The treatment landscape of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has significantly changed over the last five years with multiple options in the frontline, second line, and beyond. Tyrosine kinase inhibit...

Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is commonly observed in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed to compare the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of irLI between patients receiving ICIs for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) vs. other solid tumours. Two separate cohorts were included: 375 patients with advanced/unresectable HCC, Child-Pugh A class treated with first-line atezolizumab+bevacizumab from the AB-real study, and a non-HCC cohort including 459 patients treated with first-line ICI therapy from the INVIDIa-2 multicentre study. IrLI was defined as a treatment-related increase of aminotransferase levels after exclusion of alternative aetiologies of liver injury. The incidence of irLI was adjusted for the duration of treatment exposure. In patients with HCC, the incidence of any grade irLI was 11.4% over a median treatment exposure of 4.4 months (95% CI 3.7-5.2) vs. 2.6% in the INVIDIa-2 cohort over a median treatment exposure of 12.4 months (95% CI 11.1-14.0). Exposure-adjusted-incidence of any grade irLI was 22.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with HCC and 2.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with other solid tumours (p <0.001), with median time-to-irLI of 1.4 and 4.7 months, respectively. Among patients who developed irLI, systemic corticosteroids were administered in 16.3% of patients with HCC and 75.0% of those without HCC (p <0.001), and irLI resolution was observed in 72.1% and 58.3%, respectively (p = 0.362). In patients with HCC, rates of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation due to irLI were 7%. Grade 1-2 irLI was associated with improved overall survival only in patients with HCC (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.96). Despite higher incidence and earlier onset, irLI in patients with HCC is characterised by higher rates of remission and lower requirement for corticosteroid therapy (vs. irLI in other solid tumours), low risk of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation, not negatively affecting oncological outcomes. Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is common in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but whether irLI is more frequent or it is associated with a worse clinical course in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), compared to other tumours, is not known. Herein, we compared characteristics and outcomes of irLI in two prospective cohorts including patients treated with ICIs for HCC or for other oncological indications. irLI is significantly more common and it occurs earlier in patients with HCC, also after adjustment for duration of treatment exposure. However, outcomes of patients with HCC who developed irLI are not negatively affected in terms of requirement for corticosteroid therapy, hepatic decompensation, treatment discontinuation and overall survival.

The aim of this retrospective proof-of-concept study was to compare different second-line treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and progressive disease (PD) after first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. A total of 1381 patients had PD at first-line therapy. 917 patients received lenvatinib as first-line treatment, and 464 patients atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as first-line. 49.6% of PD patients received a second-line therapy without any statistical difference in overall survival (OS) between lenvatinib (20.6months) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line (15.7months; p = 0.12; hazard ratio [HR]= 0.80). After lenvatinib first-line, there wasn't any statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p = 0.27; sorafenib HR: 1; immunotherapy HR: 0.69; other therapies HR: 0.85). Patients who underwent trans-arterial chemo-embolization (TACE) had a significative longer OS than patients who received sorafenib (24.7 versus 15.8months, p < 0.01; HR=0.64). After atezolizumab plus bevacizumab first-line, there was a statistical difference between second-line therapy subgroups (p < 0.01; sorafenib HR: 1; lenvatinib HR: 0.50; cabozantinib HR: 1.29; other therapies HR: 0.54). Patients who received lenvatinib (17.0months) and those who underwent TACE (15.9months) had a significative longer OS than patients treated with sorafenib (14.2months; respectively, p = 0.01; HR=0.45, and p < 0.05; HR=0.46). Approximately half of patients receiving first-line lenvatinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab access second-line treatment. Our data suggest that in patients progressed to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is lenvatinib, while in patients progressed to lenvatinib, the systemic therapy able to achieve the longest survival is immunotherapy.

Atezolizumab/bevacizumab (A/B) is now a standard first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the optimal second-line regimen is not known. We evaluated real-world treatment patterns and outcomes to investigate factors associated with post-progression survival (PPS). In this multicenter, international, retrospective study, we examined clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with advanced HCC who progressed on first-line A/B. The primary outcome of PPS was defined as time from first radiographic progression on A/B to death. A total of 406 patients alive after progression on first-line A/B were included in the final analysis, of whom 45.3% (n = 184) received best supportive treatment (BST) and 54.7% (n = 222) continued active systemic treatment. In the second line, 155 patients were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), 45 with immune checkpoint inhibitor (IO)-based regimens, and 3 had missing data. Median PPS of the whole cohort (mPPS) was 6.0 months (95% CI 5.2-7.2). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, absence of portal vein tumor thrombus, ECOG <2, and continued active treatment were predictors of better PPS. mPPS was significantly longer for patients who continued active treatment vs. BST (9.7 vs. 2.6 months; HR 0.41, p <0.001). In the second-line setting, patients treated with TKIs had a numerically shorter mPPS compared to those treated with IO (8.4 vs. 14.9 months; HR 1.37, p = 0.256). Continuation of active therapy after A/B progression was independently associated with better survival even after adjusting for baseline disease characteristics. mPPS with IO-based therapy exceeded a year, suggesting that IO continuation post-progression may retain benefit. The precise sequencing of TKI and IO regimens warrants further investigation. There is currently a lack of level 1 data on second-line treatment options for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who progress after frontline atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, as all second-line approvals were established during the frontline sorafenib era. Our study aims to fill in some of the knowledge gap by investigating real-world patient outcomes in the second-line treatment setting. Findings from this study show that patients who continued active treatment had improved post-progression survival compared to those who received best supportive care, and medication regimens incorporating tyrosine kinase inhibitors as well as immunotherapy agents were active. These results can help inform clinicians of possible treatment options for patients who progress after frontline atezolizumab plus bevacizumab while we await maturing data from randomized-controlled trials.

Sex-related differences in the immune pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), particularly related to oestrogen-dependent secretion of pro-tumourigenic cytokines, are well-known. Whether sex influences the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy is not known. We performed a restricted maximum likelihood random effects meta-analysis of five phase III trials that evaluated immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced HCC and reported overall survival (OS) hazard ratios (HRs) stratified by sex to evaluate sex-related differences in OS. In a real-world cohort of 840 patients with HCC from 22 centres included between 2018 and 2023, we directly compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab (A+B) between sexes. Radiological response was reported according to RECIST v1.1. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed for OS and progression-free survival (PFS). In the meta-analysis, immunotherapy was associated with a significant OS benefit only in male (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86) but not in female (pooled HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.70-1.03) patients with HCC. When directly comparing model estimates, no differences in the treatment effect between sexes were observed. Among 840 patients, 677 (81%) were male (mean age 66 ± 11 years), and 163 (19%) were female (mean age 67 ± 12 years). Type and severity of adverse events were similar between the two groups. OS and PFS were comparable between males and females upon uni- and multivariable analyses (aHR for OS and PFS: 0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.04; 1.02, 95% CI 0.80-1.30, respectively). Objective response rates (24%/22%) and disease control rates (59%/59%) were also similar between sexes. Female phase III trial participants experienced smaller OS benefit following ICI therapy for advanced HCC, while outcomes following A+B treatment were comparable between sexes in a large real-world database. Based on the ambiguous sex-related differences in survival observed here, further investigation of sex-specific clinical and biologic determinants of responsiveness and survival following ICIs are warranted. While immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as standard of care for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma, there are conflicting reports on whether the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy differs between females and males. Our study suggests ambiguous sex-related differences in outcomes from immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma. Further investigation of sex-specific clustering in clinicopathologic and immunologic determinants of responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy should be prioritised. PROSPERO CRD42023429625.

Chronic liver disease (CLD), including non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and its advanced form, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), affects a significant portion of the population worldwide. NAFLD is characterised by fat accumulation in the liver, while NASH is associated with inflammation and liver damage. Osteosarcopenia, which combines muscle and bone mass loss, is an emerging clinical problem in chronic liver disease that is often underappreciated. The reductions in muscle and bone mass share several common pathophysiological pathways; insulin resistance and chronic systemic inflammation are the most crucial predisposing factors and are related to the presence and gravity of NAFLD and to the worsening of the outcome of liver disease. This article explores the relationship between osteosarcopenia and NAFLD/MAFLD, focusing on the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of this condition in patients with CLD.