Background
We recently reported the real-world changes in the etiologies of liver cirrhosis (LC) based on nationwide survey data and assessed the etiologies of LC with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
...Methods
Fifty-five participants from 68 institutions provided data on 23,637 patients with HCC-complicated LC. The changing trends in etiologies were assessed. We further analyzed the data from 29 hospitals that provided the annual number of newly identified HCC-complicated LC patients from 2008 to 2016 (
N
= 9362) without any missing years and assessed the transition in the real number of newly identified HCC-complicated LC cases.
Results
In the overall cohort, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection (60.3%) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection (12.9%) were the leading and third-most common causes of HCC-complicated LC in Japan, respectively. HCV infection was found to be the leading cause throughout Japan. The rate of viral hepatitis-related HCC decreased from 85.3 to 64.4%. Among non-viral etiologies, notable increases were observed in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)-related HCC (from 1.5 to 7.2%) and alcoholic liver disease (ALD)-related HCC (from 8.5 to 18.6%). Regarding the real number of newly diagnosed patients, the number of patients with viral hepatitis-related HCC decreased, while the number of patients with non-viral HCC, particularly NASH-related HCC, increased.
Conclusions
Viral hepatitis has remained the main cause of HCC in Japan. However, the decrease in viral hepatitis-related HCC, particularly HCV-related HCC highly contributed to the etiological changes. In addition, the increased incidence of non-viral HCC, particularly NASH-related HCC, was involved in the changing etiologies of HCC-complicated LC in Japan.
Aim
Lenvatinib (LEN) has recently become available as a first‐line tyrosine‐kinase inhibitor (TKI) for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u‐HCC). In patients who showed intolerability or failure ...in other TKI treatments, alternative treatment options are needed. This retrospective study evaluated the therapeutic potential of LEN in clinical practice.
Methods
We enrolled 57 u‐HCC patients treated with LEN from March to June 2018. Lenvatinib was given orally to patients weighing <60 kg at 8 mg/day and at 12 mg/day to those ≥60 kg. Following the exclusion of patients whose initial LEN dose was reduced, 49 patients were evaluated in regard to their characteristics and early therapeutic response using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors for findings of follow‐up computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations at 4 weeks after introducing LEN.
Results
The average patient age was 72.4 ± 9.3 years and 38 (77.6%) were men. The LEN dose was 8 and 12 mg in 32 and 17 patients, respectively. Twenty‐nine (59.2%) had history of treatment with sorafenib and six of them (20.7%) with regorafenib. Of the 49 patients, 27 were evaluated using findings obtained by enhanced CT/MRI at 4 weeks after introducing LEN. Partial response was shown in 11, stable disease in 12, and progressive disease in four (overall response rate ORR, 40.7%; disease control rate DCR, 85.2%). The ORR and DCR of TKI‐naïve patients (n = 8) were 50.0% and 87.5%, respectively, whereas those of TKI‐experienced patients (n = 19) were 36.8% and 84.2%, respectively (P = 0.675 and P = 1.00, respectively).
Conclusion
Early therapeutic response to LEN was favorable. This new TKI could have therapeutic potential both in patients with and without past TKI treatments.
Background
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major comorbidity in patients receiving hemodialysis. Interferon-based antiviral therapy to eradicate HCV is less effective in patients receiving ...hemodialysis than patients without renal dysfunction. Recently reported combination therapy with two oral direct-acting antiviral drugs, daclatasvir and asunaprevir, both of which are metabolized in the liver and excreted into the bile ducts, reportedly showed a high rate of HCV eradication. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of this therapy in patients receiving hemodialysis.
Methods
The safety and viral responses were compared among patients infected with HCV genotype 1, between 28 patients receiving hemodialysis, and propensity score-matched 56 patients without renal dysfunction.
Results
The reduction in serum HCV RNA levels 1 day after the start of therapy was significantly larger (
p
= 0.0329) and the disappearance of serum HCV RNA occurred significantly earlier (
p
= 0.0017) in patients receiving hemodialysis than those without renal dysfunction. The rates of sustained virologic response, i.e., the eradication of HCV, were comparable between two groups; the rate of SVR12 was 100 % in patients receiving hemodialysis and 94.6 % in patients without renal dysfunction. No adverse constitutional events were observed in either of the groups. The elevation of serum alanine aminotransferase levels, a known adverse effect of these drugs, was observed in comparable rate of patients between the two groups.
Conclusions
The therapy with daclatasvir and asunaprevir has high antiviral efficacy in patients receiving hemodialysis with a comparable safety profile to patients without renal dysfunction.
Abstract
It was recently reported that hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are not responsive to immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment. The present ...study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of lenvatinib in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/NASH-related unresectable-HCC (u-HCC). Five hundred thirty u-HCC patients with Child–Pugh A were enrolled, and divided into the NAFLD/NASH (n = 103) and Viral/Alcohol (n = 427) groups. Clinical features were compared in a retrospective manner. Progression-free survival (PFS) was better in the NAFLD/NASH than the Viral/Alcohol group (median 9.3 vs. 7.5 months, P = 0.012), while there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) (20.5 vs. 16.9 months, P = 0.057). In Cox-hazard analysis of prognostic factors for PFS, elevated ALT (≥ 30 U/L) (HR 1.247, P = 0.029), modified ALBI grade 2b (HR 1.236, P = 0.047), elevated AFP (≥ 400 ng/mL) (HR 1.294, P = 0.014), and NAFLD/NASH etiology (HR 0.763, P = 0.036) were significant prognostic factors. NAFLD/NASH etiology was not a significant prognostic factor in Cox-hazard analysis for OS (HR0.758, P = 0.092), whereas AFP (≥ 400 ng/mL) (HR 1.402, P = 0.009), BCLC C stage (HR 1.297, P = 0.035), later line use (HR 0.737, P = 0.014), and modified ALBI grade 2b (HR 1.875, P < 0.001) were significant. Lenvatinib can improve the prognosis of patients affected by u-HCC irrespective of HCC etiology or its line of treatment.
Background
Advanced Hepatocarcinoma (HCC) is an important health problem worldwide. Recently, the REFLECT trial demonstrated the non‐inferiority of Lenvatinib compared to Sorafenib in I line setting, ...thus leading to the approval of new first‐line standard of care, along with Sorafenib.
Aims and methods
With aim to evaluate the optimal choice between Sorafenib and Lenvatinib as primary treatment in clinical practice, we performed a multicentric analysis with the propensity score matching on 184 HCC patients.
Results
The median overall survival (OS) were 15.2 and 10.5 months for Lenvatinib and Sorafenib arm, respectively. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 7.0 and 4.5 months for Lenvatinib and Sorafenib arm, respectively. Patients treated with Lenvatinib showed a 36% reduction of death risk (p = 0.0156), a 29% reduction of progression risk (p = 0.0446), a higher response rate (p < 0.00001) and a higher disease control rate (p = 0.002). Sorafenib showed to be correlated with more hand‐foot skin reaction and Lenvatinib with more hypertension and fatigue. We highlighted the prognostic role of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG‐PS), bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase and eosinophils for Sorafenib. Conversely, albumin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alkaline phosphatase and Neutrophil‐Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) resulted prognostic in Lenvatinib arm. Finally, we highlighted the positive predictive role of albumin > Normal Value (NV), ECOG > 0, NLR < 3, absence of Hepatitis C Virus positivity, and presence of portal vein thrombosis in favor of Lenvatinib arm. Eosinophil < 50 and ECOG > 0 negatively predicted the response to Sorafenib.
Conclusion
SLenvatinib showed to better perform in a real‐word setting compared to Sorafenib. More researches are needed to validate the predictor factors of response to Lenvatinib rather than Sorafenib.
Key points
Recently, the REFLECT trial demonstrated the non‐inferiority of Lenvatinib compared to Sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) I line setting, thus leading to the approval of new first‐line standard of care
With aim to evaluate the optimal choice between Sorafenib and Lenvatinib as primary treatment in clinical practice, we performed a multicentric analysis with the propensity score matching on 184 HCC patients
In our analysis, Lenvatinib showed to better perform in a real‐word setting compared to Sorafenib. More researches are needed to validate the predictor factors of response to Lenvatinib rather than Sorafenib
Background/Aim
Although systemic therapy is recommended for patients with multiple intermediate stage unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u‐HCC) classified as beyond the up‐to‐7 criteria (UT‐7 ...out/multiple) as a transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) unsuitable condition, few reports have examined the therapeutic efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination therapy (Atez/Bev) in such cases. This study aimed to elucidate the therapeutic response of Atez/Bev in u‐HCC patients classified as UT‐7 out/multiple.
Material/Methods
From September 2020 to September 2021, 95 u‐HCC Japanese patients classified as UT‐7 out/multiple/Child‐Pugh A were enrolled from 21 institutions (median age 76 years, males 73, Child‐Pugh 5:6 = 68:27, TNM stage II:III = 17:78). Therapeutic response was retrospectively evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), ver. 1.1 and modified RECIST (mRECIST).
Results
Atez/Bev was given as first‐line treatment to 52 (54.7%). Objective response rate (ORR)/disease control rate (DCR) at six weeks of RECIST and mRECIST were 17.7%/84.7% and 42.5%/86.2%, respectively. Median PFS was 8.0 months (median observation period: 6.0 months). Child‐Pugh A/modified Albumin‐bilirubin grade (mALBI) 1 and 2a at baseline, 3, 6, and 9 weeks, were 100%/69.4%, 89.8%/57.3%, 94.8%/65.3%, and 91.4%/60.0%, respectively. Among adverse events (any‐grade, >10%) during the present observation period, general fatigue was most frequent (23.2%), followed by urine protein (21.1%), appetite loss (20.0%), and hypertension (13.7%).
Conclusion
Atez/Bev treatment showed favorable therapeutic response with less influence on hepatic function, suggesting it as a useful therapeutic option for patients with such condition.
Background/Aim: The frequency of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with good hepatic reserve function has been increasing in Japan along with the progression of antiviral therapies and aging ...of the society. We evaluated the usefulness of modified albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade as a tool for assessment of hepatic reserve function. Materials/Methods: We enrolled 6,649 naïve HCC patients treated from 2000 to 2017 and divided them into training (Ehime Prefecture group: E group, n = 2,357) and validation (validation group: V group, n = 4,292) cohorts. Child-Pugh classification and ALBI and modified ALBI (mALBI) grading were compared using with Japan Integrated Staging (JIS), ALBI-TNM (ALBI-T), and mALBI-T scores, which were calculated based on TNM stage and each assessment tool, retrospectively. Results: In the E group, Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC) and c-index values for mALBI-T (13,725.2/0.744) were better as compared to those of ALBI-T (13,772.6/0.733) and JIS score (13,874.7/0.720), with similar results observed in the V group (mALBI-T: 27,727.4/0.760; ALBI-T: 27,817.8/0.750; JIS: 27,807.5/0.748). Although there were some significant differences between the groups with regard to clinical background factors (age, etiology, tumor size, tumor number, treatment modalities), for all patients the AIC and c-index values of mALBI-T (45,327.1/0.755) were also better than those of ALBI-T (45,467.7/0.744) and JIS scores (45,555.8/0.739), indicating its superior stratification ability and prognostic predictive value in patients with HCC. Conclusion: The detailed stratification ability of mALBI grade for hepatic reserve function is suitable for the recent trend of HCC patients, while mALBI-T may provide a more accurate predictive value than existing total staging scoring systems.
Background/Aim
Presently, there are no therapeutic options for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u‐HCC) patients who are intolerant to sorafenib or regorafenib failure. There have been no ...reports with detailed clinical findings of lenvatinib (LEN), a newly developed first‐line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), obtained in real‐world practice. We aimed to elucidate the therapeutic efficacy of LEN.
Materials/Methods
From March to August 2018, 105 u‐HCC patients were treated with LEN. Following exclusion of those who started with a reduced LEN dose and/or had a short observation period (<2 weeks), 77 patients (72.0 ± 8.9 years, 59 males, 8 mg/12 mg = 49/28, Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan 6th LCSGJ‐TNM stage II/III/IVa/IVb = 8/28/4/37, and American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control 8th AJCC/UICC‐TNM stage IB:II:IIIA:IIIB:IVA:IVB = 2:27:6:5:9:28) were divided into two groups (TKI naïve n = 33 and TKI experienced n = 44, including 11 with regorafenib history). Therapeutic response was evaluated using mRECIST. Clinical data were retrospectively evaluated.
Results
There were significant differences in age (74.6 ± 11.2 vs 70.0 ± 5.9 years, P = 0.040), LCSGJ‐TNM (II:III:IVa:IVb = 8:12:1:12 vs 0:16:3:25, P = 0.006), and AJCC/UICC‐TNM (IB:II:IIIA:IIIB:IVA:IVB = 2:17:1:1:4:8 vs 0:10:5:4:5:20, P = 0.028), while hepatic reserve function, adverse event (AE) profiles, and progression‐free survival (89.7%/80.4% vs 90.5%/80.1%, P = 0.499) and overall survival (96.7%/96.7% vs 100%/92.3%, P = 0.769) after 4 and 12 weeks were not significantly different between the TKI‐naïve and TKI‐experienced groups. Overall response rate and disease control rate at 4 weeks (n = 52) were 38.5% and 80.8%, respectively, and 32.4% and 70.3%, respectively, at 12 weeks (n = 37). A significant decline in log10 AFP from the baseline to 4 weeks after introducing LEN was observed in patients with PR and SD (2.047 ± 1.148 vs 1.796 ± 1.179, P < 0.001).
Conclusion
Regardless of past TKI therapy, therapeutic response and AEs after introducing LEN were similar. LEN may be an important treatment for the present unmet need regarding TKI treatment against u‐HCC.
Presently, there are no therapeutic options for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u‐HCC) patients who are intolerant to sorafenib or regorafenib failure, and there have been no reports with detailed clinical findings of lenvatinib (LEN), a newly developed first‐line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), obtained in real‐world practice. Regardless of past TKI therapy, therapeutic response and adverse events after introducing LEN were similar. LEN may be an important treatment for the present unmet need regarding TKI treatment for u‐HCC.
Aim
Hepatic edema is manifested by ascites, lower limb edema and intolerable symptoms. Some patients insufficiently respond to the conventional diuretic therapy. Therefore, a novel therapeutic option ...is required. We conducted a phase 3 study to confirm therapeutic effect of tolvaptan on hepatic edema associated with liver cirrhosis.
Methods
In our multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial, liver cirrhosis patients who showed insufficient response to conventional diuretics were randomly assigned to 7‐day administration of either tolvaptan at 7.5 mg/day or placebo as an add‐on therapy to conventional diuretics. The primary outcome was change in bodyweight from baseline.
Results
Of 164 eligible patients, 84 were assigned to tolvaptan and 80 to placebo. Change in bodyweight from baseline on the final dosing day was −0.44 kg (standard deviation SD, 1.93) in the placebo group and −1.95 kg (SD, 1.77) in the tolvaptan group (P < 0.0001). Improvement rates for lower limb edema and ascites‐related clinical symptoms were higher with tolvaptan than with placebo. Even in patients with low serum albumin (<2.5 g/dL), decrease in bodyweight was greater with tolvaptan than with placebo (P = 0.0163). In addition, tolvaptan significantly increased serum sodium concentration from baseline.
Conclusion
Add‐on therapy with tolvaptan was effective for the treatment of hepatic edema and ascites‐related clinical symptoms. Furthermore, tolvaptan is expected to improve low serum sodium concentration and to exert its effect regardless of serum albumin level. Add‐on therapy with tolvaptan is therefore considered to be a novel therapeutic option for hepatic edema.
Aim
Multiple molecular agents have been developed for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. This study aimed to elucidate the clinical efficacy of sequential treatment with lenvatinib after ...regorafenib failure.
Methods
From June 2017 to October 2020, 63 patients with Child–Pugh A and treated with regorafenib followed by sorafenib were enrolled (median age 71 years, 52 men, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer B:C = 23:40). They were divided into two groups, those treated with lenvatinib after regorafenib treatment (R‐L group, n = 47) and those who did not receive lenvatinib after regorafenib (non‐R‐L group, n = 16). Prognostic factors were retrospectively analyzed after adjustment with inverse probability weighting.
Results
Serum albumin level at the start of regorafenib and reasons for discontinuation of regorafenib were significantly different between the R‐L and non‐R‐L groups, whereas the albumin‐bilirubin score, Child–Pugh class, and tumor burden were not. Progression‐free survival was also not significantly different (median 4.1 vs. 3.8 months, p = 0.586). As for overall survival, the R‐L group showed better prognosis after introducing regorafenib and after introducing sorafenib, following inverse probability weighting adjustment (MST 19.7 vs. 10.3 months, 33.8 vs. 15.3 months, p < 0.001 and p = 0.022, respectively). Modified albumin‐bilirubin grade 2b (score >−2.27) at the start of regorafenib (HR 2.074, p = 0.041) and the presence of lenvatinib treatment after regorafenib failure (HR 0.355, p = 0.004) were found to be significant prognostic factors in Cox proportional hazards multivariate analysis, after inverse probability weighting adjustment.
Conclusion
These results show that lenvatinib is a good sequential treatment option after progression under regorafenib therapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients with better hepatic reserve function.
PDF
