Hepatocellular carcinoma patients are advantaged in the current liver transplant allocation system

Bridging and downstaging treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation

Several therapeutic procedures have been proposed as bridging treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting liver transplantation (LT). The most used treatments include transarterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation. Surgical resection has also been successfully used as a bridging procedure, and LT should be considered a rescue treatment in patients with previous HCC resection who experience tumor recurrence or post-treatment severe decompensation of liver function. The aims of bridging treatments include decreasing the waiting list dropout rate before transplantation, reducing HCC recurrence after transplantation, and improving post-transplant overall survival. To date, no data from prospective randomized studies are available; however, for HCC patients listed for LT within the Milan criteria, prolonging the waiting time over 6-12 mo is a risk factor for tumor spread. Bridging treatments are useful in containing tumor progression and decreasing dropout. Furthermore, the response to pre-LT treatments may represent a surrogate marker of tumor biological aggressiveness and could therefore be evaluated to prioritize HCC candidates for LT. Lastly, although a definitive conclusion can not be reached, the experiences reported to date suggest a positive impact of these treatments on both tumor recurrence and post-transplant patient survival. Advanced HCC may be downstaged to achieve and maintain the current conventional criteria for inclusion in the waiting list for LT. Recent studies have demonstrated that successfully downstaged patients can achieve a 5-year survival rate comparable to that of patients meeting the conventional criteria without requiring downstaging.

HCC patients suffer less from geographic differences in organ availability

It has been suggested that the number of exception model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) points for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) overestimates mortality risk. Average MELD at transplant, a measure of organ availability, correlates with mortality on an intent-to-treat basis and varies by donation service area (DSA). We analyzed Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 2005 to 2010, comparing transplant and death parameters for patients transplanted with HCC exception points to patients without HCC diagnosis (non-HCC), to determine whether the two groups were impacted differentially by DSA organ availability. HCC candidates are transplanted at higher rates than non-HCC candidates and are less likely to die on the waitlist. Overall risk of death trends downward by 1% per MELD point (p = 0.65) for HCC, but increases by 7% for non-HCC patients (p < 0.0001). The difference in the change of mortality with MELD is statistically significant between HCC and non-HCC candidates p < 0.0001. Posttransplant risk of death trends downward by 2% per MELD point (p = 0.28) for HCC patients, but increases by 3% per MELD point in non-HCC patients (p = 0.027), with the difference being statistically significant with p < 0.005. In summary, increasing wait time impacts HCC candidates less than non-HCC candidates and under increased competition for donor organs, HCC candidates' advantage increases.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatitis B is endemic in many regions of Asia, including China, Korea and India. This results in a heavy burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) because hepatitis B virus is a major risk factor in the development of the disease. In addition, the incidence of hepatitis-C-related HCC is on the rise in the United States. HCC patients with poor liver function reserve are not suitable candidates for resection, and liver transplantation (LT) has emerged as the treatment of choice for small unresectable HCCs. To treat more HCC patients with LT, the standard patient selection criteria have been expanded at a number of centers. Careful and well-considered selection of patients is the key to success in LT for HCC. Although tumor size and tumor number are used to predict whether transplantation is likely to be successful, the weighting that should be attached these two parameters has not been determined. In addition to the size and number of lesions, the morphology of HCC is also predictive of its behavior. Well-circumscribed lesions, in general, are less aggressive than those with poorly defined borders. On the waiting list for LT, HCC patients compete with liver failure patients. It is essential that the criteria used for selecting HCC patients for LT should be easily applicable and fair to other transplant candidates. In the face of the scarcity of deceased-donor livers and the inevitable risks for living liver donors, a predictably low rate of recurrence of HCC after LT is mandatory.

The model for end-stage liver disease score-based system predicts short term mortality better than the current Child-Turcotte-Pugh score-based allocation system during waiting for deceased liver transplantation

To adopt the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score-based system in Korea, the feasibility should be evaluated by analysis of Korean database. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of the MELD score-based system compared with the current Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) based-system and to suggest adequate cut-off to stratify waiting list mortality among Korean population. We included 788 adult patients listed in waiting list in Seoul National University Hospital from January 2008 to May 2011. The short-term survival until 6 months after registration was evaluated. Two hundred forty six (31.2%) patients underwent live donor liver transplantation and 353 (44.8%) patients were still waiting and 121 (15.4%) patients were dropped out due to death. Significant difference was observed when MELD score 24 and 31 were used as cut-off. Three-months survival of Status 2A was 70.2%. However, in Status 2A patients whose MELD score less than 24 (n=82), 86.6% of patients survived until 6 month. Furthermore, patients with high MELD score (≥31) among Status 2B group showed poorer survival rate (45.8%, 3-month) than Status 2A group. In conclusion, MELD score-based system can predict short term mortality better and select more number of high risk patients in Korean population.

Quality of life, risk assessment, and safety research in liver transplantation: new frontiers in health services and outcomes research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we briefly summarize three fruitful, emerging areas in liver transplantation research, quality of life; risk assessment; and patient safety. Our goal is to highlight recent findings in these areas, with a call for increased integration of social scientists and transplant clinicians to address how best to shape policy and improve outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

After liver transplantation, recipients generally experience clinically significant, sustained improvement in their physical, social and emotional well being. However, a sizeable minority of patients do experience excess morbidity that may benefit from ongoing surveillance and/or intervention. There is growing body of research that describes risks associated with liver transplantation, which can be useful aids to better inform decision making by patients, clinicians, payers, and policy makers. In contrast, there has been a relative lack of empirical data on transplant patient safety vulnerabilities, placing the field of surgery in stark contrast to other high-risk industries, wherein such assessments inform continuous process improvement.

SUMMARY

Health services and outcomes research has grown in importance in the liver transplantation literature, but several important questions remain unanswered that merit programmatic, interdisciplinary research.

Hepatocellular carcinoma locoregional therapies for patients in the waiting list. Impact on transplantability and recurrence rate

The practice of treating candidates for liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with locoregional therapies, is common in most transplant centers. However, for T1 tumors and expected waiting times to LT <6 months, there is no evidence that these treatments are beneficial. For T2 tumors and for longer waiting times, neo-adjuvant treatments are usually performed with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), ablation techniques and liver resection in selected cases. The treatment choice should be based on the BCLC staging system. At present, there is no evidence of the superiority of ablation/resection vs. TACE, but some studies showed better results of the former in achieving a complete response. The response to neo-adjuvant treatments should be evaluated through mRECIST criteria, but few studies adopted these criteria and properly analyzed factors affecting response. The simultaneous evaluation of the impact of neo-adjuvant therapies on dropout rate, post-LT HCC recurrence and patient survival is rarely reported. Tumor stage and volume, alpha-fetoprotein levels, response to treatments and liver function affect pre-LT outcomes. These same factors, together with vascular invasion and poor tumor differentiation, are major determinants of poor post-LT outcomes. Due to the low number of prospective studies with well-defined entry criteria and the variability of results, the role of downstaging is still to be defined. Novel molecular markers seem promising for the estimation of prognosis and/or response to treatments. With a persistent scarcity of organ donors, neo-adjuvant treatments can help identify patients with different probabilities of cancer progression, and consequently balance the priority of HCC and non-HCC-candidates through revised additional scores for HCC.

Model for End-stage Liver Disease

Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, initially developed to predict survival following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt was subsequently found to be accurate predictor of mortality amongst patents with end-stage liver disease. Since 2002, MELD score using 3 objective variables (serum bilirubin, serum creatinine, and institutional normalized ratio) has been used worldwide for listing and transplanting patients with end-stage liver disease allowing transplanting sicker patients first irrespective of the wait time on the list. MELD score has also been shown to be accurate predictor of survival amongst patients with alcoholic hepatitis, following variceal hemorrhage, infections in cirrhosis, after surgery in patients with cirrhosis including liver resection, trauma, and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). Although, MELD score is closest to the ideal score, there are some limitations including its inaccuracy in predicting survival in 15-20% cases. Over the last decade, many efforts have been made to further improve and refine MELD score. Until, a better score is developed, liver allocation would continue based on the currently used MELD score.

Meeting report of the International Liver Transplantation Society's 18th annual international congress: Hilton San Francisco Hotel, San Francisco, CA, May 16-19, 2012

From May 16-19, 2012, the International Liver Transplantation Society held its annual congress in San Francisco, CA. More than 1300 registrants attended the meeting, which included a premeeting conference entitled Balancing Risk in Liver Transplantation, focused topic sessions, and a variety of oral and poster presentations. This report is not all-inclusive and focuses on specific research abstracts on key topics in liver transplantation. As always, the new data herein are presented in the context of the published literature to further enhance knowledge in the field.

Kidney, pancreas and liver allocation and distribution in the United States

Kidney transplant and liver transplant are the treatments of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease and end-stage liver disease, respectively. Pancreas transplant is most commonly performed along with kidney transplant in diabetic end-stage renal disease patients. Despite a steady increase in the numbers of kidney and liver transplants performed each year in the United States, a significant shortage of kidneys and livers available for transplant remains. Organ allocation is the process the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) uses to determine which candidates are offered which deceased donor organs. OPTN is charged with ensuring the effectiveness, efficiency and equity of organ sharing in the national system of organ allocation. The policy has changed incrementally over time in efforts to optimize allocation to meet these often competing goals. This review describes the history, current status and future direction of policies regarding the allocation of abdominal organs for transplant, namely the kidney, liver and pancreas, in the United States.

Increasing the donor pool reduces the severity of liver disease: lessons learned from São Paulo, Brazil

INTRODUCTION

A new liver allocation system driven by the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was implemented in Brazil in 2006. In association with the new allocation policy, there was a concomitant expansion of the number of donors. We designed this study to assess whether a potential expansion of the donor pool with these educational campaigns had reduced the severity of liver disease at transplantation.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the state of São Paulo liver transplant database from July 2003 through July 2009. Patients were divided into groups: those who were transplanted before (pre-MELD group) and those who were transplanted after (post-MELD group) the implementation of the MELD system. The number of transplantations and the severity of liver disease were the endpoints of the study.

RESULTS

There has been a significant shift towards an older donor population, mainly those who are dying of cerebrovascular accidents. The average MELD score has changed over time. Approximately one quarter of the patients have been transplanted with a MELD score of more than 30 in the post-MELD era. However, this number has decreased over the past 3 years (P = .012). Currently, it has been possible to transplant patients with a MELD score from 25 to 30. The number of transplantations due to hepatocarcinoma (HCC) has increased 8-fold.

CONCLUSION

An aggressive educational campaign has successfully expanded the donor pool with a concomitant yearly reduction of the average MELD score at the time of transplantation. Patients with HCC have been benefited tremendously with the new allocation system.

Working together as a team: adolescent transplant recipients and nurse practitioners

Nurse practitioners are a critical part of the transplant team, enhancing the quality of patient care with their knowledge and skill with respect to disease-specific populations of patients. Adolescent transplant recipients are a vulnerable population and require specific considerations. Nurse practitioners can successfully tailor care to the adolescent developmental stages in order to promote quality of life, adherence to the medical regimen, and successful transition to adult transplant centers and to minimize risk-taking behaviors. Teamwork between the patient's family and the entire transplant team is important to optimize not only the patient's health but also to ensure quality of life after transplant. Adolescents can be especially challenging after transplant, given their complex and evolving psychosocial and cognitive development. Nurse practitioners are in a unique position to be central in adolescents' successful adaptation to their medical condition. Facilitating identification and management of medication-related side effects, awareness of emotional health and quality of life, adherence to the medical regimen, and eventual transition to adult caregivers all remain critically important steps in care that are ideally suited for advance practice leadership.

A model for dropout assessment of candidates with or without hepatocellular carcinoma on a common liver transplant waiting list

In many countries, the allocation of liver grafts is based on the Model of End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and the use of exception points for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). With this strategy, HCC patients have easier access to transplantation than non-HCC ones. In addition, this system does not allow for a dynamic assessment, which would be required to picture the current use of local tumor treatment. This study was based on the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and included 5,498 adult candidates of a liver transplantation for HCC and 43,528 for non-HCC diagnoses. A proportional hazard competitive risk model was used. The risk of dropout of HCC patients was independently predicted by MELD score, HCC size, HCC number, and alpha-fetoprotein. When combined in a model with age and diagnosis, these factors allowed for the extrapolation of the risk of dropout. Because this model and MELD did not share compatible scales, a correlation between both models was computed according to the predicted risk of dropout, and drop-out equivalent MELD (deMELD) points were calculated.

CONCLUSION

The proposed model, with the allocation of deMELD, has the potential to allow for a dynamic and combined comparison of opportunities to receive a graft for HCC and non-HCC patients on a common waiting list.

Efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiation, followed by liver transplantation, for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma at 12 US centers

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Excellent single-center outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiation and liver transplantation for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma caused the United Network of Organ Sharing to offer a standardized model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) exception for this disease. We analyzed data from multiple centers to determine the effectiveness of this treatment and the appropriateness of the MELD exception.

METHODS

We collected and analyzed data from 12 large-volume transplant centers in the United States. These centers met the inclusion criteria of treating 3 or more patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma using neoadjuvant therapy, followed by liver transplantation, from 1993 to 2010 (n = 287 total patients). Center-specific protocols and medical charts were reviewed on-site.

RESULTS

The patients completed external radiation (99%), brachytherapy (75%), radiosensitizing therapy (98%), and/or maintenance chemotherapy (65%). Seventy-one patients dropped out before liver transplantation (rate, 11.5% in 3 months). Intent-to-treat survival rates were 68% and 53%, 2 and 5 years after therapy, respectively; post-transplant, recurrence-free survival rates were 78% and 65%, respectively. Patients outside the United Network of Organ Sharing criteria (those with tumor mass >3 cm, transperitoneal tumor biopsy, or metastatic disease) or with a prior malignancy had significantly shorter survival times (P < .001). There were no differences in outcomes among patients based on differences in surgical staging or brachytherapy. Although most patients came from 1 center (n = 193), the other 11 centers had similar survival times after therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma who were treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed up by liver transplantation at 12 US centers had a 65% rate of recurrence-free survival after 5 years, showing this therapy to be highly effective. An 11.5% drop-out rate after 3.5 months of therapy indicates the appropriateness of the MELD exception. Rigorous selection is important for the continued success of this treatment.

Risk factors for liver transplant waitlist dropout in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Loco-regional therapy has been developed to reduce waitlist dropout in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting liver transplantation. We evaluated the probability of transplantation and waitlist dropout, and analyzed risk factors for waitlist dropout, in 76 patients with HCC from September 2004 to August 2006. Seventy-three (96.1%) patients received one or more preoperative loco-regional treatments and 55 (72.3%) received an orthotopic liver transplantation with a median wait time of seven months (range, 2-26 months). There were 11 dropouts (14.5%) associated with tumor progression or hepatic decompensation (median waiting time; 5.4 months and range, 0.4-13 months). Cumulative probabilities of transplantation at three, six, nine, 12, 15, and 18 months were 5.4%, 35.4%, 67.5%, 78.8%, 80.7%, and 80.7%, respectively and those of waitlist dropout at three, six, nine, 12, 15, and 18 months were 3.9%, 8.7%, 12.8%, 22.9%, 29.3%, and 29.3%, respectively. A laboratory model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score >15 or multiple tumors at the time of UNOS listing were significant risk factors for waitlist dropout (p = 0.006 and 0.026, respectively). Patients with HCC being managed with loco-regional therapy who have a laboratory MELD score >15 or multiple tumors should be considered for earlier access to liver transplantation to prevent waitlist dropout.

Trends in liver transplantation 2011

This review will highlight some of the important recent trends in liver transplantation. When possible, we will compare and contrast these trends across various regions of the world, in an effort to improve global consensus and better recognition of emerging data.

Management of HCC

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a highly prevalent and lethal neoplasia, the management of which has significantly improved during the last few years. A better knowledge of the natural history of the tumor and the development of staging systems that stratify patients according to the characteristics of the tumor, the liver disease, and the performance status, such as the BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) system, have led to a better prediction of prognosis and to a most appropriate treatment approach. Today curative therapies (resection, transplantation, ablation) can improve survival in patients diagnosed at an early HCC stage and offer a potential long-term cure. Patients with intermediate stage HCC benefit from chemoembolization and those diagnosed at advanced stage benefit from sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic and antiproliferative effects. In this article we review the current management in HCC and the new advances in this field.

Number and tumor size are not sufficient criteria to select patients for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an indication for liver resection or transplantation (LT). In most centers, patients whose HCC meets the Milan criteria are considered for LT. The first objective of this study was to analyze whether there is a correlation between the pathologic characteristics of the tumor, survival and recurrence rate. Second, we focused our attention on vascular invasion (VI).

METHODS

From January 1997 to December 2007, a total of 196 patients who had a preoperative diagnosis of HCC were included. The selection criteria for LT satisfied both the Milan and the San Francisco criteria (UCSF). Demographic, clinical, and pathologic information were recorded.

RESULTS

HCC was confirmed in 168 patients (85.7%). The median follow-up was 74 months. The pathologic findings showed that 106 patients (54.1%) satisfied the Milan criteria, 134 (68.4%) the UCSF criteria of whom 28 (14.3%) were beyond the Milan criteria but within the UCSF criteria, and 34 (17.3%) beyond the UCSF criteria. VI was detected in 41 patients (24%). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 90%, 85%, and 77%, respectively, according to the Milan criteria and 90%, 83%, and 76%, respectively, according to the UCSF criteria (P = NS). In univariate and multivariate analyses, tumor size and VI were significant prognostic factors affecting survival (P < 0.001). Two factors were significantly associated with VI: alfa-fetoprotein level of >400 ng/ml and tumor grade G3.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor size and VI were the only significant prognostic factors affecting survival of HCC patients. Primary liver resection could be a potential selection treatment before LT.

Alpha-fetoprotein response correlates with EASL response and survival in solitary hepatocellular carcinoma treated with transarterial therapies: a subgroup analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) is a universally recognized tumor marker in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Its utility in assessing response to treatment remains controversial. We sought to study the: (a) correlation between AFP response and imaging response, and (b) ability of AFP, EASL, and WHO response to predict survival outcomes in patients with solitary HCC.

METHODS

Six hundred and twenty-nine HCC patients were treated with transarterial locoregional therapies over an 11-year period. To eliminate confounding factors, we included patients with single tumors, baseline AFP ≥200ng/ml, and no extrahepatic disease; this identified our study cohort of 51 patients. AFP response was defined as>50% decrease from baseline; this was correlated to EASL and WHO response criteria by Kappa agreement, Pearson correlation and receiver operating curves. Survival analyses were performed by Landmark, risk-of-death and Mantel-Byar methodologies. None of the patients received sorafenib.

RESULTS

Three months post-treatment, AFP and EASL response correlated well (Kappa: 0.83; Pearson: 0.84); the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of AFP in predicting EASL response at 3 months were 96.6%, 85.7%, 92.3%, and 93.3%, respectively. Correlation with WHO response was low. From the 3-month landmark, WHO, EASL, and AFP responders survived longer than non-responders (p=0.006, 0.0001, and <0.0001, respectively). The risk of death was lower for EASL and AFP responders by both risk-of-death and Mantel-Byar methodologies (p <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Response by AFP and EASL are predictors of survival outcome in patients with solitary HCC. AFP correlates with imaging response assessment by EASL guidelines. Achieving AFP response should be one of the therapeutic intents of locoregional therapies (LRTs).

Systematic review: the role of liver transplantation in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Liver transplantation offers a potential cure for this otherwise devastating disease. The selection of the most appropriate candidates is paramount in an era of graft shortage.

AIM

To review systematically the role of liver transplantation in the management of HCC in current clinical practice.

METHODS

An electronic literature search using PUBMED (1980-2010) was performed. Search terms included HCC, hepatoma, liver cancer, and liver transplantation.

RESULTS

Liver transplantation is a highly successful treatment for HCC, in patients within Milan criteria (MC), defined as a solitary tumour ≤50 mm in diameter or ≤3 tumours ≤30 mm in diameter in the absence of extra-hepatic or vascular spread. Other eligibility criteria for liver transplantation are also used in clinical practice, such as the University of California, San Francisco criteria, with outcomes comparable to MC. Loco-regional therapies have a role in the bridging treatment of HCC by minimising wait-list drop-out secondary to tumour progression. Beyond MC, encouraging results have been demonstrated for patients with down-staged tumours. Post-liver transplantation, there is no evidence to support a specific immunosuppressive regimen. In the context of an insufficient cadaveric donor pool to meet demand, the role of adult living donation may be increasingly important.

CONCLUSIONS

Liver transplantation offers a curative therapy for selected patients with HCC. The optimisation of eligibility criteria is paramount to ensure that maximum benefit is accrued. Although wait-list therapies have been incorporated into clinical practice, additional high quality data are required to support this strategy.

Increasing disparity in waitlist mortality rates with increased model for end-stage liver disease scores for candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma versus candidates without hepatocellular carcinoma

Candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within the Milan criteria (MC) receive standardized Model for End-Stage LIver Disease (MELD) exception points because of the projected risk of tumor expansion beyond the MC. Exception points at listing are meant to be equivalent to a 15% rusj if 90-day mortality, with additional points granted every 3 months, equivalent to a 10% increased morality risk. We analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing database (January 1, 2005 to May 31, 2009) to compare the 90-day waitlist outcomes of HCC candidates and non-HCC candidates with similar MELD scores. Two hundred fifty-nine HCC candidates (4.1%) who were initially listed with 22 MELD exception points were removed because of death or clinical deterioration within 90 days of listing, whereas 283 non-HCC candidates (11.0%) with initial laboratory MELD scores of 21 to 23 were removed. Ninety-three HCC candidates (4.6%) with 25 exception points (after 3-6 months of waiting) were removed because of death or clinical deterioration within 90 days, whereas 805 non-HCC candidates (17.3%) with laboratory MELD scores of 24 to 26 were removed. Twenty HCC candidates (3.0%) with 28 exception points (after 6-9 months of waiting) were removed for death or clinical deterioration within 90 days, whereas 646 non-HCC candidates (23.6%) with laboratory MELD scores of 27 to 29 were removed. In multivariate logistic regression models, HCC candidates had significantly lower 90-day odds of waitlist removal for death or clinical deterioration (P < 0.001). Over time, the risk of waitlist removal for death or clinical deterioration was unchanged for HCC candidates (P = 0.17), whereas it increased significantly for non-HCC candidates. The current allotment of HCC exception points should be re-evaluated because of the stable risk of waitlist dropout for these candidates.

Impact of geographic disparity on liver allocation for hepatocellular cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Liver allocation for hepatocellular cancer (HCC) is undergoing constant re-evaluation in the United States, but the impact of geographic differences in organ access has not been examined.

METHODS

From February 28th, 2002 until November 20th, 2009, 9730 adult patients with T2 HCC and 326 Beyond Milan HCC patients were studied using the UNOS database. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were generated and log-rank tests were used to test for differences in survival curves.

RESULTS

Length of waiting time and presence/absence of loco-regional therapy in T2 HCC patients did not significantly impact transplant recipient (p=0.65) and graft survival (p=0.74) (Fig. 1B). Regions with median waiting times >6 months performed more loco-regional therapy (Fig. 1D) and had significantly higher waiting list dropout rates (Regions 1: p=0.01; 5: p<0.001, and 9: p<0.001). T2 HCC post-transplant outcomes were not significantly different between UNOS regions (Fig. 2) or between T2 and Beyond Milan HCC patients (transplant recipient p=0.37, and graft p=0.72 survival) (Fig. 1C). The Beyond Milan cohort had significantly greater dropout/death (p=0.007) and a worse overall survival trend (p=0.11) (Fig. 1C).

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of the UNOS database shows inhomogeneous access to liver transplantation in the United States. Regions with longer waiting times had significantly higher T2 HCC dropout rates (Table 2), and used more loco-regional therapy (Fig. 1D). Conversely, T2 HCC patients had uniform liver transplant outcomes despite geographic differences (Fig. 2). Beyond Milan HCC patients showed significantly greater dropout/death (p=0.007) and a worse overall survival trend in an intent-to-treat analysis (p=0.11) (Fig. 1C).

Rural residency and the risk of mortality while waiting for liver transplantation

Our liver transplant program services a region that has a prominent rural demographic. The influence of rural residency on liver transplant wait-list mortality has not been previously studied. We hypothesized that residence in a rural setting, by imposing challenges to medical care access, might be associated with inferior survival while waiting for liver transplantation. To test this hypothesis, multivariable time-to-event analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazards and competing risks regression on data from a consecutive five-yr cohort of 159 primary liver transplant candidates, to derive covariate adjusted effect measures for the association between residence in a rural area and wait-list mortality. For the primary analysis, a standardized, census-based, definition was used to assign rural residency status. The Kaplan-Meier estimated 90-d and one-yr wait-list mortality for the cohort was 7.6% (95% CI: 4.2-13.8) and 15.6% (95% CI: 9.4-25.2). The covariate adjusted hazard ratio for the relationship between Rural and Small Town residency status and wait-list mortality was 0.497 (95% CI: 0.171-1.438, p = 0.197) for the Cox regression model and 0.628 (95% CI: 0.224-1.757, p = 0.376) for the competing risk regression model. As defined in this study, candidate residence in a rural setting was not found to be associated with inferior survival while awaiting liver transplantation.

Model for end-stage liver disease: end of the first decade

The Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is the basis for allocation of liver allografts for transplantation in the United States. The MELD score, as an objective scale of disease severity, is also used in the management of patients with chronic liver disease in the nontransplant setting. Several models have been proposed to improve the MELD score. The authors believe that the MELD score is, by design, continually evolving and lends itself to continued refinement and improvement to serve as a metric to optimize organ allocation in the future.

MELD Exceptions and Rates of Waiting List Outcomes

Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD)-based allocation of deceased donor livers allows exceptions for patients whose score may not reflect their true mortality risk. We hypothesized that organ procurement organizations (OPOs) may differ in exception practices, use of exceptions may be increasing over time, and exception patients may be advantaged relative to other patients. We analyzed longitudinal MELD score, exception and outcome in 88 981 adult liver candidates as reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing from 2002 to 2010. Proportion of patients receiving an HCC exception was 0-21.4% at the OPO-level and 11.9-18.8% at the region level; proportion receiving an exception for other conditions was 0.0%-13.1% (OPO-level) and 3.7-9.5 (region-level). Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exceptions rose over time (10.5% in 2002 vs. 15.5% in 2008, HR = 1.09 per year, p<0.001) as did other exceptions (7.0% in 2002 vs. 13.5% in 2008, HR = 1.11, p<0.001). In the most recent era of HCC point assignment (since April 2005), both HCC and other exceptions were associated with decreased risk of waitlist mortality compared to nonexception patients with equivalent listing priority (multinomial logistic regression odds ratio [OR] = 0.47 for HCC, OR = 0.43 for other, p<0.001) and increased odds of transplant (OR = 1.65 for HCC, OR = 1.33 for other, p<0.001). Policy advantages patients with MELD exceptions; differing rates of exceptions by OPO may create, or reflect, geographic inequity.

Genetic variations in plasma circulating DNA of HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma patients predict recurrence after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Recurrence prediction of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) present a great challenge because of a lack of biomarkers. Genetic variations play an important role in tumor development and metastasis.

METHODS

Oligonucleotide microarrays were used to evaluate the genetic characteristics of tumor DNA in 30 HBV-related HCC patients who were underwent LT. Recurrence-related single-nucleotide polymorphism were selected, and their prognostic value was assessed and validated in two independent cohorts of HCC patients (N = 102 and N = 77), using pretransplant plasma circulating DNA. Prognostic significance was assessed by Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and log-rank tests. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate prognosis-related factors.

RESULTS

rs894151 and rs12438080 were significantly associated with recurrence (P = .003 and P = .004, respectively). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that the co-index of the 2 SNPs was an independent prognostic factor for recurrence (P = .040). Similar results were obtained in the third cohort (N = 77). Furthermore, for HCC patients (all the 3 cohorts) exceeding Milan criteria, the co-index was a prognostic factor for recurrence and survival (P<.001 and P = .002, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated first that genetic variations of rs894151 and rs12438080 in pretransplant plasma circulating DNA are promising prognostic markers for tumor recurrence in HCC patients undergoing LT and identify a subgroup of patients who, despite having HCC exceeding Milan criteria, have a low risk of post-transplant recurrence.

Toward optimizing the indications for orthotopic liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma

1. Liver transplantation is currently an effective therapy for patients with HCC who meet the Milan criteria. 2. The proportion of patients on waiting lists for liver transplantation who have HCC has increased substantially in recent years. HCC is currently one of the major indications for liver transplantation; it is the indication for approximately one-third of liver transplants. 3. If the Milan criteria are not met, the survival rates after liver transplantation for HCC tend to decrease, mainly because of the catastrophic consequences of HCC recurrence. 4. A few studies have supported liver transplantation when the Milan criteria are exceeded, but extensions beyond the Milan criteria remain controversial. Even if an individual patient with HCC who does not meet the Milan criteria might benefit from liver transplantation, the limited number of currently available donor organs limits the indications for liver transplantation to those patients with HCC who have the greatest likelihood of survival after the procedure. 5. To patients with early-stage HCC, surgical resection can be offered if the hepatocellular function is well maintained and severe portal hypertension is not present. 6. To enable patients with HCC to have access to liver transplantation that is similar to the access for other patients without HCC in the MELD allocation system, additional points based on the number and size of HCC lesions are assigned to patients on the waiting list. However, this system requires further refinement to ensure that it is as fair as possible. 7. Liver transplantation for HCC should be restricted to those patients who are expected to have the same posttransplant survival as that of patients with nonneoplastic end-stage chronic liver disease. 8. On the basis of these considerations, a 5-year survival rate of 50% after liver transplantation for HCC seems too low.

Hepatocellular carcinoma and liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hepatocelluar carcinoma (HCC) continues to grow in scope and magnitude as a clinical entity. Liver transplantation has been shown to be a potentially curative treatment for a select group of patients with HCC. The role of liver transplantation as part of the multidisciplinary treatment of HCC continues to evolve.

RECENT FINDINGS

The use of liver transplantation as treatment for HCC continues to grow as selection criteria are refined to optimize outcomes. The Milan criteria (T2) are considered the standard selection criteria but have been challenged in recent years as being too limiting. Treatment for HCC patients awaiting liver transplantation includes a number of ablative techniques that may arrest tumor growth. Similar treatments may potentially downsize large (>T2) HCC so that they fall into the exception criteria for liver transplantation (downstaging), which is an area of ongoing study. Prioritizing HCC patients on the liver transplantation waiting list remains a difficult balance with non-HCC patients. After several downward adjustments of priority for HCC patients, the current system of awarding set, defined priority scores with time-dependent increases for HCC patients who remain within Milan criteria (compared to a continuous priority scale for non-HCC patients), continues to give HCC patients excess priority in access to liver transplantation. Despite this, outcomes for HCC patients remain inferior to non-HCC patients after liver transplantation.

SUMMARY

Liver transplantation remains an acceptable treatment for select HCC patients. Optimizing patient selection and pretransplant treatment, and refining prioritization in relation to non-HCC patients for these scarce resource cadaveric livers continues to challenge the transplant community.

Can the dropout risk of candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma predict survival after liver transplantation?

In the last US national conference on liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a continuous priority score, that incorporates model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), alpha-fetoprotein and tumor size, was recommended to ensure a more equitable liver allocation. However, prioritizing highest alpha-fetoprotein levels or largest tumors may select lesions at a higher risk for recurrence; similarly, patients with higher degree of liver failure could have lower postoperative survival. Data from 300 adult HCC recipients were reviewed and the proposed HCC-MELD equation was applied to verify if it can predict post-transplantation survival. The 5-year survival and recurrence rates after transplantation were 72.8 and 13.5%, respectively. Cox regression analysis confirmed HCC-MELD as predictive of both postoperative survival and recurrence (p < 0.001). The 5-year predicted survival and recurrence rates were plotted against the HCC-MELD-based dropout probability: the higher the dropout probability while on waiting list, the lower the predicted survival after transplantation, that is worsened by hepatitis C positivity; similarly, the higher the predicted HCC recurrence rate after transplantation. The HCC priority score could predict the postoperative survival of HCC recipients and could be useful in selecting patients with greater possibilities of survival, resulting in higher post-transplantation survival rates of HCC populations.

Outcome after partial hepatectomy for hepatocellular cancer within the Milan criteria

BACKGROUND

There is a trend to offer liver transplantation to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with tumour status within the Milan criteria but with preserved liver function. This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of such patients following partial hepatectomy as primary treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on all adult patients with HCC and tumour status within the Milan criteria undergoing partial hepatectomy at a single centre from 1995 to 2008. Their outcomes were compared with those of similar patients having right-lobe living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) as primary treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 408 patients with HCC were enrolled. Some 384 patients with a solitary tumour 5 cm or less in diameter had a better 5-year survival rate than 24 patients with oligonodular tumours (2-3 nodules, each 3 cm or less in size) (70·7 versus 46 per cent; P = 0·025). Multivariable analysis identified younger age (65 years or less), lack of postoperative complications, negative resection margin, absent microvascular invasion and non-cirrhotic liver as predictors of favourable overall survival. The 5-year survival rate of 287 younger patients with chronic liver disease and R0 hepatectomy was 72·8 per cent, comparable to that of 81 per cent in 50 similar patients treated by LDLT (P = 0·093).

CONCLUSION

Partial hepatectomy for patients with HCC and tumour status within the Milan criteria achieved a satisfactory 5-year survival rate, particularly in younger patients with solitary tumours and R0 hepatectomy. Patients with oligonodular tumours have a worse survival and might benefit from liver transplantation.