Improved surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma with a primary care-oriented clinical reminder

Is hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in high-risk populations effective?

Several professional societies recommend hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance in high-risk patients including patients with cirrhosis from any etiology and subsets of noncirrhotic chronic hepatitis B virus infection. The efficacy of HCC surveillance to increase early detection and improve survival has been demonstrated in a large randomized controlled trial among hepatitis B virus patients and several cohort studies among those with cirrhosis. However, the effectiveness on HCC surveillance, when applied in clinical practice, is lower due to low utilization of HCC surveillance among at-risk patients, poorer test performance given operator dependency and differences in patient characteristics, and downstream process failures such as treatment delays. Interventions to increase surveillance utilization and improve surveillance test performance should improve surveillance effectiveness in the future.

Screening for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in HIV-Infected Patients: Current Evidence and Controversies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to summarize evidence regarding hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening in the specific context of HIV infection and discuss areas of uncertainty.

RECENT FINDINGS

It has not been definitely established if HCC incidence in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with cirrhosis is above the 1.5%/year threshold that makes screening cost-effective. Outside cirrhosis or HBV infection, available data do not support surveillance. The performance of currently recommended ultrasound (US) screening strategy is poor in HIV-infected patients, as rates of early-stage HCC detection are low. Magnetic resonance imaging-based surveillance strategies or liquid biopsy are innovative approaches that should be specifically tested in this setting. HIV-infected patients with cirrhosis are at risk of HCC. US surveillance identifies patients with early-stage HCC who will benefit of curative therapies, although the quality of the evidence supporting screening remains limited. The HIV population should be a priority group to assess and validate new surveillance strategies.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance in a Cohort of Chronic Hepatitis C Virus-Infected Patients with Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Six-monthly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening in cirrhotic patients has been recommended since 2011. HCC prognosis is associated with diagnosis at an early stage. We examined the prevalence and correlates of 6-monthly HCC surveillance in a cohort of HCV-infected cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the medical records of patients receiving care from four hospitals between January 2011 and December 2016. Frequencies and logistic regression were conducted.

RESULTS

Of 2,933 HCV-infected cirrhotic patients, most were ≥ 60 years old (68.5%), male (62.2%), White (65.8%), and had compensated cirrhosis (74.2%). The median follow-up period was 3.5 years. Among these patients, 10.9% were consistently screened 6 monthly and 21.4% were never screened. Patients with a longer history of cirrhosis (AOR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.80-0.93) were less likely to be screened 6 monthly while decompensated cirrhotic patients (AOR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.06-1.81) and cirrhotic patients between 18 and 44 years (AOR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.07-3.74) were more likely to be screened 6 monthly compared to compensated cirrhotic patients and patients 60 years and older respectively. There were no significant differences by race, gender, or insurance type.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of consistent HCC surveillance remains low despite formalized recommendations. One in five patients was never surveilled. Patients with a longer history of cirrhosis were less likely to be surveilled consistently despite their greater HCC risk. Improving providers' knowledge about current HCC surveillance guidelines, educating patients about the benefits of consistent HCC surveillance, and systemic interventions like clinical reminders and standing HCC surveillance protocols can improve guideline-concordant surveillance in clinical practice.

A Telephone and Mail Outreach Program Successfully Increases Uptake of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer‐related death worldwide. Society guidelines recommend surveillance with abdominal ultrasound with or without serum alpha‐fetoprotein every 6 months for adults at increased risk of developing HCC. However, adherence is often suboptimal. We assessed the feasibility of a coordinated telephone outreach program for unscreened patients with cirrhosis within the Veteran’s Affairs (VA) health care system. Using a patient care dashboard of advanced chronic liver disease in the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, we identified veterans with a diagnosis of cirrhosis, a platelet count ≤ 150,000/uL, and no documented HCC surveillance in the previous 8 months. Eligible veterans received a telephone call from a patient navigator to describe the risks and benefits of HCC surveillance. Orders for an abdominal ultrasound and alpha‐fetoprotein were placed for veterans who agreed to surveillance. Veterans who were not reached by telephone received an informational letter by mail to encourage participation. Of the 129 veterans who met the eligibility criteria, most were male (96.9%). The most common etiology for cirrhosis was hepatitis C (64.3%), and most of the patients had compensated cirrhosis (68.2%). The patient navigators reached 32.5% of patients by phone. Patients in each group were similar across clinical and demographic characteristics. Patients who were called were more likely to undergo surveillance (adjusted odds ratio = 2.56, 95% confidence interval: 1.03‐6.33). Most of the patients (72.1%) completed abdominal imaging when reached by phone. Conclusion: Targeted outreach increased uptake of HCC surveillance among patients with cirrhosis in a large, integrated, VA health care system.

A Quality Improvement Initiative Results in Improved Rates of Timely Postvariceal Bleeding Surveillance Endoscopy

OBJECTIVES

We performed a study to assess the effects of a quality improvement (QI) initiative on the rates of postvariceal bleeding surveillance upper endoscopy (EGD).

METHODS

We identified patients with cirrhosis hospitalized with variceal bleeding and assessed the rates of timely (≤4 weeks) EGD before and after a QI initiative.

RESULTS

Preintervention: 16% (5 of 32) of patients underwent timely surveillance EGD. We developed a standardized ordering template for gastroenterology fellows and reserved postvariceal EGD scheduling slots. Postintervention: 43% (12 of 28) of patients underwent timely surveillance EGD.

DISCUSSION

A QI intervention was associated with a 27% absolute increase in timely surveillance EGDs.

Only one-third of hepatocellular carcinoma cases are diagnosed via screening or surveillance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTS

Early hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis is associated with better long-term survival. Studies of at-risk patients who are monitored in routine practice have reported an overall adherence rate to hepatocellular carcinoma screening/surveillance of approximately 60% and suboptimal diagnostic efficacy of the current screening/surveillance tools. However, it is unclear how many hepatocellular carcinoma patients were actually diagnosed via screening/surveillance given these obstacles. Therefore, via a systematic review of PubMed and Scopus databases from 2000 to 2019, we aimed to identify the proportion of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed via screening/surveillance in routine practice.

METHODS

We included original research articles of studies of patients already diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma that reported the proportion of hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed via screening/surveillance.

RESULTS

The study included 60 studies and 50 554 hepatocellular carcinoma cases. The pooled proportion of hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed by screening/surveillance was 37% (95% confidence interval: 31%-44%) and differed by geographic region (North America/Asia/Europe/Oceania/Africa/South America, 31%/42%/41%/30%/29%/47%, P = 0.017, respectively) and by surveillance interval (<12 months 39% vs. 12 months 19%, P < 0.01) but not by disease etiology, cirrhosis status, clinical setting, practice setting, hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis period, or surveillance method.

CONCLUSION

Globally, hepatocellular carcinoma was diagnosed via screening/surveillance in less than half of the patients (37%) regardless of healthcare setting or liver disease etiology and without improvement over time despite several recent guideline updates. Research is needed to understand the barriers to screening/surveillance to include medical as well as social and cultural influences.

Disparities in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: Dissecting the Roles of Patient, Provider, and Health System Factors

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide and remains one of the most rapidly rising cancers among the US adults. While overall HCC survival is poor, early diagnosis via timely and consistent implementation of routine HCC surveillance among at-risk individuals leads to earlier tumor stage at diagnosis, which is directly correlated with improved options for potentially curative therapies, translating into improved overall survival. Despite this well-established understanding of the benefits of HCC surveillance, surveillance among cirrhosis patients remains suboptimal in a variety of practice settings. While the exact reasons underlying the unacceptably low rates of routine HCC surveillance are complex, it likely reflects multifactorial contributions at the patient, provider, and health care system levels. Furthermore, these multilevel challenges affect ethnic minorities disproportionately, which is particularly concerning given that ethnic minorities already experience existing barriers in timely access to consistent medical care, and these populations are disproportionately affected by HCC burden in the United States. In this review, we provide an updated evaluation of the existing literature on rates of HCC surveillance in the United States. We specifically highlight the existing literature on the impact of patient-specific, provider-specific, and health care system-specific factors in contributing to challenges in effective implementation of HCC surveillance.

Epidemiology and surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma: New trends

The burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is highest in East Asia and Africa, although its incidence and mortality are rapidly rising in the United States and Europe. With the implementation of hepatitis B vaccination and hepatitis C treatment programmes worldwide, the epidemiology of HCC is shifting away from a disease predominated by viral hepatitis - an increasing proportion of cases are now attributable to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. Surveillance using ultrasound, with or without alpha-fetoprotein, every 6 months has been associated with improved early detection and improved overall survival; however, limitations in implementation lead to a high proportion of HCC being detected at late stages in clinical practice. Herein, we review the current state of HCC surveillance and highlight areas for future research, including improved risk stratification of at-risk patients, surveillance tools with higher sensitivity and specificity for early HCC, and interventions to increase surveillance utilisation.

Attitudes towards digital health tools for outpatient cirrhosis management in patients with decompensated cirrhosis

Background

Technology represents a promising tool to improve healthcare delivery for patients with cirrhosis. We sought to assess utilisation of technology and preferred features of a digital health management tool, in patients with an early readmission for decompensated cirrhosis.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients readmitted within 90 days for decompensated cirrhosis. A semistructured interview obtained quantitative and qualitative data through open-ended questions.

Results

Of the 50 participants, mean age was 57.6 years and mean (range) model for end stage liver disease was 22.7 (10–46). Thirty-eight (76%) patients own a Smartphone and 62% have regular access to a computer with internet. Thirty-nine (78%) patients would consider using a Smartphone application to manage their cirrhosis. Forty-six (92%) patients report having a principal caregiver, of which 80% own a Smartphone. Patients were interested in a Smartphone application that could communicate with their physician (85%), send medication notifications to the patient (65%) and caregiver (64%), transmit diagnostic results and appointment reminders (82%), educate about liver disease (79%), regularly transmit weight data to the doctor (85% with ascites) and play a game to detect cognitive decline (67% with encephalopathy). Common themes from qualitative data include a desire to learn about liver disease and communicate with providers via digital tools.

Conclusion

Among patients with cirrhosis with an early readmission for decompensation, most have Smartphones and would be willing to use a Smartphone to manage their disease. Future digital health management tools should be tailored to the use patterns and preferences of the patients with cirrhosis and their caregivers.

Effect of travel distance and rurality of residence on initial surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma in VA primary care patient with cirrhosis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relationship between travel distance and surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma among veterans with cirrhosis.

DATA SOURCES

Veterans Health Administration (VHA) inpatient and outpatient administrative data were linked to geocoded enrollee files. CMS-VHA merged data were used to assess receipt of Medicare-financed non-VA imaging.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort of US veterans diagnosed with cirrhosis between 2009 and 2015 was examined. First available abdominal imaging following the diagnosis of cirrhosis was analyzed separately as a function of travel distance to the nearest VA medical center (VAMC) and to the patient's assigned VA primary care provider. Veterans with dual use of Medicare and VA services were also examined for receipt of imaging outside of the VA.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Veterans who resided more than 30 miles from the nearest VAMC were less likely to receive any imaging for HCC surveillance. Among dual users, increased travel distance between the patient's residence and nearest VAMC was associated with an increased likelihood of receiving any abdominal imaging at non-VA facilities.

CONCLUSION

Increased travel distance to the nearest VA medical center reduces the likelihood of receiving imaging for HCC surveillance in cirrhotic veterans. Future efforts should focus on reducing geographic barriers to HCC surveillance.

A Practical Guideline for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening in Patients at Risk

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) arises in the context of cirrhosis and chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections, and the diagnosis is often made at advanced stages. Because early-stage diagnosis improves survival, guidelines recommend screening patients at risk for HCC, such as patients with cirrhosis. However, adherence to screening programs is suboptimal. In this review, we discuss the value of HCC screening and provide practical guidance on patient selection and screening methods. International guidelines concordantly recommend HCC screening in patients with cirrhosis, including patients with HBV infections, hepatitis C virus infections with or without sustained virologic response, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. There is no consensus on screening patients without cirrhosis, although patients with advanced fibrosis, HBV infections, or nonalcoholic fatty liver disease without cirrhosis have an increased risk for development of HCC. Screening for HCC improves early tumor detection, receipt of curative treatment, and overall survival in at-risk patients. However, potential harms of HCC screening have not been well quantified. Semiannual abdominal ultrasonography is the screening modality of choice. Using ultrasonography in combination with biomarkers, such as α-fetoprotein, may increase accuracy for early HCC detection. The use of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography is limited by cost-effectiveness and practical considerations. Increased awareness of HCC screening will allow for earlier diagnosis and potentially curative treatment. We propose a comprehensive screening algorithm for patients at risk for development of HCC, recommending lifelong, semiannual ultrasonography combined with α-fetoprotein testing in patients with cirrhosis and selected patients without cirrhosis.

Setting ambitious targets for surveillance and treatment rates among patients with hepatitis C related cirrhosis impacts the cost-effectiveness of hepatocellular cancer surveillance and substantially increases life expectancy: A modeling study

BACKGROUND

Hepatocelluar cancer (HCC) is the leading cause of death among people with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related cirrhosis. Our aim was to determine the optimal surveillance frequency for patients with HCV-related compensated cirrhosis.

METHODS

We developed a decision analytic Markov model and validated it against data from the Veterans Outcomes and Costs Associated with Liver Disease (VOCAL) study group and published epidemiologic studies. Four strategies of different surveillance intervals were compared: no surveillance and ultrasound surveillance every 12, 6, and 3 months. We estimated lifetime survival, life expectancy, quality adjusted life years (QALY), total costs associated with each strategy, and incremental cost effectiveness ratios. We applied a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000. Analysis was conducted for two scenarios: a scenario reflecting current HCV and HCC surveillance compliance rates and treatment use and an aspirational scenario.

RESULTS

In the current scenario the preferred strategy was 3-month surveillance with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $7,159/QALY. In the aspirational scenario, 6-month surveillance was preferred with an ICER of $82,807/QALY because treating more people with HCV led to a lower incidence of HCC. Sensitivity analyses suggested that surveillance every 12 months would suffice in the particular circumstance when patients are very likely to return regularly for testing and when appropriate HCV and HCC treatment is readily available. Compared with the current scenario, the aspirational scenario resulted in a 1.87 year gain in life expectancy for the cohort because of large reductions in decompensated cirrhosis and HCC incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

HCC surveillance has good value for money for patients with HCV-related compensated cirrhosis. Investments to improve adherence to surveillance should be made when rates are suboptimal. Surveillance every 12 months will suffice when patients are very likely to return regularly for testing and when appropriate HCV and HCC treatment is readily available.

Status of, and strategies for improving, adherence to HCC screening and surveillance

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents the second leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide and the main cause of death in patients with cirrhosis. Secondary prevention of HCC can be accomplished through the serial application of screening tests (ultrasound with or without alpha-fetoprotein) to detect the presence of subclinical lesions amenable to potentially curative treatment, such as surgery and ablation. The efficacy of HCC screening is accepted by hepatologists in terms of decline in cancer-specific mortality, but its translation into clinical practice is less than ideal. The effectiveness of HCC screening is hampered by several factors: failure to identify at-risk patients, failure to access care and failure to detect HCC. For each of these steps, possible improvements are discussed in order to face the changing etiology of cirrhosis and expand the screening of at-risk populations by including selected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease patients.

Surveillance for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Best Practice and Future Direction

Hepatocellular cancer (HCC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide and the fastest growing cause of cancer deaths in the United States. The overall prognosis of HCC remains dismal, except for the subset of patients who are diagnosed at early stage and receive potentially curative therapies, such as surgical resection and liver transplantation. Given this, expert society guidelines recommend HCC surveillance every 6 months in at-risk individuals. Despite these recommendations, the effectiveness of HCC surveillance remains a subject of debate. We discuss current best practices for HCC surveillance and the evidence that support these recommendations. We also describe several initiatives that are underway to improve HCC surveillance and outline areas that may serve as high-yield targets for future research. Overall, we believe these efforts will help the field move toward precision surveillance, where surveillance tests and intervals are tailored to individual HCC risk. Doing so can maximize surveillance benefits, minimize surveillance harms, and optimize overall value for all patients.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Imaging for Surveillance and Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to compare imaging-based surveillance and diagnostic strategies in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) while taking into account technically inadequate examinations and patient compliance. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A Markov model simulated seven strategies for HCC surveillance and diagnosis in patients with cirrhosis: strategy A, ultrasound (US) for surveillance and CT for diagnosis; strategy B, US for surveillance and complete MRI for diagnosis; strategy C, US for surveillance and CT for inadequate or positive surveillance; strategy D, US for surveillance and complete MRI for inadequate or positive surveillance; strategy E, surveillance and diagnosis with CT followed by complete MRI for inadequate surveillance; strategy F, surveillance and diagnosis with complete MRI followed by CT for inadequate surveillance; and strategy G, surveillance with abbreviated MRI followed by CT for inadequate surveillance or complete MRI for positive surveillance. Two compliance scenarios were evaluated: optimal and conservative. For each scenario, the most cost-effective strategy was based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 (Canadian) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS. Base-case analysis revealed that strategy E was the most cost-effective when compliance was optimal ($13,631/QALY), and strategy G was the most cost-effective when compliance was conservative ($39,681/QALY). Sensitivity analyses supported the base-case analysis in the optimal compliance scenario, but several parameters altered the most cost-effective strategy in the conservative compliance scenario. CONCLUSION. In an optimal compliance scenario, CT for HCC surveillance and diagnosis and complete MRI for inadequate CT was most cost-effective. In a conservative compliance scenario, abbreviated MRI may be an alternative to US-based surveillance.

Hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in the 21st century: Saving lives or causing harm?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most common cause of cancer related death worldwide. Prognosis and treatment options largely depend on tumor stage at diagnosis, with curative treatments only available if detected at an early stage. However, two thirds of patients with HCC are diagnosed at a late stage and not eligible for cure. Therefore several liver professional societies recommend HCC surveillance using abdominal ultrasound with or without alpha fetoprotein in at-risk populations, including patients with cirrhosis and subsets of those with chronic hepatitis B. Available data suggest HCC surveillance can significantly improve early tumor detection, curative treatment eligibility, and overall survival. However, the potential benefits of HCC surveillance must be considered in light a shifting HCC demographic from a viral-mediated cancer to an increasing proportion of patients having non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, which has been shown to limit ultrasound sensitivity and may mitigate observed benefits. Further, benefits of HCC surveillance must be weighed against potential physical, financial and psychological harms. Continued data for both benefits and harms of HCC surveillance in contemporary populations are necessary. In the interim, providers should continue to strive for high quality HCC surveillance in at-risk patients.

Primary Care Provider Practice Patterns and Barriers to Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Low rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance are primarily due to provider-related process failures. However, few studies have evaluated primary care provider (PCP) practice patterns, attitudes, and barriers to HCC surveillance at academic tertiary care referral centers.

METHODS

We conducted a web-based survey of PCPs at 2 tertiary care referral centers (133 providers) from June 2017 through December 2017. The survey was adapted from pretested surveys and included questions about practice patterns, attitudes, and barriers to HCC surveillance. We used the Fisher exact and Mann-Whitney rank-sum tests to identify factors associated with adherence to HCC surveillance recommendations, for categoric and continuous variables, respectively.

RESULTS

We obtained a provider-level response rate of 75% and clinic-level response rate of 100% (133 providers). Whereas most PCPs performed HCC surveillance themselves, one-third deferred surveillance to subspecialists and referred patients to a hepatology clinic. Providers believed the combination of ultrasound and α-fetoprotein analysis to be highly effective for early stage tumor detection and reported using the combination for assessment of most patients. However, PCPs were more likely to use computed tomography- or magnetic resonance imaging-based surveillance for patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis or decompensated cirrhosis. Most providers believed HCC surveillance to be efficacious for early tumor detection and increasing survival. However, they desired increased high-quality evidence to characterize screening benefits and harms. Providers expressed notable misconceptions about HCC surveillance, including the role for measurement of liver enzyme levels in HCC surveillance and cost effectiveness of surveillance in patients without cirrhosis. They also reported barriers, including not being up to date on HCC surveillance recommendations, limited time in the clinic, and competing clinical concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

In a web-based survey, PCPs reported misconceptions and barriers to HCC surveillance. This indicates the need for interventions, including provider education, to improve HCC surveillance effectiveness in clinical practice.

Mailed Outreach Invitations Significantly Improve HCC Surveillance Rates in Patients With Cirrhosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance is associated with early tumor detection and improved survival in patients with cirrhosis; however, effectiveness is limited by underuse. We compared the effectiveness of mailed outreach and patient navigation strategies to increase HCC surveillance in a racially diverse cohort of patients with cirrhosis. We conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial comparing mailed outreach for screening ultrasound (n = 600), mailed outreach plus patient navigation (n = 600), or usual care with visit-based screening (n = 600) among 1800 patients with cirrhosis at a large safety-net health system from December 2014 to March 2017. Patients who did not respond to outreach invitations within 2 weeks received reminder telephone calls. Patient navigation included an assessment of barriers to surveillance and encouragement of surveillance participation. The primary outcome was HCC surveillance (abdominal imaging every 6 months) over an 18-month period. All 1800 patients were included in intention-to-screen analyses. HCC surveillance was performed in 23.3% of outreach/navigation patients, 17.8% of outreach-alone patients, and 7.3% of usual care patients. HCC surveillance was 16.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.0%-20.0%) and 10.5% (95% CI: 6.8%-14.2%) higher in outreach groups than usual care (P < 0.001 for both) and 5.5% (95% CI: 0.9%-10.1%) higher for outreach/navigation than outreach alone (P = 0.02). Both interventions increased HCC surveillance across predefined patient subgroups. The proportion of HCC patients detected at an early stage did not differ between groups; however, a higher proportion of patients with screen-detected HCC across groups had early-stage tumors than those with HCC detected incidentally or symptomatically (83.3% versus 30.8%, P = 0.003). Conclusion: Mailed outreach invitations and navigation significantly increased HCC surveillance versus usual care in patients with cirrhosis.

Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Tumor Stage at Diagnosis in the 1945-1965 Birth Cohort Reflects Poor Use of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening

Individuals from the 1945-1965 birth cohort account for the majority of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases in the United States. Understanding trends in HCC among this birth cohort is vital given the increasing burden of chronic liver disease among this group. We retrospectively evaluated trends and disparities in HCC tumor stage at the time of diagnosis among the 1945-1965 birth cohort in the United States using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry. Tumor stage at the time of HCC diagnosis was assessed using Milan criteria and SEER HCC staging systems. Among 38,045 patients with HCC within the 1945-1965 birth cohort (81.6% male, 50.1% non-Hispanic white, 16.2% African American, 12.6% Asian, 19.8% Hispanic), 66.2% had Medicare or commercial insurance, 27.2% had Medicaid, and 6.6% were uninsured. During the period 2004-2006 to 2013-2014, the number of patients with HCC from the 1945-1965 birth cohort increased by 58.7% (5.9% increase per year). While the proportion of patients with HCC within the Milan criteria increased with time (36.4% in 2003-2006 to 46.3% in 2013-2014; P < 0.01), less than half were within the Milan criteria. On multivariate analysis within the Milan criteria, men were 12% less likely to have HCC compared to women, and African Americans were 27% less likely to have HCC compared to non-Hispanic whites (odds ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.78; P < 0.01). Conclusion: From 2004 to 2014, the burden of newly diagnosed HCC among the 1945-1965 birth cohort increased by 5.9% per year. While improvements in earlier staged HCC at diagnosis were observed, the majority of patients with HCC among the 1945-1965 birth cohort were beyond the Milan criteria at diagnosis; this may reflect poor utilization or suboptimal performance of HCC screening tests.

Utilisation of hepatocellular carcinoma screening in Australians at risk of hepatitis B virus-related carcinoma and prescribed anti-viral therapy

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To investigate hepatocellular carcinoma screening utilisation and factors associated with utilisation among patients prescribed hepatitis B virus anti-viral therapy and at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma has increased in Australia over the past three decades with chronic hepatitis B virus infection a major contributor. hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance programs aim to detect cancers early enabling curative treatment options, longer survival and longer times to recurrence.

DESIGN

Multi-site cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

An online study questionnaire was administered to eligible participants attending three Sydney tertiary hospitals. Data were grouped into six mutually exclusive hepatocellular carcinoma risk factor categories as per American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines. All analyses were undertaken in STATA. Logistic regression was used to assess the associations between covariates and screening utilisation. Multivariate models described were assessed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit.

RESULTS

Of the 177 participants, 137 (77.4%) self-reported that US had been performed in the last six months. Awareness that screening should be performed and knowing the correct frequency of US screening were independently associated with screening utilisation. Participants who knew that screening should be undertaken were three times more likely to have had pretreatment education or were prescribed hepatitis B virus anti-viral treatment for >4 years. Participants reporting a family history of hepatocellular carcinoma were less likely to know that screening should be undertaken every 6 months.

CONCLUSION

While utilisation of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance programs was higher in this study than in previous reports, strategies to further improve surveillance remain necessary.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Findings from this research form the basis for proposing strategies to improve utilisation of hepatocellular carcinoma screening, inform hepatitis B virus-related clinical practice and for the delivery of care and nursing education to people receiving hepatitis B virus anti-viral therapy and at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma.

Poor adherence to hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance: A systematic review and meta-analysis of a complex issue

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance is associated with improved outcomes and long-term survival. Our goal is to evaluate adherence rates to HCC surveillance.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the PubMed and Scopus databases and abstract search of relevant studies from recent major liver meetings. All searches and data extraction were performed independently by two authors. Analysis was via random-effects models and multivariate meta-regression.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies (n = 19 511) met inclusion criteria (original non-interventional studies with defined cirrhosis or chronic hepatitis B or chronic hepatitis C with advanced fibrosis populations, and surveillance tests and intervals). Overall adherence rate was 52% (95% CI 38%-66%). Adherence was significantly higher in cirrhotic patients compared to chronic hepatitis B and other high-risk patients, in European compared to North American studies, in less than 12-month compared to yearly surveillance intervals, and in prospective compared to retrospective studies (71%, 95% CI 64%-78% vs 39%, 95% CI 26%-51%, P < .001). The between-study heterogeneity of all above analyses was significant (P < .001). Only the study design (retrospective vs prospective cohort) had statistical significance in a multivariate meta-regression model (P < .05) and could account for some of the differences above.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall adherence rate to HCC surveillance was suboptimal at 52% with no significant differences by liver disease aetiology or study location in multivariate meta-regression analysis. Further research and educational efforts are needed to improve the current rate of HCC surveillance.

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting them to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system (computer-generated) and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on quality of care (outcomes related to healthcare professionals' practice) and patient outcomes (outcomes related to patients' health condition).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases and two trials registers up to 21 September 2016 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual- or cluster-randomized and non-randomized trials that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone (single-component intervention) or in addition to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention), compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median improvement and interquartile range (IQR) across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 35 studies (30 randomized trials and five non-randomized trials) and analyzed 34 studies (40 comparisons). Twenty-nine studies took place in the USA and six studies took place in Canada, France, Israel, and Kenya. All studies except two took place in outpatient care. Reminders were aimed at enhancing compliance with preventive guidelines (e.g. cancer screening tests, vaccination) in half the studies and at enhancing compliance with disease management guidelines for acute or chronic conditions (e.g. annual follow-ups, laboratory tests, medication adjustment, counseling) in the other half.Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), probably improves quality of care slightly compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 6.8% (IQR: 3.8% to 17.5%); 34 studies (40 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals alone (single-component intervention) probably improves quality of care compared with usual care (median improvement 11.0% (IQR 5.4% to 20.0%); 27 studies (27 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence). Adding computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention) probably improves quality of care slightly compared with the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 4.0% (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%); 11 studies (13 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).We are uncertain whether reminders, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), improve patient outcomes as the certainty of the evidence is very low (n = 6 studies (seven comparisons)). None of the included studies reported outcomes related to harms or adverse effects of the intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals probably slightly improves quality of care, in terms of compliance with preventive guidelines and compliance with disease management guidelines. It is uncertain whether reminders improve patient outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is very low. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can probably improve quality of care in various settings under various conditions.

Practice, Knowledge, and Barriers for Screening of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Among High-Risk Chinese Patients

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is among the leading causes of cancer deaths in China. Considering its poor prognosis when diagnosed late, Chinese guidelines recommend biannual screening for HCC with abdominal ultrasound and serum α-fetoprotein (AFP) test for high-risk populations.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the practice, knowledge, and self-perceived barriers for HCC screening among high-risk hospital patients in China.

METHODS

An interview-based questionnaire was conducted among Chinese patients with chronic hepatitis B and/or chronic hepatitis C infection from outpatient clinics at 2 tertiary medical institutions in Shanghai and Wuhan, China.

FINDINGS

Among 352 participating patients, 50.0% had routine screening, 23.3% had irregular screening, and 26.7% had incomplete or no screening. Significant determinants for screening included higher level of education, underlying liver cirrhosis, a family history of HCC, and better knowledge concerning viral hepatitis, HCC, and HCC screening guidelines. Moreover, factors associated with better knowledge were younger age, female gender, urban residency, education level of college or above, annual household income of greater than 150,000 RMB, and longer duration of hepatitis infection. The 3 most common barriers reported for not receiving screening were not aware that screening for HCC exists (41.5%), no symptoms or discomfort (38.3%), and lack of recommendation from physicians (31.9%).

CONLUSIONS

Health care professionals and community leaders should actively inform patients regarding the benefits of HCC screening through design of educational programs. Such interventions are expected to increase knowledge about HCC and HCC screening, as well as improve screening adherence and earlier diagnosis.

Identifying barriers to hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in a national sample of patients with cirrhosis

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in cirrhosis patients. This provides an opportunity to target the highest-risk population, yet surveillance rates in the United States and Europe range from 10% to 40%. The goal of this study was to identify barriers to HCC surveillance, using data from the Veterans Health Administration, the largest provider of liver-related health care in the United States. We included all patients 75 years of age or younger who were diagnosed with cirrhosis from January 1, 2008, until December 31, 2010. The primary outcome was a continuous measure of the percentage of time up-to-date with HCC surveillance (PTUDS) based on abdominal ultrasound (secondary outcomes included computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging). Among 26,577 patients with cirrhosis (median follow-up = 4.7 years), the mean PTUDS was 17.8 ± 21.5% (ultrasounds) and 23.3 ± 24.1% when any liver imaging modality was included. The strongest predictor of increased PTUDS was the number of visits to a specialist (gastroenterologist/hepatologist and/or infectious diseases) in the first year after cirrhosis diagnosis; the association between visits to a primary care physician and increasing surveillance was very small. Increasing distance to the closest Veterans Administration center was associated with decreased PTUDS. There was an inverse association between ultrasound lead time (difference between the date an ultrasound was ordered and requested exam date) and the odds of it being performed: odds ratio = 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.72-0.82 when ordered > 180 days ahead of time; odds ratio = 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.85-0.94 if lead time 91-180 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The responsibility for suboptimal surveillance rests with patients, providers, and the overall health care system; several measures can be implemented to potentially increase HCC surveillance, including increasing patient-specialist visits and minimizing appointment lead time. (Hepatology 2017;65:864-874).

Mailed Outreach Program Increases Ultrasound Screening of Patients With Cirrhosis for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Surveillance of patients with cirrhosis increases early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and prolongs survival. However, its effectiveness is limited by underuse, particularly among racial/ethnic minorities and individuals of low socioeconomic status. We compared the effectiveness of mailed outreach strategies, with and without patient navigation, in increasing the numbers of patients with cirrhosis undergoing surveillance for HCC in a racially diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged cohort.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of patients with documented or suspected cirrhosis at a large safety-net health system from December 2014 through March 2016. Patients were assigned randomly (1:1:1) to groups that received mailed invitations for an ultrasound screening examination (n = 600), mailed invitations for an ultrasound screening examination and patient navigation (barrier assessment and motivational education for patients who declined screening; n = 600), or usual care (visit-based screening; n = 600). Patients who did not respond to outreach invitations within 2 weeks received up to 3 reminder telephone calls. The primary outcome was completion of abdominal imaging within 6 months of randomization.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar among groups. Cirrhosis was documented, based on International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, codes, for 79.6% of patients, and suspected, based on noninvasive markers of fibrosis, for 20.4%. In an intent-to-treat analysis, significantly greater proportions of patients who received the mailed invitation and navigation (47.2%) or the mailed invitation alone (44.5%) underwent HCC screening than patients who received usual care (24.3%) (P < .001 for both comparisons). However, screening rates did not differ significantly between outreach the outreach groups (P = .25). The effects of the outreach program were consistent in all subgroups, including Caucasian vs non-Caucasian race, documented vs suspected cirrhosis, Child-Pugh A vs B cirrhosis, and receipt of gastroenterology care.

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective study, we found outreach strategies to double the percentage of patients with cirrhosis who underwent ultrasound screening for HCC. However, adding patient navigation to telephone reminders provided no significant additional benefit. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02312817.

Use of Antibiotics Among Patients With Cirrhosis and Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Is Associated With Reduced Mortality

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Prophylactic antibiotics are recommended for all patients with cirrhosis hospitalized for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). We evaluated the association between use of antibiotics, outcomes of re-admissions, and mortality in these patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 6451 patients with cirrhosis (mean age, 60.6 y) in the Veterans Affairs health care system hospitalized for UGIB from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2013 (8655 hospitalizations). We collected information on patients' baseline features, hospitalizations, etiology of UGIB, antibiotics given, hospital re-admission within 30 days of discharge, and mortality. We defined timely administration of antibiotics as receipt from 8 hours before admission through 48 hours afterward.

RESULTS

Timely administration of antibiotics occurred during 48.6% of admissions (n = 4210), increasing from 30.6% in 2005 to 58.1% in 2013. Independent predictors of antibiotic receipt included ascites, high model for end-stage liver disease score, esophageal variceal hemorrhage, and administration of octreotide or intravenous proton pump inhibitors. Variables associated with decreased odds of antibiotic provision included black race and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. In multivariate analysis, timely administration of antibiotics was associated with a reduced 30-day mortality rate (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.93; P = .012).

CONCLUSIONS

In a study of patients with cirrhosis and UGIB in the VA health care system, timely administration of antibiotics was associated with a 30% reduction in 30-day mortality. The proportion of patients with cirrhosis and UGIB receiving timely antibiotics nearly doubled from 2005 to 2013, but many patients-particularly those with less-advanced cirrhosis-did not receive this intervention. Targeted efforts are needed to promote the appropriate use of antibiotics among patients with cirrhosis and UGIB.

Quality of Care Provided by Hepatologists to Patients with Cirrhosis at Three Parallel Health Systems

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based guidelines and quality indicators for cirrhosis care have been established. Whether there are variations in adherence to these cirrhosis standards at different specialty settings has not been investigated.

AIMS

To evaluate the quality of cirrhosis care delivered at diverse hepatology care sites.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study comparing the quality of care at three hepatology specialty clinics: a Faculty Practice, safety-net hospital, and Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center. Consecutive patients with cirrhosis (85 Faculty Practice, 81 safety-net, and 76 VA) between 2010 and 2011 were included. Median follow-up was 2.3 years. Outcome measures were the adherence to six cirrhosis-specific quality-of-care indicators.

RESULTS

Adherence to hepatitis A and B vaccinations was highest at the safety-net hospital, 81 and 74 %, compared to 46 and 30 % at the Faculty Practice (P < .001). Adherence to yearly hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance was highest at the safety-net site (79 %) versus the VA (50 %) and Faculty Practice (42 %), P = .001. In contrast, screening rates for esophageal varices were 75 % at the Faculty Practice and only 58 and 43 % at the VA and safety-net sites, respectively (P < .001). Liver transplant discussions were documented most consistently at the Faculty Practice (82 %) compared to the safety-net site (53 %) and VA (54 %), P < .001.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities in cirrhosis quality measures existed by site. Strategies to overcome these disparities need to be developed to improve the delivery of quality cirrhosis care as we face a rise in cirrhosis-related complications over the next two decades.

Building Effective Quality Improvement Programs for Liver Disease: A Systematic Review of Quality Improvement Initiatives

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Quality indicators are the measurable components of clinical standards. Data are limited about the design and impact of interventions to improve quality indicators for patients with chronic liver disease.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, Web of Science, and conference proceedings was performed to find reports of quality improvement (QI) interventions. Data regarding the several indicators were collected. The search focused on vaccination against hepatitis A or hepatitis B virus, management of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, screening for varices, management of acute variceal hemorrhage, hepatocellular carcinoma screening, and 30-day readmissions.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies reported on the results of QI interventions. Ten focused on specific quality indicators (1 specific to vaccination, 2 spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, 3 gastrointestinal bleeding, and 4 hepatocellular carcinoma screening); 5 focused on clinical outcomes. Most studies used a pre-post study design. Interventions included checklists, educational conferences, electronic decision supports, nurse coordinators, and systematic changes to facilitate specialist co-management. Successful interventions optimized clinical workflow, closed knowledge gaps among frontline providers, created forced functions in the electronic ordering system, added dedicated staff to manage specific indicators, and provided viable alternatives to hospitalization to reduce readmission. Unsuccessful interventions included case management, phone calls, and home visits to reduce readmissions, checklists, and educational programs.

CONCLUSIONS

Past experience with QI provides generalizable rules for successful future interventions aimed at improved quality indicator adherence and patient outcomes.

Quality of Cancer Care in Patients with Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common primary liver cancer in patients with cirrhosis and is the leading cause of mortality in these patients. Despite existence of robust clinical practice guidelines for surveillance, diagnosis, and management for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the quality of care received by patients with HCC has been inconsistent. Several studies have reported disappointingly low surveillance rates in high-risk groups which likely contribute to most HCC cases being diagnosed at advanced stages. There is also data from large studies showing that significant under-referral to specialists and delay in initiation of treatment are linked to poor clinical outcomes. Given above circumstances, it is very important to perform studies which can identify areas in need of improvement in the care processes of HCC and design interventions to enhance quality of care. Unfortunately, data on validated quality indicators and quality metrics for HCC are non-existent. In this article, we review the existing literature pertaining to this issue and identify areas that need further research.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening and Surveillance: Practice Guidelines and Real-Life Practice

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the seventh most common malignancy worldwide. HCC meets all the criteria established by the World Health Organization for performing surveillance on those at-risk for developing cancer. Although there are consensus guidelines in the United States, Europe, and Asia for HCC surveillance, it is unclear if these guidelines are regularly implemented in routine practice to optimize real-life clinical outcomes. We reviewed the current literature on the adherence to current HCC practice guidelines by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (2009), the European Association for the Study of the Liver (2012), and the Asia Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (2010) for screening/surveillance and outcomes of optimal versus poor adherence. We performed PubMed search for relevant articles regarding HCC surveillance and screening worldwide. Currently, HCC screening is underutilized to a large extent. In most studies, the adherence to HCC screening and surveillance is suboptimal. Various patient, provider, and health care system factors may have all contributed to such nonadherence. Strategies to improve HCC screening and surveillance are urgently needed for early HCC detection and improved survival of HCC patients. Further research is needed to elucidate the various medical and/or cultural knowledge, belief, and practice patterns that can lead to barriers to HCC screening and surveillance at both patient and provider levels. These data will help focus and target advocacy and educational efforts to improve HCC surveillance at all levels: patients, providers, and health care system/government.

Hepatitis-Associated Liver Cancer: Gaps and Opportunities to Improve Care

The global burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC; primary liver cancer) is increasing. HCC is often unaccompanied by clear symptomatology, causing patients to be unaware of their disease. Moreover, effective treatment for those with advanced disease is lacking. As such, effective surveillance and early detection of HCC are essential. However, current screening and surveillance guidelines are not being fully implemented. Some at-risk populations fall outside of the guidelines, and patients who are screened are often not diagnosed at an early enough stage for treatment to be effective. From March 17 to 19, 2015, the Hepatitis B Foundation sponsored a workshop to identify gaps and limitations in current approaches to the detection and treatment of HCC and to define research priorities and opportunities for advocacy. In this Commentary, we summarize areas for further research and action that were discussed throughout the workshop to improve the recognition of liver disease generally, improve the recognition of liver cancer risk, and improve the recognition that screening for HCC makes a life-saving difference. Participants agreed that primary prevention of HCC relies on prevention and treatment of viral hepatitis and other underlying etiologies. Earlier diagnosis (secondary prevention) needs to be substantially improved. Areas for attention include increasing practitioner awareness, better definition of at-risk populations, and improved performance of screening approaches (ultrasound, biomarkers for detection, risk stratification, targeted therapies). The heterogeneous nature of HCC makes it unlikely that a single therapeutic agent will be universally effective. Medical management will benefit from the development of new, targeted treatment approaches.

Expression of serum miR-218 in hepatocellular carcinoma and its prognostic significance

BACKGROUND

Several recent studies have revealed that microRNAs (miRNAs) are stably detectable in the circulation and can be used as biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of malignancy. The aim of this manuscript is to investigate serum miR-218 expression in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and to analyze its potential diagnostic and prognostic value in HCC.

METHODS

Quantitative real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) was conducted to detect serum miR-218 expression from 156 HCC and 98 benign liver diseases (BLD) as well as 64 healthy controls. The relevance of serum miR-218 expression to the clinicopathological factors was assessed. In addition, the prediction of cutoff values of the markers was performed by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Moreover, the Kaplan-Meier method was used to plot survival curves and univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate independent prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Consequently, our findings revealed that serum miR-218 levels were remarkably underexpressed in HCC patients as compared to BLD patients and healthy controls. And its low level was obviously related to tumor size (p = 0.048), tumor number (p = 0.018), vascular invasion (p = 0.039), Edmondson grade (p = 0.042), and higher TNM stage (III-IV). ROC curve analysis showed that miR-218 had a significant diagnostic accuracy, yielded an AUC (the areas under the ROC curve) of 0.734 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.789, p < 0.01), thus providing a sensitivity of 66.7 % and a specificity of 69.1 % in discriminating HCC from BLD and healthy controls. Meanwhile, miR-218 can act as a useful biomarker in distinguishing the patients with large tumors (>5 cm) from patients with small tumors (<5 cm) (p < 0.01). In addition, the combination of miR-218 and AFP had greater diagnosis capacity with an AUC of 0.908 (95 % CI 0.876-0.940; p < 0.01). Both log-rank test and Cox regression analysis demonstrated that the decreased serum expression of miR-218 had a significant impact on overall survival of the patients with HCC (HR = 3.049, 95 % CI 2.028-4.585, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Taken together, this study suggested that serum expression of miR-218 might be a potential noninvasive tumor biomarker in the diagnosis and assessment of prognosis of HCC.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma From Epidemiology to Prevention: Translating Knowledge into Practice

The epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is characterized by dynamic temporal trends, several major established (i.e., HCV, HBV, alcohol) and emerging (i.e., diabetes, obesity, NAFLD) risk factors. Epidemiologic studies and clinical trials have identified additional demographic, clinical, pharmacological, genetic and life style factors that further affect or modify the likelihood of HCC and can be used in clinical practice to identify at-risk patients (i.e., risk stratification or prognostic algorithms) that can be targeted for prevention and early detection programs. These studies have also paved the way toward several well established preventive measures including HBV vaccination, HBV treatment, HCV treatment and HCC surveillance, and potential chemoprevention using statins, metformin or coffee. However, the effectiveness of HCC prevention in clinical practice and at the population level has lagged behind due to patient, provider, system, and societal factors. The Quality in the Continuum of Cancer Care model provides a framework for evaluating the HCC prevention processes, including potential failures that create a gap between efficacy and effectiveness.

Primary Care Providers Report Challenges to Cirrhosis Management and Specialty Care Coordination

BACKGROUND

Two-thirds of patients with cirrhosis do not receive guideline-concordant liver care. Cirrhosis patients are less likely to receive recommended care when followed exclusively by primary care providers (PCPs), as opposed to specialty co-management. Little is known about how to optimize cirrhosis care delivered by PCPs.

AIMS

We conducted a qualitative analysis to explore PCPs' attitudes and self-reported roles in caring for patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We recruited PCPs from seven Veterans Affairs facilities in the Pacific Northwest via in-service trainings and direct email from March to October 2012 (n = 24). Trained staff administered structured telephone interviews covering: (1) general attitudes; (2) roles and practices; and (3) barriers and facilitators to cirrhosis management. Two trained, independent coders reviewed each interview transcript and thematically coded responses.

RESULTS

Three overarching themes emerged in PCPs' perceptions of cirrhosis patients: the often overwhelming complexity of comorbid medical, psychiatric, and substance issues; the importance of patient self-management; and challenges surrounding specialty care involvement and co-management of cirrhosis. While PCPs felt they brought important skills to bear, such as empathy and care coordination, they strongly preferred to defer major cirrhosis management decisions to specialists. The most commonly reported barriers to care included patient behaviors, access issues, and conflicts with specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs perceive Veterans with cirrhosis as having significant medical and psychosocial challenges. PCPs tend not to see their role as directing cirrhosis-related management decisions. Educational efforts directed at PCPs must foster PCP empowerment and improve comfort with managing cirrhosis.

How can we boost colorectal and hepatocellular cancer screening among underserved populations?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are common causes of cancer incidence and mortality in the USA, particularly among underserved populations such as racial/ethnic minorities, the under-/uninsured, and individuals with low socioeconomic status. Although screening can reduce cancer-related mortality, participation is suboptimal among underserved populations, likely serving as the largest contributor to observed inequities in HCC and CRC outcomes among US populations. In this narrative review, we highlight inequities across populations in the USA with respect to incidence and mortality for CRC and HCC and highlight potential causes, with a focus on screening rates. In addition, drawing from the recent literature, we highlight promising strategies for increasing screening for HCC and CRC and propose future research and policy solutions to optimize screening rates. With focused implementation of screening strategies and novel research, the burden of HCC and CRC can be reduced among underserved populations.

The effects of on-screen, point of care computer reminders on processes and outcomes of care

BACKGROUND

The opportunity to improve care by delivering decision support to clinicians at the point of care represents one of the main incentives for implementing sophisticated clinical information systems. Previous reviews of computer reminder and decision support systems have reported mixed effects, possibly because they did not distinguish point of care computer reminders from e-mail alerts, computer-generated paper reminders, and other modes of delivering 'computer reminders'.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects on processes and outcomes of care attributable to on-screen computer reminders delivered to clinicians at the point of care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane EPOC Group Trials register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL and CENTRAL to July 2008, and scanned bibliographies from key articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies of a reminder delivered via a computer system routinely used by clinicians, with a randomised or quasi-randomised design and reporting at least one outcome involving a clinical endpoint or adherence to a recommended process of care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. For each study, we calculated the median improvement in adherence to target processes of care and also identified the outcome with the largest such improvement. We then calculated the median absolute improvement in process adherence across all studies using both the median outcome from each study and the best outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies (reporting a total of thirty-two comparisons) were included. Computer reminders achieved a median improvement in process adherence of 4.2% (interquartile range (IQR): 0.8% to 18.8%) across all reported process outcomes, 3.3% (IQR: 0.5% to 10.6%) for medication ordering, 3.8% (IQR: 0.5% to 6.6%) for vaccinations, and 3.8% (IQR: 0.4% to 16.3%) for test ordering. In a sensitivity analysis using the best outcome from each study, the median improvement was 5.6% (IQR: 2.0% to 19.2%) across all process measures and 6.2% (IQR: 3.0% to 28.0%) across measures of medication ordering. In the eight comparisons that reported dichotomous clinical endpoints, intervention patients experienced a median absolute improvement of 2.5% (IQR: 1.3% to 4.2%). Blood pressure was the most commonly reported clinical endpoint, with intervention patients experiencing a median reduction in their systolic blood pressure of 1.0 mmHg (IQR: 2.3 mmHg reduction to 2.0 mmHg increase).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Point of care computer reminders generally achieve small to modest improvements in provider behaviour. A minority of interventions showed larger effects, but no specific reminder or contextual features were significantly associated with effect magnitude. Further research must identify design features and contextual factors consistently associated with larger improvements in provider behaviour if computer reminders are to succeed on more than a trial and error basis.