Patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) and Child-Pugh grade B face limited treatment options and poor outcomes. This study aims to evaluate whether the effect and safety of combining tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with progressive disease (PD)-1 inhibitors in uHCC patients with Child-Pugh B7 (CP7) and B8/9 (CP8/9) differ.

This multicenter retrospective study included 179 uHCC patients with Child-Pugh B (CP7 group: n = 106; CP8/9 group: n = 73), receiving a combination of lenvatinib/sorafenib/other TKIs and PD-1 inhibitors between December 2020 and March 2023. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were defined as the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included the objective response rate (ORR) and safety.

The median PFS and OS for the entire cohort were 7.3 months (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 6.3-8.3) and 16.0 months (95% CI: 12.9-19.1), respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between CP7 and CP8/9 groups in PFS (7.8 vs. 6.3 months, p = 0.28), OS (17.8 vs. 14.0 months, p = 0.20), ORR (33.0% vs. 27.4%, p = 0.42), or safety profiles. However, the CP8/9 group had significantly higher rates of TKI dose reductions (46.6% vs. 31.1%, p = 0.04) and discontinuations (57.5% vs. 24.5%, p < 0.001). Notably, 30.2% of patients maintained sustained radiographic responses despite advanced liver dysfunction.

Combining TKIs with PD-1 inhibitors is an effective and well-tolerated option for HCC patients with Child-Pugh B, including those with CP8/9.

The survival outcomes associated with hepatic recompensation in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with first-line systemic therapies remain unclear. We compared survival from the initiation of first-line systemic treatments for advanced HCC among patients with compensated, decompensated, and recompensated cirrhosis.

A Latin American multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted from 2018 to 2024, involving patients with HCC and Child-Pugh class A or B who received systemic therapy. At the time of first-line therapy, patients with cirrhosis were categorised as compensated (never decompensated), decompensated, or recompensated. Cox proportional hazards models were estimated.

Among 306 patients receiving first-line systemic therapy (sorafenib: 60.5%, atezolizumab + bevacizumab: 29.7%, lenvatinib: 9.1%), 240 had cirrhosis, with 30.4% having a history of hepatic decompensation. Of these, 57.5% (95% CI 45.4%-69.0%) achieved hepatic recompensation over a median period of 12 months. At the time of first-line therapy, 69.6% were compensated, 17.5% recompensated, and 12.9% decompensated. Metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) was the most common underlying aetiology in the recompensated group. Median survival was significantly shorter in the decompensated group (8.6 months) compared to the compensated group (17.2 months) [aHR 1.91 (95% CI 1.04-3.5); p = 0.03], without a significant difference between the recompensated and compensated groups [aHR 1.28 (95% CI 0.79-2.1); p = 0.31]. Tumour progression was the primary reason for treatment discontinuation, and similar access to second-line therapies was observed between the compensated and recompensated groups.

Patients with cirrhosis and advanced HCC who achieved hepatic recompensation might benefit from systemic therapies after a cautious observation period.

Systemic therapy represents the standard of care treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Given the increased risk of death from cirrhosis-related complications in patients with advanced liver dysfunction, pivotal phase III trials traditionally limited inclusion to patients with Child-Pugh class A, where death is more likely to be attributed to HCC progression. Therefore, Western guidelines recommend the use of systemic therapies primarily in patients with preserved liver function. However, patients with HCC and Child-Pugh class B are commonly encountered in clinical practice, but due to limited prospective evidence, there is no clear guidance on their optimal management.In this recent advances article, we discuss how the clinical course of cirrhosis can affect eligibility to treatment in the modern era of systemic therapy for HCC, elaborate on strategies to improve liver function in HCC patients by targeting cirrhosis-related and tumour-related factors and summarise the current literature on systemic therapy in HCC patients with Child-Pugh class B. Based on this information, we finally propose a clinical algorithm on how to systematically approach patients with HCC and advanced liver dysfunction in clinical practice.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a highly aggressive cancer with a paucity of efficacious treatment options, particularly in advanced stages following first-line systemic therapy (FLST).

The objective of this trial is to assess the efficacy and safety of radiotherapy as a treatment option to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) and delay the necessity for second-line systemic therapy (SLST) in patients with oligoprogressive HCC following FLST.

Multicentre, single-arm, phase II trial.

This prospective, multicentre, single-arm phase II clinical trial will enrol 36 patients with oligoprogressive advanced HCC following FLST. A comprehensive clinical imaging evaluation will be conducted to confirm the presence of oligoprogressive disease, categorized as metachronous oligoprogression, repeat oligoprogression or induced oligoprogression. Furthermore, patients must have demonstrated stability of the primary HCC for a minimum of 3 months during FLST. Eligible patients will receive radiotherapy for all oligoprogressive lesions with a biologically effective dose (LQ, α/β = 10) of at least 60 Gy while continuing their current FLST until disease progression necessitates SLST. The primary endpoint is PFS, with secondary endpoints including objective remission rate, overall survival (OS), disease control rate, safety and duration of disease remission.

The final protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shandong First Medical University.

Given the greater number of options for FLST in advanced HCC, which have demonstrated improvements in PFS and OS, and the limited number and less effective SLST options, this phase II trial aims to evaluate the use of radiotherapy to extend PFS and delay the application of SLST in patients with oligoprogressive HCC after FLST. This approach may preserve SLST options for more aggressive, widespread metastatic disease in the future.

This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06261047.

Aim: Poor outcomes in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) coupled with potential significant treatment side effects underpin a strong rationale to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in those treated with systemic therapies. This study is aimed at quantifying the effect of systemic therapies on HRQOL outcomes in HCC patients when compared to baseline or placebo, other systemic therapies, and transarterial radioembolisation (TARE). Methods: In May 2024, two independent reviewers searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar for studies comparing postsystemic therapy HRQOL scores in adult patients with HCC to baseline or placebo, other systemic therapies, or to TARE. Narrative synthesis was used to synthesise results. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I. This review was structured according to PRISMA guidelines and was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO register (CRD42024521699). Results: Twenty-nine studies with 10,472 patients using eight HRQOL instruments were included. Compared to baseline, patients on atezolizumab/bevacizumab and sorafenib both experienced significant declines in HRQOL, and lenvatinib nonsignificantly decreased HRQOL. HRQOL remained unchanged in patients on pembrolizumab or nivolumab. Atezolizumab/bevacizumab and lenvatinib both significantly delayed HRQOL deterioration compared to sorafenib. Compared to TARE, atezolizumab/bevacizumab delayed time-to-deterioration in HRQOL, whereas sorafenib had significantly worse HRQOL. Conclusion: Despite worsening HRQOL outcomes compared to baseline, the first-line agents atezolizumab/bevacizumab and lenvatinib had superior HRQOL outcomes in comparison to sorafenib. Sorafenib significantly worsened HRQOL compared to TARE. As the majority of included studies included sorafenib, which has been largely superseded by newer therapies, further trials evaluating HRQOL with these newer therapies are required.

Durable responses to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are limited to a minority of patients, yet reliable biomarkers are still lacking. Inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-8 (IL-8) are associated with HCC progression, and IL-8 is known as the chemoattractant for immunosuppressive myeloid cells. Therefore, we aim to elucidate the ICB resistance mechanisms mediated by the activation of the IL-8/CXCR2 pathway. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) was performed in advanced HCC patients with baseline and on-treatment biopsy after pembrolizumab in a phase 2 clinical trial cohort. Our data revealed that IL-8 and its receptor, CXCR2, mainly derived from immunosuppressive myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs). In particular, the high circulating IL-8 level was strongly associated with poor ICB response. This myeloid IL-8/CXCR2 pathway was further elucidated in our ICB-resistant orthotopic mouse model using AZD5069, a clinically available CXCR2 antagonist. Suppression of the IL-8/CXCR2 pathway significantly abrogated MDSC trafficking and immunosuppressive activity, which sensitized the anti-PD-L1 blockade to reduce tumor growth and prolong survival. The association between myeloid IL-8 and ICB therapeutic outcomes also extended to multiple cancer types. Collectively, our study not only suggests a potential non-invasive biomarker for patient stratification and monitoring of ICB response but it also provides a proof of concept for combinational immunotherapy to benefit patients who are non-responsive to ICB monotherapy.

Locoregional therapies play a fundamental role in the treatment of patients with early and intermediate and locally advanced hepatocellular carcinomas. With encouraging recent advances in immunotherapy-based systemic therapies, locoregional therapies are being both promoted and challenged by new systemic therapy options. Combined locoregional and systemic therapies might enhance treatment outcomes compared with either option alone. This Series paper summarises the existing data on locoregional and systemic therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma, and discusses evidence from studies investigating their combination with a focus on their synergistic efficacy and safety.

Despite liver transplantation (LT) is considered the optimal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), particularly in patients with impaired liver function, the shortage of donors has forced the application of very restrictive criteria for selecting ideal candidates for whom LT can offer the best outcome. With the evolving LT landscape due to the advent of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) and the steady increase in donors, major efforts have been made to expand the transplant eligibility criteria for HCC. In addition, the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of HCC, with demonstrated efficacy in earlier stages, has revolutionized the therapeutic approach for these patients, and their integration in the setting of LT is challenging. Management of immunological compromise from ICIs, including the wash-out period before LT and post-LT immunosuppression adjustments, is crucial to balance the risk of graft rejection against HCC recurrence. Additionally, the effects of increased immunosuppression on non-hepatic complications must be understood to prevent them from becoming obstacles to long-term OS.

In this review, we will evaluate the emerging evidence and its implications for the future of LT in HCC. Addressing these novel challenges and opportunities, while integrating the current clinical evidence with predictive algorithms, would ensure a fair balance between individual patient needs and the overall population benefit in the LT system.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a major global health concern, as it is the most common primary liver cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly shifted the treatment paradigm, offering promising survival outcomes. However, the controlled conditions of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) often fail to reflect real-world complexities, emphasizing the necessity for strong real-world evidence (RWE). RWE, in most cases derived from observational studies, provides critical insights into the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of systemic therapies across diverse populations and settings. The authors searched MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Scopus for full-text published articles in any language from the inception to 30 June 2024.This review evaluates RWE on systemic therapies for advanced HCC, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) like sorafenib and lenvatinib, ICIs such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, and combination therapies like atezolizumab/bevacizumab and durvalumab/tremelimumab.

Studies reveal discrepancies in treatment efficacy and adverse event profiles between RCTs and routine clinical practice, underscoring the need for individualized treatment strategies. RWE highlights the influence of liver disease etiology, liver function, and tumor burden on treatment outcomes, guiding therapy selection.

In recent years, several global phase III trials have shown that combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) offer superior efficacy and survival compared to multi-kinase inhibitors, establishing them as the gold standard for treating patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This success has led to investigations into expanding the use of immunotherapy into various other settings and populations, including neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies, patients with decompensated liver function and those awaiting liver transplantation. Despite its proven efficacy, a significant number of patients still develop resistance to immunotherapy, highlighting the need for innovative strategies to address this challenge. Approaches aimed at enhancing tumour immunogenicity, such as combining immunotherapy with transarterial chemoembolization or radiation therapies, show significant promise. Additionally, novel immunotherapeutics - such as triplet therapy, bispecific antibodies, adoptive T-cell therapy and cancer vaccines - are in early development for HCC. These agents have demonstrated potential for synergistic effects with existing ICIs, with initial studies yielding positive outcomes. In this review, we offer our future perspective on immunotherapy, emphasizing emerging indications, novel combination strategies and the development of new immunotherapeutic agents. Overall, the future of immunotherapy in HCC is brimming with extraordinary potential, set to transform the treatment landscape and redefine the possibilities for managing this challenging disease.

Liver transplantation (LT) is a curative strategy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the risk of HCC recurrence remains a challenging problem. In patients with HCC recurrence after LT (HCC-R_LT), the locoregional and surgical approaches are complex, and the guidelines do not report evidence-based strategies for the management of immunosuppression. In recent years, immunotherapy has become an effective option for patients with advanced HCC in pre-transplant settings. However, due to the risk of potentially fatal allograft rejection, the use of immunotherapy is avoided in post-transplant settings. Combining immunosuppressants with immunotherapy in transplant patients is also challenging due to the complex tumor microenvironment and immunoreactivity. The fear of acute liver rejection and the lack of predictive factors hinder the successful clinical application of immunotherapy for post-liver transplantation HCC recurrence. This review aims to comprehensively summarize the risk of HCC-R_LT, the available evidence for the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with HCC-R_LT, and the clinical issues regarding the innovative management of this patient population.

In recent years, the standard treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has changed dramatically due to the emergence of potent systemic treatment options. These advanced therapies have led to increased survival benefits for patients with advanced or intermediate-stage HCC. Advancements in HCC treatments also offer the possibility of conversion therapy for initially unresectable HCC. However, the treatment of HCC is becoming increasingly complex, due to the expanding availability of systemic therapies, their use in combination with locoregional therapies, and their perioperative applications. Patient characteristics such as liver function, esophageal and gastric variceal status, and treatment goal (downstaging resection or long-term maintenance treatment), are the most critical factors when selecting a systemic treatment strategy. Consequently, the necessity to tailor a personalized and comprehensive treatment strategy for individual patients is growing. This review briefly summarizes the current systemic treatment regimens for HCC from a surgeon's perspective. It is based on results from clinical studies as well as personal experience and introduces the concept of a patient-centered, treatment goals-driven, individualized systemic treatment strategy for managing HCC.

Liver cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounting for approximately 90% of primary liver cancers. Advances in diagnostic and therapeutic tools, along with improved understanding of their application, are transforming patient treatment. Integrating these innovations into clinical practice presents challenges and necessitates guidance. These clinical practice guidelines offer updated advice for managing patients with HCC and provide a comprehensive review of pertinent data. Key updates from the 2018 EASL guidelines include personalised surveillance based on individual risk assessment and the use of new tools, standardisation of liver imaging procedures and diagnostic criteria, use of minimally invasive surgery in complex cases together with updates on the integrated role of liver transplantation, transitions between surgical, locoregional, and systemic therapies, the role of radiation therapies, and the use of combination immunotherapies at various stages of disease. Above all, there is an absolute need for a multiparametric assessment of individual risks and benefits, considering the patient's perspective, by a multidisciplinary team encompassing various specialties.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have proven efficacy against hepatitis B-virus positive hepatocellular. However, Immunotherapy-related adverse reactions are still a major challenge faced by tumor immunotherapy, so it is urgent to establish new methods to effectively predict immunotherapy-related adverse reactions.

Multi-machine learning model were constructed to screen the risk factors for irAEs in ICIs for the treatment of HBV-related hepatocellular and build a prediction model for the occurrence of clinical IRAEs.

Data from 274 hepatitis B virus positive tumor patients who received PD-1 or/and CTLA4 inhibitor treatment and had immune cell detection results were collected from Henan Cancer Hospital for retrospective analysis. Models were established using Lasso, RSF (RandomForest), and xgBoost, with ten-fold cross-validation and resampling methods used to ensure model reliability. The impact of influencing factors on irAEs (immune-related adverse events) was validated using Decision Curve Analysis (DCA). Both uni/multivariable analysis were accomplished by Chi-square/Fisher's exact tests. The accuracy of the model is verified in the DCA curve.

A total of 274 HBV-related liver cancer patients were enrolled in the study. Predictive models were constructed using three machine learning algorithms to analyze and statistically evaluate clinical characteristics, including immune cell data. The accuracy of the Lasso regression model was 0.864, XGBoost achieved 0.903, and RandomForest reached 0.961. Resampling internal validation revealed that RandomForest had the highest recall rate (AUC = 0.892). Based on machine learning-selected indicators, antiviral therapy and The HBV DNA copy number showed a significant correlation with both the occurrence and severity of irAEs. Antiviral therapy notably reduced the incidence of IRAEs and may modulate these events through regulation of B cells. The DCA model also demonstrated strong predictive performance. Effective control of viral load through antiviral therapy significantly mitigates the occurrence of irAEs.

ICIs show therapeutic potential in the treatment of HBV-HCC. Following antiviral therapy, the incidence of severe irAEs decreases. Even in cases where viral load control is incomplete, continuous antiviral treatment can still mitigate the occurrence of irAEs.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a prevalent malignant tumour worldwide. Depending on the stage of the tumour and liver function, a variety of treatment options are indicated. Traditional radiotherapy and chemotherapy are ineffective against HCC; however, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved radiofrequency ablation (RFA), surgical resection, and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for advanced HCC. On the other hand, liver transplantation is recommended in the early stages of the disease. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) like lenvatinib and sorafenib, immunotherapy and anti-angiogenesis therapy, including pembrolizumab, bevacizumab, tremelimumab, durvalumab, camrelizumab, and atezolizumab, are other treatment options for advanced HCC. Moreover, to maximize outcomes for patients with HCC, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) along with targeted therapies or local ablative therapy is being investigated. This review elaborates on the current status of HCC treatment, outlining the most recent clinical study results and novel approaches.

The impairment of liver function strongly limits the therapeutic options for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and the assessment of liver function is key to finding the appropriate therapy for patients suffering from this disease. Furthermore, preexisting liver dysfunction has a negative impact on the prognosis of patients in addition to the malignant potential of HCC. Hence, defining the optimal treatment of patients with HCC requires a comprehensive examination with liver function being a crucial part of it.

This review will provide an overview of the currently existing methods for evaluating the liver function in patients with HCC. Assessment of liver function includes scoring systems but also functional and technical methods. In addition, the role of these tests in different treatment facilities such as liver resection, transplantation, interventional and systemic therapy is summarized.

A comprehensive pretherapeutic assessment of the liver function includes laboratory-based scoring systems, as well as imaging- and non-imaging-based functional tests. Combining diverse parameters can help to improve the safety and efficacy of HCC therapy particularly in patients with compromised liver function. Future research should focus on optimizing pretherapeutic assessment recommendations for each therapy.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common primary liver cancer, is a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Limited treatment options for advanced stages highlight the need for effective therapies.

This review explores immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), specifically PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4 inhibitors, as emerging treatments for advanced HCC. It discusses data from phase II and III trials evaluating ICI combinations with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), anti-angiogenic agents, and locoregional treatments like Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE). Clinical outcomes, including progression-free survival and response rates, were analyzed alongside the incidence and management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). A systematic review approach ensured comprehensive, high-quality study inclusion.

ICI-based therapies and their combinations are transforming advanced HCC treatment, offering improved outcomes and potential survival benefits. However, these therapies need optimization in sequencing and selection, particularly considering variations in liver function and disease stage. Effective management of adverse effects is critical to maximize clinical benefits. Further research is required to develop personalized strategies, tailoring treatments to patient-specific factors and enhancing safety and effectiveness in HCC management.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), such as durvalumab, tremelimumab, and atezolizumab, have emerged as a significant therapeutic option for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In fact, the efficacy of ICIs as single agents or as part of combination therapies has been demonstrated in practice-changing phase III clinical trials. However, ICIs confront several difficulties, including the lack of predictive biomarkers, primary and secondary drug resistance, and treatment-related side effects. Herein, we provide an overview of current issues and future challenges in this setting.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations extend overall survival (OS) while anti-PD-1/L1 monotherapy is non-inferior to sorafenib in treatment-naïve, patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Clinicogenomic features are posited to influence patient outcomes.

The primary objective of this retrospective study was to define the clinical, pathologic, and genomic factors associated with outcomes to ICI therapy in patients with HCC. Patients with histologically confirmed advanced HCC treated with ICI at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2012 to 2022 were included. Association between clinical, pathological, and genomic characteristics were assessed with univariable and multivariable Cox regression model for progression-free survival (PFS) and OS.

Two-hundred and forty-two patients were treated with ICI-based therapy. Patients were predominantly male (82%) with virally mediated HCC (53%) and Child Pugh A score (70%). Median follow-up was 28 months (0.5-78.4). Median PFS for those treated in 1st line, 2nd line and ≥ 3rd line was 4.9 (range: 2.9-6.2), 3.1 (2.3-4.0), and 2.5 (2.1-4.0) months, respectively. Median OS for those treated in 1st line, 2nd line, and ≥ 3rd line was 16 (11-22), 7.5 (6.4-11), and 6.4 (4.6-26) months, respectively. Poor liver function and performance status associated with worse PFS and OS, while viral hepatitis C was associated with favorable outcome. Genetic alterations were not associated with outcomes.

Clinicopathologic factors were the major determinates of outcomes for patients with advanced HCC treated with ICI. Molecular profiling did not aid in stratification of ICI outcomes. Future studies should explore alternative biomarkers such as the level of immune activation or the pretreatment composition of the immune tumor microenvironment.

Immunotherapy has revolutionised the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In addition, several phase III trials of immunotherapy in combination with surgical or locoregional therapies for early-to intermediate-stage HCC have recently reported positive results, and other phase III trials in the same patient population are currently in progress. As the application of immunotherapy is shifting to include patients with earlier stages of HCC, one looming question now emerges: What is the role of immunotherapy in the pre-liver transplant population? Liver transplantation is a potentially curative therapy for HCC and confers the additional advantage of restoring a normal, healthy liver. In pre-transplant patients, immunotherapy may improve downstaging success and tumour control at the cost of some immunologic risks. These include immune-related toxicities, which are particularly relevant in a uniquely vulnerable population with chronic liver disease, and the possibility of acute rejection after transplantation. Ultimately, the goal of immunotherapy in this population will be to effectively expand access to liver transplantation while preserving pre- and post-transplant outcomes. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms supporting combination immunotherapy, summarise key recent clinical data from major immunotherapy trials, and explore how immunotherapy can be applied in the neoadjuvant setting prior to liver transplantation in selected high-risk patients.

Deterioration of liver function is a leading cause of death in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We evaluated the impact of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-treatment on liver function and outcomes.

HCC patients receiving ICIs or sorafenib between 04/2003 and 05/2024 were included. Liver function (assessed by Child-Pugh score [CPS]) was evaluated at the start of ICI-treatment (baseline, BL) and 3 and 6 months thereafter. A ≥1 point change in CPS was defined as deterioration (-) or improvement (+), while equal CPS points were defined as stable (=).

Overall, 182 ICI-treated patients (66.8 ± 11.8 years; cirrhosis: n = 134, 74%) were included. At BL, median CPS was 5 (IQR: 5-6; CPS-A: 147, 81%). After 3 months, liver function improved/stabilized in 102 (56%) and deteriorated in 61 (34%) patients, while 19 (10%) patients deceased/had missing follow-up (d/noFU). Comparable results were observed at 6 months (+/=: n = 82, 45%; -: n = 55, 30%; d/noFU: n = 45, 25%). In contrast, 54 (34%) and 33 (21%) out of 160 sorafenib patients achieved improvement/stabilization at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Radiological response was linked to CPS improvement/stabilization at 6 months (responders vs. non-responders, 73% vs. 50%; p = 0.007). CPS improvement/stabilization at 6 months was associated with better overall survival following landmark analysis (6 months: +/=: 28.4 [95% CI: 18.7-38.1] versus -: 14.2 [95% CI: 10.3-18.2] months; p < 0.001). Of 35 ICI-patients with CPS-B at BL, improvement/stabilization occurred in 16 (46%) patients, while 19 (54%) patients deteriorated/d/noFU at 3 months. Comparable results were observed at 6 months (CPS +/=: 14, 40%, -: 8, 23%). Importantly, 6/35 (17%) and 9/35 (26%) patients improved from CPS-B to CPS-A at 3 and 6 months.

Radiological response to ICI-treatment was associated with stabilization or improvement in liver function, which correlated with improved survival, even in patients with Child-Pugh class B at baseline.

Atezolizumab (TECENTRIQ®) and nivolumab (OPDIVO®) are both immunotherapeutic indications targeting programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) and programmed cell death 1 (PD-1), respectively. These inhibitors hold promise as therapies for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and have demonstrated encouraging results in reducing the progression and spread of tumors. However, due to their adverse effects and low response rates, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has withdrawn the approval of atezolizumab in TNBC and nivolumab in HCC treatment. The withdrawals of atezolizumab and nivolumab have raised concerns regarding their effectiveness and the ability to predict treatment responses. Therefore, the current study aims to investigate the immunotherapy withdrawal of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, specifically atezolizumab for TNBC and nivolumab for HCC. This study will examine both the structural and clinical aspects. This review provides detailed insights into the structure of the PD-1 receptor and its ligands, the interactions between PD-1 and PD-L1, and their interactions with the withdrawn antibodies (atezolizumab and nivolumab) as well as PD-1 and PD-L1 modifications. In addition, this review further assesses these antibodies in the context of TNBC and HCC. It seeks to elucidate the factors that contribute to diverse responses to PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in different types of cancer and propose approaches for predicting responses, mitigating the potential risks linked to therapy withdrawals, and optimizing patient outcomes. By better understanding the mechanisms underlying responses to PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and developing strategies to predict these responses, it is possible to create more efficient treatments for TNBC and HCC.

Whether patients with Child-Pugh class B (CP-B) cancer with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) benefit from active anticancer treatment vs best supportive care (BSC) is debated.

To evaluate the association of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapies vs BSC with overall survival (OS) of patients with uHCC and CP-B liver dysfunction.

This retrospective, multicenter, international clinical case series examined data of patients with CP-B with uHCC who were receiving first-line ICI-based regimens from September 2017 to December 2022 whose data were extracted from an international consortium and compared with a cohort of patients with CP-B receiving BSC. Patients were treated in tertiary care centers across Europe, US, and Asia in routine clinical practice. After applying the inclusion criteria, 187 and 156 patients were left in the ICI and BSC groups, respectively. The propensity score was calculated for the following variables: age, alpha-fetoprotein levels, Child-Pugh score, extrahepatic spread, portal vein tumor thrombosis, cirrhosis, ascites, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.

Patients in the ICI group received first-line systemic therapy with either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A+B) (n = 141) or nivolumab (n = 46).

OS in the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) populations was the main outcome, and it was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method; univariable Cox regression test was used to make comparisons between the 2 groups.

The median age was 66 (IQR, 61-72) and 73 (IQR, 66-81) years in the ICI (33 women [18%]) and BSC groups (41 women [26%]), respectively. In the IPTW populations, median OS was significantly longer in the ICI group (7.50 months; 95% CI, 5.62-11.15) compared with BSC (4.04 months; 95% CI, 3.03-5.03; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.80; P < .001). Multivariable analysis confirmed that ICI exposure was associated with a reduction of approximately 50% in the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35-0.86; P < .001), and the presence of portal vein tumor thrombosis, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of greater than 1, and alpha-fetoprotein levels of 400 ng/mL or greater were associated with increased risk of death.

The results of this case series provide comparative evidence of improved survival in association with ICI treatment compared with BSC in patients with uHCC with CP-B liver dysfunction.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most common type of liver tumor, is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths, and the incidence of liver cancer is still increasing worldwide. Curative hepatectomy or liver transplantation is only indicated for a small population of patients with early-stage HCC. However, most patients with HCC are not candidates for radical resection due to disease progression, leading to the choice of the conventional tyrosine kinase inhibitor drug sorafenib as first-line treatment. In the past few years, immunotherapy, mainly immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has revolutionized the clinical strategy for HCC. Combination therapy with ICIs has proven more effective than sorafenib, and clinical trials have been conducted to apply these therapies to patients. Despite significant progress in immunotherapy, the molecular mechanisms behind it remain unclear, and immune resistance is often challenging to overcome. Several studies have pointed out that the complex intercellular communication network in the immune microenvironment of HCC regulates tumor escape and drug resistance to immune response. This underscores the urgent need to analyze the immune microenvironment of HCC. This review describes the immunosuppressive cell populations in the immune microenvironment of HCC, as well as the related clinical trials, aiming to provide insights for the next generation of precision immunotherapy.

Anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) monotherapy triggers various responses by each organ. In advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), while extrahepatic lesions demonstrate objective response rates (ORR) of 20%-40%, only 10% of intrahepatic lesions respond. Although first-line atezolizumab/bevacizumab has shown survival benefits in advanced HCC, organ-specific responses remain unexplored. Therefore, we aimed to assess organ-specific responses in patients with advanced HCC receiving atezolizumab/bevacizumab.

This retrospective, multicenter, observational study included patients who received first-line atezolizumab/bevacizumab for advanced HCC. Patients with Child-Pugh class A, measurable tumour lesions and serial imaging available for response evaluation were eligible.

Between May 2020 and June 2021, 131 patients (median age: 62) from three cancer referral institutions were included. Ninety-one had hepatitis B (69.5%), 108 were at Barcelona clinic liver cancer stage C (82.4%), and 78 had extrahepatic metastasis (59.5%). After a median follow-up of 10.1 months, median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6-9.2), median overall survival remained unreached (95% CI, range unavailable) and the ORR was 29.0%. Among 270 individual tumour lesions, the liver was the most commonly involved organ (n = 158). Atezolizumab/bevacizumab induced ORR of 27.8%, 42.2%, 29.1% and 21.0% for liver, lymph nodes, lungs and other sites, respectively. The organ-specific response rate for intrahepatic tumours decreased with increasing size (35.6%: <5 cm, 15.0%: ≥ 5 cm).

Unlike anti-PD-1 monotherapy, atezolizumab/bevacizumab demonstrated favourable responses in intrahepatic lesions, comparable to those in extrahepatic lesions, and may potentially overcome the immune-tolerant hepatic microenvironment in patients with advanced HCC.