Search

Abstract We report on structural and electronic properties of defects in chemical vapor-deposited monolayer and few-layer MoS2 films. Scanning tunneling microscopy, Kelvin probe force microscopy, and transmission electron microscopy were used to obtain high resolution images and quantitative measurements of the local density of states, work function and nature of defects in MoS2 films. We track the evolution of defects that are formed under heating and electron beam irradiation. We observe formation of metastable domains with different work function values after annealing the material in ultra-high vacuum to moderate temperatures. We attribute these metastable values of the work function to evolution of crystal defects forming during the annealing. The experiments show that sulfur vacancies formed after exposure to elevated temperatures diffuse, coalesce, and migrate bringing the system from a metastable to equilibrium ground state. The process could be thermally or e-beam activated with estimated energy barrier for sulfur vacancy migration of 0.6 eV in single unit cell MoS2. Even at equilibrium conditions, the work function and local density of states values are strongly affected near grain boundaries and edges. The results provide initial estimates of the thermal budgets available for reliable fabrication of MoS2-based integrated electronics and indicate the importance of defect control and layer passivation.

Abstract Using magnetization, magneto-transport and single-crystal specific heat measurements we have determined the superconducting phase diagram of MgB2. The superconducting anisotropy ? changes monotonously from a value of around 2 near Tc to above 4.5 at 22 K. For H?c a pronounced peak effect in the critical current occurs at the upper critical field. We present a strong evidence for a surface superconducting state for H?c which might account for the wide spread in reported values of the superconducting anisotropy ?. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We have investigated the electronic properties of ultrathin Pb films by low temperature scanning tunneling microscopy and spectroscopy. Our results show that 30 nm thick Pb(111) films grown on atomically flat highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) and on amorphous SiO2 are both in the strong-coupling limit with transition temperature and energy gap close to the bulk value. Conductance maps and spectroscopy in the vortex state reveal a bound state at the center of the vortices, which suggest that the films are in the clean limit. Measurements of 3 nm Pb films grown on HOPG show a clear crossover to the weak-coupling regime and dirty limit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A magnetic study of superconductor/ferromagnet bilayers was performed by hysteresis loops and temperature-dependent magnetization measurements. The superconductor/ferromagnet bilayers consist of a Nb film deposited on a Py film with weak perpendicular magnetic anisotropy. By comparing the temperature-dependent magnetization data obtained on samples with different ferromagnetic layer thickness, a decrease of the magnetic pinning with increasing thickness of the ferromagnetic layer has been found. This is confirmed by the reduction of the Nb film critical current density at low fields extracted by using the magnetic irreversibility of the hysteresis loops. The reduction of the pinning can be related to the increase of the stripe width in the ferromagnetic layer observed by magnetic force microscopy (MFM) measurements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Delays and limitations of palliative care in patients with liver transplantation- ineligible end-stage hepatocellular carcinoma according to Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system may be explained by different perceptions between hepatologists and palliative care physicians in the absence of shared guidelines., Aim: To assess physicians' attitudes toward palliative care in end-stage hepatocellular carcinoma and to understand what the obstacles are to more effective management and co-shared between palliative care physicians and hepatologists., Design: Members of the Italian Association for the Study of Liver Disease and the Italian Society of Palliative Care were invited to a web-based survey to investigate practical management attitude for patients with liver transplant- ineligible end-stage hepatocellular carcinoma., Participants: Physician members of the of the two associations, representing several hospitals and services in the country., Results: Ninety-seven hepatologists and 70 palliative care physicians completed the survey: >80% regularly follow 1-19 patients; 58% of hepatologists collaborate with palliative care physicians in the management of patients, 55% of palliative care physicians take care of patients without the aid of hepatologists. Management of cirrhosis differed significantly between the two groups in terms of prescription of albumin, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, anti-viral treatment, anticoagulation, indication to paracentesis and management of encephalopathy. Full-dose acetaminophen is widely used among hepatologists, while opioids are commonly used by both categories, at full dosage, regardless of liver function., Conclusions: This survey highlights significant differences in the approach to patients with liver transplantation- ineligible end-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, reinforcing the need for shared guidelines and further studies on palliative care in the setting., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: M. Iavarone: Advisory Board/Speaker Bureau for Bayer, Gilead Sciences, BMS, Janssen, Ipsen, MSD, BTG-Boston Scientific, AbbVie, Guerbet, EISAI, Roche, Astra-Zeneca; A. Aghemo: Advisory Board/Speaker Bureau for GILEAD SCIENCES, ABBVIE, MSD, MYLAN, ALFASIGMA, SOBI, INTERCEPT; P. Lampertico: Advisory Board/Speaker Bureau for BMS, ROCHE, GILEAD SCIENCES, GSK, ABBVIE, MSD, ARROWHEAD, ALNYLAM, JANSSEN, SBRING BANK, MYR, EIGER, ALIGOS, ANTIOS, VIR.

Background & Aims: Sarcopenia and myosteatosis are common in patients with cirrhosis. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of these muscle changes, their interrelations and their prognostic impact over a 12-month period., Methods: We conducted a prospective multicentre study involving 433 patients. Sarcopenia and myosteatosis were evaluated using computed tomography scans. The 1-year cumulative incidence of relevant events was assessed by competing risk analysis. We used a Fine-Gray model adjusted for known prognostic factors to evaluate the impact of sarcopenia and myosteatosis on mortality, hospitalization, and liver decompensation., Results: At enrolment, 166 patients presented with isolated myosteatosis, 36 with isolated sarcopenia, 135 with combined sarcopenia and myosteatosis and 96 patients showed no muscle changes. The 1-year cumulative incidence of death in patients with either sarcopenia and myosteatosis (13.8%) or isolated myosteatosis (13.4%) was over twice that of patients without muscle changes (5.2%) or with isolated sarcopenia (5.6%). The adjusted sub-hazard ratio for death in patients with muscle changes was 1.36 (95% CI 0.99-1.86, p = 0.058). The cumulative incidence of hospitalization was significantly higher in patients with combined sarcopenia and myosteatosis than in patients without muscle changes (adjusted sub-hazard ratio 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.35). The cumulative incidence of liver decompensation was greater in patients with combined sarcopenia and myosteatosis (p = 0.018) and those with isolated sarcopenia (p = 0.046) than in patients without muscle changes. Lastly, we found a strong correlation of function tests and frailty scores with the presence of muscle changes., Conclusions: Myosteatosis, whether alone or combined with sarcopenia, is highly prevalent in patients with cirrhosis and is associated with significantly worse outcomes. The prognostic role of sarcopenia should always be evaluated in relation to the presence of myosteatosis., Impact and Implications: This study investigates the prognostic role of muscle changes in patients with cirrhosis. The novelty of this study is its multicentre, prospective nature and the fact that it distinguishes between the impact of individual muscle changes and their combination on prognosis in cirrhosis. This study highlights the prognostic role of myosteatosis, especially when combined with sarcopenia. On the other hand, the relevance of sarcopenia could be mitigated when considered together with myosteatosis. The implication from these findings is that sarcopenia should never be evaluated individually and that myosteatosis may play a dominant role in the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Recently, in Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) setting, the use of metformin has been associated to a trend toward worse response rate, overall survival and progression free survival in patients who received immunotherapy. The study population included individuals from both Eastern and Western regions with a confirmed diagnosis of HCC and receiving first line treatment with Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or Lenvatinib. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed by Cox proportional. For the analysis, patients were stratified based on their use of concomitant medication or not. At the time of database lock, 319 deaths were observed: 209 in the Lenvatinib cohort, 110 in the Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab cohort. In the Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab arm, 50 (16.5%) patients were on chronic metformin use. At the univariate analysis for OS, patients who used metformin showed significantly shorter OS compared to patients who did not use metformin (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients in metformin group had significantly shorter OS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.9; 95% CI 1.1-3.1). At the univariate analysis for PFS, patients in metformin group had significantly shorter PFS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.6). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients in metformin group had significantly shorter PFS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.7; p = 0.0147). No differences were reported in terms of ORR and DCR between patients in metformin group and those in no-metformin group. In the Lenvatinib cohort, 65 (15%) patients were recorded to chronically use metformin. No statistically significant differences in terms of both OS and PFS were found between patients in metformin group and patients in no-metformin group. This analysis unveils a negative prognostic role associated with metformin use specifically within the Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab group., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Chronic liver disease and cancer are global health challenges. The role of the circadian clock as a regulator of liver physiology and disease is well established in rodents, however, the identity and epigenetic regulation of rhythmically expressed genes in human disease is less well studied. Here we unravel the rhythmic transcriptome and epigenome of human hepatocytes using male human liver chimeric mice. We identify a large number of rhythmically expressed protein coding genes in human hepatocytes of male chimeric mice, which includes key transcription factors, chromatin modifiers, and critical enzymes. We show that hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, a major cause of liver disease and cancer, perturbs the transcriptome by altering the rhythmicity of the expression of more than 1000 genes, and affects the epigenome, leading to an activation of critical pathways mediating metabolic alterations, fibrosis, and cancer. HCV-perturbed rhythmic pathways remain dysregulated in patients with advanced liver disease. Collectively, these data support a role for virus-induced perturbation of the hepatic rhythmic transcriptome and pathways in cancer development and may provide opportunities for cancer prevention and biomarkers to predict HCC risk., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The indolent and aggressive behaviors of HCC might have a role in clinical trial (CT) results; however, the indolent HCC is less analyzed compared to others cancer. Indolent profile could be characterized as follows: (1) patients with low risk of progression itself due to the HCC molecular profile and/or due to the interaction between cancer cell their microenvironment; (2) patients who achieve objective response or present spontaneous regression; and (3) patients who develop radiological progression with no consequence on either the liver function or general status, and without trigger a change in the tumor stage. Patients with "indolent HCC" generally never develop cancer-related symptoms neither die for HCC-related causes. Thus, we hypothesize that the imbalance in the proportion of "indolent" versus "aggressive HCC" between arms or the underestimation/overestimation of HCC behavior at baseline in single-arm CT could be associated with CT failure or under-overestimation of trial results. The "indolent progression" may also explain the discrepancy between radiological progression-based end points and survival. Moreover, we discuss the related causes that explain the indolent profile of HCC and propose (1) refining the progression-related end point by the pattern of progression to minimize the limitations of the current end points; (2) considering alternative statistical tools for survival analysis such as milestone survival, or restricted mean survival time to capture the value of indolent HCC. According to these considerations, we propose incorporating novel end points into the single arm of phase I/II CT as exploratory analysis or as a secondary end point in phase III CT., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

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

Introduction: The impact of etiology on response to immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is being debated, with contrasting findings between early and recent post hoc analyses of IMbrave-150 and metanalyses of clinical trials of PD-1/PD-L1 blockers. As a results, it is not clear whether the first-line systemic treatment atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A + B) is equally effective in viral and nonviral patients., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 885 HCC patients treated with the first-line A + B from multiple centers from Eastern and Western countries, 53.9% having viral and 46.1% nonviral etiology. Baseline clinical and laboratory characteristics were analyzed with uni- and multivariate models to explore potential differences on overall survival (OS), time-to-progression (TTP), disease control rates (DCRs) based on etiology and to identify putative prognostic factors in etiology subgroups. Treatment toxicities and access to the second-line treatments and outcomes were also reported and compared between etiologies., Results: Overall, no statistically significant differences were found in median OS (mOS: viral 15.9 months; nonviral 16.3 months), TTP (mTTP: viral 8.3 months; nonviral 7.2 months), and DCRs (viral 78.1%; nonviral 80.8%) based on etiology. Prognostic factors of survival and progression were mainly shared between viral and nonviral etiologies, including alpha-fetoprotein, aspartate transaminase, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and ALBI score. Exploratory analyses highlighted a possible stronger association of immunological factors, i.e., NLR and eosinophil count, to treatment outcomes in viral patients. The toxicity profile, the access to and type of the second-line treatments and their outcome in terms of OS almost overlap in the two etiology subgroups., Conclusion: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab efficacy does not vary according to underlying etiology of HCC in a multicenter, real-world population, matching recent post hoc findings from the IMbrave-150 trial. Preliminary analyses suggest that some prognostic factors differ between viral and nonviral patients, potentially due to biological and immunological differences. Prospective and comparative trials stratifying by etiology are warranted to validate these findings and guide clinical practice., Competing Interests: Andrea Casadei-Gardini has received grants and personal fees from MSD, Eisai, Bayer and is an advisor for MSD, Eisai, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca and GSK. Atsushi Hiraoka received lecture’s fees from Chugai, Lilly, AstraZeneca. Fabian Finkelmeier has received travel support from Ipsen, and speaker’s fees from AbbVie, MSD, Ipsen, Eisai and Fresenius. Gianluca Masi is an advisor for Roche, MSD, Eisai. Giuseppe Cabibbo is a consultant for Roche, AstraZeneca, Eisai, MSD. Hidenori Toyoda has received grants and personal fees from Gilead, AbbVie, Eisai, Fujifilm, Teruma, Kowa, Takeda. Ho Yeong Lim is an advisor for Roche, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Bayer. Hong Jae Chon has advisory role for Roche, Eisai, Bayer, ONO, MDS, BMS, Sanofi, Servier, AstraZeneca, Silajen, Menarini, GreenCross Cell; received speaker’s fee and research grants from Roche, Eisai, Bayer, BMS, Sanofi, Dong-A ST, BORYUNG, Inno.N, Hanmi, YUHAN. Josè Presa is an advisor for Gilead, AbbVie, Roche, AstraZeneca, Giszi, Advaus. Mario Scartozzi received grants and personal fees from MSD, Merck, Servier, Novartis, AstraZeneca. Masatoshi Kudo received lecture’s fees from Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eisai, Eli Lilly Japan, Takeda Pharmaceutical; is an advisor for F. Hoffmann-La Roche, AstraZeneca, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eisai; and received grants from Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Chugai Pharmaceutical, GE Healthcare Japan Corporation, Eisai, AbbVie, EA Pharma. Massimo Iavarone received grants and personal fees from MSD, Gilead, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Roche, Ipsen, Eisai. Takeshi Hatanaka received lecture’s fees from Eisai. The other coauthors have no conflict of interest to disclose., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

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

Background and Aims: Sarcopenia has been associated with poor outcomes in patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. We investigated the impact of sarcopenia on survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with Sorafenib., Methods: A total of 328 patients were retrospectively analyzed. All patients had an abdominal CT scan within 8 weeks prior to the start of treatment. Two cohorts of patients were analyzed: the "Training Group" (215 patients) and the "Validation Group" (113 patients). Sarcopenia was defined by reduced skeletal muscle index, calculated from an L3 section CT image., Results: Sarcopenia was present in 48% of the training group and 50% of the validation group. At multivariate analysis, sarcopenia (HR: 1.47, p = 0.026 in training; HR 1.99, p = 0.033 in validation) and MELD > 9 (HR: 1.37, p = 0.037 in training; HR 1.78, p = 0.035 in validation) emerged as independent prognostic factors in both groups. We assembled a prognostic indicator named "SARCO-MELD" based on the two independent prognostic factors, creating three groups: group 1 (0 prognostic factors), group 2 (1 factor) and group 3 (2 factors), the latter with significantly worse survival and shorter time receiving treatment.

The outcome of liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocarcinoma (HCC) is strongly influenced by HCC staging, which is based on radiological examinations in a pre-LT setting; concordance between pre-LT radiological and definitive pathological staging remains controversial. To address this issue, we retrospectively analyzed our LT series to assess concordance between radiology and pathology and to explore the factors associated with poor concordance and outcomes. We included all LTs with an HCC diagnosis performed between 2013 and 2018. Concordance (Co group) was defined as a comparable tumor burden in preoperative imaging and post-transplant pathology; otherwise, non-concordance was diagnosed (nCo group). Concordance between radiology and pathology was observed in 32/134 patients (Co group, 24%). The number and diameter of the nodules were higher when nCo was diagnosed, as was the number of pre-LT treatments. Although concordance did not affect survival, more than three pre-LT treatments led to a lower disease-free survival. Patients who met the Milan Criteria (Milan-in patients) were more likely to receive ≥three prior treatments, leading to a lower survival in multi-treated Milan-in patients than in other Milan-in patients. In conclusion, the concordance rate between the pre-LT imaging and histopathological results was low in patients with a high number of nodules. Multiple bridging therapies reduce the accuracy of pre-LT imaging in predicting HCC stages and negatively affect outcomes after LT.

Due to the lack of biomarkers predictive of response to atezolizumab-bevacizumab, the standard of care for advanced HCC, we analyzed baseline and early on-treatment variation of peripheral lymphocyte populations of 37 prospective patients treated by atezolizumab-bevacizumab and in 15 prospective patients treated by sorafenib or lenvatinib (TKIs). RNAseq analysis followed by RT-PCR validation on patients-derived PBMC was also performed. At first imaging, re-evaluation 13 patients receiving atezolizumab-bevacizumab, showed an objective response, 17 stable disease, while 7 were nonresponders. Baseline CD8+ and CD8+PD-L1+ peripheral lymphocytes were lower in responders versus nonresponders (T-test, p = 0.012 and 0.004, respectively). At 3 weeks, 28 of 30 responders displayed a rise of CD8+PD1+ lymphocytes with a positive mean fold change of 4.35 (±5.6 SD), whereas 6 of 7 nonresponders displayed a negative fold change of 0.89 (±0.84 SD). These changes were not observed in patients treated by TKIs. TRIM56, TRIM16, TRIM64, and Ki67 mRNAs were validated as upregulated in responders versus nonresponders after 3 weeks after treatment start, providing possible evidence of immune activation. Baseline CD8+ and CD8+PD-L1+ peripheral lymphocytes and early changes in CD8+PD1+ lymphocytes predict response to atezolizumab-bevacizumab providing noninvasive markers to complement clinical practice in the very early phases of treatment of HCC patients., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Immunology published by Wiley-VCH GmbH.)

Background: Data concerning the use of lenvatinib in very old patients (≥ 80 years) are limited, although the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in this patient population is constantly increasing., Objective: This analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in a large cohort of very old patients (≥ 80 years) with unresectable HCC., Patients and Methods: The study was conducted on a cohort of 1325 patients from 46 centers in four Western and Eastern countries (Italy, Germany, Japan, and the Republic of Korea) who were undergoing first-line treatment with lenvatinib between July 2010 and February 2022. Patients were stratified according to age as very old (≥ 80 years) and not very old (< 80 years)., Results: The median overall survival (OS) was 15.7 months for patients < 80 years old and 18.4 months for patients ≥ 80 years old [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-1.25, p = 0.8281]. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 6.3 months for patients < 80 years old and 6.5 months for patients ≥ 80 years old (HR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.91-1.25, p = 0.3954). No differences between the two study groups were found in terms of disease control rate (DCR; 80.8% versus 78.8%; p = 0.44) and response rate (RR; 38.2% versus 37.9%; p = 0.88). Patients < 80 years old experienced significantly more hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) grade ≥ 2 and decreased appetite grade ≥ 2. Conversely, patients ≥ 80 years old experienced significantly more fatigue grade ≥ 2. In the very old group, parameters associated with prognosis were AFP, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC), and Child-Pugh score. BCLC stage was the only independent predictor of overall survival (OS; HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.11-2.29, p = 0.01115)., Conclusions: Our study highlights the same efficacy and safety of lenvatinib between very old and not very old patients., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background & Aims: Comparative assessments of immunogenicity following different COVID-19 vaccines in patients with distinct liver diseases are lacking. SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell and antibody responses were evaluated longitudinally after one to three vaccine doses, with long-term follow-up for COVID-19-related clinical outcomes., Methods: A total of 849 participants (355 with cirrhosis, 74 with autoimmune hepatitis [AIH], 36 with vascular liver disease [VLD], 257 liver transplant recipients [LTRs] and 127 healthy controls [HCs]) were recruited from four countries. Standardised immune assays were performed pre and post three vaccine doses (V1-3)., Results: In the total cohort, there were incremental increases in antibody titres after each vaccine dose (p <0.0001). Factors associated with reduced antibody responses were age and LT, whereas heterologous vaccination, prior COVID-19 and mRNA platforms were associated with greater responses. Although antibody titres decreased between post-V2 and pre-V3 (p = 0.012), patients with AIH, VLD, and cirrhosis had equivalent antibody responses to HCs post-V3. LTRs had lower and more heterogenous antibody titres than other groups, including post-V3 where 9% had no detectable antibodies; this was heavily influenced by intensity of immunosuppression. Vaccination increased T-cell IFNγ responses in all groups except LTRs. Patients with liver disease had lower functional antibody responses against nine Omicron subvariants and reduced T-cell responses to Omicron BA.1-specific peptides compared to wild-type. 122 cases of breakthrough COVID-19 were reported of which 5/122 (4%) were severe. Of the severe cases, 4/5 (80%) occurred in LTRs and 2/5 (40%) had no serological response post-V2., Conclusion: After three COVID-19 vaccines, patients with liver disease generally develop robust antibody and T-cell responses to vaccination and have mild COVID-19. However, LTRs have sustained no/low antibody titres and appear most vulnerable to severe disease., Impact and Implications: Standardised assessments of the immune response to different COVID-19 vaccines in patients with liver disease are lacking. We performed antibody and T-cell assays at multiple timepoints following up to three vaccine doses in a large cohort of patients with a range of liver conditions. Overall, the three most widely available vaccine platforms were immunogenic and appeared to protect against severe breakthrough COVID-19. This will provide reassurance to patients with chronic liver disease who were deemed at high risk of severe COVID-19 during the pre-vaccination era, however, liver transplant recipients had the lowest antibody titres and remained vulnerable to severe breakthrough infection. We also characterise the immune response to multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants and describe the interaction between disease type, severity, and vaccine platform. These insights may prove useful in the event of future viral infections which also require rapid vaccine development and delivery to patients with liver disease., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: to evaluate the clinical impact of a protocol for the image-guided percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that includes cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), fusion imaging and ablation volume prediction in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma unsuitable for standard ultrasound (US) guidance., Materials and Methods: this study included all patients with HCC treated with MWA between January 2021 and June 2022 in a tertiary institution. Patients were divided into two groups: Group A, treated following the protocol, and Group B, treated with standard ultrasound (US) guidance. Follow-up images were reviewed to assess residual disease (RD), local tumor progression (LTP) and intrahepatic distant recurrence (IDR). Ablation response at 1 month was also evaluated according to mRECIST. Baseline variables and outcomes were compared between the groups. For 1-month RD, propensity score weighting (PSW) was performed., Results: 80 consecutive patients with 101 HCCs treated with MWA were divided into two groups. Group A had 41 HCCs in 37 patients, and Group B had 60 HCCs in 43 patients. Among all baseline variables, the groups differed regarding their age (mean of 72 years in Group A and 64 years in Group B, respectively), new vs. residual tumor rates (48% Group A vs. 25% Group B, p < 0.05) and number of subcapsular tumors (56.7% Group B vs. 31.7% Group A, p < 0.05) and perivascular tumors (51.7% Group B vs. 17.1% Group A, p < 0.05). The protocol led to repositioning the antenna in 49% of cases. There was a significant difference in 1-month local response between the groups measured as the RD rate and mRECIST outcomes. LTP rates at 3 and 6 months, and IDR rates at 1, 3 and 6 months, showed no significant differences. Among all variables, logistic regression after PSW demonstrated a protective effect of the protocol against 1-month RD., Conclusions: The use of CBCT, fusion imaging and ablation volume prediction during percutaneous MWA of HCCs provided a better 1-month tumor local control. Further studies with a larger population and longer follow-up are needed.

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

Introduction: Lenvatinib is indicated for the forefront treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC), but its use may be limited by the risk of esophagogastric varices (EGV) bleeding. This study assessed the prevalence, predictors, and complications of EGV in aHCC patients treated with lenvatinib., Methods: In this multicenter international retrospective study, cirrhotic patients treated with lenvatinib for aHCC, were enrolled if upper-gastrointestinal endoscopy was available within 6 months before treatment. Primary endpoint was the incidence of EGV bleeding during lenvatinib therapy; secondary endpoints were predictors for EGV bleeding, prevalence, and risk factors for the presence of EGV and high-risk EGV at baseline, as well as impact of EGV bleeding on patients' survival., Results: 535 patients were enrolled in the study (median age: 72 years, 78% male, 63% viral etiology, 89% Child-Pugh A, 16% neoplastic portal vein thrombosis [nPVT], 56% Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer-C): 234 had EGV (44%), 70 (30%) were at high risk and 59 were on primary prophylaxis. During lenvatinib treatment, 17 patients bled from EGV (3 grade 5), the 12-month cumulative incidence being 3%. The only baseline independent predictor of EGV bleeding was the presence of baseline high-risk EGV (hazard ratio: 6.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.23-21.57, p = 0.001). In these patients the 12-month risk was 17%. High-risk varices were independently associated with Child-Pugh B score (odds ratio [OR]: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.08-4.17, p = 0.03), nPVT (OR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.40-4.61, p = 0.002), and platelets <150,000/μL (OR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.35-4.50, p = 0.003)., Conclusion: In hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with lenvatinib, the risk of EGV bleeding was mostly low but significant only in patients with high-risk EGV at baseline., Competing Interests: M. Iavarone: speaking/teaching, consultant, and advisory board for Bayer, Gilead Sciences, BMS, Janssen, Ipsen, MSD, BTG-Boston Scientific, AbbVie, Guerbet, EISAI, Roche, and AstraZeneca; C. Soldà: consulting/advisory role for MSD and EISAI; speakers’ bureau for Roche and MSD; C. Yoo: received honoraria from Servier, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Eisai, Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Debiopharm, Ipsen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Boryung Pharmaceuticals, Merck Serono, Mundipharma, Roche, and Janssen; and received research grants from Servier, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Celgene, Ipsen, Boryung Pharmaceuticals, Ildong Pharmaceutical, and Chong Kun Dang Pharm.; F. Piscaglia: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bracco, EISAI, Esaote, Exact Sciences, IPSEN, MSD, Roche, Samsung, and Tiziana Life Sciences; P. Lampertico: advisory board/speaker bureau for BMS, Roche, Gilead Sciences, GSK, AbbVie, MSD, Arrowhead, Alnylam, Janssen, SPRING Bank, MYR, Eiger, Aligos, Antios, and Vir., (© 2023 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Introduction: The aim of this retrospective proof-of-concept study was to compare different second-line treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and progressive disease (PD) after first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab., Materials and Methods: A total of 1381 patients had PD at first-line therapy. 917 patients received lenvatinib as first-line treatment, and 464 patients atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as first-line., Results: 49.6% of PD patients received a second-line therapy without any statistical difference in overall survival (OS) between lenvatinib (20.6months) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line (15.7months; p = 0.12; hazard ratio [HR]= 0.80). After lenvatinib first-line, there wasn't any statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p = 0.27; sorafenib HR: 1; immunotherapy HR: 0.69; other therapies HR: 0.85). Patients who underwent trans-arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) had a significative longer OS than patients who received sorafenib (24.7 versus 15.8months, p < 0.01; HR=0.64). After atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line, there was a statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p < 0.01; sorafenib HR: 1; lenvatinib HR: 0.50; cabozantinib HR: 1.29; other therapies HR: 0.54). Patients who received lenvatinib (17.0months) and those who underwent TACE (15.9months) had a significative longer OS than patients treated with sorafenib (14.2months; respectively, p = 0.01; HR=0.45, and p < 0.05; HR=0.46)., Conclusion: Approximately half of patients receiving first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab access second-line treatment. Our data suggest that in patients progressed to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is lenvatinib, while in patients progressed to lenvatinib, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is immunotherapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: A.C.G. is an advisor for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, GSK, and MSD; received grants and personal fees from Bayer, Eisai, and MSD. M.S. is an advisor for AMGEN, Eisai, MERCK, MSD, and SERVIER. M.K. received research grant from AbbVie, Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Medico’s Hirata, MSD, Otsuka, Sumitomo Dainippon, Takeda, and Taiho; received advisory consulting fee from BMS, Chugai, Eisai, MSD, Ono pharmaceutical, and Taiho; received lecture fee from Bayer, Chugai, EA Pharma, Eisai, and MSD. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare response rates of lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in first-line real-world setting., Methods: Overall cohort included Western and Eastern hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patient populations from 46 centres in 4 countries (Italy, Germany, Japan, and Republic of Korea)., Results: 1312 patients were treated with lenvatinib, and 823 patients were treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Objective response rate (ORR) was 38.6% for patients receiving lenvatinib, and 27.3% for patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (p < 0.01; odds ratio 0.60). For patients who achieved complete response (CR), overall survival (OS) was not reached in both arms, but the result from univariate Cox regression model showed 62% reduction of death risk for patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (p = 0.05). In all multivariate analyses, treatment arm was not found to be an independent factor conditioning OS. Comparing ORR achieved in the two arms, there was a statistically significant difference in favor of lenvatinib compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in all subgroups except for Eastern patients, Child-Pugh B patients, presence of portal vein thrombosis, α-feto-protein ≥ 400 ng/mL, presence of extrahepatic disease, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 2, and no previous locoregional procedures., Conclusion: Lenvatinib achieves higher ORR in all patient subgroups. Patients who achieve CR with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab can achieve OS so far never recorded in HCC patients. This study did not highlight any factors that could identify patient subgroups capable of obtaining CR., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Advances in the surgical and systemic therapeutic landscape of hepatocellular carcinoma have increased the complexity of patient management. A dynamic adaptation of the available staging-based algorithms is required to allow flexible therapeutic allocation. In particular, real-world hepatocellular carcinoma management increasingly relies on factors independent of oncological staging, including patients' frailty, comorbid burden, critical tumour location, multiple liver functional parameters, and specific technical contraindications impacting the delivery of treatment and resource availability. In this Policy Review we critically appraise how treatment allocation strictly based on pretreatment staging features has shifted towards a more personalised treatment approach, in which expert tumour boards assume a central role. We propose an evidence-based framework for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment based on the novel concept of multiparametric therapeutic hierarchy, in which different therapeutic options are ordered according to their survival benefit (ie, from surgery to systemic therapy). Moreover, we introduce the concept of converse therapeutic hierarchy, in which therapies are ordered according to their conversion abilities or adjuvant abilities (ie, from systemic therapy to surgery)., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests GC declares consulting fees from Bayer, Roche, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Eisai, and AstraZeneca. MI declares consulting fees and honoraria for lectures from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Roche, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Eisai. DJP declares grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and GlaxoSmithKline; consulting fees from Mina Therapeutics, Eisai, Roche, Avamune, DaVolterra, Mursla, H3B, Ipsen, Exact Sciences, and AstraZeneca; payment for lectures from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Eisai; participation on advisory boards from Mina Therapeutics, Eisai, Roche, Avamune, DaVolterra, Mursla, H3B, Ipsen, LIfT Biosciences, Exact Sciences, and AstraZeneca. CC declares advisory board and speaker fees from Eisai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Ipsen. GG declares honoraria from Roche and Eisai. LC declares consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Biomedical, GEM, and Terumo; and payment for lectures from Angiodynamics, AstraZeneca, Boston, Cascination, Terumo, Varian, and Esaote. EGG declares honoraria for lectures from Eisai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and AstraZeneca. FF declares honoraria from Roche and Eisai. FT declares research funding from Roche, AbbVie, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Bayer; consulting fees and advisory boards from Roche, AstraZeneca, Eisai, and Bayer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is one of the leading causes of cardiovascular death in general population. SCD primary prevention requires the correct selection of patients at increased risk who may benefit from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Despite several non-invasive arrhythmic risk indexes are available, their ability to stratify the SCD risk among asymptomatic patients with cardiac disease at increased arrhythmic risk is debated. The programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) is an invasive approach historically used for SCD risk stratification in patients with acquired or inherited cardiac disease and is currently included in international guidelines. Aim of this review is to summarize all available data about the role of PVS for the SCD risk stratification in different clinical settings., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest. Saverio Muscoli, Giuseppe Mascia and Vincenzo Russo are serving as Guest Editors of this journal. We declare that Saverio Muscoli, Giuseppe Mascia and Vincenzo Russo had no involvement in the peer review of this article and have no access to information regarding its peer review. Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to Bernard Belhassen., (Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s). Published by IMR Press.)

Introduction: Immune check point inhibitors have recently entered the armamentarium of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment. Among them, the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has pushed it a step forward; however, a number of patients still present primary non-responses without any biomarker to predict responses to different options. Here, we aimed to identify a putative baseline biomarker to predict the response to atezolizumab-bevacizumab, by investigating whether baseline PD1+ and PD-L1+ peripheral granulocyte percentages might offer a non-invasive, cheap, and easily feasible assay., Methods: A prospective Italian cohort of 34 patients treated by atezolizumab-bevacizumab was tested to assay the baseline percentage of peripheral granulocytes and their PD1 and PD-L1 expression. The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was also considered, and all data were compared with the clinical course of patients., Results: A low-baseline PD1+ peripheral granulocyte percentage turned out to predict responder patients (mean ±SD of PD1+ granulocyte percentage in responders versus non-responders: 9.9 ± 9.1 vs. 29.2 ± 17.6; student's t -test, p < 0.01). In line, patients identified by a low PD1+ granulocyte percentage displayed a longer TTP (log-rank test, p < 0.0001). A lower granulocyte percentage on total white blood cells, irrespective of PD1 or PD-L1 expression, is also associated with responses to atezolizumab-bevacizumab (log-rank test, p < 0.05). No predictive value was observed for either the PD-L1+ granulocyte percentage or NLR., Conclusions: A low-baseline PD1+ peripheral granulocyte percentage is associated with responses to atezolizumab-bevacizumab treatment in advanced HCC. These findings encourage evaluating this minimally invasive, cheap, and easy test in further independent cohorts and outlining the relevance of innate immunity in the response to immune-checkpoint inhibitors.

Background and Aims: COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were approved to prevent severe forms of the disease, but their immunogenicity and safety in cirrhosis is poorly known., Method: In this prospective single-center study enrolling patients with cirrhosis undergoing COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273), we assessed humoral and cellular responses vs healthy controls, the incidence of breakthrough infections and adverse events (AEs). Antibodies against spike- and nucleocapsid-protein (anti-S and anti-N) and Spike-specific T-cells responses were quantified at baseline, 21 days after the first and second doses and during follow-up., Results: 182 cirrhotics (85% SARS-CoV-2-naïve) and 38 controls were enrolled. After 2 doses of vaccine, anti-S titres were significantly lower in cirrhotics vs controls [1,751 (0.4-25,000) U/mL vs 4,523 (259-25,000) U/mL, p=0.012] and in SARS-CoV-2-naïve vs previously infected cirrhotics [999 (0.4-17,329) U/mL vs 7,500 (12.5-25,000) U/mL, (p<0.001)]. T-cell responses in cirrhotics were similar to controls, although with different kinetics. In SARS-CoV-2-naïve cirrhotics, HCC, Child-Pugh B/C and BNT162b2 were independent predictors of low response. Neither unexpected nor severe AEs emerged. During follow-up, 2% turned SARS-CoV-2 positive, all asymptomatic., Conclusion: Humoral response to COVID-19 vaccines appeared suboptimal in patients with cirrhosis, particularly in SARS-CoV-2-naïve decompensated cirrhotics, although cellular response appeared preserved, and low breakthrough infections rate was registered., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest MI: Speaking/Teaching, consultant and advisory board for Bayer, Gilead Sciences, BMS, Janssen, Ipsen, MSD, BTG-Boston Scientific, AbbVie, Guerbet, EISAI, Roche. BA: A patent for a method to monitor SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cells in biological samples pending. PL: Advisory Board/Speaker Bureau for BMS, ROCHE, GILEAD SCIENCES, GSK, ABBVIE, MSD, ARROWHEAD, ALNYLAM, JANSSEN, SBRING BANK, MYR, EIGER, ALIGOS, ANTIOS, VIR., (Copyright © 2022 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib have not been compared in a randomised controlled trial. We conducted a retrospective multi-centre study to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and atezolizumab with bevacizumab as a first-line treatment for patients with unresectable HCC in the real-world scenario., Methods: Clinical features of lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab patients were balanced through inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology, which weights patients' characteristics and measured outcomes of each patient in both treatment arms. Overall survival (OS) was the primary end-point., Results: The analysis included 1341 patients who received lenvatinib, and 864 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. After IPTW adjustment, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab did not show a survival advantage over lenvatinib HR 0.97 (p = 0.739). OS was prolonged by atezolizumab plus bevacizumab over lenvatinib in viral patients (HR: 0.76; p = 0.024). Conversely, OS was prolonged by lenvatinib in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis/non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (HR: 1.88; p = 0.014). In the IPTW-adjusted population, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab provided better safety profile for most of the recorded adverse events., Conclusion: Our study did not identify any meaningful difference in OS between atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib. Although some hints are provided suggesting that patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis/non-alcoholic fatty liver disease might benefit more from lenvatinib therapy and patients with viral aetiology more from atezolizumab plus bevacizumab., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests. L Rimassa has received consulting fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, BMS, Celgene, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, IQVIA, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Taiho Oncology, Zymeworks; lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi; 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. A.C.G. has received grants and personal fees from MSD, Eisai, Bayer, and is an advisor for MSD, Eisai, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca and GSK. M.K. has received grants from Taiho Pharmaceuticals, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Otsuka, Takeda, Sumitomo Dainippon-Sumitomo, Daiichi Sankyo, AbbVie, Astellas Pharma, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; has received grants and personal fees from MSD, Eisai, and Bayer, and is an adviser for MSD, Eisai, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and ONO Pharmaceutical. F.P. has received consulting or lecture fees from Consulting or lecture fees in the last two years from: Astrazeneca, Bayer, Bracco, EISAI, ESAOTE, Exact Sciences, IPSEN; MSD; Roche, Samsung, Tiziana Life Sciences. F.F received speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Abbvie, Eisai and CSL Behring and received travel support from Ipsen. T.P. consults for and received grants from Bayer. She also received grants from Lilly and Roche. There are no conflicts of interest among the other authors., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Lenvatinib is approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic or recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, clinical outcomes of lenvatinib therapy in patients with post-liver transplantation (LT) HCC recurrence remain unclear. We investigated the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in patients with post-LT HCC recurrence., Methods: This multinational, multicenter, retrospective study included 45 patients with recurrent HCC after LT who received lenvatinib at six institutions in three countries (Korea, Italy, and Hong Kong) from June 2017 to October 2021., Results: At the time of lenvatinib initiation, 95.6% (n = 43) of patients had Child-Pugh A status, and 35 (77.8%) and 10 (22.2%) participants were classified as having albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grades 1 and 2, respectively. The objective response rate was 20.0%. With a median follow-up duration of 12.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.2-14.7), the median progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were 7.6 (95% CI: 5.3-9.8) months, and 14.5 (95% CI: 0.8-28.2) months, respectively. Patients with ALBI grade 1 showed significantly better OS (52.3 months, [95% CI: not assessable]) than patients with ALBI grade 2 (11.1 months [95% CI: 0.0-30.4 months], p = 0.003). The most common adverse events were hypertension (n = 25, 55.6%), fatigue (n = 17, 37.8%), and anorexia (n = 14, 31.1%)., Conclusion: Lenvatinib showed consistent efficacy and toxicity profiles in patients with post-LT HCC recurrence that were comparable to those reported from previous studies among non-LT HCC patients. The baseline ALBI grade correlated with better OS in post-LT lenvatinib-treated patients., (© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Sorafenib and other tyrosine kinase inhibitors are the current standard of care for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurring after liver transplantation (LT). Sorafenib is sometimes regarded as a scarcely effective treatment in this setting because of some studies showing a short overall survival (OS) indirectly compared with historical series of nontransplanted patients. Additional data from multicenter prospective studies are needed before drawing definite conclusions., Methods: Retrospective analyses of a large prospective multicenter dataset of sorafenib-treated HCC patients to report the characteristics and outcomes of LT recipients (n = 81)., Results: At the baseline, LT patients had key prognostic features (high prevalence of metastatic disease, and low prevalence of macrovascular invasion, α-fetoprotein >400 ng/mL, ALBI grade >1, performance status >0) that differentiated them from the typical populations of non-LT patient reported in clinical trials and observational studies. Moreover, a relevant proportion of LT patients received concurrent locoregional (12.3%) and postprogression systemic treatments (34.2%), resulting in a median OS of 18.7 mo., Conclusions: Multimodal and sequential treatments are relatively frequent in post-LT HCC patients and contribute to a remarkable OS, together with favorable baseline characteristics. Despite the impossibility of matching with non-LT patients, our results indirectly suggest that the metastatic nature of post-LT recurrence and concurrent antirejection regimens should not discourage systemic treatments., Competing Interests: F.T. has served as a consultant for Bayer, Ipsen, and Eisai and an advisory board member for Laforce. M.I.: speaking/teaching, consultant, and the advisory board for Bayer, Gilead Sciences, BMS, Janssen, Ipsen, MSD, BTG-Boston Scientific, AbbVie, Guerbet, and EISAI. M.D.G. received honoraria for serving on advisory boards for Eisai and Bayer. F.T. is an advisor and a consultant for Bayer and an advisory board member for Sirtex, Alfasigma, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. F.P. is a consultant for AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, EISAI, GE, and Tiziana Life Sciences; Speaker bureau honoraria: Bayer AG, Bracco, EISAI, and Laforce; research contract with Esaote. A.G. has served as a consultant for Bayer. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Tumor ablation is included in several major cancer therapy guidelines. One technical challenge of percutaneous ablation is targeting and verification of complete treatment, which is prone to operator variabilities and human imperfections and are directly related to successful outcomes, risk for residual unablated tumor and local progression. The use of "Prediction Ablation Volume Software" may help the operating Interventional Radiologist to better plan, deliver, and verify before the ablation, via virtual treatment zones fused to target tumor. Fused and superimposed images provide 3-dimensional information from different timepoints, just when that information is most useful. The aim of this study is to evaluate the technical success and efficacy of an ablation treatment flowchart provided by a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) "Prediction Ablation Volume Software." This is a single-center retrospective study. From April 2021 to January 2022, 29 nonconsecutive evaluable patients with 32 lesions underwent liver ablation with Prediction Ablation Volume Software. Each patient was discussed in a multidisciplinary tumor board and underwent an enhanced computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging approximately 1 month before the procedure, as well as ∼1 month after. Technical success was defined as treatment of the tumor according to the protocol, covered completely by the Prediction Ablation Volume. Technical efficacy was defined as assessment of complete ablation of the target tumor at imaging follow up (∼1 month). Technical success, technical efficacy, and procedural factors were studied. Technical success was achieved in 30 of 32 liver lesions (94%), measuring 20 mm mean maximum diameter. The antenna was repositioned in 16 of 30 (53%) evaluable target lesions. Residual tumor was detected at 1 month imaging follow up in only 4 of 30 (13%) of the treated lesion. Technical efficacy was of 87% in this retrospective description of our process. The implementation of a CBCT Prediction Ablation Volume Software and flowchart for the treatment of liver malignancies altered the procedure, and demonstrated high technical success and efficacy. Such tools are potentially useful for procedural prediction and verification of ablation.

Benign liver lesions are increasingly diagnosed in daily clinical practice due to the growing use of imaging techniques for the study of the abdomen in patients who have non-specific symptoms and do not have an increased risk of hepatic malignancy. They include simple or parasitic hepatic cysts and solid benign tumors which differ widely in terms of prevalence, clinical relevance, symptoms and natural history and often lead to significant clinical problems relating to diagnosis and clinical management. Following the need to have updated guidelines on the management of benign focal liver lesions, the Scientific Societies mainly involved in their management have promoted the drafting of a new dedicated document. This document was drawn up according to the present Italian rules and methodologies necessary to produce clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic guidelines based on evidence. Here we present the second part of the guideline, concerning the diagnosis and clinical management of hemangioma, focal nodular hyperplasia, and hepatocellular adenoma., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The Authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest All authors have no conflicts of interest relating to this article.

Background: A growing body of evidence suggests that non-viral hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) might benefit less from immunotherapy., Materials and Methods: We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients with non-viral advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib, or sorafenib, in 36 centers in 4 countries (Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, and UK). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib, and OS and PFS with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib. For the primary and secondary endpoints, we carried out the analysis on the whole population first, and then we divided the cohort into two groups: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) population and non-NAFLD/NASH population., Results: One hundred and ninety patients received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, 569 patients received lenvatinib, and 210 patients received sorafenib. In the whole population, multivariate analysis showed that treatment with lenvatinib was associated with a longer OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.95; P = 0.0268] and PFS (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.51-0.86; P = 0.002) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the NAFLD/NASH population, multivariate analysis confirmed that lenvatinib treatment was associated with a longer OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.84; P = 0.0110) and PFS (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.38-0.82; P = 0.031) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the subgroup of non-NAFLD/NASH patients, no difference in OS or PFS was observed between patients treated with lenvatinib and those treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. All these results were confirmed following propensity score matching analysis. By comparing patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib, no statistically significant difference in survival was observed., Conclusions: The present analysis conducted on a large number of advanced non-viral HCC patients showed for the first time that treatment with lenvatinib is associated with a significant survival benefit compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in particular in patients with NAFLD/NASH-related HCC., Competing Interests: Disclosure 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; 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. ACG has received grants and personal fees from MSD, Eisai, Bayer, and is an advisor for MSD, Eisai, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and GSK. MK has received grants from Taiho Pharmaceuticals, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, Otsuka, Takeda, Sumitomo Dainippon-Sumitomo, Daiichi Sankyo, AbbVie, Astellas Pharma, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; has received grants and personal fees from MSD, Eisai, and Bayer; and is an adviser for MSD, Eisai, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, and ONO Pharmaceutical. FPi has received consulting or lecture fees from in the last 2 years from Astrazeneca, Bayer, Bracco, EISAI, ESAOTE, Exact Sciences, IPSEN, MSD, Roche, Samsung, and Tiziana Life Sciences. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Data sharing All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this article. Further enquiries can be directed to the corresponding author., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Benign liver lesions are increasingly diagnosed in daily clinical practice due to the growing use of imaging techniques for the study of the abdomen in patients who have non-specific symptoms and do not have an increased risk of hepatic malignancy. They include simple or parasitic cysts and solid benign tumors which differ widely in terms of prevalence, clinical relevance, symptoms and natural history and often lead to significant clinical problems relating to diagnosis and clinical management. Following the need to have updated guidelines on the management of benign focal liver lesions, the Scientific Societies mainly involved in their management have promoted the drafting of a new dedicated document. This document was drawn up according to the present Italian rules and methodologies necessary to produce clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic guidelines based on evidence. Here we present the first part of the guideline, concerning the characterization of focal hepatic lesions detected by ultrasound, and the diagnosis and clinical management of simple and parasitic hepatic cysts, and of polycystic liver disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)