Abstract:e16168 Background: HCC pts with active HBV infection were excluded from most clinical trials involving immune checkpoint inhibitors because of safety concerns. We are aiming to evaluate the treatment safety of atezo/bev treatment in the TALENTop study (NCT04649489) which enrolled a large number of pts with active HBV infection. Methods: The TALENTop study is to clarify whether liver resection may provide additional benefits in Chinese HCC pts with macrovascular invasion who responded to conversion therapy with atezo/bev. After two versions of protocol modification, pts with active HBV infection were allowed. This study is ongoing, and the primary analysis is expected later. The current analysis is to evaluate treatment safety in pts with active HBV infection in the induction phase when pts received 3 cycles of atezo/bev and 1 cycle of atezo monotherapy. We compared the adverse events (AEs) between pts with active (baseline serum HBV-DNA ≥500 IU/mL) or inactive HBV infection (HBV-DNA < 500 IU/mL). All pts with detectable HBV-DNA or positive hepatitis B surface antigen received oral antiviral therapy throughout the study. Results: From Apr 2021 to Sep 2023, 296 pts were enrolled and completed induction phase therapy of atezo/bev. 274 pts (92.6%) had HBV-related HCC, and 133 pts (44.9%) had active HBV infection. The baseline characteristics were mainly balanced between groups, except pts with active HBV infection were younger (52 vs 56 years, P = 0.024), had larger tumor size (the diameter of target lesion 88.3 vs 78.1 mm, P = 0.007), and had higher album-bilirubin score (-2.62 vs -2.80, P < 0.001). In the induction phase, the AEs of any grade were higher in pts with active HBV infection (88.0% vs 73.6%, P = 0.002). However, the grade ≥3 AEs (20.3% vs 17.8%, P = 0.584), grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs (12.0% vs 12.3%, P = 0.950) and serious AEs (15.0% vs 13.5%, P = 0.706) were comparable between pts with active and inactive HBV infection. Additionally, the incidence of liver-related AEs was also comparable, including increased AST (17.3% vs 16.0%), increased ALT (17.3% vs 14.7%), and increased bilirubin (10.5% vs 12.9%). AEs leading to treatment withdrawal were also comparable (6.0% vs 6.1%, P = 0.966). In pts with active HBV infection, 20.8% remained serum HBV-DNA ≥500 IU/mL at the end of cycle 4. Conclusions: Active HBV infection did not compromise the safety of atezo/bev therapy. These findings could support that, with concurrent use of oral antiviral therapy, pts with active HBV infection should be not excluded from clinical trials or delayed for immunotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT04649489 .

Comparing the impact of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib on the liver function in hepatocellular carcinoma patients: A mixed-effects regression model approach

Comparison of the treatment effect between lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in pathologically diagnosed metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease.

Differential liver function at cessation of atezolizumab-bevacizumab versus lenvatinib in HCC: a multicenter, propensity-score matched comparative study

Frontline evaluation: Atezolizumab–bevacizumab versus lenvatinib for BCLC stage B hepatocellular carcinoma exceeding the up‐to‐seven criteria

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Lenvatinib as First-Line Therapy for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Comparing Lenvatinib/Pembrolizumab with Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Real-World Experience with Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Initial Experience of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Clinical Practice

Does first‐line treatment have prognostic impact for unresectable HCC?—Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib

Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab Versus Lenvatinib for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

The Safety of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab (atezo/bev) Treatment in Chinese Patients (pts) with Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) with Active Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) Infection: Results from the TALENTop Study.

The neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio at the start of the second course during atezolizumab plus bevacizumab therapy predicts therapeutic efficacy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A multicenter analysis

Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab–bevacizumab vs pembrolizumab-lenvatinib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective, cohort study

Albumin-Bilirubin Grade Analyses of Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab versus Sorafenib in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Phase III IMbrave150 Study

989P Effects of combination therapy using lenvatinib and anti-pd-1 antibody on liver function in patients with advanced hepatocellar carcinoma

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Transarterial Chemoembolization with or Without Lenvatinib for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Retrospective Propensity Score–Matched Analysis

Efficacy of lenvatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma based on background liver disease etiology: multi-center retrospective study

Balancing Efficacy and Tolerability of First-Line Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis

Similar efficacy and safety between lenvatinib versus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as the first‐line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Changes in ALBI Score and PIVKA-II within Three Months after Commencing Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab Treatment Affect Overall Survival in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Comparative Efficacy of Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab and Other Treatment Options for Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis

Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients with esophageal-gastric varices