PFS) in the LEN and Atez/Bev groups was 6.3 and 7.2 months, respectively, which were not significantly different (p = 0.2). The median overall survival (OS) was 17.9 months in the LEN group and 14.0 months in the Atez/Bev group. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.7). In multivariate analyses, the choice of treatment (LEN vs. Atez/Bev) showed no association with PFS or OS. The Atez/Bev group had a significantly higher rate of postprogression treatment (59.0% vs. 35.7%, p = 0.01) and a lower rate of discontinuation due to adverse events (69 [40.6%] vs. 19 [20.7%], p < 0.001) compared to the LEN group. Conclusions: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed comparable effectiveness to LEN in HCC patients aged 80 years and older. Given the results of postprogression treatment and discontinuation due to adverse events, Atez/Bev could serve as a first‐line treatment even for elderly HCC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims: The study goal was to compare the outcomes of patients with intermediate‐stage (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC]‐B) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) or lenvatinib (LEN) as first‐line systemic therapy. Methods: A total of 358 patients with BCLC‐B HCC treated with Atezo/Bev (n = 177) or LEN (n = 181) as first‐line systemic therapy were included. Results: The median progression‐free survival (PFS) times in the Atezo/Bev and LEN groups were 10.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.8–12.6) and 7.3 months (95% CI, 6.3–8.5), respectively (p =.019). In the propensity score‐matched cohort, the median PFS times in the Atezo/Bev (n = 151) and LEN (n = 151) groups were 10.2 months (95% CI, 7.0–12.3) and 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.9–8.1), respectively (p =.020). Restricted mean survival times of PFS were significantly higher in the Atezo/Bev group than in the LEN group at landmarks of 12 and 18 months (p =.031 and.012, respectively). In a subgroup analysis of patients with HCC beyond the up‐to‐seven criteria, the median PFS times in the Atezo/Bev (n = 134) and LEN (n = 117) groups were 10.5 months (95% CI, 7.0–11.8) and 6.3 months (95% CI, 5.5–7.3), respectively (p =.044). Conclusions: The use of Atezo/Bev as first‐line systemic therapy in patients with BCLC‐B HCC is expected to result in good PFS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This retrospective study compared the impact of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) and lenvatinib (LEN) on the liver function in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: We included 526 patients who received Atez/Bev and 731 who received LEN March 2018 and July 2022 in this study. We conducted a 1:1 propensity‐score‐matched analysis and identified 324 patients in each group for inclusion in the present analysis. Nonlinear mixed‐effects regression models were employed, allowing for the evaluation and inclusion of cases where treatment was interrupted due to disease progression, adverse events, or loss to follow‐up. These models were used to compare the ALBI score between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups. Results: Following propensity score matching, the mean ALBI scores in the Atez/Bev and LEN groups were −2.41 ± 0.40 and −2.44 ± 0.42 at baseline, and −2.17 ± 0.56 and −2.19 ± 0.58 at 12 weeks, respectively. Although the ALBI score significantly worsened during treatment in both groups (p < 0.001), there was no significant difference in the rate of ALBI score deterioration between the groups (p = 0.06). Subgroup analyses showed that LEN‐treated patients with BCLC advanced stage (p = 0.02) and those who initially received the full dose (p < 0.001) had a significantly greater worsening of ALBI score compared to Atez/Bev. Conclusions: Using a nonlinear mixed‐effects regression approach, which allowed for the inclusion of cases with treatment interruption, we found no significant difference in the trend of liver function deterioration between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups. Caution should be exercised for LEN‐treated patients with BCLC advanced stage or those receiving the full dose of LEN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The clinical usefulness of tumor markers alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and des-gamma carboxyprothrombin (DCP) in the early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC), including those with marker decline after antiviral therapy, is limited. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are expected to complement detection; however, their details remain unknown. Our prospective pilot study aimed to improve the surveillance of HCC high-risk LC patients by propensity scoring with tumor markers and additional predictors. Methods: Tumor markers and plasma levels of cytokines and miRNAs were observationally measured and statistically evaluated with propensity scoring in 85 eligible patients: 43 with current HCC (cHCC) including 8 with early-HCC, 22 with previous HCC cured (pHCC), and 20 with intact LC (iLC). Results: The analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) showed that the best single predictor was AFP (0.794 for cHCC-discrimination and 0.771 for pHCC-discrimination). AFP−DCP integrated with miR-21-5p for cHCC-discrimination was 0.896; with IL-10 for pHCC-discrimination was 0.872, these were significantly better than those of AFP alone, independently (P <.01). The best single predictor for iLC-discrimination was IL-17 level (0.756). IL-17 integrated with AFP−DCP was 0.882, which was significantly better than that of IL-17 alone (P <.01). The positive likelihood ratio (pLR) for cHCC-discrimination by integration of AFP−DCP and miR-21-5p was 32.2. Preliminary validation analysis of early-HCCs compared to conventional AFP and DCP showed the combinations of AFP–DCP and 3 integrated predictors, miR-21-5p for cHCC-discrimination, IL-10 for pHCC-discrimination, and IL-17 for iLC-discrimination, sensitivity, specificity, and pLR, improved from 37.5% to 62.5%, 55.8% to 83.1%, and 0.85 to 3.70, respectively. Conclusion: The predictors of AFP-DCP combined with iR-21-5p, IL-10, and IL-17 by propensity scoring achieved higher discrimination of cHCCs, pHCCs, and iLCs, may be beneficial for the surveillance of early-HCCs, improving prediction of early-HCCs over conventional methods. However, further validation is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Because of recent developments in treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), methods for determining suitable therapy for initial or recurrent HCC have become important. This study used artificial intelligence (AI) findings to establish a system for predicting prognosis of HCC patients at time of reoccurrence based on clinical data as a reference for selection of treatment modalities. Methods: As a training cohort, 5,701 observations obtained at the initial and each subsequent treatment for recurrence from 1,985 HCC patients at a single center from 2000 to 2021 were used. The validation cohort included 5,692 observations from patients at multiple centers obtained at the time of the initial treatment. An AI calculating system (PRAID) was constructed based on 25 clinical factors noted at each treatment from the training cohort, and then predictive prognostic values for 1- and 3-year survival in both cohorts were evaluated. Results: After exclusion of patients lacking clinical data regarding albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade or tumor-node-metastasis stage of the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan, 6th edition (TNM-LCSGJ 6th), ALBI-TNM-LCSGJ 6th (ALBI-T) and modified ALBI-T scores confirmed that prognosis for patients in both cohorts was similar. The area under the curve for prediction of both 1- and 3-year survival in the validation cohort was 0.841 (sensitivity 0.933 [95% CI: 0.925–0.940], specificity 0.517 [95% CI: 0.484–0.549]) and 0.796 (sensitivity 0.806 [95% CI: 0.790–0.821], specificity 0.646 [95% CI: 0.624–0.668]), respectively. Conclusion: The present PRAID system might provide useful prognostic information related to short and medium survival for decision-making regarding the best therapeutic modality for both initial and recurrent HCC cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Lack of an established methodology for post-progression systemic treatment following atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) administration is an important clinical issue. The present study aimed to elucidate the potential of lenvatinib as a second-line treatment option after Atez/Bev failure. Methods: From 2020 to 2022, 101 patients who received lenvatinib as second-line treatment were enrolled (median 72 years, males 77, Child-Pugh A 82, BCLC-A:B:C:D = 1:35:61:4), while 29 treated with another molecular targeting agent (MTA) during the period as second-line treatment were enrolled as controls. The therapeutic efficacy of lenvatinib given as second-line treatment was retrospectively evaluated. Results: Median progression-free survival/median overall survival for all patients was 4.4/15.7 months and for those with Child-Pugh A was 4.7 months/not-reached. When prognosis was compared with patients who received another MTA, there was no significant difference for PFS (3.5 months, p = 0.557) or OS (13.6 months, p = 0.992), and also no significant differences regarding clinical background factors. mRECIST findings showed that objective response and disease control rates in patients treated with lenvatinib were 23.9% and 70.4%, respectively (CR:PR:SD:PD = 3:14:33:21), while those shown by RECIST, ver. 1.1, were 15.4% and 66.2%, respectively (CR:PR:SD:PD = 1:10:36:24). Adverse events (any grade ≥10%) were appetite loss (26.7%) (grade 1:2:3 = 2:15:10), general fatigue (21.8%) (grade 1:2:3 = 3:13:6), protein in urine (16.8%) (grade 1:2:3 = 0:4:13), and hypertension (13.9%) (grade 1:2:3 = 1:8:5). Conclusion: Although lenvatinib treatment might not provide a pseudo-combination immunotherapy effect following Atez/Bev failure, lenvatinib when used as second-line treatment after Atez/Bev failure might be expected to be comparable as compared to its use as first-line treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The present study focused on Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), which is based on bodyweight and serum albumin, and known as an easy‐to‐use nutritional assessment tool in clinical settings, to elucidate the prognostic predictive ability of GNRI in patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: A total of 525 HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev, based on their classification of unsuitable status for curative treatments and/or transarterial catheter chemoembolization, were enrolled (Child–Pugh A:B:C = 484:40:1, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0:A:B:C:D = 7:25:192:283:18). Prognosis was evaluated retrospectively using GNRI. Results: Atez/Bev was used in 338 of the present cohort as first‐line systemic chemotherapy (64.4%). Median progression‐free survival based on GNRI indicating normal, mild decline, moderate decline, and severe decline was 8.3, 6.7, 5.3, and 2.4 months, respectively, whereas median overall survival was 21.4, 17.0, 11.5. and 7.3 months, respectively (both p < 0.001). The concordance index (c‐index) values of GNRI for predicting prognosis (progression‐free survival/overall survival) were superior to those of Child–Pugh class and albumin‐bilirubin grade (0.574/0.632 vs. 0.527/0.570 vs. 0.565/0.629). As a subanalysis, muscle volume loss was observed in 37.5% of 256 patients with computed tomography data available. Along with GNRI decline, frequency of muscle volume loss became progressively larger (normal vs. mild vs. moderate vs. severe = 17.6% vs. 29.2% vs. 41.2% vs. 57.9%, p < 0.001), and a GNRI value of 97.8 was predictive of its occurrence (AUC 0.715, 95% CI 0.649–0.781; specificity/sensitivity = 0.644/0.688). Conclusion: These findings indicate that GNRI is an effective nutritional prognostic tool for predicting prognosis and muscle volume loss complication in HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) is the first-line treatment for unresectable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The tumor markers (TMs) for HCC include alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), fucosylated alpha-fetoprotein (AFP-L3), and des-gamma carboxyprothrombin (DCP). A TM score combining these markers has been reported to be useful in predicting HCC prognosis. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the ability of this previously reported TM score involving AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP as TMs in predicting prognosis and therapeutic efficacy in HCC patients administered Atez/Bev as first-line treatment. The TM score was found to be effective in stratifying overall survival and progression-free survival in 371 patients with unresectable advanced HCC treated with Atez/Bev. The TM score proved to be a simple and useful prognostic marker and therapeutic efficacy indicator for advanced HCC patients administered Atez/Bev as first-line treatment. Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the ability of a previously reported tumor marker (TM) score involving alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), fucosylated AFP (AFP-L3), and des gamma-carboxy prothrombin (DCP) as TMs in predicting the prognosis and therapeutic efficacy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients administered atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) as first-line treatment. Materials/Methods: The study period covered September 2020 to December 2022 and involved 371 HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev. The values of the TMs AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP were measured upon introducing Atez/Bev. Elevations in the values of AFP (≥100 ng/mL), AFP-L3 (≥10%), and DCP (≥100 mAU/mL) were considered to indicate a positive TM. The number of positive TMs was summed up and used as the TM score, as previously proposed. Hepatic reserve function was assessed using the modified albumin–bilirubin grade (mALBI). Predictive values for prognosis were evaluated retrospectively. Results: A TM score of 0 was shown in 81 HCC patients (21.8%), 1 in 110 (29.6%), 2 in 112 (29.9%), and 3 in 68 (18.3%). The median overall survival (OS) times for TM scores 0, 1, 2, and 3 were not applicable [NA] (95% CI NA-NA), 24.0 months (95% CI 17.8-NA), 16.7 months (95% CI 17.8-NA), and NA (95% CI 8.3-NA), respectively (p < 0.001). The median progression-free survival (PFS) times for TM scores 0, 1, 2, and 3 were 16.5 months (95% CI 8.0-not applicable [NA]), 13.8 months (95% CI 10.6–21.3), 7.7 months (95% CI 5.3–8.9), and 5.8 months (95% CI 3.0–7.6), respectively (p < 0.001). OS was well stratified in mALBI 1/2a and mALBI 2a/2b. PFS was well stratified in mALBI 2a/2b, but not in mALBI 1/2a. Conclusions: The TM score involving AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP as TMs was useful in predicting the prognosis and therapeutic efficacy in terms of OS and PFS in HCC patients administered Atez/Bev as first-line treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Systemic treatment is generally recommended for Child-Pugh (CP) A status patients with an unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). This study aimed to elucidate differences regarding therapeutic efficacy between lenvatinib (LEN), a multi-molecular target agent, and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev), a newly developed immune-combined therapeutic regimen for CP-B patients affected by uHCC. Methods: From April 2018 to July 2022, 128 patients with uHCC treated with Atez/Bev (n = 29) or LEN (n = 99) as the initial systemic treatment were enrolled (median age 71 years; males 97; CP score 7:8:9 = 94:28:6; median albumin-bilirubin score −1.71). Therapeutic response was evaluated using RECIST, version 1.1. Clinical features and prognosis were retrospectively examined. Results: There were no significant differences between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups in regard to best response (CR:PR:SD:PD = 0:5:12:7 vs. 5:22:25:20, p = 0.415), progression-free survival (PFS) (median 5.0 [95% CI: 2.4–7] vs. 5.5 [95% CI: 3.4–7.9] months, p = 0.332), or overall survival (OS) (5.8 [95% CI: 4.3–11] vs. 8.8 [95% CI: 6.1–12.9] months, p = 0.178). Adverse events (any grade/≥ grade 3) were observed in 72.4%/17.2% (n = 21/5) of patients treated with Atez/Bev and 78.8%/25.3% (n = 78/25) of those treated with LEN (p = 0.46/0.46). Discussion: This retrospective study found no significant differences regarding PFS or OS between CP-B patients given Atez/Bev or LEN as initial systemic treatment for uHCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Multiple studies have revealed the correlation between gut microbiome and the response to checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in patients with cancer, and oral administration of butyrate‐producing enterobacteria has been reported to enhance the efficacy of CPIs. However, the effects of enterobacteria on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not well understood. Methods: In this retrospective multicenter study, we enrolled 747 patients with advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab combination therapy. Tumor response, survival, and adverse effects were compared between 99 patients who ingested drugs containing butyric acid‐producing enterobacteria (butyric acid group) and the remaining patients (control group). Results: Objective response and disease control rates in butyric acid group (29.7% and 77.8%, respectively) were higher than those in the control group (26.4% and 72.7%, respectively). However, the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.543 and p = 0.222, respectively). No difference in median survival time was observed between the two groups (20.0 months and 21.4 months, respectively; p = 0.789), even after matching the backgrounds of the patients with propensity scores (p = 0.714). No adverse effects occurred upon the administration of butyrate‐producing bacteria. However, proteinuria (41.4% vs. 30.9%; p = 0.041), fever (17.2% vs. 10.2%, p = 0.036), and diarrhea (15.2% vs. 6.2%; p = 0.001) occurred more frequently in the butyric acid group. Conclusion: Butyrate‐producing bacteria does not enhance the efficacy of atezolizumab–bevacizumab combination therapy in patients with HCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: The study goal was to compare the outcomes of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) as either first‐ or later‐line systemic therapy. Methods: A total of 430 patients with HCC treated with Atezo/Bev at 22 institutions in Japan were included. Patients treated with Atezo/Bev as first‐line therapy for HCC were defined as the first‐line group (n = 268) while those treated with Atezo/Bev as second‐ or later‐line therapy were defined as the later‐line group (n = 162). Results: The median progression‐free survival times in the first‐ and later‐line groups were 7.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.7–9.2) and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.0–7.7) (P = 0.021). Regarding treatment‐related adverse events, hypertension of any grade was more common in the first‐line group than in the later‐line group (P = 0.025). Analysis adjusted by inverse probability weighting, including patient and HCC characteristics, showed that the later‐line group (hazard ratio, 1.304; 95% CI, 1.006–1.690; P = 0.045) was significantly associated with progression‐free survival. In patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B, the median progression‐free survival times in the first‐ and later‐line groups were 10.5 months (95% CI, 6.8–13.8) and 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.0–9.4) (P = 0.021). Among patients with a history of lenvatinib therapy, the median progression‐free survival times in the first‐ and later‐line groups were 7.7 months (95% CI, 6.3–9.2) and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.0–7.7) (P = 0.022). Conclusion: The use of Atezo/Bev as first‐line systemic therapy in patients with HCC is expected to prolong survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This retrospective study aimed to investigate the impact of proton pump inhibitor treatment (PPI) and antibiotic treatment on the therapeutic outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients receiving atezolizumab and bevacizumab (Atez/Bev). Methods: The present study included a total of 441 HCC patients who were treated with Atez/Bev in 20 Japanese institutions from September 2020 to April 2022. We adopted the inverse probability of treatment weight to adjust for imbalance in the baseline characteristics of patients with and without PPI treatment as well as patients with and without antibiotic treatment. Results: The progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with and without PPI treatment did not differ to a statistically significant extent. In the weighted cohort, the difference in PFS and OS between the patients with and without PPI did not reach statistical significance (median PFS, 7.0 vs. 6.5 months, p = 0.07; 1‐year survival rate 66.3% and 73.8%, p = 0.9). The PFS and OS in patients with antibiotic treatment were worse in comparison to patients without antibiotic treatment (median PFS, 3.8 vs. 7.0 months, p = 0.007; 1‐year survival rate 58.8% and 70.3%, p = 0.01). In the weighted cohort, the PFS and OS of the two groups did not differ to a statistically significant extent (median PFS, 3.8 vs. 6.7 months, p = 0.2; 1‐year survival rate, 61.8% and 71.0%, p = 0.6). Conclusions: The therapeutic outcomes of Atez/Bev in HCC patients did not differ between patients with and without PPI treatment or between patients with and without antibiotic treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aim: There is no known report regarding the relationship of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) treatment with muscle volume loss (MVL) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC) patients. This study aimed to elucidate the clinical relationship between MVL and Atez/Bev. Materials/Methods: From September 2020 to December 2021, 229 u-HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev and with muscle volume data obtained by computed tomography at the baseline available were analyzed (median age, 74 years; males, 186 (81.2%); ECOG PS 0/1, 221 (96.5%); HCV:HBV:alcohol:others = 81:33:40:75; Child-Pugh A, 212 (92.6%); modified albumin-bilirubin (mALBI) grade 1:2a:2b = 79:60:90; BCLC 0:A:B:C = 1:24:87:117; median observation period, 6.8 months). Japan Society of Hepatology criteria were used for definition of MVL and prognostic factors were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Multivariate Cox-hazard analysis of prognostic factors for progression-free survival (PFS) showed elevated alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) (≥100 ng/mL) (HR 1.848, 95% CI 1.264–2.702, p = 0.002), mALBI grade (≥2a) (HR 1.563, 95% CI 1.035–2.359, p = 0.034), and MVL (HR 1.479, 95% CI 1.020–2.144, p = 0.039) as significant factors. For overall survival (OS), significant factors included elevated AFP (≥100 ng/mL) (HR 3.564, 95% CI 1.856–6.844, p < 0.001), mALBI grade (≥2a) (HR 3.451, 95% CI 1.580–7.538, p = 0.002), and MVL (HR 2.119, 95% CI 1.150–3.904, p = 0.016). Patients with MVL (MVL group, n = 91) showed worse PFS than those without (non-MVL group, n = 138) (median PFS 5.3 vs. 7.6 months, p = 0.025), while the MVL group showed worse OS (p = 0.038), though neither reached the median survival time. Conclusion: MVL may be a clinical factor related to poor prognosis in patients receiving Atez/Bev treatment for u-HCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study investigated the relationship between nutritional status, as determined by the prognostic nutritional index (PNI), and outcomes in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/bev). Methods: The study analyzed 485 HCC patients treated with Atez/bev. Results: There were 342 patients with a low PNI (<47) and 143 patients with a high PNI (≥47). The median follow-up duration was 9.4 (6.0–14.3) months. Multivariate Cox hazards analysis showed that an α-fetoprotein level ≥100 ng/mL (hazard ratio (HR), 2.217; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.588–3.095; p < 0.001), and PNI ≥47 (HR, 0.333; 95% CI, 0.212–0.525; p < 0.001) were independently associated with overall survival. Multivariate analysis showed that an α-fetoprotein level ≥100 ng/mL (HR, 1.690; 95% CI, 1.316–2.170; p < 0.001) and PNI ≥47 (HR, 0.696; 95% CI, 0.528–0.918; p = 0.010) were independently associated with progression-free survival. Cumulative overall and progression-free survival rates differed significantly by PNI (p < 0.001 and p < 0.002, respectively). In a subgroup analysis using inverse probability weighting adjustment in patients with albumin-bilirubin grade 1 (n = 173), univariate Cox hazards analysis showed that a PNI ≥47 (HR, 0.502; 95% CI, 0.260–0.991; p = 0.047) was significantly associated with overall survival. Spline curve analysis revealed that a PNI of approximately 34–48 is an appropriate cutoff for predicting good overall and progression-free survival. Conclusion: The PNI, a biomarker of nutritional status, can predict prognosis in patients with HCC treated with Atez/bev, even those who are considered to have a good prognosis due to good liver function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To investigate the possible correlation between the development of adverse events (AEs) and prognosis in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev). Methods: A total of 286 patients with unresectable HCC treated with Atez/Bev as first‐line systematic therapy were included. Results: Regarding treatment‐related AEs, decreased appetite of any grade, proteinuria of any grade, and fatigue of any grade were found with a frequency of ≥20%. Multivariate analysis adjusted for immune‐related liver injury, immune‐related endocrine dysfunction, proteinuria, fatigue, decreased appetite, hypertension, sex, age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, HCC etiology, HCC stage, Child–Pugh score, and α‐fetoprotein showed that hypertension of any grade (hazard ratio [HR], 0.527; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.326–0.854; p = 0.009) and α‐fetoprotein ≥100 ng/ml (HR, 1.642; 95% CI, 1.111–2.427; p = 0.013) were independently associated with progression‐free survival. Multivariate analysis adjusted for the same AEs showed that fatigue (HR, 2.354; 95% CI, 1.299–4.510; p = 0.010) was independently associated with overall survival. Median progression‐free survival was 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.2–8.1) in patients without hypertension of any grade and 12.6 months (95% CI, 6.7–not available) in patients with hypertension of any grade (p = 0.035). The overall survival was significantly shorter in patients in whom treatment‐related fatigue of any grade was observed (p < 0.001). Regarding response rates, the disease control rate of patients who developed treatment‐related hypertension (94.2%) was significantly higher than those who did not (79.1%) (p = 0.009). Conclusions: Treatment‐related hypertension is associated with good outcomes in patients with HCC treated with Atez/Bev. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Recently, the neo‐Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), a composite biomarker determined by the C‐reactive protein level and albumin–bilirubin grade, was developed to predict outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who undergo hepatic resection. The present research investigated whether the neo‐GPS could predict prognosis in HCC patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev). Methods: A total of 421 patients with HCC who were treated with Atez/Bev were investigated. Results: Multivariate Cox hazards analysis showed that a GPS of 1 (hazard ratio (HR), 1.711; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.106–2.646) and a GPS of 2 (HR, 4.643; 95% CI, 2.778–7.762) were independently associated with overall survival. Conversely, multivariate Cox hazards analysis showed that a neo‐GPS of 1 (HR, 3.038; 95% CI, 1.715–5.383) and a neo‐GPS of 2 (HR, 5.312; 95% CI, 2.853–9.890) were also independently associated with overall survival in this cohort. Additionally, cumulative overall survival rates differed significantly by GPS and neo‐GPS (p < 0.001). The neo‐GPS, compared with the GPS, had a lower Akaike information criterion (1207 vs. 1,211, respectively) and a higher c‐index (0.677 vs. 0.652, respectively) regarding to overall survival. In a subgroup analysis of patients considered to have a good prognosis as confirmed using a Child–Pugh score of 5 (p = 0.001), a neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio <3 (p = 0.001), or an α‐fetoprotein level < 100 ng/mL (p < 0.001), those with a high neo‐GPS (≥1) had a statistically poorer overall survival than those with a low neo‐GPS. Conclusions: The neo‐GPS can predict prognosis in advanced unresectable HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This study compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) in patients with viral and non‐viral infection in clinical settings. Methods: We conducted the retrospective cohort study of 323 BCLC stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with Child‐Pugh class A, and a performance status of 0 or 1 who started Atez/Bev from September 2020 to December 2021 at 22 institutions in Japan. Patients with viral infection was defined as those who were either serum anti‐HCV‐ Ab or HBs‐Ag‐positive, while patients with non‐viral infection was defined as those who were both serum anti‐HCV Ab‐ and HBs‐Ag‐negative. We constructed a propensity‐score‐matched cohort to minimize the risk of observable potential confounders. Results: Propensity score matching produced 126 matched pairs for patients with viral versus non‐viral infection. After matching, the significant differences in baseline demographic features did not exist between the two groups. The objective response rate was 20.6% and 24.6% in viral‐ and non‐viral‐related HCC patients, respectively, without a significant difference (p = 0.55). The disease control rate was not also significantly different (68.3% vs 69.0%, p = 1.00). The median progression‐free survival was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0–9.6) and 6.2 months (95% CI 5.1–7.8) in patients with viral and non‐viral infection, and the 12‐month survival rates were 65.5% (95% CI 50.8–76.8) and 71.7% (95% CI 57.3–81.9) in those with viral and non‐viral infection, respectively, which were not significantly different (p = 0.33, p = 0.38). No significant difference in treatment‐related adverse events was found between the two groups. Conclusions: Our etiology‐based study demonstrated that Atez/Bev showed good efficacy and safety for HCC patient with non‐viral infection as well as those with viral infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]