Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent a promising treatment for many kinds of cancers, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The rationale for using ICIs in HCC is based on the immunogenic background of hepatitis and cirrhosis and on the observation of high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in this cancer. Promising data from phase I/II studies in advanced HCC, showing durable objective response rates (~20% in first- and second-line settings) and good safety profile, have led to phase III studies with ICIs as single agents or in combination therapy, both in first and second line setting. While the activity of immunotherapy agents as single agents seems to be limited to an “ill-defined” small subset of patients, the combination of the anti PD-L1 atezolizumab and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor bevacizumab revealed a benefit in the outcomes when compared to sorafenib in the first line. In addition, the activity and efficacy of the combinations between anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 antibody and other ICIs, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or surgical and locoregional therapies, has also been investigated in clinical trials. In this review, we provide an overview of the role of ICIs in the management of HCC with a critical evaluation of the current status and future directions.

Background Locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) is a heterogeneous disease in which better predictive and prognostic factors are needed. Apart from TNM stage, both systemic inflammation and poor nutritional status have a negative impact on survival. Methods We retrospectively analysed two independent cohorts of a total of 145 patients with LAHNSCC treated with induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy at two different academic institutions. Full clinical data, including the Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, were analysed in a training cohort of 50 patients. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to establish optimal cut-off. Univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) were performed. Independent predictors of OS identified in multivariate analysis were confirmed in a validation cohort of 95 patients. Results In the univariate analysis, low PNI (PNI<45) (p=0.001), large primary tumour (T4) (p=0.044) and advanced lymph node disease (N2b-N3) (p=0.025) were significantly associated with poorer OS in the validation cohort. The independent prognostic factors in the multivariate analysis for OS identified in the training cohort were dRNL (p=0.030) and PNI (p=0.042). In the validation cohort, only the PNI remained as independent prognostic factor (p=0.007). Conclusions PNI is a readily available, independent prognostic biomarker for OS in LAHNSCC. Adding PNI to tumour staging could improve individual risk stratification of patients with LAHNSCC in future clinical trials.

Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth-most common cancer worldwide and an important cause of cancer-related-death. The growing knowledge of its molecular pathogenesis has shown that GC is not a single entity, but a constellation of different diseases, each with its own molecular and clinical characteristics. Currently, surgery represents the only curative approach for localized GC, but only 20% of patients (pts) showed resectable disease at diagnosis and, even in case of curative resection, the prognosis remains poor due to the high rate of disease relapse. In this context, multimodal perioperative approaches were developed in western and eastern countries in order to decrease relapse rates and improve survival. However, there is little consensus about the optimal treatment for non-metastatic GC. In this review, we summarize the current status and future developments of perioperative chemotherapy in resectable GC, attempting to find clear answers to the real problems in clinical practice.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is an aggressive disease with poor prognosis. In a randomized phase III trial, combination of Nab-paclitaxel (Nab-P) plus gemcitabine showed superior activity and efficacy in first-line treatment compared with gemcitabine alone. Nab-P is not dispensed in Italy; however, we obtained this drug from our Ethics Committee for compassionate use. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of this Nab-P and gemcitabine combination in a cohort of patients treated outside clinical trials. From January 2012 to May 2014, we included 41 patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma receiving combination of 125 mg/m2 Nab-P and 1 g/m2 gemcitabine on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, as first-line treatment. Median age of patients was 67 (range 41–77) years, and 11 patients were aged ≥70 years. Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group performance status was 0 or 1 in 32 patients (78 %) and 2 in nine patients (22 %). Primary tumor was located in the pancreatic head or body/tail in 24 (58.5 %) and 17 (41.5 %) patients, respectively, and nine patients had received biliary stent implantation before starting chemotherapy. Median carbohydrate antigen 19–9 level was 469 U/l (range 17.4–61546 U/l) and 29 patients (70.7 %) had referred pain at the time of diagnosis. Patients received a median six cycles (range 1–14) of treatment. Overall response rate was 36.6 %; median progression-free survival was 6.7 months [(95 % confidence interval (CI) 5.966–8.034), and median overall survival was 10 months (95 % CI 7.864–12.136). Treatment was well tolerated. No grade 4 toxicity was reported. Grade 3 toxicity included neutropenia in 10 patients (24.3 %), thrombocytopenia in five (12 %), anemia in three (7.3 %), diarrhea in four (9.7 %), nausea and vomiting in two (4.9 %), and fatigue in six (14.6 %). Finally, pain control was achieved in 24 of 29 patients (82.3 %) with a performance status improvement of 10 % according to the Karnofsky scale. Our results confirm that combination of gemcitabine plus Nab-P is effective both in terms of overall response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival, with a good safety profile.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) represent about 7% of all NETs, 8.7% of gastroenteropancreatic NETs (GEP-NETs) and 1-2% of all pancreatic neoplasms. In the last two decades, the increased diagnosis of pNETs has generated great interest and the development of different classifications, grading and staging systems. Recently, several trials were performed in order to improve the knowledge of biomarkers and imaging and to provide an early diagnosis, but their role is still under debate. Nowadays, surgery represents the only curative approach for pNETs. Approximately 90% of pNETs are silent and non-functional; therefore, most patients are diagnosed in late stage and present metastatic (60%) or locally unresectable advanced disease (21%) with a poor prognosis. Not many therapeutic options are available for pNETs, with different treatments for G1-G2 and G3 tumors, because these diseases are still rare and trials are made up of few series of patients. At present, medical treatments is controversial. On these bases, we believe that a multidisciplinary team composed of surgeons, oncologists, endocrinologists, radiation oncologists, radiologists, pathologists and medicals nuclear is required. This paper presents a review of present state-of-the-art in the field of pNETs.