The Evolving Scenario in the Assessment of Radiological Response for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Era of Immunotherapy: Strengths and Weaknesses of Surrogate Endpoints

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a challenging malignancy characterised by clinical and biological heterogeneity, independent of the stage. Despite the application of surveillance programs, a substantial proportion of patients are diagnosed at advanced stages when curative treatments are no longer available. The landscape of systemic therapies has been rapidly growing over the last decade, and the advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has changed the paradigm of systemic treatments. The coexistence of the tumour with underlying cirrhosis exposes patients with HCC to competing events related to tumour progression and/or hepatic decompensation. Therefore, it is relevant to adopt proper clinical endpoints to assess the extent of treatment benefit. While overall survival (OS) is the most accepted endpoint for phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and drug approval, it is affected by many limitations. To overcome these limits, several clinical and radiological outcomes have been used. For instance, progression-free survival (PFS) is a useful endpoint to evaluate the benefit of sequential treatments, since it is not influenced by post-progression treatments, unlike OS. Moreover, radiological endpoints such as time to progression (TTP) and objective response rate (ORR) are frequently adopted. Nevertheless, the surrogacy between these endpoints and OS in the setting of unresectable HCC (uHCC) remains uncertain. Since most of the surrogate endpoints are radiology-based (e.g., PFS, TTP, ORR), the use of standardised tools is crucial for the evaluation of radiological response. The optimal way to assess the radiological response has been widely debated, and many criteria have been proposed over the years. Furthermore, none of the criteria have been validated for immunotherapy in advanced HCC. The coexistence of the underlying chronic liver disease and the access to several lines of treatments highlight the urgent need to capture early clinical benefit and the need for standardised radiological criteria to assess cancer response when using ICIs in mono- or combination therapies. Here, we review the most commonly used clinical and radiological endpoints for trial design, as well as their surrogacy with OS. We also review the criteria for radiological response to treatments for HCC, analysing the major issues and the potential future perspectives

Balancing efficacy and tolerability of first-line systemic therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a network metanalysis

Background: Atezolizumab+Bevacizumab represents the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced HCC. However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune-checkpoint inhibitors(ICI)+tyrosine-kinase inhibitors(TKIs) are lacking. Objectives: This network meta-analysis(NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable-advanced HCC. Method:A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to 31st October, 2022. Phase III randomized controlled trials(RCTs) testing TKIs, including Sorafenib and Lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival(OS) and progression-free survival(PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time (RMST). A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy(15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade≥3(severe)adverse events(SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio(ISER) as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAEs probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments. Results:Nine RCTs enrolling 6600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability(88%)of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab was favored in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, Lenvatinib was favored in 76% of cases. Conclusions: Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab, Lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity

The Role of Endoscopy in the Palliation of Pancreatico-Biliary Cancers: Biliary Drainage, Management of Gastrointestinal Obstruction, and Role in Relief of Oncologic Pain

Therapeutic endoscopy permits many and various treatments for cancer palliation in patients with bilio-pancreatic cancers, enabling different options, supporting patients during their route to oncologic treatments, and trying to improve their quality of life. Therefore, both endoscopic and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided techniques are performed in this scenario. We performed a literature review focusing on the role of endoscopy in the palliation of those advanced pancreatic and biliary cancers developing malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and pain unresponsive to medical therapies. Therefore, we explored and focused on the clinical outcomes of endoscopic procedures in this scenario. In fact, the endoscopic treatment is based on achieving biliary drainage in the case of MBO through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), while GOO is endoscopically treated through the deployment of an enteral stent or the creation of EUS-guided gastro-entero-anastomosis (EUS-GEA). Furthermore, untreatable chronic abdominal pain is a major issue in patients unresponsive to high doses of painkillers, so EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) or celiac ganglia neurolysis (CGN) helps to reduce dosage and have better pain control. Therefore, therapeutic endoscopy in the palliative setting is an effective and safe approach for managing most of the clinical manifestations of advanced biliopancreatic tumors

Efficacy of 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate versus 4 L polyethylene glycol in split-dose for colonoscopy cleansing in out and inpatient: A multicentre, randomized trial (OVER 2019)

Background and aims: Adequate bowel cleansing is essential for colonoscopy quality. A novel 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate (1 L PEG+ASC) solution has been recently introduced. Nevertheless, the efficacy of 1 L PEG+ASC as compared to that of high-volume bowel preparation in both inpatients and outpatients is still unclear. Patients and methods: This single-blinded, non-inferiority study randomized patients undergoing colonoscopy to receive split-dose 1 L PEG+ASC or 4 L PEG. The primary endpoint was the overall cleansing success. Secondary endpoints were excellent cleansing and high-quality cleansing of the right colon, as well as lesions detection rate, patient compliance, tolerability and safety. Results: Overall, 478 patients were randomized to 1 L PEG+ASC (N = 236) or 4 L PEG (N = 242). The 1 L PEG+ASC showed higher cleansing success rate (91.8% vs 83.6%; P=0.01) and a high-quality cleansing of the right colon (52.3% and 38.5%; P=0.004) compared to 4 L PEG. Moreover, 1 L PEG+ASC achieved a higher cleansing success in out-patients (96.3%% vs 88.6%; P=0.018), and a similar success rate in the in-patients (84.7% vs 76.7%; P=0.18). Adenoma detection rate, tolerability and incidence of adverse events were comparable between preparations. Conclusions: The 1 L PEG+ASC showed higher efficacy in achieving adequate colon cleansing compared with 4 L PEG, particularly in the right colon. No differences in the tolerability and safety were detected

Role of Etiology in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Treated with Lenvatinib: A Counterfactual Event-Based Mediation Analysis

Background: Whether the etiology of underlying liver disease represents a prognostic factor in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with lenvatinib is still a matter of debate. This study investigates whether the viral etiology of HCC plays a prognostic role in overall survival (OS). Methods: Data derived from a multicenter series of 313 HCC patients treated with lenvatinib between 2019 and 2022 were analyzed. Actuarial survival estimates were computed using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. We performed an event-based counterfactual mediation analysis to estimate direct (chronic inflammation and immunosuppression), indirect (tobacco smoking, alcohol use, illicit drug abuse with injections), and the total effect of viral etiology on OS. Results were expressed as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI. Results: Median OS was 21 months (95% CI: 20–23) in the group with other etiologies and 15 months (14–16) in the group with viral etiology (p p < 0.0001). No difference in terms of adverse event rate was observed between the two groups. Conclusions: Patients affected by HCC with nonviral etiology treated with lenvatinib exhibit longer survival than those with viral etiology. This finding may have relevance in the treatment decision-making process

Real-Life Clinical Data of Lenvatinib versus Sorafenib for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Italy

Background: 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 &lt; 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

Landscape of alcohol-related hepatocellular carcinoma in the last 15 years highlights the need to expand surveillance programs

Background &amp; Aims: Alcohol abuse and metabolic disorders are leading causes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) worldwide. Alcohol-related aetiology is associated with a worse prognosis compared with viral agents, because of the lower percentage of patients diagnosed with HCC under routine surveillance and a higher burden of comorbidity in alcohol abusers. This study aimed to describe the evolving clinical scenario of alcohol-related HCC over 15 years (2006–2020) in Italy. Methods: Data from the Italian Liver Cancer (ITA.LI.CA) registry were used: 1,391 patients were allocated to three groups based on the year of HCC diagnosis (2006–2010; 2011–2015; 2016–2020). Patient characteristics, HCC treatment, and overall survival were compared among groups. Survival predictors were also investigated. Results: Approximately 80% of alcohol-related HCCs were classified as cases of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease. Throughout the quinquennia, <50% of HCCs were detected by surveillance programmes. The tumour burden at diagnosis was slightly reduced but not enough to change the distribution of the ITA.LI.CA cancer stages. Intra-arterial and targeted systemic therapies increased across quinquennia. A modest improvement in survival was observed in the last quinquennia, particularly after 12 months of patient observation. Cancer stage, HCC treatment, and presence of oesophageal varices were independent predictors of survival. Conclusions: In the past 15 years, modest improvements have been obtained in outcomes of alcohol-related HCC, attributed mainly to underuse of surveillance programmes and the consequent low amenability to curative treatments. Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease is a widespread condition in alcohol abusers, but its presence did not show a pivotal prognostic role once HCC had developed. Instead, the presence of oesophageal varices, an independent poor prognosticator, should be considered in patient management and refining of prognostic systems. Impact and Implications: Alcohol abuse is a leading and growing cause of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) worldwide and is associated with a worse prognosis compared with other aetiologies. We assessed the evolutionary landscape of alcohol-related HCC over 15 years in Italy. A high cumulative prevalence (78%) of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease, with signs of metabolic dysfunction, was observed in HCC patients with unhealthy excessive alcohol consumption. The alcohol + metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease condition tended to progressively increase over time. A modest improvement in survival occurred over the study period, likely because of the persistent underuse of surveillance programmes and, consequently, the lack of improvement in the cancer stage at diagnosis and the patients’ eligibility for curative treatments. Alongside the known prognostic factors for HCC (cancer stage and treatment), the presence of oesophageal varices was an independent predictor of poor survival, suggesting that this clinical feature should be carefully considered in patient management and should be included in prognostic systems/scores for HCC to improve their performance