Background Updated practice guidelines on adjuvant chemotherapy for completely resected colon cancer are lacking. In 2008, Cancer Care Ontario’s Program in Evidence-Based Care developed a guideline on adjuvant therapy for stages ii and iii colon cancer. With newer regimens being assessed in this patient population and older agents being either abandoned because of non-effectiveness or replaced by agents that are more efficacious, a full update of the original guideline was undertaken. Methods Literature searches (January 1987 to August 2015) of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were conducted; in addition, abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the European Society for Medical Oncology, and the European Cancer Congress were reviewed (the latter for January 2007 to August 2015). A practice guideline was drafted that was then scrutinized by internal and external reviewers whose comments were incorporated into the final guideline. Results Twenty-six unique reports of eighteen randomized controlled trials and thirteen unique reports of twelve meta-analyses or pooled analyses were included in the evidence base. The 5 recommendations developed included 3 for stage ii colon cancer and 2 for stage iii colon cancer. Conclusions Patients with completely resected stage iii colon cancer should be offered adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (5FU)–based chemotherapy with or without oxaliplatin (based on definitive data for improvements in survival and disease-free survival). Patients with resected stage ii colon cancer without “high-risk” features should not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. For patients with “high-risk” features, 5FU-based chemotherapy with or without oxaliplatin should be offered, although no clinical trials have been conducted to conclusively demonstrate the same benefits seen in stage iii colon cancer.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination regimens have recently become the new standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Large, phase III registrational trials of ICI-containing regimens in resectable and embolization-eligible settings are now reading out. This review summarizes and critically appraises efficacy and safety data from these studies with consideration of the optimal use of ICIs in conjunction with antiangiogenic agents including important issues in management of HCC across the continuum of care such as those related to patient selection, treatment sequencing, and liver preservation. IMbrave050 assessed atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in resected HCC and EMERALD-1 and LEAP-012 evaluated addition of durvalumab–bevacizumab and pembrolizumab–lenvatinib to transarterial chemoembolization in unresectable, embolization-eligible HCC. Both EMERALD-1 and LEAP-012 met the primary endpoint of progression-free survival. While IMbrave050 initially met its primary endpoint of recurrence-free survival, the adjuvant atezolizumab–bevacizumab benefit was not maintained in an updated analysis. Survival benefits remain unclear for all phase III trials. Safety outcomes can be generally described as predictable based on experience with the respective experimental regimens in the advanced setting. Treatment selection in embolization-eligible settings should consider risks and benefits with special consideration of liver preservation. Additional research is required to optimize ICI combination use in the perioperative and peri-embolization settings.

The IMbrave150 trial established atezolizumab with bevacizumab (A+B) as standard care for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), recommending an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) within 6 months of treatment initiation to prevent bleeding from esophagogastric varices. The necessity of mandatory EGD for all patients remains unclear. We retrospectively analyzed 112 HCC patients treated with A+B at five Canadian cancer centers from 1 July 2020 to 31 August 2022. A+B was the first-line therapy for 90% of patients, with median overall survival at 20.3 months and progression-free survival at 9.6 months. There was no survival difference between patients with bleeding and those without. Before A+B, 71% (n = 79) of patients underwent an EGD within 6 months, revealing varices in 41% (n = 32) and requiring intervention in 19% (n = 15). The overall bleeding rate was 15% (n = 17), with GI-specific bleeding occurring in 5% (n = 17). In the EGD group, GI-specific bleeding was 6% (n = 5) while in the non-EGD group, it was 3% (n = 1). Non-GI bleeding was observed in 10% (n = 11) of patients. Outcomes for HCC patients treated with A+B in Canada were comparable to IMbrave150. There was no increase in GI bleeding in patients without pre-treatment EGD, possibly supporting a selective EGD approach.