We sought to investigate the clinical profile(s) associated with the discontinuation of lenvatinib (LEN) due to severe adverse events (DLSAE) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This retrospective study enrolled 177 patients with HCC treated with LEN. Independent factors associated with DLSAE were advanced age, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 2, fatigue grade ≥ 3, and appetite loss ≥ 2. The overall survival (OS) in the group that did not require DLSAE was significantly longer compared to the group that did require DLSAE (median survival time (MST): not reached vs. 12.8 months, p < 0.001). Moreover, advanced age was the most important variable for DLSAE in a decision tree analysis. Hypertension and hand-foot-skin-reaction (HFSR) were also significantly associated with longer survival, and the occurrence of hypertension was the earliest predictor for improved prognosis, while appetite loss and development of grade ≥ 3 fatigue were predictive of a poor prognosis. We concluded that the appearance of hypertension has potential as an early surrogate marker to predict improved prognosis. Moreover, careful management to avoid discontinuation of treatment leads to longer survival in patients receiving LEN.

Background: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was approved for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although clinical trials have revealed its efficacy, the outcomes in the real-world clinical practice are unclear. We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for HCC. Materials and Methods: This is a multicenter study conducted between November 2020 and March 2021. Among the 61 patients, 51 were assessed for progression-free survival (PFS), therapeutic response, and adverse events (AEs). Results: The median PFS was 5.4 months. The objective response rate (ORR) was 35.3%. The disease control rate (DCR) was 86.3%. The incidence rates of AEs at any grade and grade >3 were 98.0% and 29.4%, respectively. The most frequent AE at any grade and grade >3 was hepatic disorder. In patients with a previous history of molecular targeted agent (MTA) or the degree of albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade, there were no significant differences in the PFS, ORR, DCR, and incidence rates of AEs. Conclusion: The study demonstrated that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was effective and safe for patients with HCC even in the real-world setting including patients with a previous MTA history or other than ALBI grade 1.

We aimed to investigate the impact of the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score, an immuno-nutritional biomarker, on the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with lenvatinib (LEN). This retrospective study enrolled 164 patients with HCC and treated with LEN (median age 73 years, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B/C 93/71). Factors associated with overall survival (OS) were evaluated using multivariate and decision tree analyses. OS was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and analyzed using the log–rank test. Independent factors for OS were albumin–bilirubin grade 1, BCLC stage B, and CONUT score <5 (hazard ratio (HR) 2.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.58–5.31, p < 0.001). The CONUT score was the most important variable for OS, with OS rates of 70.0% and 29.0% in the low and high CONUT groups, respectively. Additionally, the median survival time was longer in the low CONUT group than in the high CONUT group (median survival time not reached vs. 11.3 months, p < 0.001). The CONUT score was the most important prognostic variable, rather than albumin–bilirubin grade and BCLC stage, in patients with HCC treated with LEN. Accordingly, immuno-nutritional status may be an important factor in the management of patients with HCC treated with LEN.

BACKROUND: Not all patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) benefit from treatment with molecular targeted agents such as sorafenib. We investigated whether New-FP (fine-powder cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil), a hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy regimen, is more favorable than sorafenib as an initial treatment for locally progressed HCC. METHODS: To avoid selection bias, we corrected the data from different facilities that did or did not perform New-FP therapy. In total, 1709 consecutive patients with HCC initially treated with New-FP or sorafenib; 1624 (New-FP, n = 644; sorafenib n = 980) were assessed. After propensity score matching (PSM), overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors were assessed (n = 344 each). Additionally, the patients were categorized into four groups: cohort-1 [(without macrovascular invasion (MVI) and extrahepatic spread (EHS)], cohort-2 (with MVI), cohort-3 (with EHS), and cohort-4 (with MVI and EHS) to clarify the efficacy of each treatment. RESULTS: New-FP prolonged OS than sorafenib after PSM (New-FP, 12 months; sorafenib, 7.9 months; p < 0.001). Sorafenib treatment, and severe MVI and EHS were poor prognostic factors. In the subgroup analyses, the OS was significantly longer the New-FP group in cohort-2. CONCLUSIONS: Local treatment using New-FP is a potentially superior initial treatment compared with sorafenib as a multidisciplinary treatment in locally progressed HCC without EHS.