Background: Sarcopenia worsens patient prognoses in chronic liver disease. This study aimed to elucidate the effects of vitamin D supplementation on skeletal muscle volume and strength in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Methods: Thirty-three patients were entered into the study based on the criteria and then randomly assigned to two groups: Group A (n = 17), the control group, and Group B (n = 16), those who received oral native vitamin D3 at a dose of 2000 IU once a day for 12 months. Results: SMI values in Group B were significantly increased at 12 months (7.64 × 10⁻³). The extent of changes in the SMI and grip strength in Group B were significantly greater than that in Group A at 12 months (p = 2.57 × 10⁻³ and 9.07 × 10⁻³). The median change rates in the SMI were +5.8% and the prevalence of sarcopenia was significantly decreased from 80.0% (12/15) to 33.3% (5/15; p = 2.53 × 10⁻²) in Group B. Conclusions: Vitamin D supplementation might be an effective and safe treatment option for patients with decompensated cirrhosis to increase or restore the skeletal muscle volume and strength or prevent the muscle volume and strength losses.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of lenvatinib in real-world settings, including patients excluded from the REFLECT trial, a phase III trial that compared lenvatinib with sorafenib. Patients and Methods: This multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label prospective study was conducted at 10 medical facilities in Japan (jRCTs031190017). Eligible patients had advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and were suitable for lenvatinib therapy. The study included patients with high tumor burden (with >50% intrahepatic tumor volume, main portal vein invasion, or bile duct invasion), Child-Pugh B status, and receiving lenvatinib as second-line therapy following atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Results: From December 2019 to September 2021, 59 patients were analyzed (47 and 12 patients with Child-Pugh A and B, respectively). In patients with Child-Pugh A, the frequency of aspartate aminotransferase elevation was high (72.7%) in the high-burden group. No other significant ad verse events (AE) were observed even in second-line treatment. However, patients with Child-Pugh B had high incidence of grade ≥3 AE (100.0%) and high discontinuation rates caused by AE (33.3%) compared with patients with Child-Pugh A (80.9% and 17.0%, respectively). Median progression-free survival was 6.4 and 2.5 months and median overall survival was 19.7 and 4.1 months in Child-Pugh A and B, respectively. Lenvatinib plasma concentration was higher in patients with Child-Pugh B on days 8 and 15 and correlated with dose modifications and lower relative dose intensity. Conclusions: Lenvatinib is safe and effective for advanced HCC in patients with Child-Pugh A, even with high tumor burden. However, it carries a higher risk of AE and may not provide adequate efficacy for patients with Child-Pugh B status.

Introduction: The most frequently used first-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Upon progression after this treatment, the standard of care in many countries is sorafenib, due to the lack of reimbursement for other drugs. Several randomized trials are currently underway to clarify the best second-line therapy in patients with HCC. This real-world study aimed to compare outcomes reached by lenvatinib and sorafenib second-line therapy in this setting. Methods: The overall cohort included 891 patients with HCC from 5 countries treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in first-line setting between October 2018 and April 2022. At the data cut-off (May 2022), 41.5% of patients were continuing a first-line treatment, 5.5% were lost at follow-up, and 53.0% of patients had progressive disease after first-line therapy. 51.5% of patients with progressive disease received a second-line treatment, while 48.5% did not receive any subsequent therapy. Between patients receiving second-line treatment, 11.1% of patients underwent transarterial chemoembolization, 21.0% received sorafenib, 35.4% underwent lenvatinib, and 32.5% were treated with other drugs. Results: Lenvatinib second-line subgroup achieved a median overall survival (mOS) of 18.9 months, significative longer (p = 0.01; hazard ratio [HR]: 2.24) compared to sorafenib subgroup that reached a mOS of 14.3 months. The multivariate analysis highlighted albumin-bilirubin 1 grade (p < 0.01; HR: 5.23) and lenvatinib second-line therapy (p = 0.01; HR: 2.18) as positive prognostic factors for OS. The forest plot highlighted a positive trend in terms of OS in favor of patients treated with lenvatinib second-line regardless of baseline characteristics before first-line therapy. Conclusion: These results suggest that, in patients with HCC progressed to first-line atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib second-line therapy is associated to an improved survival compared to sorafenib.

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the ability of a previously reported tumor marker (TM) score involving alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), fucosylated AFP (AFP-L3), and des gamma-carboxy prothrombin (DCP) as TMs in predicting the prognosis and therapeutic efficacy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients administered atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) as first-line treatment. Materials/Methods: The study period covered September 2020 to December 2022 and involved 371 HCC patients treated with Atez/Bev. The values of the TMs AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP were measured upon introducing Atez/Bev. Elevations in the values of AFP (≥100 ng/mL), AFP-L3 (≥10%), and DCP (≥100 mAU/mL) were considered to indicate a positive TM. The number of positive TMs was summed up and used as the TM score, as previously proposed. Hepatic reserve function was assessed using the modified albumin–bilirubin grade (mALBI). Predictive values for prognosis were evaluated retrospectively. Results: A TM score of 0 was shown in 81 HCC patients (21.8%), 1 in 110 (29.6%), 2 in 112 (29.9%), and 3 in 68 (18.3%). The median overall survival (OS) times for TM scores 0, 1, 2, and 3 were not applicable [NA] (95% CI NA-NA), 24.0 months (95% CI 17.8-NA), 16.7 months (95% CI 17.8-NA), and NA (95% CI 8.3-NA), respectively (p < 0.001). The median progression-free survival (PFS) times for TM scores 0, 1, 2, and 3 were 16.5 months (95% CI 8.0-not applicable [NA]), 13.8 months (95% CI 10.6–21.3), 7.7 months (95% CI 5.3–8.9), and 5.8 months (95% CI 3.0–7.6), respectively (p < 0.001). OS was well stratified in mALBI 1/2a and mALBI 2a/2b. PFS was well stratified in mALBI 2a/2b, but not in mALBI 1/2a. Conclusions: The TM score involving AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP as TMs was useful in predicting the prognosis and therapeutic efficacy in terms of OS and PFS in HCC patients administered Atez/Bev as first-line treatment.

Background: Osteoporosis is a common complication in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of denosumab and zoledronic acid (ZOL) in treating osteoporosis in PBC patients. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label trial enrolled Japanese patients with PBC and osteoporosis. Patients were randomized to receive either subcutaneous denosumab 60 mg every 6 months (denosumab group) or i.v. zoledronic acid 5 mg yearly (ZOL group). The primary endpoint was the mean percent change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine and total hip from baseline to 12 months. Results: Of 47 enrolled patients, 41 (87.2%) completed the study (denosumab: n=21; ZOL: n=20). At 12 months, lumbar spine BMD increased by 7.5% in the denosumab group and 6.4% in the ZOL group, demonstrating the non-inferiority of denosumab (95% CI: −1.6% to 3.8%). Although the total hip BMD increased more in the denosumab group than in the ZOL group (5.0% vs. 2.6%, p<0.01), the difference did not meet the predefined non-inferiority margin (95% CI: −1.3% to 6.2%). Serum ALP to upper limit of normal ratio and bone turnover markers significantly decreased in both groups; however, the rates of change were not significantly different between them. The incidence of adverse events was significantly lower in the denosumab group compared with the ZOL group (14.3% vs. 50.0%, p=0.013). Conclusions: Denosumab is a safe and effective treatment option for osteoporosis in patients with PBC.