4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Immunmodulatory Treatment Strategies of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From Checkpoint Inhibitors Now to an Integrated Approach in the Future

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Simple Summary

          Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is among the most common cancer diseases worldwide and has only limited treatment options at advanced disease stages. Activation of the immune system with checkpoint inhibitors has revolutionized cancer medicine and has become important also for HCC treatment. Here, we summarize the current status of immunotherapy options for HCC and highlight how combination with locoregional therapies could improve the outcome of patients. Novel pathways and targets for immunologic drug development are briefly discussed that could help to increase the response rate of these approaches in HCC.

          Abstract

          Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) still represents a human tumor entity with very limited therapeutic options, especially for advanced stages. Here, immune checkpoint modulating drugs alone or in combination with local ablative techniques could open a new and attractive therapeutic “door” to improve outcome and response rate for patients with HCC. Methods: Published data on HCC experimental to pre-(clinical) treatment strategies from standard of care to novel immunomodulatory concepts were summarized and discussed in detail. Results: Overall, our knowledge of the role of immune checkpoints in HCC is dramatically increased in the last years. Experimental and pre-clinical findings could be translated to phase 1 and 2 clinical trials and became standard of care. Local ablative techniques of HCC could improve the effectivity of immune checkpoint inhibitors in situ. Conclusions: This review demonstrates the importance of immunomodulatory treatment strategies of HCC, whereby the “best treatment code” of immune checkpoint drugs, combination with ablative techniques and of timing must be evaluated in coming clinical trials.

          Related collections

          Most cited references119

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries

          This article provides a status report on the global burden of cancer worldwide using the GLOBOCAN 2018 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, with a focus on geographic variability across 20 world regions. There will be an estimated 18.1 million new cancer cases (17.0 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 9.6 million cancer deaths (9.5 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) in 2018. In both sexes combined, lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer (11.6% of the total cases) and the leading cause of cancer death (18.4% of the total cancer deaths), closely followed by female breast cancer (11.6%), prostate cancer (7.1%), and colorectal cancer (6.1%) for incidence and colorectal cancer (9.2%), stomach cancer (8.2%), and liver cancer (8.2%) for mortality. Lung cancer is the most frequent cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among males, followed by prostate and colorectal cancer (for incidence) and liver and stomach cancer (for mortality). Among females, breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death, followed by colorectal and lung cancer (for incidence), and vice versa (for mortality); cervical cancer ranks fourth for both incidence and mortality. The most frequently diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death, however, substantially vary across countries and within each country depending on the degree of economic development and associated social and life style factors. It is noteworthy that high-quality cancer registry data, the basis for planning and implementing evidence-based cancer control programs, are not available in most low- and middle-income countries. The Global Initiative for Cancer Registry Development is an international partnership that supports better estimation, as well as the collection and use of local data, to prioritize and evaluate national cancer control efforts. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2018;0:1-31. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

            The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab showed encouraging antitumor activity and safety in a phase 1b trial involving patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

              No effective systemic therapy exists for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. A preliminary study suggested that sorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, the platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and Raf may be effective in hepatocellular carcinoma. In this multicenter, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 602 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who had not received previous systemic treatment to receive either sorafenib (at a dose of 400 mg twice daily) or placebo. Primary outcomes were overall survival and the time to symptomatic progression. Secondary outcomes included the time to radiologic progression and safety. At the second planned interim analysis, 321 deaths had occurred, and the study was stopped. Median overall survival was 10.7 months in the sorafenib group and 7.9 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the sorafenib group, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.55 to 0.87; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the median time to symptomatic progression (4.1 months vs. 4.9 months, respectively, P=0.77). The median time to radiologic progression was 5.5 months in the sorafenib group and 2.8 months in the placebo group (P<0.001). Seven patients in the sorafenib group (2%) and two patients in the placebo group (1%) had a partial response; no patients had a complete response. Diarrhea, weight loss, hand-foot skin reaction, and hypophosphatemia were more frequent in the sorafenib group. In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, median survival and the time to radiologic progression were nearly 3 months longer for patients treated with sorafenib than for those given placebo. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00105443.) 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Cancers (Basel)
                Cancers (Basel)
                cancers
                Cancers
                MDPI
                2072-6694
                29 March 2021
                April 2021
                : 13
                : 7
                : 1558
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Gastroenterology (Campus Benjamin Franklin), Charité University Medicine Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany; matthias.ocker@ 123456charite.de
                [2 ]Translational Medicine & Clinical Pharmacology, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, 55216 Ingelheim, Germany
                [3 ]Institute of Physiology and Pathophysiology, Paracelsus Medical University, 5020 Salzburg, Austria; christian.mayr@ 123456pmu.ac.at (C.M.); tobias.kiesslich@ 123456pmu.ac.at (T.K.)
                [4 ]Department of Internal Medicine I, Paracelsus Medical University, University Hospital Salzburg (SALK), 5020 Salzburg, Austria
                [5 ]Division of Hematology, Oncology, and Tumor Immunology (Campus Charité Mitte), Medical Department, Charité University Medicine Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany; sebastian.stintzing@ 123456charite.de
                [6 ]Institute of Pathology, Paracelsus Medical University, University Hospital Salzburg (SALK), 5020 Salzburg, Austria
                [7 ]Cancer Cluster Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: d.neureiter@ 123456salk.at
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8263-6288
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3297-5801
                Article
                cancers-13-01558
                10.3390/cancers13071558
                8036419
                33805268
                4f045fb8-1c6d-4691-a0fb-c68308765feb
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 25 February 2021
                : 25 March 2021
                Categories
                Review

                hepatocellular carcinoma,immunotherapy,immune checkpoint inhibitors,locoregional treatment

                Comments

                Comment on this article