3 research outputs found

    Effect of butyrate‐producing enterobacteria on advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treatment with atezolizumab and bevacizumab

    No full text
    Abstract Aim Multiple studies have revealed the correlation between gut microbiome and the response to checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in patients with cancer, and oral administration of butyrate‐producing enterobacteria has been reported to enhance the efficacy of CPIs. However, the effects of enterobacteria on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not well understood. Methods In this retrospective multicenter study, we enrolled 747 patients with advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab combination therapy. Tumor response, survival, and adverse effects were compared between 99 patients who ingested drugs containing butyric acid‐producing enterobacteria (butyric acid group) and the remaining patients (control group). Results Objective response and disease control rates in butyric acid group (29.7% and 77.8%, respectively) were higher than those in the control group (26.4% and 72.7%, respectively). However, the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.543 and p = 0.222, respectively). No difference in median survival time was observed between the two groups (20.0 months and 21.4 months, respectively; p = 0.789), even after matching the backgrounds of the patients with propensity scores (p = 0.714). No adverse effects occurred upon the administration of butyrate‐producing bacteria. However, proteinuria (41.4% vs. 30.9%; p = 0.041), fever (17.2% vs. 10.2%, p = 0.036), and diarrhea (15.2% vs. 6.2%; p = 0.001) occurred more frequently in the butyric acid group. Conclusion Butyrate‐producing bacteria does not enhance the efficacy of atezolizumab–bevacizumab combination therapy in patients with HCC

    Comparative efficacy and safety of atezolizumab and bevacizumab between hepatocellular carcinoma patients with viral and non‐viral infection: A Japanese multicenter observational study

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

    Comparing the impact of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib on the liver function in hepatocellular carcinoma patients: A mixed‐effects regression model approach

    No full text
    Abstract Aim This retrospective study compared the impact of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) and lenvatinib (LEN) on the liver function in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods We included 526 patients who received Atez/Bev and 731 who received LEN March 2018 and July 2022 in this study. We conducted a 1:1 propensity‐score‐matched analysis and identified 324 patients in each group for inclusion in the present analysis. Nonlinear mixed‐effects regression models were employed, allowing for the evaluation and inclusion of cases where treatment was interrupted due to disease progression, adverse events, or loss to follow‐up. These models were used to compare the ALBI score between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups. Results Following propensity score matching, the mean ALBI scores in the Atez/Bev and LEN groups were −2.41 ± 0.40 and −2.44 ± 0.42 at baseline, and −2.17 ± 0.56 and −2.19 ± 0.58 at 12 weeks, respectively. Although the ALBI score significantly worsened during treatment in both groups (p < 0.001), there was no significant difference in the rate of ALBI score deterioration between the groups (p = 0.06). Subgroup analyses showed that LEN‐treated patients with BCLC advanced stage (p = 0.02) and those who initially received the full dose (p < 0.001) had a significantly greater worsening of ALBI score compared to Atez/Bev. Conclusions Using a nonlinear mixed‐effects regression approach, which allowed for the inclusion of cases with treatment interruption, we found no significant difference in the trend of liver function deterioration between the Atez/Bev and LEN groups. Caution should be exercised for LEN‐treated patients with BCLC advanced stage or those receiving the full dose of LEN
    corecore