Explore the vast range of titles available.

Liver cancer remains a global health challenge, with an estimated incidence of >1 million cases by 2025. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common form of liver cancer and accounts for ~90% of cases. Infection by hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus are the main risk factors for HCC development, although non-alcoholic steatohepatitis associated with metabolic syndrome or diabetes mellitus is becoming a more frequent risk factor in the West. Moreover, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis-associated HCC has a unique molecular pathogenesis. Approximately 25% of all HCCs present with potentially actionable mutations, which are yet to be translated into the clinical practice. Diagnosis based upon non-invasive criteria is currently challenged by the need for molecular information that requires tissue or liquid biopsies. The current major advancements have impacted the management of patients with advanced HCC. Six systemic therapies have been approved based on phase III trials (atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, cabozantinib and ramucirumab) and three additional therapies have obtained accelerated FDA approval owing to evidence of efficacy. New trials are exploring combination therapies, including checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors or anti-VEGF therapies, or even combinations of two immunotherapy regimens. The outcomes of these trials are expected to change the landscape of HCC management at all evolutionary stages. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common type of primary liver cancer, is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death in the world. This Primer summarizes the current knowledge on the epidemiology, pathogenetic mechanisms and diagnosis of HCC and provides an update on key advancements in the management of this disease.

Cabozantinib has shown clinical activity in combination with checkpoint inhibitors in solid tumours. The COSMIC-312 trial assessed cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib as first-line systemic treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. COSMIC-312 is an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not amenable to curative or locoregional therapy and previously untreated with systemic anticancer therapy at 178 centres in 32 countries. Patients with fibrolamellar carcinoma, sarcomatoid hepatocellular carcinoma, or combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma were not eligible. Tumours involving major blood vessels, including the main portal vein, were permitted. Patients were required to have measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1), Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, adequate organ and marrow function, and Child-Pugh class A. Previous resection, tumour ablation, radiotherapy, or arterial chemotherapy was allowed if more than 28 days before randomisation. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1) via a web-based interactive response system to cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily plus atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily, or single-agent cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily. Randomisation was stratified by disease aetiology, geographical region, and presence of extrahepatic disease or macrovascular invasion. Dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival per RECIST 1.1 as assessed by a blinded independent radiology committee in the first 372 patients randomly assigned to the combination treatment of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab or sorafenib (progression-free survival intention-to-treat [ITT] population), and overall survival in all patients randomly assigned to cabozantinib plus atezolizumab or sorafenib (ITT population). Final progression-free survival and concurrent interim overall survival analyses are presented. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03755791. Analyses at data cut-off (March 8, 2021) included the first 837 patients randomly assigned between Dec 7, 2018, and Aug 27, 2020, to combination treatment of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab (n=432), sorafenib (n=217), or single-agent cabozantinib (n=188). Median follow-up was 15·8 months (IQR 14·5–17·2) in the progression-free survival ITT population and 13·3 months (10·5–16·0) in the ITT population. Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (99% CI 5·6–8·3) in the combination treatment group versus 4·2 months (2·8–7·0) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·63, 99% CI 0·44–0·91, p=0·0012). Median overall survival (interim analysis) was 15·4 months (96% CI 13·7–17·7) in the combination treatment group versus 15·5 months (12·1–not estimable) in the sorafenib group (HR 0·90, 96% CI 0·69–1·18; p=0·44). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were alanine aminotransferase increase (38 [9%] of 429 patients in the combination treatment group vs six [3%] of 207 in the sorafenib group vs 12 [6%] of 188 in the single-agent cabozantinib group), hypertension (37 [9%] vs 17 [8%] vs 23 [12%]), aspartate aminotransferase increase (37 [9%] vs eight [4%] vs 18 [10%]), and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (35 [8%] vs 17 [8%] vs 16 [9%]); serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 78 (18%) patients in the combination treatment group, 16 (8%) patients in the sorafenib group, and 24 (13%) in the single-agent cabozantinib group. Treatment-related grade 5 events occurred in six (1%) patients in the combination treatment group (encephalopathy, hepatic failure, drug-induced liver injury, oesophageal varices haemorrhage, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and tumour lysis syndrome), one (<1%) patient in the sorafenib group (general physical health deterioration), and one (<1%) patient in the single-agent cabozantinib group (gastrointestinal haemorrhage). Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab might be a treatment option for select patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but additional studies are needed. Exelixis and Ipsen.

Abstract Background Previous studies report increasing cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) incidence up to 2015. This contemporary retrospective analysis of CCA incidence and mortality in the US from 2001-2017 assessed whether CCA incidence continued to increase beyond 2015. Patients and Methods Patients (≥18 years) with CCA were identified in the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 cancer registry (International Classification of Disease for Oncology [ICD-O]-3 codes: intrahepatic [iCCA], C221; extrahepatic [eCCA], C240, C241, C249). Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) cases were identified (ICD-O-3: C809; 8140/2, 8140/3, 8141/3, 8143/3, 8147/3) because of potential misclassification as iCCA. Results Forty-thousand-and-thirty CCA cases (iCCA, n=13,174; eCCA, n=26,821; iCCA and eCCA, n=35) and 32,980 CUP cases were analyzed. From 2001-2017, CCA, iCCA, and eCCA incidence (per 100 000 person-years) increased 43.8% (3.08 to 4.43), 148.8% (0.80 to 1.99), and 7.5% (2.28 to 2.45), respectively. In contrast, CUP incidence decreased 54.4% (4.65 to 2.12). CCA incidence increased with age, with greatest increase among younger patients (18-44 years, 81.0%). Median overall survival from diagnosis was 8, 6, 9, and 2 months for CCA, iCCA, eCCA, and CUP. From 2001-2016, annual mortality rate declined for iCCA (57.1% to 41.2%) and generally remained stable for eCCA (40.9% to 37.0%) and for CUP (64.3% to 68.6%). Conclusions CCA incidence continued to increase from 2001-2017, with greater increase in iCCA versus eCCA, whereas CUP incidence decreased. The divergent CUP versus iCCA incidence trends, with overall greater absolute change in iCCA incidence, provide evidence for a true increase in iCCA incidence that may not be wholly attributable to CUP reclassification. This article analyzes trends in incidence, prevalence, and mortality rates of cholangiocarcinoma to assess whether rates continue to rise in the US and contributing factors that may be influencing current rates, including changing incidence of cancers of unknown primary.

Background Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and Child–Pugh B liver cirrhosis have poor prognosis and are underrepresented in clinical trials. The CELESTIAL trial, in which cabozantinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with HCC and Child–Pugh A liver cirrhosis at baseline, was evaluated for outcomes in patients who had Child–Pugh B cirrhosis at Week 8. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of adult patients with previously treated advanced HCC. Child–Pugh B status was assessed by the investigator. Patients were randomised 2:1 to cabozantinib (60 mg once daily) or placebo. Results Fifty-one patients receiving cabozantinib and 22 receiving placebo had Child–Pugh B cirrhosis at Week 8. Safety and tolerability of cabozantinib for the Child–Pugh B subgroup were consistent with the overall population. For cabozantinib- versus placebo-treated patients, median OS from randomisation was 8.5 versus 3.8 months (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18–0.58), median PFS was 3.7 versus 1.9 months (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25–0.76), and best response was stable disease in 57% versus 23% of patients. Conclusions These encouraging results with cabozantinib support the initiation of prospective studies in patients with advanced HCC and Child–Pugh B liver function. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01908426.

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have historically had few options and faced extremely poor prognoses if their disease progressed after standard-of-care tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Recently, the standard of care for HCC has been transformed as a combination of the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) atezolizumab plus the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibody bevacizumab was shown to offer improved overall survival in the first-line setting. Immunotherapy has demonstrated safety and efficacy in later lines of therapy as well, and ongoing trials are investigating novel combinations of ICIs and TKIs, in addition to interventions earlier in the course of disease or in combination with liver-directed therapies. Because HCC usually develops against a background of cirrhosis, immunotherapy for liver tumors is complex and oncologists need to account for both immunological and hepatological considerations when developing a treatment plan for their patients. To provide guidance to the oncology community on important concerns for the immunotherapeutic care of HCC, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop a clinical practice guideline (CPG). The expert panel drew on the published literature as well as their clinical experience to develop recommendations for healthcare professionals on these important aspects of immunotherapeutic treatment for HCC, including diagnosis and staging, treatment planning, immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and patient quality of life (QOL) considerations. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations in this CPG are intended to give guidance to cancer care providers treating patients with HCC.

Introduction: Cabozantinib, an inhibitor of MET, AXL, and VEGF receptors, significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this exploratory analysis, outcomes were evaluated according to plasma biomarker levels. Methods: Baseline plasma levels were evaluated for MET, AXL, VEGFR2, HGF, GAS6, VEGF-A, PlGF, IL-8, EPO, ANG2, IGF-1, VEGF-C, and c-KIT for 674/707 randomized patients; and Week 4 levels were evaluated for MET, AXL, VEGFR2, HGF, GAS6, VEGF-A, PlGF, IL-8, and EPO for 614 patients. OS and PFS were analyzed by baseline levels as dichotomized or continuous variables and by on-treatment changes at Week 4 as continuous variables; biomarkers were considered potentially prognostic if p < 0.05 and predictive if p < 0.05 for the interaction between treatment and the biomarker. Multivariable analyses adjusting for clinical covariates were also performed. Results: In the placebo group, high levels of MET, HGF, GAS6, IL-8, and ANG2 and low levels of IGF-1 were associated with shorter OS in univariate and multivariable analyses; these associations were also observed for MET, IL-8, and ANG2 in the cabozantinib group. Hazard ratios for OS and PFS favored cabozantinib over the placebo at low and high baseline levels for all biomarkers. No baseline biomarkers were predictive of a treatment benefit. Cabozantinib promoted pharmacodynamic changes in several biomarkers, including increases in VEGF-A, PlGF, AXL, and GAS6 levels and decreases in VEGFR2 and HGF levels; these changes were not associated with OS or PFS. Conclusion: Cabozantinib improved OS and PFS versus placebo at high and low baseline concentrations for all biomarkers analyzed. Low baseline levels of MET, HGF, GAS6, IL-8, and ANG2 and high levels of IGF-1 were identified as potential favorable prognostic biomarkers for survival in previously treated advanced HCC. Although cabozantinib promoted pharmacodynamic changes in several biomarkers, these changes were not associated with survival.

The STORM trial joins a growing list of negative adjuvant studies of anti-angiogenic treatments across cancer types, including bevacizumab in breast, colon, and lung cancers,2-4 and sunitinib and sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma.5 Collectively, these negative trials underscore the importance of developing mechanistic preclinical models for studying adjuvant treatments, as well as reinforcing a recurring lesson in oncology: antitumour activity against established or advanced tumours is not necessarily associated with efficacy in the adjuvant setting against micrometastatic disease.6 The high biological heterogeneity across hepatocellular carcinoma presents an additional challenge.

To determine whether chemoembolization using drug-eluting beads (DEB-TACE) is safe and effective for liver transplantation candidates with liver-limited hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) without vascular invasion and baseline hepatic dysfunction. Seventeen adult liver transplantation candidates (median age 66 years, range 58-73 years; 13 men) with HCC were treated with DEB-TACE as a part of Stage 1 of a prospective single-institution Phase II trial. All patients had marginal hepatic reserve based on at least one of the following criteria: ascites (n=14), bilirubin between 3 and 6 mg/dL (n=5), AST 5-10 times upper normal limit (n=1), INR between 1.6 and 2.5 (n=4), portal vein thrombosis (n=2), and/or portosystemic shunt (n=2). Primary study objectives were safety and best observed radiographic response. Thirty-seven DEB-TACE procedures were performed. Objective response rate and disease control rate were 63% and 88%, respectively. HCC progression was observed in 12 patients. Median time to progression was 5.6 months (range 0.9-13.6 months). Within 1 month following DEB-TACE, 13 patients (76%) developed grade 3 or 4 AE attributable to the procedure. Four patients (all within Milan Criteria) were transplanted (2.7-6.9 months after DEB-TACE), and 12 patients died (1.8-32 months after DEB-TACE). All deaths were due to liver failure that was either unrelated to HCC (n=5), in the setting of metastatic HCC (n=5), or in the setting of locally advanced HCC (n=2). Mortality rate at 1 month was 0%. DEB-TACE achieves tumor responses but carries a high risk of hepatotoxicity for liver transplant candidates with HCC and marginal hepatic reserve.

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. 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. 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. 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. Bristol Myers Squibb in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical.