OnCo

Sign in to keep your watchlist

Your watched pages live in this browser. Sign in with an email link and OnCo keeps the same list on every device you use. Only your email address and your watchlist are stored.

Intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma: the decisions you may face

4 treatment settings, 4 with more than one named option. Each section lays out the options the standard of care names, what each is for, the trials behind them with their recorded results, the side effects and cautions on record, and questions to ask. Built from the cancer page's standard-of-care rows; nothing here is advice for your case.

Other settings

Well-defined nodules, preserved liver function

2 options

Transarterial chemoembolisation, conventional or with drug-eluting beads, repeated on demand; radioembolisation as an alternative.

The options, in plain words

A catheter threaded into the artery feeding a liver tumour delivers chemotherapy and then blocks the vessel, starving the tumour from inside.

  • Liver-directed with limited systemic toxicity
  • Decades of evidence and universal availability
  • Bridges patients to transplant

Millions of tiny radioactive glass or resin beads are injected into the liver artery, lodging in the tumour and irradiating it from within.

  • Outpatient, single session
  • Effective in portal vein thrombosis where TACE is contraindicated
  • Radiation segmentectomy can be curative for small tumours
The evidence behind it

No trial record is attached to this row yet. The trials tab lists what is recruiting and the landmark trials for this cancer.

The main trade-offs on record
  • Post-embolisation syndrome; hepatic decompensation in poor liver function
  • Rarely curative; repeat sessions
  • OS benefit of combinations with systemic therapy not yet shown
  • Radioembolisation-induced liver disease
  • Failed to beat sorafenib on OS in advanced disease
  • Lung shunting excludes some patients
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) and Radioembolisation (TARE / SIRT, yttrium-90), which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  4. For my situation (well-defined nodules, preserved liver function), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Transarterial chemoembolisation, conventional or with drug-eluting beads, repeated on demand; radioembolisation as an alternative.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Other settings

TACE plus systemic therapy

Durvalumab with bevacizumab (EMERALD-1) or lenvatinib with pembrolizumab (LEAP-012) added to TACE, where approved; durvalumab-tremelimumab with TACE after EMERALD-3.

The options, in plain words

A PD-L1 blocker that became standard after chemoradiation for stage III lung cancer, and now in bladder, biliary, and gastric cancers.

Bevacizumab is a humanised antibody that soaks up VEGF-A, the signal tumours use to grow new blood vessels. Approved in 2004, it partners chemotherapy in colorectal, ovarian, cervical, lung, kidney and liver cancer and glioblastoma, and adds to trifluridine/tipiracil in late-line bowel cancer; hypertension, protein in the urine and bleeding are its characteristic side effects.

An oral anti-angiogenic pill that matched sorafenib in liver cancer with higher response rates, and partners with pembrolizumab in kidney and endometrial cancer.

Pembrolizumab is a PD-1 blocking antibody approved in more than 40 settings, from melanoma and lung cancer to the first tumour-agnostic approval for mismatch-repair-deficient tumours in 2017, and before and after surgery in triple-negative breast cancer. A subcutaneous form arrived in 2025, and it is the backbone partner for ADCs and personalised neoantigen vaccines.

Tremelimumab is AstraZeneca's CTLA-4 antibody, given as a single priming dose with durvalumab and chemotherapy in lung and liver cancer.

The evidence behind it
The main trade-offs on record
Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Pneumonitis (any cause, PACIFIC) · vs 12.8% placebo; 1.1% fatal18.3%-

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

  • Known QT prolongation. Avoid other QT-prolonging drugs where possible; check ECG and correct potassium and magnesium before and during treatment.
  • Reduce to 14 mg (thyroid) or 10 mg (RCC) in severe impairment.
  • Reduce in severe renal impairment.
Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Hypothyroidism (immune-mediated) · Pooled monotherapy data, >2,800 patients8%-
Pneumonitis (immune-mediated) · Pooled monotherapy data, >2,800 patients3.4%-
Colitis (immune-mediated) · Pooled monotherapy data, >2,800 patients1.7%-
Hepatitis (immune-mediated) · Pooled monotherapy data, >2,800 patients0.7%-
  • No pharmacokinetic interactions expected (antibody). See the irAE guide for toxicity management.

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Durvalumab, Bevacizumab, Lenvatinib and the other options, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. How closely do I match the people in EMERALD-1 and LEAP-012, and does that change what the results mean for me?
    Why: Trial populations are selected; age, fitness, prior treatment and biomarkers all affect how far results carry.
  4. Which side effects of Durvalumab or Pembrolizumab are most likely for me, which are reversible, and which would make us stop?
    Why: The recorded rates below come from labels and trials; your own risk depends on dose, other medicines and your health.
  5. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  6. For my situation (tace plus systemic therapy), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Durvalumab with bevacizumab (EMERALD-1) or lenvatinib with pembrolizumab (LEAP-012) added to TACE, where approved; durvalumab-tremelimumab with TACE after EMERALD-3.
  7. Am I a candidate for Durvalumab, Bevacizumab, Lenvatinib or related drugs, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.
  8. How do the results of EMERALD-1 and LEAP-012 apply to someone like me?
    Why: Trial populations differ from individual patients; ask how closely you match.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Other settings

High burden or diffuse disease

Systemic therapy as for advanced disease (atezolizumab-bevacizumab or durvalumab-tremelimumab) instead of embolisation.

The options, in plain words

A PD-L1 blocker used in lung, liver, and bladder cancer. In 2026 it became the first drug approved based on a blood test showing leftover cancer after bladder surgery.

Bevacizumab is a humanised antibody that soaks up VEGF-A, the signal tumours use to grow new blood vessels. Approved in 2004, it partners chemotherapy in colorectal, ovarian, cervical, lung, kidney and liver cancer and glioblastoma, and adds to trifluridine/tipiracil in late-line bowel cancer; hypertension, protein in the urine and bleeding are its characteristic side effects.

A PD-L1 blocker that became standard after chemoradiation for stage III lung cancer, and now in bladder, biliary, and gastric cancers.

Tremelimumab is AstraZeneca's CTLA-4 antibody, given as a single priming dose with durvalumab and chemotherapy in lung and liver cancer.

The evidence behind it
  • First-line unresectable HCC: atezolizumab + bevacizumab vs sorafenib

    OS 19.2 vs 13.4 months, HR 0.66.

    Overall survival (updated) (months): Atezolizumab + bevacizumab 19.2 (n=336) vs Sorafenib 13.4 (n=165) · HR 0.66 · source
  • First-line unresectable HCC: STRIDE (single priming dose tremelimumab + durvalumab) vs sorafenib
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • OS HR 0.78; 5-year OS 19.6% vs 9.4%.
    Overall survival (months): STRIDE 16.4 (n=393) vs Sorafenib 13.8 (n=389) · HR 0.78 · source
The main trade-offs on record
Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Pneumonitis (immune-mediated) · Monotherapy pooled3%0.8%
Hepatitis (immune-mediated) · Monotherapy pooled1.8%0.7%
Colitis (immune-mediated) · Monotherapy pooled1%0.5%
Hypothyroidism (immune-mediated) · Monotherapy pooled4.9%0.2%

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Pneumonitis (any cause, PACIFIC) · vs 12.8% placebo; 1.1% fatal18.3%-

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Atezolizumab, Bevacizumab, Durvalumab and the other options, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. How closely do I match the people in IMbrave150 and HIMALAYA, and does that change what the results mean for me?
    Why: Trial populations are selected; age, fitness, prior treatment and biomarkers all affect how far results carry.
  4. Which side effects of Atezolizumab or Durvalumab are most likely for me, which are reversible, and which would make us stop?
    Why: The recorded rates below come from labels and trials; your own risk depends on dose, other medicines and your health.
  5. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  6. For my situation (high burden or diffuse disease), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Systemic therapy as for advanced disease (atezolizumab-bevacizumab or durvalumab-tremelimumab) instead of embolisation.
  7. Am I a candidate for Atezolizumab, Bevacizumab, Durvalumab or related drugs, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.
  8. How do the results of IMbrave150 and HIMALAYA apply to someone like me?
    Why: Trial populations differ from individual patients; ask how closely you match.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Screening, prevention and diagnosis

Within transplant criteria after downstaging

2 options

Chemoembolisation or radioembolisation as a bridge, then liver transplantation.

The options, in plain words

Replacing the whole diseased liver cures both the cancer and the cirrhosis underneath it, for patients whose tumours are small enough.

  • Only therapy that treats cancer and cirrhosis together
  • Best long-term survival for early HCC

A catheter threaded into the artery feeding a liver tumour delivers chemotherapy and then blocks the vessel, starving the tumour from inside.

  • Liver-directed with limited systemic toxicity
  • Decades of evidence and universal availability
  • Bridges patients to transplant
Also referenced:Bridging therapy
The evidence behind it

No trial record is attached to this row yet. The trials tab lists what is recruiting and the landmark trials for this cancer.

The main trade-offs on record
  • Organ shortage and waiting-list dropout
  • Lifelong immunosuppression; checkpoint inhibitors before transplant risk rejection
  • Post-embolisation syndrome; hepatic decompensation in poor liver function
  • Rarely curative; repeat sessions
  • OS benefit of combinations with systemic therapy not yet shown
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Liver transplantation for cancer (Milan criteria and beyond) and Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE), which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  4. For my situation (within transplant criteria after downstaging), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Chemoembolisation or radioembolisation as a bridge, then liver transplantation.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

How to read this page. Options and results come from OnCo records with their sources; the settings are the standard-of-care rows on the cancer page, and the lines of therapy are on the sequencing grid. Where a setting names one path, the choice is usually about timing, trials and where to be treated: see expert centres. OnCo is orientation, not medical advice.