Search

Giulia Francesca Manfredi,1,2 Ciro Celsa,1,3,4 Chloe John,1 Charlotte Jones,1 Nicole Acuti,1 Bernhard Scheiner,5 Claudia Angela Maria Fulgenzi,1,6 James Korolewicz,1 Matthias Pinter,5 Alessandra Gennari,7 Francesco A Mauri,1 Mario Pirisi,2,8 Rosalba Minisini,2 Federica Vincenzi,2 Michela Burlone,8 Cristina Rigamonti,2,8 Matteo Donadon,9,10 Giuseppe Cabibbo,3 Antonio D’Alessio,1,7 David James Pinato1,7 1Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK; 2Department of Translational Medicine, Università Del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy; 3Section of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, PROMISE, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy; 4Department of Surgical, Oncological and Oral Sciences (Di.chir.on.s.), University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy; 5Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; 6Department of Medical Oncology, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Rome, Italy; 7Division of Oncology, Department of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy; 8Division of Internal Medicine, AOU Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy; 9Department of Health Science, Università Del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy; 10Department of Surgery, University Maggiore Hospital della Carità, Novara, ItalyCorrespondence: David James Pinato, Clinical Senior Lecturer and Consultant in Medical Oncology, Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0HS, UK, Tel +44 020 83833720, Email david.pinato@imperial.ac.ukAbstract: 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.Keywords: immune checkpoint inhibitors, liver cancer, recurrence, tumor microenvironment

Background: Neoadjuvant use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) before liver resection results in pathological tumour regression in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to describe the characteristics of pathological responses after preoperative ICI therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma and to evaluate the association between the depth of tumour regression and relapse-free survival., Methods: In this cross-trial, patient-level analysis, we performed a pooled analysis of data from patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving ICI therapy before liver resection as part of a global collaborative consortium (NeoHCC) of five phase 1 and 2 clinical trials and standardised observational protocols conducted in 12 tertiary referral centres across the USA, UK, and Taiwan. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma by tissue core biopsy before treatment initiation, a Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System score of 5 on imaging, or both, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1, and no extrahepatic spread or previous ICI treatment. Pathological response was measured as the percentage of non-viable tumour in the resected surgical specimen, with major pathological response corresponding to at least 70% tumour regression and pathological complete response corresponding to 100% tumour regression. We correlated pathological response with radiological overall response using RECIST criteria (version 1.1) and relapse-free survival, and evaluated the threshold of tumour regression that could be optimally associated with relapse-free survival., Findings: At data cutoff on Jan 31, 2024, 111 patients were included in the study, of whom data on pathological response were available for 104 (94%) patients. Patients received treatment from Oct 5, 2017, to Nov 15, 2023, mostly ICI combinations (76 [69%]), for a median of 1·4 months (IQR 0·7-2·9). 87 (78%) patients were men and 24 (22%) were women. Most patients had underlying viral chronic liver disease (73 [66%]) and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage A hepatocellular carcinoma (61 [55%]), without portal vein thrombosis (87 [78%]). We observed major pathological response in 33 (32%) patients and pathological complete response in 19 (18%) patients. Radiological overall response was associated with major pathological response, with 23 (74%) of 31 patients with radiological response showing major pathological response compared with ten (14%) of 73 patients without radiological response (p<0·0001). However, ten (30%) of 33 major pathological responses were not predicted by radiological response. After a median follow-up of 27·2 months (95% CI 22·3-32·1), median relapse-free survival for the whole cohort was 43·6 months (95% CI 28·3-not evaluable). Relapse-free survival was significantly longer in patients with major pathological response than in those who did not have a major pathological response (not reached [95% CI not evaluable-not evaluable] vs 28·3 months [12·8-43·8]; hazard ratio 0·26 [0·10-0·66]; p=0·0024) and in patients with pathological complete response than in those who did not have a pathological complete response (NR [95% CI not evaluable-not evaluable] vs 32·8 months [15·0-50·5]; 0·19 [0·05-0·78]; p=0·010). Unbiased recursive partitioning of the cohort for the risk of relapse, death, or both identified a threshold of 90% as the optimal cutoff of pathological tumour regression to predict improved relapse-free survival., Interpretation: The extent of tumour regression following neoadjuvant ICI therapy could identify patients with improved relapse-free survival following liver resection. The threshold of at least 90% tumour regression should be validated for its surrogate role for relapse-free survival in phase 3 randomised controlled trials., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AD received educational support for congress attendance and consultancy fees from Roche; and speaker fees from Roche, AstraZeneca, Eisai, and Chugai. SS reports consultancy fees from Eisai and Pfizer. CAMF reports speaker fees from EISAI. CC received consulting fees from Eisai and MSD; speaker fees from Eisai, MSD, AstraZeneca, and Ipsen; and travel expenses from Roche. SCW received speaker fees from AstraZeneca and Intercept; and research funding (to their institution) from Boehringer Ingelheim. AC received consulting fees from Regeneron, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and Roche; speaker fees from Sanofi–Regeneron, MSD, Roche, and AstraZeneca; and travel expenses from MSD, Roche, and Sanofi–Regeneron. CH received speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb–ONO, and Roche; and research funding (to their institution) from National Science and Technology Council (Taiwan) and Bristol Myers Squibb–ONO. MB received consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Eisai. MY received speaker fees from Genentech, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, Replimune, Hepion, and Lantheus; grant or research support (to their institution) from the National Cancer Institute–National Institutes of Health, Fibrolamellar Cancer Foundation, Cancer Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb, Exelixis, Incyte, and Genentech; and is cofounder with equity of Adventris Pharmaceuticals. TUM received consulting fees from Avammune Therapeutics and ONO; participated on boards for Rockefeller, AbbVie, Celldex, Regeneron, AbbVie, Merck, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Atara, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Chimeric, Glenmark, Simcere, Surface, G1 Therapeutics, NGM Bio, DBV Technologies, Arcus, Fate, EMD Serono, and Astellas; and received research funding (to their institution) from Regeneron, Genentech, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, and Boehringer Ingelheim. DJP received lecture fees from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, and Boston Scientific; travel expenses from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, and MSD; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, Eisai, Roche, Avamune, Da Volterra, Mursla, H3B, Ipsen, Boston Scientific, Starpharma, Exact Sciences, and AstraZeneca; participated on advisory boards for Mina Therapeutics, Eisai, Roche, Avamune, Da Volterra, Mursla, H3B, Ipsen, LIfT Biosciences, Exact Sciences, and AstraZeneca; and received research funding (to their institution) from MSD, GSK, and Bristol Myers Squibb. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.)

Background: The determinants of the response to checkpoint immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain poorly understood. The organisation of the immune response in the tumour microenvironment (TME) is expected to govern immunotherapy outcomes but spatial immunotypes remain poorly defined., Objective: We hypothesised that the deconvolution of spatial immune network architectures could identify clinically relevant immunotypes in HCC., Design: We conducted highly multiplexed imaging mass cytometry on HCC tissues from 101 patients. We performed in-depth spatial single-cell analysis in a discovery and validation cohort to deconvolute the determinants of the heterogeneity of HCC immune architecture and develop a spatial immune classification that was tested for the prediction of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy., Results: Bioinformatic analysis identified 23 major immune, stroma, parenchymal and tumour cell types in the HCC TME. Unsupervised neighbourhood detection based on the spatial interaction of immune cells identified three immune architectures with differing involvement of immune cells and immune checkpoints dominated by either CD8 T-cells, myeloid immune cells or B- and CD4 T-cells. We used these to define three major spatial HCC immunotypes that reflect a higher level of intratumour immune cell organisation: depleted, compartmentalised and enriched. Progression-free survival under ICI therapy differed significantly between the spatial immune types with improved survival of enriched patients. In patients with intratumour heterogeneity, the presence of one enriched area governed long-term survival., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) presents a formidable challenge in oncology, demanding innovative treatment approaches. Both adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies, thanks to the introduction of immunotherapy, have emerged as promising strategies in the management of HCC, aiming to reduce the risk of relapse and ultimately to improve survival., Areas Covered: This review considers current evidence, ongoing clinical trials, and future strategies to elucidate the evolving landscape of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments in HCC., Expert Opinion: Both adjuvant and neoadjuvant regimens, notably those incorporating immune checkpoint inhibitors, demonstrated encouraging safety profiles and efficacy outcomes in HCC.While significant challenges persist, including optimizing patient selection and endpoint definition, the evolving landscape of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy holds promise for maximizing the therapeutic potential of immunotherapy across all stages of HCC. Further insights into tumor biology and host immunity will shape the role of these approaches which are close to becoming reality in clinical practice.

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.)

Purpose: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) may prime adaptive immunity and enhance immunotherapy efficacy. PETAL evaluated safety, preliminary activity of TACE plus pembrolizumab and explored mechanisms of efficacy., Patients and Methods: Patients with liver-confined hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were planned to receive up to two rounds of TACE followed by pembrolizumab 200 mg every 21 days commencing 30 days post-TACE until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for up to 1 year. Primary endpoint was safety, with assessment window of 21 days from pembrolizumab initiation. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and evaluation of tumor and host determinants of response., Results: Fifteen patients were included in the safety and efficacy population: 73% had nonviral cirrhosis; median age was 72 years. Child-Pugh class was A in 14 patients. Median tumor size was 4 cm. Ten patients (67%) received pembrolizumab after one TACE; 5 patients after two (33%). Pembrolizumab yielded no synergistic toxicity nor dose-limiting toxicities post-TACE. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 93% of patients, most commonly skin rash (40%), fatigue, and diarrhea (27%). After a median follow-up of 38.5 months, objective response rate 12 weeks post-TACE was 53%. PFS rate at 12 weeks was 93% and median PFS was 8.95 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 7.30-NE (not estimable)]. Median duration of response was 7.3 months (95% CI: 6.3-8.3). Median overall survival was 33.5 months (95% CI: 11.6-NE). Dynamic changes in peripheral T-cell subsets, circulating tumor DNA, serum metabolites, and in stool bacterial profiles highlight potential mechanisms of action of multimodal therapy., Conclusions: TACE plus pembrolizumab was tolerable with no evidence of synergistic toxicity, encouraging further clinical development of immunotherapy alongside TACE., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background & Aims: Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is commonly observed in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed to compare the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of irLI between patients receiving ICIs for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) vs. other solid tumours., Methods: Two separate cohorts were included: 375 patients with advanced/unresectable HCC, Child-Pugh A class treated with first-line atezolizumab+bevacizumab from the AB-real study, and a non-HCC cohort including 459 patients treated with first-line ICI therapy from the INVIDIa-2 multicentre study. IrLI was defined as a treatment-related increase of aminotransferase levels after exclusion of alternative aetiologies of liver injury. The incidence of irLI was adjusted for the duration of treatment exposure., Results: In patients with HCC, the incidence of any grade irLI was 11.4% over a median treatment exposure of 4.4 months (95% CI 3.7-5.2) vs. 2.6% in the INVIDIa-2 cohort over a median treatment exposure of 12.4 months (95% CI 11.1-14.0). Exposure-adjusted-incidence of any grade irLI was 22.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with HCC and 2.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with other solid tumours (p <0.001), with median time-to-irLI of 1.4 and 4.7 months, respectively. Among patients who developed irLI, systemic corticosteroids were administered in 16.3% of patients with HCC and 75.0% of those without HCC (p <0.001), and irLI resolution was observed in 72.1% and 58.3%, respectively (p = 0.362). In patients with HCC, rates of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation due to irLI were 7%. Grade 1-2 irLI was associated with improved overall survival only in patients with HCC (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.96)., Conclusions: Despite higher incidence and earlier onset, irLI in patients with HCC is characterised by higher rates of remission and lower requirement for corticosteroid therapy (vs. irLI in other solid tumours), low risk of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation, not negatively affecting oncological outcomes., Impact and Implications: Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is common in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but whether irLI is more frequent or it is associated with a worse clinical course in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), compared to other tumours, is not known. Herein, we compared characteristics and outcomes of irLI in two prospective cohorts including patients treated with ICIs for HCC or for other oncological indications. irLI is significantly more common and it occurs earlier in patients with HCC, also after adjustment for duration of treatment exposure. However, outcomes of patients with HCC who developed irLI are not negatively affected in terms of requirement for corticosteroid therapy, hepatic decompensation, treatment discontinuation and overall survival., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: To date, limited evidence exists on the impact of COVID-19 in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS), nor about the impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and recent chemotherapy on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality in this specific population., Methods: We described COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among patients with STS across 'Omicron' (15 December 2021-31 January 2022), 'Pre-vaccination' (27 February 2020-30 November 2020), and 'Alpha-Delta' phase (01 December 2020-14 December 2021) using OnCovid registry participants (NCT04393974). Case fatality rate at 28 days (CFR 28 ) and COVID-19 severity were also described according to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status, while the impact of the receipt of cytotoxic chemotherapy within 4 weeks prior to COVID-19 on clinical outcomes was assessed with Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (IPTW) models adjusted for possible confounders., Results: Out of 3820 patients, 97 patients with STS were included. The median age at COVID-19 diagnosis was 56 years (range: 18-92), with 65 patients (67%) aged < 65 years and most patients had a low comorbidity burden (65, 67.0%). The most frequent primary tumor sites were the abdomen (56.7%) and the gynecological tract (12.4%). In total, 36 (37.1%) patients were on cytotoxic chemotherapy within 4 weeks prior to COVID-19. The overall CFR 28 was 25.8%, with 38% oxygen therapy requirement, 34% rate of complications, and 32.3% of hospitalizations due to COVID-19. CFR 28 (29.5%, 21.4%, and 12.5%) and all indicators of COVID-19 severity demonstrated a trend toward a numerical improvement across the pandemic phases. Similarly, vaccinated patients demonstrated numerically improved CFR 28 (16.7% versus 27.7%) and COVID-19 morbidity compared with unvaccinated patients. Patients who were on chemotherapy experienced comparable CFR 28 (19.4% versus 26.0%, p = 0.4803), hospitalizations (50.0% versus 44.4%, p = 0.6883), complication rates (30.6% versus 34.0%, p = 0.7381), and oxygen therapy requirement (28.1% versus 40.0%, p = 0.2755) compared to those who were not on anticancer therapy at COVID-19, findings further confirmed by the IPTW-fitted multivariable analysis., Conclusion: In this study, we demonstrate an improvement in COVID-19 outcomes in patients with STS over time. Recent exposure to chemotherapy does not impact COVID-19 morbidity and mortality and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination confers protection against adverse outcomes from COVID-19 in this patient population., Competing Interests: AC received consulting fees from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, and Roche; speakers’ fee from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, and Eisai. AG has declared consulting/advisory role for Roche, MSD, Eli Lilly, Pierre Fabre, EISAI, and Daichii Sankyo; speakers bureau for Eisai, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Roche, Teva, Gentili, Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Celgene, and Daichii Sankyo; research funds: EISAI, Eli Lilly, and Roche. CMV has received travel grants and other honoraria from BMS, MSD, Novartis, and Roche. JB has declared a consulting/advisory role for MSD and Astra Zeneca. 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, and Astra Zeneca; research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s), 2024.)

Background & Aims: Sex-related differences in the immune pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), particularly related to oestrogen-dependent secretion of pro-tumourigenic cytokines, are well-known. Whether sex influences the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy is not known., Methods: We performed a restricted maximum likelihood random effects meta-analysis of five phase III trials that evaluated immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced HCC and reported overall survival (OS) hazard ratios (HRs) stratified by sex to evaluate sex-related differences in OS. In a real-world cohort of 840 patients with HCC from 22 centres included between 2018 and 2023, we directly compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab (A+B) between sexes. Radiological response was reported according to RECIST v1.1. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed for OS and progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: In the meta-analysis, immunotherapy was associated with a significant OS benefit only in male (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86) but not in female (pooled HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.70-1.03) patients with HCC. When directly comparing model estimates, no differences in the treatment effect between sexes were observed. Among 840 patients, 677 (81%) were male (mean age 66 ± 11 years), and 163 (19%) were female (mean age 67 ± 12 years). Type and severity of adverse events were similar between the two groups. OS and PFS were comparable between males and females upon uni- and multivariable analyses (aHR for OS and PFS: 0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.04; 1.02, 95% CI 0.80-1.30, respectively). Objective response rates (24%/22%) and disease control rates (59%/59%) were also similar between sexes., Conclusion: Female phase III trial participants experienced smaller OS benefit following ICI therapy for advanced HCC, while outcomes following A+B treatment were comparable between sexes in a large real-world database. Based on the ambiguous sex-related differences in survival observed here, further investigation of sex-specific clinical and biologic determinants of responsiveness and survival following ICIs are warranted., Impact and Implications: While immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as standard of care for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma, there are conflicting reports on whether the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy differs between females and males. Our study suggests ambiguous sex-related differences in outcomes from immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma. Further investigation of sex-specific clustering in clinicopathologic and immunologic determinants of responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy should be prioritised., Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42023429625., Competing Interests: The authors have nothing to disclose regarding the work under consideration for publication. The following authors disclose conflicts of interests outside the submitted work: L.B. has nothing to disclose. B.Sc. received travel support from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Gilead and Ipsen as well as grant support from AstraZeneca. C.A.M.F. has nothing to disclose. A.D. is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Imperial BRC, by grant funding from the European Association for the Study of the Liver (2021 Andrew Burroughs Fellowship) and from Cancer Research UK (RCCPDB- Nov21/100008). A.D. received educational support for congress attendance and consultancy fees from Roche. K.P. has nothing to disclose. M.B.R. has nothing to disclose. E.L.M. is a salaried employee of Berry Consultants. J.C. has nothing to disclose. N.N. has nothing to disclose. P.-C.L. has nothing to disclose. L.W. has nothing to disclose. C.A. has nothing to disclose. A.K. has nothing to disclose. An.S. has nothing to disclose. B.St. has nothing to disclose. A.Ca. has nothing to disclose. T.P. has nothing to disclose. Y.I.A. has nothing to disclose. S.C. has nothing to disclose. B.W. has nothing to disclose. A.P. has nothing to disclose. Y.-H.H. has nothing to disclose. S.P. has nothing to disclose. C.V. has nothing to disclose. F.S. has nothing to disclose. G.M. has nothing to disclose. D.B. has nothing to disclose. A.V. has nothing to disclose. J.v.F. has received advisory board fees from Roche. K.S. has nothing to disclose. M.S. has nothing to disclose. M.T. served as a speaker and/or consultant and/or advisory board member for Albireo, BiomX, Falk, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Falk, Genfit, Gilead, Hightide, Intercept, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Phenex, Pliant, Regulus, Siemens and Shire, and received travel support from AbbVie, Falk, Gilead, and Intercept as well as grants/research support from Albireo, Alnylam, Cymabay, Falk, Gilead, Intercept, MSD, Takeda, and UltraGenyx. He is also co-inventor of patents on the medical use of 24-norursodeoxycholic acid. Ad.S. is supported by grant funding from CRUK, served as a speaker for Merck and Chugai and received grants from Histosonics, Transgene, Oncolytics and Theolytics. H.W. has received lecture and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Roche, and Eisai. F.P. has received honoraria for advisory board or lecturing from Astrazeneca, Bayer, Bracco, ESAOTE, EISAI, Exact Sciences, GE, IPSEN, MSD, Roche, Samsung, Siemens Healthineers. P.R.G. received honoraria from Bayer, Boston Scientific, AstraZeneca, Adaptimmune, BMS, Eisai, MSD, Sirtex, Lilly, Roche, Guerbet, Ipsen and Daiichi-Sankyo. R.S. has nothing to disclose. M.K. received lecture fees from Eli Lilly, Bayer, Eisai, Chugai, Takeda, AstraZeneca as well as grant support from Taiho, Otsuka, EA Pharma, AbbVie, Eisai, Chugai, GE Healthcare; and acts on advisory boards from Chugai, Roche, AstraZeneca, Eisai. A.G.S. has served as a consultant or on advisory boards for Genentech, AztraZeneca, Eisai, Exelixis, Bayer, Boston Scientific, FujiFilm Medical Sciences, Exact Sciences, Roche, Glycotest, Freenome, and GRAIL. Dr. Singal’s research is conducted with support from National Cancer Institute R01 MD012565 and R01 CA256977. A.I. has nothing to disclose. S.V.U. has served on advisory boards for Eisai, Astra Zeneca, IgM biosciences and received institutional support for research from AbbVie, Inc, Adlai Nortye, ArQule, Inc, AstraZeneca, Atreca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Ciclomed LLC, Erasca, Evelo Biosciences, Inc, Exelexis, G1 Therapeutics, Inc, GlaxoSmithKline GSK, IGM biosciences, Incyte, Isofol, Klus Pharma, Inc, Macrogenics, Merck Co. Inc, Mersana Therapeutics, OncoMed Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Pfizer, Regeneron, Inc, Revolution Medicines, Inc, Synermore Biologics Co, Takeda, Tarveda Therapeutics, Tesaro, Tempest, Vigeo Therapeutics Inc. (all funds to institution). N.D.P. serves as a consultant for Exact Sciences, Eli Lilly, Freenome, Astra Zeneca and has served on advisory boards of Genentech, Eisai, Bayer, Exelixis, Wako/Fujifilm and has received research funding from Bayer, Target Pharmasolutions, Exact Sciences, and Glycotest. A.Co. served as consultant/advisory role for AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Roche, IQVIA and OncoC4. He also received speaker’s fees from AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, EISAI. A.K. has nothing to disclose. L.R. reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Servier, Taiho Oncology, Zymeworks; lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck, Serono, Roche, Sanofi, 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. H.J.C. has nothing to disclose. D.J.P. is supported by grant funding from the Wellcome Trust Strategic Fund (PS3416) and acknowledges grant support from the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust (CTRT); the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre; and the AIRC MFAG Grant No. 25697, Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro Foundation, Milan, Italy. D.J.P. acknowledges the following COIs: Lecture fees: Bayer Healthcare, Astra Zeneca, EISAI, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Roche, Ipsen; Travel expenses: Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Roche, Bayer Healthcare; Consulting fees: Mina Therapeutics, Boeringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, EISAI, Ipsen, Roche, H3B, Astra Zeneca, DaVolterra, Mursla, Avammune Therapeutics, LiFT Biosciences, Exact Sciences; Research funding (to institution): MSD, BMS, GSK. M.P. served as a speaker and/or consultant and/or advisory board member for Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, and Roche, and received travel support from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ipsen, and Roche. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Background: Since the introduction of the combination treatment of anti-programmed death-ligand 1 antibody atezolizumab and anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab (AB), median overall survival in HCC has drastically improved. However, evidence on the efficacy and safety of the novel treatment standard in patients with prior exposure to systemic treatment is scarce. The aim of this global, multicenter, observational study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AB in patients after previous systemic therapy., Methods: We screened our global, multicenter, prospectively maintained registry database for patients who received any systemic therapy before AB. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points were time-to-progression, progression-free survival, objective response rate, and safety (rate and severity of adverse events)., Results: Among 493 patients who received AB for unresectable HCC, 61 patients received prior systemic therapy and were included in this analysis. The median age of the study population was 66 years, with 91.8% males. Predominant risk factors for HCC were viral hepatitis (59%) and alcohol (23%). Overall survival for AB was 16.2 (95% CI, 14.5-17.9) months, time-to-progression and progression-free survival were 4.1 (95% CI, 1.5-6.6) and 3.1 (95% CI, 1.1-5.1) months, respectively. The objective response rate was 38.2% (7.3% with complete and 30.9% with partial response). Overall survival was not influenced by treatment line (2nd vs. >2nd) or previous systemic treatment modality (tyrosine kinase inhibitors vs. immune checkpoint inhibitors). Treatment-related adverse events of all grades according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events were documented in 42.6% of patients, with only 13.1% of grade ≥3, including one death., Conclusion: In this observational study, AB emerges as a safe and efficacious treatment option in patients with HCC previously treated with other systemic therapy., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: Geriatric patients (≥80 years) are underrepresented in immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICIs) clinical trials. However, their unique biology may affect their response to ICIs. There are currently no established biomarkers of the response to ICIs in adult patients with cancer that can help with patient selection., Methods: We built a multicenter, international retrospective study of 885 patients (<80 years: n = 417, 47.12%; ≥80 years: n = 468, 52.88%) with different tumor types treated with ICIs between 2011 and 2021 from 11 academic centers in the U.S. and Europe. The main outcome measures were objective response rates (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) stratified by age and circulating inflammatory levels (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and systemic immune-inflammatory index (SII))., Results: Patients ≥80 years with low NLR (NLR-L) and SII (SII-L) had significantly higher ORR (vs. high NLR [NLR-H], p < 0.01 and SII-H, p < 0.05, respectively). At median follow-ups (13.03 months), and compared to SII-H, patients with SII-L had significantly longer median PFS and OS in patients <80 ( p < 0.001), and ≥80 years ( p < 0.001). SII-L was independently associated with longer PFS and OS (HR: 0.61 and 0.62, respectively, p < 0.01)., Conclusion: Lower inflammation pre-ICI initiation may predict an improved response and survival in geriatric patients with cancer.

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly used in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, data on ICI therapy in patients with advanced HCC and impaired liver function are scarce., Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of ICI treatment for advanced HCC with Child-Pugh B liver function., Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies from inception through June 15, 2022., Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials, cohort studies, or single-group studies that investigated the efficacy or safety of ICI therapy for Child-Pugh B advanced HCC were included., Data Extraction and Synthesis: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guideline was followed to extract data. A random-effects model was adopted if the heterogeneity was significant (I2 > 50%); otherwise, a fixed-effect model was used., Main Outcomes and Measures: The objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS) were considered to be the primary efficacy outcomes of ICI treatment for Child-Pugh B advanced HCC, and the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) was set as the primary measure for the safety outcome., Results: A total of 22 studies including 699 patients with Child-Pugh B and 2114 with Child-Pugh A advanced HCC comprised the analytic sample (median age range, 53-73 years). Upon pooled analysis, patients treated with ICIs in the Child-Pugh B group had an ORR of 14% (95% CI, 11%-17%) and disease control rate (DCR) of 46% (95% CI, 36%-56%), with a median OS of 5.49 (95% CI, 3.57-7.42) months and median progression-free survival of 2.68 (95% CI, 1.85-3.52) months. The rate of any grade trAEs in the Child-Pugh B group was 40% (95% CI, 34%-47%) and of grade 3 or higher trAEs was 12% (95% CI, 6%-23%). Compared with the Child-Pugh A group, the ORR (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.81; P < .001) and DCR (odds ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.81; P < .001) were lower in the Child-Pugh B group. Child-Pugh B was independently associated with worse OS in patients with advanced HCC treated with ICIs (hazard ratio, 2.72 [95% CI, 2.34-3.16]; adjusted hazard ratio, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.81-2.99]). However, ICIs were not associated with increased trAEs in the Child-Pugh B group., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that although the safety of ICI treatment was comparable between patients with HCC with vs without advanced liver disease and the treatment resulted in a significant number of radiologic responses, survival outcomes are still inferior in patients with worse liver function. More study is needed to determine the effectiveness of ICI treatment in this population.

Competing Interests: DJP reports grants from GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck Sharp & Dohme for supporting academic trials in oncology; personal payment from Wiley for an Editor in Chief role unrelated to the topic of this Comment; consulting fees from Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, H3B, AstraZeneca, DaVolterra, Avamune, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Roche for supporting research in oncology unrelated to the topic of this Comment; speaker's fees from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, EISAI, and Ewopharma unrelated to the topic of this Comment; travel support from Merck Sharp & Dohme and Bayer; and participation on advisory boards for Astra Zeneca, EISAI, and H3B unrelated to the topic of this Comment. CC reports consulting fees from Eisai, Ipsen, and Merck Sharp & Dohme for supporting research in liver cancer unrelated to the topic of this Comment. All the other authors declare no competing interests.

Background: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) is first line-treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Body mass index (BMI) has demonstrated predictive value for response to immunotherapy in non-HCC cancer types. Our study investigated the effect of BMI on safety and efficacy of real-life use of Atezo/Bev for unresectable HCC., Methods: 191 consecutive patients from seven centres receiving Atezo/Bev were included in the retrospective study. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) defined by RECIST v1.1 were measured in overweight (BMI ≥ 25) and non-overweight (BMI < 25) patients. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were evaluated., Results: Patients in the overweight cohort (n = 94) had higher rates of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and lower rates of Hepatitis B compared to non-overweight cohort (n = 97). Baseline Child-Pugh class and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage were similar between cohorts, with lower rates of extrahepatic spread in the overweight group. Overweight patients had similar OS compared to non-overweight (median OS 15.1 vs. 14.9 months; p = 0.99). BMI did not influence median PFS (7.1 vs. 6.1 months; p = 0.42), ORR (27.2% vs. 22.0%; p = 0.44) and DCR (74.1% vs. 71.9%; p = 0.46). There were higher rates of atezolizumab-related fatigue (22.3% vs. 10.3%; p = 0.02) and bevacizumab-related thrombosis (8.5% vs. 2.1%; p = 0.045) in the overweight patients, but overall trAEs and treatment discontinuation were comparable between cohorts., Conclusion: Atezo/Bev has comparable efficacy in overweight HCC patients, with an increase in treatment-related fatigue and thrombosis. Combination therapy is safe and efficacious to use in overweight patients, including those with underlying NAFLD., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Although programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) blockade in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy has become a mainstay of first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC, factors associated with efficacy of chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) are not well characterized., Methods: In this multicenter retrospective analysis, clinicopathologic and genomic data were collected from patients with advanced NSCLC (lacking sensitizing genomic alterations in EGFR and ALK) and evaluated with clinical outcomes to first-line CIT., Results: Among 1285 patients treated with CIT, a worsening performance status and increasing derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in the blood were associated with a significantly reduced objective response rate (ORR), median progression-free survival (mPFS), and median overall survival (mOS). With increasing PD-L1 tumor proportion scores of less than 1%, 1% to 49%, 50% to 89%, and greater than or equal to 90%, there was a progressive improvement in ORR (32.7% versus 37.5% versus 51.6% versus 61.7%, p < 0.001), mPFS (5.0 versus 6.1 versus 6.8 versus 13.0 mo, p < 0.001), and generally mOS (12.9 versus 14.6 versus 34.7 versus 23.1 mo, p = 0.009), respectively. Of 789 NSCLCs with comprehensive genomic data, NSCLCs with a tumor mutational burden (TMB) greater than or equal to the 90th percentile had an improved ORR (53.5% versus 36.4%, p = 0.004), mPFS (10.8 versus 5.5 mo, p < 0.001), and mOS (29.2 versus 13.1 mo, p < 0.001), compared with those with a TMB less than the 90th percentile. In all-comers with nonsquamous NSCLC, the presence of an STK11, KEAP1, or SMARCA4 mutation was associated with significantly worse ORR, mPFS, and mOS to CIT (all p < 0.05); this was also observed in the KRAS-mutant subgroup of NSCLCs with co-occurring mutations in STK11, KEAP1, or SMARCA4 (all p < 0.05). In KRAS wild-type NSCLC, KEAP1 and SMARCA4 mutations were associated with a significantly shorter mPFS and mOS to CIT (all p < 0.05), but STK11 mutation status had no significant impact on mPFS (p = 0.16) or mOS (p = 0.38)., Conclusions: In advanced NSCLC, better patient performance status, low derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, increasing PD-L1 expression, a very high TMB, and STK11/KEAP1/SMARCA4 wild-type status are associated with improved clinical outcomes to first-line CIT., (Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The taxonomy of Kaposi Sarcoma (KS) is based on a classification system focused on the description of clinicopathological features of KS in geographically and clinically diverse populations. The classification includes classic, endemic, epidemic/HIV associated and iatrogenic KS, and KS in men who have sex with men (MSM). We assessed the medical relevance of the current classification of KS and sought clinically useful improvements in KS taxonomy., Methods: We reviewed the demographic and clinicopathological features of 676 patients with KS, who were referred to the national centre for HIV oncology at Chelsea Westminster hospital between 2000 and 2021., Results: Demographic differences between the different subtypes of KS exist as tautological findings of the current classification system. However, no definitive differences in clinicopathological, virological or immunological parameters at presentation could be demonstrated between the classic, endemic or MSM KS patients. Reclassifying patients as either immunosuppressed or non-immunosuppressed, showed that the immunosuppressed group had a significantly higher proportion of adverse disease features at presentation including visceral disease and extensive oral involvement, classified together as advanced disease (chi 2 P = 0.0012*) and disseminated skin involvement (chi 2 P < 0.0001*). Immunosuppressed patients had lower CD4 counts, higher CD8 counts and a trend towards higher HHV8 levels compared to non-immunosuppressed patients, however overall survival and disease specific (KS) survival was similar across groups., Conclusion: The current system of KS classification does not reflect meaningful differences in clinicopathological presentation or disease pathogenesis. Reclassification of patients based on the presence or absence of immunosuppression is a more clinically meaningful system that may influence therapeutic approaches to KS., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: COVID-19 sequelae can affect about 15% of patients with cancer who survive the acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and can substantially impair their survival and continuity of oncological care. We aimed to investigate whether previous immunisation affects long-term sequelae in the context of evolving variants of concern of SARS-CoV-2., Methods: OnCovid is an active registry that includes patients aged 18 years or older from 37 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and a history of solid or haematological malignancy, either active or in remission, followed up from COVID-19 diagnosis until death. We evaluated the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae in patients who survived COVID-19 and underwent a formal clinical reassessment, categorising infection according to the date of diagnosis as the omicron (B.1.1.529) phase from Dec 15, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022; the alpha (B.1.1.7)-delta (B.1.617.2) phase from Dec 1, 2020, to Dec 14, 2021; and the pre-vaccination phase from Feb 27 to Nov 30, 2020. The prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae was compared according to SARS-CoV-2 immunisation status and in relation to post-COVID-19 survival and resumption of systemic anticancer therapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974., Findings: At the follow-up update on June 20, 2022, 1909 eligible patients, evaluated after a median of 39 days (IQR 24-68) from COVID-19 diagnosis, were included (964 [50·7%] of 1902 patients with sex data were female and 938 [49·3%] were male). Overall, 317 (16·6%; 95% CI 14·8-18·5) of 1909 patients had at least one sequela from COVID-19 at the first oncological reassessment. The prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae was highest in the pre-vaccination phase (191 [19·1%; 95% CI 16·4-22·0] of 1000 patients). The prevalence was similar in the alpha-delta phase (110 [16·8%; 13·8-20·3] of 653 patients, p=0·24), but significantly lower in the omicron phase (16 [6·2%; 3·5-10·2] of 256 patients, p<0·0001). In the alpha-delta phase, 84 (18·3%; 95% CI 14·6-22·7) of 458 unvaccinated patients and three (9·4%; 1·9-27·3) of 32 unvaccinated patients in the omicron phase had sequelae. Patients who received a booster and those who received two vaccine doses had a significantly lower prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae than unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients (ten [7·4%; 95% CI 3·5-13·5] of 136 boosted patients, 18 [9·8%; 5·8-15·5] of 183 patients who had two vaccine doses vs 277 [18·5%; 16·5-20·9] of 1489 unvaccinated patients, p=0·0001), respiratory sequelae (six [4·4%; 1·6-9·6], 11 [6·0%; 3·0-10·7] vs 148 [9·9%; 8·4-11·6], p=0·030), and prolonged fatigue (three [2·2%; 0·1-6·4], ten [5·4%; 2·6-10·0] vs 115 [7·7%; 6·3-9·3], p=0·037)., Interpretation: Unvaccinated patients with cancer remain highly vulnerable to COVID-19 sequelae irrespective of viral strain. This study confirms the role of previous SARS-CoV-2 immunisation as an effective measure to protect patients from COVID-19 sequelae, disruption of therapy, and ensuing mortality., Funding: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AC has received consulting fees from MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and Roche, and speakers' fee from AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, and Eisai. ML acted as a consultant for Roche, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, MSD, Pfizer, and Seagen, and received speaker honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, Takeda, Ipsen, and Sandoz outside the submitted work. AG declares consulting or advisory roles for Roche, MSD, Eli Lilly, Pierre Fabre, Eisai, and Daichii Sankyo; speakers' fees for Eisai, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Roche, Teva, Gentili, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Celgene, and Daichii Sankyo; and research funds from Eisai, Eli Lilly, and Roche. CM-V has received travel grants and other honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis, and Roche. JB has declared consulting or advisory roles for MSD and AstraZeneca, and support for attending meetings and travel from GlaxoSmithKline. OM reports personal fees from Grupo Pacifico, Kyowa Kirin, Roche, and ROVI, and travel support from Almirall, Kyowa Kirin, and Sanofi. JT reports personal financial interest in the form of scientific consultancy roles for Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech, HalioDX SAS, Hutchison MediPharma International, Ikena Oncology, Inspirna, IQVIA, Lilly, Menarini, Merck Serono, Merus, MSD, Mirati, Neophore, Novartis, Ona Therapeutics, Orion Biotechnology, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, Scandion Oncology, Scorpion Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Sotio Biotech, Taiho, Tessa Therapeutics, and TheraMyc; stocks in Oniria Therapeutics; and educational collaboration with Imedex/HMP, Medscape Education, MJH Life Sciences, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and Physicians Education Resource. LRi reports receiving consulting fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Taiho Oncology, and Zymeworks; lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi, and Servier; travel expenses from AstraZeneca; and institutional research funding from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, and Zymeworks. AD'A has received educational support for congress attendance and consultancy fees from Roche. DJP has received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare, BMS, Roche, Eisai, and the Falk Foundation; travel expenses from Bristol Myers Squibb and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, Eisai, Roche, DaVolterra, and Astra Zeneca; and institutional research funding from MSD and Bristol Myers Squibb. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) alone or in combination with other ICIs or vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors are therapeutic options in unresectable/metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Whether antibiotic (ATB) exposure affects outcome remains unclear., Methods: This study retrospectively analysed an FDA database including 4,098 patients receiving ICI (n = 842) either as monotherapy (n = 258) or in combination (n = 584), tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) (n = 1,968), vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors (n = 480), or placebo (n = 808) as part of nine international clinical trials. Exposure to ATB within 30 days before or after treatment initiation was correlated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) across therapeutic modality before and after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)., Results: Of 4,098 patients with unresectable/metastatic HCC, of which 39% were of hepatitis B aetiology and 21% were of hepatitis C aetiology, 83% were males with a median age of 64 years (range 18-88), a European Collaborative Oncology Group performance status of 0 (60%), and Child-Pugh A class (98%). Overall, ATB exposure (n = 620, 15%) was associated with shorter median PFS (3.6 months in ATB-exposed vs . 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR] 1.29; 95% CI 1.22, 1.36) and OS (8.7 months in ATB-exposed vs . 10.6 months; HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.29, 1.43). In IPTW analyses, ATB was associated with shorter PFS in patients treated with ICI (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.34, 1.73), TKI (HR 1.29; 95% CI 1.19, 1.39), and placebo (HR 1.23; 95% CI 1.11, 1.37). Similar results were observed in IPTW analyses of OS in patients treated with ICI (HR 1.22; 95% CI 1.08, 1.38), TKI (HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.30, 1.52), and placebo (HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.25, 1.57)., Conclusions: Unlike other malignancies where the detrimental effect of ATB may be more prominent in ICI recipients, ATB is associated with worse outcomes in this study across different therapies for HCC including placebo. Whether ATB is causally linked to worse outcomes through disruption of the gut-liver axis remains to be demonstrated in translational studies., Impact and Implications: A growing body of evidence suggests the host microbiome, frequently altered by antibiotic treatment, as an important outcome predictor in the context of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. In this study, we analysed the effects of early antibiotic exposure on outcomes in almost 4,100 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated within nine multicentre clinical trials. Interestingly, early exposure to antibiotic treatment was associated with worse outcomes not only in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors but also in those treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors and placebo. This is in contrast to data published in other malignancies, where the detrimental effect of antibiotic treatment may be more prominent in immune checkpoint inhibitor recipients, highlighting the uniqueness of hepatocellular carcinoma given the complex interplay between cirrhosis, cancer, risk of infection, and the pleiotropic effect of molecular therapies for this disease., Competing Interests: DJP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare, EISAI, BMS, and Roche; travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; and consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, DaVolterra, Mursla, IPSEN, Exact Sciences, Avamune, EISAI, Roche, and Astra Zeneca. DJP received research funding (to institution) from MSD, GSK, and BMS. BS received travel support from AbbVie, Gilead, and Ipsen. AC received consulting fees from MSD, Astra Zeneca, Roche, and BMS. He also received speaker fees from Novartis, Astra Zeneca, and EISAI. AD received educational grant support for conference attendance by Roche. There are no other personal or financial conflicts of interest to disclose. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Background & Aims: HIV-seropositivity shortens survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although risk factors for HCC including HCV infection can influence T cell phenotype, it is unknown whether HIV can influence functional characteristics of the T cell infiltrate., Methods: From the Liver Cancer in HIV biorepository, we derived 129 samples of transplanted (76%) or resected (20%) HCC in eight European and North American centres. We profiled intra- and peritumoural tissue to evaluate regulatory CD4+/FOXP3+ and immune-exhausted CD8+/PD1+ T cells in HIV+ (n = 66) and HIV- (n = 63) samples. We performed targeted transcriptomics and T-cell receptor sequencing in a restricted subset of samples evaluated in relationship with HIV status. We correlated immunopathologic features with patients' characteristics including markers of HIV infection., Results: Of the 66 HIV+ patients, 83% were HCV coinfected with an undetectable HIV viral load (51%) and a median blood CD4+ cell count of 430 cells/mm 3 (range 15-908). Patients who were HIV+ were compared with HIV- controls with similar staging characteristics including Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage A-B (86% vs. 83%, p  = 0.16), <3 nodules (90% vs. 83%, p  = 0.3) and median alpha-foetoprotein values (10.9 vs. 12.8 ng/ml, p  = 0.72). HIV+ samples had higher PD-L1 expression rates in tumour tissue (51% vs. 8% p <0.0001) and displayed denser intratumoural CD4+/FOXP3+ ( p <0.0001), CD8+/PD1+ ( p  <0.0001), with lower total peritumoural CD4+ ( p <0.0001) and higher peritumoural CD8+/PD1+ ( p <0.0001). Gene set analysis revealed HIV+ cases to have evidence of dysregulated adaptive and innate immunity. Tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte clonality was not influenced by HIV status., Conclusions: HIV-associated HCC harbours a profoundly immune-exhausted tumour microenvironment, warranting prospective testing of immunotherapy in this treatment-deprived patient population., Impact and Implications: Hepatocellular carcinoma is a non-AIDS defining malignancy characterised by poor survival. The programmed cell death (PD-1) pathway governs antiviral and anticancer immune exhaustion and is a therapeutic target in HCC. This study highlights how HIV infection is associated with significantly higher PD-L1 expression in HCC cells and in the surrounding microenvironment, leading to changes in cytotoxic and regulatory T cell function and dysregulation of proinflammatory pathways. Taken together, our results suggest dysfunctional T cell immunity as a mechanism of worse outcome in these patients and suggest clinical testing of checkpoint inhibitors in HIV-associated HCC., Competing Interests: 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, LIfT Biosciences, Starpharma, Exact Sciences and Astra Zeneca; research funding (to institution) from MSD, GSK, and BMS. AF received lecture fees from Bayer HealthCare, Gilead, and MDS; Consulting fees from Bayer HealthCare, Roche, Guerbert, and Astra Zeneca. AD received educational support for congress attendance and consultancy fees from Roche. EG received lecture fees from Bayer HealthCare, Gilead, AbbVie, MSD, Eisai. JMM has received consulting honoraria and/or research grants from AbbVie, Angelini, Contrafect, Cubist, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Jansen, Lysovant, Medtronic, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and ViiV Healthcare, outside the submitted work. NB received lecture fees from Abbvie and Gilead Sciences. BM received lecture fees from Eisai, MSD, Roche. Consultancy fees from Bayer-Shering Pharma, Eisai-Merck. 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. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Background and Aims: Different approaches are available after the progression of disease (PD) to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including the continuation of ICI, treatment switching to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and cessation of anticancer therapy. We sought to characterise the relationship between radiological patterns of progression and survival post-ICI, also appraising treatment strategies., Methods: We screened 604 HCC patients treated with ICIs, including only those who experienced PD by data cut-off. We evaluated post-progression survival (PPS) according to the treatment strategy at PD and verified its relationship with radiological patterns of progression: intrahepatic growth (IHG), new intrahepatic lesion (NIH), extrahepatic growth (EHG), new extrahepatic lesion (NEH) and new vascular invasion (nVI)., Results: Of 604 patients, 364 (60.3%) experienced PD during observation. Median PPS was 5.3 months (95% CI: 4.4-6.9; 271 events). At the data cut-off, 165 patients (45%) received no post-progression anticancer therapy; 64 patients (17.6%) continued ICI beyond PD. IHG (HR 1.64 [95% CI: 1.21-2.22]; p = .0013) and nVI (HR 2.15 [95% CI: 1.38-3.35]; p = .0007) were associated with shorter PPS. Multivariate models adjusted for progression patterns, treatment line and albumin-bilirubin grade and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at PD confirmed receipt of ICI beyond PD with (HR 0.17, 95% CI: 0.09-0.32; p < .0001) or without subsequent TKI (HR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.26-0.58; p < .0001) as predictors of prolonged PPS versus no anticancer therapy., Conclusions: ICI-TKI sequencing is a consolidated option in advanced HCC. nVI and IHG predict a poorer prognosis. Despite lack of recommendation, the continuation of ICI beyond progression in HCC is adopted clinically: future efforts should appraise which patients benefit from this approach., (© 2022 The Authors. Liver International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background & Aims: Direct comparisons across first-line regimens for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma are not available. We performed a network metanalysis of phase III of trials to compare first-line systemic treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, disease control rate, and incidence of adverse events (AEs)., Methods: After performing a literature review from January 2008 to September 2022, we screened 6,329 studies and reviewed 3,009 studies, leading to identification of 15 phase III trials for analysis. We extracted odds ratios for objective response rate and disease control rate, relative risks for AEs, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for OS and PFS, and used a frequentist network metanalysis, with fixed-effect multivariable meta-regression models to estimate the indirect pooled HRs, odds ratios, relative risks, and corresponding 95% CIs, considering sorafenib as reference., Results: Of 10,820 included patients, 10,444 received active treatment and 376 placebo. Sintilimab + IBI350, camrelizumab + rivoceranib, and atezolizumab + bevacizumab provided the greatest reduction in the risk of death compared with sorafenib, with HRs of 0.57 (95% CI 0.43-0.75), 0.62 (95% CI 0.49-0.79), and 0.66 (95% CI 0.52-0.84), respectively. Considering PFS, camrelizumab + rivoceranib and pembrolizumab + lenvatinib were associated with the greatest reduction in the risk of PFS events compared with sorafenib, with HRs of 0.52 (95% CI 0.41-0.65) and 0.52 (95% CI 0.35-0.77), respectively. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapies carried the lowest risk for all-grade and grade ≥3 AEs., Conclusions: The combinations of ICI + anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, and double ICIs lead to the greatest OS benefit compared with sorafenib, whereas ICI + kinase inhibitor regimens are associated with greater PFS benefit at the cost of higher toxicity rates., Impact and Implications: In the last few years, many different therapies have been studied for patients with primary liver cancer that cannot be treated with surgery. In these cases, anticancer drugs (alone or in combination) are given with the intent to keep the cancer at bay and, ultimately, to prolong survival. Among all the therapies that have been investigated, the combination of immunotherapy (drugs that boost the immune system against the cancer) and anti-angiogenic agents (drugs that act on tumoural vessels) has appeared the best to improve survival. Similarly, the combination of two types of immunotherapies that activate the immune system at different levels has also shown positive results., Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022366330., Competing Interests: DJP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare, EISAI, BMS, and Roche and travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, DaVolterra, Mursla, IPSEN, Exact Sciences, Avamune, EISAI, Roche, and Astra Zeneca; and research funding (to institution) from MSD, GSK, and BMS. BS received travel support from AbbVie, Gilead, and Ipsen. AC received consulting fees from MSD, Astra Zeneca, Roche, and BMS. He also received speaker fees from Novartis, Astra Zeneca, and EISAI. AD received educational support for conference attendance and consultancy fees by Roche. There are no other personal or financial conflicts of interest to disclose. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Importance: Currently, predictive biomarkers for response to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in lung cancer are limited. Identifying such biomarkers would be useful to refine patient selection and guide precision therapy., Objective: To develop a machine-learning (ML)-based tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) scoring approach, and to evaluate TIL association with clinical outcomes in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter retrospective discovery-validation cohort study included 685 ICI-treated patients with NSCLC with median follow-up of 38.1 and 43.3 months for the discovery (n = 446) and validation (n = 239) cohorts, respectively. Patients were treated between February 2014 and September 2021. We developed an ML automated method to count tumor, stroma, and TIL cells in whole-slide hematoxylin-eosin-stained images of NSCLC tumors. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression were assessed separately, and clinical response to ICI therapy was determined by medical record review. Data analysis was performed from June 2021 to April 2022., Exposures: All patients received anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy., Main Outcomes and Measures: Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were determined by blinded medical record review. The area under curve (AUC) of TIL levels, TMB, and PD-L1 in predicting ICI response were calculated using ORR., Results: Overall, there were 248 (56%) women in the discovery cohort and 97 (41%) in the validation cohort. In a multivariable analysis, high TIL level (≥250 cells/mm2) was independently associated with ICI response in both the discovery (PFS: HR, 0.71; P = .006; OS: HR, 0.74; P = .03) and validation (PFS: HR = 0.80; P = .01; OS: HR = 0.75; P = .001) cohorts. Survival benefit was seen in both first- and subsequent-line ICI treatments in patients with NSCLC. In the discovery cohort, the combined models of TILs/PD-L1 or TMB/PD-L1 had additional specificity in differentiating ICI responders compared with PD-L1 alone. In the PD-L1 negative (<1%) subgroup, TIL levels had superior classification accuracy for ICI response (AUC = 0.77) compared with TMB (AUC = 0.65)., Conclusions and Relevance: In these cohorts, TIL levels were robustly and independently associated with response to ICI treatment. Patient TIL assessment is relatively easily incorporated into the workflow of pathology laboratories at minimal additional cost, and may enhance precision therapy.

Background: Early progression on first-line (1L) platinum-based therapy or between therapy lines may be a surrogate of more aggressive disease and poor outcomes in advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC), but its prognostic role regarding immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) response and survival is unclear. We hypothesized that shorter time until start of second-line (2L) ICI would be associated with worse outcomes in aUC., Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective multi-institution cohort study in patients with aUC treated with 1L platinum-based chemotherapy, who received 2L ICI. Patients receiving switch maintenance ICI were excluded. We defined time to 2L ICI therapy as the time between the start of 1L platinum-based chemotherapy to the start of 2L ICI and categorized patients a priori into 1 of 3 groups: less than 3 months versus 3-6 months versus more than 6 months. We calculated overall response rate (ORR) with 2L ICI, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the start of 2L ICI. ORR was compared among the 3 groups using multivariable logistic regression, and PFS, OS using cox regression. Multivariable models were adjusted for known prognostic factors., Results: We included 215, 215, and 219 patients in the ORR, PFS, and OS analyses, respectively, after exclusions. ORR difference did not reach statistical significance between patients with less than 3 months versus 3-6 months versus more than 6 months to 2L ICI. However, PFS (HR 1.64; 95% CI 1.02-2.63) and OS (HR 1.77; 95% CI 1.10-2.84) was shorter among those with time to 2L ICI less than 3 months compared to those who initiated 2L ICI more than 6 months., Conclusion: Among patients with aUC treated with 2L ICI, time to 2L ICI less than 3 months was associated with lower, but not significantly different ORR, but shorter PFS and OS compared to 2L ICI more than 6 months. This highlights potential cross resistance mechanisms between ICI and platinum-based chemotherapy., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers; ∼20% of patients have metastases at diagnosis, and 50%-60% subsequently develop metachronous metastases. Bone involvement, despite being rare, is usually associated with higher disease burden, worse prognosis, impaired quality of life, and significant health-related cost. In the last few years, following the positive results of the TRIBE and TRIBE2 trials, the association of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab has become the new standard of care for metastatic CRC. Despite being highly efficacious in all subgroups, little is known about the activity of this regimen in patients with bone metastases., Patients and Methods: We carried out a pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies focusing on patients with skeletal deposits., Results: Our analyses on the whole population showed that patients with baseline bone involvement reported shorter overall survival [OS; 14.0 versus 26.2 months; hazard ratio (HR) 2.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46-2.87; P < 0.001] and progression-free survival (PFS; 6.2 versus 11.1 months; HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.42-2.69; P < 0.001) compared with those without bone metastases; no significant interaction with the treatment was reported for PFS (P = 0.094) and OS (P = 0.38). Bone metastases had a negative prognostic implication in the multivariate analysis (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.54-3.26; P < 0.001). Furthermore, patients with bone lesions at first radiological progression (including those with baseline bone metastases) had a shorter OS compared with those who progressed in other sites (10.4 versus 13.2 months; HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.15-1.91; P = 0.002). A trend toward inferior OS (7.5 versus 11 months, HR 1.50, 95% CI 0.92-2.45; P = 0.10) appeared in patients with basal skeletal deposits compared with those with bone involvement at first radiological progression., Conclusions: Our study confirmed the negative prognostic impact of bone metastases in CRC. Furthermore, we demonstrated for the first time that the survival advantage of triplet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab is maintained even in this prognostically unfavorable subgroup., Competing Interests: Disclosure CC reports consulting or advisory role for Roche, Bayer, Amgen, MSD, and Pierre Fabre; is on the speakers bureau for SERVIER and Merck; honoraria from Roche, Amgen, Bayer, SERVIER, MSD, Merck, Pierre Fabre, and Organon; research funding from Merck, Bayer, Roche, and SERVIER. DR is on the speakers bureau for MSD Oncology. SL received consulting or advisory role from Amgen, Merck Serono, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Incyte, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Servier, and MSD; is on the speakers bureau for Roche, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Servier, Merck Serono, Pierre-Fabre, GSK, and Amgen; research funding from Amgen, Merck Serono, Bayer, Roche, Lilly, Astra Zeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. AZ is on the speaker’s bureau for Amgen, Merck Serono, MSD, Bayer, Servier, and AstraZeneca. GV received accommodation reimbursement from Roche and Amgen. GM received contribution for advisory role from Eisai, Roche, MSD, and Amgen. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Systemic inflammation is a key risk factor for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progression and poor outcomes. Inflammatory markers such as the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) may have prognostic value in HCC treated with standard of care atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo-Bev). We conducted a multicenter, international retrospective cohort study of patients with unresectable HCC treated with Atezo-Bev to assess the association of NLR and PLR with overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rates. Patients with NLR ≥ 5 had a significantly shorter OS (9.38 vs. 16.79 months, p < 0.001) and PFS (4.90 vs. 7.58 months, p = 0.03) compared to patients with NLR < 5. NLR ≥ 5 was an independent prognosticator of worse OS (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.22−3.56, p = 0.007) but not PFS. PLR ≥ 300 was also significantly associated with decreased OS (9.38 vs. 15.72 months, p = 0.007) and PFS (3.45 vs. 7.11 months, p = 0.04) compared to PLR < 300, but it was not an independent prognosticator of OS or PFS. NLR and PLR were not associated with objective response or disease control rates. NLR ≥ 5 independently prognosticated worse survival outcomes and is worthy of further study and validation.

Background and Aims: Combination atezolizumab/bevacizumab is the gold standard for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our study investigated the efficacy and safety of combination therapy in older patients with HCC., Methods: 191 consecutive patients from eight centres receiving atezolizumab and bevacizumab were included. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) defined by RECIST v1.1 were measured in older (age ≥ 65 years) and younger (age < 65 years) age patients. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were evaluated., Results: The elderly (n = 116) had higher rates of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (19.8% vs. 2.7%; p < .001), presenting with smaller tumours (6.2 cm vs 7.9 cm, p = .02) with less portal vein thrombosis (31.9 vs. 54.7%, p = .002), with fewer patients presenting with BCLC-C stage disease (50.9 vs. 74.3%, p = .002). There was no significant difference in OS (median 14.9 vs. 15.1 months; HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.65-2.02 p = .63) and PFS (median 7.1 vs. 5.5 months; HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.54-1.92; p = .72) between older age and younger age. Older patients had similar ORR (27.6% vs. 20.0%; p = .27) and DCR (77.5% vs. 66.1%; p = .11) compared to younger patients. Atezolizumab-related (40.5% vs. 48.0%; p = .31) and bevacizumab-related (44.8% vs. 41.3%; p = .63) trAEs were comparable between groups. Rates of grade ≥3 trAEs and toxicity-related treatment discontinuation were similar between older and younger age patients. Patients 75 years and older had similar survival and safety outcomes compared to younger patients., Conclusions: Atezolizumab and bevacizumab therapy is associated with comparable efficacy and tolerability in older age patients with unresectable HCC., (© 2022 The Authors. Liver International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

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 & Aims: We investigated the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) rechallenge in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received ICI-based therapies in a previous systemic line., Methods: In this international, retrospective multicenter study, patients with HCC who received at least two lines of ICI-based therapies (ICI-1, ICI-2) at 14 institutions were eligible. The main outcomes included best overall response and treatment-related adverse events., Results: Of 994 ICI-treated patients screened, a total of 58 patients (male, n = 41; 71%) with a mean age of 65.0±9.0 years were included. Median systemic treatment lines of ICI-1 and ICI-2 were 1 (range, 1-4) and 3 (range, 2-9), respectively. ICI-based therapies used at ICI-1 and ICI-2 included ICI alone (ICI-1, n = 26, 45%; ICI-2, n = 4, 7%), dual ICI regimens (n = 1, 2%; n = 12, 21%), or ICI combined with targeted therapies/anti-VEGF (n = 31, 53%; n = 42, 72%). Most patients discontinued ICI-1 due to progression (n = 52, 90%). Objective response rate was 22% at ICI-1 and 26% at ICI-2. Responses at ICI-2 were also seen in patients who had progressive disease as best overall response at ICI-1 (n = 11/21; 52%). Median time-to-progression at ICI-1 and ICI-2 was 5.4 (95% CI 3.0-7.7) months and 5.2 (95% CI 3.3-7.0) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3-4 at ICI-1 and ICI-2 were observed in 9 (16%) and 10 (17%) patients, respectively., Conclusions: ICI rechallenge was safe and resulted in a treatment benefit in a meaningful proportion of patients with HCC. These data provide a rationale for investigating ICI-based regimens in patients who progressed on first-line immunotherapy in prospective trials., Impact and Implications: Therapeutic sequencing after first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a challenge as no available second-line treatment options have been studied in immunotherapy-pretreated patients. Particularly, the role of ICI rechallenge in patients with HCC is unclear, as data from prospective trials are lacking. We investigated the efficacy and safety of ICI-based regimens in patients with HCC pretreated with immunotherapy in a retrospective, international, multicenter study. Our data provide the rationale for prospective trials investigating the role of ICI-based regimens in patients who have progressed on first-line immunotherapy., Competing Interests: BS received travel support from AbbVie, Ipsen and Gilead. DR has received advisory fees from Bayer and speakers fees as well as travel grants from Ipsen. He is an investigator for Bayer, BMS, Lilly, AstraZeneca and Roche. SP has nothing to disclose. ML has nothing to disclose. KP has nothing to disclose. TP received consulting fees from IQVIA and Bayer; and institutional research funding from Lilly, Roche, Bayer. AC has nothing to disclose. TWF has nothing to disclose. JVF has received advisory board fees from Roche. KS served as consultant for Ipsen and Bayer, and conducts studies for Bayer, Roche, Lilly, MSD, and BMS. VH has nothing to disclose. FF received travel support from Abbvie and Novartis, and speaker fees from Abbvie and MSD. AD has nothing to disclose. ARS has served at advisory boards and received consulting honoraria from AMGEN, AAA, Bayer, BMS, IPSEN, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Servier. KS has nothing to disclose. PR has nothing to disclose. BiS has nothing to disclose. MPE received consulting honoraria from BMS and MSD. AT received consulting honoraria and/or lecture fees from Bayer, IPSEN, Lilly, BMS, Eisai Novartis, Roche, Intercept, Falk, AbbVie, and Gilead. He received travel grants from IPSEN, AbbVie, and Gilead. He is an investigator for IPSEN and GILEAD. AngD received advisory board fees from Roche and BMS, and travel support from Roche and Ipsen. FH received travel support from Bayer, Abbvie, and Gilead. LB has nothing to disclose. ABP has nothing to disclose. DH received research support from Pfizer. MV received speaker fees from Nordic Pharma, Ipsen, Merck Serono, Bayer Vital, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), and Sirtex, advisory board fees from Roche, Ipsen, Lilly, Nordic Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Eisai, AstraZeneca and Amgen, research grants from Sirtex. FS has nothing to disclose. MT received speaker fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Falk Foundation, Gilead, Intercept and Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD); advisory board fees from Abbvie, Albireo, Boehringer Ingelheim, BiomX, Falk Pharma GmbH, GENFIT, Gilead, Intercept, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Phenex, Regulus and Shire; travel grants from AbbVie, Falk, Gilead, and Intercept; and research grants from Albireo, CymaBay, Falk, Gilead, Intercept, MSD, and Takeda. He is also coinventor of patents on the medical use of norUDCA filed by the Medical University of Graz. ADA received travel support and consultancy fees from Roche. CAMF has nothing to disclose. 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. MPR is advisor/consultant for Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, and Roche; he served as a speaker for Bayer, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, and Roche; he is an investigator for Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Exelixis, Lilly, and Roche. JFD received compensations as a member of scientific advisory boards of Abbvie, Bayer, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Falk, Galapagos, Genfit, Genkyotex, Gilead Sciences, HepaRegenix, Intercept, Lilly, Merck, and Novartis. AW received compensations as a member of scientific advisory boards for BMS, Wako and Sanofi. He served as a speaker for Leo Pharma, Eisai, Ipsen and Roche and received travel support from Merck and Servier. AEK has received consulting fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, CymaBay, Escient, FMC, Gilead, GSK, Guidepoint, Intercept, Mirum, Medscape, MSD, Myr, Viofor; lecture fees from Abbvie, AOP Orphan, Bayer, BMS, CMS, CymaBay, Eisai, Falk, Gilead, GSK, Intercept, Janssen, Newbridge, Novartis, Lilly, MSD, Zambon; and institutional research funding from Intercept. AGS served on advisory boards and as a consultant for Genentech, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Bayer, Exelixis, TARGET RWE, FujiFilm Medical Sciences, Glycotest, Exact Sciences, GRAIL, and Freenome. ENDT has served as a paid consultant for AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, EISAI, Eli Lilly & Co, MSD, Mallinckrodt, Omega, Pfizer, IPSEN, Terumo and Roche. He has received reimbursement of meeting attendance fees and travel expenses from Arqule, Astrazeneca, BMS, Bayer, Celsion and Roche, and lecture honoraria from BMS and Falk. He has received third-party funding for scientific research from Arqule, AstraZeneca, BMS, Bayer, Eli Lilly, and IPSEN and Roche. LR 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; lectures fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi, Servier; travel expenses from AstraZeneca; and institutional research funding from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Zymeworks. MP is an investigator for Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Ipsen, Lilly, and Roche; he received speaker honoraria from Bayer, 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, BMS, and Roche. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

Background: Dual programmed cell death-1 and vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibition is the novel standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Direct comparisons between first-line treatments are lacking., Method: We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), the Cochrane library (https://www.cochranelibrary.com) and Embase (www.embase.com) between January 2007 and February 2022. We included phase III randomised controlled trials that tested immune-checkpoint inhibitors or tyrosine kinase inhibitors, including sorafenib, lenvatinib and donafenib, and evaluated as primary end-point overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS). Studies testing loco-regional therapies were excluded. The primary end-point was to compare the efficacy of first-line options in terms of OS and PFS. We extracted Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for OS and PFS and performed a frequentist network meta-analysis with fixed effect multivariable meta-regression models. The research protocol was registered in PROSPERO, an international prospective register of systematic reviews (registration code CRD42022312489)., Findings: Literature review yielded 13709 results, after duplicates removal and exclusion of not relevant studies, 70 papers were available for screening. After full-text review, 9 studies were eligible for analysis. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab reduced the risk of death compared to placebo (HR 0·40; 95% CI 0·28-0·57), sorafenib (HR 0·58; 95% CI 0·42-0·80), lenvatinib (HR 0·63; 95% CI 0·44-0·89), atezolizumab plus cabozantinib (HR 0·64; 95% CI 0·43-0·97), nivolumab (HR 0·68; 95% CI 0·48-0·98) and donafenib (HR 0·69; 95% CI 0·48-0·99). Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was not statistically superior to durvalumab plus tremelimumab (HR 0·74; 95% CI 0·52-1·06) and sintilimab plus IBI305 (HR 1·02; 95% CI 0·67-1·55) in reducing the risk of death. Efficacy was associated with a higher risk of grade 3 adverse events., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: DJP 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; received research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. AC received grant consultancies from MSD, Astrazeneca, Roche and BMS. He also received speaker's fees from Novartis, Astrazeneca and EISAI. AG has declared consulting/advisory role for Roche, MSD, Eli Lilly, Pierre Fabre, EISAI, and Daichii Sankyo; speakers bureau for Eisai, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Roche, Teva, Gentili, Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Celgene, and Daichii Sankyo; research funds: EISAI, Eli Lilly, and Roche., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (AtezoBev) is the standard of care for first-line treatment of unresectable HCC. No evidence exists as to its use in routine clinical practice in patients with impaired liver function., Approach and Results: In 216 patients with HCC who were consecutively treated with AtezoBev across 11 tertiary centers, we retrospectively evaluated treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) graded (G) according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0, including in the analysis all patients treated according to label (n = 202, 94%). We also assessed overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response (ORR), and disease control rates (DCR) defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Disease was mostly secondary to viral hepatitis, namely hepatitis C (n = 72; 36%) and hepatitis B infection (n = 35, 17%). Liver function was graded as Child-Pugh (CP)-A in 154 patients (76%) and CP-B in 48 (24%). Any grade trAEs were reported by 143 patients (71%), of which 53 (26%) were G3 and 3 (2%) G4. Compared with CP-A, patients with CP-B showed comparable rates of trAEs. Presence and grade of varices at pretreatment esophagogastroduodenoscopy did not correlate with bleeding events. After a median follow-up of 9.0 months (95% CI, 7.8-10.1), median OS was 14.9 months (95% CI, 13.6-16.3), whereas median PFS was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.2-8.5). ORR and DCR were respectively 25% and 73%, with no difference across CP classes., Conclusions: This study confirms reproducible safety and efficacy of AtezoBev in routine practice. Patients with CP-B reported similar tolerability compared with CP-A, warranting prospective evaluation of AtezoBev in this treatment-deprived population., (© 2022 The Authors. Hepatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: Sites of metastasis have prognostic significance in advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC), but more information is needed regarding outcomes based on metastatic sites in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We hypothesized that presence of liver/bone metastases would be associated with worse outcomes with ICI., Methods: We identified a retrospective cohort of patients with aUC across 26 institutions, collecting demographics, clinicopathological, treatment, and outcomes information. Outcomes were compared with logistic (observed response rate; ORR) and Cox (progression-free survival; PFS, overall survival; OS) regression between patients with/without metastasis beyond lymph nodes (LN) and those with/without bone/liver/lung metastasis. Analysis was stratified by 1st or 2nd + line., Results: We identified 917 ICI-treated patients: in the 1st line, bone/liver metastases were associated with shorter PFS (Hazard ratio; HR: 1.65 and 2.54), OS (HR: 1.60 and 2.35, respectively) and lower ORR (OR: 0.48 and 0.31). In the 2nd + line, bone/liver metastases were associated with shorter PFS (HR: 1.71 and 1.62), OS (HR: 1.76 and 1.56) and, for bone-only metastases, lower ORR (OR: 0.29). In the 1st line, LN-confined metastasis was associated with longer PFS (HR: 0.53), OS (HR:0.49) and higher ORR (OR: 2.97). In the 2nd + line, LN-confined metastasis was associated with longer PFS (HR: 0.47), OS (HR: 0.54), and higher ORR (OR: 2.79); all associations were significant., Conclusion: Bone and/or liver metastases were associated with worse, while LN-confined metastases were associated with better outcomes in patients with aUC receiving ICI. These findings in a large population treated outside clinical trials corroborate data from trial subset analyses., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.

Adjuvant treatment with Imatinib is the standard of care for high-risk resected GISTs. Imatinib is known to have an impact on bone mineral density in patients affected by chronic myeloid leukemia, however this effect has never been investigated in GISTs. We retrospectively evaluated, on CT scans, the effect of adjuvant Imatinib (400 mg/die) on bone mineral density and muscle composition in 14 patients with surgically resected GISTs and in a control group of 8 patients who did not received any treatment. The effect of bone and muscle composition on Imatinib-tolerance was assessed as well. Overall patients receiving Imatinib experienced an increase in bone mineral density during treatment (p = 0.021); with higher increase in patients with basal values < 120 mg/cm 3 (p = 0.002). No changes were observed in the control group (p = 0.918). Skeletal muscle index and lean body mass did not change over time during Imatinib therapy; however, patients with lower lean body mass and lower body mass index experienced more grade 3 treatment related toxicities (p = 0.024 and p = 0.014 respectively). We also found a non-significant trend between basal BMD and grade 3 toxicities (p = 0.060)., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Introduction: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer and fourth-leading cause of cancer death. While drug discovery to improve disease survival was historically poor, there is now evidence of significant potential for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) in treatment of the disease, and indeed such drug approvals are beginning to emerge., Areas Covered: HCC typically arises in the context of cirrhosis and chronic liver disease (CLD), and HCC exhibits significant biological heterogeneity, in part reflecting the broad range of etiologies of CLD. Different classes and combinations of ICPI-based therapy exist, but not all patients will respond and predictive biomarkers are not yet available to guide clinician decision-making, unlike some other cancer types. In this review, we discuss the emerging biomarkers for ICPI sensitivity in HCC, including tumor genomic features, perturbation of the gut microbiome, and systemic inflammatory markers., Expert Opinion: Additional profiling studies are required to appreciate existing trends with clinical outcome and to further drive clinical studies in disease stratification by response. This will only be possible within collaborative and international efforts, especially regarding biopsy collection. A close collaboration between basic scientists and clinicians will be the key to shape the next future of HCC biomarker research.

Introduction: It has been recognized that increasing body mass index (BMI) is associated with improved outcome from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with various malignancies including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, it is unclear whether baseline BMI may influence outcomes from first-line chemoimmunotherapy combinations., Methods: In this international multicenter study, we evaluated the association between baseline BMI, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a cohort of patients with stage IV NSCLC consecutively treated with first-line chemoimmunotherapy combinations. BMI was categorized according to WHO criteria., Results: Among the 853 included patients, 5.3% were underweight; 46.4% were of normal weight; 33.8% were overweight; and 14.5% were obese. Overweight and obese patients were more likely aged ≥70 years (p=0.00085), never smokers (p<0.0001), with better baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status (p=0.0127), and had lower prevalence of central nervous system (p=0.0002) and liver metastases (p=0.0395). Univariable analyses showed a significant difference in the median OS across underweight (15.5 months), normal weight (14.6 months), overweight (20.9 months), and obese (16.8 months) patients (log-rank: p=0.045, log rank test for trend: p=0.131), while no difference was found with respect to the median PFS (log-rank for trend: p=0.510). Neither OS nor PFS was significantly associated with baseline BMI on multivariable analysis., Conclusions: In contrast to what was observed in the context of chemotherapy-free ICI-based regimens, baseline BMI does not affect clinical outcomes from chemoimmunotherapy combinations in patients with advanced NSCLC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AC received speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Roche, Novartis, and EISAI. GLB received grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and Astellas Pharma. LM reports receiving research grant/funding (self) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, Stilla, and Inivata; serving in advisory/consultancy for Roche and Takeda; receiving honoraria (self) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, and Roche; receiving travel/accommodation/expenses from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, and AstraZeneca; and having non-remunerated activities from AstraZeneca. AA received consulting fees from BMS, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and Astellas; speakers fees from Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca. MT received speaker and consultant fees from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis, Roche, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Otsuka, Takeda, Pierre Fabre, Amgen, and Merck. MT received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, and Boehringer Ingelheim. CC received honorarium/educational grants from Lilly, Pfizer, and Boehringer-Inghelheim. DJP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare and Bayer Healthcare and travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, AstraZeneca, DaVolterra, and BMS; and received research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver tumor, and it rates fourth as a cause of cancer-related death. The presence of underlying liver disease and poor chemosensitivity pose major treatment challenges in the management of HCC. However, in the last few years, the therapeutic scenario has substantially changed, and immunotherapy in the form of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) has become an essential therapeutic strategy in this field., Summary: After controversial results of monotherapy, ICPIs have been mainly investigated in association with antiangiogenic agents or as dual checkpoint inhibition. The combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has become the new therapeutic standard for unresectable HCC. Currently, a number of ICPI-based combinations are being studied in phase III clinical trials as front-line therapy for advanced HCC, with growing interest in integration of early-stage disease management in the form of adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapies. With most of the trials investigating ICPIs as first-line treatment, the second-line scenario relies mainly on tyrosine kinase inhibitors, which however have not been formally trialed after ICPIs., Key Messages: In this review, we summarize the main therapeutic advances in the systemic management of HCC focusing on the most relevant ongoing trials. We also discuss the main issues arising from a such rapidly evolving field including therapeutic sequencing and patient stratification., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Systemic inflammation is a hallmark of cancer, and it has a pivotal role in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development and progression. We conducted a retrospective study including 362 patients receiving immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs) across three continents, evaluating the influence of neutrophiles to lymphocytes ratio (NLR), platelets to lymphocytes ratio (PLR), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI) on overall (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and radiologic responses. In our 362 patients treated with immunotherapy, median OS and PFS were 9 and 3.5 months, respectively. Amongst tested inflammatory biomarkers, patients with NLR ≥ 5 had shorter OS (7.7 vs. 17.6 months, p < 0.0001), PFS (2.1 vs. 3.8 months, p = 0.025), and lower objective response rate (ORR) (12% vs. 22%, p = 0.034); similarly, patients with PLR ≥ 300 reported shorter OS (6.4 vs. 16.5 months, p < 0.0001) and PFS (1.8 vs. 3.7 months, p = 0.0006). NLR emerged as independent prognostic factors for OS in univariate and multivariate analysis (HR 1.95, 95%CI 1.45-2.64, p < 0.001; HR 1.73, 95%CI 1.23-2.42, p = 0.002) and PLR remained an independent prognostic factor for both OS and PFS in multivariate analysis (HR 1.60, 95%CI 1.6-2.40, p = 0.020; HR 1.99, 95%CI 1.11-3.49, p = 0.021). Systemic inflammation measured by NLR and PLR is an independent negative prognostic factor in HCC patients undergoing ICI therapy. Further studies are required to understand the biological mechanisms underlying this association and to investigate the predictive significance of circulating inflammatory biomarkers in HCC patients treated with ICIs.

Opinion Statement: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been traditionally deprived from highly effective systemic therapy options in the past decades. The multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib, approved in 2008, remained the only treatment option for advanced HCC for over a decade. A number of molecularly targeted therapies such as lenvatinib, regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab have significantly widened treatment options in patients with advanced HCC. However, emergence of resistance and long-term toxicity from treatment are barriers to long-term survivorship. Immunotherapy is at the focus of intense research efforts in HCC. Whilst targeting of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte 4 (CTLA-4) is associated with radiologically measurable disease-modulating effects in HCC, monotherapies fell short of demonstrating evidence of significant survival extension in advanced disease. Atezolizumab and bevacizumab were the first immunotherapy regimen to demonstrate clear superiority in improving the survival of patients with unresectable HCC compared to sorafenib, paving the way for immunotherapy combinations. As the treatment landscape of HCC rapidly evolves, with immunotherapy integrating within early- and intermediate-stage disease treatment algorithms, lack of level 1 evidence on sequencing of therapeutic strategies and lack of head-to-head comparisons across immunotherapy combinations will affect prescribing of immunotherapy in routine practice. In the absence of predictive biomarkers, choice of immunotherapy over kinase inhibitors will continue to remain an empirical exercise, guided by balancing anti-tumour efficacy with toxicity considerations in the individual patient., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: After the advent of new treatment options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the identification of prognostic factors is crucial for the selection of the most appropriate therapy for each patient., Patients and Methods: With the aim to fill this gap, we applied recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) to a cohort of 404 patients treated with lenvatinib., Results: The application of RPA resulted in a classification based on five variables that originated a new prognostic score, the lenvatinib prognostic index (LEP) index, identifying three groups: low risk [patients with prognostic nutritional index (PNI) >43.3 and previous trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE)]; medium risk [patients with PNI >43.3 but without previous TACE and patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 1 and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B (BCLC-B)]; high risk [patients with PNI <43.3 and ALBI grade 2 and patients with PNI <43.3, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 1 and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C (BCLC-C)]. Median overall survival was 29.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 22.8-29.8 months] in low risk patients (n = 128), 17.0 months (95% CI 15.0-24.0 months) in medium risk (n = 162) and 8.9 months (95% CI 8.0-10.7 months) in high risk (n = 114); low risk hazard ratio (HR) 1 (reference group), medium risk HR 1.95 (95% CI 1.38-2.74), high risk HR 4.84 (95% CI 3.16-7.43); P < 0.0001. The LEP index was validated in a cohort of 127 Italian patients treated with lenvatinib. While the same classification did not show a prognostic value in a cohort of 311 patients treated with sorafenib, we also show a possible predictive role in favor of lenvatinib in the low risk group., Conclusions: LEP index is a promising, easy-to-use tool that may be used to stratify patients undergoing systemic treatment of advanced HCC., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Data sharing Data are available upon reasonable request., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although most of the analyses included transverse colon cancers (TCC) among right colon cancer (RCC), it is not completely clear if they present total similarities with RCC or if they have their specific features. Therefore, we present an observational study to evaluate clinicopathological characteristics and survival data of patients with TCC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 450 RCC, of whom 97 stages I-IV TCC were included in this multicenter study; clinicopathological and molecular parameters were analyzed to identify prognostic factors for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Most of TCC cases were male (61%), with ≤70 years old (62%), and good performance status (ECOG PS 0, 68%). According to WHO classification, 41 (49%) and 40 (48%) tumors were classified as well to moderate and poorly/undifferentiated respectively, regardless of mucinous component (30%). About molecular data, 8 (26%), 45 (63%), and 14 (24%) were MSI-H, KRAS wild-type, and BRAF V600E mutant, respectively. With a median follow-up of 34 months, there were 29 and 50 disease recurrences and deaths respectively. Charlson comorbidity index ≥5 was a significant prognostic factor for DFS (HR = 7.67, 95% CI 2.27-25.92). Colon obstruction/perforation (HR = 2.65, 95% CI 1.01-7.01), and BRAF mutant (HR = 3.03, 95% CI 0.97-9.50) cases showed a worst, despite not statistically significant, DFS. Whereas for OS, at the multivariate model, only tumor grade differentiation (HR = 5.26, 95% CI 1.98-14.01) and BRAF mutation status (3.71, 95% CI 1.07-12.89) were independent prognostic factors. Conclusions: Poorly/undifferentiated tumor grade and BRAF V600E mutation are independent prognostic factors for OS in TCC. Further prospective clinical trials are needed to better define TCC treatment in order to improve patient outcome.

Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Its high mortality rate has remained unchanged for years. Radiotherapy and surgery are considered standard treatments in early and locally advanced stages. Chemotherapy is the only option for metastatic patients. Two treatment regimens, i. e. the association of 5-fluorouracil- irinotecan-oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) and the association of nab-paclitaxel with gemcitabine, have been shown to improve outcomes for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients. However, there are not standardized predictive biomarkers able to identify patients who benefit most from treatments. CA19-9 is the most studied prognostic biomarker, its predictive role remains unclear. Other clinical, histological and molecular biomarkers are emerging in prognostic and predictive settings. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of prognostic and predictive markers used in clinical practice and to explore the most promising fields of research in terms of treatment selection and tailored therapy in pancreatic cancer., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2020 Dell’Aquila et al.)

Background and Aim: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common disease, but data on outcomes in octogenarians are scarce in the literature. The aim of this study is to analyze results from patients aged 80 years old and over who were treated for AP at a single center., Methods: Patients aged 80 years and older diagnosed with AP from April 2010 to October 2015 were considered. Demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), serum biochemistry at 24 and 48 h after admission, and revised Atlanta severity score were analyzed and correlated with hospital mortality rate and length of stay using the multiple regression and Kaplan-Meier tests., Results: A total of 100 consecutive patients were included in the study. There were 52 women, and the mean age was 87.5 years (range 80-95). Gallstones were the most common cause of AP (69.7%). The ASA score was ≥III in 51 patients. Eight patients had severe, disease and all of them died in hospital. A CCI > 4 was associated with higher disease severity and mortality ( P  < 0.00001). The median hospital stay was 9 days (range 1-59). Longer hospital stay was associated with serum C-reactive protein ≥242 mg/L ( P = 0.01) and serum albumin ≤30 g/L ( P = 0.01) at 48 h. Over a 5-year period, 22% of patients were readmitted to hospital with recurrent AP. Gallstones were the main cause of disease (63.6%)., Conclusions: AP in octogenarians has low mortality. Higher death rate is associated with disease severity. In the presence of gallstone disease, cholecystectomy is recommended whenever possible as the risk of disease recurrence is significant., (© 2019 The Authors. JGH Open: An open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Insulin resistance and obesity are suggested to have a key role in the molecular pathogenesis of various disorders, including several malignancies. Moreover, insulin resistance has recently been found to be associated with cutaneous and uveal melanoma, while a variable positive correlation between obesity and the risk of cutaneous melanoma was also found at least in men. The present trial aims at confirming whether insulin resistance, assessed with the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and the quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI), is a risk factor for cutaneous melanoma. One hundred and thirty patients diagnosed with cutaneous melanoma and 130 age-, sex-, and skin phototype-matched controls were evaluated. At the univariate and multivariate analysis, the diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma was inversely related with insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and positively with BMI ( p = 0.0014 and p = 0.008, respectively). Consistently, insulin sensitivity (QUICKI) and BMI resulted positively associated with the diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma ( p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0026, respectively). The results obtained are partially in agreement with those reported in the literature. By comparing our data with those generated by other studies, inconsistencies in key features among subgroups of different trials have emerged, possibly affecting final correlations. Based on insulin resistance/sensitivity, fasting insulinemia/glycemia, and BMI values collected from patients who participated in the present trial, two nomograms potentially assessing the risk of cutaneous melanoma have been generated. Molecular aspects sustain a role for insulin resistance in the carcinogenesis of cutaneous melanoma, but clinical data remain uncertain. Larger, well-balanced, correlative trials are still needed to define the potential role of insulin resistance in the carcinogenesis of cutaneous melanoma., (Copyright © 2019 Scoppola, Strigari, Barnabei, Petasecca, De Galitiis, Fulgenzi, Roselli, De Lorenzo, Di Renzo, Marchetti and Torino.)