No abstract

Objective: To perform an individual participant data meta-analysis using randomized trials and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies which compared laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM). Background: Randomized trials and PSM studies constitute the highest level of evidence in addressing the long-term oncologic efficacy of laparoscopic versus open resection for CLM. However, individual studies are limited by the reporting of overall survival in ways not amenable to traditional methods of meta-analysis, and violation of the proportional hazards assumption. Methods: Survival information of individual patients was reconstructed from the published Kaplan-Meier curves with the aid of a computer vision program. Frequentist and Bayesian survival models (taking into account random-effects and nonproportional hazards) were fitted to compare overall survival of patients who underwent laparoscopic versus open surgery. To handle long plateaus in the tails of survival curves, we also exploited “cure models” to estimate the fraction of patients effectively “cured” of disease. Results: Individual patient data from 2 randomized trials and 13 PSM studies involving 3148 participants were reconstructed. Laparoscopic resection was associated with a lower hazard rate of death (stratified hazard ratio = 0.853, 95% confidence interval: 0.754–0.965, P = 0.0114), and there was evidence of time-varying effects (P = 0.0324) in which the magnitude of hazard ratios increased over time. The fractions of long-term cancer survivors were estimated to be 47.4% and 18.0% in the laparoscopy and open surgery groups, respectively. At 10-year follow-up, the restricted mean survival time was 8.6 months (or 12.1%) longer in the laparoscopy arm (P < 0.0001). In a subgroup analysis, elderly patients (≥65 years old) treated with laparoscopy experienced longer 3-year average life expectancy (+6.2%, P = 0.018), and those who live past the 5-year milestone (46.1%) seem to be cured of disease. Conclusions: This patient-level meta-analysis of high-quality studies demonstrated an unexpected survival benefit in favor of laparoscopic over open resection for CLM in the long-term. From a conservative viewpoint, these results can be interpreted to indicate that laparoscopy is at least not inferior to the standard open approach.

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting PD-L1/PD-1 and CTLA-4 has transformed the oncology practice of hepatocellular carcinoma. However, only 25–30% of the patients with advanced HCC treated with atezolizumab-bevacizumab or tremelimumab-durvalumab (STRIDE) respond initially, and mechanistic biomarkers and novel treatment strategies are urgently needed for patients who present with or acquire resistance to first-line ICI-based therapies. The recent approval of the STRIDE regimen has also engendered new questions, such as patient selection factors (e.g. portal hypertension and history of variceal bleed) and biomarkers, and the optimal combination and sequencing of ICI-based regimens. Triumphs in the setting of advanced HCC have also galvanized considerable interest in the broader application of ICIs to early- and intermediate-stage diseases, including clinical combination of ICIs with locoregional therapies. Among these clinical contexts, the role of ICIs in liver transplantation – which is a potentially curative strategy unique to HCC management – as a bridge to liver transplant in potential candidates or in the setting of post-transplant recurrence, warrants investigation in view of the notable theoretical risk of allograft rejection. In this review, we summarize and chart the landscape of seminal immuno-oncology trials in HCC and envision future clinical developments.