UNASSIGNED: Atezolizumab/bevacizumab (atez/bev) has been established as first-line systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, concerns regarding safety and efficacy have been raised, and no biomarkers to predict response have yet been identified. We aimed to evaluate the real-life experience of atez/bev in a Spanish tertiary hospital and identify factors associated with overall survival (OS).
UNASSIGNED: A prospective study of consecutive patients with HCC treated with atez/bev was conducted from December 2020 to December 2022. Efficacy was assessed through OS and progression-free survival (PFS), whereas safety was evaluated based on adverse events (AE). Twenty-three patients were included; 91% were males with a mean of 70 years. Thirteen patients were classified as having BCLC-C.
UNASSIGNED: The median treatment duration was 126 days (range=567). Median OS was 381 days (95%CI=205-557) with a cumulative probability of death of 13%, 30%, and 49% at 3, 6 and 12-month follow-up, respectively. The only factor associated with OS was the ALBI score (HR=5.03; 95%CI=1.3-19.1), which showed an AUROC of 0.906 (95%CI=0.78-1.00) for the risk of death at 18 months follow up. Median PFS was 141 days (95%CI=110-172). Twenty (86.9%) patients experienced AE, which in nine (39.1%) cases led to the definitive discontinuation of the treatment, four of them (17.4%) due to an AE grade 5.
UNASSIGNED: The initial experience with atez/bev at our center demonstrated poorer outcomes compared to the original trial (IMbrave150). A careful assessment of the ALBI score may serve as a crucial factor in the selection of systemic treatment for patients with HCC.

暂无摘要。

Atezolizumab, a humanized antiprogrammed death ligand 1 monoclonal immunoglobulin G1 antibody, is a targeted therapeutic drug known as an immune checkpoint inhibitor. It is currently used to treat various types of cancer, including unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), nonsmall cell lung cancer, urothelial cancer, and breast cancer, and is becoming a therapeutic option in the forefront of oncology treatment. However, it may sometimes lead to undesirable adverse reactions owing to the activation of immune responses in various organs. Cutaneous adverse reactions to atezolizumab are well known; however, cases of anaphylaxis are very rare. In this report, we present the first case of HCC who experienced near-fatal anaphylaxis to atezolizumab in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Trilaciclib, in comparison to placebo plus carboplatin, etoposide, ± atezolizumab (PEA), has shown significant reductions in incidence of severe neutropenia (SN) among patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Despite these findings, real-world utility remains limited.
METHODS: A single-center quasi-experimental study compared trilaciclib + PEA (PEAT) versus PEA in ES-SCLC patients. The study period ranged from April 1, 2021 to July 31, 2022, for the PEAT recipients and February 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, for PEA recipients. The primary endpoint evaluated was incidence of SN after cycle 1 and during the treatment period. Secondary endpoints included measures related to myelopreservation and patient outcomes.
RESULTS: Among 34 PEAT and 44 PEA patients, baseline characteristics were similar, except for a higher median age (69 vs 64 years) and more males (64.7% vs 38.6%) in the PEAT cohort. The PEAT cohort exhibited a lower SN rate (3%) versus the PEA cohort (18%), with statistical significance demonstrated on multivariate analysis (p = 0.015). Additionally, the PEAT cohort also demonstrated significant reductions in red blood cell transfusion requirements (3% vs 23%; p = 0.02), grade 3-4 anemia (6% vs 25%; p = 0.03), and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (0% vs 11%, p = 0.045).
CONCLUSIONS: Trilaciclib, in combination with PEA, demonstrated an improvement in the safety profile without compromising survival outcomes in ES-SCLC patients. These findings underscore the potential benefits of incorporating trilaciclib in real-world clinical settings for enhanced patient care.

Immunotherapies have significantly improved the prognosis of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), although more than 70% of patients still do not respond to this first-line treatment. Many new combination strategies are currently being explored, which drastically increases the need for preclinical models that would allow large-scale testing of new immunotherapies and their combinations. We developed several in ovo (in the egg) human liver cancer models, based on human tumor xenografts of different liver cancer cell lines on the chicken embryo\'s chorioallantoic membrane. We characterized the angiogenesis, as well as the collagen accumulation and tumor immune microenvironment, and tested atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) plus bevacizumab (anti-VEGF) treatment. Our results show the involvement of chicken immune cells in tumor growth, reproducing a classical non-inflamed \"cold\" as well as inflamed \"hot\" tumor status, depending on the in ovo liver cancer model. The treatment by atezolizumab and bevacizumab was highly efficient in the \"hot\" tumor model PLC/PRF/5 in ovo with the reduction of tumor size by 76% (p ≤ .0001) compared with the control, whereas the efficacy was limited in the \"cold\" Hep3B in ovo tumor. The contribution of the anti-PD-L1 blockade to the anti-tumoral effect in the PLC/PRF/5 in ovo model was demonstrated by the efficacy of atezolizumab monotherapy (p = .0080, compared with the control). To conclude, our study provides a detailed characterization and rational arguments that could help to partially replace conventional laboratory animals with a more ethical model, suited to the current needs of preclinical research of new immunotherapies for liver cancer.

UNASSIGNED: Recently, the IMmotion151 trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and found that this combination led to longer progression-free survival. However, no studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.
UNASSIGNED: We constructed a Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, using costs and utilities from the published studies. We set the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold at $150,000. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to ensure that our results were robust. We performed a threshold analysis to explore a more appropriate price for atezolizumab.
UNASSIGNED: Our results found that although atezolizumab plus bevacizumab provided more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), its incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $1,640,532/QALY, well above the WTP threshold. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis results confirmed the robust of this conclusion. Based on the threshold analysis, for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab to be cost-effective, the price of them would need to be reduced by 46.3% or more.
UNASSIGNED: From the perspective of US payers, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is not cost-effective for mRCC patients. To make this combination cost-effective in the future, the price of atezolizumab and bevacizumab needs to be reduced.

Recently, in Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) setting, the use of metformin has been associated to a trend toward worse response rate, overall survival and progression free survival in patients who received immunotherapy. The study population included individuals from both Eastern and Western regions with a confirmed diagnosis of HCC and receiving first line treatment with Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or Lenvatinib. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed by Cox proportional. For the analysis, patients were stratified based on their use of concomitant medication or not. At the time of database lock, 319 deaths were observed: 209 in the Lenvatinib cohort, 110 in the Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab cohort. In the Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab arm, 50 (16.5%) patients were on chronic metformin use. At the univariate analysis for OS, patients who used metformin showed significantly shorter OS compared to patients who did not use metformin (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients in metformin group had significantly shorter OS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.9; 95% CI 1.1-3.1). At the univariate analysis for PFS, patients in metformin group had significantly shorter PFS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.6). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients in metformin group had significantly shorter PFS compared to patients in no-metformin group (HR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.7; p = 0.0147). No differences were reported in terms of ORR and DCR between patients in metformin group and those in no-metformin group. In the Lenvatinib cohort, 65 (15%) patients were recorded to chronically use metformin. No statistically significant differences in terms of both OS and PFS were found between patients in metformin group and patients in no-metformin group. This analysis unveils a negative prognostic role associated with metformin use specifically within the Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab group.

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression is related to the efficacy and prognosis in triple-negative breast cancer. This study employed an indirect labeling method to synthesize [125I]PI-Atezolizumab. The in vitro stability of [125I]PI-Atezolizumab was assessed through incubation in phosphate buffered saline and fetal bovine serum, revealing sustained stability. Specific binding of [125I]PI-Atezolizumab to MDA-MB-231 cells expressing humanized PD-L1 was assessed through in vitro incubation, yielding a Kd value comparable to that of Atezolizumab. This suggests that the labeling process did not compromise the affinity of the Atezolizumab to PD-L1. Subsequently, pharmacokinetic studies were conducted in normal mice and biodistribution experiments in tumor-bearing mice. A comparison of the biodistribution results between [125I]PI-Atezolizumab and 125I-labeled Atezolizumab indicated better in vivo stability for the former. Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT imaging further confirmed the targeted specificity of [125I]PI-Atezolizumab for PD-L1 in MDA-MB-231 xenografts, which were validated by immunohistochemistry staining. This research underscores the utility of [125I]PI-Atezolizumab, prepared via indirect labeling, for monitoring PD-L1 in triple-negative breast cancer models.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) offer a new treatment approach for cancer, with an improvement in patient survival. However, it remains unclear whether their use impacts the quality of life of treated patients. This study aims to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients treated with different anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 drugs, including several single or combination therapies. Methods: This is a prospective observational study conducted with adult cancer patients who received at least one dose of anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1. The HRQoL of all adult patients was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 module (QLQ-C30), version 3, Arabic version. Results: A total of 199 patients were found to be eligible for this study. Of these, 93 patients (82 on a single medication and 11 on multiple ICIs) completed the questionnaire, with a response rate of 46.7%. The majority of patients were treated with pembrolizumab (39.8%), followed by a smaller number treated with nivolumab (35.5%). Most of the patients were diagnosed with solid and advanced malignancies-88.2% (p = 0.023) and 87.1% (p = 0.021), respectively-with a significant difference between treatment groups. The median functioning score was 84.7%, with no significant difference between treatment groups (p = 0.752). Fatigue and pain were noted in >50% of patients, influencing the overall cohort\'s score related to these symptoms, with scores of 88.8% and 83.3%, respectively. Although a non-significant variation was found in the scores of all combined symptoms among all groups, ranging from 82.1% to 90.4% (p = 0.931), patients receiving anti-PD-1 + anti-PD-L1 tended to more frequently complain about fatigue, pain, dyspnea, and constipation and hence, exhibited the worst, yet non-significant, scores compared to those of the other groups, with p = 0.234, p = 0.79, p = 0.704, and p = 0.86, respectively. All combined groups scored 83.3% on the global health scale. Nevertheless, the nivolumab-treated patients scored 75%, which was the worst global health score compared with those of the other groups, but this score was not statistically significant (p = 0.809). Conclusions: Our findings revealed no significant difference in the impact of different ICIs on the HRQoL of cancer patients. However, a larger number of cases would be necessary to provide a robust analysis and to yield conclusive results.

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.