Would you offer first line atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable/metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma based on the IMbrave 150 data?

I would definitely discuss (and offer) atezolizumab/bevacizumab as first-line therapy for advanced HCC and in fact, I have already started the treatment in 3 patients. There is no denying that this is the greatest advance in first-line therapy since the presentation/publication of the SHARP trial an...

In the appropriate patient (Childs Pugh A hepatic function and good PS), I believe that this therapy should be considered a new standard of care based on the results of the IMbrave 150 study and offered as a treatment option. It is the first therapy since the introduction of VEGF TKIs to demonstrate...

Completely agree with the above. A provocative question: when designing trials in the first line HCC space, is sorafenib an appropriate control arm, or has it been lapped by lenvatinib or atezo-bev? I am struggling with having equipoise about what I think might be an inferior control arm.

I would certainly offer this treatment for a patient fitting the criteria of the study (treatment naïve, excellent ECOG PS, Child Pugh A) that did not have other contraindications to the therapy. The updated IMbrave150 overall survival data provided at the 2021 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium str...

We all know the final results of IMbrave150 resulted in mOS of 19.2 months vs 13.4 months for sorafenib and based on these impressive results, I would definitely offer this regimen as first line therapy for advanced/metastatic HCC patients. Of course, if a patient has had a history of GI bleed or kn...

If we consider BLCL-B patients first, I would offer Atezo/Bev to patients with multifocal disease and large tumor burden as outlined in the updated BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update. For patients with BCLC C stage, I would recommend this regimen.