Pathological complete response and major pathological response as surrogate endpoints for recurrence-free survival in perioperative immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
BackgroundHigh post-resection recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) limits long-term survival. Perioperative immunotherapy, including neoadjuvant therapy for resectable HCC and conversion therapy for unresectable HCC, has become a research hotspot. Whether pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR) can serve as surrogate endpoints for recurrence-free survival (RFS) remains unclear, with important implications for accelerating trial design.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the correlation between pCR/MPR and RFS following HCC perioperative immunotherapy, quantitatively synthesize hazard ratios (HRs) of pCR/MPR versus non-pCR/non-MPR for RFS (and overall survival, OS) across studies, and assess their reliability as surrogate endpoints.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Data databases (from inception to June 2026), supplemented by manual searching and citation tracking. The DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model was used to pool effect sizes. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistic and Q test. Sensitivity analysis was performed using leave-one-out method. Subgroup analyses were conducted by treatment stage (neoadjuvant vs. conversion), treatment regimen (ICI mono/dual vs. ICI + TKI vs. triple therapy), study design (prospective vs. retrospective), and MPR definition (≥70% vs. ≥ 90% necrosis). Publication bias was evaluated using Egger’s regression test.ResultsThe systematic review included 21 studies for descriptive analysis. The meta-analysis included 10 studies reporting HR values: 5 pCR studies (n = 720) and 6 MPR studies (n = 785), one of which (NeoHCC, D’Alessio 2024) (D'Alessio et al., Lancet Oncol, 2024, 25(12), 1465–1475) encompassed both. The pCR vs. non-pCR → RFS/DFS: Pooled HR = 0.342 (95% CI: 0.248–0.472), p < 0.000001, heterogeneity I2 = 0.0%. In sensitivity analysis, pooled HR remained stable at 0.244–0.354. MPR vs. non-MPR → RFS/PFS: Pooled HR = 0.291 (95% CI: 0.155–0.548), p = 0.000132, I2 = 66.6%. Heterogeneity was primarily driven by one study containing non-immunotherapy cohorts (Zhang 2024, n = 481) (Zhang et al., Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int, 2025, 24(2), 157–163); after exclusion, I2 decreased to 0.0%, HR = 0.215.ConclusionThe pCR and MPR after perioperative immunotherapy are strongly associated with improved RFS in HCC, corresponding to approximately 66% and 70% reductions in recurrence risk, respectively. These findings support pCR/MPR as promising surrogate endpoints, although prospective randomized validation remains necessary.
Related
- Adjuvant and Perioperative Systemic Therapy for Resectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Evidence, Biological Rationale, and Trial Design
- Preoperative Zinc Deficiency as a Novel Prognostic Predictor for Postoperative Recurrence in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- Protocol for an immunocompetent KPC mouse model of pancreatic cancer resection and recurrence for perioperative treatment studies.
- Peri-interventional neutrophil extracellular traps and immune surveillance in hepatocellular carcinoma: mechanisms, biomarkers, and recurrence after liver resection or thermal ablation
- Microvascular invasion-associated serum glutaminolysis index and recurrence risk after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma
BibTeX
@article{ai2026pathological,
title = {{Pathological complete response and major pathological response as surrogate endpoints for recurrence-free survival in perioperative immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis}},
author = {Xin Ai and Xiaoxiao Wang and Xin Wang and Haiying Zhang and Feng Liu and Huiying Rao and Yannan Liu},
journal = {Frontiers in Pharmacology},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.3389/fphar.2026.2000218},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2026.2000218},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Pathological complete response and major pathological response as surrogate endpoints for recurrence-free survival in perioperative immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Xin Ai
AU - Xiaoxiao Wang
AU - Xin Wang
AU - Haiying Zhang
AU - Feng Liu
AU - Huiying Rao
AU - Yannan Liu
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/03
JO - Frontiers in Pharmacology
DO - 10.3389/fphar.2026.2000218
UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2026.2000218
AB - BackgroundHigh post-resection recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) limits long-term survival. Perioperative immunotherapy, including neoadjuvant therapy for resectable HCC and conversion therapy for unresectable HCC, has become a research hotspot. Whether pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR) can serve as surrogate endpoints for recurrence-free survival (RFS) remains unclear, with important implications for accelerating trial design.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the correlation between pCR/MPR and RFS following HCC perioperative immunotherapy, quantitatively synthesize hazard ratios (HRs) of pCR/MPR versus non-pCR/non-MPR for RFS (and overall survival, OS) across studies, and assess their reliability as surrogate endpoints.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Data databases (from inception to June 2026), supplemented by manual searching and citation tracking. The DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model was used to pool effect sizes. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistic and Q test. Sensitivity analysis was performed using leave-one-out method. Subgroup analyses were conducted by treatment stage (neoadjuvant vs. conversion), treatment regimen (ICI mono/dual vs. ICI + TKI vs. triple therapy), study design (prospective vs. retrospective), and MPR definition (≥70% vs. ≥ 90% necrosis). Publication bias was evaluated using Egger’s regression test.ResultsThe systematic review included 21 studies for descriptive analysis. The meta-analysis included 10 studies reporting HR values: 5 pCR studies (n = 720) and 6 MPR studies (n = 785), one of which (NeoHCC, D’Alessio 2024) (D'Alessio et al., Lancet Oncol, 2024, 25(12), 1465–1475) encompassed both. The pCR vs. non-pCR → RFS/DFS: Pooled HR = 0.342 (95% CI: 0.248–0.472), p < 0.000001, heterogeneity I2 = 0.0%. In sensitivity analysis, pooled HR remained stable at 0.244–0.354. MPR vs. non-MPR → RFS/PFS: Pooled HR = 0.291 (95% CI: 0.155–0.548), p = 0.000132, I2 = 66.6%. Heterogeneity was primarily driven by one study containing non-immunotherapy cohorts (Zhang 2024, n = 481) (Zhang et al., Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int, 2025, 24(2), 157–163); after exclusion, I2 decreased to 0.0%, HR = 0.215.ConclusionThe pCR and MPR after perioperative immunotherapy are strongly associated with improved RFS in HCC, corresponding to approximately 66% and 70% reductions in recurrence risk, respectively. These findings support pCR/MPR as promising surrogate endpoints, although prospective randomized validation remains necessary.
SN - 1663-9812
ER -