Mount Sinai Liver Cancer Program, Division of Liver Diseases, Department of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Digestive Oncology, Department of Gastroenterology, Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven/Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
JAMA Oncol. 2024 Mar 1;10(3):395-404. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.2677.
The combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors with antiangiogenic agents has revolutionized the treatment landscape of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, due to rapid publication of new studies that attained their predefined primary end points, a lack of robust cross-trial comparison of first-line therapies, and diverging clinical guidelines, no clear-cut treatment flowchart and sequence of therapies are available. This critical analysis of the recommendations for the management of advanced HCC from the main scientific societies in the US and Europe adopted an integrated approach to provide information on the clinical benefit (overall survival and progression-free survival) and safety profile of these therapies using the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) score and an ad hoc network meta-analysis.
There is a major consensus among guidelines that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has a primacy as the recommended first-line treatment of choice in advanced HCC. On progression after immunotherapy-containing regimens and for patients with contraindications for immunotherapies, most guidelines maintain the established treatment hierarchy, recommending lenvatinib or sorafenib as the preferred options, followed by either regorafenib, cabozantinib, or ramucirumab. Thus far, the first-line immune-based regimen of tremelimumab plus durvalumab has been integrated only in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidance document and the latest National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and has particular utility for patients with a high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. Overall, in the first-line setting, both atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and sintilimab plus IBI305 (a bevacizumab biosimilar) and durvalumab plus tremelimumab received the highest ESMO-MCBS score of 5, indicating a substantial magnitude of clinical benefit. In a network meta-analysis, no significant differences in overall survival were found among the various combination regimens. However, the newly reported combination of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib was associated with a significantly higher risk of treatment-related adverse events compared with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (relative risk, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.25-2.03; P < .001).
This narrative review found that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is regarded as the primary standard of care for advanced HCC in the first-line setting. These findings from integrating the recommendations from scientific societies' guidelines for managing advanced HCC along with new data from cross-trial comparisons may aid clinicians in decision-making and guide them through a rapidly evolving and complex treatment landscape.
免疫检查点抑制剂与抗血管生成药物的联合应用彻底改变了晚期肝细胞癌(HCC)的治疗格局。然而,由于新研究的快速发表,这些研究达到了预先设定的主要终点,缺乏对一线治疗的稳健的跨试验比较,以及临床指南的差异,目前尚无明确的治疗流程图和治疗顺序。美国和欧洲主要科学学会对晚期 HCC 管理建议的这一关键性分析采用了综合方法,使用欧洲肿瘤内科学会(ESMO)临床获益量表(MCBS)评分和专门的网络荟萃分析,提供了这些治疗方法的临床获益(总生存期和无进展生存期)和安全性概况的信息。
指南之间存在主要共识,即阿替利珠单抗联合贝伐珠单抗作为晚期 HCC 的首选一线治疗具有首要地位。在免疫治疗联合方案进展后以及对免疫治疗有禁忌症的患者中,大多数指南维持既定的治疗层次,推荐仑伐替尼或索拉非尼作为首选,其次是regorafenib、卡博替尼或雷莫芦单抗。到目前为止, tremelimumab 联合 durvalumab 的一线免疫治疗方案仅被纳入美国肝病研究协会的指导文件和最新的国家综合癌症网络指南中,对胃肠道出血风险较高的患者尤其有用。总体而言,在一线治疗环境中,阿替利珠单抗联合贝伐珠单抗和 sintilimab 联合 IBI305(贝伐珠单抗生物类似物)以及 durvalumab 联合 tremelimumab 获得了 ESMO-MCBS 评分最高的 5 分,表明具有显著的临床获益幅度。在网络荟萃分析中,各种联合方案之间的总生存期无显著差异。然而,新报告的卡瑞利珠单抗联合 rivoceranib 与阿替利珠单抗联合贝伐珠单抗相比,治疗相关不良事件的风险显著增加(相对风险,1.59;95%CI,1.25-2.03;P < .001)。
本叙述性综述发现,阿替利珠单抗联合贝伐珠单抗被认为是晚期 HCC 一线治疗的主要标准治疗方法。这些从科学学会指南管理晚期 HCC 的建议整合以及跨试验比较的新数据得出的发现,可能有助于临床医生进行决策,并指导他们通过快速发展和复杂的治疗领域。