Citations

e16159 Background: Pivotal trials established atezolizumab-bevacizumab and durvalumab-tremelimumab as first-line therapies for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab demonstrated superior survival outcomes compared to sorafenib for unresectable HCC in the IMbrave150 trial in 2020, while durvalumab plus tremelimumab showed superior survival in the HIMALAYA trial in 2022. However, data on head-to-head comparison of these two combinations as first-line systemic therapy for the patient with decompensated HCC are limited. This study aims to compare survival outcomes between these two treatment regimens in decompensated HCC patients to address a critical gap in the current literature, as decompensated patients have largely been excluded from clinical trials. Methods: This retrospective study utilized electronic health records from 146 U.S. healthcare organizations within the TriNetX Network. Adults aged ≥21 years diagnosed with decompensated HCC receiving atezolizumab/bevacizumab and durvalumab/tremelimumab from 10/21/2022 to 8/20/2024 were included. The comparison group received atezolizumab/bevacizumab, and the control group received durvalumab/tremelimumab. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. A 1:1 propensity score matching was conducted to balance baseline characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, lab results including liver function tests, platelet counts, INR, gamma glutamyl transferase, alpha-fetoprotein, and underlying liver diseases). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and Cox regression was used to estimate the mortality risk. Subgroup analysis was stratified by HCC etiology. Results: A total of 302 and 664 patients received durvalumab/tremelimumab, atezolizumab/bevacizumab, respectively. After propensity matching, 253 patients per group were included. Median OS was 283 days with durvalumab/tremelimumab and 391 days with atezolizumab/bevacizumab. The two treatment regimens showed no significant difference in survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.875, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.696–1.101, p=0.254). Subgroup analyses demonstrated no significant differences in survival between the two groups of patients in MASLD (HR: 0.698, 95% CI: 0.468–1.040), alcohol associated liver disease (HR: 0.821, 95% CI: 0.603–1.118), and chronic viral hepatitis (HR: 0.852, 95% CI: 0.596–1.219). Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference in survival outcomes between atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and durvalumab plus tremelimumab in patients with decompensated advanced HCC. These results support current real-world practice in which both regimens may be considered viable first-line treatment options in this high-risk population with liver decompensation.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a poor long-term prognosis due to high recurrence and cirrhosis-related mortality, even after potentially curative treatments such as liver transplantation (LT), surgical resection, or ablation. This study aimed to identify factors associated with ≥10-year survival in HCC patients. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted among HCC patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2022 using the National Cancer Database. Multivariable Cox regression was used to identify predictors of overall survival, and logistic regression was used to identify predictors of ≥10-year survival. Results: Among 249,600 HCC patients, 177,585 (71.2%) died within 5 years, 8613 (3.5%) died at 5–10 years, 54,988 (22.0%) were alive with <10 years of follow-up, and 8219 (3.3%) survived ≥10 years. LT, resection, and ablation were performed in 6.6%, 9.3%, and 11% of patients, respectively. Compared with ablation as the reference group, LT [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 11.96, 95% confidence interval (CI): 11.27–13.29] and resection (aOR: 2.83, 95% CI: 2.57–3.08) increased the odds of ≥10-year survival, while non-curative treatments reduced the odds compared with ablation (aOR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.47–0.55). Cox regression results were consistent with the logistic model, confirming the association. Decision tree analysis confirmed LT as the dominant determinant of long-term survival. Black individuals were associated with lower odds of ≥10-year survival (aOR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.820–0.96) and decreased likelihood of receiving LT (aOR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.55–0.96). Conclusions: LT offers the best chance of ≥10-year survival in HCC. Ensuring equitable access is essential, especially for Black patients who have lower transplant rates and worse outcomes.

Abstract Background Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer remains a major global health challenge. This study provides updated 2022 estimates of GI cancer incidence and mortality worldwide, along with projections of incident cases and deaths through 2050 to inform cancer control strategies. Methods In this population‐based study, data from the GLOBOCAN 2022 database were used to examine incidence and deaths associated with GI cancer. By using global demographic projections, this study estimated the projected number of incident cases and deaths until the year 2050. Results By 2050, the global burden of GI cancer is projected to reach 9.06 million incident cases (+85%) and 6.42 million deaths (+93%) from 2022. Increases in incidence are projected for both females (+87%) and males (+83%), as are increases in mortality for both females (+97%) and males (+91%). Whereas the Western Pacific region will have the highest absolute burden, with 3.88 million new cases and 2.79 million deaths, the greatest relative increase is expected in Africa, with incidence and deaths rising by 157% and 160%, respectively. As measured by the Human Development Index (HDI), the steepest increases are projected in low (+151% incidence; +152% deaths) and medium (+112% incidence; +114% deaths) HDI countries. Overall, all GI cancer types are projected to increase, led by pancreatic cancer in incidence (+95%) and colorectal cancer in deaths (+103%). Conclusions GI cancer incidence and deaths are expected to nearly double by 2050, with increases across sexes, cancer types, and regions, especially in lower HDI countries.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States and worldwide. HCC screening among patients at elevated risk is associated with improved early detection and overall survival, but current ultrasound-based screening strategies are challenged by low adherence and suboptimal sensitivity. Blood-based screening tests have the potential to enhance adherence and improve early-stage HCC detection if they can demonstrate favorable performance compared with ultrasound-based screening. Here we present the design and rationale for ALTUS (A lternative to Ultrasound), a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter study in the United States to investigate the performance of the multi-target HCC blood test (mt-HBT) for the detection of HCC in a screening population. Methods: Adults with liver cirrhosis or chronic hepatitis B infection will be enrolled to undergo standard-of-care screening imaging and concurrent blood collection for the mt-HBT. All participants will undergo contrast-enhanced CT or MRI imaging with central radiology LI-RADS assessment as the reference method to determine HCC status. Participants without an identified malignancy will undergo a second screening visit and blood collection, and longitudinal clinical and imaging data will be collected up to 18 months from enrollment. The primary study objectives are to demonstrate that the mt-HBT is non-inferior to ultrasound for early-stage HCC sensitivity and to assess mt-HBT HCC specificity. The secondary objective is to assess mt-HBT overall sensitivity. Results: ALTUS is in progress with readout of the primary analysis expected in 2025. Conclusions: This prospective head-to-head comparison of the mt-HBT versus ultrasound will provide novel data regarding the performance and utility of the mt-HBT for HCC screening.

Abstract Background Unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) is a leading cause of cancer death. FDA-approved first-line systemic therapies include atezolizumab/bevacizumab (atezo/bev) and durvalumab/tremelimumab (durva/treme); however, there is a lack of comparative data. Methods We reviewed outcomes of patients with uHCC who initiated atezo/bev or durva/treme between 2017 and 2024, across six institutions. Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier and Cox models, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Results Four hundred fifty-two uHCC pts were included. Median age: 68 years; 77% male; 81% white. Most common etiologies were viral hepatitis (38.9%) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (19.5%). Disease progression was the primary reason for treatment discontinuation, atezo/bev (56%) and durva/treme (42%). Outcomes were not statistically significant (median OS [month, m]: 14.0 vs 14.6 [P = .66]; median TTD [m]: 4.9 vs 3.9 [P = .42] for atezo/bev vs durva/treme). Outcomes were significantly different between Child-Pugh classes (CP: A, B7, B8/9, C) respectively, median OS(m): 19.0, 6.1, 5.1, 2.0 (P &lt; .001); median TTD(m): 6.1, 2.3, 3.0, 1.3 (P &lt; .001). Conclusions In this real-world study of uHCC, no significant difference in clinical outcomes was observed between atezo/bev and durva/treme in the first-line setting. CP scores were a key prognostic variable with both regimens.

ABSTRACTBackgroundMetabolic dysfunction‐associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) affects over one third of the global population and is closely linked to gastrointestinal, oncological, and cardiovascular diseases. As the most common cause of steatotic liver disease (SLD), MASLD is often referred to as “fatty liver” in general health information searches. With the Internet becoming a primary source of healthcare information, this study aimed to evaluate global and regional public interest in steatotic liver disease using Google Trends data from January 2004 to December 2024.MethodsA comprehensive analysis was performed using Google Trends with the search term “fatty liver disease.” Interest levels were quantified using Google Trends indices, and temporal patterns were evaluated using average annual percent change (AAPC). Regional variations were assessed to identify geographic hotspots of public interest.ResultsGlobal interest in MASLD demonstrated significant growth (AAPC: 6.77%, 95% Confidence interval [CI]: 5.33–8.23), with a 264% increase from 2004 to 2024. Peak interest was observed in August 2024 (index: 100) compared to the lowest point in June 2007. Iran showed the highest country‐specific search volume (index: 100), while within the United States, West Virginia demonstrated the greatest relative interest (index: 100). Key topics associated with MASLD included “liver,” “symptoms,” “disease,” and “therapy.”ConclusionsSubstantial growth in global public interest in MASLD, with distinct temporal and geographical patterns, provides insights to develop targeted awareness campaigns and educational interventions, particularly in regions with low search volumes. Future research should examine the relationship between online search patterns and clinical outcomes in MASLD.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The prognostic value of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in these patients remains controversial. We aimed to investigate the association between irAEs and clinical outcomes in patients with HCC treated with ICIs. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for articles published from inception to June 2024, using keywords including ICI, HCC, and irAEs. Statistical analysis was performed with a random effects model. RESULTS: Of 3,028 studies, 24 (4,127 patients) met the criteria for inclusion. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was the most common treatment regimen (n = 10 studies). IrAEs were associated with an increased objective response rate (pooled relative ratio: 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.36–2.21, I 2 = 41%), a higher disease control rate (pooled relative ratio: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.21–1.74, I 2 = 74%), and longer progression-free survival (pooled hazard ratio [HR]: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.52–0.84, I 2 = 71%). There was a trend toward longer overall survival for patients with irAEs compared with those without (pooled HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.63–1.12, I 2 = 73%). Subgroup analysis indicated a survival benefit for patients with grade 1–2 irAEs (pooled HR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.36–0.67, I 2 = 0%) and for those with endocrine irAEs (pooled HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.48–0.83, I 2 = 12%). DISCUSSION: The development of irAEs is associated with favorable clinical outcomes in HCC, including improved progression-free survival and higher objective response rate. Overall survival benefit was noted in patients with mild irAEs but not those with severe irAEs.

Background and Aims: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) prevent fibrosis progression in a preclinical model of steatotic liver disease. Our objective was to assess the impact of ACEi/ARB use on clinical outcomes in patients with metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver diseases. Approach and Results: Using TriNetX, a nationwide database, we identified all patients with metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver diseases from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2019. Using a target trial emulation framework, ACEi/ARB users were matched with calcium channel blocker (CCB) users using propensity score matching (PSM). Patients were followed up to 10 years after the index date. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine the risk of mortality, major adverse liver outcomes, major adverse cardiac events, and incident cancers. Of the 35,988 eligible patients, 28,423 were ACEi/ARB users, and 7565 were CCB users. After PSM, 7238 pairs were well-balanced. ACEi/ARB use was associated with a significantly decreased mortality risk (HR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.51–0.68). ACEi/ARB was associated with a significantly reduced risk of developing major adverse liver outcomes (HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.61–0.80), including ascites (HR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.63–0.98) and HE (HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.57–0.78). ACEi/ARB use was also associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiac events (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.76–0.90) but not incident cancer (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.86-1.10) compared with CCB. Conclusions: ACEi/ARB use in patients with metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver diseases was associated with a reduced risk of mortality, major adverse liver outcomes, and major adverse cardiac events compared with CCB use. A large prospective study is needed for external validation.