Adverse Effects

Brain Cancer

HER2-Positive Breast Cancer

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Breast Cancer

Colorectal Cancer

Esophageal Cancer

Gastric Cancer

Liver Cancer

Pancreatic Cancer

Gastrointestinal Cancer

Bladder Cancer

Kidney Cancer

Prostate Cancer

Genitourinary Cancers

Cervical Cancer

Endometrial Cancer

Ovarian Cancer

Gynecologic Cancers

Head & Neck Cancer

Multiple Myeloma

Myelodysplastic Syndromes

Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

Hematologic Oncology

Vaccines

Infection

Leukemia

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC)

Lung Cancer

Lymphoma

Neuroendocrine Tumors

Oncology

Pediatric Cancers

Radiation Oncology

Sarcoma

Screening

Skin Cancer & Melanoma

Surgery

Thyroid Cancer

News

Global Bulletin

All News

FDA Approval Alert

Women in Oncology

Media

Around the Practice

Between the Lines

Face Off

From All Angles

Meeting of the Minds

OncView

Podcasts

Training Academy

Treatment Algorithms with the Oncology Brothers

Videos

Conferences

Publications

All Journals

Editorial Board

For Authors

Year in Review

Events

Frontline Forum

Satellite Sessions

CME/CE

Resources

Awareness Month

Nurse Practitioners/Physician's Assistants

Partners

Career Center

Subscribe

CancerNetwork is home to the journal Oncology & provides insights on the screening, early detection, diagnosis, treatment and prevention of cancers.

About

Advertise

CureToday.com

OncLive.com

OncNursingNews.com

TargetedOnc.com

Editorial

Contact

Terms and Conditions

Privacy

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

CancerNetwork - Oncology News and Clinical Expertise

Facebook

LinkedIn

Youtube

Spotlight

Clinical

Genitourinary Cancer

Gynecologic Cancer

Hematology

Skin Cancer

1rem

Topics

 spoke with Govindarajan Narayanan, MD about his practice becoming the first in the United States to successfully surgically treat a patient with a liver tumor using the Epione robot, as well as the process of transitioning from CT-based image guidance to the robotic workstation in his care.

Narayanan, a professor of Radiology and an interventional radiologist at Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute and the chief of Interventional Oncology at Miami Cancer Institute, both of Baptist Health South Florida, described how the use of Epione may save significant amounts of time while performing microwave ablation, cryoablation, and irreversible electroporation (IRE). Developers designed the robotic device to simplify several probe procedures, helping make large tumors more predictable to manage.

According to Narayanan, Epione is suitable for use in any patient for whom his practice typically performs image-guided ablations. Additionally, the device may “level the playing field” by allowing those with less experience to give highly accurate surgery, thereby increasing the availability of physicians who can offer these treatments across multiple practices.

Narayanan also described some of the potential challenges associated with adopting the Epione robot in clinic, such as adapting to the physical space that it occupies in the operating room. The device may also pose a steep learning curve with respect to procedures involving multiple needles such as cryoablation and IRE, as it is necessary to set a path that won’t cause any deflections of the needle.

Looking ahead, Narayanan said that future technological developments may allow users to operate the robot remotely, allowing patients to receive surgery at a treatment center even if a practicing physician is not physically present.

“It’s very exciting to be at the forefront of bringing such a cutting-edge technology to mainstream clinical practice,” Narayanan said. “Everything is done with one click, so it saves a significant amount of time. And because you’re not doing multiple check scans when you place the needles, you’re saving on radiation time.”

First patient treated in the United States with Quantum Surgical’s Epione® robot. News release. Quantum Surgical. May 24, 2023. Accessed November 6, 2023. https://shorturl.at/lzH01

Epione. Quantum Surgical. Accessed November 7, 2023. https://shorturl.at/dqyL6

Govindarajan Narayanan, MD, speaks to the potential time-saving advantages of using the Epione robot for microwave ablation, cryoablation, and other surgical strategies in patients with liver cancer and other tumors. 

Adapting to a Robotic Workstation for Image-Guided Liver Cancer Surgery

Receiving treatment at an academic center may improve the probability of receiving subsequent curative care among those with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Post-IO Curative Treatment Conversion May Prolong Survival in Liver Cancer

The safety profile of lenvatinib/pembrolizumab plus TACE among patients with unresectable HCC was consistent with previously reported studies.

Pembrolizumab Combo Does Not Significantly Improve OS in Unresectable HCC

Overall survival data in the IMbrave152/SKYSCRAPER-14 study are not anticipated to show statistical significance.

Tiragolumab Regimen Misses PFS End Point in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

The addition of dendritic cells to TACE in patients with intermediate-stage HCC did not significantly increase the incidence or severity of AEs.

Dendritic Cell Vaccine Shows Preliminary Activity in Advanced HCC

Transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib did not significantly improve overall survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma vs sorafenib alone.

Transarterial Chemoembolization Regimen Shows PFS Improvement in HCC

Although 1 of 21 patients with liver-dominant NETs died due to RILD in the phase 1 study, no RILD-induced deaths were observed in the phase 2 trial.

Radioembolization Plus Chemotherapy Is Feasible in Liver-Dominant NETs

The toxicity of radioembolization with the radiosensitizing chemotherapy agents capecitabine (Xeloda) and temozolomide (Temodar) was additive in patients with liver-dominant neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), and no new safety signals were identified, according to Michael C. Soulen, MD, director of Interventional Oncology at the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania.

He spoke with CancerNetwork® in an interview at the 2025 North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (NANETS) Multidisciplinary NET Medical Symposium about a presentation of the phase 2 CapTemY90 trial (NCT04339036), assessing the combination of radioembolization and chemotherapy in patients with liver-dominant NETs, he gave at the conference. Specifically, he highlighted safety findings, with an emphasis on adverse effects.

Soulen began by highlighting findings from the phase 1 portion of the trial, which showed that administering the combination regimen was feasible among patients with liver-metastatic NETs. Furthermore, he noted that the most common toxicity was cytopenia, with platelet count decreases also being the most prevalent. He further emphasized that toxicities with radioembolization were uncommon, but that radioembolization-induced liver disease (RILD) could be a major concern.

In the phase 1 trial, which included 21 patients, he stated that 1 patient died due to an RILD event. However, in the larger phase 2 trial, which enrolled approximately 50 patients, he noted that no patients had died from RILD complications.

We did the phase 1 study several years ago. Of course, if you combine 2 things, they could be synergistically toxic. They could be too intolerable for the patient. We did a 21-patient phase 1 study, and we demonstrated that it was feasible. We could do this: combine [radioembolization and chemotherapy]. Almost everybody was able to complete the regimen as prescribed. The toxicity was additive. That means we expected toxicity from the drugs and expected toxicity from the radiation, but not worse [toxicity].

The major toxicity you see are cytopenias and drops, particularly [for] the platelet counts. We continue to see more or less what you would expect from the dose of [capecitabine/temozolomide] that they are on. Y90 toxicities, fortunately, are quite uncommon. Most people have none. The big question we worry about is what’s called radioembolization-induced liver disease (RILD), which can happen in anyone who is getting radioembolization.

You worry about whether you potentiate that with chemotherapy. In the phase 1 cohort, we did have 1 patient who died from [RILD]. That could happen, and in a 20-patient [cohort], you do not know if that’s more [than] you expect. So far, so good in the larger 50-patient phase 2 cohort. It does seem to be pretty much as expected, so no worrisome signals in terms of toxicity.

Soulen MC, Iyer R, Berman Z, Chauhan A, Thornton L. Multicenter phase 2 trial of Yttrium-90 radioembolization with capecitabine-temozolomide for grade 2 liver-dominant metastatic neuroendocrine tumors: interim report. Presented at the 2025 NANETS Multidisciplinary NET Medical Symposium; October 23-25, 2025; Austin, TX. Abstract 33445.

CapTemY90 for Grade 2/3 NET Liver Metastases (CapTemY90). ClinicalTrials.gov. Updated September 5, 2025. Accessed November 4, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/5euyvtu4

Conference

A simulation procedure helped to ascertain chemotherapy tolerability before administering radioembolization therapy for NETs with liver metastases.

Outlining a Radioembolization/Chemotherapy Regimen for NET Liver Metastases

In an interview with CancerNetwork® at the 2025 North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (NANETS) Multidisciplinary NET Medical Symposium, Michael C. Soulen, MD, discussed the design of a phase 2 trial (NCT04339036) he conducted to ascertain the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of radioembolization with the radiosensitizing chemotherapy agents capecitabine (Xeloda) and temozolomide (Temodar) in patients with grade 2 or 3 liver-dominant neuroendocrine tumors (NETs).

He began by highlighting the dosing schedule for chemotherapy, which was given in 4-week cycles, 2 weeks on and 2 weeks off, for as long as a patient could tolerate it. Additionally, Soulen identified a need to undertake a simulation procedure, wherein a harmless nuclear medicine agent is administered, to ensure that radioembolization can be done safety in conjunction with chemotherapy.

Furthermore, he explained that 7 days into the second cycle of chemotherapy, the radioembolization seeds are instilled, with the option to irradiate the other lobe the following month, if needed. Soulen concluded by saying that this combination regimen was hypothesized to attain a higher response rate and/or more durable responses vs either therapy alone.

Soulen is director of Interventional Oncology at the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania.

We came up with this regimen where patients would start their [capecitabine-temozolomide]—which is an oral chemotherapy regimen taken for 2 weeks on, 2 weeks off—and you keep doing that every month for as long as it works, where the patient can tolerate it. They need to do that first to make sure they can tolerate the chemotherapy. [Because] a small number of patients [will not], if you are going to do radioembolization, you first must do a simulation procedure.

They need a catheterization, where we map out the plumbing of their liver. We do a test injection of a harmless nuclear medicine agent. We do a nuclear medicine SPECT scan. In the first month, they get their first cycle of chemotherapy––[we] make sure they can tolerate the chemotherapy, and they get the simulation for radioembolization––[and we] make sure that can be done safely. Then, the next month, on cycle 2, we drop the radioembolization procedure on day 7 of the 14 days of chemotherapy. They get a week of chemotherapy, they get their seeds instilled, and then on the next week of chemotherapy, the seeds are radiating their tumors. Then, if you need the other lobe treated, we do that the next month, and then they stay on the chemotherapy every month as long as it’s working and they can tolerate it.

The hope was that by combining the 2, that we would get either a higher response rate, more durable control, or both.

The addition of radioembolization to radiosensitizing chemotherapy may help concurrently treat patients with liver tumors and disease outside the liver.

Searching for Synergy in Liver-Dominant Neuroendocrine Tumors

The addition of radioembolization to a combination of capecitabine (Xeloda) and temozolomide (Temodar) as radiosensitizing chemotherapy may improve efficacy outcomes for patients with liver-dominant neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), according to Michael C. Soulen, MD.

Soulen, director of interventional oncology at the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, spoke with CancerNetwork® at the 2025 North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Multidisciplinary NET Medical Symposium about a presentation he gave on the phase 2 CapTemY90 trial (NCT04339036).

 Providing some background for the trial, he initially explained that embolization-based combinations have been used for liver-dominant NETs for over 50 years.

Soulen then expressed that although these combinations are effective and durable enough on their own, a need to enhance treatment outcomes persists. To that end, he outlined considerations for combination therapies, suggesting that, at worst, combinations could be wasted as opposed to sequencing therapies. At best, however, treatments could function synergistically and deliver outcomes that are greater than the sum of their parts.

In this trial, he explained, his team evaluated radioembolization with radiosensitizing chemotherapy, which is already a standard combination therapy for NETs, to attempt to achieve that treatment synergy. He concluded by highlighting that this combination may help treat the primary tumor and metastases concurrently, which would help those with more aggressive liver-dominant NET histologies.

We have been doing [liver-directed therapy] for patients with liver-dominant NETs for 50 years. Those treatments are typically either bland embolization, chemoembolization, or radioembolization, all of which are reasonably effective and reasonably durable. But we are always looking for ways to make them better, either make them [with a] higher response rate or more durable. A very logical thing to do would be to combine our interventional therapies with a drug or a systemic therapy, where the goal is synergy.

The problem of combining 2 therapies at once is you are firing 2 bullets. That could be bad for the patient in the sense that you essentially expended one more bullet than you needed and used a therapy that may have benefited them later in life if you do them sequentially. When you combine 2 things, the most likely outcome is you wasted one of them, in part. They could be additive, meaning that you get the benefit of both at the same time, which would be OK, but the Holy Grail is synergy. Something where you combine them and they are better than the sum of the parts.

In this particular trial, we were looking at radioembolization, a technique where we instill millions of little radioactive seeds into the liver that get embedded in the tumor. They radiate the tumor from the inside out. Radiation oncologists, for years, have been doing what they call radiosensitizing chemotherapy. If you are doing radiation therapy for your brain tumors, gastrointestinal tumors, [or] any kind of tumor, they almost always give a chemotherapy drug such as capecitabine or temozolomide, which are known to make radiation work better.

Capecitabine and temozolomide are a standard combination therapy in NETs. The idea of combining that with radioembolization evolved very organically out of our tumor board. We had patients who had liver metastases, but they also had disease outside the liver that the medical oncologist wanted to treat. They had a more aggressive histology—maybe a high grade 2 or something where we were worried—where I wanted to treat the liver [and] the medical oncologist wanted to treat everything else. We said, “Well, why don’t we do it together?”

Soulen MC, Iyer R, Berman Z, Chauhan A, Thornton L. Multicenter phase 2 trial of yttrium-90 radioembolization with capecitabine-temozolomide for grade 2 liver-dominant metastatic neuroendocrine tumors: interim report. Abstract presented at: 2025 North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Multidisciplinary NET Medical Symposium; October 23-25, 2025; Austin, TX. Abstract 33445.

CapTemY90 for grade 2/3 NET liver metastases (CapTemY90). ClinicalTrials.gov. Updated September 5, 2025. Accessed November 4, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/5euyvtu4

Treatment with stereotactic body radiation therapy in combination with sorafenib (Nexavar) bested sorafenib alone among a group of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, according to recent study results.

The findings, according to Louis Potters, MD, FACR, FABS, FASTRO, mark the first time that radiation has elicited a survival benefit in patients with this type of liver cancer.

 spoke with Potters about those findings, which were from a randomized phase 3 trial (NCT01730937) and presented at the 

2022 American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Annual Meeting.

Potters, who is the chair of the Department of Radiation Medicine and deputy physician-in-chief of Northwell Health Cancer Institute in New Hyde Park, New York, said that these findings show that radiation therapy has a role in the treatment of patients with this form of liver cancer.

The NRG 1112 trial was a hepatocellular SBRT trial. That was actually an overall positive survival benefit trial. It's the first time that radiation therapy has been identified to improve overall survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. And although there continues to be an effort in the chemotherapy side of things looking at agents that work well with this particular disease, we've clearly been able to carve out, based on the results of this study, a role for radiation therapy, SBRT in particular, for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. That was an exciting study to hear about.

Dawson LA, Winter K, Knox J, et al. NRG/RTOG 1112: Randomized phase III study of sorafenib vs. stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) followed by sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (NCT01730937). Presented at 2022 American Society for Radiation Oncology Annual Meeting (ASTRO); October 23-26, 2022; San Antonio, TX. Abstract LBA 01.

Adding radiation to sorafenib elicited a survival improvement in a group of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, a type of liver cancer.

Radiation Shown to Improve Survival in Liver Cancer ‘For the First Time’

Ghassan K. Abou Alfa, MD, an attending physician at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, spoke with CancerNetwork

FDA approval of tremelimumab (Imjudo) in combination with durvalumab (Imfinzi) for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)

 about the next steps in managing the disease. In addition to highlighting the progress that has been made thus far in terms of improving outcomes in patients with HCC, he spotlighted future focuses such as advancing treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, as well as combining them with local therapies.

We need to cure [HCC] and we still have ways to go. No question that I humbly and proudly have witnessed this disease start from a median survival of barely 3 months, and worked through different studies at Memorial Sloan Kettering for the last 22 years, and look where we are: We're talking about a mean survival of close to 16.5 months or more. There is no doubt that we are on the right track, but of course, we want more. Why do we need more? We owe our patients that and promise them that. Will there be further advancement of the use of checkpoint inhibitors in a more advanced way? Absolutely. Is it also possible to consider local therapy married with the use of the checkpoint inhibitors? By all means, yes. To that extent, our current study, which is already open in some parts of the world will actually combine chemoembolization for local therapy plus the use of durvalumab and tremelimumab, as we just mentioned.

Imjudo (tremelimumab) in combination with Imfinzi approved in the US for patients with unresectable liver cancer. News Release. AstraZeneca. October 24, 2022. Accessed October 31, 2022. https://bit.ly/3Fbwx1w

Future research into the management of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma may involve combining local therapies with checkpoint inhibitors like durvalumab and tremelimumab, according to Ghassan K. Abou-Alda, MD.

Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, Discusses Next Steps in Researching Unresectable HCC

FDA approval of tremelimumab (Imjudo) in combination with durvalumab (Imfinzi) for the treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC),

 spoke with Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, an attending physician at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, about which patients may benefit most from this regimen. Although the combination therapy might not be suitable for those who have received prior transplantation, he highlighted several other patient subgroups with recurrent disease who may derive benefit from the treatment.

The chance for recurrence of [unresectable HCC], even among patients who have a surgical resection is unfortunately very high. Understandably, patients who have received transplants—who hopefully will never have recurrence—might not be the right patients for the use of checkpoint inhibitors because of the transplant and immunosuppression that's already there. Besides that, patients who either have recurrent disease after surgery, locally advanced diseases that will fail local therapy, or those with systemic therapy will all benefit from [durvalumab plus tremelimumab]. This unfortunately is a large number of patients [in terms of] the separation of the different cancer stages. As such, almost every patient will have some opportunity to benefit from that therapy.

Patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma who have recurrent disease following surgery or locally advanced diseases who will likely progress on local therapy may have an opportunity to benefit from tremelimumab and durvalumab following its FDA approval, according to Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD.

Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, Spotlights Patients With Unresectable HCC Who May Best Benefit From Tremelimumab/Durvalumab 

FDA approval of tremelimumab (Imjudo) in combination with durvalumab (Imfinzi) for the treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

, Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, an attending physician and board certified medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), spoke with CancerNetwork

 about the significance of ensuring equal access to treatment for this disease on an international scale. He discussed the current barriers to treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, especially those observed in developing countries within Africa, and how his team at MSKCC is working to broaden access.

We have to realize that, sadly, some patients who might be eligible for [treatment with tremelimumab and durvalumab] will never see it. The reason is because they will not have access to it. It’s good news that we have this new therapy that we are beyond thrilled to have. Other than further enhancing benefit from the therapy, we have to find ways to ensure that patients get access to treatment. Considering that liver cancer has one of the highest incidences in the continent of Africa, this really tells you how much we still have to do in regard to our lower-/middle-income countries to make sure they get access to therapy. One of the efforts that we have done at Memorial Sloan Kettering [Cancer Center] along with colleagues from Africa last year was to form a committee of 26 physicians from throughout the whole continent. We asked about what therapies were available to about 500 physicians throughout the continent. It’s amazing how limited the access is. This is really what we owe to our colleagues and our patients, wherever they are in the world: better therapy. I am excited but at the same time, it’s a little bit of a wake-up call to make sure that everybody has access.

Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, discusses the importance of improving access to novel therapies and combinations for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma across the world.

Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, Discusses Importance of Treatment Accessibility in Unresectable HCC

In an interview with CancerNetwork®, Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, an attending physician at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, spoke about the 

FDA approval of tremelimumab (Imjudo) in combination with durvalumab (Imfinzi)

 for the treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Abou-Alfa highlighted key findings from the phase 3 HIMALAYA study (NCT03298451) that led to the FDA approval, which showed 31% of patients receiving tremelimumab and durvalumab had an improved 3-year survival period compared with 20% of those who were treated with sorafenib (Nexavar).

 Although more research is necessary to improve the treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, he indicated that the newly-approved Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab (STRIDE) regimen is a step in the right direction in the management of this disease.

[Hepatocellular] carcinoma is still not a curable disease. As such, it's definitely a cancer with an unmet need, because we did not cure people [only provided an option for treatment]. If anything, the advent of the durvalumab plus tremelimumab [regimen] that we now call the STRIDE regimen based on the HIMALAYA study, is no doubt a step in the right direction for further improvement and survival. However, a response [displayed] can be a complete response and will be [shown] in survival that are matching up to 1/3 of the patients having a 3-year overall survival. This is no doubt a step in the right direction, but by all means, there’s still more work to do.

Abou-Alfa GK, Chan SL, Kudo M, et al. Phase 3 randomized, open-label, multicenter study of tremelimumab and durvalumab as first-line therapy in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: HIMALAYA. 

. 2022;40(suppl 4):379. doi:10.1200/JCO.2022.40.4_suppl.379

Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, spoke about the recent approval of tremelimumab plus durvalumab for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, based on results from the phase 3 HIMALAYA trial. 

Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, Highlights Approval of Tremelimumab and Durvalumab in Unresectable HCC

CancerNetwork® spoke with Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, a medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Comprehensive Cancer Center, at the 

 about the key results and main takeaways to emerge in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who were treated with tremelimumab at 300 mg plus durvalumab (Imfinzi), tremelimumab at 75 mg plus durvalumab, or durvalumab alone vs sorafenib (Nexavar) in the phase 3 HIMALAYA study (NCT03298451).

In the HIMALAYA study, the primary end point was positive showing improved [median overall] survival for the tremelimumab [at a] single dose of 300 mg plus durvalumab of 16.4 months compared with 13.8 for sorafenib, with a hazard ratio of 0.78 [95% CI, 96% CI, 0.65-0.92; 

 = .0035], which is clinically and statistically significant. If anything, the separation of the curve was noticeable around 4 months and started propagating further enough that when we did a landmark evaluation at 9 months, we have seen the hazard ratio improve markedly up to 0.70. That suppression continued at [follow-up] analysis at 18 months, 24 months, and 36 months, enough that by 3 years, 30% of the were still alive with the tremelimumab single dose plus durvalumab.

Now, this brings up an important question in regard to the priming effect that’s needed for [efficacy]. Interestingly, that’s why the PFS [progression-free survival] was totally equal between the 2 arms of tremelimumab single dose plus durvalumab, single-agent durvalumab, and sorafenib. There was no difference at all even though the separation started to be seen afterwards. More importantly, the critical point is that the priming of the T cells happened right away. The time to response was only 2 months for tremelimumab plus durvalumab and close to 5 months for sorafenib. If anything, it tells us one more time that we have been using new science and the new language of checkpoint inhibitors, but we’re still using the old dictionary of median survival and median PFS. I would say here the PFS is not of critical importance. If anything, the improvement in survival is the key player that we have seen not only with HCC but with other diseases such as melanoma, lung cancer, gastric cancer, etc.

Abou-Alfa G, Chan SL, Kudo M, et al. Phase 3 randomized, open-label, multicenter study of tremelimumab (T) and durvalumab (D) as first-line therapy in patients (pts) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC): HIMALAYA. 

. 2022;40(suppl 4):379. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.4_suppl.379

The combination of tremelimumab plus durvalumab improved survival for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the phase 3 HIMALAYA trial.

Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, Details Survival Data With Durvalumab Plus Tremelimumab in HCC From HIMALAYA Trial

 about the patient population, dosing regimens, and eligibility criteria for enrollment in the phase 3 HIMALAYA study (NCT03298451), which looked at tremelimumab plus durvalumab (Imfinzi) vs durvalumab alone for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

The HIMALAYA study was a randomized, open-label, multicenter study covering patients from all over the world. It included patients like any other studies who are of appropriate performance status, good liver functionality with a Child-Pugh score of A. [They] randomized 1325 patients to 4 arms. The fourth arm of tremelimumab, anti–CTLA-4 at 75 mg given 4 times plus durvalumab, did not fare any better compared to durvalumab as a single agent in Study 22 [NCT02519348] that was already reported in [

 As such, we stopped that arm and continued with 3 arms on the study, the first arm being a single dose of tremelimumab at 300 mg plus durvalumab. This was compared to sorafenib [Nexavar] looking for superiority of overall survival. In addition to that, we did look at single-agent durvalumab compared with sorafenib to look for noninferiority.

Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa, MD, examined the trial design of the phase 3 HIMALAYA trial of tremelimumab plus durvalumab for frontline hepatocellular carcinoma, with results presented at the 2022 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium.

Liver Cancer

Latest News