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]

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 Methods Results Conclusion Since the development of tremelimumab plus durvalumab (Dur/Tre) for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), it has been used as not only an initial but also later line treatment in clinical practice. This study aimed to elucidate clinical prognostic factors for progression‐free survival (PFS) in Dur/Tre treatment cases.Enrolled were 183 uHCC patients treated with Dur/Tre from 2023 to May 2024 (median age, 74 years; male patients, 152; Child–Pugh class A:B, 150:33; Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B:C, 59:124; initial line use, 64). Clinical factors with prognostic influence on PFS in these patients were retrospectively evaluated.The median observation period was 7.2 months (interquartile range, 3.2–10.4). History of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atz/Bev) treatment was the only significant prognostic factor for PFS at introduction of Dur/Tre in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 2.040, p = 0.028) (median PFS: without vs. with = 5.6 vs. 2.7 months, p < 0.001). Although immune‐mediated adverse events (imAE) occurrence was only significant in univariate analysis, when objective response and disease control rates were examined according to imAE positivity (any grade) at the time of analysis, those were noted in 14.4% and 39.2%, respectively, of patients without imAE, while in patients with imAE (any grade), they were noted in 18.2% and 56.1%, respectively (p = 0.523 and p = 0.038, respectively).History of Atz/Bev treatment may be an independent clinical factor for poor PFS at Dur/Tre introduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The most frequently used first-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Upon progression after this treatment, the standard of care in many countries is sorafenib, due to the lack of reimbursement for other drugs. Several randomized trials are currently underway to clarify the best second-line therapy in patients with HCC. This real-world study aimed to compare outcomes reached by lenvatinib and sorafenib second-line therapy in this setting., Methods: The overall cohort included 891 patients with HCC from 5 countries treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in first-line setting between October 2018 and April 2022. At the data cut-off (May 2022), 41.5% of patients were continuing a first-line treatment, 5.5% were lost at follow-up, and 53.0% of patients had progressive disease after first-line therapy. 51.5% of patients with progressive disease received a second-line treatment, while 48.5% did not receive any subsequent therapy. Between patients receiving second-line treatment, 11.1% of patients underwent transarterial chemoembolization, 21.0% received sorafenib, 35.4% underwent lenvatinib, and 32.5% were treated with other drugs., Results: Lenvatinib second-line subgroup achieved a median overall survival (mOS) of 18.9 months, significative longer (p = 0.01; hazard ratio [HR]: 2.24) compared to sorafenib subgroup that reached a mOS of 14.3 months. The multivariate analysis highlighted albumin-bilirubin 1 grade (p < 0.01; HR: 5.23) and lenvatinib second-line therapy (p = 0.01; HR: 2.18) as positive prognostic factors for OS. The forest plot highlighted a positive trend in terms of OS in favor of patients treated with lenvatinib second-line regardless of baseline characteristics before first-line therapy., Conclusion: These results suggest that, in patients with HCC progressed to first-line atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib second-line therapy is associated to an improved survival compared to sorafenib., (© 2024 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

We previously found that "albumin grade", formerly called the "ALBS grade," demonstrated significant capability for prognostic stratification in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with lenvatinib. The purpose of the present study was to compare the performance of the albumin grade with that of the modified albumin-bilirubin (mALBI) grade in predicting overall survival of HCC patients with different BCLC stages and treatment types. We enrolled 7,645 Japanese patients newly diagnosed with HCC using the Akaike information criteria (AIC), likelihood ratio, and C-index in different Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages and treatments. The albumin grade showed similar and slightly better performance than the mALBI grade for BCLC stage 0 and A and especially for patients who underwent curative surgery and ablation. In patients treated with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, molecular targeted agents, and the best supportive care, the mALBI grade had better performance than the albumin grade. However, the differences of the indices were very small in all scenarios. Overall, the albumin grade was comparable in efficacy to the mALBI grade, showing particular benefit for patients with early-stage HCC., Competing Interests: No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Introduction: Overweight is a negative prognostic factor in the general population in the long term. However, the role of body mass index (BMI) in the short-mid term in advanced tumours is unclear. The present analysis investigates the role of BMI weight classes in a large sample of patients affected by HCC and receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line treatment., Methods and Material: The cohort included consecutive patients affected by BCLC-c and BCLC-B HCC patients from a multicenter international study group who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line therapy. Population was stratified according to the BMI in under-, over- and normal-weight according to the conventional thresholds. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the prognostic and predictive impact of BMI in patients affected by advanced or intermediate HCC. Survival curves were estimated using the product-limit method of Kaplan-Meier. The role of stratification factors was analysed with log-rank tests., Results: 1292 consecutive patients with HCC were analysed. 466 (36%) patients were treated with lenvatinib and 826 (64%) patients were treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab arm, 510 (62%) patients were normal-weight, 52 (6%) underweight and 264 (32%) overweight. At the univariate analysis for OS, underweight patients had significantly shorter OS compared to normal-weight patients, whereas no differences were found between normal-weight versus overweight. Multivariate analysis confirmed that underweight patients had significantly shorter OS compared to normal-weight patients (HR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0-2.8; p = .0323). In the lenvatinib arm, 26 patients (5.6%) were categorized as underweight, 256 (54.9%) as normal-weight, and 184 (39.5%) as overweight. At the univariate analysis for OS, no significant differences were found between normal-weight versus underweight and between normal-weight versus overweight, which was confirmed at multivariate analysis., Conclusion: Our analysis highlighted a prognostic role of BMI in a cohort of patients with advanced HCC who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, while no prognostic role for low BMI was apparent in patients who received lenvatinib., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (AB) and lenvatinib can be alternatively used as first-line systemic treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, no direct comparison of the two regimens has been performed in randomized clinical trials, making the identification of baseline differential predictors of response of major relevance to tailor the best therapeutic option to each patient. Baseline clinical and laboratory characteristics of real-world AB-treated HCC patients were analyzed in uni- and multivariate analyses to find potential prognostic factors of overall survival (OS). Significant variables were incorporated in a composite score (α-FAtE) and it was tested for specificity and sensitivity in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and in multivariate analysis for OS. The score was applied in uni- and multivariate analyses for OS of a comparable lenvatinib-treated HCC population. Finally, comparison between treatments was performed in patients with low and high α-FAtE scores and predictivity estimated by interaction analysis. Time-to-progression (TTP) was a secondary endpoint. OS of AB-treated HCC patients was statistically longer in those with α-fetoprotein <400 ng/mL (HR 0.62, p = .0407), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) <125 IU/L (HR 0.52, p = .0189) and eosinophil count ≥70/μL (HR 0.46, p = .0013). The α-FAtE score was generated by the sum of single points attributed to each variable among the above reported. In ROC curve analysis, superior sensitivity and specificity were achieved by the score compared to individual variables (AUC 0.794, p < .02). Patients with high score had longer OS (HR 0.44, p = .0009) and TTP (HR 0.34, p < .0001) compared to low score if treated with AB, but not with lenvatinib. Overall, AB was superior to lenvatinib in high score patients (HR 0.55, p = .0043) and inferior in low score ones (HR 1.75, p = .0227). At interaction test, low α-FAtE score resulted as negative predictive factor of response to AB (p = .0004). In conclusion, α-FAtE is a novel prognostic and predictive score of response to first-line AB for HCC patients that, if validated in prospective studies, could drive therapeutic choice between lenvatinib and AB., (© 2023 UICC.)