Search

Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma that is amenable to embolisation; however, median progression-free survival is still approximately 7 months. We aimed to assess whether adding durvalumab, with or without bevacizumab, might improve progression-free survival.

Introduction:RATIONALE-301 (NCT03412773) was a global, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab with sorafenib as first-line (1L) treatment in adult patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that met its primary endpoint of noninferiority in overall survival (OS). This analysis compared health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) outcomes between the arms. Methods:Systemic therapy-naive adults with HCC were randomized 1:1 to receive tislelizumab (n= 342) or sorafenib (n= 332). HRQOL was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-HCC18, and EQ-5D-5L. At cycles 4 and 6, a mixed model for repeated measures was performed using key-prespecified patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoints of the QLQ-C30 and the QLQ-HCC18. Time to deterioration was analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method using the PRO endpoints. Results:At cycles 4 and 6, patients in the tislelizumab arm had better HRQOL outcomes than the patients in the sorafenib arm per mean-change difference in GHS/QOL, QLQ-C30 physical functioning and fatigue, and QLQ-HCC18 symptom index; however, no differences for pain were observed. Patients in the tislelizumab arm had lower risk of deterioration in GHS/QOL (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.49–0.94), QLQ-C30 physical functioning (HR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.32–0.63) and fatigue (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.36–0.61), QLQ-HCC18 symptom index (HR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.34–0.81), and HCC-specific fatigue (HR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.45–0.79). For pain, both arms had similar risk of deterioration (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.56–1.09). At cycles 4 and 6, patients in the tislelizumab arm maintained in EQ-5D-5L visual analog scale, whereas scores decreased for the patients in the sorafenib arm. Conclusion:Patients with 1L HCC treated with tislelizumab had favorable HRQOL outcomes compared with patients treated with sorafenib, particularly in fatigue and physical functioning. These results, along with favorable safety profile, better response rate, and OS noninferiority, support tislelizumab as a potential 1L treatment option for unresectable HCC.

Introduction:In REFLECT, lenvatinib was noninferior to sorafenib in terms of overall survival (OS) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC; median 13.6 vs. 12.3 months; HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79–1.06). The objective response rate (ORR) with lenvatinib was 18.8% by blinded independent imaging review (IIR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1); per modified RECIST (mRECIST), the ORR was 40.6%. We sought to further characterize these tumor responses and explore ORR’s importance among outcomes for patients with HCC. Methods:Efficacy assessments included all patients randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib treatment (if bodyweight ≥60 kg, 12 mg/day; if <60 kg, 8 mg/day). Time to first objective response (TTR) and duration of response (DOR) included patients who achieved a partial or complete tumor response. Tumors were assessed by IIR per RECIST v1.1 or mRECIST. Results:Four hundred seventy-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib. By IIR, 90 patients (18.8%) achieved an objective response per RECIST v1.1, and 194 (40.6%) had an objective response per mRECIST. Median TTR/DOR were 2.8 months/7.4 months in responders per RECIST v1.1, and 1.9 months/7.3 months in responders per mRECIST, respectively. Per baseline disease characteristics, ORRs by Child-Pugh score (A5/A6) were 21.2%/11.2% per RECIST v1.1 and 42.9%/33.6% per mRECIST, respectively. By baseline alpha-fetoprotein level (<400/≥400 ng/mL), ORRs were 21.4%/15.4% per RECIST v1.1 and 45.6%/33.8% per mRECIST, respectively. Incidences of treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were 98.9% in responders per RECIST v1.1 and 97.9% in responders per mRECIST. Conclusions:Responses were seen even in those patients with more severe disease at baseline. Tumor responses occurred early and were durable.

In the preplanned interim analysis of the TOPAZ-1 study, durvalumab plus gemcitabine–cisplatin significantly improved overall survival versus placebo plus gemcitabine–cisplatin in participants with advanced biliary tract cancer. We aimed to report updated overall survival and safety data from TOPAZ-1 with additional follow-up and data maturity beyond the interim analysis.

The aim of the COSMIC-312 trial was to evaluate cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib in patients with previously untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. In the initial analysis, cabozantinib plus atezolizumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus sorafenib. Here, we report the pre-planned final overall survival analysis and updated safety and efficacy results following longer follow-up.

No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after curative-intent resection or ablation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma.

The vascular endothelial growth factor pathway plays a key role in the pathogenesis of gastric cancer. In the multicenter, double-blind phase 3 FRUTIGA trial, 703 patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma who progressed on fluorouracil- and platinum-containing chemotherapy were randomized (1:1) to receive fruquintinib (an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1/2/3; 4 mg orally, once daily) or placebo for 3 weeks, followed by 1 week off, plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2intravenously on days 1/8/15 per cycle). The study results were positive as one of the dual primary endpoints, progression-free survival (PFS), was met (median PFS, 5.6 months in the fruquintinib arm versus 2.7 months in the placebo arm; hazard ratio 0.57; 95% confidence interval 0.48–0.68; P< 0.0001). The other dual primary endpoint, overall survival (OS), was not met (median OS, 9.6 months versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.81–1.13; P= 0.6064). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia, leukopenia and anemia. Fruquintinib plus paclitaxel as a second-line treatment significantly improved PFS, but not OS, in Chinese patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and could potentially be another treatment option for these patients. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03223376.

Introduction:In the Phase 3 IMbrave150 trial (NCT03434379), atezolizumab + bevacizumab demonstrated a clinically meaningful survival benefit over sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including those with hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. We used IMbrave150 data to investigate the safety and risk of viral reactivation or flare in infected patients treated with atezolizumab + bevacizumab or sorafenib. Methods:Patients with unresectable HCC not previously treated with systemic therapy were randomized 2:1 to atezolizumab + bevacizumab or sorafenib. In this exploratory analysis, safety was continually evaluated, including for hepatic adverse events. Patients were monitored for HBV and HCV reactivation and flare at screening, the beginning of Cycles 5 and 9, and at treatment discontinuation. Results:Of 501 enrolled patients, 485 were included in the safety population; 329 (68%) received atezolizumab + bevacizumab, and 156 (32%) received sorafenib. Overall, 150 (31%) and 58 (12%) patients had HBV and HCV infections, respectively. The safety profiles of atezolizumab + bevacizumab and sorafenib were consistent across patients, regardless of viral infection. Overall, hepatic serious adverse events occurred in 11% of patients receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab and 8% receiving sorafenib. HBV or HCV reactivation occurred in 2% or 16% of atezolizumab + bevacizumab-treated patients, respectively, versus 7% or 14% with sorafenib. There were no instances of hepatitis flare with atezolizumab + bevacizumab. Conclusions:Atezolizumab + bevacizumab had a similar hepatic safety profile in patients with and without HBV or HCV infection. Viral reactivation rates were similar between arms. Overall, these data support the use of atezolizumab + bevacizumab in patients with HCC and HBV or HCV infection without any special precaution.

IMPORTANCE: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality, and additional first-line treatments are needed. The programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor tislelizumab demonstrated efficacy and a tolerable safety profile as second-line HCC treatment. OBJECTIVE: To investigate efficacy and safety of tislelizumab vs sorafenib tosylate for first-line treatment of unresectable HCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The open-label, global, multiregional phase 3 RATIONALE-301 randomized clinical trial enrolled systemic therapy–naive adults with histologically confirmed HCC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, disease progression following (or patient was not amenable to) locoregional therapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, and Child-Pugh class A, between December 27, 2017, and October 2, 2019. Data cutoff was July 11, 2022. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive tislelizumab, 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, or sorafenib tosylate, 400 mg orally twice daily. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included objective response rate, progression-free survival, duration of response, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 674 patients were included in the analysis (570 men [84.6%]; median age, 61 years [range, 23-86 years]). As of July 11, 2022, minimum study follow-up was 33 months. The primary end point of OS noninferiority of tislelizumab vs sorafenib was met in the intention-to-treat population (n = 674); median overall survival was 15.9 (95% CI, 13.2-19.7) months vs 14.1 (95% CI, 12.6-17.4) months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85 [95.003% CI, 0.71-1.02]), and superiority of tislelizumab vs sorafenib was not met. The objective response rate was 14.3% (n = 49) for tislelizumab vs 5.4% (n = 18) for sorafenib, and median duration of response was 36.1 (95% CI, 16.8 to not evaluable) months vs 11.0 (95% CI, 6.2-14.7) months, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.1 (95% CI, 2.1-3.5) months vs 3.4 (95% CI, 2.2-4.1) months with tislelizumab vs sorafenib (HR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.92-1.33]). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) was 96.2% (325 of 338 patients) for tislelizumab and 100% (n = 324) for sorafenib. Grade 3 or greater treatment-related AEs were reported in 75 patients (22.2%) receiving tislelizumab and 173 (53.4%) receiving sorafenib. There was a lower incidence of treatment-related AEs leading to drug discontinuation (21 [6.2%] vs 33 [10.2%]) and drug modification (68 [20.1%] vs 187 [57.7%]) with tislelizumab vs sorafenib. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In RATIONALE-301, tislelizumab demonstrated OS benefit that was noninferior vs sorafenib, with a higher objective response rate and more durable responses, while median progression-free survival was longer with sorafenib. Tislelizumab demonstrated a favorable safety profile vs sorafenib. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03412773

Introduction:KEYNOTE-394 showed pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate with manageable safety versus placebo for patients from Asia with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We present results on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods:HRQoL was evaluated using the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaires. Key HRQoL endpoints were least squares mean (LSM) score changes from baseline to week 12 and time to deterioration (TTD) for EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL. pvalues were one-sided and nominal without adjustment for multiplicity. Results:The HRQoL population included patients randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n =298) and placebo (n =152). From baseline to week 12, a greater decline in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL score was observed with placebo (LSM, −8.4; 95% CI: −11.7 to −5.1) versus pembrolizumab (−4.0; 95% CI: −6.4 to −1.6; difference vs. placebo: 4.4; 95% CI: 0.5–8.4; nominal p= 0.0142). Similarly, a greater decline in the EQ-5D-3L visual analog scale score was observed with placebo (−6.9; 95% CI: −9.4 to −4.5) versus pembrolizumab (−2.7; 95% CI: −4.5 to −1.0; difference vs. placebo: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.2–7.2; nominal p= 0.0030). TTD in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL score was similar between arms (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI: 0.58–1.25; nominal p= 0.1993). Conclusion:Patients receiving placebo showed a greater decline in HRQoL than those receiving pembrolizumab. Combined with efficacy and safety data from KEYNOTE-394 and the global KEYNOTE-240 and KEYNOTE-224 trials, our data support the clinically meaningful benefit and manageable tolerability of pembrolizumab as second-line therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Biliary tract cancers, which arise from the intrahepatic or extrahepatic bile ducts and the gallbladder, generally have a poor prognosis and are rising in incidence worldwide. The standard-of-care treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer is chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Because most biliary tract cancers have an immune-suppressed microenvironment, immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy is associated with a low objective response rate. We aimed to assess whether adding the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin would improve outcomes compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.

AST-3424 is a novel specific aldo-keto reductase 1C3 (AKR1C3) prodrug that releases a DNA alkylating reagent upon reduction by AKR1C3. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AST-3424 in patient-derived tumor xenograft (PDTX) model and orthotopic model against hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Background:Primary liver cancer, of which around 75–85% is hepatocellular carcinoma in China, is the fourth most common malignancy and the second leading cause of tumor-related death, thereby posing a significant threat to the life and health of the Chinese people. Summary:Since the publication of Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Primary Liver Cancer in China in June 2017, which were updated by the National Health Commission in December 2019, additional high-quality evidence has emerged from researchers worldwide regarding the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of liver cancer, that requires the guidelines to be updated again. The new edition (2022 Edition) was written by more than 100 experts in the field of liver cancer in China, which not only reflects the real-world situation in China but also may reshape the nationwide diagnosis and treatment of liver cancer. Key Messages:The new guideline aims to encourage the implementation of evidence-based practice and improve the national average 5-year survival rate for patients with liver cancer, as proposed in the “Health China 2030 Blueprint.”

Introduction:Intratumoral administration of pexa-vec (pexastimogene devacirepvec), an oncolytic and immunotherapeutic vaccinia virus, given to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is associated with both local and distant tumor responses. We hypothesized subsequent treatment with sorafenib could demonstrate superior efficacy. Methods:This random phase III open-label study evaluated the sequential treatment with pexa-vec followed by sorafenib compared to sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC and no prior systemic treatment. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Key secondary endpoints included time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival, overall response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR). Safety was assessed in all patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment. Results:The study was conducted at 142 sites in 16 countries. From December 30, 2015, to the interim analysis on August 2, 2019, 459 patients were randomly assigned (pexa-vec plus sorafenib: 234, sorafenib: 225). At the interim analysis, the median OS was 12.7 months (95% CI: 9.89, 14.95) in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib arm and 14.0 months (95% CI: 11.01, 18.00) in the sorafenib arm. This led to the early termination of the study. The median TTP was 2.0 months (95% CI: 1.77, 2.96) and 4.2 months (95% CI: 2.92, 4.63); ORR was 19.2% (45 patients) and 20.9% (47 patients); and DCR was 50.0% (117 patients) and 57.3% (129 patients) in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib and sorafenib arms, respectively. Serious adverse events were reported in 117 (53.7%) patients in the pexa-vec plus sorafenib and 77 (35.5%) patients in the sorafenib arm. Liver failure was the most frequently reported in both groups. Conclusion:Sequential pexa-vec plus sorafenib treatment did not demonstrate increased clinical benefit in advanced HCC and fared worse compared to sorafenib alone. The advent of the added value of checkpoint inhibitors should direct any further development of oncolytic virus therapy strategies.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with radioactive iodine–refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RAIR-DTC) have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of apatinib, a highly selective vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGFR-2) inhibitor, in patients with progressive locally advanced or metastatic RAIR-DTC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (Efficacy of Apatinib in Radioactive Iodine-refractory Differentiated Thyroid Cancer [REALITY]) was conducted in 92 patients with progressive locally advanced or metastatic RAIR-DTC between February 17, 2017, and March 2, 2020, at 21 sites within China, and the data cutoff date for this analysis was March 25, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to apatinib, 500 mg/d, or placebo. Patients who developed progression while receiving placebo were allowed to cross over to apatinib. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response, time to objective response, and safety. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed to evaluate efficacy. RESULTS: Of the 92 patients included in the trial, 56 were women (60.9%); mean (SD) age at baseline was 55.7 (10.6) years. Patients were randomized to the apatinib (n = 46) or placebo (n = 46) group. The median follow-up duration was 18.1 (IQR, 12.7-22.2) months. The median PFS was 22.2 (95% CI, 10.91-not reached) months for apatinib vs 4.5 (95% CI, 1.94-9.17) months for placebo (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.47; P &lt; .001). The confirmed ORR was 54.3% (95% CI, 39.0%-69.1%) and the DCR was 95.7% (95% CI, 85.2%-99.5%) in the apatinib group vs an ORR of 2.2% (95% CI, 0.1%-11.5%) and DCR of 58.7% (95% CI, 43.2%-73.0%) in the placebo group. The median overall survival was not reached for apatinib (95% CI, 26.25-not reached) and was 29.9 months (95% CI, 18.96-not reached) for placebo (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18-0.97; P = .04). The most common grade 3 or higher-level treatment-related adverse events in the apatinib group were hypertension (16 [34.8%]), hand-foot syndrome (8 [17.4%]), proteinuria (7 [15.2%]), and diarrhea (7 [15.2%])—none of which occurred in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The REALITY trial met its primary end point of PFS at the prespecified interim analysis. Apatinib showed significant clinical benefits in both prolonged PFS and overall survival with a manageable safety profile in patients with progressive locally advanced or metastatic RAIR-DTC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03048877

Background:Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of liver cancer and causes many cancer-related deaths worldwide; in China, it is the second most prevalent cause of cancer deaths. Most patients are diagnosed clinically with advanced stage disease. Summary:For more than a decade, sorafenib, a small-molecular-weight tyrosine kinase inhibitor (SMW-TKI) was the only molecular targeted drug available with a survival benefit for the treatment of advanced HCC. With the development of novel TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced HCC, the management of patients has been greatly improved. However, though angiogenic-based targeted therapy remains the backbone for the systemic treatment of HCC, to date, no Chinese guidelines for novel molecular targeted therapies to treat advanced HCC have been established. Our interdisciplinary panel on the treatment of advanced HCC comprising hepatologists, hepatobiliary surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, pathologists, orthopedic surgeons, traditional Chinese medicine physicians, and interventional radiologists has reviewed the literature in order to develop updated treatment regimens. Key Messages:Panel consensus statements for the appropriate use of new molecular -targeted drugs including doses, combination therapies, adverse reaction management as well as efficacy evaluation, and predictions for treatment of advanced HCC with evidence levels based on published data are presented, thereby providing an overview of molecular targeted therapies for healthcare professionals.

Introduction:In a multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized, phase 2 study for pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), camrelizumab showed potent antitumor activity and acceptable safety profile. The aim of this report was to provide long-term data and evaluate potential benefit of treatment with camrelizumab beyond progression. Methods:From November 15, 2016, to November 16, 2017, 217 patients received camrelizumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 or 3 weeks. Treatment beyond first Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)-defined progression (TBP) with camrelizumab was allowed. Results:At data cutoff of December 16, 2019 (>2 years after the last patient enrollment; median duration of follow-up, 13.2 months [IQR 5.7–25.8]), 14 (43.8%) of the 32 responses per blinded independent central review were ongoing. The median duration of response was not reached (range 2.5–30.5 + months). The ongoing response rates at 12, 18, and 24 months were 68.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 47.7–82.2), 59.8% (95% CI 38.8–75.6), and 53.1% (95% CI 31.0–71.0), respectively. The median overall survival (OS) was 14.2 months (95% CI 11.5–16.3). The 18- and 24-month OS rates were 41.3% (95% CI 34.6–47.9) and 33.7% (95% CI 27.3–40.2), respectively. Of the 172 patients who experienced RECIST-defined progression per investigator, 102 received TBP, while 70 did not (non-TBP). The median OS was 16.9 months (95% CI 13.3–22.6) in the TBP group versus 9.4 months (95% CI 5.8–14.8) in the non-TBP group, and the 18- and 24-month OS rates were 47.5% (95% CI 37.3–56.9) versus 33.1% (95% CI 22.3–44.3) and 38.8% (95% CI 29.2–48.4) versus 23.2% (95% CI 13.8–34.1), respectively. No new safety signals of camrelizumab were observed. Conclusions:With prolonged follow-up, camrelizumab continues to demonstrate the durable response and long survival in pretreated advanced HCC patients with manageable toxicities, especially in those who continued the treatment beyond first RECIST-defined progression.

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the third-leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Preservation of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) during treatment is an important therapeutic goal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of treatment with lenvatinib versus sorafenib on HRQOL.

Introduction:Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in IMbrave150. Efficacy and safety data from the Chinese subpopulation are reported. Methods:IMbrave150, a global, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study in patients with systemic treatment-naive unresectable HCC, included an extension phase that enrolled additional patients from mainland China. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive intravenous atezolizumab 1,200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg once every 3 weeks or sorafenib 400 mg twice a day until unacceptable toxicity or loss of clinical benefit. Co-primary endpoints were OS and independent review facility-assessed PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population. Results:Of 194 Chinese patients enrolled from April 16, 2018, to April 8, 2019 (137 in the global study and 57 in the China extension phase), 133 received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 61 received sorafenib. At the data cutoff (August 29, 2019), the stratified hazard ratio for OS was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.25–0.76) and for PFS was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.40–0.90). The respective median OS and PFS with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab were not reached (NR; 95% CI, 13.5 months to NR) and 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.2–8.3) versus 11.4 months (95% CI, 6.7 to NR) and 3.2 months (95% CI, 2.6–4.8) with sorafenib. Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 78 of 132 (59.1%) atezolizumab plus bevacizumab-treated and 27 of 58 (46.6%) sorafenib-treated patients. The most common grade 3–4 AE with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was hypertension, occurring in 15.2% of patients; however, other high-grade AEs were infrequent. Conclusion:Clinically meaningful improvements in OS and PFS observed with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib suggest that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab may become a practice-changing treatment for Chinese patients with unresectable HCC.

Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) has shown antitumour activity in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but few studies of VEGFR inhibitors have been done in populations with a high prevalence of hepatitis B virus infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apatinib in patients with pretreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2, also known as ERBB2) amplification or overexpression occurs in approximately 20% of advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinomas1–3. More than a decade ago, combination therapy with the anti-HER2 antibody trastuzumab and chemotherapy became the standard first-line treatment for patients with these types of tumours4. Although adding the anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) antibody pembrolizumab to chemotherapy does not significantly improve efficacy in advanced HER2-negative gastric cancer5, there are preclinical6–19and clinical20,21rationales for adding pembrolizumab in HER2-positive disease. Here we describe results of the protocol-specified first interim analysis of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III KEYNOTE-811 study of pembrolizumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy for unresectable or metastatic, HER2-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma22(https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03615326). We show that adding pembrolizumab to trastuzumab and chemotherapy markedly reduces tumour size, induces complete responses in some participants, and significantly improves objective response rate.

ABSTRACTGinsenoside Rg3, a natural compound, has been reported to function as an anticancer agent for hepatoma carcinoma, while the mechanisms underlying the anticancer effects are not clear. Therefore, the objective of our study was to explore the impact of RG3 on cell migration and invasion by regulating the lncRNA HOX antisense intergenic (HOTAIR) expression involving PI3K/AKT signaling pathway. qRT-PCR was utilized to measure the mRNA expression of HOTAIR. Furthermore, HOTAIR overexpression plasmids were transfected to SMMC-7721 and SK-Hep-1 cells. Additionally, MTT assay was used to evaluate the proliferation of transfected cells. The scratch and transwell assays were used to determine the migration and invasion ability of the cell. The protein levels were determined with Western blot. lncRNA HOTAIR was overexpressed in SMMC-7721 and SK-Hep-1 cells. Ginsenoside-Rg3 reduced the level of lncRNA HOTAIR. Overexpressed lncRNA HOTAIR offset ginsenoside-Rg3 inhibited proliferation, migration and invasion of HCC cells. Furthermore, ginsenoside-Rg3 decreased the expression of p-AKT, p-PI3K, matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP2) and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP9), which was reversed after the treatment of HOTAIR. LncRNA HOTAIR was overexpressed in SMMC-7721 cells. Ginsenoside-Rg3 could reduce the expression of lncRNA HOTAIR, resulting in the inhibited cell proliferation, migration and invasion. Furthermore, ginsenoside-Rg3 inhibited cell proliferation and invasion ability through the PI3k/AKT pathway. Thus, ginsenoside-Rg3 might be a potential and effective treatment for HCC.

Background:Primary liver cancer, around 90% are hepatocellular carcinoma in China, is the fourth most common malignancy and the second leading cause of tumor-related death, thereby posing a significant threat to the life and health of the Chinese people. Summary:Since the publication of Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Primary Liver Cancer (2017 Edition)in 2018, additional high-quality evidence has emerged with relevance to the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of liver cancer in and outside China that requires the guidelines to be updated. The new edition (2019 Edition)was written by more than 70 experts in the field of liver cancer in China. They reflect the real-world situation in China regarding diagnosing and treating liver cancer in recent years. Key Messages:Most importantly, the new guidelines were endorsed and promulgated by the Bureau of Medical Administration of the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China in December 2019.

Alflutinib (AST2818) is a newly developed third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor selective for EGFR-sensitizing and T790M-resistant mutations. We assessed the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of alflutinib in patients with advanced NSCLC with confirmed EGFR T790M mutation, whose status progressed after the first- or second-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy.

Introduction:Understanding the relationship between subsequent-line therapies and overall survival (OS) is important for maximizing OS for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Objective:In this post hoc analysis, we investigated OS in lenvatinib- and sorafenib-treated patients from the REFLECT study, who then received subsequent anticancer medication during the survival follow-up period. Methods:The follow-up period commenced at the first off-treatment visit after stopping the study medication and continued until study termination, withdrawal of consent, or death. OS and objective response rate were calculated for patients who did or did not receive poststudy anticancer medication for both treatment arms, as well as for the overall cohort. We investigated the subset of patients who responded to first-line treatment and subsequently received anticancer medication. Results:The OS for patients initially randomized to first-line lenvatinib (versus first-line sorafenib) and who then received any subsequent anticancer medication was 20.8 vs. 17.0 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87; 95% CI 0.67–1.14). The OS for patients who initially received first-line lenvatinib (versus first-line sorafenib) and who did not receive any subsequent anticancer medication was 11.5 vs. 9.1 months (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.75–1.09). Responders to first-line lenvatinib who received subsequent medication had a median OS of 25.7 months (95% CI 18.5–34.6); responders to first line-sorafenib who received subsequent medication had a median OS of 22.3 months (95% CI 14.6–not evaluable). Conclusions:In this post hoc analysis of all patients in the REFLECT study who received subsequent anticancer medication, OS was increased compared with patients who did not receive any subsequent anticancer medication. In a subset analysis of responders who had received subsequent anticancer medication, use of first-line lenvatinib led to a slightly longer median OS; more research is needed on the benefits of using first-line lenvatinib compared with sorafenib.

First-line pembrolizumab monotherapy improves overall and progression-free survival in patients with untreated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer with a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumour proportion score (TPS) of 50% or greater. We investigated overall survival after treatment with pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 TPS of 1% or greater.

Angiogenesis plays fundamentally critical roles in solid-tumor pathogenesis, growth, invasion and metastasis. Endostatin, one of the most potent anti-angiogenic factors, was first isolated in Folkman’s lab in 1997, and was reported to dramatically shrink tumor blood formation. But its insoluble and unstable nature coupled with the high cost of synthesizing the endostatin protein doomed it for clinical cancer treatment. Intrigued by Folkman’s pioneering discoveries, Chinese scientists found a way to refold the protein, making it cost-effective to manufacture a recombinant human endostatin, a soluble and stable form of endostatin. A number of clinical studies have demonstrated the significant survival benefit of rh-endostatin in treating late stage non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) and, as a result, rh-endostatin (Endostar®) was approved by the State Food and Drug Administration of China (CFDA) in September of 2005 as a treatment option for NSCLC. Since then, increasing bodies of clinical data and experience have been obtained from a variety of other different cancers, such as small cell lung cancer, NSCLC in other settings, including malignant serous effusion, melanoma, colon cancer, gastric cancer, breast cancer, nasopharyngeal cancers, and others. This review aims at summarizing current clinical data of rh-endostatin including its survival benefits, optimized dosages, routes of administration, recommended duration and frequency of treatment, predictive biomarkers, and its safety profile in lung cancers as well as other cancers.

ABSTRACTGastric carcinoma (GC) is a common gastrointestinal malignancy with high incidence and mortality worldwide, and most patients are diagnosed in the late stages of disease. Palliative chemotherapy provides a survival benefit for patients with inoperable advanced GC. However, elderly patients who are unable to tolerate chemotherapy had worse prognosis due to lack of effective treatment. Herein we reported a Chinese elderly GC patient using next generation sequencing (NGS)-based tumor DNA analysis. Valuable gene variants of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) A gene amplification were detected. Additionally, a novel NOTCH1-BPHLfusion has been identified. He received antiangiogenic drug apatinib and showed both good clinical and radiographic response, but eventually died of non-cancer related cause, with progression free survival time (PFS) and overall survival time (OS) up to 9.53 months. This was the first GC case with apatinib usage as first-line treatment under the guidance of NGS gene profiling.

Background:An unmet need exists for treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who progress on or are intolerant to sorafenib. A global randomized phase II trial (ClinicalTrial.gov No. NCT01210495) of axitinib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1-3 inhibitor, in combination with best supportive care (BSC) did not prolong overall survival (OS) over placebo/BSC, but showed improved progression-free survival in some patients. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify potential predictive/prognostic factors. Methods:The data from this phase II study were analyzed for the efficacy and safety of axitinib/BSC in patients from Asia versus non-Asia versus Asian subgroups (Japan, Korea, or mainland China/Hong Kong/Taiwan) and predictive/prognostic values of baseline microRNAs and serum soluble proteins, using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results:Of 202 patients, 78 were from non-Asia and 124 from Asia (37 Japanese, 36 Korean, and 51 Chinese). No significant differences in OS were found between axitinib/BSC and placebo/BSC in non-Asians, Asians, or Asian subgroups. However, in an exploratory analysis, axitinib/BSC showed favorable OS in Asians, especially Japanese, when patients intolerant to prior antiangiogenic therapy were excluded from the data set. Axitinib/BSC was well tolerated by non-Asians and Asians alike. The presence of 4 circulating microRNAs, including miR-5684 and miR-1224-5p, or a level lower than or equal to the median protein level of stromal cell-derived factor 1 at baseline was significantly associated with longer OS in axitinib/BSC-treated Asians or non-Asians. Conclusions:Axitinib/BSC did not prolong survival over placebo/BSC in non-Asians, Asians, or Asian subgroups, but favorable OS with axitinib/BSC was observed in a subset of Japanese patients. A patient population that excludes sorafenib-intolerant patients might potentially be more suitable for clinical trials of new agents in advanced HCC. Since these results are very preliminary, further investigation is warranted. The potential predictive/prognostic value of several baseline microRNAs and soluble proteins identified in this study would require validation in prospective studies on a large cohort of patients.

In a phase 2 trial, lenvatinib, an inhibitor of VEGF receptors 1–3, FGF receptors 1–4, PDGF receptor α, RET, and KIT, showed activity in hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to compare overall survival in patients treated with lenvatinib versus sorafenib as a first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with an anti-angiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) has been shown to improve overall survival versus anti-angiogenic therapy alone in advanced solid tumours, but not in hepatocellular carcinoma. Therefore, a clinical study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of the anti-PD-1 antibody camrelizumab plus the VEGFR2-targeted TKI rivoceranib (also known as apatinib) versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

IMPORTANCE: Capecitabine is an oral cytotoxic chemotherapeutic commonly used across cancer subtypes. As with other oral medications though, it may suffer from drug interactions that could impair its absorption. OBJECTIVE: To determine if gastric acid suppressants such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may impair capecitabine efficacy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This secondary analysis of TRIO-013, a phase III randomized trial, compares capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOx) with or without lapatinib in 545 patients with ERBB2/HER2-positive metastatic gastroesophageal cancer (GEC); patients were randomized 1:1 between CapeOx with or without lapatinib. Proton pump inhibitor use was identified by medication records. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients treated with PPIs vs patients who were not. Specific subgroups were accounted for, such as younger age (&lt;60 years), Asian ethnicity, female sex, and disease stage (metastatic/advanced) in multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling. The TRIO-013 trial accrued and randomized patients between June 2008 and January 2012; this analysis took place in January 2014. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were divided based on PPI exposure. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary study outcome was PFS and OS between patients treated with PPIs vs patients who were not. Secondary outcomes included disease response rates and toxicities. RESULTS: Of the 545 patients with GEC (median age, 60 years; 406 men [74%]) included in the study, 229 received PPIs (42.0%) and were evenly distributed between arms. In the placebo arm, PPI-treated patients had poorer median PFS, 4.2 vs 5.7 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% CI, 1.29-1.81, P &lt; .001); OS, 9.2 vs 11.3 months (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.62; P = .04); and disease control rate (72% vs 83%; P = .02) vs patients not treated with PPIs. In multivariate analysis considering age, race, disease stage, and sex, PPI-treated patients had poorer PFS (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.42-1.94; P &lt; .001) and OS (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.71; P = .001). In patients treated with CapeOx and lapatinib, PPIs had less effect on PFS (HR, 1.08; P = .54) and OS (HR, 1.26; P = .10); however, multivariate analysis in this group demonstrated a significant difference in OS (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.06-1.66; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Proton pump inhibitors negatively effected capecitabine efficacy by possibly raising gastric pH levels, leading to altered dissolution and absorption. These results are consistent with previous erlotinib and sunitinib studies. Whether PPIs affected lapatinib is unclear given concurrent capecitabine. Given capecitabine’s prevalence in treatment breast cancer and colon cancer, further studies are under way. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00680901

ABSTRACTHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third-leading cause of cancer-related deaths with 750,000 newly diagnosed cases each year. Surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy constitute the main treatment modalities for HCC, but liver cirrhosis and damage often occur. Molecular targeted drugs have been recently developed to treat HCC. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/VEGF receptor (VEGFR) autocrine signaling is closely related to the growth, progression, and metastasis of HCC, making the VEGF/VEGFR axis an ideal target for the development of molecular targeted agents. Here, we report the effects of the novel anti-VEGF humanized monoclonal antibody BD0801 on the growth of HCC cells in vitroand in vivoas well as the underlying mechanisms. BD0801 significantly inhibited the proliferation of HepG2, SMMC-7721, and Bel7402 cells in vitro, accompanied with an induction of apoptosis and cell cycle arrest at the G1 phase. BD0801 potently suppressed AKT, Erk1/2, and retinoblastoma (Rb) phosphorylation, while increasing p21 and decreasing cyclin D1 protein levels. BD0801 significantly inhibited growth in mouse tumor xenografts and induced cell apoptosis of HepG2 and SMMC-7721 tumor xenografts. Furthermore, BD0801 effectively reduced the vascular density and tumor tissue microvessel density (MVD). Similarly, BD0801 decreased AKT, Erk1/2, and Rb phosphorylation and cyclin D1 expression whereas it increased p21 protein expression in mouse HCC tumor xenografts. Importantly, BD0801 showed a better effect than Bevacizumab (Bev) on the inhibition of cell growth and induction of apoptosis in HCC cells in vitroand in vivo. These findings suggest that BD0801 is a potent anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody for the treatment of HCC.

There are no systemic treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) whose disease progresses during sorafenib treatment. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in patients with HCC who have progressed during sorafenib treatment.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) characterized by insidious onset is a highly invasive malignance and has a rapid progress. The majority of patients, especially in Asian countries, present with locally advanced or distant metastatic disease at diagnosis and are not eligible for local treatment. Before the publication of the EACH study results showing the survival benefits of the FOLFOX 4 regimen in Chinese patients with advanced HCC, no chemotherapeutical drug or regimen was considered as systemic chemotherapy standard for this group of patients due to the lack of evidence-based recommendations. Oxaliplatin-containing regimens have shown clinical activity against advanced HCC with an acceptable safety profile. The aim of this article is to present a review of the scientific evidence mainly originating from China that supports the recommendation of oxaliplatin-based regimens for the treatment of Chinese patients with advanced HCC.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) characterized by insidious onset is a highly invasive malignance and has a rapid progress. The majority of patients, especially in Asian countries, present with locally advanced or distant metastatic disease at diagnosis and are not eligible for local treatment. Before the publication of the EACH study results showing the survival benefits of the FOLFOX 4 regimen in Chinese patients with advanced HCC, no chemotherapeutical drug or regimen was considered as systemic chemotherapy standard for this group of patients due to the lack of evidence-based recommendations. Oxaliplatin-containing regimens have shown clinical activity against advanced HCC with an acceptable safety profile. The aim of this article is to present a review of the scientific evidence mainly originating from China that supports the recommendation of oxaliplatin-based regimens for the treatment of Chinese patients with advanced HCC.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has high mortality partly due to acquiring drug resistance during chemotherapy treatment. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the underlying mechanism of drug resistance. Methods: We used 2-DE and MALDI-TOF-MS analysis to explore the possible molecular insight into 5-FU resistance in HCC. The differentially expressed proteins were validated by Western blot analysis. Results: We identified 102 unique proteins including p16, maspin, PRDX6, PSMB7, MYL6, PHB, and HSP27 with alteration in SMMC- 7721/5-FU. Furthermore, down-regulation of PRDX6 and PSMB7 enhanced SMMC-7721/5-FU cells to 5-FU sensitivity. Conclusions: Our study suggests that targeting drug resistant genes such as PRDX6 and PSMB7 could be a novel approach to overcome 5-FU resistance in HCC cells.

In the global phase 3 RAINBOW study, ramucirumab plus paclitaxel significantly improved overall survival compared with placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. RAINBOW-Asia, a bridging study with similar design to RAINBOW, aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab plus paclitaxel for advanced gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma in Asian, predominantly Chinese, patients.