Explore the vast range of titles available.

Sorafenib is the recommended treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of sorafenib to that of selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) with yttrium-90 (90Y) resin microspheres in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. SARAH was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, investigator-initiated, phase 3 trial done at 25 centres specialising in liver diseases in France. Patients were eligible if they were aged at least 18 years with a life expectancy greater than 3 months, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, Child-Pugh liver function class A or B score of 7 or lower, and locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC] stage C), or new hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for surgical resection, liver transplantation, or thermal ablation after a previously cured hepatocellular carcinoma (cured by surgery or thermoablative therapy), or hepatocellular carcinoma with two unsuccessful rounds of transarterial chemoembolisation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a permutated block method with block sizes two and four to receive continuous oral sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) or SIRT with 90Y-loaded resin microspheres 2–5 weeks after randomisation. Patients were stratified according to randomising centre, ECOG performance status, previous transarterial chemoembolisation, and presence of macroscopic vascular invasion. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of sorafenib or underwent at least one of the SIRT work-up exams. This study has been completed and the final results are reported here. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01482442. Between Dec 5, 2011, and March 12, 2015, 467 patients were randomly assigned; after eight patients withdrew consent, 237 were assigned to SIRT and 222 to sorafenib. In the SIRT group, 53 (22%) of 237 patients did not receive SIRT; 26 (49%) of these 53 patients were treated with sorafenib. Median follow-up was 27·9 months (IQR 21·9–33·6) in the SIRT group and 28·1 months (20·0–35·3) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 8·0 months (95% CI 6·7–9·9) in the SIRT group versus 9·9 months (8·7–11·4) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% CI 0·94–1·41] for SIRT vs sorafenib; p=0·18). In the safety population, at least one serious adverse event was reported in 174 (77%) of 226 patients in the SIRT group and in 176 (82%) of 216 in the sorafenib group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (20 [9%] vs 41 [19%]), liver dysfunction (25 [11%] vs 27 [13%]), increased laboratory liver values (20 [9%] vs 16 [7%]), haematological abnormalities (23 [10%] vs 30 [14%]), diarrhoea (three [1%] vs 30 [14%]), abdominal pain (six [3%] vs 14 [6%]), increased creatinine (four [2%] vs 12 [6%]), and hand-foot skin reaction (one [<1%] vs 12 [6%]). 19 deaths in the SIRT group and 12 in the sorafenib group were deemed to be treatment related. In patients with locally advanced or intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma after unsuccessful transarterial chemoembolisation, overall survival did not significantly differ between the two groups. Quality of life and tolerance might help when choosing between the two treatments. Sirtex Medical Inc.

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and increased α-fetoprotein concentrations have poor prognosis. We aimed to establish the efficacy of ramucirumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and α-fetoprotein concentrations of 400 ng/mL or higher. REACH-2 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done at 92 hospitals, clinics, and medical centres in 20 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had histologically or cytologically confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma, or diagnosed cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, Child-Pugh class A liver disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance statuses of 0 or 1, α-fetoprotein concentrations of 400 ng/mL or greater, and had previously received first-line sorafenib. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) via an interactive web response system with a computer-generated random sequence to 8 mg/kg intravenous ramucirumab every 2 weeks or placebo. All patients received best supportive care. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, proportion of patients achieving an objective response, time to radiographic progression, safety, time to deterioration in scores on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Hepatobiliary Symptom Index 8 (FHSI-8), and time to deterioration in ECOG performance status. We also pooled individual patient data from REACH-2 with data from REACH (NCT01140347) for patients with α-fetoprotein concentrations of 400 ng/mL or greater. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat, whereas safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02435433. Between July 26, 2015, and Aug 30, 2017, 292 patients were randomly assigned, 197 to the ramucirumab group and 95 to the placebo group. At a median follow-up of 7·6 months (IQR 4·0–12·5), median overall survival (8·5 months [95% CI 7·0–10·6] vs 7·3 months [5·4–9·1]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·710 [95% CI 0·531–0·949]; p=0·0199) and progression-free survival (2·8 months [2·8–4·1] vs 1·6 months [1·5–2·7]; 0·452 [0·339–0·603]; p<0·0001) were significantly improved in the ramucirumab group compared with the placebo group. The proportion of patients with an objective response did not differ significantly between groups (nine [5%] of 197 vs one [1%] of 95; p=0·1697). Median time to deterioration in FHSI-8 total scores (3·7 months [95% CI 2·8–4·4] vs 2·8 months [1·6–2·9]; HR 0·799 [95% CI 0·545–1·171]; p=0·238) and ECOG performance statuses (HR 1·082 [95% CI 0·639–1·832]; p=0·77) did not differ between groups. Grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred in at least 5% of patients in either group were hypertension (25 [13%] in the ramucirumab group vs five [5%] in the placebo group), hyponatraemia (11 [6%] vs 0) and increased aspartate aminotransferase (six [3%] vs five [5%]). Serious adverse events of any grade and cause occurred in 68 (35%) patients in the ramucirumab group and 28 (29%) patients in the placebo group. Three patients in the ramucirumab group died from treatment-emergent adverse events that were judged to be related to study treatment (one had acute kidney injury, one had hepatorenal syndrome, and one had renal failure). REACH-2 met its primary endpoint, showing improved overall survival for ramucirumab compared with placebo in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and α-fetoprotein concentrations of at least 400 ng/mL who had previously received sorafenib. Ramucirumab was well tolerated, with a manageable safety profile. To our knowledge, REACH-2 is the first positive phase 3 trial done in a biomarker-selected patient population with hepatocellular carcinoma. Eli Lilly.

ObjectiveSorafenib is the standard systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Survival benefits of resection/local ablation for early HCC are compromised by 70% 5-year recurrence rates. The phase 3 STORM trial comparing sorafenib with placebo as adjuvant treatment did not achieve its primary endpoint of improving recurrence-free survival (RFS). The biomarker companion study BIOSTORM aims to define (A) predictors of recurrence prevention with sorafenib and (B) prognostic factors with B level of evidence.DesignTumour tissue from 188 patients randomised to receive sorafenib (83) or placebo (105) in the STORM trial was collected. Analyses included gene expression profiling, targeted exome sequencing (19 known oncodrivers), immunohistochemistry (pERK, pVEGFR2, Ki67), fluorescence in situ hybridisation (VEGFA) and immunome. A gene signature capturing improved RFS in sorafenib-treated patients was generated. All 70 RFS events were recurrences, thus time to recurrence equalled RFS. Predictive and prognostic value was assessed using Cox regression models and interaction test.ResultsBIOSTORM recapitulates clinicopathological characteristics of STORM. None of the biomarkers tested (related to angiogenesis and proliferation) or previously proposed gene signatures, or mutations predicted sorafenib benefit or recurrence. A newly generated 146-gene signature identifying 30% of patients captured benefit to sorafenib in terms of RFS (p of interaction=0.04). These sorafenib RFS responders were significantly enriched in CD4+ T, B and cytolytic natural killer cells, and lacked activated adaptive immune components. Hepatocytic pERK (HR=2.41; p=0.012) and microvascular invasion (HR=2.09; p=0.017) were independent prognostic factors.ConclusionIn BIOSTORM, only hepatocytic pERK and microvascular invasion predicted poor RFS. No mutation, gene amplification or previously proposed gene signatures predicted sorafenib benefit. A newly generated multigene signature associated with improved RFS on sorafenib warrants further validation.Trial registration number NCT00692770.

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.

Tivantinib (ARQ 197), a selective, oral MET inhibitor, improved overall survival and progression-free survival compared with placebo in a randomised phase 2 study in patients with high MET expression (MET-high) hepatocellular carcinoma previously treated with sorafenib. The aim of this phase 3 study was to confirm the results of the phase 2 trial. We did a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 90 centres in Australia, the Americas, Europe, and New Zealand. Eligible patients were 18 years or older and had unresectable, histologically confirmed, hepatocellular carcinoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1, high MET expression (MET-high; staining intensity score ≥2 in ≥50% of tumour cells), Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, and radiographically-confirmed disease progression after receiving sorafenib-containing systemic therapy. We randomly assigned patients (2:1) in block sizes of three using a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive oral tivantinib (120 mg twice daily) or placebo (twice daily); patients were stratified by vascular invasion, extrahepatic spread, and α-fetoprotein concentrations (≤200 ng/mL or >200 ng/mL). The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat and safety analyses were done in all patients who received any amount of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01755767. Between Dec 27, 2012, and Dec 10, 2015, 340 patients were randomly assigned to receive tivantinib (n=226) or placebo (n=114). At a median follow-up of 18·1 months (IQR 14·1–23·1), median overall survival was 8·4 months (95% CI 6·8–10·0) in the tivantinib group and 9·1 months (7·3–10·4) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·97; 95% CI 0·75–1·25; p=0·81). Grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 125 (56%) of 225 patients in the tivantinib group and in 63 (55%) of 114 patients in the placebo group, with the most common being ascites (16 [7%] patients]), anaemia (11 [5%] patients), abdominal pain (nine [4%] patients), and neutropenia (nine [4%] patients) in the tivantinib group. 50 (22%) of 226 patients in the tivantinib group and 18 (16%) of 114 patients in the placebo group died within 30 days of the last dose of study medication, and general deterioration (eight [4%] patients) and hepatic failure (four [2%] patients) were the most common causes of death in the tivantinib group. Three (1%) of 225 patients in the tivantinib group died from a treatment-related adverse event (one sepsis, one anaemia and acute renal failure, and one acute coronary syndrome). Tivantinib did not improve overall survival compared with placebo in patients with MET-high advanced hepatocellular carcinoma previously treated with sorafenib. Although this METIV-HCC trial was negative, the study shows the feasibility of doing integral tissue biomarker studies in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Additional randomised studies are needed to establish whether MET inhibition could be a potential therapy for some subsets of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. ArQule Inc and Daiichi Sankyo (Daiichi Sankyo Group).

Hepatocellular carcinoma recurs in 70–80% of cases following potentially curative resection or ablation and the immune component of the liver microenvironment plays a key role in recurrence. Many immunosuppressive mechanisms implicated in HCC recurrence are modulated by VEGF and/or immune checkpoints such as PD-L1. Atezolizumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) plus bevacizumab (VEGF inhibitor) has been shown to significantly improve overall survival, progression-free survival and overall response rate in unresectable HCC. Dual PD-L1/VEGF blockade may be effective in reducing HCC recurrence by creating a more immune-favorable microenvironment. We describe the rationale and design of IMbrave 050 (NCT04102098), a randomized, open-label, Phase III study comparing atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in HCC patients at high-risk of recurrence following curative resection or ablation. The primary end point is recurrence-free survival. NCT04102098

There is no standard of care for adjuvant therapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. This trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of sorafenib versus placebo as adjuvant therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after surgical resection or local ablation. We undertook this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with a complete radiological response after surgical resection (n=900) or local ablation (n=214) in 202 sites (hospitals and research centres) in 28 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 400 mg oral sorafenib or placebo twice a day, for a maximum of 4 years, according to a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) using an interactive voice-response system. Patients were stratified by curative treatment, geography, Child-Pugh status, and recurrence risk. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival assessed after database cut-off on Nov 29, 2013. We analysed efficacy in the intention-to-treat population and safety in randomly assigned patients receiving at least one study dose. The final analysis is reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00692770. We screened 1602 patients between Aug 15, 2008, and Nov 17, 2010, and randomly assigned 1114 patients. Of 556 patients in the sorafenib group, 553 (>99%) received the study treatment and 471 (85%) terminated treatment. Of 558 patients in the placebo group, 554 (99%) received the study treatment and 447 (80%) terminated treatment. Median duration of treatment and mean daily dose were 12·5 months (IQR 2·6–35·8) and 577 mg per day (SD 212·8) for sorafenib, compared with 22·2 months (8·1–38·8) and 778·0 mg per day (79·8) for placebo. Dose modification was reported for 497 (89%) of 559 patients in the sorafenib group and 206 (38%) of 548 patients in the placebo group. At final analysis, 464 recurrence-free survival events had occurred (270 in the placebo group and 194 in the sorafenib group). Median follow-up for recurrence-free survival was 8·5 months (IQR 2·9–19·5) in the sorafenib group and 8·4 months (2·9–19·8) in the placebo group. We noted no difference in median recurrence-free survival between the two groups (33·3 months in the sorafenib group vs 33·7 months in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·940; 95% CI 0·780–1·134; one-sided p=0·26). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hand-foot skin reaction (154 [28%] of 559 patients in the sorafenib group vs four [<1%] of 548 patients in the placebo group) and diarrhoea (36 [6%] vs five [<1%] in the placebo group). Sorafenib-related serious adverse events included hand-foot skin reaction (ten [2%]), abnormal hepatic function (four [<1%]), and fatigue (three [<1%]). There were four (<1%) drug-related deaths in the sorafenib group and two (<1%) in the placebo group. Our data indicate that sorafenib is not an effective intervention in the adjuvant setting for hepatocellular carcinoma following resection or ablation. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and Onyx Pharmaceuticals.

Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is standard care for unresectable, non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the addition of lenvatinib and pembrolizumab to TACE versus dual placebo plus TACE in patients with unresectable, non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma. In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study (LEAP-012), patients were recruited from 137 global sites in 33 countries or regions. Eligible patients were age 18 years or older with unresectable, non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma not amenable to curative treatment, but with tumours amenable to TACE, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and Child-Pugh class A disease. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by study site, α-fetoprotein level, ECOG performance status, albumin-bilirubin grade, and tumour burden, by a central interactive response system, to receive TACE and either oral lenvatinib (bodyweight ≥60 kg: 12 mg; bodyweight <60 kg: 8 mg; once daily) plus intravenous pembrolizumab (400 mg once every 6 weeks for up to 2 years) or matched dual placebo (oral and intravenous). Primary endpoints were progression-free survival (threshold one-sided p=0·025), per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 (modified for the current study to allow for up to five target tumours in the liver and requiring new intrahepatic tumours to meet LI-RADS 5 criteria to be considered progressive disease) by blinded independent central review, and overall survival (threshold one-sided p=0·0012) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all participants randomly assigned to treatment). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population (ie, all participants who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of any study treatment). Here, we report results from the first interim analysis (final analysis for progression-free survival). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04246177, and is active but not recruiting. Between May 22, 2020, and Jan 11, 2023, 847 patients were screened, of whom 480 (57%) were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive TACE plus lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (n=237) or TACE plus dual placebo (n=243; ITT population). Median age was 66 years (IQR 58–73), 82 (17%) of 480 participants were female, 398 (83%) were male, 98 (20%) were White, 347 (72%) were Asian, four (1%) were Black or African American, and five (1%) were American Indian or Alaska Native. Median follow-up as of data cutoff (Jan 30, 2024) was 25·6 months (IQR 19·5–32·4). Median progression-free survival was 14·6 months (95% CI 12·6–16·7; 132 events [20 deaths and 112 progressions]) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab and 10·0 months (8·1–12·2; 154 events [eight deaths and 146 progressions]) with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·51–0·84]; one-sided p=0·0002). 69 (29%) of 237 in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group and 82 (34%) of 243 from the placebo group died, with a 24-month overall survival rate of 75% (95% CI 68–80) in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group and 69% (62–74) in the placebo group (HR 0·80 [95% CI 0·57–1·11]; one-sided p=0·087). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 169 (71%) of 237 participants in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group and in 76 (32%) of 241 in the placebo group, the most common of which were hypertension (57 [24%] vs 18 [7%]) and platelet count decreased (27 [11%] vs 15 [6%]). Deaths due to treatment-related adverse events occurred in four (2%) participants in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group (n=1 each due to hepatic failure, gastrointestinal haemorrhage, myositis, and immune-mediated hepatitis) and one (<1%) in the placebo group (due to brain stem haemorrhage). TACE plus lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed significant, clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival in patients with unresectable, non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma compared with TACE plus placebo. The numerical improvement in overall survival is encouraging, but longer follow-up is necessary. Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA, and Eisai, Nutley, NJ, USA.

No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after curative-intent resection or ablation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma. In the global, open-label, phase 3 IMbrave050 study, adult patients with high-risk surgically resected or ablated hepatocellular carcinoma were recruited from 134 hospitals and medical centres in 26 countries in four WHO regions (European region, region of the Americas, South-East Asia region, and Western Pacific region). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio via an interactive voice–web response system using permuted blocks, using a block size of 4, to receive intravenous 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab every 3 weeks for 17 cycles (12 months) or to active surveillance. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by independent review facility assessment in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04102098. The intention-to-treat population included 668 patients randomly assigned between Dec 31, 2019, and Nov 25, 2021, to either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=334) or to active surveillance (n=334). At the prespecified interim analysis (Oct 21, 2022), median duration of follow-up was 17·4 months (IQR 13·9–22·1). Adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with significantly improved recurrence-free survival (median, not evaluable [NE]; [95% CI 22·1–NE]) compared with active surveillance (median, NE [21·4–NE]; hazard ratio, 0·72 [adjusted 95% CI 0·53–0·98]; p=0·012). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 136 (41%) of 332 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 44 (13%) of 330 patients in the active surveillance group. Grade 5 adverse events occurred in six patients (2%, two of which were treatment related) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group, and one patient (<1%) in the active surveillance group. Both atezolizumab and bevacizumab were discontinued because of adverse events in 29 patients (9%) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Among patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following curative-intent resection or ablation, recurrence-free survival was improved in those who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance. To our knowledge, IMbrave050 is the first phase 3 study of adjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma to report positive results. However, longer follow-up for both recurrence-free and overall survival is needed to assess the benefit–risk profile more fully. F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) is standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma that is amenable to embolisation; however, median progression-free survival is still approximately 7 months. We aimed to assess whether adding durvalumab, with or without bevacizumab, might improve progression-free survival. In this multiregional, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (EMERALD-1), adults aged 18 years or older with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma amenable to embolisation, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 at enrolment, and at least one measurable intrahepatic lesion per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) were enrolled at 157 medical sites including research centres and general and specialist hospitals in 18 countries. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), stratified by TACE method, region, and portal vein invasion, using an interactive voice response or web response system, to TACE plus either durvalumab plus bevacizumab (1500 mg intravenous durvalumab once every 4 weeks, then 1120 mg durvalumab plus 15 mg/kg intravenous bevacizumab once every 3 weeks), durvalumab plus placebo (same regimen using placebo instead of bevacizumab), or placebo alone (same regimen using placebo instead of durvalumab and instead of bevacizumab). Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment assignment until data analysis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, by blinded independent central review (BICR), and per RECIST version 1.1, with durvalumab plus bevacizumab versus placebo alone in the intention-to-treat population (ITT; ie, all participants assigned to treatment). Key secondary endpoints were progression-free survival by BICR per RECIST version 1.1 with durvalumab plus placebo versus placebo alone, overall survival, and time to deterioration in select patient-reported outcomes. Participants continue to be followed up for overall survival, and overall survival and patient-reported outcomes will be reported in a later publication. Safety was assessed in the safety analysis set, which included all participants assigned to treatment who received any study treatment (ie, any durvalumab, bevacizumab, or placebo) by treatment received. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03778957, and is closed to accrual. Between Nov 30, 2018, and July 19, 2021, 887 patients were screened, of whom 616 were randomly assigned to durvalumab plus bevacizumab (n=204), durvalumab plus placebo (n=207), or placebo alone (n=205; ITT population). Median age was 65·0 years (IQR 59·0–72·0), 135 (22%) of 616 participants were female, 481 (78%) were male, 375 (61%) were Asian, 176 (29%) were White, 22 (4%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, nine (1%) were Black or African American, one (<1%) was native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and 33 (5%) were other races. As of data cutoff (Sept 11, 2023) median follow-up for progression-free survival was 27·9 months (95% CI 27·4–30·4), median progression-free survival was 15·0 months (95% CI 11·1–18·9) with durvalumab plus bevacizumab, 10·0 months (9·0–12·7) with durvalumab, and 8·2 months (6·9–11·1) with placebo. Progression-free survival hazard ratio was 0·77 (95% CI 0·61–0·98; two-sided p=0·032) for durvalumab plus bevacizumab versus placebo, and 0·94 (0·75–1·19; two-sided p=0·64) for durvalumab plus placebo versus placebo. The most common maximum grade 3–4 adverse events were hypertension in participants who received durvalumab and bevacizumab (nine [6%] of 154 participants), anaemia in participants who received durvalumab and placebo (ten [4%] of 232 participants), and post-embolisation syndrome in participants who received placebo alone (eight [4%] of 200 participants). Study treatment-related adverse events that led to death occurred in none of 154 participants who received durvalumab and bevacizumab, three (1%) of 232 who received durvalumab and placebo (n=1 for arterial haemorrhage, liver injury, and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome), and three (2%) of 200 who received placebo alone (n=1 for oesophageal varices haemorrhage, upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and dermatomyositis). Durvalumab plus bevacizumab plus TACE has the potential to set a new standard of care. With additional follow-up of the EMERALD-1 study, future analyses, including the final overall survival data and patient-reported outcomes, will help to further characterise the potential clinical benefits of durvalumab plus bevacizumab plus TACE in hepatocellular carcinoma amenable to embolisation. AstraZeneca.