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.

Valentina Burgio,1 Massimo Iavarone,2 Giovanni Giuseppe Di Costanzo,3 Fabio Marra,4 Sara Lonardi,5,6 Emiliano Tamburini,7 Fabio Piscaglia,8 Gianluca Masi,9,10 Ciro Celsa,11 Francesco Giuseppe Foschi,12 Marianna Silletta,13 Daniela Caterina Amoruso,14 Margherita Rimini,15 Mariangela Bruccoleri,2 Raffaella Tortora,3 Claudia Campani,4 Caterina Soldà ,6 Massimo Giuseppe Viola,16 Antonella Forgione,8 Fabio Conti,12 Francesca Salani,9,10 Silvia Catanese,9,10 Carmelo Marco Giacchetto,17 Claudia Fulgenzi,13 Carmine Coppola,14 Pietro Lampertico,18 Antonio Pellino,6,19 Gabriele Rancatore,17 Giuseppe Cabibbo,17 Francesca Ratti,20 Federica Pedica,21 Angelo Della Corte,22 Massimo Colombo,18 Francesco De Cobelli,23 Luca Aldrighetti,20 Stefano Cascinu,1,23 Andrea Casadei-Gardini1,23 1Department of Medical Oncology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, 20132, Italy; 2Foundation IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Milan, Italy; 3Department of Hepatology, Naples, 80131, Italy; 4Dipartimento di Medicina Sperimentale e Clinica, Università di Firenze, Firenze, Italy; 5Early Phase Clinical Trial Unit, Department of Oncology, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy; 6Medical Oncology Unit 1, Department of Oncology, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV - IRCCS, Padua, Italy; 7Department of Oncology and Palliative Care, Cardinale Hospital, Naples, Italy; 8Division of Internal Medicine, Hepatobiliary and Immunoallergic Disease, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 9Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy; 10Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy; 11Department of Surgical, Oncological and Oral Sciences (Di.Chir.On.S.), University of Palermo, Palermo, 90127, Italy; 12Internal Medicine, Infermi Hospital, Faenza (AUSL ROMAGNA), Ravenna, Italy; 13Department of Oncology, Campus Bio Medico, Roma, Italy; 14Hepatology Unit, Internal Medicine, Area Stabiese Hospital, Naples, Italy; 15Department of Oncology and Hematology, Division of Oncology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, 4121, Italy; 16Department of General Surgery and Emergency Surgery, Cardinale Hospital, Tricase, Italy; 17Section of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, PROMISE, University of Palermo, Palermo, 90127, Italy; 18Liver Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, 20132, Italy; 19Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padua, Padua, Italy; 20Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, Liver Center, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, 20132, Italy; 21Department of Experimental Oncology, Pathology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, 20132, Italy; 22Department of Radiology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, 20132, Italy; 23School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, 20132, ItalyCorrespondence: Andrea Casadei-GardiniDepartment of Medical Oncology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Via Olgettina n. 60, Milan, ItalyEmail casadeigardini@gmail.comBackground: Lenvatinib has been approved in Italy since October 2019 as a first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and to date data on effectiveness and safety of lenvatinib are not available in our region. To fill this gap, we performed a multicentric analysis of the real-world treatment outcomes with the propensity score matching in a cohort of Italian patients with unresectable HCC who were treated with either sorafenib or lenvatinib.Aims and Methods: To evaluate the effectiveness of sorafenib and lenvatinib as primary treatment of advanced HCC in clinical practice we performed a multicentric analysis of the treatment outcomes of 288 such patients recruited in 11 centers in Italy. A propensity score was used to mitigate confounding due to referral biases in the assessment of mortality and progression-free survival.Results: Over a follow-up period of 11 months the Cox regression model showed 48% reduction of death risk for patients treated with lenvatinib (95% CI: 0.34– 0.81; p = 0.0034), compared with those treated with sorafenib. The median PFS was 9.0 and 4.9 months for lenvatinib and sorafenib arm, respectively. Patients treated with lenvatinib showed a higher percentage of response rate (29.4% vs 2.8%; p < 0.00001) compared with patients treated with sorafenib. Sorafenib was shown to be correlated with more HFSR, diarrhea and fatigue, while lenvatinib with more hypertension and fatigue.Conclusion: Our study highlighted for the first time the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in an Italian cohort of patients.Keywords: hepatocarcinoma, sorafenib, lenvatinib

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.

All Supplementary Data

Purpose:After 10 years of clinical practice and research studies, there are still no validated prognostic or predictive factors of response to sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). On the basis of the results of our two retrospective studies, we designed the multicenter INNOVATE study with the aim to validate the role of nitric oxide synthase 3 (NOS3) and ANGPT2 polymorphisms in patients with HCC treated with sorafenib [NCT02786342].Patients and Methods:This prospective multicenter study was conducted at 10 centers in Italy. All eligible patients received a continuous oral treatment with 400 mg of sorafenib twice daily. Genotyping analysis was performed for NOS3 (rs2070744) and ANGPT2 SNPs (rs55633437). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), whereas secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-control rate.Results:A total of 165 patients were enrolled between March 2016 and June 2018. NOS3 rs2070744 CC/CT genotypes were significantly associated with a higher median PFS (5.9 months vs. 2.4 months; HR = 0.43; P = 0.0007) and OS (15.7 months vs. 8.6 months; HR = 0.38; P < 0.0001) compared with TT genotype. There was no statistically significant association between ANGPT2 rs55633437 TT/GT genotypes and PFS (2.4 months vs. 5.7 months; HR = 1.93; P = 0.0833) and OS (15.1 months vs. 13.0 months; HR = 2.68; P = 0.55) when compared with the other genotype. Following adjustment for clinical covariates, multivariate analysis confirmed NOS3 as an independent prognostic factor for PFS (HR = 0.50; P = 0.0128) and OS (HR = 0.29; P = 0.0041).Conclusions:The INNOVATE study met the primary endpoint, confirming that patients with advanced HCC with NOS3 rs2070744 CC/CT genotypes had a better prognosis with respect to TT genotype patients.

Background Loco-regional treatments have improved the survival of patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but tumor relapse is a frequent event and survival rates remain low. Moreover, conflicting evidences address early HCC patients to surgery or radiofrequency ablation (RFA), with the clinical need to find predictive non-invasive biomarkers able to guide treatment choice and define patients survival. Methods Two independent case series of treatment-naive HCC patients treated with local RFA, and a cohort of 30 HCC patients treated with liver surgery were enrolled. On the basis of literature evidence, we customized a panel of 21 miRNAs correlated with relapse and prognosis after local curative treatment of HCC. Results Expression levels of let-7c predict tumor relapse after RFA; we also investigated the same panel in a small cohort of HCC patients undergoing surgery, finding no statistically significance in predicting tumor relapse or survival. Moreover, interaction test indicated that let-7c expression levels are predictive for identifying a subset of patients that should be addressed to surgery. Conclusion Results from this study could predict prognosis of early HCC patients, helping to address early HCC patients to surgery or RFA treatment.

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.

We assessed long-term mortality and its association with chronic alcohol-related diseases in patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) because of acute alcoholic intoxication (AAI). A retrospective cohort study was performed at the ED of Sant’Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy. 3304 patients, corresponding to 6415 admissions for AAI, who accessed the ED from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2017, were studied. The ED electronic registry system was used to assess living status on 08 May 2020 and to obtain the prespecified potential predictors, i.e., age at first admission, sex, alcohol use disorder (AUD), substance use disorder (SUD), more than 1 admission to ED for trauma, mental and behavioral disorders, neurological disorders, and cardiovascular disease. The median follow-up time was 9.3 years and the time on risk was 30,053 person years (PY) with a death rate corresponding to 4.42 (95% CI 3.74–5.26) per 1000 PY (n = 133 deaths). The death rate was higher in patients with AUD (17.30) than in those without AUD (1.98) and in those with SUD (13.58) than in those without SUD (3.80). Lastly, there was a clearly higher death rate among AUD+ SUD+ (20.89) compared to AUD–SUD–patients (1.74). At multivariable Cox regression, AUD, SUD, and liver cirrhosis were strong and independent predictors of time-to-death. Using standardized mortality ratios, a clear excess of mortality was evident for all the age bands from (40–45] to (60–65] years. Mortality is higher in AAI than in the general population and chronic alcohol-related diseases are strongly associated with it.

We assessed the impact of long-term albumin administration to hyponatremic patients with ascites enrolled in the ANSWER trial.The normalization rate of baseline hyponatremia and the 18-month incidence rate of at least moderate hyponatremia were evaluated.The hyponatremia normalization rate was higher with albumin than with standard medical treatment (45% vs 28%, P = 0.042 at 1 month). Long-term albumin ensured a lower incidence of at least moderate hyponatremia than standard medical treatment (incidence rate ratio: 0.245 [CI 0.167-0.359], P0.001).Long-term albumin administration improves hyponatremia and reduces episodes of at least moderate hyponatremia in outpatients with cirrhosis and ascites.

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.

BackgroundMetabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) represents a new inclusive definition of the whole spectrum of liver diseases associated to metabolic disorders. The main objective of this study was to compare patients with MAFLD and non-MAFLD with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) included in a nationally representative cohort.MethodsWe analysed 6882 consecutive patients with HCC enrolled from 2002 to 2019 by 23 Italian Liver Cancer centres to compare epidemiological and future trends in three subgroups: pure, single aetiology MAFLD (S-MAFLD); mixed aetiology MAFLD (metabolic and others, M-MAFLD); and non-MAFLD HCC.ResultsMAFLD was diagnosed in the majority of patients with HCC (68.4%). The proportion of both total MAFLD and S-MAFLD HCC significantly increased over time (from 50.4% and 3.6% in 2002–2003, to 77.3% and 28.9% in 2018–2019, respectively, pConclusionsThe prevalence of MAFLD HCC in Italy is rapidly increasing to cover the majority of patients with HCC. Despite a less favourable cancer stage at diagnosis, patients with MAFLD HCC have a lower risk of HCC-related death, suggesting reduced cancer aggressiveness.

Background: Inflammation is a long-established hallmark of liver fibrosis and carcinogenesis. Eosinophils are emerging as crucial components of the inflammatory process influencing cancer development. The role of blood eosinophils in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving systemic treatment is an unexplored field. Objective: The objective of this study was to analyse the prognostic role of the baseline eosinophil count in patients with sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma. Patients and methods: A training cohort of 92 patients with advanced- or intermediate-stage sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma and two validation cohorts of 65 and 180 patients were analysed. Overall survival and progression-free survival in relation to baseline eosinophil counts were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: A negative prognostic impact of low baseline eosinophil counts (< 50*109/L) was demonstrated in all cohorts (training cohort: hazard ratio = 50.1, 95% confidence interval 11.6-216.5, p < 0.0001 for low vs high eosinophil counts; first validation cohort: hazard ratio = 4.55, 95% confidence interval 1.24-16.65, p = 0.022; second validation cohort: hazard ratio = 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.83-5.64, p < 0.0001). Moreover, low eosinophil counts had a negative prognostic role in patients progressing on or intolerant to sorafenib who received second-line regorafenib, but not capecitabine or best supportive care. Conclusions: Our analysis identified baseline blood eosinophil counts as a new prognostic factor in patients with sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma. Concerning second-line therapies, eosinophil counts were associated with survival outcomes only in regorafenib-treated patients, suggesting a possible predictive role in this setting.

Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC-R) after Liver Transplant (LT) is difficult to manage and often characterized by relevant aggressiveness and extrahepatic localizations. Currently TKIs are the only therapeutic option, but results in term of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival are disappointing. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in association with recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody to VEGF were to be proved effective in non-LT patients with metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma in determining tumor stabilization and improved survival. However, as in LT patients immunotherapy may increase the risk of acute liver rejection, such combination therapy has not been used so far. We designed a proof-of-concept study to analyze safety and efficacy of Nivolumab and Bevacizumab in LT patients as treatment for HCC-R after LT. Combination therapy received nominal authorization from the Provincial Medicines Commission. Candidate patients underwent routine blood test (hepatic, renal, and cardiac function), echocardiogram and a total body CT as baseline assessment. Patients with creatinine higher than 1.5 ULN or with ejection fraction lower than 45% were excluded. Five patients who experienced HCC-R 2 to 8 years after LT with pulmonary, lymph node, adrenal, bones, and hepatic localization and were either intolerant to TKIs or had had progression on TKIs, were included. All recurrent tumors and extra-hepatic localizations were characterized by high biologic aggressiveness. Patients received Nivolumab infusion every 14 days at a dose of 240 mg. Total body CT scan was performed every 8 weeks. When progression disease (PD) was detected at CT scan, Bevacizumab was added at a dose of 5 mg/kg every 14 days. One patient received a single Nivolumab infusion but was withdrawn because of rapid tumor progression, eventually followed by death. Another patient experienced moderate/severe rejection, which resolved with 1g/day Methylprednisolone e.v. for 3[EV1] days followed by Prednisone 50mg/day for 1 week then tapered and stopped. This patient was maintained on double therapy without residual problems. The 4 alive patients are still on double therapy after a mean period of treatment of 36±21 weeks. Disease stability with the combination of Nivolumab/Bevacizumab has been achieved in all patients at hepatic and all extra-hepatic HCC localization but bone, where 2/2 patients experienced progression. It should be underlined, however, that progression was very slow and mean survival of these two patients on combination therapy is 54±2 weeks. Combination therapy was very well tolerated, with few side effects throughout treatment period. These results indicate that the combination Nivolumab/Bevacizumab can be safely used in liver transplant patients. The risk of acute allograft rejection is minimal and manageable. Bone metastases remain an unsolved issue and need further alternative therapeutic approach. For patients with hepatic or other extra-hepatic localization, this combination obtained a relevant and protracted stabilization of disease. Citation Format: Lorenza Di Marco, Alessandra Pivetti, Nicola De Maria, Francesco Giuseppe Foschi, Dante Romagnoli, Federico Casari, Cristian Caporali, Paolo Magistri, Barbara Catellani, Fabrizio Di Benedetto, Erica Villa. Combination therapy with Nivolumab/Bevacizumab is safe and effective in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplant [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference: Advances in the Pathogenesis and Molecular Therapies of Liver Cancer; 2022 May 5-8; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2022;28(17_Suppl):Abstract nr PO003.

Background After the advent of new treatment options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the identification of prognostic factors is crucial for the selection of the most appropriate therapy for each patient. Patients and methods With the aim to fill this gap, we applied recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) to a cohort of 404 patients treated with lenvatinib. Results The application of RPA resulted in a classification based on five variables that originated a new prognostic score, the lenvatinib prognostic index (LEP) index, identifying three groups: low risk [patients with prognostic nutritional index (PNI) >43.3 and previous trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE)]; medium risk [patients with PNI >43.3 but without previous TACE and patients with PNI, Highlights • This study shows a new prognostic index (LEP index) for patients undergoing systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. • LEP index is an easy-to-use tool, based on clinical and laboratory features, that identifies three risk groups. • LEP index may be used to stratify hepatocellular carcinoma patients in order to select the most appropriate treatment.

Andrea Casadei Gardini,1* Marco Puzzoni,2* Francesco Montagnani,3* Giorgia Marisi,4* Emiliano Tamburini,5 Alessandro Cucchetti,6,7 Leonardo Solaini,6,7 Francesco Giuseppe Foschi,8 Fabio Conti,8 Giorgio Ercolani,6,7 Stefano Cascinu,1 Mario Scartozzi21Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences for Children and Adults, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy; 2Department of Medical Oncology, Cagliari University Hospital, SS 554 Monserrato, CA, Italy; 3Department of Oncology, Azienda Sanitaria locale di Biella, Ponderano, Italy; 4Biosciences Laboratory, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, 47014 Meldola, Italy; 5Department of Medical Oncology, Card. G. Panico Hospital of Tricase, 73039 Tricase, Italy; 6Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna 40126, Italy; 7General and Oncologic Surgery, Morgagni-Pierantoni Hospital, Forlì, Italy; 8Department of Internal Medicine, Degli Infermi Hospital, Faenza 48018, Italy*These authors contributed equally to this workPurpose: Sorafenib is the only approved drug in first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Recently, the Phase III REFLECT trial proved lenvatinib not inferior to sorafenib, potentially establishing a new standard of care in this setting. The study showed that both have similar overall survivals, yet with longer time to progression for lenvatinib. Currently, the selection of one or other is not based on clinical or biological parameters for this reason we performed a network meta-analysis and we also analyzed the REFLECT trial and its implications in the current and future clinical practice.Materials and methods: We performed the meta-analysis according to the Prisma statement recommendations. HR was the measure of association for time to progression and overall survival. The pooled analysis of HR was performed using a random effect model, fixing a 5% error as index of statistical significance.Results: For HBV-positive patients, there was a clear trend in favor of lenvatinib over sorafenib (HR 0.82 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.60–1.15). For HCV-positive no differences between lenvatinib and sorafenib were observed (HR 0.91 95% CrI 0.41–2.01). The data showed that lenvatinib could be the best drug for HBV-positive patients in 59% of cases compared to only 1% of patients treated with sorafenib.Conclusion: The identification of clinical or biological markers that could predict response or resistance to treatments is needed to guide treatment decision. This network meta-analysis demonstrates that the etiology is a good candidate and this result should be validated in a specific trial.Keywords: sorafenib, hepatocellular carcinoma, randomized trial, biomarkers, erlotinib, linifanib, sunitinib, brivanib

Andrea Casadei Gardini,1 Giorgia Marisi,2 Matteo Canale,2 Francesco Giuseppe Foschi,3 Gabriele Donati,4 Giorgio Ercolani,5,6 Martina Valgiusti,1 Alessandro Passardi,1 Giovanni Luca Frassineti,1 Emanuela Scarpi7 1Department of Medical Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy; 2Biosciences Laboratory, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy; 3Department of Internal Medicine, Degli Infermi Hospital, Faenza, Italy; 4Internal Medicine, Infermi Hospital, AUSL Romagna, Rimini, Italy; 5Department of General Surgery, Morgagni-Pierantoni Hospital, Forlì, Italy; 6Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 7Unit of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy Background and aims: So far, no randomized trial or meta-analysis has been conducted on overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) factors in patients treated with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) alone. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate prognostic factors of OS and RFS in patients treated with RFA.Methods: A primary analysis was planned to evaluate the clinical prognostic factor of OS. RFS was the secondary aim. Thirty-four studies published from 2003 to 2017 were analyzed. They included 11,216 hepatocellular carcinoma patients.Results: The results showed that Child–Pugh B vs Child–Pugh A (HR =2.32; 95% CI: 2.201–2.69; P2 cm vs 3 cm vs 1 nodule (HR =1.59; 95% CI: 1.46–1.74; P20 ng/mL (HR =1.46; 95% CI: 1.25–1.70; P

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma prognosis depends on both liver and tumor determinants, especially on maximum tumor diameter, multifocality, and presence of portal vein thrombosis, despite apparently complete tumor removal by resection or liver transplantation. Aims: To examine parameters of hepatocellular carcinoma aggressiveness as tumor size increases. Methods: A large hepatocellular carcinoma database was examined for trends in serum alpha-fetoprotein and the percentage of patients with macroscopic portal vein thrombosis or tumor multifocality. Results: A total of 13,016 hepatocellular carcinoma patients were identified having full tumor and survival data. Of these, 76.56% were male and 23.44% were female, with a median age of 64.4 years. We found that as the maximum tumor diameter increased, there was a significant trend for increased alpha-fetoprotein levels ( PConclusions: The greater fold-increases in alpha-fetoprotein and portal vein thrombosis compared with increases in maximum tumor diameter imply that hepatocellular carcinoma characteristics may change with increasing size to a more aggressive phenotype, suggesting that follow-up tumor sampling might be useful, in addition to baseline tumor sampling, for optimal therapeutic choices to be made.

Background. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) factors, especially maximum tumor diameter (MTD), tumor multifocality, portal vein thrombosis (PVT), and serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), influence survival. Aim. To examine patterns of tumor factors in large HCC patients. Methods. A database of large HCC patients was examined. Results. A multiple Cox proportional hazard model on death identified low serum albumin levels and the presence of PVT and multifocality, with each having a hazard ratio ≥2.0. All combinations of these three parameters were examined in relation to survival. Using univariate Cox analysis, the combination of albumin &gt, 3.5 g/dL and the absence of both PVT and multifocality had the best survival rate, while all combinations that included the presence of PVT had poor survival and hazard ratios. We identified four clinical phenotypes, each with a distinct median survival: patients with or without PVT or multifocality plus serum albumin ≥3.5 (g/dL), with each subgroup displaying high (≥100 IU/mL) or low (&lt, 100 IU/mL) blood AFP levels. Across a range of MTDs, we identified only two significant trends, blood AFP and platelets. Conclusions. Patients with large HCCs have distinct phenotypes and survival, as identified by the combination of PVT, multifocality, and blood albumin levels.

Background Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment remains a big challenge in the field of oncology. The liver disease (viral or not viral) underlying HCC turned out to be crucial in determining the biologic behavior of the tumor, including its response to treatment. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the role of the etiology of the underlying liver disease in survival outcomes. Patients and methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective study on a large cohort of patients treated with lenvatinib as first-line therapy for advanced HCC from both Eastern and Western institutions. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results Among the 1232 lenvatinib-treated HCC patients, 453 (36.8%) were hepatitis C virus positive, 268 hepatitis B virus positive (21.8%), 236 nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) correlate (19.2%) and 275 had other etiologies (22.3%). The median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 6.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.9-6.7 months] and the median overall survival (mOS) was 15.8 months (95% CI 14.9-17.2 months). In the univariate analysis for OS NASH-HCC was associated with longer mOS [22.2 versus 15.1 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.69; 95% CI 0.56-0.85; P = 0.0006]. In the univariate analysis for PFS NASH-HCC was associated with longer mPFS (7.5 versus 6.5 months; HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71-0.99; P = 0.0436). The multivariate analysis confirmed NASH-HCC (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.48-0.86; P = 0.0028) as an independent prognostic factor for OS, along with albumin–bilirubin (ALBI) grade, extrahepatic spread, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, portal vein thrombosis, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status and alpha-fetoprotein. An interaction test was performed between sorafenib and lenvatinib cohorts and the results highlighted the positive predictive role of NASH in favor of the lenvatinib arm (P = 0.0047). Conclusion NASH has been identified as an independent prognostic factor in a large cohort of patients with advanced HCC treated with lenvatinib, thereby suggesting the role of the etiology in the selection of patients for tyrosine kinase treatment. If validated, this result could provide new insights useful to improve the management of these patients., Highlights • Evidence supported the idea that etiology could sustain a crucial role in biological behavior. • NASH constitutes one of the more important risk factors for hepatocarcinoma, and its incidence is increasing very fast. • We performed an analysis in patients treated with lenvatinib as the first-line therapy. • NASH was found to be an independent prognostic factor.

Introduction: The prognosis of patients undergoing transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is extremely variable, and a confounding factor is that TACE is often repeated several times. We retrospectively evaluated the accuracy of different prognostic scores and staging systems in estimating overall survival (OS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: An analysis considering prognostic models as time-varying variables was performed, calculating OS from the time of TACE to the time of the subsequent treatment. Total follow-up time for each patient was therefore split into several observation times accounting for each TACE procedure. Values of the likelihood ratio test (LRT) and Akaike information criterion (AIC) were used to compare different systems. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted to identify additional factors predictive of OS. We analyzed 1,610 TACE performed in 1,058 patients recorded in the Italian Liver Cancer database from 2008 through 2016. Results: The median OS of the enrolled patients was 41 months. According to LRT χ2 and AIC values based on the time-varying analysis, mHAP-III achieved the best values (41.72 and 4,625.49, respectively, p < 0.0001), indicating the highest predictive performance compared with all other scores (HAP, mHAP-II, ALBI, and pALBI) and staging systems (MELD, ITALICA, CLIP, MESH, MESIAH, JIS, HKLC, and BCLC). In the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, mHAP-III maintained an independent effect on OS (hazard ratio 1.31, 95% CI: 1.10–1.55, p < 0.0001). Time-varying age, alcoholic etiology, radiologic response to TACE, and performing ablation or surgery after TACE were additional significant variables resulting from the multivariable model. Conclusion: An innovative time-varying analysis revealed that mHAP-III was the most accurate model in predicting OS in patients with HCC undergoing TACE. Other clinical pre- and post-TACE variables were also found to be relevant for this prediction.

Background and Aim: Lenvatinib is a standard of care option in first-line therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In the present study, we aim to identify, in patients with HCC treated with lenvatinib, a possible association between occurrence and grading of adverse events (AEs) and outcome. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 606 Japanese and Italian patients treated with lenvatinib in first-line setting and investigated the possible correlation between the onset of AEs, toxicity grade (G) and outcome measures such as overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: The appearance of arterial hypertension G≥2 independently predicted prolonged OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46–0.93, P=.0188], whereas decreased appetite G≥2 independently predicted decreased OS (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.25–2.32, P=.0007) by multivariate analysis. Appearance of hand-foot skin reaction independently predicted prolonged PFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56–0.93, P=.0149), whereas decreased appetite G≥2 predicted decreased PFS (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.04–1.77, P=.0277). Conclusions: Our main findings are that the occurrence of arterial hypertension G≥2 is a predictor of longer survival, whereas decreased appetite G≥2 predicts for a poor prognosis. A careful management of AEs under lenvatinib treatment for HCC is required, to improve patients’ quality of life, minimize the need for treatment discontinuation and achieve optimal outcome.

OBJECTIVE: We externally validated the fatty liver index (FLI), the lipid accumulation product (LAP), the hepatic steatosis index (HSI), and the Zhejiang University index (ZJU) for the diagnosis of fatty liver (FL) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in the general population. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The validation was performed on 2159 citizens of the town of Bagnacavallo (Ravenna, Italy). Calibration was evaluated by calculating the calibration slope and intercept and by inspecting calibration plots; discrimination was evaluated using the c-statistic. RESULTS: The average calibration slope was 1 and the average intercept was 0 for all combinations of outcomes and biomarkers. As for FL, the c-statistic was 0.85 for FLI, 0.83 for ZJU, 0.82 for HSI, and 0.80 for LAP. As for NAFLD, the c-statistic was 0.77 for FLI, 0.76 for ZJU, 0.75 for HSI, and 0.74 for LAP. All the biomarkers were strongly correlated with each other. CONCLUSION: FLI, LAP, HSI, and ZJU can be used to diagnose FL in the Bagnacavallo population, even if FLI has the highest discriminative ability. The same biomarkers perform similarly for the diagnosis of NAFLD even if FLI has a small advantage as discrimination is concerned.

Background: Inflammation is a long-established hallmark of liver fibrosis and carcinogenesis. Eosinophils are emerging as crucial components of the inflammatory process influencing cancer development. The role of blood eosinophils in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving systemic treatment is an unexplored field. Objective: The objective of this study was to analyse the prognostic role of the baseline eosinophil count in patients with sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma. Patients and Methods: A training cohort of 92 patients with advanced- or intermediate-stage sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma and two validation cohorts of 65 and 180 patients were analysed. Overall survival and progression-free survival in relation to baseline eosinophil counts were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: A negative prognostic impact of low baseline eosinophil counts (< 50*109/L) was demonstrated in all cohorts (training cohort: hazard ratio = 50.1, 95% confidence interval 11.6–216.5, p < 0.0001 for low vs high eosinophil counts; first validation cohort: hazard ratio = 4.55, 95% confidence interval 1.24–16.65, p = 0.022; second validation cohort: hazard ratio = 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.83–5.64, p < 0.0001). Moreover, low eosinophil counts had a negative prognostic role in patients progressing on or intolerant to sorafenib who received second-line regorafenib, but not capecitabine or best supportive care. Conclusions: Our analysis identified baseline blood eosinophil counts as a new prognostic factor in patients with sorafenib-treated hepatocellular carcinoma. Concerning second-line therapies, eosinophil counts were associated with survival outcomes only in regorafenib-treated patients, suggesting a possible predictive role in this setting.

Sorafenib represents the standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), even though a large number of patients have reported limited efficacy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic value of single-nucleotide polymorphisms on angiopoietin-2 (ANGPT2) and endothelial-derived nitric oxide synthase (NOS3) genes in 135 patients with advanced HCC receiving sorafenib. Eight ANGPT2 polymorphisms were analyzed by direct sequencing in relation to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). In univariate analysis, ANGPT2rs55633437 and NOS3 rs2070744 were associated with OS and PFS. In particular, patients with ANGPT2rs55633437 TT/GT genotypes had significantly lower median OS (4.66 vs. 15.5 months, hazard ratio (HR) 4.86, 95% CI 2.73&ndash, 8.67, p &lt, 0.001) and PFS (1.58 vs. 6.27 months, HR 4.79, 95% CI 2.73&ndash, 8.35, p &lt, 0.001) than those homozygous for the G allele. Moreover, patients with NOS3 rs2070744 TC/CC genotypes had significantly higher median OS (15.6 vs. 9.1 months, HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44&ndash, 0.97, p = 0.036) and PFS (7.03 vs. 3.5 months, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30&ndash, 0.63, p &lt, 0.001) than patients homozygous for the T allele. Multivariate analysis confirmed these polymorphisms as independent prognostic factors. Our results suggest that ANGPT2rs55633437 and NOS3 rs2070744 polymorphisms could identify a subset of HCC patients more resistant to sorafenib.

Purpose: After 10 years of clinical practice and research studies, there are still no validated prognostic or predictive factors of response to sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). On the basis of the results of our two retrospective studies, we designed the multicenter INNOVATE study with the aim to validate the role of nitric oxide synthase 3 (NOS3) and ANGPT2 polymorphisms in patients with HCC treated with sorafenib [NCT02786342]. Patients and Methods: This prospective multicenter study was conducted at 10 centers in Italy. All eligible patients received a continuous oral treatment with 400 mg of sorafenib twice daily. Genotyping analysis was performed for NOS3 (rs2070744) and ANGPT2 SNPs (rs55633437). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), whereas secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-control rate. Results: A total of 165 patients were enrolled between March 2016 and June 2018. NOS3 rs2070744 CC/CT genotypes were significantly associated with a higher median PFS (5.9 months vs. 2.4 months; HR = 0.43; P = 0.0007) and OS (15.7 months vs. 8.6 months; HR = 0.38; P < 0.0001) compared with TT genotype. There was no statistically significant association between ANGPT2 rs55633437 TT/GT genotypes and PFS (2.4 months vs. 5.7 months; HR = 1.93; P = 0.0833) and OS (15.1 months vs. 13.0 months; HR = 2.68; P = 0.55) when compared with the other genotype. Following adjustment for clinical covariates, multivariate analysis confirmed NOS3 as an independent prognostic factor for PFS (HR = 0.50; P = 0.0128) and OS (HR = 0.29; P = 0.0041). Conclusions: The INNOVATE study met the primary endpoint, confirming that patients with advanced HCC with NOS3 rs2070744 CC/CT genotypes had a better prognosis with respect to TT genotype patients.

The application of non-targeted serum metabolomics profiling represents a noninvasive tool to identify new clinical biomarkers and to provide early diagnostic differentiation, and insight into the pathological mechanisms underlying hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progression. In this study, we used proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (1H-NMR) Spectroscopy and multivariate data analysis to profile the serum metabolome of 64 HCC patients, in early (n = 28) and advanced (n = 36) disease stages. We found that 1H-NMR metabolomics profiling could discriminate early from advanced HCC patients with a cross-validated accuracy close to 100%. Orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) showed significant changes in serum glucose, lactate, lipids and some amino acids, such as alanine, glutamine, 1-methylhistidine, lysine and valine levels between advanced and early HCC patients. Moreover, in early HCC patients, Kaplan&ndash, Meier analysis highlighted the serum tyrosine level as a predictor for overall survival (OS). Overall, our analysis identified a set of metabolites with possible clinical and biological implication in HCC pathophysiology.