Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Working Group Report from the ILTS Transplant Oncology Consensus Conference

Cumulative postoperative change in serum albumin levels and organ failure after living-donor liver transplantation: A retrospective cohort analysis

Many studies have reported that hypoalbuminemia could be associated with organ failure after liver transplantation. However, most of them focused on serum albumin levels measured at specific time points and not on the trend of serum albumin change. We investigated whether a cumulative postoperative change in serum albumin level up to postoperative day (POD) 5 is related to organ failure in patients who underwent living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Data of adult recipients who underwent LDLT between January 2016 and December 2020 at a single tertiary hospital were reviewed (n = 399). After screening, three patients were excluded because of insufficient data. A cumulative change in serum albumin level was demonstrated using the area under the threshold (AUT, threshold = 3.0 g/dL) of the serum albumin curve up to POD 5. Based on the AUT, the patients were divided into a high-decrease group (n = 156) and a low-decrease group (n = 240). All analyses were conducted using 1:1 propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score on POD 5. The secondary endpoints were postoperative hospital stay and postoperative 90-day mortality. A total of 162 patients were included. The SOFA score on POD 5 was significantly higher in the High-decrease group compared with the Low-decrease group (5.2 ± 2.6 vs. 4.1 ± 2.3; mean difference: 1.1, 95% CI: 0.3 to 1.8; P = 0.005). However, the length of postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.661) and 90-day mortality (P = 0.497) did not differ between the groups. In conclusion, a cumulative postoperative change in serum albumin level up to POD 5 could help predict postoperative organ failure on POD 5 in patients who underwent LDLT.

Clinical Usefulness of Surgical Resection Including the Complementary Use of Radiofrequency Ablation for Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background/Aim: For intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC]-B) cases, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is recognized as the standard treatment, while systemic therapy is recommended for TACE-unsuitable HCC. However, because the curative potential is not high, this study was conducted to elucidate the potential outcomes of surgical resection (SR) for BCLC-B HCC cases. Materials/Methods: From January 2000 to July 2022, 70 patients with BCLC-B HCC treated with surgery as the initial treatment were enrolled (median age 67.5 years, beyond up-to-7 criteria 44). Forty-five were treated with SR only (SR group), while twenty-five underwent that with complemental radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (Comb group). Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively evaluated in both groups. Results: The median albumin−bilirubin (ALBI) score was better in the SR as compared with the Comb group (−2.74 vs. −2.52, p = 0.02), while there were no significant differences between them for median RFS (17.7 vs. 13.1 months; p = 0.70) or median OS (66.6 vs. 72.0 months p = 0.54). As for those beyond up-to-7 criteria, there were no significant differences for median RFS (18.2 vs. 13.0 months; p = 0.36) or median OS (66.5 vs. 72.0 months; p = 0.57). An acceptable five-year cumulative survival rate (>50%) was obtained in both groups (54% vs. 64%). Conclusion: This retrospective study found no significant differences for RFS or OS between the present SR and Comb groups with BCLC-B HCC. When possible to perform, the outcome of SR for BCLC-B is favorable, with a five-year survival rate greater than 50%.

Expert Insights on Current Treatments for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Clinical and Molecular Approaches and Bottlenecks to Progress

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a primary liver tumor that typically occurs in the setting of chronic liver disease/cirrhosis. Treatment modalities for HCC have evolved and given the variety of treatment options, a multi-disciplinary approach requiring input from surgical, medical, and radiation oncology, hepatology, and interventional radiology is necessary. Multiple advances have been made over the last decade regarding treatment of HCC, especially advanced disease. Resection and transplantation remain as cornerstone curative-intent treatment options. For patients who are not candidates for curative-intent therapy, exciting progress has been made in molecular and cellular approaches to systemic therapy for HCC including immunotherapies and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Although the prognosis for advanced HCC remains poor, the armamentarium of therapies has increased, and valuable years of life can be gained with these therapies. While the main therapeutic modality for early-stage disease remains resection, multimodal immunotherapy has emerged as first-line treatment for advanced disease. We herein review different clinical and molecular treatment modalities related to the treatment of HCC, as well as provide insights into future directions for HCC treatment. We highlight how research and progress are needed to move into a new era of molecular and cellular treatments.

Selecting the Best Approach for the Treatment of Multiple Non-Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma

According to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system, the optimal strategy for patients with multiple HCC within the Milan Criteria is liver transplantation (LT). However, LT cannot be offered to all the patients due to organ shortages and long waiting lists, as well as because of the advanced disease carrying a high risk of poor outcomes. For early stages, liver resection (LR) or thermal ablation (TA) can be proposed, while trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) still remains the treatment of choice for intermediate stages (BCLC-B). Asian guidelines and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network suggest LR for resectable multinodular HCCs, even beyond Milan criteria. In this scenario, a growing body of evidence shows better outcomes after surgical resection when compared with TACE. Trans-arterial radioembolization (TARE) and stereotaxic body radiation therapy (SBRT) can also play an important role in this setting. Furthermore, the role of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) specifically for patients with multiple HCC is still not clear. This review aims to summarize current knowledge about the best therapeutical strategy for multiple HCC while focusing on the role of minimally invasive surgery and on the most attractive future perspectives.

The benefit of liver transplant beyond Milan criteria: An analysis using the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Published studies examining the efficacy of liver transplantation in patients presenting with hepatocellular cancer beyond the traditional Milan criteria for liver transplantation have primarily been single institution series with limited ability to compare outcomes to alternative methods of management.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients presenting between 2004 and 2016 with histologically confirmed clinical stage III and IVA hepatocellular cancer. Multivariable regression was used to identify factors associated with liver transplantation. Patients undergoing liver transplantation were 1:1 propensity score-matched for age, demographics, comorbid disease, clinical stage, and histologic resection margin to those undergoing surgical resection. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare overall survival profiles for matched cohorts.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and ninety-two patients met inclusion criteria-590 (74.5%) underwent surgical resection and 202 (25.5%) liver transplantation. On adjusted analysis, patients undergoing liver transplantation were less likely to have advanced age (>60 years; odds ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval [0.21-0.71]) and to be of Black race (odds ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval [0.23-0.73]) or Asian (odds ratio 0.25, 95% confidence interval [0.11-0.53]) ethnicity but were more likely to have advanced (Charlson score >2) comorbidity scores, (odds ratio 2.48, 95% confidence interval [1.58-3.90]) and more likely to have private health insurance (odds ratio 4.17, 95% confidence interval [1.31-18.66]) than those undergoing surgical resection. On Kaplan-Meier analysis of matched cohorts, patients undergoing liver transplantation demonstrated significantly better rates of 5-year overall survival (65.3% vs 26.3%, P < .0001) and longer median overall survival times than those undergoing resection (53.1 ± 2.78 vs 26.9 ± 1.20 months, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Liver transplantation offers the potential to be an effective treatment modality in select patients presenting with stage III and IVA hepatocellular cancer.

Tumor Burden Score and Serum Alpha-fetoprotein Subclassify Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Resection of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. While not recommended by the BCLC algorithm, some patients may indeed benefit from hepatectomy. We sought to identify that subset of patients who might derive long-term survival benefit from resection.

METHODS

Intermediate-stage HCC patients who underwent curative-intent resection were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Factors associated with long-term prognosis were identified using multivariate analysis and a risk score was developed and assessed.

RESULTS

Among 194 patients, most individuals had two tumors (n = 123, 63.4%) with a median size of 6.0 cm (IQR, 4.0-8.4) for a median tumor burden score (TBS) of 6.5 (IQR, 5.0-9.1); median alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) was 23.9 ng/mL (IQR, 5.0-503.2), and median overall survival (OS) was 69 months (IAR, 60.7-77.3). Factors associated with OS included AFP (referent ≤ 20 ng/mL, > 20 ng/mL: HR 1.78 95%CI, 1.09-2.89) and TBS (referent TBS ≤ 8.0, TBS > 8.0: HR 1.72 95%CI, 1.07-2.75). While 71 (36.6%) patients had neither risk factor, 79 (40.7%) and 44 (22.7%) had 1 or 2, respectively. A simplified score stratified patients relative to recurrence-free survival (RFS) (0: 33.6% vs. 1: 18.0% vs. 2: 14.7%) (AUC 0.60) and recurrence time (i.e., < 6 months after surgery) (0: 21.3% vs. 1: 43.1% vs. 2: 68.6%) (AUC 0.69) (both p < 0.001). Of note, a higher score was also associated with incrementally worse 5-year OS (0: 68.1% vs. 1: 61.0% vs. 2: 29.9%) (AUC 0.62) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Long-term OS and RFS outcomes varied considerably. Using a simple risk score, patients with low AFP and low TBS were identified as the subset of individuals most likely to benefit from resection.

Treatment patterns for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with Child-Pugh class B and their impact on survival: A Korean nationwide registry study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There are no established practice guidelines for treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) class B liver function. To evaluate the impact of various initial treatment modalities on these patients, we conducted a nationwide registry study in Korea.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) of patients with HCC and CTP class B according to initial treatment modalities in each Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage were analysed using data from the Korean Primary Liver Cancer Registry between 2008 and 2016. Initial treatment modalities were categorized as standard, alternative treatment and supportive care only, referring to the 2018 BCLC guidelines, irrespective of liver function.

RESULTS

Of the 2318 newly diagnosed Korean patients with HCC and CTP class B, 29.7%, 60.3% and 15.6% of patients in BCLC stages A, B and C, respectively, underwent standard treatment. Adjusted OS hazard ratios of alternative treatment referring to standard treatment were 1.55 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.94; p < .001) in BCLC-A, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.43-1.56; p = .550) for curative alternative treatment, 1.89 (95% CI, 0.97-3.68; p = .059) for non-curative alternative treatment in BCLC-B, 0.40 (95% CI, 0.28-0.56; p < .001) for curative alternative treatment, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.69-1.02; p = .076) for non-curative alternative treatment for BCLC-C.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of BCLC stages, chemoembolization was conducted the most among patients with CTP class B. Treatment in line with the BCLC treatment algorithm resulted in favourable OS outcomes, except for those with BCLC stage C, as systemic therapy showed poor OS.

Postoperative outcomes and recurrence patterns of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma dictated by the sum of tumor size and number

BACKGROUND

The selection criteria for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who would truly benefit from liver resection (LR) remain undefined.

AIM

To identify BCLC-B HCC patients more suitable for LR.

METHODS

We included patients undergoing curative LR for BCLC stage A or B multi-nodular HCC (MNHCC) and stratified BCLC-B patients by the sum of tumor size and number (N + S). Overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), recur-rence-to-death survival (RTDS), recurrence patterns, and treatments after recurrence in BCLC-B patients in each subgroup were compared with those in BCLC-A patients.

RESULTS

In total, 143 patients who underwent curative LR for MNHCC with BCLC-A (n = 25) or BCLC-B (n = 118) were retrospectively analyzed. According to the N + S, patients with BCLC-B HCC were divided into two subgroups: BCLC-B1 (N + S ≤ 10, n = 83) and BCLC-B2 (N + S > 10, n = 35). Compared with BCLC-B2 patients, those with BCLC-B1 had a better OS (5-year OS rate: 67.4% vs 33.6%; P < 0.001), which was comparable to that in BCLC-A patients (5-year OS rate: 67.4% vs 74.1%; P = 0.250), and a better RFS (median RFS: 19 mo vs 7 mo; P < 0.001), which was worse than that in BCLC-A patients (median RFS: 19 mo vs 48 mo; P = 0.022). Further analysis of patients who developed recurrence showed that both BCLC-B1 and BCLC-A patients had better RTDS (median RTDS: Not reached vs 49 mo; P = 0.599), while the RTDS in BCLC-B2 patients was worse (median RTDS: 16 mo vs not reached, P < 0.001; 16 mo vs 49 mo, P = 0.042). The recurrence patterns were similar between BCLC-B1 and BCLC-A patients, but BCLC-B2 patients had a shorter recurrence time and a higher proportion of patients had recurrence with macrovascular invasion and/or extrahepatic metastasis, both of which were independent risk factors for RTDS.

CONCLUSION

BCLC-B HCC patients undergoing hepatectomy with N + S ≤ 10 had mild recurrence patterns and excellent OS similar to those in BCLC-A MNHCC patients, and LR should be considered in these patients.

Antitumor Effect of Low-Dose of Rapamycin in a Transgenic Mouse Model of Liver Cancer

PURPOSE

We investigate whether low-dose rapamycin is effective in preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) growth and treating HCC after tumor development in transgenic mice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We established transgenic mice with HCC induced by activated HrasG12V and p53 suppression. Transgenic mice were randomly assigned to five experimental groups: negative control, positive control, tacrolimus only, rapamycin only, and tacrolimus plus rapamycin. The mice were further divided into two groups according to time to commencement of immunosuppressant treatment: de novo treatment and post-tumor development.

RESULTS

In the de novo treatment group, marked suppression of tumor growth was observed in the rapamycin only group. In the post-tumor development group, the rapamycin only group displayed no significant suppression of tumor growth, compared to the positive control group. In T lymphocyte subset analysis, the numbers of CD4⁺ effector T cells and CD4⁺ regulatory T cells were significantly lower in the positive control, tacrolimus only, and tacrolimus plus rapamycin groups than the negative control group. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed significantly higher expression of phosphorylated-mTOR, 4E-BP1, and S6K1 in the positive control group than in the rapamycin only group.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose rapamycin might be effective to prevent HCC growth, but may be ineffective as a treatment option after HCC development.

The closing survival gap after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States

BACKGROUND

Socio-economic inequalities among different racial/ethnic groups have increased in many high-income countries. It is unclear, however, whether increasing socio-economic inequalities are associated with increasing differences in survival in liver transplant (LT) recipients.

METHODS

Adults undergoing first time LT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) between 2002 and 2017 recorded in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) were included and grouped into three cohorts. Patient survival and graft survival stratified by race/ethnicity were compared among the cohorts using unadjusted and adjusted analyses.

RESULTS

White/Caucasians comprised the largest group (n=9,006, 64.9%), followed by Hispanic/Latinos (n=2,018, 14.5%), Black/African Americans (n=1,379, 9.9%), Asians (n=1,265, 9.1%) and other ethnic/racial groups (n=188, 1.3%). Compared to Cohort I (2002-2007), the 5-year survival of Cohort III (2012-2017) increased by 18% for Black/African Americans, by 13% for Whites/Caucasians, by 10% for Hispanic/Latinos, by 9% for patients of other racial/ethnic groups and by 8% for Asians (All P values<0.05). Despite Black/African Americans experienced the highest survival improvement, their overall outcomes remained significantly lower than other ethnic∕racial groups (adjusted HR for death=1.20; 95%CI 1.05-1.36; P=0.005; adjusted HR for graft loss=1.21; 95%CI 1.08-1.37; P=0.002).

CONCLUSION

The survival gap between Black/African Americans and other ethnic/racial groups undergoing LT for HCC has significantly decreased over time. However, Black/African Americans continue to have the lowest survival among all racial/ethnic groups.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Historical evolution of transplantation criteria

Liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma is still a hot topic, and the main factor that is associated with the success of treatment is to determine the patients who will benefit from LT. Milan criteria have been defined 25 years ago and still is being used for patient selection for LT. However, in living donor LT, the Milan criteria is being extended. Current criteria for patient selection do not only consider morphologic characteristics such as tumor size and number of tumor nodules but also biologic markers that show tumor aggressiveness is also being considered. In the present review article, we have summarized all the criteria and scoring systems regarding LT for hepatocellular carcinoma. All criteria have 5-year overall survival rates that were comparable to the Milan Criteria and ranged between 60%-85%. On the other hand, it was seen that the recurrence rates had increased as the Milan criteria were exceeded; the 5-year recurrence rates ranged between 4.9% to 39.9%. Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma needs a multidisciplinary approach. Ideal selection criteria are yet to be discovered. The same is true for treatment modalities. The goal will be achieved by a harmonic interplay between basic science researchers and clinicians.

Therapeutic strategies for post-transplant recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma

Despite stringent selection criteria, hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) still occurs in up to 20% of cases, mostly within the first 2–3 years. No adjuvant treatments to prevent such an occurrence have been developed so far. However, a balanced use of immunosuppression with minimal dose of calcineurin inhibitors and possible addition of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors is strongly advisable. Moreover, several pre- and post-transplant predictors of recurrence have been identified and may help determine the frequency and duration of post-transplant follow-up. When recurrence occurs, the outcomes are poor with a median survival of 12 mo according to most retrospective studies. The factor that most impacts survival after recurrence is timing (within 1–2 years from LT according to different authors). Several therapeutic options may be chosen in case of recurrence, according to timing and disease presentation. Surgical treatment seems to provide a survival benefit, especially in case of late recurrence, while the benefit of locoregional treatments has been suggested only in small retrospective studies. When systemic treatment is indicated, sorafenib has been proved safe and effective, while only few data are available for lenvatinib and regorafenib in second line. The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is controversial in this setting, given the safety warnings for the risk of acute rejection.

Liver transplantation and portal vein tumour thrombus: futile enterprise?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize recent evidence in literature regarding liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein tumour thrombosis (PVTT) with no extrahepatic disease. In addition, in this review, we have tried to highlight the advances in downstaging with ablative therapies that have made liver transplantation a possibility, and also the key points to focus on when considering liver transplantation in these patients with locally advanced HCC.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advances in the understanding of technicalities and effectiveness of ablative therapies, including transarterial chemoembolization, stereotactic body radiotherapy and transarterial radioembolization on PVTT have helped successfully downstage patients with HCC and PVTT to within transplant criteria. This provides the opportunity to offer a curative liver transplantation in these patients who are generally managed with systemic or palliative therapy alone with dismal prognosis. Meticulous patient selection based on tumour biology, documented downstaging based on imaging and decrease in tumour marker levels, an adequate waiting period to demonstrate stable disease, liver transplantation with some technical modifications, and a modified immunosuppression protocol may offer long-term survival in a select group of patients treated with initial downstaging therapies in an intention to treat strategy.

SUMMARY

In patients with HCC, presence of PVTT is generally considered the end of the road by many. A multidisciplinary approach combining ablation and a curative liver transplantation may offer the best hope of long-term survival in a select group of patients with favourable tumour biology. Although promising, current evidence is limited, and future studies with larger number of patients, and longer follow-up may pave the way for an elaborate selection algorithm to choose the ideal candidates for such a curative strategy in patients with locally advanced HCC with PVTT.

The Hidden Epidemic: The Prevalence and Impact of Concurrent Liver Diseases in Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation in Australia and New Zealand

Prevalence of concurrent liver diseases among liver transplant recipients and impact on posttransplant outcomes are unknown.

Methods

This retrospective study included adult liver transplants between January 1' 1985' and December 31' 2019' from the Australian and New Zealand Liver and Intestinal Transplant Registry. Up to 4 liver disease causes were recorded for each transplant; concurrent liver diseases were defined as >1 liver disease indication for transplantation, excluding hepatocellular carcinoma. Impact on posttransplant survival was determined using Cox regression.

Results

A total of 840 (15%) of 5101 adult liver transplant recipients had concurrent liver diseases. Recipients with concurrent liver diseases were more likely male (78% versus 64%) and older (mean age 52 versus 50 y). A higher proportion of liver transplants for hepatitis B (12% versus 6%), hepatitis C (33% versus 20%), alcohol liver disease (23% versus 13%), and metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (11% versus 8%, all P < 0.001) were identified when all indications were included than with primary diagnosis only. The number and proportion of liver transplants performed for concurrent liver diseases have increased from 8 (6%) during Era 1 (1985-1989) to 302 (20%) during Era 7 (2015-2019; P < 0.001). Concurrent liver diseases were not associated with increased posttransplant mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.98, 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.14).

Conclusions

Concurrent liver diseases are increasing among adult liver transplant recipients in Australia and New Zealand; however, they do not appear to impact posttransplant survival. Reporting all liver disease causes in the transplant registry reports provides more accurate estimates of liver disease burden.

Case Vignettes in Transplant Psychiatry Ethics

The demand for liver transplants continues to far exceed the number of available viable donor organs; hence, it is of utmost importance to determine those individuals who are best able to care for these valuable, limited resources as potential recipients. At the same time, psychiatric comorbidity is common in the course of end-stage liver disease and can be mutually complicating. This article focuses on liver transplant candidacy from a psychiatric perspective, using illustrative cases to underscore the foundational facets of medical ethics that serve as the guide to these complex medical and ethical decisions.

National experience with living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an attractive option to decrease waitlist dropout, particularly for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who face lengthening waiting times. Using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) national database, trends in LDLT utilization for patients with HCC were evaluated, and post-LT outcomes for LDLT versus deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) were compared. From 1998 to 2018, LT was performed in 20,161 patients with HCC including 726 (3.6%) who received LDLT. The highest LDLT utilization was prior to the 2002 HCC Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception policy (17.5%) and dropped thereafter (3.1%) with a slight increase following the 6-month wait policy in 2015 (3.8%). LDLT was more common in patients from long-wait UNOS regions with blood type O, in those with larger total tumor diameter (2.3 vs. 2.1 cm, p = 0.02), and higher alpha-fetoprotein at LT (11.5 vs. 9.0 ng/ml, p = 0.04). The 5-year post-LT survival (LDLT 77% vs. DDLT 75%), graft survival (72% vs. 72%), and HCC recurrence (11% vs. 13%) were similar between groups (all p > 0.20). In conclusion, LDLT utilization for HCC has remained low since 2002 with only a slight increase after the 6-month wait policy introduction in 2015. Given the excellent post-LT survival, LDLT appears to be an underutilized but valuable option for patients with HCC, especially those at high risk for waitlist dropout.

Influence of the ABO Blood Group System on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence After Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The ABO blood group system may influence tumorigenesis, but its prognostic value in liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has never been assessed.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent LT for HCC between 2013 and 2017 at 9 centers were analyzed. Predictors of tumor recurrence were identified using multivariable analysis, while comparison between group A and non-A recipients was performed after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Among 925 LT recipients, 406 were blood group A, 94 group B, 380 group O, and 45 group AB. On multivariable analysis, group A was associated with tumor recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.574 [95% confidence interval; 95% CI = 1.034-2.394] P = 0.034). After propensity score matching, 1- and 5-y recurrence rates were 7.4% and 20.1% in group A recipients versus 3.3% and 13.2% in non-A recipients (HR = 1.66 [95% CI = 1.12-2.45], P = 0.011). One and 5-y recurrence-free survivals were 85.2% and 66.8% in group A recipients versus 88.5% and 71.3% in non-A recipients (HR = 1.38 [95% CI = 1.01-1.90], P = 0.045). Among recipients within Milan criteria (n = 604), 1- and 5-y recurrence rates were 5.8% and 12.7% in group A recipients versus 3.1% and 12.2% in non-A recipients (HR = 1.197 [95% CI = 0.721-1.987], P = 0.485). Among recipients outside Milan criteria (n = 182), 1- and 5-y recurrence rates were 12.1% and 43.8% in group A recipients versus 3.9% and 15.6% in non-A recipients (HR = 3.175 [95% CI = 1.526-6.608], P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

ABO blood system influences the oncological outcome of recipients undergoing LT for HCC. Its incorporation in the prognostication model of LT for HCC may allow improving the management of LT candidates.

National Trends and Waitlist Outcomes of Locoregional Therapy Among Liver Transplant Candidates With Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the United States

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Policy changes in the United States have lengthened overall waiting times for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We investigated temporal trends in utilization of locoregional therapy (LRT) and associated waitlist outcomes among liver transplant (LT) candidates in the United States.

METHODS

Data for primary adult LT candidates listed from 2003 to 2018 who received HCC exception were extracted from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Explant histology was examined, and multivariable competing risk analysis was used to evaluate the association between LRT type and waitlist dropout.

RESULTS

There were 31,609 eligible patients with at least 1 approved HCC exception, and 34,610 treatments among 24,145 LT candidates. The proportion with at least 1 LRT recorded increased from 42.3% in 2003 to 92.4% in 2018. Chemoembolization remains the most frequent type, followed by thermal ablation, with a notable increase in radioembolization from 3% in 2013 to 19% in 2018. An increased incidence of LRT was observed among patients with tumor burden beyond Milan criteria, higher α-fetoprotein level, and more compensated liver disease. Receipt of any type of LRT was associated with a lower risk of waitlist dropout; there was no significant difference by number of LRTs. In inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis, radioembolization or ablation as the first LRT was associated with a reduced risk of waitlist dropout compared with chemoembolization.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large nationwide cohort of LT candidates with HCC, LRT, and in particular radioembolization, increasingly was used to bridge to LT. Patients with greater tumor burden and those with more compensated liver disease received more treatments while awaiting LT. Bridging LRT was associated with a lower risk of waitlist dropout.

Future challenges in gastroenterology and hepatology, between innovations and unmet needs: A SIGE Young Editorial Board's perspective

Gastroenterology, Digestive Endoscopy and Hepatology have faced significant improvements in terms of diagnosis and therapy in the last decades. However, many fields still remain poorly explored, and many questions unanswered. Moreover, basic-science, as well as translational and clinical discoveries, together with technology advancement will determine further steps toward a better, refined care for many gastroenterological disorders in the future. Therefore, the Young Investigators of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE) joined together, offering a perspective on major future innovations in some hot clinical topics in Gastroenterology, Endoscopy, and Hepatology, as well as the current pitfalls and the grey zones.

Prognostic Factors for 10-Year Survival in Patients With Hepatocellular Cancer Receiving Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Long-term survival after liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular cancer (HCC) continues to increase along with the modification of inclusion criteria. This study aimed at identifying risk factors for 5- and 10-year overall and HCC-specific death after LT.

METHODS

A total of 1,854 HCC transplant recipients from 10 European centers during the period 1987-2015 were analyzed. The population was divided in three eras, defined by landmark changes in HCC transplantability indications. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the significance of independent risk factors for survival.

RESULTS

Five- and 10-year overall survival (OS) rates were 68.1% and 54.4%, respectively. Two-hundred forty-two patients (13.1%) had HCC recurrence. Five- and 10-year recurrence rates were 16.2% and 20.3%. HCC-related deaths peaked at 2 years after LT (51.1% of all HCC-related deaths) and decreased to a high 30.8% in the interval of 6 to 10 years after LT. The risk factors for 10-year OS were macrovascular invasion (OR = 2.71; P = 0.001), poor grading (OR = 1.56; P = 0.001), HCV status (OR = 1.39; P = 0.001), diameter of the target lesion (OR = 1.09; P = 0.001), AFP slope (OR = 1.63; P = 0.006), and patient age (OR = 0.99; P = 0.01). The risk factor for 10-year HCC-related death were AFP slope (OR = 4.95; P < 0.0001), microvascular (OR = 2.13; P < 0.0001) and macrovascular invasion (OR = 2.32; P = 0.01), poor tumor grading (OR = 1.95; P = 0.001), total number of neo-adjuvant therapies (OR = 1.11; P = 0.001), diameter of the target lesion (OR = 1.11; P = 0.002), and patient age (OR = 0.97; P = 0.001). When analyzing survival rates in function of LT era, a progressive improvement of the results was observed, with patients transplanted during the period 2007-2015 showing 5- and 10-year death rates of 26.8% and 38.9% (vs. 1987-1996, P < 0.0001; vs. 1997-2006, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

LT generates long-term overall and disease-free survival rates superior to all other oncologic treatments of HCC. The role of LT in the modern treatment of HCC becomes even more valued when the follow-up period reaches at least 10 years. The results of LT continue to improve even when prudently widening the inclusion criteria for transplantation. Despite the incidence of HCC recurrence is highest during the first 5 years post-transplant, one-third of them occur later, indicating the importance of a life-long follow-up of these patients.

Long-Term Outcomes of Living Donor Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplant for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the United States

OBJECTIVES

Although living donor liver transplant has become a vital treatment option in hepatocellular carcinoma, controversy remains on whether recurrence and survival rates are different versus deceased donor recipients. Here, we compared clinical characteristics and outcomes between recipients of living and deceased donor liver transplants for hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our comparisons used data from the United Network of Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.

RESULTS

There were 385 living donor and 25 274 deceased donor liver transplant recipients with diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Transplant list wait times of ≥6 months were more common in deceased donor(55.9%) versus living donor recipients (45.2%; P < .001). Both recipient groups were comparable with regard to alpha-fetoprotein level <200 ng/mL (P = .18). Only a small percentage in both groups had ≥3 total tumors (P = .73); both groups had similar low transplants outside of Milan criteria (P = .45). Overall, 1-, 5-, and 10-year overall survival rates for deceased versus living donor recipients were similar (91.2% vs 92%, 74% vs 76.4%, 58.9% vs 56.5%; P = .69). On multivariate analysis, Black/African American race/ethnicity was associated with worse outcomes than White race/ethnicity as reference (P < .001), whereas Hispanic and Asian race/ethnicity were more protected. Hepatitis C virus as liver disease etiology was associated with worse outcomes than other etiologies. Tumor characteristics, ≥3 lesions, tumor size, and higher alpha-fetoprotein levels were associated with worse outcomes. Living donor transplant was not associated with higher hazard of death. Among living donor recipients only, largest tumor size was associated with higher risk of death (P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Survival was similarin between the living donor versus deceased donor recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma. With changes in Model for End-Stage Liver Disease exception policies for hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States, living donor transplant for hepatocellular carcinoma could expand the donor pool.

BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update

There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.

BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update

There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.

BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update

There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.

BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update

There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.

BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update

There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.

BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update

There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.

BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update

There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.

BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: The 2022 update

There have been major advances in the armamentarium for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) since the last official update of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer prognosis and treatment strategy published in 2018. Whilst there have been advances in all areas, we will focus on those that have led to a change in strategy and we will discuss why, despite being encouraging, data for select interventions are still too immature for them to be incorporated into an evidence-based model for clinicians and researchers. Finally, we describe the critical insight and expert knowledge that are required to make clinical decisions for individual patients, considering all of the parameters that must be considered to deliver personalised clinical management.

UNOS Down-Staging Criteria for Liver Transplantation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 25 Studies

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Down-staging is commonly used to select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond Milan criteria (MC) for liver transplantation (LT), but outcomes are heterogenous. We aimed to estimate pooled down-staging success rates, HCC recurrence, and overall survival (OS), stratified by criteria used for baseline tumor burden.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed and EMBASE databases from inception until August 2021 for studies reporting down-staging success (reduction of tumor burden to within MC) and outcomes of adult HCC patients. In addition, we performed a pooled analysis using reconstructed individual participant data to obtain robust estimates for OS.

RESULTS

We screened 1059 articles and included 25 articles involving 3997 patients. Overall, 55.16% (45.49%-64.46%) underwent successful down-staging, and 31.52% (24.03%-40.11%) received LT (by intention-to-treat analysis [ITT]). Among patients who received LT, 16.01% (11.80%-21.37%) developed HCC recurrence. Comparing studies that used the United Network for Organ Sharing Down-Staging (UNOS-DS) criteria versus studies beyond UNOS-DS or did not specify criteria, down-staging success (by ITT) was 83.21% versus 45.93%, P < .001; the proportion who received LT (by ITT) was 48.61% vs 28.60%, P = .030; and HCC recurrence (among patients who received LT) occurred in 9.06% versus 20.42%, P < .001. Among studies that used UNOS-DS criteria, ITT 1- and 5-year OS from the initiation of down-staging treatment was 86% and 58%, respectively, whereas 1- and 5-year post-LT OS was 94% and 74%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Among studies that adhered to UNOS-DS criteria, down-staging was successful in four-fifths of patients, >50% received LT, and post-LT outcomes were excellent. These data provide clinical validation for the utilization of UNOS-DS criteria.

Patient stratification in hepatocellular carcinoma: impact on choice of therapy

INTRODUCTION

HCC comprises around 60 to 80% of all primary liver cancers and exhibits wide geographical variability. Appropriate treatment allocation needs to include both patient and tumor characteristics.

AREAS COVERED

Current HCC classification systems to guide therapy are either liver function-centric and evaluate physiologic liver function to guide therapy or prognostic stratification classification systems broadly based on tumor morphologic parameters, patient performance status, and liver reserve assessment. This review focuses on different classification systems for HCC, their strengths, and weaknesses as well as the use of artificial intelligence in improving prognostication in HCC.

EXPERT OPINION

Future HCC classification systems will need to incorporate clinic-pathologic data from a multitude of sources and emerging therapies to develop patient-specific treatment plans targeting a patient's unique tumor profile.

Utility of Cell-Free DNA Detection in Transplant Oncology

Simple Summary

Transplant oncology is an emerging field in cancer treatment that applies transplant medicine, surgery, and oncology to improve cancer patient survival and quality of life. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the history and emergence of cfDNA technology, its applications to specifically monitor tumor burden at pre-and post-liver transplant stages, and evaluate transplant rejection. The use of ctDNA to evaluate transplant rejection has been extensively studied in non-hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diseases. Emerging studies have also investigated the use of ctDNA detection in evaluating HCC tumor burden pre-and post-surgery as well as transplant rejection. However, extensive studies still need to be conducted to evaluate the role of ctDNA detection in the medical management of transplant oncology patients.

Abstract

Transplant oncology is an emerging field in cancer treatment that applies transplant medicine, surgery, and oncology to improve cancer patient survival and quality of life. A critical concept that must be addressed to ensure the successful application of transplant oncology to patient care is efficient monitoring of tumor burden pre-and post-transplant and transplant rejection. Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) detection has emerged as a vital tool in revolutionizing the management of cancer patients who undergo organ transplantation. The advances in cfDNA technology have provided options to perform a pre-transplant evaluation of minimal residual disease (MRD) and post-transplant evaluation of cancer recurrence and transplant rejection. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the history and emergence of cfDNA technology, its applications to specifically monitor tumor burden at pre-and post-transplant stages, and evaluate transplant rejection.

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: How Should We Improve the Thresholds?

Simple Summary

The ideal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is liver transplantation (LT), which both eliminates the HCC and cures the diseased liver. Once considered an experimental treatment with dismal survival rates, LT for HCC entered a new era with the establishment of the Milan criteria over 20 years ago. However, over the last two decades, the Milan criteria, which are based on tumor morphology, have come under intense scrutiny and are now largely regarded as too restrictive, and limit the access of transplantation for many patients who would otherwise achieve good clinical outcomes. The liver transplant community has been making every effort to reach a goal of establishing more reliable selection criteria. This article addresses how the criteria have been extended, as well as the concept of pre-transplant down-staging to maximize the eligibility.

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third highest cause of cancer-related mortality, and liver transplantation is the ideal treatment for this disease. The Milan criteria provided the opportunity for HCC patients to undergo LT with favorable outcomes and have been the international gold standard and benchmark. With the accumulation of data, however, the Milan criteria are not regarded as too restrictive. After the implementation of the Milan criteria, many extended criteria have been proposed, which increases the limitations regarding the morphological tumor burden, and incorporates the tumor’s biological behavior using surrogate markers. The paradigm for the patient selection for LT appears to be shifting from morphologic criteria to a combination of biologic, histologic, and morphologic criteria, and to the establishment of a model for predicting post-transplant recurrence and outcomes. This review article aims to characterize the various patient selection criteria for LT, with reference to several surrogate markers for the biological behavior of HCC (e.g., AFP, PIVKA-II, NLR, 18F-FDG PET/CT, liquid biopsy), and the response to locoregional therapy. Furthermore, the allocation rules in each country and the present evidence on the role of down-staging large tumors are addressed.

Prognostic Factors of Liver Transplantation for HCC: Comparative Literature Review

PURPOSE

The aim of the review study is investigation of the prognostic factors of the liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

A literature review has been made, especially in countries where dominantly living donor liver transplantation is performed, such as Turkey. Liver transplantation from deceased donor and from living donor has been evaluated about as advantages and disadvantages, and their effects on prognosis have been compared. In addition, hepatocellular carcinoma series of Koç University Liver Transplantation center has been presented.

RESULTS

Liver transplantation is still the best treatment option with 5-year 50% survival rate for hepatocellular carcinoma even in patient who has locally advanced tumor. The patient's survival is not only an important issue but also the living donor's safety is controversial particularly when expectation of recipient's 5-year survival is below 50% due to donor complication.

CONCLUSION

Detailed preoperative examination, appropriate patient selection, and timing of surgery are seen the most important issues in liver transplant's patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Downstaging Outcomes for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results From the Multicenter Evaluation of Reduction in Tumor Size before Liver Transplantation (MERITS-LT) Consortium

BACKGROUND & AIMS

United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) has adopted uniform criteria for downstaging (UNOS-DS) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) before liver transplantation (LT), but the downstaging success rate and intention-to-treat outcomes across broad geographic regions are unknown.

METHODS

In this first multiregional study (7 centers, 4 UNOS regions), 209 consecutive patients with HCC undergoing downstaging based on UNOS-DS criteria were prospectively evaluated from 2016 to 2019.

RESULTS

Probability of successful downstaging to Milan criteria and dropout at 2 years from the initial downstaging procedure was 87.7% and 37.3%, respectively. Pretreatment with lectin-reactive α-fetoprotein ≥10% (hazard ratio, 3.7; P = .02) was associated with increased dropout risk. When chemoembolization (n = 132) and yttrium-90 radioembolization (n = 62) were compared as the initial downstaging treatment, there were no differences in Modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors response, probability of or time to successful downstaging, waiting list dropout, or LT. Probability of LT at 3 years was 46.6% after a median of 17.2 months. In the explant, 17.5% had vascular invasion, and 42.8% exceeded Milan criteria (understaging). The only factor associated with understaging was the sum of the number of lesions plus largest tumor diameter on the last pre-LT imaging, and the odds of understaging increased by 35% per 1-unit increase in this sum. Post-LT survival at 2 years was 95%, and HCC recurrence occurred in 7.9%.

CONCLUSION

In this first prospective multiregional study based on UNOS-DS criteria, we observed a successful downstaging rate of >80% and similar efficacy of chemoembolization and yttrium-90 radioembolization as the initial downstaging treatment. A high rate of tumor understaging was observed despite excellent 2-year post-LT survival of 95%. Additional LRT to reduce viable tumor burden may reduce tumor understaging.

[The use of immuno-oncologic therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma in the context of liver transplantation. An interdisciplinary benefit/risk assessment]

BACKGROUND

Multiple systemic therapy options have been recently approved for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In particular, immuno-oncology combination therapies can now achieve impressive response rates and significantly prolonged survival with good tolerability. These immuno-oncology (IO)-based combinations are currently not only evaluated for the therapy of advanced HCC, but increasingly also in earlier stages in terms of peri-interventional therapy concepts and also for down-sizing to local therapies. In the context of liver transplantation (LTx), a particularly critical benefit/risk assessment must be made before the use of immunotherapeutics in the context of multimodal concepts, since the risk of a potentially lethal rejection can be significantly increased by immunotherapy.

METHODS

This review is based on a selective literature search performed between December 2020 and April 2021 in the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases. Guidelines, expert opinions, and recommendations from professional societies were given special consideration.

RESULTS

Nearly one in five LTx in Germany are performed due to HCCs. In this context, LTx is a curative therapy option not only for the underlying liver disease but also for the malignant tumor. Individual case reports indicate that IO therapy prior to LTx may increase the risk of rejection or liver failure after subsequent liver transplantation. Since 2015, immunotherapeutics have also been widely used for tumor therapy in patients after LTx. In small case series, rejection rates of 36%, associated with rejection-related mortality of 20% of treated patients, have been described. A similar incidence of rejection has also been described following the use of immunotherapeutics in patients after other organ transplantations.

CONCLUSION

In the context of organ transplantation, IO therapy carries the risk of graft rejection, which can lead to graft loss and also patient death. However, from today's point of view, IO-based therapy can be considered in the context of organ transplantation with a careful benefit/risk assessment.

Transplant Oncology: An Evolving Field in Cancer Care

Transplant oncology is an emerging concept of cancer treatment with a promising prospective outcome. The application of oncology, transplant medicine, and surgery to improve patients' survival and quality of life is the core of transplant oncology. Hepatobiliary malignancies have been treated by liver transplantation (LT) with significant improved outcome. In addition, as the liver is the most common site of metastasis for colorectal cancer (CRC), patients with CRC who have stable unresectable liver metastases are good candidates for LT, and initial studies have shown improved survival compared to palliative systemic therapy. The indications of LT for hepatobiliary malignancies have been slowly expanded over the years in a stepwise manner; however, they have only been shown to improve patient survival in the setting of limited systemic therapy options. This review illustrates the concept and history of transplant oncology as an evolving field for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic biliary cancer, and liver-only metastasis of non-hepatobiliary carcinoma. The utility of immunotherapy in the transplant setting is discussed as well as the feasibility of using circulating tumor DNA for surveillance post-transplantation.

HCC and Molecular Targeting Therapies: Back to the Future

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of death from cancer in the world. Recently, the effectiveness of new antiviral therapies and the HBV vaccine have reduced HCC’s incidence, while non-alcoholic steato-hepatitis is an emerging risk factor. This review focuses on antiangiogenic molecules and immune checkpoint inhibitors approved for HCC treatment and possible future approaches. Sorafenib was the first drug approved for the treatment of advanced HCC (aHCC) and it has been shown to increase survival by a few months. Lenvatinib, a multikinase inhibitor, has shown non-inferiority in survival compared with sorafenib and an improvement in progression-free survival (PFS). The combination of atezolizumab (an anti-PDL1 antibody) and bevacizumab (an anti-VEGF antibody) was the first drug combination approved for HCC, demonstrating improved survival compared with sorafenib (19.2 vs. 13.4 months). As a second line of therapy, three regimens (regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab) have been approved for the treatment of aHCC after progression on sorafenib according to guidelines. Furthermore, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab plus ipilimumab have been approved by the FDA (2017, 2018, and 2020, respectively). Finally, immune target therapy, cancer vaccines, and epigenetic drugs represent three new possible weapons for the treatment of HCC.

Liver Transplantation for HCC in HIV-Infected Patients: Long-Term Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

HIV-infected patients now have long life expectation since the introduction of the highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Liver diseases, especially cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), currently represent a leading cause of death in this setting of patients.

AIM

To address the results of liver transplantation (LT) for HCC in HIV-infected patients.

METHODS

All patients with and without HIV infection who underwent LT for HCC (n = 420) between 2001 and 2021 in our center were analyzed with the intent of comparing graft and patient survival. Cox regression analysis was used to determine prognostic survival factors and logistic regression to determine the predictor factors of post-LT recurrence.

RESULTS

Among 1010 LT, 32 were HIV-infected recipients. With an average follow-up of 62 ± 51 months, 5-year overall survival in LT recipients with and without HIV-infection was 71.6% and 69.9%, respectively (p = ns), whereas 5-year graft survival in HIV-infected and HIV-non infected was 68.3% and 68.2%, respectively (p = ns). The independent predictive factor of survival in the study group was: HCV infection (HR 1.83, p = 0.024). There were no significant differences in the pathological characteristics of HCC between the two groups. The logistic regression analysis of the study population demonstrated that microvascular invasion (HR 5.18, p< 0.001), HCC diameter (HR 1.16, p = 0.028), and number of HCC nodules (HR 1.26, p = 0.003) were predictors of recurrence post-LT.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that HIV patients undergoing LT for HCC have comparable results in terms of post-LT survival. Excellent results can be achieved for HIV-infected patients with HCC, as long as a strategy of close surveillance and precise treatment of the tumor is adopted while on the waiting list.

Extreme living donation: A single center simultaneous and sequential living liver-kidney donor experience with long-term outcomes under literature review

OBJECTIVES

Living liver and kidney donor surgeries are major surgical procedures applied to healthy people with mortality and morbidity risks not providing any direct therapeutic advantage to the donor. In this study, we aimed to share our simultaneous and sequential living liver-kidney donor experience under literature review in this worldwide rare practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2007 and February 2018, a total of 1109 living donor nephrectomies and 867 living liver donor hepatectomies were performed with no mortality to living-related donors. Eight donors who were simultaneous or sequential living liver-kidney donors in this time period were retrospectively reviewed and presented with their minimum 2- year follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 8 donors, 3 of them were simultaneous and 5 of them were sequential liver-kidney donation. All of them were close relatives. Mean age was 39 (26-61) years and mean BMI was 25.7 (17.7-40). In 3 donors, right lobe, in 4 donors, left lateral sector, and in 1 donor, left lobe hepatectomy were performed. Median hospital stay was 9 (7-13) days. Two donors experienced early and late postoperative complications (Grade 3b and Grade 1). No mortality and no other long-term complication occurred.

CONCLUSION

Expansion of the donor pool by utilizing grafts from living donors is a globally-accepted proposition since it provides safety and successful outcomes. Simultaneous or sequential liver and kidney donation from the same donor seems to be a reasonable option for combined liver-kidney transplant recipients in special circumstances with acceptable outcomes.

Liver Transplantation in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma beyond the Milan Criteria: A Comprehensive Review

The Milan criteria (MC) were developed more than 20 years ago and are still considered the benchmark for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the strict application of MC might exclude some patients who may receive a clinical benefit of LT. Several expanded criteria have been proposed. Some of these consider pretransplant morphological and biological variables of the tumor, others consider post-LT variables such as the histology of the tumor, and others combine pre- and post-LT variables. More recently, the HCC response to locoregional treatments before transplantation emerged as a surrogate marker of the biological aggressiveness of the tumor to be used as a better selection criterion for LT in patients beyond the MC at presentation. This essential review aims to present the current data on the pretransplant selection criteria for LT in patients with HCC exceeding the MC at presentation based on morphological and histological characteristics of the tumor and to critically discuss those that have been validated in clinical practice. Moreover, the role of HCC biological markers and the tumor response to downstaging procedures as new tools for selecting patients with a tumor burden outside of the MC for LT is evaluated.

State-of-the-art surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most commonly diagnosed primary liver tumor with an increasing incidence worldwide. Management of patients with HCC is largely dictated by the presence of cirrhosis, disease stage, underlying liver function, and patient performance status.

PURPOSE

We provide an update on key aspects of surgical treatment options for patients with HCC. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS: Liver resection and transplantation remain cornerstone treatment options for patients with early-stage disease and constitute the only potentially curative options for HCC. Selection of patients for surgical treatment should include a thorough evaluation of tumor characteristics and biology, as well as evidence-based use of various available treatment options to achieve optimal long-term outcomes for patients with HCC.

Identifying Patients Who May Benefit from Liver Resection Compared to Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using 18F-FDG PET

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess an oncologic setting where patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) could benefit from liver resection (LR) compared to living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) using ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography.

METHODS

The consecutive data of patients with HCC who underwent ¹⁸F-FDG PET before LR (LR group, n = 314) and LDLT (LDLT group, n = 65) between 2003 and 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Tumor ¹⁸F-FDG avidity was quantified as the tumor to liver standardized uptake value ratio (TLR, cut-off value was defined at 2). Multivariate analysis was performed to assess significant preoperative tumor factors in the LR group. Survival outcomes between the two groups were stratified by these factors.

RESULTS

The 5-year overall survival (OS: 56.9% vs. 73.8%, LR vs. LDLT, p < 0.001) and recurrence-free survival rate (RFS: 27.4% vs. 70.7%, p < 0.001) were significantly better in the LDLT group compared to the LR group. In the LR study, multivariate analysis identified TLR and tumor multiplicity as significant preoperative tumor factors for OS. In patients with solitary and TLR < 2 HCC, the 5-year OS rate was not significantly different between the LR and LDLT groups (70.3% vs. 71.8%, p = 0.352); meanwhile, RFS rate was better in the LDLT group (34.3% vs. 71.8%, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LDLT is associated with better long-term outcomes than LR in patients with HCC; however, selected patients with solitary and TLR < 2 HCC may benefit from LR.

Tumor Diameter for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Why Should Size Matter?

PURPOSE

There are two main goals in hepatocellular carcinoma management, the first is long term survival and the second is the low recurrence rate after the treatment. Therefore, a lot of selection criteria defined for each treatment method and tumor size is one of the most important parameter in almost all of them.

METHODS

In this review, importance of diamater in hepatocellular carcinoma is reviewed.

RESULTS

Many reports showed a significant association between increase in maximum tumor diameter and microvascular invasion. Patients with larger tumors are more likely to have poorly differentiated tumors. Increased regional and distant metastasis of tumors were observed in the larger size hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver transplantation represents the best treatment option for patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined with biological, inflammatory, radiological, pathological and genetic markers that predict the biological behavior of the tumor, today, tumor size is one of the best aggressiveness markers until new markers are found. So, tumor size is matter.

The Key Role of Staging Definitions for Assessment of Downstaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

The success of liver transplant (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is dependent on accurate tumor staging using validated imaging criteria, and adherence to acceptable criteria based on tumor size and number. Other factors including α-fetoprotein (AFP) and response to local regional therapy (LRT) have now played a larger role in candidate selection. Tumor downstaging is defined as reduction in the size of viable tumors using LRT to meet acceptable criteria for LT, and serves as a selection tool for a subgroup of HCC with more favorable biology. The application of tumor downstaging requires a structured approach involving three key components in tumor staging-initial tumor stage and eligibility criteria, tumor viability assessment following LRT, and target tumor stage prior to LT-and incorporation of AFP into staging and treatment response assessments. In this review, we provide in-depth discussions of the key role of these staging definitions in ensuring successful outcome.

Incorporating Tumor Biology to Predict Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence in Patients Undergoing Living Donor Liver Transplantation Using Expanded Selection Criteria

Conventional selection criteria for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are based on tumour size/number only, and do not consider vital surrogates of tumor biology such as alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and tumor [¹⁸ F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ([¹⁸ F]FDG PET) avidity. We analyzed survival outcomes, and predictors of HCC recurrence in 405 patients with cirrhosis and HCC (HCC-cirr) who underwent living donor LT (LDLT) using our expanded selection criteria: no extrahepatic disease or major vascular invasion, irrespective of tumor size/number. Fifty-one percent patients had tumours beyond Milan, and 43% beyond the University of California San Francisco [UCSF] criteria. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were 64% and 70%, respectively. Three preoperatively available factors predicted recurrence: pre-LT AFP ≥100 ng/mL (P = 0.005; hazard ratio [HR], 2.190), tumor burden beyond the UCSF criteria (P = 0.001; HR, 2.640), and [¹⁸ F]FDG PET avidity (P = 0.004; HR, 2.442). A prognostic model based on the number and combination of the aforementioned preoperative risk factors was developed using a competing-risk RFS model. Three risk groups were identified: low (none or a single risk factor present, 9.3% recurrence), moderate (AFP ≥100 ng/mL and [¹⁸ F]FDG PET avidity, or beyond UCSF tumor and [¹⁸ F]FDG PET avidity, 25% recurrence), and high (AFP ≥100 ng/mL and beyond UCSF, or presence of all 3 risk factors, 46% recurrence). Acceptable long-term outcomes were achieved using our expanded selection criteria. Our prognostic model to predict recurrence based on preoperative biological and morphological factors could guide pretransplant management (downstaging versus upfront LDLT) with the aim of reducing post-LDLT recurrence.

Evaluation and selection of the liver transplant candidate: updates on a dynamic and evolving process

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although conceptually unchanged, the evaluation and selection of the liver transplant candidate has seen significant recent advances. Expanding criteria for transplant candidacy, improved diagnostics for risk stratification and advances in prognostic models have paralleled recent changes in allocation and distribution that require us to revisit core concepts of candidate evaluation and selection while recognizing its now dynamic and continuous nature.

RECENT FINDINGS

The liver transplant evaluation revolves around three interrelated themes: candidate selection, donor selection and transplant outcome. Introduction of dynamic frailty indices, bariatric surgery at the time of liver transplant in obese patients and improved therapies and prognostic tools for hepatobiliary malignancy have transformed candidate selection. Advances in hypothermic organ preservation have improved outcomes in marginal donor organs. Combined with expansion of hepatitis C virus positive and split donor organs, donor selection has become an integral part of candidate evaluation. In addition, with liver transplant for acute alcohol-related hepatitis now widely performed and increasing recognition of acute-on-chronic liver failure, selection of critically ill patients is refining tools to balance futility versus utility.

SUMMARY

Advances in liver transplant candidate evaluation continue to transform the evaluation process and require continued incorporation into our clinical practice amidst a dynamic backdrop of demographic and policy changes.