Search

Background: The combination of atezolizumab-bevacizumab has been proven to be superior to sorafenib for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma not amenable to locoregional treatments, be-coming the standard of care of systemic therapy.Aim: This study aimed at assessing real-world feasibility of atezolizumab-bevacizumab in patients treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors.Methods: Among 1447 patients treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors from January 2010 to December 2020, we assessed the percentage of those potentially eligible to atezolizumab-bevacizumab (according to IMbrave-150 trial criteria), and the overall survival of eligible and non-eligible patients.Results: 422 (29%) patients were qualified for atezolizumab-bevacizumab therapy. The main exclusion causes were Child-Pugh class and Performance Status. Adopting the more permissive inclusion criteria of SHARP trial, 535 patients became eligible. The median overall survival of tyrosine-kinase inhibitors patients was 14.9 months, longer in eligible patients than in their counterpart due to better baseline liver function and oncological features.Conclusion: Real-world data indicate that less than one-third of hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors are potentially eligible to atezolizumab-bevacizumab according to the reg-istration trial criteria. These patients have a longer survival than the non-eligible ones. If the selection criteria of atezolizumab-bevacizumab trial are maintained in clinical practice, tyrosine-kinase inhibitors will remain the most used systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma patients.(c) 2022 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by 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.

Francesca Benevento,1 Anna Pecorelli,2 Horia Stefanescu,3 Zeno Sparchez,3 Ranka Vukotic,1,4 Irene Pettinari,2 Crina-Anca Grigoras,3 Francesco Tovoli,1,5 Federico Ravaioli,1 Bernardo Stefanini,1 Pietro Andreone,6 Fabio Piscaglia1,5 1Department of Medicine and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 2Department of Radiology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 3Gastroenterology Department, Liver Unit & Ultrasound Laboratory, Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cluj-Napoca, Romania; 4Medicina Interna 4, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy; 5Division of Internal Medicine, Hepatobiliary and Immunoallergic Diseases, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 6Divisione di Medicina Interna a Indirizzo Metabolico-Nutrizionale, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Modena, Modena, ItalyCorrespondence: Fabio Piscaglia, Email Fabio.piscaglia@unibo.itBackground: Malignancies are generally considered a risk factor for deep vein thrombosis and may hamper the recanalisation of thrombosed veins.Aim: We investigate whether the natural course and response to anticoagulant treatment of bland portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with cirrhosis complicated by hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) differ from those without HCC.Methods: Retrospective study in two hepatology referral centres, in Italy and Romania where patients with a diagnosis of PVT on cirrhosis and follow-up of at least 3 months with repeated imaging were included.Results: A total of 162 patients with PVT and matching inclusion and exclusion criteria were identified: 30 with HCC were compared to 132 without HCC. Etiologies, Child-Pugh Score (7 vs 7) and MELD scores (11 vs 12, p=0.3679) did not differ. Anticoagulation was administered to 43% HCC vs 42% nonHCC. The extension of PVT in the main portal trunk was similar: partial/total involvement was 73.3/6.7% in HCC vs 67.4/6.1% in nonHCC, p=0.760. The remainder had intrahepatic PVT. The recanalization rate was 61.5% and 60.7% in HCC/nonHCC in anticoagulated patients (p=1). Overall PVT recanalisation, including treated and untreated patients, was observed in 30% of HCC vs 37.9% of nonHCC, p=0.530. Major bleeding incidence was almost identical (3.3% vs 3.8%, p=1). Progression of PVT after stopping anticoagulation did not differ (10% vs 15.9%, respectively, HCC/nHCC, p=0.109).Conclusion: The course of bland non-malignant PVT in cirrhosis is not affected by the presence of active HCC. Treatment with anticoagulation in patients with active HCC is safe and as effective as in nonHCC patients, this can potentially allow us to use otherwise contraindicated therapies (ie TACE) if a complete recanalization is achieved with anticoagulation.Keywords: LC, liver cirrhosis, HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma, PVT, portal vein thrombosis

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 Wheat and other gluten-containing grains are widely consumed, providing approximately 50% of the caloric intake in both industrialised and developing countries. The widespread diffusion of gluten-containing diets has rapidly led to a sharp increase in celiac disease prevalence. This condition was thought to be very rare outside Europe and relatively ignored by health professionals and the global media. However, in recent years, the discovery of important diagnostic and pathogenic milestones has led to the emergence of celiac disease (CD) from obscurity to global prominence. These modifications have prompted experts worldwide to identify effective strategies for the diagnosis and follow-up of CD. Different scientific societies, mainly from Europe and America, have proposed guidelines based on CD's most recent evidence. AIM To identify the most recent scientific guidelines on CD, aiming to find and critically analyse the main differences. METHODS We performed a database search on PubMed selecting papers published between January 2010 and January 2021 in the English language. PubMed was lastly accessed on 1 March 2021. RESULTS We distinguished guidelines from 7 different scientific societies whose reputation is worldwide recognized and representative of the clinical practice in different geographical regions. Differences were noted in the possibility of a no-biopsy diagnosis, HLA testing, follow-up protocols, and procedures. CONCLUSION We found a relatively high concordance between the guidelines for CD. Important modifications have occurred in the last years, especially about the possibility of a no-biopsy diagnosis in children. Other modifications are expected in the next future and will probably involve the extension of the non-invasive diagnosis to the adult population and the follow-up modalities.

Extrahepatic spread is a well-known negative prognostic factor in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The prognostic role of different metastatic sites and their response rate to systemic treatment is still being debated. We considered 237 metastatic HCC patients treated with sorafenib as first-line therapy in five different Italian centers from 2010 to 2020. The most common metastatic sites were lymph nodes, lungs, bone and adrenal glands. In survival analysis, the presence of dissemination to lymph nodes (OS 7.1 vs. 10.2 months; p = 0.007) and lungs (OS 5.9 vs. 10.2 months; p < 0.001) were significantly related to worse survival rates compared with all other sites. In the subgroup analysis of patients with only a single metastatic site, this prognostic effect remained statistically significant. Palliative radiation therapy on bone metastases significantly prolonged survival in this cohort of patients (OS 19.4 vs. 6.5 months; p < 0.001). Furthermore, patients with lymph node and lung metastases had worse disease control rates (39.4% and 30.5%, respectively) and shorter radiological progression-free survival (3.4 and 3.1 months, respectively). In conclusion, some sites of an extrahepatic spread of HCC have a prognostic impact on survival in patients treated with sorafenib; in particular, lymph nodes and lung metastases have worse prognosis and treatment response rate.

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.

Background: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is the second most frequent liver cancer. The overall survival of iCCA and other biliary tract cancers (BTC) remains poor. Recently, the ABC-06 trial reported the superiority of FOLFOX vs clinical observation as a second-line treatment. Still, the survival benefit was less than expected. We hypothesized that the pattern of progression of iCCA can drive post-progression survival (PPS), similar to hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: Multicentre retrospective evaluation of consecutive iCCA patients who progressed after frontline systemic treatment with gemcitabine as monotherapy or in combination with platinum. Radiological assessment of progression was evaluated according to RECIST 1.1. The progression pattern was divided according to the presence/absence of new extrahepatic lesions (NEH). Results: We included 206 patients from 5 centres. The median OS was 14.1months and its independent predictors (hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]) were previous surgery 0.699 [0.509-0.961], performance status >2.445 [1.788-3.344], permanent first-line discontinuation 16.072 [5.102-50.633], registration of ascites 2.226 [1.448-3.420] or bilirubin >3mg/dl 3.004 [1.935-4.664] during the follow-up, and disease progression 2.523 [1.261-5.050]. The appearance of NEH independently predicted OS 2.18 [1.55-3.06] in patients with radiological progression. Amongst 138 patients eligible for second-line treatment, PPS was 16.8 and 5.9months in cases without and with NEH, respectively (P=.001). Progression owing to NEH lesions was an independent predictor of PPS 1.873 [1.333-2.662], together with performance status, time to progression to the frontline treatment, bilirubin >3mg/dl and ascites. Conclusions: PPS of iCCA is influenced by progression pattern, with important implications for second-line trial design and analysis.

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.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.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.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.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an aggressive disease with increasing incidence. Thyroid hormones play different roles in development and physiological processes of the entire digestive system, including pancreas. Therefore, many have hypothesized that thyroid hormone supplementation for hypothyroidism disorders might increase the risk of malignancy.We conducted retrospective observational mono-centre study. The aim was to examine the prevalence of thyroid disorders among patients with pancreatic cancer. Moreover, we investigated the impact of thyroid hormone supplementation in pancreatic cancer patients' outcome and the correlation with various clinicopathologic parameters.A total of 92 consecutive pancreatic cancer patients were retrospectively reviewed: 18.5% patients had a history of hypothyroidism and all received a replacement hormone therapy with levothyroxine, in particular 20% in metastatic group and 11% in radically resected PDAC patients' group. Nor in radically resected neither in metastatic group, we did not observe any statistically significant difference in outcome between the group with or without thyroid disorders. On multivariate analyses, cox proportional hazards model analysis showed that only the presence of perineural invasion was associated with a significantly higher hazard ratio for overall survival in metastatic PDAC patients (HR=2.7; 95%CI=1.029-6.925; p=0.009).We observed higher prevalence of thyroid disorders in PDAC patients. Further studies are warranted to explore the impact of levothyroxine therapy on outcome in PDAC patients.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a globally relevant medical problem. Fortunately, risk factors for this tumor have been identified, and surveillance protocols developed. Patients with liver cirrhosis have the highest risk of developing HCC and have historically been included in surveillance programs. Special categories have also emerged in recent years, especially patients with eradicated HCV infection or nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Novel serum biomarkers and magnetic resonance imaging protocols are currently being proposed to refine existing surveillance protocols.We discuss the rationale of surveillance programs for HCC and report the most recent recommendations from international guidelines about this topic. Gray areas, such as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and the role of intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma, are also discussed.Surveillance is recognized as a tool to favor early diagnosis of HCC, access to curative treatment, and increase survival, even if the supporting evidence is mainly based on observational studies. As new randomized clinical trials are difficult to propose, future challenges will include optimizing implementation in the primary care setting and a more personalized approach, balancing the opportunities and risks of overdiagnosis of novel techniques and biomarkers.Not long after its development, ultrasound (US) has been used to identify liver cancer in patients with liver cirrhosis. Consequently, US-based semiannual surveillance programs have been implemented in recent decades to facilitate an early diagnosis of liver cancer and increase chances of successful radical treatment. The efficacy of these protocols has been recognized in observational studies and clinical trials. However, recent years have shown the appearance of new categories of patients with chronic liver disease. Also, imaging innovations and putative novel biomarkers appeared on the stage. This review discusses the current knowledge and future perspective of these surveillance programs for liver cancer.

Background: Comprehensive and contemporary data pertaining large populations of patients with Primary Biliary Cholangitis (PBC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are missing. Aim: To describe main characteristics and outcome of PBC patients with HCC diagnosed in the new millennium. Methods: Analysing the Italian Liver Cancer registry we identified 80 PBC patients with HCC diagnosed after the year 2000, and described their clinical characteristics, access to treatment and survival. Results: Median age of patients was 71 years and 50.0% were males. Cirrhosis was present in 86.3% of patients, being well-compensated in 58.0%. Median HCC diameter was smaller in patients under surveillance (2.6vs 4.0cm, P=0.007). Curative treatment, feasible in 50.0% of patients, was associated with improved survival compared to palliative and supportive care (42vs 33vs 6 months, P

Background An enhanced surveillance schedule has been proposed for cirrhotics with viral etiology, who are considered at extremely high-risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Aims We compared the 3- and 6-months surveillance interval, evaluating cancer stage at diagnosis and patient survival. Methods Data of 777 HBV and HCV cirrhotic patients with HCC diagnosed under a 3-months (n = 109, 3MS group) or a 6-months (n = 668, 6MS group) surveillance were retrieved from the Italian Liver Cancer database. Survival in the 3MS group was considered as observed and adjusted for lead-time bias, and survival analysis was repeated after a propensity score matching. Results The 3-months surveillance interval neither reduced the share of patients diagnosed outside the Milano criteria, nor increased their probability to receive curative treatments. The median survival of 6MS patients (55.0 months [45.9–64.0]) was not significantly different from the observed (47.0 months [35.0–58.9]; p = 0.43) and adjusted (44.9 months [33.4–56.4]; p = 0.30) survival of 3MS patients. A propensity score analysis confirmed the absence of a survival advantage for 3MS patients. Conclusions A tightening of surveillance schedule does not increase the diagnosis of early-stage tumors, the feasibility of curative treatments and the survival. Therefore, we should maintain the 6-months interval in the surveillance of viral cirrhotics.

579 Background: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib have not been compared in a randomized controlled trial. We conducted a retrospective multi-center 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 was the primary endpoint. Results: The analysis included 1,341 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 NASH/NAFLD (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. Conclusions: Our study did not identify any meaningful difference in overall survival between atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib. Although some hints are provided suggesting that patients with NASH/NAFLD might benefit more from lenvatinib therapy and patients with viral etiology more from atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

Simple Summary Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are now a cornerstone of systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, their efficacy is blunted by mechanisms of tumour resistance in many patients. This review reports on the state of the art of resistance to ICIs, focusing on HCC, with the aim to provide clear and direct information to clinicians and researchers. Growing knowledge on the mechanisms of resistance to immunotherapy can indeed guide the choice of and expand the application of novel combined treatments. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common liver cancer and a relevant global health problem. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent the most effective systemic treatment for HCC. However, due to primary resistance, approximately 40% of HCC patients do not achieve a disease control with ICIs. Moreover, a similar proportion will experience disease progression after an initial response caused by secondary resistance. This review describes the mechanisms of primary and secondary resistance and reports the ongoing therapeutic strategies to overcome these obstacles.

Simple Summary The European (EASL) and American (AASLD) guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) suggest different management of nodules with indeterminate imaging in cirrhosis. In particular, nodules classified as LR-3 and LR-4 by the CEUS LI-RADS algorithm (indeterminate for HCC) are suggested to be biopsied according the EASL guidelines, but may be only monitored with follow-up imaging, with biopsy left to selected LR-4/LR-M cases, according to the AASLD ones. The present study shows that CEUS LI-RADS classes LR-3 and LR-4 HCC have no better clinical outcome than typical HCC (LR-5). Such data support the EASL policy, aimed at conclusive diagnostic investigations of indeterminate nodules up to obtaining histological proof to avoid leaving aggressive HCC not timely treated. Abstract The American College of Radiology (ACR) released the Liver Imaging Report and Data System (LI-RADS) scheme, which categorizes hepatic nodules in risk classes from LR-1 to LR-5 (according to the degree of risk to be HCC) and LR-M (probable malignancy not specific for HCC). The aim of this study was to test whether HCC with different LR patterns on CEUS have different overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). We retrospectively enrolled 167 patients with the first definitive diagnosis of single HCC (by using CT/MRI or histological techniques if CT/MRI were inconclusive) for whom CEUS examination was available. The median size of HCC lesions was 2.2 cm (range 1.0–7.2 cm). According to CEUS LI-RADS classification, 28 patients were in LR-3, 48 in LR-4, 83 in LR-5, and 8 in LR-M. Patient liver function and nodule characteristics were not statistically different between CEUS LI-RADS classes. Using univariate analysis, CEUS LI-RADS class was not found to be a predictor of survival (p = 0.347). In conclusion, HCC showing the CEUS LI-RADS classes LR-3 and LR-4 have no better clinical outcome than typical HCC. Such data support the EASL policy, aimed at conclusive diagnostic investigations of indeterminate nodules up to obtaining histological proof to avoid leaving aggressive HCC not timely treated.

Aim: The present study evaluated the duration of chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, analyzing possible factors affecting the procedural time. Methods: In total, 175 patients who underwent chemoembolization have been prospectively enrolled. The procedural length was considered the time between the insertion and the removal of the angiographic sheath. The features related to the tumor burden and angiographic procedures, which could be related to the procedural time, were recorded. Results: The chemoembolization time resulted in a mean of 58.1 min. The longer procedural time was associated with a number of nodules treated per patient ≥ 2 (P < 0.001), a number of segments with nodules ≥ 2 (P < 0.001), the presence of more than 1 nodule in the same segment (P < 0.001), the location of the tumor in the left lobe (P = 0.001), the exclusion from the Milan criteria (P < 0.001), and a number of segments treated ≥ 2 (P < 0.001). Only the number of nodules treated per patient resulted significantly in multivariate analysis (OR 2.927, 95%CI: 2.015-4.251, P < 0.001). Conclusion: The factors related to longer procedural time are the number of nodules treated ≥ 2, the number of segments with nodules ≥ 2, the involvement of the left lobe, the tumor burden outside the Milan criteria, and the number of segments treated ≥ 2. All these characteristics, known in the pre-procedural phase, represent useful tools for a correct planning of the angiographic room’s workflow during the pandemic era as well as in the future to reduce downtime and increase productivity.