First line atezolizumab + bevacizumab (atezo/bev) or durvalumab ± tremelimumab (durva±treme) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): A real world, multi-institutional retrospective cohort study.
Authors: Ioannis Kournoutas, Paulina S Marell, Anina Peersen, Garima Gupta, Mehmet Akce, Ju Dong Yang, Pin-Jung Chen, Nikolas Naleid, Amit Mahipal, Vaibhav Sahai, Scott Thompson, Zhaohui Jin, Sudhakar Venkatesh, Mitesh J. Borad, Hani M. Babiker, Tanios S. Bekaii-Saab, Robert R. McWilliams, Thorvardur Ragnar Halfdanarson, Fang-Shu Ou, Nguyen H. Tran
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2025)

532 Background: HCC accounts for 80% of primary liver cancers, and worldwide, is the third common cause of cancer-related death. Two FDA approved 1st line systemic treatment options include atezo/bev and durva ± treme. Herein we report outcomes of these regimens in the 1st line setting via a real-world, multi-institutional retrospective cohort study. Methods: We reviewed clinical outcomes of patients (pts) who initiated 1st line atezo/bev or durva ± treme for unresectable HCC between March 2017 and February 2024, across 5 institutions (Mayo Clinic, University of Alabama, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and University of Michigan). Time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Best (objective) response was tabulated. Multivariable analyses were performed using Cox models and logistic regression for time-to-event and binary outcomes, respectively, while adjusting for age, sex, race, HCC etiology, Child-Pugh class, and ALBI grade. Results: A total of 433 HCC pts were included; atezo/bev (336), durva ± treme (97). Median age at the start of therapy was 68 years; 77% were male, 82% were Caucasian. Etiologies of HCC were viral hepatitis (38%), MASLD (20%), alcohol (10%), non-viral multifactorial (10%), or unknown (22%). Pts receiving durva ± treme were less likely to have cirrhosis (11% vs. 28%, p&lt;0.01) but similar in terms of macrovascular invasion (63% vs. 58%, p=0.35) compared to pts receiving atezo/bev. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were similar between the two groups, with the most common being disease progression - atezo/bev (56%) and durva ± treme (47%). The differences in clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly and remained consistent after multivariable adjustment. (Table, atezo/bev as the reference group). Outcomes were significantly different between Child-Pugh classes (CP: A,B,C) respectively, OS: 19.0 m, 6.4 m, 1.9 m (p&lt;0.001); TTF: 6.1 m, 2.7 m, 1.3 m (p&lt;0.001). Conclusions: In this real-world retrospective cohort study of unresectable HCC, the differences in overall survival, objective response, and time to treatment failure were not statistically significant between atezo/bev and durva ± treme in the 1st line setting. Outcome Atezo/bev Durva±treme Univariate p-value Multivariable adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) Multivariable adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) Overall Survival, Median (month) 14.0 14.6 0.77 0.78 (0.54-1.14) --- Time to Treatment Failure, Median (month) 4.9 4.1 0.71 0.95 (0.72-1.26) --- Objective response, % 26.3% 21.1% 0.31 --- 0.78 (0.43-1.39)