Therapy For Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Research Articles

Low miR-10b-3p associated with sorafenib resistance in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Sorafenib is one of the standard first-line therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Unfortunately, there are currently no appropriate biomarkers to predict the clinical efficacy of sorafenib in HCC patients. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have been studied for their biological functions and clinical applications in human cancers. In this study, we found that miR-10b-3p expression was suppressed in sorafenib-resistant HCC cell lines through miRNA microarray analysis. Sorafenib-induced apoptosis in HCC cells was significantly enhanced by miR-10b-3p overexpression and partially abrogated by miR-10b-3p depletion. Among 45 patients who received sorafenib for advanced HCC, those with high miR-10b-3p levels, compared to those with low levels, exhibited significantly longer overall survival (OS) (median, 13.9 vs. 3.5 months, p = 0.021), suggesting that high serum miR-10b-3p level in patients treated with sorafenib for advanced HCC serves as a biomarker for predicting sorafenib efficacy. Furthermore, we confirmed that cyclin E1, a known promoter of sorafenib resistance reported by our previous study, is the downstream target for miR-10b-3p in HCC cells. This study not only identified the molecular target for miR-10b-3p, but also provided evidence that circulating miR-10b-3p may be used as a biomarker for predicting sorafenib sensitivity in patients with HCC.

A clinical scoring tool validated with machine learning for predicting severe hand\u2013foot syndrome from sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma

PurposeSorafenib is an effective therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Hand–foot syndrome (HFS) is a serious adverse effect associated with sorafenib therapy. This study aimed to develop an updated clinical prediction tool that allows personalized prediction of HFS following sorafenib initiation.MethodsIndividual participant data from Phase III clinical trial NCT00699374 were used in Cox proportional hazard analysis of the association between pre-treatment clinicopathological data and grade ≥ 3 HFS occurring within the first 365 days of sorafenib treatment for advanced HCC. Multivariable prediction models were developed using stepwise forward inclusion and backward deletion and internally validated using a random forest machine learning approach.ResultsOf 542 patients, 116 (21%) experienced grades ≥ 3 HFS. The prediction tool was optimally defined by sex (male vs female), haemoglobin (< 130 vs ≥ 130 g/L) and bilirubin (< 10 vs 10–20 vs ≥ 20 µmol/L). The prediction tool was able to discriminate subgroups with significantly different risks of grade ≥ 3 HFS (P ≤ 0.001). The high (score = 3 +)-, intermediate (score = 2)- and low (score = 0–1)-risk subgroups had 40%, 27% and 14% probability of developing grade ≥ 3 HFS within the first 365 days of sorafenib treatment, respectively.ConclusionA clinical prediction tool defined by female sex, high haemoglobin and low bilirubin had high discrimination for predicting HFS risk. The tool may enable improved evaluation of personalized risks of HFS for patients with advanced HCC initiating sorafenib.

Impact of Exogenous Treatment with Histidine on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells.

Simple SummarySorafenib (Nexavar@) is the only currently approved anti-cancer drug for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, despite the development of strategies combining sorafenib with other cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents to overcome sorafenib resistance, clinical trial results are still disappointing. In this study, we examined the enhancement of tumor responses to sorafenib by exogenous histidine treatment.Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Sorafenib, a multi-kinase inhibitor, is the first-line therapy for advanced HCC. However, long-term exposure to sorafenib often results in reduced sensitivity and the development of resistance. Although various amino acids have been shown to contribute to cancer initiation and progression, little is known about the effects of histidine, a dietary essential amino acid that is partially taken up via histidine/large neutral amino acid transporter (LAT1), on cancer cells. In this study, we evaluated the effects of histidine on HCC cells and sensitivity to sorafenib. Remarkably, we found that exogenous histidine treatment induced a reduction in the expression of tumor markers related to glycolysis (GLUT1 and HK2), inflammation (STAT3), angiogenesis (VEGFB and VEGFC), and stem cells (CD133). In addition, LAT1 expression was downregulated in HCC tumor regions with high expression of GLUT1, CD133, and pSTAT3, which are known to induce sorafenib resistance. Finally, we demonstrated that combined treatment with sorafenib and histidine could be a novel therapeutic strategy to enhance the sensitivity to sorafenib, thereby improving long-term survival in HCC.

A genome‐wide CRISPR activation screen reveals Hexokinase 1 as a critical factor in promoting resistance to multi‐kinase inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma cells

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is often diagnosed at an advanced stage and is, therefore, treated with systemic drugs, such as tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs). These drugs, however, offer only modest survival benefits due to the rapid development of drug resistance. To identify genes implicated in TKI resistance, a cluster of regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated protein 9 activation screen was performed in hepatoma cells treated with regorafenib, a TKI used as second-line therapy for advanced HCC. The screen results show that Hexokinase 1 (HK1), catalyzing the first step in glucose metabolism, is a top candidate for conferring TKI resistance. Compatible with this, HK1 was upregulated in regorafenib-resistant cells. Using several experimental approaches, both in vitro and in vivo, we show that TKI resistance correlates with HK1 expression. Furthermore, an HK inhibitor resensitized resistant cells to TKI treatment. Together, our data indicate that HK1 may function as a critical factor modulating TKI resistance in hepatoma cells and, therefore, may serve as a biomarker for treatment success.

Interleukin-6 Is a Circulating Prognostic Biomarker for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Treated with Combined Immunotherapy.

Simple SummaryHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of cancer death worldwide. Due to its high recurrence rate, many HCC patients progress to an advanced stage and require systemic therapy. Among six available chemotherapy regimens for advanced HCC, atezolizumab/bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) combination therapy is considered as a front-line therapy, but approximately 20% of patients are non-responders. Therefore, biomarker-driven prediction of non-responders facilitates precision medicine for HCC patients. To identify noninvasive circulating biomarkers predicting therapeutic response of Atezo/Bev, we performed simultaneous measurement of 34 plasma proteins and found that plasma IL-6 level was a significant predictor of non-responder for Atezo/Bev therapy. We subsequently confirmed that the progression-free survival and overall survival of the IL-6-high group were significantly shorter than those of the IL-6-low group. In conclusion, circulating IL-6 levels are a novel prognostic biomarker for advanced HCC patients who undergo combined immunotherapy.Atezolizumab/bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) combination therapy has become a front-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but approximately 20% of patients are nonresponders. We investigated circulating biomarkers to predict therapeutic outcomes. We performed simultaneous measurement of 34 proteins using a multiplex bead-based immunoassay in baseline plasma from 34 patients who underwent Atezo/Bev therapy as first- or second-line treatment. Logistic regression analysis showed that plasma IL-6 and interferon alpha (IFNα) levels were significant predictors of non-responders (odds ratio of 13.33 and FDR p = 0.021 for IL-6 and IFNα). The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with high IL-6 levels were significantly shorter than those of patients with low IL-6 levels. Next, we measured baseline plasma IL-6 levels in 64 HCC patients who underwent Atezo/Bev therapy by ELISA. The IL-6-high group showed higher female ratio, AST levels, tumor markers, Child–Pugh score, and vascular invasion ratio. The PFS and OS of the IL-6-high group were significantly shorter than those of the IL-6-low group. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that IL-6 level and age were independent risk factors for disease progression (hazard ratio of 2.785 and p = 0.015 for IL-6, and hazard ratio 0.306 and p = 0.03 for age). In conclusion, circulating IL-6 levels are a novel prognostic biomarker for advanced HCC patients who undergo combined immunotherapy.

Analysis of the tumor microenvironment in ineffective patients of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

468 Background: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo + Bev) has been the standard treatment for frontline systemic therapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Immune check point inhibitors and its combination therapies are completely ineffective in some population of patients based on previous reports in several other malignancies. Regarding the results of a phase III trial (IMbrave 150) and several reports from real world practice, ̃20% of patients were determined to be progression disease (PD) as the best radiological response to Atezo + Bev in patients with advanced HCC. In this study, we analyzed the tumor microenvironment using tumor biopsy samples obtained before starting Atezo + Bev to clarify the mechanism of resistance to Atezo + Bev in patients with advanced HCC. Methods: This study enrolled patients with advanced HCC treated with Atezo + Bev at Chiba University Hospital between October 2020 and April 2021. We defined an ineffective group as patients with PD within 2 months according to RECIST version 1.1. The analysis of the tumor microenvironment in this study was performed using the nCounter PanCancer IO 360TM Panel. Results: Of 56 patients who initiated Atezo + Bev during the study period, biopsy samples with a sufficient amount of tumor tissue for analysis were obtained from 30 patients by percutaneous needle biopsy immediately before administering Atezo + Bev. According to radiological assessments, 7 and 23 patients were classified as ineffective and effective groups, respectively. Comparing baseline characteristics of the two groups, the rate of alpha fetoprotein (AFP) ≥ 400 ng/mL was significantly higher in the ineffective group (ineffective group: 85.7%; effective group: 34.8%; p = 0.031). According to gene expression analyses, 101 of 775 genes were differentially expressed between the two groups. Gene set enrichment analysis showed that antigen presentation, cytokine and chemokine signaling, cytotoxicity, immune cell adhesion and migration, and interferon signaling had a lower expression in the ineffective group. Conversely, a higher expression of cell proliferation signaling was observed in the ineffective group. In this cohort, the expression of Wnt signaling showed no significant difference between the two groups. We calculated the cytolytic activity based on the expression of granzyme A and perforin 1, and it was significantly lower in the ineffective group (6.1 in the effective group and 5.3 in the ineffective group, p = 0.013). Conclusions: Analysis of the tumor microenvironment found differences of several gene expressions and those of signaling between the ineffective and effective groups of Atezo + Bev in patients with advanced HCC. The ineffectiveness of Atezo + Bev is due to the reduced action of T cell infiltration and its immune response to tumor.

Clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) experiencing hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA increases during tislelizumab (TIS) treatment in RATIONALE-208.

411 Background: The effect of checkpoint inhibitor therapy on HBV infection is uncertain. TIS, an anti-PD-1 antibody, was clinically active and well tolerated in pts with previously treated advanced HCC in the phase 2 RATIONALE-208 study (NCT03419897). Objective response rate by independent committee review (IRC) in pts with a history of HBV infection was consistent with the overall population (12.5% vs. 13.3%, respectively). We explored whether TIS treatment was associated with increased HBV DNA and the clinical significance of HBV DNA elevations. Methods: Pts with ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy for advanced HCC received TIS 200 mg IV Q3W. Pts with inactive, chronic, or active HBV were eligible if HBV DNA levels were &lt; 500 IU/mL at screening (pts with detectable hepatitis B surface antigen [HBsAg] or detectable HBV DNA were required to be managed per treatment guidelines). HBV DNA testing was conducted every 4 cycles if HBV DNA was detectable at screening, or when clinically indicated. Results: Among 249 enrolled pts, 128 had a history of HBV infection. Of these pts, 114 were HBsAg positive at baseline (BL), 36 had detectable HBV DNA at BL, and 32 had detectable HBV DNA and HBsAg at BL. Clinically significant increases in HBV DNA levels from BL were reported in 7 pts, with no pattern relative to the time of TIS initiation (Table). All 7 pts were HBsAg positive at BL and had been receiving antiviral treatment for ≥ 3 months before the first dose of TIS. Six out of the 7 pts had increases in alanine transaminase (ALT) from BL during the study (Table), 4 of whom had ≥ 3-fold increases in ALT which were observed concurrently or soon after HBV DNA increases. IRC-assessed best overall response (BOR) was partial response (PR) for 1 pt with increased HBV DNA and progressive disease for the remaining 6. HBV-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 6 of the 7 pts (2 pts had a grade 3 TEAE of hepatitis B; 2 pts had a grade 2 TEAE of HBV reactivation; 2 pts had a TEAE of increased HBV DNA, with one grade 1 and one grade 3 event). All HBV-related TEAEs were non-serious and did not result in discontinuation of TIS. Conclusions: Clinically significant increases in HBV DNA from BL were reported in a small number of pts, which does not suggest that TIS is associated with increased HBV DNA. Tumor responses in these pts were consistent with the overall population and HBV-related TEAEs were manageable and did not require discontinuation of TIS, demonstrating that HBV DNA increases did not impact treatment. The effects of TIS in pts with HBV infection will be further investigated in an ongoing phase 3 trial (NCT03412773). Clinical trial information: NCT03419897. [Table: see text]

Clinical outcomes associated with tislelizumab in patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who have been previously treated with sorafenib (SOR) or lenvatinib (LEN) in RATIONALE-208.

420 Background: Tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, demonstrated clinical activity and was well tolerated in pts with previously treated advanced HCC in the phase 2 RATIONALE-208 study (NCT03419897). At the time of this study, SOR and LEN were recommended first-line treatments for pts with advanced HCC and continue to have an important role in the first-line treatment of HCC despite the recent approval of new immuno-oncology-based combinations (atezolizumab and bevacizumab) in some regions. We report the clinical outcomes of pts with advanced HCC who were previously treated with SOR/LEN. Methods: Pts who had received ≥1 prior line of systemic therapy for advanced HCC received tislelizumab 200 mg intravenously once every three weeks. Objective response rate (ORR) by independent review committee (IRC) (ORRIRC), duration of response by IRC (DORIRC), progression-free survival by IRC (PFSIRC), overall survival (OS), and safety were evaluated in pts who had been previously treated with SOR/LEN. Results: As of February 2020, 249 pts were enrolled and 235 pts had received prior treatment with SOR/LEN, of whom 126 and 109 pts had received 1 or ≥ 2 prior lines of systemic therapy, respectively. At study entry, 211 (89.8%) pts had BCLC stage C and 187 (79.6%) pts had extrahepatic spread. Median follow-up duration for pts previously treated with SOR/LEN was 12.5 months and ORRIRC was 13.6% (95% CI: 9.5, 18.7), including 2 complete responses and 30 partial responses. Median DORIRC was not reached. Median PFSIRC and OS of pts previously treated with SOR/LEN was 2.7 months (95% CI: 1.6, 2.8) and 13.5 months (95% CI: 10.9, 15.8), respectively. Tislelizumab was generally well tolerated in pts previously treated with SOR/LEN (Table), and the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were increased aspartate aminotransferase (n=70; 28.1%) and alanine aminotransferase (n=52; 20.9%). Conclusions: Tislelizumab was investigated beyond the first-line setting, as effective second- and third-line treatment options are limited for pts with advanced HCC and there is an unmet medical need. This analysis indicates that tislelizumab is clinically active and well tolerated in pts with advanced HCC who have received prior systemic treatment with SOR/LEN. Clinical trial information: NCT03419897. [Table: see text]

Pembrolizumab plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care as second-line therapy in patients in Asia with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): Phase 3 KEYNOTE-394 study.

383 Background: The anti–PD-1 antibody pembro showed efficacy and manageable safety in the global phase 2 KEYNOTE-224 and phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 studies of patients (pts) with previously treated advanced HCC, a population of high unmet need. KEYNOTE-394 is a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study conducted in Asia to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembro vs placebo, both given with BSC, as second-line therapy for previously treated advanced HCC (NCT03062358). Methods: Eligible pts in Asia with confirmed advanced HCC and progression on or intolerance to sorafenib or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy were randomized 2:1 to pembro 200 mg or placebo Q3W for ≤35 cycles plus BSC per local guidelines. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints were PFS, ORR, DOR, DCR, and TTP, all assessed per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review, and safety. Treatment differences were assessed using the stratified log-rank test (OS and PFS) or the stratified Miettinen &amp; Nurminen method (ORR). The P value boundary for OS superiority at final analysis (FA) was 0.019307. If OS was superior, PFS and ORR superiority at the second interim analysis (IA2; primary analysis timepoint for these endpoints) could be tested at boundaries of 0.013447 and 0.009139, respectively. Results: 453 pts were randomized to pembro (N = 300) or placebo (N = 153). Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between arms; 90.7% had received sorafenib as first-line therapy. As of the June 30, 2021 cutoff date for FA, median study follow-up was 33.8 mo (range 18.7-49.0). At FA, pembro significantly improved OS vs placebo (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99, P = 0.0180); median (95% CI) OS was 14.6 mo (12.6-18.0) for pembro vs 13.0 mo (10.5-15.1) for placebo and 24-mo OS rate was 34.3% vs 24.9%. At IA2, pembro significantly improved PFS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60-0.92, P = 0.0032) and ORR (estimated difference 11.4%, 95% CI 6.7-16.0, P = 0.00004); median (95% CI) PFS was 2.6 mo (1.5-2.8) for pembro vs 2.3 mo (1.4-2.8) for placebo, 12-mo PFS rates were 15.9% vs 1.4%, and ORR was 12.7% vs 1.3%. At FA, ORR was 13.7% vs 1.3%, median DOR was 23.9 mo vs 5.6 mo, DCR was 52.7% vs 47.7%, and median TTP was 2.7 mo vs 1.7 mo (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.90). At FA, treatment-related AEs occurred in 66.9% of pts in the pembro arm and 49.7% in the placebo arm, including 14.4% and 5.9% with grade 3-5 events. 3 pts (1.0%) in the pembro arm and 0 in the placebo arm died of treatment-related AEs. Conclusions: Pembro plus BSC significantly improved OS, PFS, and ORR compared with placebo plus BSC as second-line therapy for patients from Asia with advanced HCC. The pembro safety profile was as expected. Overall, results were consistent with those previously observed in KEYNOTE-224 and KEYNOTE-240 and thus add to the body of evidence supporting the use of pembro as second-line therapy for advanced HCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03062358.

LEAP-012 trial in progress: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with or without lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)

TPS494 Background: Limited treatment options are available for patients with intermediate HCC. Lenvatinib, a potent multikinase inhibitor, and pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, are approved first- and second-line therapies for advanced HCC, respectively. The LEAP-012 study (NCT04246177) is investigating lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in combination with TACE versus placebo plus TACE in patients with intermediate-stage HCC. Methods: LEAP-012 is a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study. Adults with confirmed HCC localized to the liver without portal vein thrombosis and not amenable to curative treatment, ≥1 measurable lesion per RECIST v1.1, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and no previous systemic treatment for HCC are eligible. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib 8 mg (body weight &lt; 60 kg) or 12 mg (body weight ≥60 kg) orally once daily plus pembrolizumab 400 mg intravenously (IV) every 6 weeks (Q6W) plus TACE or placebo orally once daily plus placebo IV Q6W plus TACE. Response will be assessed by imaging every 9 weeks; safety will be assessed throughout the study and up to 90 days after the end of treatment. Dual primary end points are overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary end points are PFS, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR), and time to progression (TTP) per modified RECIST by BICR; ORR, DCR, DOR, and TTP per RECIST v1.1 by BICR; and safety. Exploratory end points are PFS, ORR, DCR, DOR, TTP, and time from randomization to second/subsequent disease progression after initiation of new anticancer therapy or death from any cause, whichever occurs first, per RECIST v1.1 by investigator review, identification of molecular biomarkers, and health-related quality of life. Recruitment began in April 2020, and the planned sample size is 950 patients. The results of the LEAP-012 study will show the clinical benefit of adding lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab to the current standard of care TACE for patients with intermediate-stage HCC not amenable to curative treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT04246177.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Molecular Pathogenesis and Therapeutic Advances.

Simple SummaryPatients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common primary tumor of the liver, have poor prognosis and are increasing worldwide. The recent approval of several novel therapies for HCC was long expected, and it will make physician decision-making more challenging. The molecular mechanisms triggered during chronic liver diseases and the cellular cross-talk established with liver cells influence HCC growth and may reduce immune control, making this knowledge relevant to help with clinical decisions. This review analyzes these issues and points to relevant topics for future research.Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common form of liver cancer, continues to be a serious medical problem with poor prognosis, without major therapeutic improvement for years and increasing incidence. Fortunately, advances in systemic treatment options are finally arriving for HCC patients. After a decade of sorafenib as a standard therapy for advanced HCC, several tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), antiangiogenic antibodies, and immune checkpoint inhibitors have reached the clinic. Although infections by hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus remain principal factors for HCC development, the rise of non- alcoholic steatohepatitis from diabetes mellitus or metabolic syndrome is impeding HCC decline. Knowledge of specific molecular mechanisms, based on the etiology and the HCC microenvironment that influence tumor growth and immune control, will be crucial for physician decision-making among a variety of drugs to prescribe. In addition, markers of treatment efficacy are needed to speed the movement of patients towards other potentially effective treatments. Consequently, research to provide scientific data for the evidence-based management of liver cancer is guaranteed in the coming years and discussed here.

Hypofractionated radiation combined with systemic therapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a case series.

Background and Aim: Immune checkpoint-inhibitors combined with monoclonal antibody (Atezo+Bev) is currently first-line therapy for BCLC Stage-C HCC. We report encouraging responses achieved in such patients on systemic therapy, after addition of hypo-fractionated radiation therapy (RT).

Genome-Wide CRISPR/Cas9 Library Screening Identified that DUSP4 Deficiency Induces Lenvatinib Resistance in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Background: Lenvatinib is in a first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, drug resistance is one of the principal obstacles for treatment failure. The molecular mechanism of Lenvatinib resistance has not been well investigated.Materials and methods: A genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 knockout screening system was established and bioinformatic analysis was used to identify critical genes associated with Lenvatinib resistance. Cell proliferation assays, colony formation assays and cell migration assays were performed to investigate the effect of drug resistance associated genes, particularly DUSP4, on cancer cell malignant behavior during Lenvatinib treatment. In vivo experiments were conducted by using a xenograft mouse model.Results: We identified six genes that were associated with Lenvatinib resistance in HCC, including DUSP4, CCBL1, DHDH, CNTN2, NOS3 and TNF. DUSP4 was found to be significantly decreased at the mRNA and protein levels in Lenvatinib resistant HCC cells. DUSP4 knockout enhanced HCC cell survival, cell proliferation and migration during Lenvatinib treatment in vitro and in vivo, accompanied by regulation of p-ERK and p-MEK levels. This finding implied that DUSP4 deficiency induced Lenvatinib resistance. Interestingly, DUSP4 deficiency induced Lenvatinib resistance was abrogated by the MEK inhibitor Selumetinib, implying that MEK phosphorylation and DUSP4-inhibition dependent ERK activation were required for drug resistance. Finally, we found that DUSP4 deficiency was associated with HCC prognosis and response to Lenvatinib based on clinical data.Conclusions: DUSP4 deficiency mediates Lenvatinib resistance by activating MAPK/ERK signaling and combination therapy using Lenvatinib and MEK inhibitors may be a promising therapeutic strategy for overcoming Lenvatinib resistance.

Frontline therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: an update.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fastest increasing cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States and is projected to be the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States by 2030. Main risk factors include alcoholic cirrhosis, chronic hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). More than half of the patients have advanced-stage disease at presentation. Currently approved frontline systemic therapy options include sorafenib, lenvatinib, and atezolizumab/bevacizumab. Over the past decade, there has been a significant improvement in survival with a median overall survival of 19.2 months reported with first-line treatment with atezolizumab/bevacizumab. Based on positive results of randomized phase III HIMALAYA trial, durvalumab and tremelimumab combination could become another frontline option. Multiple frontline clinical trials with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) or ICI combined with other novel agents are underway. In the frontline setting, identifying predictive biomarkers for ICI-based or tyrosine kinase (TKI)-based therapy is an unmet need. Subsequent treatment is poorly defined in patients with prior ICI-based therapy since all the available second-line and beyond therapy was studied after first-line sorafenib. Frontline systemic therapy is poorly defined in certain subgroups of HCC such as Child–Pugh B and post-transplant recurrent HCC. The landscape of frontline HCC treatment is rapidly changing, and this article reviews the most recent treatment approaches to frontline therapy for advanced HCC.

Surrogate Indicators of Overall Survival in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

To the Editor, For more than a decade, the targeted drug sorafenib[1, 2] has been the dominant first-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, due to the low overall response rate and high drug resistance rate, many new targeted drugs have been developed, including sunitinib, brivanib, linifanib, nintedanib, dovitinib, sorafenib plus erlotinib, lenvatinib, and donafenib. On the other hand, with the increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in solid tumors, several trials investigated the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced HCC. Among these trials, only lenvatinib and donafenib as monotherapy were non-inferior to sorafenib in overall survival in untreated advanced HCC. Most of other trials did not meet their primary end point of overall survival. However, the efficacy of the combination therapy with PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor plus bevacizumab (VEGF inhibitor) is amazing.[3, 4] An expert panel convened by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases recommended time to progression as the primary endpoint in randomized phase 2 trials and overall survival as the main endpoint to measure effectiveness in phase 3 trials.[5, 6] In real world clinical practice, subsequent antitumor therapies after tumor progression and/or therapies for concurrent liver disease can confound the assessment of clinical benefit. In the recent issue of Journal of Hepatology, on behalf of EASL, Bruix and coworkers updated the recommendations of systemic treatment of HCC.7 This review proposed that “overall survival is the sole robust endpoint to assess the benefit from any intervention in advanced HCC” and “all proposed surrogates lack adequate validation”. Here, we tried to reveal the relationship among objective response rate (ORR), median overall survival (OS) time and median progression-free survival (PFS) time by presenting them in a same curve graph. The potential relationship between PFS and OS is revealed by representing the hazard ratio (with 95% confidence interval) of PFS and OS with a forest plot. We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE databases and analyzed phase 3 clinical trials with large sample size. A total of 11 trials about first-line systemic therapies for advanced HCC published from 2008 to 2021 were included into analysis. All these 11 trials included a group of patients treated with sorafenib. In addition, 7 trials about second-line systemic therapies published from 2015 to 2021 were also included into analysis. The control group received placebo treatment in all these 7 trials. All these 18 trials reported ORR, median PFS and OS time. The ORR according to RECIST 1.1 in the sorafenib group ranged from 0.7% to 11.9% (median 6.1%). Among patients with sorafenib therapy, the median PFS and OS time was 3.75 (range 2.8 to 5.5) and 10.4 (range 6.5 to 14.7) months, re-spectively. The mean ORR of sorafenib was also calculated. The denominator equals the sum of the sample sizes for each sorafenib group. Percentage was obtained by the sum number of cases with complete or partial response in each trial divided by the denominator. The mean ORR of sorafenib was 6.0%. Actually, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with the highest ORR (27.3%) while donafenib with the lowest (4.6%). In addition, the median OS time of each trial tended to increase gradually with the increase of ORR and median PFS time (Fig. 1a). However, this trend was not significant in second-line treatment (Fig. 1b). And then, we describe the association between PFS and OS with forest plot (Fig. 1c). We found (1) PD-1 (sintilimab) or PD-L1 (atezolizumab) inhibitor plus bevacizumab was associated with the best survival benefit for patients with advanced HCC;[3, 4] (2) the significant benefit of PFS may not translate into significant benefit of OS (linifanib, lenvatinib, ramucirumab in REACH trial, S-1); (3) similar PFS generally does not translate into OS benefits (sunitinib, brivanib, sorafenib plus erlotinib), except in the ZGDH3 trial (donafenib); (4) a benefit in PFS could predict a benefit in OS when the hazard ratio for PFS is lower than 0.6 in most trials, except ZGDH3[8] (hazard ratio 0.91) and KEYNOTE 240 trial (hazard ratio 0.72).[9] Tumor progression is the leading cause of death in patients with HCC. Increased ORR and PFS may increase OS in firstline setting, but not in second-line therapy. In addition, the optimum cut-off value of hazard ratio for PFS in predicting benefit in OS is still pending.

Immunotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Current and developing strategies.

Liver cancer including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. HCC arises from hepatocyte or hepatic stem cells, while iCCA originates from biliary epithelial cells, and the respective biological context are very different. Despite screening programs, the diagnosis of liver cancer is in most cases made when curative treatments such as surgery or ablation are not possible. In 2020, after a decade of using only tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), a combination of an immune-check point inhibitor (ICI) and a VEGF antagonist proved superior to a TKI as first line therapy of advanced HCC. In 2022, the addition of an ICI to standard chemotherapy demonstrated an improvement of patient survival in iCCA. Moreover, ICI offer an unprecedented rate of durable responses to HCC and iCCA patients. Nevertheless, still two thirds of patients do not respond to ICI-based combinations, and research efforts are focused on deciphering the mechanisms of immune evasion of these lethal cancers. Reliable predictive and prognostic biomarkers are still lacking, but the molecular phenotyping of the tumor microenvironment is currently providing potential candidates for patient stratification. In this review, we will summarize the current knowledge on the immune biology of the liver, the discovery of cell-intrinsic and immune cell-mediated mechanisms of immune evasion by means of high-resolution single cell data, the main targets of current immunotherapy approaches, and the recent milestones in immunotherapy of HCC and iCCA.

Targeting Tumor Microenvironment in Liver Cancers: Rationale, Current Progress, and Future Perspective.

Surgical treatments offer the chance for cure in primary or metastatic liver cancers. However, many patients experience disease progression after surgical interventions, or cannot undergo surgery as they present with unresectable disease at diagnosis. In such cases, available treatment options (local and systemic) have been limited in efficacy, which led to dismal survival rates in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic colangiocarcinoma (ICC) or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). More recent developments in oncology have offered renewed hope for advanced liver cancer patients. Hypofractionated radiation has shown feasibility and promise in unresectable setting, and is now being tested in a randomized phase III trial in HCC (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT03186898). Antiangiogenic agents have strongly impacted the management of advanced HCC, with multiple drug options in first line setting (sorafenib, lenvatinib) and second line setting (regorafenib, cabozantinib, ramucirumab). Chemotherapy based regimens are standard of care in ICC and PDAC. Immunotherapy with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 or anti-CTLA4 antibodies has shown real potential to transform advanced HCC therapy, both in first line and second line settings. Finally, combinations of these new strategies are very attractive approaches, as they promise durable and profound responses in advanced HCC. But in order to achieve this promise more broadly, these concepts require greater understanding based on mechanistic preclinical studies and validation in correlative studies in clinical trials as a basis to establish optimal combinatorial strategies. The insights gained from this "bench to the bedside and back" approach raise the hope for a more efficient development of targeted agents in combination, and in earlier stages of the disease, with the goal of increasing survival in patients afflicted with this aggressive and deadly diseases. (Presented at the 2001st Meeting, July 4, 2022).

Trends of Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with First-Line Sorafenib in Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Sorafenib has consistently served as the control arm in multiple randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating novel therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for more than a decade. Analyzing trends in clinical outcomes of patients treated with sorafenib for the same indication over time offers the opportunity for unique insight into the evolution of clinical trial conduct and potential non-drug factors impacting outcomes. Methods: We identified RCTs in patients with treatment-naïve advanced HCC where sorafenib was compared to another systemic therapy or placebo. We extracted trial-level demographic, clinicopathologic, and outcome data (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS], objective response rate [ORR], and duration of therapy). Sample-weighted linear regression was used to identify temporal trends with significance set at p ≤ 0.05. Results: Sixteen RCTs (9 phase III and 7 phase II) enrolling 4,086 patients treated with sorafenib were included in the analysis. Included trials enrolled patients from 2005 to 2019. OS has significantly improved by 4.5 months from 2005 to 2019 (p = 0.048) over time. Thirteen studies provided data on PFS using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, with no significant change over time (p = 0.69). ORR assessed by RECIST 1.1 has significantly improved by 6.0% over time (p = 0.003). Median duration of therapy with sorafenib has decreased by 53% since the enrollment of the first clinical trial in 2005, from 23.1 weeks to 12.2 weeks (p = 0.0037). There was no significant change in patient demographics were identified over time to explain the OS findings. Conclusion: The median OS of patients with advanced HCC treated with sorafenib has improved significantly over 15 years. At the same time, the median duration of therapy with sorafenib has decreased. The reason for these findings was not explained by changing demographics of patients enrolled in these trials and has implications for ongoing clinical trials.

Evolution of Survival Impact of Molecular Target Agents in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background and Aims: The prognosis of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is expected to improve as multiple molecular target agents (MTAs) are now available. However, the impact of the availability of sequential MTAs has not been fully verified yet. Approach and Results: We retrospectively collected the data on the whole clinical course of 877 patients who received any MTAs as first-line systemic therapy for advanced HCC between June 2009 and March 2019. The study population was divided into 3 groups according to the date of first-line MTA administration (period 1: 2009–2012, n = 267; period 2: 2013–2016, n = 352; period 3: 2017–2019, n = 258). Then, we compared the number of MTAs used, overall survival (OS), and MTA treatment duration among the 3 groups. Analysis was also performed separately for advanced-stage and nonadvanced-stage HCC. The proportion of patients who received multiple MTAs was remarkably increased over time (1.1%, 10.2%, and 42.6% in periods 1, 2, and 3, respectively, p < 0.001). The median OS times were prolonged to 10.4, 11.3, and 15.2 months in periods 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p = 0.016). Similarly, the MTA treatment durations were extended (2.7, 3.2, and 6.6 months in periods 1, 2, and 3, respectively; p < 0.001). We confirmed that the correlation between OS and MTA treatment duration was strengthened (period 1: 0.395, period 2: 0.505, and period 3: 0.667). All these trends were pronounced in the patients with advanced-stage HCC but limited in the patients with nonadvanced-stage HCC. Conclusions: The availability of multiple MTAs had steadily improved the prognosis of patients with advanced HCC patients, particularly advanced-stage HCC patients.

Real-Life Clinical Data of Lenvatinib versus Sorafenib for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Italy.

BackgroundLenvatinib has been approved in Italy since October 2019 as a first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and to date data on effectiveness and safety of lenvatinib are not available in our region. To fill this gap, we performed a multicentric analysis of the real-world treatment outcomes with the propensity score matching in a cohort of Italian patients with unresectable HCC who were treated with either sorafenib or lenvatinib.Aims and MethodsTo evaluate the effectiveness of sorafenib and lenvatinib as primary treatment of advanced HCC in clinical practice we performed a multicentric analysis of the treatment outcomes of 288 such patients recruited in 11 centers in Italy. A propensity score was used to mitigate confounding due to referral biases in the assessment of mortality and progression-free survival.ResultsOver a follow-up period of 11 months the Cox regression model showed 48% reduction of death risk for patients treated with lenvatinib (95% CI: 0.34–0.81; p = 0.0034), compared with those treated with sorafenib. The median PFS was 9.0 and 4.9 months for lenvatinib and sorafenib arm, respectively. Patients treated with lenvatinib showed a higher percentage of response rate (29.4% vs 2.8%; p < 0.00001) compared with patients treated with sorafenib. Sorafenib was shown to be correlated with more HFSR, diarrhea and fatigue, while lenvatinib with more hypertension and fatigue.ConclusionOur study highlighted for the first time the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in an Italian cohort of patients.