Search

Aim: This study compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab and bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) in patients with viral and non‐viral infection in clinical settings. Methods: We conducted the retrospective cohort study of 323 BCLC stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with Child‐Pugh class A, and a performance status of 0 or 1 who started Atez/Bev from September 2020 to December 2021 at 22 institutions in Japan. Patients with viral infection was defined as those who were either serum anti‐HCV‐ Ab or HBs‐Ag‐positive, while patients with non‐viral infection was defined as those who were both serum anti‐HCV Ab‐ and HBs‐Ag‐negative. We constructed a propensity‐score‐matched cohort to minimize the risk of observable potential confounders. Results: Propensity score matching produced 126 matched pairs for patients with viral versus non‐viral infection. After matching, the significant differences in baseline demographic features did not exist between the two groups. The objective response rate was 20.6% and 24.6% in viral‐ and non‐viral‐related HCC patients, respectively, without a significant difference (p = 0.55). The disease control rate was not also significantly different (68.3% vs 69.0%, p = 1.00). The median progression‐free survival was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0–9.6) and 6.2 months (95% CI 5.1–7.8) in patients with viral and non‐viral infection, and the 12‐month survival rates were 65.5% (95% CI 50.8–76.8) and 71.7% (95% CI 57.3–81.9) in those with viral and non‐viral infection, respectively, which were not significantly different (p = 0.33, p = 0.38). No significant difference in treatment‐related adverse events was found between the two groups. Conclusions: Our etiology‐based study demonstrated that Atez/Bev showed good efficacy and safety for HCC patient with non‐viral infection as well as those with viral infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: The study goal was to compare the outcomes of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev) as either first‐ or later‐line systemic therapy. Methods: A total of 430 patients with HCC treated with Atezo/Bev at 22 institutions in Japan were included. Patients treated with Atezo/Bev as first‐line therapy for HCC were defined as the first‐line group (n = 268) while those treated with Atezo/Bev as second‐ or later‐line therapy were defined as the later‐line group (n = 162). Results: The median progression‐free survival times in the first‐ and later‐line groups were 7.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.7–9.2) and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.0–7.7) (P = 0.021). Regarding treatment‐related adverse events, hypertension of any grade was more common in the first‐line group than in the later‐line group (P = 0.025). Analysis adjusted by inverse probability weighting, including patient and HCC characteristics, showed that the later‐line group (hazard ratio, 1.304; 95% CI, 1.006–1.690; P = 0.045) was significantly associated with progression‐free survival. In patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B, the median progression‐free survival times in the first‐ and later‐line groups were 10.5 months (95% CI, 6.8–13.8) and 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.0–9.4) (P = 0.021). Among patients with a history of lenvatinib therapy, the median progression‐free survival times in the first‐ and later‐line groups were 7.7 months (95% CI, 6.3–9.2) and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.0–7.7) (P = 0.022). Conclusion: The use of Atezo/Bev as first‐line systemic therapy in patients with HCC is expected to prolong survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The present study focused on the association of early bevacizumab (Bev) interruption with the clinical outcome of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Methods: This retrospective study included 239 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma receiving atezolizumab/Bev from September 2020 to June 2021 at 16 different institutions in Japan. We conducted a 9‐week landmark analysis to investigate the association of Bev interruption due to adverse events with the therapeutic efficacy. Results: The median age was 73.0 (68.0–80.0) years old, with 195 (81.6%) men. The objective response rate was significantly higher in patients without Bev interruption than in those with it (34.5% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.038). The median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 6.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.5–9.7) and 9.0 months (95% CI 7.1–not applicable) in patients with and without Bev interruption, respectively, with statistical significance (p = 0.021). The 12‐month overall survival (OS) rates in patients with and without Bev interruption were 49.4% (CI 27.7%–67.9%) and 82.2% (95% CI 70.3%–89.6%), respectively, showing a significant difference (p = 0.004). The presence of Bev interruption was a significant factor associated with the PFS (p = 0.021) and OS (p = 0.008). A multivariate analysis showed that modified albumin–bilirubin 2b (p < 0.001) and later‐line treatment (p = 0.018) were unfavorable factors associated with Bev interruption. Liver injury, appetite loss, protein urea, and ascites or hepatic edema were more frequently found in patients with Bev interruption than in those without it. Conclusions: Early Bev interruption was an unfavorable factor associated with the PFS and OS. Good liver function and treatment settings may be associated with maintaining Bev treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]