UNASSIGNED: We elucidated the clinical and immunologic implications of serum IL-6 levels in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab (Ate/Bev).
UNASSIGNED: We prospectively enrolled 165 patients with unresectable HCC (discovery cohort: 84 patients from three centres; validation cohort: 81 patients from one centre). Baseline blood samples were analysed using a flow cytometric bead array. The tumour immune microenvironment was analysed using RNA sequencing.
UNASSIGNED: In the discovery cohort, clinical benefit 6 months (CB6m) was defined as complete or partial response, or stable disease for ≥6 months. Among various blood-based biomarkers, serum IL-6 levels were significantly higher in participants without CB6m than in those with CB6m (mean 11.56 vs. 5.05 pg/ml, p = 0.02). Using maximally selected rank statistics, the optimal cut-off value for high IL-6 was determined as 18.49 pg/ml, and 15.2% of participants were found to have high IL-6 levels at baseline. In both the discovery and validation cohorts, participants with high baseline IL-6 levels had a reduced response rate and worse progression-free and overall survival after Ate/Bev treatment compared with those with low baseline IL-6 levels. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, the clinical implications of high IL-6 levels persisted, even after adjusting for various confounding factors. Participants with high IL-6 levels showed reduced interferon-γ and tumour necrosis factor-α secretion from CD8+ T cells. Moreover, excess IL-6 suppressed cytokine production and proliferation of CD8+ T cells. Finally, participants with high IL-6 levels exhibited a non-T-cell-inflamed immunosuppressive tumour microenvironment.
UNASSIGNED: High baseline IL-6 levels can be associated with poor clinical outcomes and impaired T-cell function in patients with unresectable HCC after Ate/Bev treatment.
UNASSIGNED: Although patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who respond to treatment with atezolizumab and bevacizumab exhibit favourable clinical outcomes, a fraction of these still experience primary resistance. We found that high baseline serum levels of IL-6 correlate with poor clinical outcomes and impaired T-cell response in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab.

UNASSIGNED: We investigated the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) rechallenge in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who received ICI-based therapies in a previous systemic line.
UNASSIGNED: In this international, retrospective multicenter study, patients with HCC who received at least two lines of ICI-based therapies (ICI-1, ICI-2) at 14 institutions were eligible. The main outcomes included best overall response and treatment-related adverse events.
UNASSIGNED: Of 994 ICI-treated patients screened, a total of 58 patients (male, n = 41; 71%) with a mean age of 65.0±9.0 years were included. Median systemic treatment lines of ICI-1 and ICI-2 were 1 (range, 1-4) and 3 (range, 2-9), respectively. ICI-based therapies used at ICI-1 and ICI-2 included ICI alone (ICI-1, n = 26, 45%; ICI-2, n = 4, 7%), dual ICI regimens (n = 1, 2%; n = 12, 21%), or ICI combined with targeted therapies/anti-VEGF (n = 31, 53%; n = 42, 72%). Most patients discontinued ICI-1 due to progression (n = 52, 90%). Objective response rate was 22% at ICI-1 and 26% at ICI-2. Responses at ICI-2 were also seen in patients who had progressive disease as best overall response at ICI-1 (n = 11/21; 52%). Median time-to-progression at ICI-1 and ICI-2 was 5.4 (95% CI 3.0-7.7) months and 5.2 (95% CI 3.3-7.0) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3-4 at ICI-1 and ICI-2 were observed in 9 (16%) and 10 (17%) patients, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: ICI rechallenge was safe and resulted in a treatment benefit in a meaningful proportion of patients with HCC. These data provide a rationale for investigating ICI-based regimens in patients who progressed on first-line immunotherapy in prospective trials.
UNASSIGNED: Therapeutic sequencing after first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a challenge as no available second-line treatment options have been studied in immunotherapy-pretreated patients. Particularly, the role of ICI rechallenge in patients with HCC is unclear, as data from prospective trials are lacking. We investigated the efficacy and safety of ICI-based regimens in patients with HCC pretreated with immunotherapy in a retrospective, international, multicenter study. Our data provide the rationale for prospective trials investigating the role of ICI-based regimens in patients who have progressed on first-line immunotherapy.

UNASSIGNED: Previously reported results have shown promising efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, no randomized control trials comparing neoadjuvant immunotherapy with chemotherapy have yet been reported. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the superiority of neoadjuvant immunotherapy compared with standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable NSCLC in terms of short-term clinical outcomes and surgical outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the ClinicalTrials.gov database, Web of Science, and abstracts derived from multiple major cancer meetings up to March 1, 2020. Short-term clinical outcomes (including objective response rate [ORR], major pathologic response, and pathologic complete response [pCR]) and surgical outcomes (including surgical resection rate and R0 resection rate) were reported. Data were summarized as the estimated pooled value of each evaluated index. The risk of bias of included studies was assessed using standard methods.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic review and meta-analysis of 21 trials on neoadjuvant immunotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for NSCLC included 1795 patients. Patients who received Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors (NeoIO) alone (13.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.0%-19.3%) had the lowest ORR compared with those who received NeoIO plus chemotherapy (CT) (62.5%; 95% CI, 54.4%-70.0%) or CT alone (41.6%; 95% CI, 36.8%-46.7%) (NeoIO vs CT, P < .001; NeoIO + CT vs CT, P < .001). Receipt of NeoIO + CT (36.2%; 95% CI, 19.2%-57.6%) was associated with an elevated pCR rate compared with receipt of NeoIO alone (10.6%; 95% CI, 6.5%-16.9%; P < .001) or standard CT (7.5%; 95% CI, 5.7%-9.8%; P < .001). Neoadjuvant CT (87.2%; 95% CI, 74.9%-94.0%) was associated with a lower R0 resection rate compared with NeoIO alone (92.7%; 95% CI, 83.4%-97.0%; P = .360) or NeoIO + CT (91.6%; 95% CI, 84.3%-95.7%; P = .409). Meta-regression showed that a higher proportion of stage III patients was correlated with decreased surgical resection and R0 resection rates, whereas no impact was observed with neoadjuvant immunotherapy.
UNASSIGNED: Current data suggest that compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, immunotherapy-based regimens may provide superior pathological response along with a higher rate of complete resection. Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be a more favorable clinical option. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted to provide long-term results of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for localized NSCLC and help guide clinical practice.

UNASSIGNED: As the immune-related response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (irRECIST) by imaging greatly underestimated the objective response to immunotherapy, we established the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors based on tumor markers (RecistTM) to explore whether RecistTM can compensate for the deficiencies of the irRECIST criteria.
UNASSIGNED: This was an observational study, which consisted of two parts. The first part (Group A) was a retrospective study including the patients with malignant solid tumors. The second part (Group B) was a prospective study, which were EGFR-negative and ALK-negative patients with stage IIIB-IV non-small cell lung cancer receiving first-line treatment. From January 2017 to September 2020, one hundred and ten patients with a three-time increase in tumor markers receiving immunotherapy were recruited. The treatment response to immunotherapy was evaluated by irRECIST and RecistTM. Efficacy, overall survival (OS), first evaluation time and earliest response time under the different evaluation criteria were compared by statistics.
UNASSIGNED: The treatment response evaluated by the RecistTM criteria was not consistent with that evaluated by the irRECIST criteria (Kappa = 0.386, p < 0.001). RecistTM had a higher completed response (CR) rate compared to irRECIST criteria (20.9% vs 1.8%, p < 0.001). The earliest response time under the RecistTM criteria was 3.42 weeks earlier than that under the irRECIST criteria (u = -5.233, p < 0.001). There were significant differences in median OS between tumor marker-related complete response (tmCR) and tumor marker-related partial response (tmPR), as well as between tmPR and tumor marker-related stable disease (tmSD) (χ2 = 15.572, p < 0.001; χ2 = 7.720, p = 0.005), but not between tmSD and tumor marker-related progressive disease (tmPD) (χ2 = 1.596, p = 0.206). When applying both criteria together, for patients with immune-related CR / immune-related PR (irCR/irPR) (n = 54) under irRECIST criteria, there was a significant difference in median OS between achieving tmCR (n = 22) and tmPR (n = 32) (χ2 = 14.011, p < 0.001). RecistTM criteria can predict 1-year and 2-year OS more accurately than irRECIST criteria (AUCs:0.862 vs 0.552, 0.649 vs 0.521, respectively;both p < 0.001). In RecistTM, 4 patients had been observed with pseudoprogression in tumor markers.
UNASSIGNED: The RecistTM criteria could effectively distinguish CR, PR, and SD, which may help resolve the shortcomings of the RECIST criteria in evaluating the treatment response to immunotherapy, especially in assessing whether patients can achieve deep or even complete response as soon as possible.
UNASSIGNED: This work was supported by the Key projects of Chongqing Health and Family Planning Commission (to Xueqin Yang, 2019ZDXM011).

Genomic instability remains an enabling feature of cancer and promotes malignant transformation. Alterations of DNA damage response (DDR) pathways allow genomic instability, generate neoantigens, upregulate the expression of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and interact with signaling such as cyclic GMP-AMP synthase-stimulator of interferon genes (cGAS-STING) signaling. Here, we review the basic knowledge of DDR pathways, mechanisms of genomic instability induced by DDR alterations, impacts of DDR alterations on immune system, and the potential applications of DDR alterations as biomarkers and therapeutic targets in cancer immunotherapy.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) usually arises in the context of a chronically damaged liver. Liver functional estimation is of paramount importance in clinical decision making. The Child-Pugh score (CPS) can be used to categorise patients into 3 classes (A to C) based on the severity of liver functional impairment according to 5 parameters (albumin, bilirubin, prothrombin time, presence of ascites and hepatic encephalopathy). The albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade has emerged as an alternative, reproducible and objective measure of liver functional reserve in patients with HCC, defining worsening liver impairment across 3 grades (I to III). The ALBI score can identify different subgroups of patients with different prognoses across the diverse Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stages and CP classes, making it an appealing clinical predictor. In patients treated with potentially curative approaches (resection, transplantation, radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation), ALBI grade has been shown to correlate with survival, tumour relapse, and post-hepatectomy liver failure. ALBI grade also predicts survival, toxicity and post-procedural liver failure in patients treated with transarterial chemoembolisation, radioembolisation, external beam radiotherapy as well as multi-kinase inhibitors (sorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, regorafenib) and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. In this review, we summarise the body of evidence surrounding the role of ALBI grade as a biomarker capable of optimising patient selection and therapeutic sequencing in HCC.

Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are aggressive epithelial malignancies that can arise at any point of the biliary tree. Albeit rare, their incidence and mortality rates have been rising steadily over the past 40 years, highlighting the need to improve current diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. BTCs show high inter- and intra-tumour heterogeneity both at the morphological and molecular level. Such complex heterogeneity poses a substantial obstacle to effective interventions. It is widely accepted that the observed heterogeneity may be the result of a complex interplay of different elements, including risk factors, distinct molecular alterations and multiple potential cells of origin. The use of genetic lineage tracing systems in experimental models has identified cholangiocytes, hepatocytes and/or progenitor-like cells as the cells of origin of BTCs. Genomic evidence in support of the distinct cell of origin hypotheses is growing. In this review, we focus on recent advances in the histopathological subtyping of BTCs, discuss current genomic evidence and outline lineage tracing studies that have contributed to the current knowledge surrounding the cell of origin of these tumours.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) improve clinical outcomes in patients suffering from different types of cancer. Liver toxicity is one of the immune-related adverse events associated with immunotherapy; although not common, its management is challenging as it is extremely heterogeneous in terms of presentation and severity. Differences in the development and evolution of ICI-related toxicity in healthy or cirrhotic livers have not yet been elucidated. Assessing causality is key to diagnosing ICI-induced liver toxicity; liver biopsies can assist not only in the differential diagnosis but also in assessing the severity of histological liver damage. The current classification of severity overestimates the grade of liver injury and needs to be revised to reflect the views of hepatologists. Spontaneous improvements in ICI-related liver toxicity have been reported, so corticosteroid therapy should probably be individualised not systematic. The reintroduction of ICIs in a patient with previous immune-mediated hepatitis may be possible, but the risk/benefit ratio should be considered, as the risk factors for hepatitis recurrence are currently unclear. The management of these patients, requiring a balance between efficacy, toxicity and specific treatments, necessitates multidisciplinary collaboration. The incidence of immune-related liver toxicity will continue to rise based on the increasing use of ICIs for most cancers, mandating improved understanding and management of this complication.

Tumor recurrence rate after surgery or ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is as high as 70%. However, there are no widely accepted adjuvant therapies; therefore, no treatment has been recommended by guidelines from the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease or the European Association for the Study of the Liver. All the registered trials failed to find any treatment to prolong recurrence-free survival, which is the primary outcome in most studies, including sorafenib. Some investigator-initiated studies revealed that anti-hepatitis B virus agents, interferon-α, transcatheter chemoembolization, chemokine-induced killer cells, and other treatments prolonged patient recurrence-free survival or overall survival after curative therapies. In this review, we summarize the current status of adjuvant treatments for HCC and explain the challenges associated with designing a clinical trial for adjuvant therapy. Promising new treatments being used as adjuvant therapy, especially anti-PD-1 antibodies, are also discussed.

Liver cancer, mostly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is the second leading cause of cancer mortality globally. Most patients were diagnosed at an advanced stage, and systemic therapy is the standard of care. All the approved systemic therapies for HCC are molecular targeted therapies with anti-angiogenic effects targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor signaling pathway. Sorafenib and lenvatinib are the first-line treatment, and regorafenib, ramucirumab, and cabozantinib are second-line treatment options. Although anti-PD-1 antibodies, including nivolumab and pembrolizumab, demonstrated promising anti-tumor effects as monotherapy for advanced HCC in phase II clinical trials, both failed in phase III studies. Anti-angiogenic treatment remains the backbone of systemic therapy for HCC. In this review, we summarized the approved anti-angiogenic medicines and discussed the potential strategies to improve the efficacy of anti-angiogenic therapy, including combination therapy with other treatments, and discussed the approaches to overcome the drawbacks of anti-angiogenic therapies.