Background and Aims: Liver transplantation has evolved from a treatment restricted to patients with end-stage liver disease to a therapeutic option for selected patients with primary and metastatic liver malignancies. This review explores the rapidly expanding field of transplant oncology, highlighting its role in hepatocellular carcinoma, colorectal liver metastasis, neuroendocrine liver metastasis, and intrahepatic and perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Emphasis is placed on strategies to broaden eligibility, optimize donor organ use, and improve oncologic outcomes. Approach and Results: We synthesized current evidence from clinical series, registries, and experimental protocols to evaluate patient selection criteria, outcomes, and peri-transplant management. Key topics include downstaging approaches to meet transplant criteria, such as locoregional therapies and systemic regimens, and their prognostic implications. Advances in donor utilization have been analyzed for their capacity to expand the graft pool. In addition, the review addresses the integration of oncologic principles into immunosuppression regimens, balancing graft protection with cancer control. Collectively, the reported studies demonstrate improved survival and reduced recurrence when stringent selection and multimodal therapy were applied. Conclusions: Transplant oncology reshapes the therapeutic landscape of liver malignancies, with growing evidence supporting liver transplantation in carefully selected patients beyond traditional indications. Optimized downstaging, innovative donor strategies, and tailored immunosuppression are pivotal for safe expansion. Continued collaboration between the transplant and oncology disciplines, along with prospective trials, is essential to further define standardized protocols and solidify transplantation as a cornerstone of multidisciplinary cancer care.
Durvalumab in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: Real‐World Data From a Large Cohort of Patients Across Multiple International Centers
ABSTRACT Background We recently published the first real‐world multicenter and multi‐institutional study of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). Here we present an expanded patient cohort with an increased sample size and longer median follow‐up. Methods The study population included patients with advanced BTC, who received cisplatin/gemcitabine plus durvalumab at 55 centers across 12 countries in Europe, the United States, and Asia. The primary endpoints of the study were progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Results Overall, 1358 patients were enrolled. Median PFS was 7.6 months (95% CI: 7.2–8.1), and median OS was 15.6 months (95% CI: 14.8–16.5). ORR was 35.6%, and DCR was 82.7%. Any grade AEs occurred in 1213 patients (89.3%). Grade 3–4 AEs occurred in 597 patients (43.2%). The rate of immune‐related AEs (irAE) was 20.3%. Grade 3–4 irAE occurred in 3.0% of patients. At the multivariate analysis for OS, normal albumin level (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57–0.81, p < 0.0001), CEA levels within normal ranges (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57–0.82, p < 0.0001), NLR < 3 (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52–0.74, p < 0.0001), ECOG PS 0 (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.42–0.61, p < 0.0001), and prior surgery (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65–0.99, p = 0.036) were positive prognostic factors. Conclusion The updated findings, derived from an expanded cohort, further support the adoption of durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in routine clinical practice, reinforcing the efficacy and safety outcomes demonstrated in the phase III TOPAZ‐1 trial.
Negative impact of corticosteroid use on outcome in patients with advanced
BTCs
treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab: A large real‐life worldwide population
Abstract In recent years, there has been increasing interest in the possible prognostic impact of concomitant medications in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy combinations. This real‐world analysis aims to evaluate the impact of concomitant medications on survival outcomes in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTCs) treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine and durvalumab (CGD) therapy. The study cohort included patients with a diagnosis of advanced BTCs who were taking concomitant medications for their comorbidities before the start of CGD. The primary objectives were overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS). The initial population consisted of 666 patients, who were retrospectively collected from 41 sites in 12 countries. Data on concomitant medications were available for 493 patients. After a median follow‐up of 8.8 months (95% CI: 7.8–9.8), patients who did not take steroids (prednisone >10 mg/day or equivalent) or nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids, before the start of CGD, had longer OS and PFS in univariate analysis. The multivariate analysis confirmed longer OS for patients who did not take steroids. Patients who did not take steroids had an OS of 14.8 months (95% CI: 13.1–29.1) versus 5.0 months (95% CI: 2.14–11.32) of patients who took prednisone >10 mg/day or equivalent. No differences were reported in terms of overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) ( p = 1.0 and p = .16, respectively), and safety profile between the two groups. Our analysis suggests that patients who did not receive steroids before the start of GCD had longer survival and highlighted the relevance of balancing concomitant medications and chemoimmunotherapy.
The impact of molecular alterations in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer receiving cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab: a large, real-life, worldwide population
Abstract Background Cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab combination is a standard first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer. This study aimed to assess the impact of genetic alterations on outcomes in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab in real-world clinical practice. Methods Patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer treated with cisplatin and gemcitabine plus durvalumab across 39 centers in 11 countries in Europe, the United States, and Asia were included in this analysis. Results The cohort included 513 patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. The 5 most frequently altered genes were TP53 (22.1%), KRAS (13.7%), CDKN2A/B (13.6%), ARID1A (12.2%), and IDH1 (9.2%). In multivariate analysis, SMAD4 mutations were associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.49, P = .018) and overall survival (HR = 0.11, P = .023), while TP53 mutations were linked to worse PFS (HR = 1.62, P = .0047) and TERT mutations to worse overall survival (HR = 8.92, P = .0012). No other genomic alterations were statistically associated with outcomes. Subgroup analysis showed that TP53 mutations negatively affected PFS and overall survival in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, while KRAS mutations were associated with poorer PFS in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. No gene alterations were linked to outcomes in gallbladder cancer. Conclusions This large-scale analysis, with comprehensive molecular profiling, supports the positive prognostic impact of SMAD4 mutations for PFS and overall survival and highlights the negative prognostic roles of TP53 (PFS) and TERT (overall survival) mutations, providing valuable insights for personalized treatment strategies in biliary tract cancer.
A Prognostic Index for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer Treated With Cisplatin, Gemcitabine and Durvalumab: The
MAGIC
‐D Index
ABSTRACT Background Over the years, prognostic indexes have been developed to help clinicians stratify patients with biliary tract cancers (BTC) into risk groups. This study aims to identify a new prognostic index for patients with BTC treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine and durvalumab (CGD) in the first‐line setting. Patients and Methods The study population consisted of patients with BTC from 11 Eastern and Western Countries. Using multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), we identified 5 baseline statistically significant variables: stage, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, albumin levels, gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT) levels, neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR). Metastatic disease is a prognostic factor with a superior weight considering the HR of 3.62, while all the others can be considered prognostic factors with equivalent weight as the HRs are quite similar (HRs between 1.55 and 1.92). Based on these reasons, we developed a prognostic model called the MAGIC‐D index by assigning a score of 2 for metastatic disease, and a score of 1 for CEA increased levels, albumin decreased levels, GGT increased levels, NLR ≥ 3. Patients were stratified into three risk groups as follows: low‐risk group (Score from 0 to 2), intermediate‐risk group (Score from 3 to 4) and high‐risk group (Score from 5 to 6). At the first data cutoff (April 2024), these data were available for 319 patients that composed the training cohort used for the analysis. At the second data cutoff (May 2025), 79 patients were further enrolled and composed the validation cohort. Results Median progression‐free survival was 11.7 months in low‐risk group (20.7%), 8.7 months in intermediate‐risk group (46.4%) and 5.4 months in high‐risk group (32.9%) [low‐risk hazard ratio (HR): 0.27, intermediate‐risk HR: 0.55, high‐risk HR: 1, p < 0.0001]. Median OS was 18.4 months in low‐risk group,15.9 months in intermediate‐risk group and 7.8 months in high‐risk group (low‐risk HR: 0.17, intermediate‐risk HR: 0.43, high‐risk HR: 1, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in overall response rate (low‐risk: 31.8%, intermediate‐risk: 36.5% and high‐risk: 25.7%; p = 0.0718), while disease control rate was significantly different across the three risk groups (low‐risk: 83.3%, intermediate‐risk: 70.9% and high‐risk: 60.9%; p < 0.0001) as well as the rate of patients receiving a second‐line therapy (low‐risk: 54.5%, intermediate‐risk: 48.6% and high‐risk: 25.7%; p = 0.0061). Finally, the prognostic role in terms of OS and PFS of the MAGIC‐D index was confirmed in a validation cohort of 79 patients. Conclusion The MAGIC‐D index is an easy‐to‐use tool able to stratify patients with BTC with different prognoses undergoing first‐line therapy with CGD.
A first-in-human multi-center phase 1/2 study of a selective FGFR2/3 inhibitor, CGT4859, in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas or other advanced solid tumors.
TPS3171 Background: Genetic alterations in fibroblast growth factor receptors 2 and 3 ( FGFR2/3 ) occur in nearly all cancer types. FGFR2 fusions and rearrangements occur in up to 10-15% of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (iCCA) and alterations in FGFR3 occur in 15-30% of urothelial cancers. The clinical benefit from currently approved FGFR inhibitors (FGFRi) is often curtailed by development of acquired resistance, which may arise through on-target mutations in the FGFR2/3 kinase domain. Additionally, off-tumor effects on FGFR1 by pan-FGFRi can lead to hyperphosphatemia and consequently to dose reductions or dose holds. Thus, there is an unmet clinical need for a selective FGFR2/3 inhibitor that has clinical efficacy against activating alterations and resistance mutations without causing FGFR1-mediated hyperphosphatemia. CGT4859 is an orally bioavailable, ATP-competitive, reversible inhibitor of FGFR2/3, with potency against clinically relevant FGFR2/3 kinase domain mutations. In addition, CGT4859 demonstrates >140 fold selectivity over FGFR1, and shows robust efficacy in target altered in vivo tumor models without increases in serum phosphorus. Nonclinical pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety data support evaluating CGT4859 in a first-in-human, open-label, dose-escalation and signal-seeking Phase I/II study (NCT06777316). Safety, tolerability, PK, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of CGT4859 will be assessed in adults with histologically confirmed unresectable or metastatic iCCA or other solid tumors with FGFR2/3 alterations. Methods: CGT4859 will be administered orally continuously in 28-day cycles to patients (N=~50) at a starting dose of 1 mg QD, and dose escalation will not exceed 40 mg QD as determined using a Bayesian optimal interval design with backfill (BF-BOIN). This approach will be used to guide dose escalation and establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase 2 Dose (RP2D). BF-BOIN enables backfilling of participants to doses that are cleared for safety during the dose escalation, generating additional data on safety and tolerability below the MTD. Objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate will be determined based on investigator assessment using RECIST v1.1. Phase II will enroll up to 4 cohorts, each enrolling ~15 patients. Proposed cohorts will include participants who have iCCA and are either FGFRi-naïve or FGFRi-exposed. Two additional cohorts with other advanced solid tumors harboring FGFR2/3 alterations may be included based on signals detected in dose escalation. The primary efficacy endpoint for Phase II is ORR per RECIST v1.1. The preclinical data support the study of CGT4859 in this patient population with solid tumors harboring FGFR2 and/or FGFR3 genetic alterations. The phase I dose escalation study is currently enrolling at sites in the United States. Clinical trial information: NCT06777316 .
Factors associated with reaching maintenance therapy in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer treated with durvalumab: Real‐world results from a multicenter and multinational study
AbstractStandard of care first‐line systemic treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer includes chemo‐immunotherapy with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and durvalumab, followed by maintenance durvalumab monotherapy. The present work aims to investigate the differences in baseline clinical and molecular characteristics between patients with early progression during chemo‐immunotherapy and those who reach durvalumab maintenance therapy. The study population included patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic BTC who received treatment at 38 clinical Institutions in 12 countries from July 2021 to December 2023. The primary objective of the study was to investigate whether baseline clinical and molecular characteristics differed between patients with early progression during chemo‐immunotherapy versus those reaching durvalumab maintenance therapy. Four hundred forty‐eight patients were included in this study. Two hundred twenty‐seven patients (50.7%) received maintenance with durvalumab monotherapy, whereas 221 (49.3%) did not receive maintenance therapy due to PD during first‐line chemo‐immunotherapy before completing 8 cycles. Results show that patients who received maintenance were more likely to be older (≥70 years), have an ECOG = 0, locally advanced disease, and a neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR) <3. A higher proportion of patients with BAP1 mutations received maintenance, while TP53 mutations were more common in those who progressed early. According to the present analysis, a substantial proportion of patients (50.7%) with advanced BTC who were treated with chemotherapy plus durvalumab proceeded to receive maintenance therapy with durvalumab monotherapy, with a median treatment duration of 4.4 cycles. Patients ≥70 years, with ECOG PS 0, with locally advanced disease, and with NLR <3 had a higher likelihood of receiving maintenance therapy.
Evaluating the safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors prior to liver transplant.
614 Background: Liver transplantation (LT) offers a 5-year survival exceeding 70% for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may be used to downstage or bridge to transplantation. This study aims to evaluate the safety of ICIs prior to LT. Methods: Multicenter retrospective study, involving 9 centers, included adults who received ICIs and, subsequent LT, between 2019 and 2023. The ICI cohort was matched by age, sex, liver diseases and transplant date (1:3) with a similar cohort of HCC transplanted patients that did not receive ICIs. Results: The ICI cohort included 45 patients (Table part 1). The most common underlying liver diseases were viral. 15.5% of patients had macrovascular invasion and, 62.2% multifocal disease. The most commonly used ICI was nivolumab (75.6%), followed by atezolizumab-bevacizumab (17.8%). The median follow up was 32.5 months (17.4 - 47.6). The median ICI duration was 147 days (129.5-276.5), with a median interval of 58 days (22–193) between the last ICI dose and LT. There were 8 (17.8%) cases of graft rejection, 2 steroid-resistant leading to 1 graft failure. There were 4 (8%) HCC recurrences. During follow-up there were 6 deaths, 2 related to HCC recurrence and 4 non liver related. When compared with 135 non-ICI cohort patients, there were no differences within the groups (Table part 2). Importantly, we found no significant differences in crude rejection rates (p=0.5). Conclusions: Our study suggest that ICI treatment prior to LT is safe. ICI rejection primarily occurs in the acute post-transplant period (within 3 months), with a low risk of death due to graft failure. Further clinical trials are needed. Part 1: ICI cohort descriptive analysis. N (%); Median (IQR); Part 2: Comparison between cohorts. N (%); Mean (SD). (part 1) ICI-cohort n=45 General data Male 38 (84.4) Age 61.2 (7.6) Etiology of liver diseases Hepatitis C 17 (37.8)Hepatitis B 6 (13.3)MASLD 6 (13.3)Viral +Alcohol 5 (11.1)Alcohol 3 (6.7)Autoimmune 3 (6.7)Other 3 (6.7)Combined viral 2 (4.4) Largest tumor (mm) 39 (22) Macrovascular invasion 7 (15.5) Multifocal 28 (62.2) Locoregional therapy 36 (80.0) Number of locoregional therapies 2 (2) Immunotherapy Nivolumab 34 (75.6) Atezolizumab/bevacizumab 8 (17.8) Pembrolizumab 1 (2.2) Nivolumab+pembrolizumab 1 (2.2) PD1 inhibitor clinical trial 1 (2.2) Days of ICI treatment 147 (203) Radiological tumor response ICI No 17 (37.8) Transplant Deceased donor 43 (95.6) Washout period (days) 58 (171) Induction therapy (anti-thymoglobulin) 8 (17.8) Outcomes Rejection Biopsy proven 8 (17.8) 8 (100) Time to rejection (days) 43 (102) Graft failure Rejection 2 (4.4)1 (2.2) HCC recurrence 4 (8) Deaths 6 (13.3) Follow up Since transplant (months) 32.5 (30.2) (part 2) ICI-cohort (n=45) Non-ICI cohort (n= 135) P Post transplant rejection rate 8 (17.8) 32 (23.7) 0.53 Time to rejection (days) 180.1 (SD 218) 62.2 (SD 62.8) 0.25 Overall deaths 6 (13.3) 10 (7.4) 0.36
FIGHT-302: first-line pemigatinib vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin for advanced cholangiocarcinoma with
FGFR2
rearrangements
Background and Aims Lifetime risk of biliary tract cancer (BTC) in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) may exceed 20%, and BTC is currently the leading cause of death in patients with PSC. To open new avenues for management, we aimed to delineate clinically relevant genomic and pathological features of a large panel of PSC‐associated BTC (PSC‐BTC). Approach and Results We analyzed formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded tumor tissue from 186 patients with PSC‐BTC from 11 centers in eight countries with all anatomical locations included. We performed tumor DNA sequencing at 42 clinically relevant genetic loci to detect mutations, translocations, and copy number variations, along with histomorphological and immunohistochemical characterization. Regardless of the anatomical localization, PSC‐BTC exhibited a uniform molecular and histological characteristic similar to extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. We detected a high frequency of genomic alterations typical of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, such as TP53 (35.5%), KRAS (28.0%), CDKN2A (14.5%), and SMAD4 (11.3%), as well as potentially druggable mutations (e.g., HER2/ERBB2). We found a high frequency of nontypical/nonductal histomorphological subtypes (55.2%) and of the usually rare BTC precursor lesion, intraductal papillary neoplasia (18.3%). Conclusions Genomic alterations in PSC‐BTC include a significant number of putative actionable therapeutic targets. Notably, PSC‐BTC shows a distinct extrahepatic morpho‐molecular phenotype, independent of the anatomical location of the tumor. These findings advance our understanding of PSC‐associated cholangiocarcinogenesis and provide strong incentives for clinical trials to test genome‐based personalized treatment strategies in PSC‐BTC.