Search

Patient profiles suitable for long-term lenvatinib treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) are yet to be fully understood. This post-hoc analysis aimed to identify such patient characteristics and explore the impact of treatment duration and relative dose intensity (RDI) on treatment outcomes. The data were obtained from 703 patients in a multicenter, prospective cohort study in Japan. Lenvatinib-naïve patients with uHCC were enrolled between July 2018 and January 2019 and were followed up for 12 months. Moreover, patients were dichotomized using the median treatment duration into the longer- (≥177 days; n = 352) or shorter-treatment (<177 days; n = 351) groups. The longer-treatment group often had better performance status, lower Child-Pugh score and better modified albumin-bilirubin grade than the shorter treatment group (p<0.05 for all). The objective response rate (47.6% vs. 28.2%; p<0.001) and disease control rate (92.4% vs. 60.2%; p<0.001) were both significantly higher in the longer-treatment groups than in the shorter-treatment groups. The proportion of patients with any adverse drug reactions was generally similar between the two treatment groups. Within the longer-treatment group, the disease control rate was high regardless of dose modification (i.e., RDI <100% vs. ≥100% during the initial 177 days) (91.2% vs. 98.0%). In conclusion, patients with longer treatment tended to have better overall conditions. Lenvatinib dose modifications at the physician's discretion, considering the balance between effectiveness and safety, may contribute to the long-term treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) with cisplatin and lenvatinib exhibits strong antitumor effects against advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Higher antitumor activity is expected for the combination treatment. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in combination with HAIC using cisplatin in patients with advanced HCC. Methods: In this multicenter, open-labeled, single-arm, phase II trial, patients with advanced HCC categorized as Child-Pugh class A with no prior history of systemic therapy were enrolled. Patients received lenvatinib plus HAIC with cisplatin (lenvatinib: 12 mg once daily for patients ≥60 kg, 8 mg once daily for patients <60 kg; HAIC with cisplatin: 65 mg/m2, day 1, every 4–6 weeks, maximum of six cycles). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) assessed using modified RECIST by the Independent Review Committee. The secondary endpoints were the ORR assessed using RECIST v1.1, progression-free survival, overall survival, and frequency of adverse events associated with the treatment. Results: A total of 36 patients were enrolled between September 2018 and March 2020. In the 34 evaluable patients, the ORR assessed by the Independent Review Committee using modified RECIST and RECIST v1.1 were 64.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 46.5–80.3%) and 45.7% (95% CI: 28.8–63.4%), respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 6.3 months (95% CI: 5.1–7.9 months) and 17.2 months (95% CI: 10.9 – not available, months), respectively. The main grade 3–4 adverse events were increased aspartate aminotransferase (34%), leukopenia (22%), increased alanine aminotransferase (19%), and hypertension (11%). Conclusion: Lenvatinib plus HAIC with cisplatin yielded a favorable ORR and overall survival and was well tolerated in patients with advanced HCC. Further evaluation of this regimen in a phase III trial is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lenvatinib was approved for use in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) in Japan in 2018. Patients with diverse clinical characteristics receive lenvatinib treatment in clinical practice. Thus, it is crucial to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of lenvatinib in real-world clinical settings. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of lenvatinib for uHCC in clinical practice in Japan. Patients and Methods: Between July 2018 and January 2019, patients with uHCC who were administered lenvatinib for the first time were enrolled in this prospective, multicenter, observational post-marketing study (NCT03663114). Patients were orally administered lenvatinib and followed up for 12 months. For safety, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were evaluated. For effectiveness, the objective response rate (ORR) was calculated to evaluate tumor response. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Data of 703 patients (median age, 73 years; 80.2% males) were analyzed. The median (range) treatment duration was 25.3 (0.3–68.9) weeks. The mean ± standard deviation initial dose was 7.37 ± 1.65 mg in patients with body weight < 60 kg and 10.43 ± 2.49 mg in those with body weight ≥ 60 kg. ADRs (any grade) were reported in 84.9% of the patients, with Grade ≥ 3 ADRs reported in 42.5% of the patients. The most common ADRs (> 10%) were decreased appetite, fatigue, hypertension, proteinuria, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, hypothyroidism, and diarrhea. The median OS of the 703 patients was 498.0 days. In 494 patients assessed using the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST), the ORR was 39.5% (95% confidence interval: 35.1–43.9%). Patients with better liver or renal function at baseline achieved significantly higher ORR than those with worse liver or renal function. Conclusions: In patients with uHCC in real-world clinical practice in Japan, treatment with lenvatinib was generally well tolerated, and no new safety concerns were identified. The ORR and median OS were similar to or better than the results of the Japanese subset of the global Phase III REFLECT trial. Our results demonstrated that clinically meaningful treatment responses were achieved with lenvatinib in real-world clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The fifth version of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Hepatocellular Carcinoma was revised by the Japan Society of Hepatology, according to the methodology of evidence‐based medicine and partly to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system, which was published in October 2021 in Japanese. In addition to surveillance–diagnostic and treatment algorithms, a new algorithm for systemic therapy has been created, as multiple drugs for hepatocellular carcinoma can be currently selected. Here, new or revised algorithms and evidence on which the recommendations are based are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) is inappropriate to assess the direct effects of treatment on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by locoregional therapies, such as radiofrequency ablation or transarterial chemoembolization. Therefore, establishment of response evaluation criteria solely devoted to HCC is needed in clinical practice, as well as in clinical trials of HCC treatment, such as systemic therapies, which cause necrosis of the tumor. Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver (RECICL) was revised in 2021 by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan based on the 2019 version of RECICL, which was commonly used in Japan. The major revised points of the RECICL 2021 is inclusion of RECIST version 1.1 and modified RECIST as response evaluation criteria in systemic therapy for HCC. We hope this new treatment response criteria, RECICL, proposed by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan will benefit the HCC treatment response evaluation in the setting of daily clinical practice and clinical trials as well, not only in Japan, but also internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dear Editor, Recent developments in systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been outstanding, and a response rate of 40.6% based on the modified RECIST criteria has been reported after lenvatinib (LEN) therapy for advanced HCC [[1]]. Preoperative LEN therapy might be a promising option among the multidisciplinary treatments for HCC with macroscopic HVTT. CT, computed tomography; TT, tumor thrombus; LEN, lenvatinib; IVC, inferior vena cava. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction: Combining an immune checkpoint inhibitor with a targeted antiangiogenic agent may leverage complementary mechanisms of action for the treatment of advanced/metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). Avelumab is a human anti-PD-L1 IgG1 antibody with clinical activity in various tumor types; axitinib is a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3. We report the final analysis from VEGF Liver 100 (NCT03289533), a phase 1b study evaluating safety and efficacy of avelumab plus axitinib in treatment-naive patients with aHCC. Methods: Eligible patients had confirmed aHCC, no prior systemic therapy, ≥1 measurable lesion, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1, and Child-Pugh class A disease. Patients received avelumab 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks plus axitinib 5 mg orally twice daily until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. Endpoints included safety and investigator-assessed objective response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 and modified RECIST (mRECIST) for HCC. Results: Twenty-two Japanese patients were enrolled and treated with avelumab plus axitinib. The minimum follow-up was 18 months as of October 25, 2019 (data cutoff). Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 16 patients (72.7%); the most common (≥3 patients) were hypertension (n = 11 [50.0%]), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (n = 5 [22.7%]), and decreased appetite (n = 3 [13.6%]). No grade 4 TRAEs or treatment-related deaths occurred. Ten patients (45.5%) had an immune-related AE (irAE) of any grade; 3 patients (13.6%) had an infusion-related reaction (IRR) of any grade, and no grade ≥3 irAE and IRR were observed. The objective response rate was 13.6% (95% CI: 2.9–34.9%) per RECIST 1.1 and 31.8% (95% CI: 13.9–54.9%) per mRECIST for HCC. Conclusion: Treatment with avelumab plus axitinib was associated with a manageable toxicity profile and showed antitumor activity in patients with aHCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a summary of results from a phase 3 clinical study called HIMALAYA. HIMALAYA looked at treatment with one dose of a medication called tremelimumab combined with multiple doses of a medication called durvalumab (the STRIDE regimen) or multiple doses of durvalumab alone. These treatments were compared with a medication called sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). HCC is a type of liver cancer that is difficult to treat because it is often diagnosed when it is unresectable, meaning it can no longer be removed with surgery. Sorafenib has been the main treatment for unresectable HCC since 2007. However, people who take sorafenib may experience side effects that can reduce their quality of life, so alternative medicines are being trialed. Tremelimumab and durvalumab are types of drugs called immunotherapies, and they both work in different ways to help the body's immune system fight cancer. Participants who took STRIDE lived longer than participants who took sorafenib, whilst participants who took durvalumab alone lived a similar length of time as participants who took sorafenib. Participants who took STRIDE or durvalumab had a lower relative risk of experiencing worsening in their quality of life than participants who took sorafenib. The side effects that participants who received STRIDE or durvalumab experienced were expected for these types of treatments and could mostly be managed. Overall, STRIDE is more effective than sorafenib for people with unresectable HCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A previous randomized phase 2 study of hepatocellular carcinoma revealed that the c‐Met inhibitor tivantinib as second‐line treatment significantly prolonged progression‐free survival in a subpopulation whose tumor samples highly expressed c‐Met (MET‐high). Accordingly, this phase 3 study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of tivantinib as a second‐line treatment for Japanese patients with MET‐high hepatocellular carcinoma. This randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study was conducted at 60 centers in Japan. Hepatocellular carcinoma patients with one prior sorafenib treatment and those with MET‐high tumor samples were eligible for inclusion. Registered patients were randomly assigned to either the tivantinib or placebo group at a 2:1 ratio and were treated with twice‐a‐day oral tivantinib (120 mg bid) or placebo until the discontinuation criteria were met. The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival while the secondary endpoints included overall survival and safety. Between January 2014 and June 2016, 386 patients provided consent, and 195 patients were randomized to the tivantinib (n = 134) or placebo (n = 61) group. Median progression‐free survival was 2.8 (95% confidence interval: 2.7‐2.9) and 2.3 (1.5‐2.8) mo in the tivantinib and placebo groups, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.74, 95% confidence interval: 0.52‐1.04, P =.082). Median overall survival was 10.3 (95% confidence interval: 8.1‐11.6) and 8.5 (6.2‐11.4) mo in the tivantinib and placebo group, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval: 0.58‐1.15). The most common tivantinib‐related grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia (31.6%), leukocytopenia (24.8%), and anemia (12.0%). This study did not confirm the significant efficacy of tivantinib as a second‐line treatment for Japanese patients with MET‐high hepatocellular carcinoma. (NCT02029157). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) is inappropriate to assess the direct effects of treatment on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by locoregional therapies, such as radiofrequency ablation and transarterial chemoembolization. Therefore, establishment of response evaluation criteria solely devoted to HCC is needed in clinical practice, as well as in clinical trials of HCC treatment, such as systemic therapies, which cause necrosis of the tumor. Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver (RECICL) was revised in 2019 by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan based on the 2015 version of RECICL, which was commonly used in Japan. The major revised points of the RECICL 2019 are as follows: (i) CEA and CA19‐9 have been newly added as tumor markers that should be recorded for use as criteria in the response evaluation for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; (ii) the criteria now state that the details of molecular targeted therapy should be specified; and (iii) specific methods for overall evaluation are now described. Also, as an assessment of overall TE4 requires that TE4 is achieved in all nodules (even non‐target lesions), the same calculation methods described above are used. We hope this new treatment response criteria, RECICL, proposed by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan will benefit the HCC treatment response evaluation in the setting of daily clinical practice and clinical trials as well, not only in Japan, but also internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: REACH evaluated ramucirumab in the second-line treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. In the intent-to-treat population (n = 565), a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) was not observed. In patients with an elevated baseline α-fetoprotein (AFP) level (400 ng/mL or greater), an improvement in OS was demonstrated. An analysis of the Japanese patients in REACH was performed.Methods: An analysis was performed with the subset of the intent-to-treat population enrolled in Japan (n = 93).Results: The median OS was 12.9 months for the ramucirumab arm (n = 45) and 8.0 months for the placebo arm (n = 48) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.621 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.391-0.986); P = 0.0416]. The median progression-free survival was 4.1 months for the ramucirumab arm and 1.7 months for the placebo arm [HR 0.449 (95 % CI 0.285-0.706); P = 0.0004]. The objective response rates were 11 % for the ramucirumab arm and 2 % for the placebo arm (P = 0.0817). The grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in more than 5 % of patients with a higher incidence for the ramucirumab arm (n = 44) than for the placebo arm (n = 47) were ascites (7% vs 2 %), hypertension (7 % vs 2 %), and cholangitis (7 % vs 0 %). In patients with a baseline AFP level of 400 ng/mL or greater, the median OS was 12.9 months for the ramucirumab arm (n = 20) and 4.3 months for the placebo arm (n = 22) [HR 0.464 (95 % CI 0.232-0.926); P = 0.0263].Conclusions: In the Japanese patients in REACH, ramucirumab treatment improved OS, including in patients with a baseline AFP level of 400 ng/mL or greater; improvements in progression-free survival and objective response rate were also demonstrated. The safety profile of ramucirumab was acceptable and well tolerated in Japanese patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01140347. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims Treatment approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma ( HCC) vary across countries, but these differences and their potential impact on outcomes have not been comprehensively assessed. Data from the multinational GIDEON (Global Investigation of therapeutic DEcisions in HCC and Of its treatment with sorafeNib) registry evaluated differences in patient characteristics, practice patterns and outcomes in HCC across geographical regions in patients who received sorafenib. Methods GIDEON is a non-randomised, observational registry study conducted in 39 countries across five global regions. HCC patients in whom a decision to treat with sorafenib was made in clinical practice and according to local practices were included. Results 3202 patients were evaluable for safety analysis: Asia-Pacific ( n = 928), Japan ( n = 508), Europe ( n = 1113), USA ( n = 563) and Latin America ( n = 90). Patients in Japan had earlier-stage disease at initial diagnosis compared with patients in other regions (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage A; 43.7% vs 9.1-24.3%). Use of locoregional therapies before sorafenib, including transarterial chemoembolisation, was more common in Japan (84.4%) and Asia-Pacific (67.2%) compared with the USA (49.4%) and Europe (43.5%). Treatment patterns with respect to sorafenib also differed, with a shorter duration of treatment reported in the USA and Asia-Pacific. Time from initial diagnosis to death was longer in Japan compared with other regions (median, 79.6 months vs 14.8-25.0 months). Conclusions Data from GIDEON highlight regional variations in the management of HCC and patient outcomes. Greater standardisation of management may help optimise outcomes for HCC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) is inappropriate to assess the direct effects of treatment on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by locoregional therapies such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Therefore, establishment of response evaluation criteria solely devoted to HCC is needed urgently in clinical practice as well as in clinical trials of HCC treatment, such as molecular-targeted therapies, which cause necrosis of the tumor. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver (RECICL) was revised in 2015 by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan based on the 2009 version of RECICL, which was commonly used in Japan. Major revised points of the RECICL 2015 is to define the target lesions of two lesions per organ or three lesions per liver, up to a maximum of five lesions. The second revised point is that setting the timing at which the overall treatment response has been changed. The third point is that the definition of treatment effect 1 has been changed to more than 50% tumor enlargement, excluding the area of necrosis after treatment. Overall evaluation of treatment response has been amended to make it possible to evaluate the overall response including extrahepatic lesions by systemic therapy, which is similar to RECIST ormodified RECIST.We hope this new treatment response criteria, RECICL, proposed by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan will benefit HCC treatment response evaluation in the setting of daily clinical practice and clinical trials, not only in Japan, but also internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A c-Met inhibitor tivantinib is a candidate anticancer agent for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and CYP2C19 is the key metabolic enzyme for tivantinib. Previous Japanese phase I studies in patients with solid tumors (except HCC) recommend 360 mg twice daily (BID) and 240 mg BID for CYP2C19 extensive metabolizers (EM) and poor metabolizers (PM), respectively. In this study, Japanese patients with HCC in whom sorafenib treatment has failed were enrolled to evaluate the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of oral tivantinib as a single agent. The dose was escalated separately in EM and PM, from 120 mg BID to 240 mg BID, in both capsule and tablet formulations. A total of 28 patients (EM: 21, PM: 7) received tivantinib. At a dose of 120 mg BID, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) did not develop in 12 EM (capsule: 6, tablet: 6) and 7 PM (capsule: 4, tablet: 3) during the DLT-observation period (for 29 days after first dosing). At this dose, the pharmacokinetic profiles of tivantinib (AUC0-12 and Cmax) did not remarkably differ between EM and PM. When treated with 240 mg BID, 5 of 9 EM (capsule: 4 of 6, tablet: 1 of 3) developed neutropenia-related DLT accompanying plasma tivantinib concentration higher than expected from the previous studies. Consequently, PM did not receive 240 mg BID. In conclusion, 120 mg BID of tivantinib is recommended among Japanese patients with HCC regardless of CYP2C19 phenotype. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

GC33 is a humanized mAb against human glypican-3 (GPC3). In the first-in-human study carried out in the USA, GC33 was well tolerated and showed preliminary antitumor activity in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. This study aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic characteristics of GC33 in Japanese patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The study design was a conventional 3 + 3 dose-escalation design to determine the maximum tolerated dose of GC33 given i.v. at 5, 10, or 20 mg/kg weekly. Immunohistochemistry was carried out on tumor biopsies to evaluate GPC3 expression. Thirteen patients were enrolled across the three dose levels, and no patients observed any dose-limiting toxicity up to the highest planned dose of 20 mg/kg. The most common adverse events were decreased lymphocyte count, decreased natural killer cell count, increased C-reactive protein, and pyrexia. Grade 3 adverse events (increased blood pressure, decreased lymphocyte count, and decreased platelet count) were observed in two or more patients. The AUCinf showed a dose-proportional increase from the 5 mg/kg dose group to the 20 mg/kg dose group. The trough concentrations of GC33 appeared to reach a steady state after the fourth to the sixth dose. Seven of the 13 patients showed stable disease, the other six showed progressive disease. Furthermore, three patients showed long-term stable disease of more than 5 months. In conclusion, GC33 given at up to 20 mg/kg weekly was well tolerated in Japanese patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Asia has a disproportionate share of the world's burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the highly regarded clinical practice guidelines and recommendations for the design and conduct of clinical trials for HCC largely reflect Western practice. In order to design mutually beneficial international clinical trials of promising targeted therapies, it is imperative to understand how the aetiology, staging and treatment of HCC differ between Asian and Western countries. Our group, comprising experts in oncology and hepatology from countries that constitute the Eastern Asian region, convened to compare and contrast our current practices, evaluate potential compliance with the clinical trial recommendations, and offer suggestions for modifications that would enhance international collaboration. Here, we describe the results of our discussions, including recommendations for appropriate patient stratification based on potentially important differences in HCC aetiology, identification of practices that may confound interpretation of clinical trial outcomes (traditional Chinese medicine; antivirals that target hepatitis B virus; heterogeneous embolization procedures), suggestions for utilizing a common staging system in study protocols, recognition that sorafenib usage is limited by financial constraints and potentially increased toxicity in Asian patients, and expansion of patient populations that should be eligible for initial clinical trials with new agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and the burden of this devastating cancer is expected to increase further in coming years. The collection and analysis of epidemiologic HCC data will play a critical role in guiding future disease prevention strategies and optimizing patient management. Previous epidemiologic studies have highlighted striking global variations in the incidence of HCC, which is particularly high in much of east Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, and lower, but on the increase, in North America and most of Europe. This variation appears to be related to the complex etiology of HCC, with different risk factors, primarily infection with hepatitis B or hepatitis C virus, responsible for driving HCC incidence rates in different regions. Although previous studies have contributed considerably to the knowledge of HCC epidemiology, there are limitations associated with the currently available data, which arise from studies performed at different times in the past, using varying methodologies, and with diverse patient populations. A new and global approach to the study of HCC epidemiology is required if HCC disease prevention and treatment strategies are to be adequately directed and supported in coming years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Health Organization (WHO) criteria and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) are inappropriate to assess the direct effects of treatment on the hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by locoreginal therapies such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE). Therefore, establishment of response evaluation criteria solely devoted for HCC is needed urgently in the clinical practice as well as in the clinical trials of HCC treatment, such as molecular targeted therapies, which cause necrosis of the tumor. Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver (RECICL) was revised in 2009 by Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan based on the 2004 version of RECICL, which was commonly used in Japan. Major revised points of the RECICL 2009 is to provide TE4a (Complete response with enough ablative margin) and TE4b (complete response without enough ablative margin) for local ablation therapy. Second revised point is that setting the timing at which the overall treatment effects are assessed. Third point is that emergence of new lesion in the liver is regarded as progressive disease, different from 2004 version. Finally, 3 tumor markers including alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and AFP-L3 and des-gamma-carboxy protein (DCP) were also added for the overall treatment response. We hope this new treatment response criteria, RECICL, proposed by Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan will benefit the HCC treatment response evaluation in the setting of the daily clinical practice and clinical trials as well not only in Japan, but also internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Despite various effective local treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), some patients do not meet the treatment criteria because of extrahepatic metastases or macroscopic vascular invasion at the time of their diagnosis. Furthermore, many patients treated with successful local treatments develop recurrences after treatment. Although these patients receive systemic treatment including chemotherapy, HCC is generally recognized as a chemo-resistant tumor. Recently, new molecular targets have been confirmed and various targeted agents are now being investigated for the treatment of HCC. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is frequently expressed in human hepatoma cells, and EGF may be one of the mitogens that are needed for the growth of hepatoma cells. HCC is generally hypervascular, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) promotes HCC development and metastasis. Various inhibitors targeting EGFR and/or VEGF, VEGF receptor (VEGFR) have been developed as treatments of HCC. In phase-II studies of these growth factor inhibitors, the response rates are relatively low; however, high rates of disease control, enabling a good time to progression, have been achieved. Recently, a randomized phase III trial of sorafenib versus placebo conducted in patients with advanced HCC demonstrated the beneficial effects of this drug on the time-to-progression and overall survival of the patients, and the drug could become established as the standard chemotherapeutic agent for advanced HCC. Further clinical trials using biologic agents are warranted to prolong the survival in HCC patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Radiotherapy is often used to treat patients with unresectable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The present study examines the nature and frequency of adverse events with respect to liver function in such patients after radiotherapy. Methods: Forty-six patients with HCC who underwent radiotherapy were retrospectively examined. Radiotherapy was applied using coplanar 2–3-beam arrangements to a target dose of 50 Gy/5 weeks. The adverse hepatic events were evaluated according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Late Radiation Morbidity Scoring Scheme during the acute phase and the late phase by following the patients for up to 1 year. The influence on survival by adverse hepatic events and other factors was analyzed. Results: The full irradiation dose of 50 Gy was given to 40 patients (87.0%). Grade 3 or 4 toxicity was observed in 18 (39.1%) within 3 months after radiotherapy and in 11 (33.3%) of 33 thereafter, respectively. The most frequent and serious adverse events were hyperbilirubinemia, hypoalbuminemia, and ascites. The independent adverse prognostic factors for survival were portal vein tumor thrombus ( P = 0.0012), tumor response ( P = 0.011), acute adverse hepatic event ( P = 0.012), and late adverse hepatic event ( P = 0.015). Conclusions: Hypoalbuminemia, hyperbilirubinemia, and ascites were important hepatic adverse events that developed after applying radiotherapy to treat advanced HCC. These adverse events seriously affected survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Single-agent nivolumab showed durable responses, manageable safety, and promising survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the phase 1-2 CheckMate 040 study. We aimed to investigate nivolumab monotherapy compared with sorafenib monotherapy in the first-line setting for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.Methods: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at medical centres across 22 countries and territories in Asia, Australasia, Europe, and North America, patients at least 18 years old with histologically confirmed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for, or whose disease had progressed after, surgery or locoregional treatment; with no previous systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, with Child-Pugh class A and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and regardless of viral hepatitis status were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive nivolumab (240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02576509.Findings: Between Jan 11, 2016, and May 24, 2017, 743 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (nivolumab, n=371; sorafenib, n=372). At the primary analysis, the median follow-up for overall survival was 15·2 months (IQR 5·7-28·0) for the nivolumab group and 13·4 months (5·7-25·9) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 16·4 months (95% CI 13·9-18·4) with nivolumab and 14·7 months (11·9-17·2) with sorafenib (hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·72-1·02]; p=0·075; minimum follow-up 22·8 months); the protocol-defined significance level of p=0·0419 was not reached. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (1 [<1%] of 367 patients in the nivolumab group vs 52 [14%] of patients in the sorafenib group), aspartate aminotransferase increase (22 [6%] vs 13 [4%]), and hypertension (0 vs 26 [7%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 43 (12%) patients receiving nivolumab and 39 (11%) patients receiving sorafenib. Four deaths in the nivolumab group and one death in the sorafenib group were assessed as treatment related.Interpretation: First-line nivolumab treatment did not significantly improve overall survival compared with sorafenib, but clinical activity and a favourable safety profile were observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, nivolumab might be considered a therapeutic option for patients in whom tyrosine kinase inhibitors and antiangiogenic drugs are contraindicated or have substantial risks.Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nivolumab, a programmed death (PD)-1 (PD-1) inhibitor, led to durable responses, manageable safety, and increased survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In our retrospective analysis, we studied the immunobiology and potential associations between biomarkers and outcomes with nivolumab in HCC. Fresh and archival tumour samples from dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases of the CheckMate 040 trial were analysed by immunohistochemistry and RNA sequencing to assess several inflammatory gene expression signatures, including CD274 (PD-ligand 1 [PD-L1]), CD8A , LAG3 , and STAT1. Biomarkers were assessed for association with clinical outcomes (best overall response by blinded independent central review per RECIST v1.1 and overall survival [OS]). Complete or partial tumour responses were observed in PD-L1–positive and PD-L1–negative patients treated with nivolumab monotherapy. Median OS was 28.1 (95% CI 18.2–n.a.) vs. 16.6 months (95% CI 14.2–20.2) for patients with tumour PD-L1 ≥1% vs. <1% (p = 0.03). Increased CD3 and CD8 showed a non-significant trend towards improved OS (both p = 0.08), and macrophage markers were not associated with OS. Tumour PD-1 and PD-L1 expression were associated with improved OS (p = 0.05 and p = 0.03, respectively). An inflammatory gene signature consisting of 4 genes was associated with improved objective response rate (p = 0.05) and OS (p = 0.01). PD-1 and PD-L1 expression, biomarkers of inflammation, and inflammatory gene signatures trended with improved survival and response. While further confirmation within a larger phase III trial is needed to evaluate predictive value of these biomarkers, these exploratory analyses suggest that anti-tumour immune response may play a role in the treatment benefit of nivolumab in HCC. Certain tests may be used to provide a picture of how a tumour is escaping the immune system, allowing it to continue to grow and create more tumours. Therapies such as nivolumab are designed to help the immune system fight the tumour. These tests may be used to determine how effective such therapies will be in the treatment of advanced liver cancer. NCT01658878. • Many inflammation-related markers are associated with response to nivolumab in HCC. • Many inflammatory signature scores within tumour samples are associated with survival. • Lower ratios of systemic inflammation markers are associated with clinical benefit. • Patients with HCC demonstrated positive responses regardless of AFP and viral dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Aims GIDEON (Global Investigation of therapeutic DEcisions in hepatocellular carcinoma and Of its treatment with sorafeNib) is a prospective, observational registry study evaluating the safety of sorafenib and treatment practices in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. This large global database allowed for assessment of the use and tolerability of sorafenib in patients with liver dysfunction. Methods Baseline characteristics and medical/treatment history were collected in patients for whom a decision to treat with sorafenib had been made. Adverse event, dosing, and outcomes data were collected during follow-up. Results In the overall safety population (n = 3202), 1968 patients (61%) had Child-Pugh A status and 666 (21%) had Child-Pugh B. The majority of Child-Pugh A (72%) and Child-Pugh B (70%) patients received an initial sorafenib dose of 800 mg, consistent with the label, and dose reduction rates were 40% and 29%, respectively. The type and incidence of adverse events were generally consistent across Child-Pugh subgroups. The incidence of drug-related adverse events leading to discontinuation was similar between Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B patients (17% and 21%). In the intent-to-treat population (n = 3213), median overall survival (months [95% confidence interval]) was longer in Child-Pugh A patients (13.6 [12.8–14.7]) compared with Child-Pugh B patients (5.2 [4.6–6.3]). Conclusions In clinical practice, the safety profile of sorafenib appeared to be consistent across Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B patients. Findings suggest sorafenib may be safely used in some Child-Pugh B patients and indicate the importance of careful patient evaluation when making treatment decisions. Lay summary The GIDEON (Global Investigation of therapeutic DEcisions in hepatocellular carcinoma and Of its treatment with sorafeNib) study is a large prospective registry of patients with liver cancer who were treated with sorafenib. The aims were to evaluate the safety and tolerability of sorafenib among those in which the liver was not functioning properly. The study showed that the safety profile of sorafenib was consistent across patients with preserved liver function and those in which the liver was not functioning properly, and therefore, suggesting that sorafenib may be a valid treatment for some patients with liver impairment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: In Japan and South Korea, transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is an important locoregional treatment for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, has been shown effective and safe in patients with advanced HCC. This phase III trial assessed the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in Japanese and Korean patients with unresectable HCC who responded to TACE. Methods: Patients (n =458) with unresectable HCC, Child-Pugh class A cirrhosis and ⩾25% tumour necrosis/shrinkage 1–3months after 1 or 2 TACE sessions were randomised 1:1 to sorafenib 400mg bid or placebo and treated until progression/recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end-point was time to progression/recurrence (TTP). Secondary end-point was overall survival (OS). Findings: Baseline characteristics in the two groups were similar; >50% of patients started sorafenib >9weeks after TACE. Median TTP in the sorafenib and placebo groups was 5.4 and 3.7months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR), 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70–1.09; P = 0.252). HR (sorafenib/placebo) for OS was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.69–1.64; P =0.790). Median daily dose of sorafenib was 386mg, with 73% of patients having dose reductions and 91% having dose interruptions. Median administration of sorafenib and placebo was 17.1 and 20.1weeks, respectively. No unexpected adverse events were observed. Interpretation: This trial, conducted prior to the reporting of registrational phase III trials, found that sorafenib did not significantly prolong TTP in patients who responded to TACE. This may have been due to delays in starting sorafenib after TACE and/or low daily sorafenib doses. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background Nivolumab (NIVO), a programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor, is approved in several countries for sorafenib-treated patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) based on CheckMate040. We report findings on exploratory biomarker analyses. Methods In CheckMate040, pts with aHCC received NIVO regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status and HCC etiology. Baseline tumor samples were analyzed by IHC for expression of PD-L1, PD-1, T-cell markers (CD3, CD4, CD8, FOXP3), and macrophages (CD68, CD163), and (in a subset of pts) by RNA sequencing for inflammatory signatures (ISs). Results were correlated with clinical outcomes: response (complete response [CR]/partial response [PR]/stable disease [SD]/progressive disease [PD]) and overall survival (OS). Associations with etiology and geographical region (non-Asia vs Asia) were assessed. Data cutoff: June 2018. Results In 184 pts with evaluable data, increased tumor cell PD-L1 expression was associated with response (CR+PR vs SD [P = 0.00009]; CR+PR vs PD [P = 0.0007]) and OS (P = 0.03), as was increased PD-1 expression (CR+PR vs SD [P = 0.05]; CR+PR vs PD [P = 0.009]; OS [P = 0.05]). Of the T-cell markers assessed, CD3 was associated with response (n = 182, CR+PR vs SD; P = 0.05). In pts positive for CD3 or CD8, there was a trend toward improved OS (P = 0.08). There was no association between CD68 and CD163 expression and clinical outcomes. For 37 pts with RNA sequencing data available, median Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) IS score was higher in pts with PR vs SD (P = 0.05) and was correlated with improved OS (P = 0.01). For all inflammation markers assessed, there was no association with etiology or geographical region. Conclusions In pts with aHCC, improved OS and response to NIVO may be associated with higher PD-L1, PD-1, and CD3 expression, and higher BMS IS scores, supporting the role of PD-1 inhibition in HCC treatment. Further investigation of these biomarkers is required. Originally presented at the AACR 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]