A comparative analysis of transarterial downstaging for hepatocellular carcinoma: chemoembolization versus radioembolization

Radioembolization and chemoembolization for unresectable neuroendocrine liver metastases - a systematic review

This review examines the clinical efficacy and safety of the use of hepatic arterial chemoembolization, bland embolization and radioembolization in the treatment of unresectable neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases (NETLM). Response to treatment, survival outcome and toxicity were examined in this review of 37 studies comprising 1575 patients. These therapies are safe and effective in the treatment of NETLM. Prospective clinical trials to compare the relative efficacy and toxicity are warranted.

Radionuclide therapy beyond radioiodine

For decades, Iodine-131 has been used for the treatment of patients with thyroid cancer. In recent years, increasingly, other radiopharmaceuticals are in clinical use in the treatment of various malignant diseases. Although in principle these therapies-as in all applications of radionuclides-special radiation protection measures are required, a separate nuclear medicine therapy department is not necessary in many cases due to the lower or lack of gamma radiation. In the following article, four different radionuclide therapies are more closely presented which are emerging in the last years. One of them is the "Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy," the so-called PRRT in which radiolabeled somatostatin (SST)-receptor(R) ligands are used in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. On the basis of radiolabeled antibodies against CD20-positive cells, the so-called radioimmunotherapy is used in the treatment of certain forms of malignant lymphoma. In primary or secondary liver tumors, the (90)Y-labeled particles can be administered. Last but not the least, the palliative approach of bone-seeking radiopharmaceuticals is noted in patients with painful bone metastases.

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).

Interventional therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the third most common cause of cancer-related death. In the past few years, staging systems have been developed that enable patients to be stratified into treatment algorithms in a multidisciplinary setting. Several of these treatments involve minimally invasive image-guided therapy that can be performed by radiologists.

Dosimetry based on 99mTc-macroaggregated albumin SPECT/CT accurately predicts tumor response and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with 90Y-loaded glass microspheres: preliminary results

Radioembolization of liver cancers using (90)Y-loaded microspheres is experiencing more widespread use. However, few data are available concerning the doses delivered to the tumors and the healthy liver. This retrospective study was conducted to calculate the tumor dosimetry (planned tumor dose [T(plan) D]) and nontumor dosimetry in patients treated by (90)Y-loaded glass microspheres and determine whether tumor dosimetry could predict response and survival.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including 16 with portal vein thrombosis (PVT), were treated with (90)Y-loaded glass microspheres. The T(plan) D and the dose delivered to the injected healthy liver were calculated using a quantitative analysis of the (99m)Tc-macroaggregated albumin ((99m)Tc-MAA) SPECT/CT exam. Responses were assessed after 3 mo, using the criteria of the European Association for the Study of the Liver. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier tests.

RESULTS

The response rate was 69% for the overall population and 75% for the PVT patients. The dose delivered to the tumor was the only parameter associated with response with multivariate analysis (P = 0.019). A threshold T(plan) D value of 205 Gy was predictive of response, with a sensitivity of 100% and an accuracy of 91%. Quantitative (99m)Tc-MAA SPECT/CT allowed us to increase the injected activity for 4 patients with large lesions. PFS was only 5.2 mo and OS 9 mo when using a T(plan) D of less than 205 Gy versus 14 mo (P = 0.0003) and 18 mo (P = 0.0322), respectively, with a T(plan) D of 205 Gy or more.

CONCLUSION

Quantitative (99m)Tc-MAA SPECT/CT is predictive of response, PFS, and OS. Dosimetry based on (99m)Tc-MAA SPECT/CT can be used for the selection of patients and for an adaptation of treatment planning, especially in selected patients (particularly in the case of large tumors). These results also confirm the efficacy and safety of (90)Y-loaded microspheres in treating HCC, even in the presence of PVT (and especially when (99m)Tc-MAA uptake is seen inside the PVT).

Confirmation of drug delivery after liver chemoembolization: direct tissue doxorubicin measurement by UHPLC-MS-MS

Because liver cancer is rarely suitable for surgery, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) is used for palliative therapy. In this procedure, an emulsion of doxorubicin in iodized oil is injected directly into liver tumors through a catheter positioned within the artery supplying blood flow to the tumor. At present, there is limited understanding of factors affecting the delivery and dispersion of doxorubicin within treated tumors during TACE. This study addresses the development and application of an ultrahigh-pressure liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS-MS) method for rapid confirmation of drug delivery after TACE in a rabbit VX2 liver cancer model. Doxorubicin levels in liver tumors were measured using UHPLC-MS-MS and compared with computed tomography measured levels of iodized oil, a metric used clinically to indicate drug delivery. We found that tissue drug levels determined using UHPLC-MS-MS did not correlate with the regional iodized oil concentration (vehicle) within tumors following TACE, suggesting that chemotherapeutic drugs like doxorubicin spread throughout tumors, and that lack of iodized oil staining in portions of a tumor does not necessarily indicate inadequate therapy during TACE.

Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma

Radioembolization is a form of brachytherapy in which intra-arterially injected (90)Y-loaded microspheres serve as sources for internal radiation purposes. It produces average disease control rates above 80% and is usually very well tolerated. Main complications do not result from the microembolic effect, even in patients with portal vein occlusion, but rather from an excessive irradiation of non-target tissues including the liver. All the evidence that support the use of radioembolization in HCC is based on retrospective series or non-controlled prospective studies. However, reliable data can be obtained from the literature, particularly since the recent publication of large series accounting for nearly 700 patients. When compared to the standard of care for the intermediate and advanced stages (transarterial embolization and sorafenib), radioembolization consistently provides similar survival rates. Two indications seem particularly appealing in the boundaries of these stages for first-line radioembolization. First, the treatment of patients straddling between the intermediate and advanced stages (intermediate patients with bulky or bilobar disease that are considered poor candidates for TACE, and advanced patients with solitary tumors invading a segmental or lobar branch of the portal vein). Second, the treatment of patients that are slightly above the criteria for resection, ablation or transplantation, for which downstaging could open the door for a radical approach. Radioembolization can also be used to treat patients progressing to TACE or sorafenib. With a number of clinical trials underway, the available evidence shows that it adds a significant value to the therapeutic weaponry against HCC of tertiary care centers dealing with this major cancer problem.

Radioembolization for primary and metastatic liver cancer

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma is increasing. Most patients present beyond potentially curative options and are usually affected by underlying cirrhosis. In this scenario, transarterial therapies, such as radioembolization, are rapidly gaining acceptance as a potential therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma and liver metastases. Radioembolization is a catheter-based liver-directed therapy that involves the injection of micron-sized embolic particles loaded with a radioisotope by use of percutaneous transarterial techniques. Cancer cells are preferentially supplied by arterial blood and normal hepatocytes by portal venous blood; therefore, radioembolization specifically targets tumor cells with a high dose of lethal radiation and spares healthy hepatocytes. The antitumor effect mostly comes from radiation rather than embolization. The most commonly used radioisotope is yttrium-90. The commercially available devices are TheraSphere (glass based; MDS Nordion, Ottawa, Canada) and SIR-Sphere (resin based; Sirtex, Lane Cove, Australia). The procedure is performed on an outpatient basis. The incidence of complications is comparatively less than other locoregional therapies and may include nausea, fatigue, abdominal pain, hepatic dysfunction, biliary injury, fibrosis, radiation pneumonitis, gastrointestinal ulcers, and vascular injury. However, these complications can be avoided by meticulous pretreatment assessment, careful patient selection, and adequate dosimetry. This article focuses on both the technical and clinical aspects of radioembolization with emphasis on patient selection, uses and complications.

Recommendations for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an international consensus conference report

Although liver transplantation is a widely accepted treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), much controversy remains and there is no generally accepted set of guidelines. An international consensus conference was held on Dec 2-4, 2010, in Zurich, Switzerland, with the aim of reviewing current practice regarding liver transplantation in patients with HCC and to develop internationally accepted statements and guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the Danish model. 19 working groups of experts prepared evidence-based reviews according to the Oxford classification, and drafted recommendations answering 19 specific questions. An independent jury of nine members was appointed to review these submissions and make final recommendations, after debates with the experts and audience at the conference. This report presents the final 37 statements and recommendations, covering assessment of candidates for liver transplantation, criteria for listing in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients, role of tumour downstaging, management of patients on the waiting list, role of living donation, and post-transplant management.

Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by intra-arterial infusion of radio-emitter compounds: trans-arterial radio-embolisation of HCC

Traditional radiotherapy is only effective in treating hepatocellular cancer (HCC) in doses above 50 Gy, but this is above the recommended liver radiation exposure of about 35 Gy, which is an important limitation making this treatment unsuitable for routine clinical practice. Trans-arterial radio-embolisation (TARE), consists of delivery of compounds linked to radio-emitter particles which end up in hepatic end-arterioles or show affinity for the neoplasm itself, allowing localised delivery of doses beyond 120 Gy. These are well tolerated in patients treated with this type of internal radiation therapy. TARE for HCC is used for palliative treatment of advanced disease which cannot be treated in other ways, or for tumour down-staging before liver transplantation, or as adjuvant therapy for surgically resected HCC. Tumour response after TARE is between 25% and 60% if assessed by using RECIST criteria, and 80% by EASL criteria. In this review we outline the advantages and limitations of radio-emitter therapy including 131-I, 90-Y and 188-Re. We include several observational, and all comparative studies using these compounds. In particular we compare TARE to trans-arterial chemo-embolisation and other intra-arterial techniques.

Tumoral and angiogenesis factors in hepatocellular carcinoma after locoregional therapy

Locoregional therapy (LRT) is used as a bridge to orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. Liver explants in OLT patients with HCC were studied regarding both tumor stage, histology, and immunohistochemical staining for cytokeratin (CK)7, CK19, P53, Ki-67, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Patients receiving no LRT (control) (n=30) were compared with LRT treatment groups with conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) (n=25) or drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB TACE) (n=17). Tumor stage and histology were similar between treatment and control groups. The mean percent necrosis was significantly higher for treatment groups versus the control group (p<0.0001 for both groups versus control) and was significantly higher in the cTACE group versus the DEB TACE group. Only the DEB TACE group showed peritumoral CK19 positivity, and tumors were all CK19-negative. Using a threshold of 50% of tumoral cells, tumoral VEGF was significantly different between groups, with the control group having the highest degree of positivity; however, peritumoral VEGF was not significantly different between the groups. The Ki-67 proliferation fraction was higher in the treated groups with a statistically significant difference between the DEB-treated group and those without treatment (p=0.02). There were no statistically significant differences in tumoral or peritumoral CK7 or p53. Percent necrosis and percent Ki-67 positivity were higher with LRT, with a significant difference between groups for percent necrosis, confirming that LRT causes necrosis and suggesting that treatment leads to increased proliferation and decreased tumoral VEGF.

Treating and downstaging hepatocellular carcinoma in the caudate lobe with yttrium-90 radioembolization

PURPOSE

This study was designed to determine the technical feasibility, safety, efficacy, and potential to downstage patients to within transplantation criteria when treating patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of the caudate lobe using Y90 radioembolization.

METHODS

During a 4-year period, 8 of 291 patients treated with radioembolization for unresectable HCC had disease involving the caudate lobe. All patients were followed for treatment-related clinical/biochemical toxicities, serum tumor marker response, and treatment response. Imaging response was assessed with the World Health Organization (WHO) and European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) classification schemes. Pathologic response was reported as percent necrosis at explantation.

RESULTS

Caudate lobe radioembolization was successfully performed in all eight patients. All patients presented with both cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Half were United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) stage T3 (n = 4, 50%). Fatigue was reported in half of the patients (n = 4, 50%). One (13%) grade 3/4 bilirubin toxicity was reported. One patient (13%) showed complete tumor response by WHO criteria, and three patients (38%) showed complete response using EASL guidelines. Serum AFP decreased by more than 50% in most patients (n = 6, 75%). Four patients (50%) were UNOS downstaged from T3 to T2, three of who underwent transplantation. One specimen showed histopathologic evidence of 100% complete necrosis, and two specimens demonstrated greater than 50% necrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Radioembolization with yttrium-90 appears to be a feasible, safe, and effective treatment option for patients with unresectable caudate lobe HCC. It has the potential to downstage patients to transplantation.

Criteria for liver transplantation for HCC: what should the limits be?

Liver transplantation is a well-established treatment in a subset of patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. The Milan criteria (single nodule up to 5 cm, up to three nodules none larger than 3 cm, with no evidence of extrahepatic spread or macrovascular invasion) have been traditionally accepted as standard of care. However, some groups have proposed that these criteria are too restrictive, and exclude some patients from transplantation who might benefit from this procedure. Transplanting patients with tumors beyond the established criteria falls into two categories, those whose tumors are beyond the Milan criteria at presentation without the use of treatment prior to transplantation (expanded criteria), and those in whom treatment allows the Milan Criteria to be fulfilled (down-staging). Currently, however, there is no international consensus regarding these approaches in clinical practice. The purpose of this systematic review is to clarify this debate through a critical analysis of available data. Finally, some comments on predictive factors apart from morphological characteristics are also addressed.

Recommendations for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an international consensus conference report

Although liver transplantation is a widely accepted treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), much controversy remains and there is no generally accepted set of guidelines. An international consensus conference was held on Dec 2-4, 2010, in Zurich, Switzerland, with the aim of reviewing current practice regarding liver transplantation in patients with HCC and to develop internationally accepted statements and guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the Danish model. 19 working groups of experts prepared evidence-based reviews according to the Oxford classification, and drafted recommendations answering 19 specific questions. An independent jury of nine members was appointed to review these submissions and make final recommendations, after debates with the experts and audience at the conference. This report presents the final 37 statements and recommendations, covering assessment of candidates for liver transplantation, criteria for listing in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients, role of tumour downstaging, management of patients on the waiting list, role of living donation, and post-transplant management.

Recommendations for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an international consensus conference report

Although liver transplantation is a widely accepted treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), much controversy remains and there is no generally accepted set of guidelines. An international consensus conference was held on Dec 2-4, 2010, in Zurich, Switzerland, with the aim of reviewing current practice regarding liver transplantation in patients with HCC and to develop internationally accepted statements and guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the Danish model. 19 working groups of experts prepared evidence-based reviews according to the Oxford classification, and drafted recommendations answering 19 specific questions. An independent jury of nine members was appointed to review these submissions and make final recommendations, after debates with the experts and audience at the conference. This report presents the final 37 statements and recommendations, covering assessment of candidates for liver transplantation, criteria for listing in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients, role of tumour downstaging, management of patients on the waiting list, role of living donation, and post-transplant management.

Comparative analysis of the safety and efficacy of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and yttrium-90 radioembolization in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE

To compare retrospectively the safety and efficacy of yttrium-90 ((90)Y) radioembolization with the safety and efficacy of chemoembolization in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Survival and complication rates were evaluated for patients with HCC who underwent chemoembolization or radioembolization at a single institution between August 2007 and April 2010. Complications were graded according to a standardized grading system for embolization procedures. Survival was determined via the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariable analysis for factors affecting survival was performed.

RESULTS

This study included 73 patients with HCC who underwent index embolization with radioembolization (n = 38; 52.1%) or chemoembolization (n = 35; 47.9%). The two patient populations were similar in terms of demographics, etiology of cirrhosis, functional status, tumor characteristics, Child-Pugh class, previous liver-directed therapy, and number of patients with bilirubin > 2.0 mg/dL. There was no significant difference in survival between the radioembolization (median 8.0 months) and chemoembolization (median 10.3 months) cohorts (P = .33). Postembolization syndrome was significantly more severe in patients who underwent chemoembolization, which led to increased total hospitalization rates in these patients. The rates of other complications and rehospitalization were similar between groups. Increased age, Child-Pugh class B, hepatitis seropositivity, bilobar tumor distribution, tumor vascular invasion, and presence of extrahepatic metastases were associated with reduced patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with radioembolization did not show a survival advantage over patients treated with chemoembolization. However, patients who underwent chemoembolization had significantly higher rates of hospitalization as a result of postembolization syndrome.

Presentation and outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma patients at a western centre

BACKGROUND

The present study examines the presentation and outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at a Western centre over the last decade.

METHODS

Between January 2000 and September 2009, 1010 patients with HCC were evaluated at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC). Retrospectively, four treatment groups were classified: no treatment (NT), systemic therapy (ST), hepatic artery-based therapy (HAT) and surgical intervention (SI) including radiofrequency ablation, hepatic resection and transplantation. Kaplan-Meier analysis assessed survival between groups. Cox regression analysis identified factors predicting survival.

RESULTS

Patients evaluated were 75% male, 87% Caucasian, 84% cirrhotic, and predominantly diagnosed with hepatitis C. In all, 169 patients (16.5%) received NT, 25 (2.4%) received ST, 529 (51.6%) received HAT and 302 (29.5%) received SI. Median survival was 3.6, 5.6, 8.8, and 83.5 months with NT, ST, HAT and SI, respectively (P= 0.001). Transplantation increased from 9.5% to 14.2% after the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) criteria granted HCC patients priority points. Survival was unaffected by bridging transplantation with HAT or SI (P= 0.111). On multivariate analysis, treatment modality was a robust predictor of survival after adjusting for age, gender, AFP, Child-Pugh classification and cirrhosis (P < 0.001, χ(2) = 460).

DISCUSSION

  Most patients were not surgical candidates and received HAT alone. Surgical intervention, especially transplantation, yields the best survival.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhosis: evaluation of radiological and pathological response

BACKGROUND

Loco-regional therapies for cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are awaiting liver transplantation (OLT) attempt to prevent tumor progression. However, there is limited data regarding the efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as loco-regional treatment.

METHODS

From 2006 to 2009, 27 HCC patients (AJCC I, II) listed for OLT underwent SBRT. Thirty-nine lesions were treated and 27 assessed radiologically. Seventeen patients had OLT, liver explants were analyzed and 22 lesions underwent pathological evaluation.

RESULTS

In a cumulative analysis of all imaging, 30% had complete response, 7% had partial response, 56% were stable, and 7% had progression of disease. Of the 22 pathologically evaluated lesions, 37% were responders: 14% with complete response, 23% with partial response, and 63% with no response. Side effects from SBRT were recorded in three patients, which included nausea in two and liver decompensation in one.

CONCLUSION

SBRT achieves total or partial radiological response in 37% of patients and total or partial pathological response in 37% of patients with early HCC in the setting of cirrhosis. SBRT may be a safe and effective alternative for local tumor control in patients with HCC and cirrhosis awaiting OLT.

Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a review of the evidence and treatment recommendations

Treatment decisions for hepatocellular carcinoma involve the evaluation of multiple factors including tumor size, location, and morphology; comorbidity and/or extrahepatic disease; health status; patient preferences; and the treating physician's expertise and skill. For patients who are not candidates for transplant or resection, and for whom other therapies (radiofrequency ablation, systemic chemotherapies, transarterial embolization or chemoembolization), may have limited efficacy, an urgent need for bridging procedures, to enable surgery or ablation, or meet transplantation criteria, has led to investigations with radioembolization. A number of recent reports have supported the effectiveness of Yttrium-90 ((90)Y) labeled microspheres to treat intermediate and advanced disease in patients with good overall functional status and liver reserve; patients with portal vein involvement and in a limited role to treat unresectable early-stage disease. This review addresses response rates and survival benefit following radioembolization in different patient populations, in centers throughout Europe, North America, and Asia, and across the spectrum of patients presenting with various prognostic factors. By using stringent selection criteria and conservative models for calculating radiation dosage, radioembolization can be performed safely even in cirrhotic patients, without postembolization syndrome or radiation-induced liver disease, and even with multiple treatments to whole or part of the liver.

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.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: locoregional and targeted therapies

HCC is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Advances in cancer screening and surveillance have allowed for earlier detection of tumors, affording greater treatment potential. The advent of locoregional therapies has generated greater treatment options for patients with HCC. Either alone or in combination as an adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy, these novel approaches continue to hold promise for improving morbidity and/or mortality of patients with HCC. The emergence of systemic molecular targeted therapies increases the role of translational science. Whereas surgical resection and transplantation conventionally form the cornerstone of curative approaches, the advancement of locoregional therapies holds great promise in adding to the curative armamentarium.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: prevention and therapy

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an aggressive malignancy of the liver and occurs most often in the setting of chronic liver disease. The most common acquired causes for this are chronic viral hepatitis infections (mostly HBV and HCV), and alcohol. Other causes include nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-related nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, autoimmune liver disease, and biliary diseases. In addition, certain heritable diseases like hemochromatosis and α-1-antitrypsin deficiency can also lead to HCC. Therefore, prevention of HCC can be achieved by preventing and controlling these problems. For treatment, curative modalities are surgical resection and liver transplantation. However, most patients are not candidates for these surgical maneuvers, and outcomes are poor. New therapeutic developments have brought some improvement with both local and systemic disease control.

Radiographic response to locoregional therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma predicts patient survival times

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is not clear whether survival times of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are associated with their response to therapy. We analyzed the association between tumor response and survival times of patients with HCC who were treated with locoregional therapies (LRTs) (chemoembolization and radioembolization).

METHODS

Patients received LRTs over a 9-year period (n = 463). Patients with metastases, portal venous thrombosis, or who had received transplants were excluded; 159 patients with Child-Pugh B7 or lower were analyzed. Response (based on European Association for the Study of the Liver [EASL] and World Health Organization [WHO] criteria) was associated with survival times using the landmark, risk-of-death, and Mantel-Byar methodologies. In a subanalysis, survival times of responders were compared with those of patients with stable disease and progressive disease.

RESULTS

Based on 6-month data, in landmark analysis, responders survived longer than nonresponders (based on EASL but not WHO criteria: P = .002 and .0694). The risk of death was also lower for responders (based on EASL but not WHO criteria: P = .0463 and .707). Landmark analysis of 12-month data showed that responders survived longer than nonresponders (P < .0001 and .004, based on EASL and WHO criteria, respectively). The risk of death was lower for responders (P = .0132 and .010, based on EASL and WHO criteria, respectively). By the Mantel-Byar method, responders had longer survival than nonresponders, based on EASL criteria (P < .0001; P = .596 with WHO criteria). In the subanalysis, responders lived longer than patients with stable disease or progressive disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiographic response to LRTs predicts survival time. EASL criteria for response more consistently predicted survival times than WHO criteria. The goal of LRT should be to achieve a radiologic response, rather than to stabilize disease.

Hepatic Arterial Therapy as a Bridge to Ablation or Transplant in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a challenging malignancy as a result of the advanced course at presentation. Recent interventional advances have improved treatment of lesions unamenable to resection using drug-eluting microbeads delivered into the hepatic circulation. We hypothesize that the use of hepatic arterial therapy (HAT) will safely identify appropriate patients who can proceed to ablation and/or transplantation. We evaluated our open-label, multicenter, multinational, single-arm study including 240 patients with intermediate-staged HCC who received drug-eluting beads and were not initial candidates for transplantation or resection. We reviewed the resulting clinical data to determine factors leading to possible ablation or transplant. Of 240 patients undergoing HAT, 14 (5.8%) received ablation or transplant. We compared those receiving ablation or transplant with those receiving only HAT. Groups were similar regarding sex, age, median number of tumors (one; range, 1 to 25), Child's score, tobacco and alcohol abuse, and treatment type. Patients who were downstaged were more likely to have: hepatitis-related tumors (76 to 66%, P = 0.02), distinct lesions on imaging (92 to 76%, P = 0.004), and less than 25 per cent parenchymal involvement (84 to 59%, P = 0.0001). These patients typically had one tumor frequently in the left lobe (58.8 vs 30.9%, P = 0.0001), accessible through segmental arteries (47 vs 17%, P = 0.001), with increased segmental branch occlusion (57 vs 39%, P = 0.02). HAT should be considered a potential bridging therapy to eventual ablation or transplant in the multimodal treatment of HCC.

Transcatheter intraarterial therapies: rationale and overview

Transcatheter intraarterial therapies have proved valuable in the battle against primary and secondary hepatic malignancies. The unique aspects of all such therapies are their reduced toxicity profiles and highly effective tumor responses. These unique characteristics coupled with their minimally invasive nature provide an attractive therapeutic option in patients who may have previously had few alternatives. The concept of all catheter-based intraarterial therapies is to selectively deliver anticancer treatment to tumor(s). These therapies, which include transarterial embolization, intraarterial chemoinfusion, transarterial chemoembolization with or without drug-eluting beads, and radioembolization with use of yttrium 90, inflict lethal insult to tumors while preserving normal hepatic parenchyma. This is possible because hepatic neoplasms preferentially derive their blood supply from an arterial source while the majority of noncancerous liver is supplied by the portal vein. As part of the interventional oncology review series, in this article we describe the rationale behind each of these transcatheter therapies and provide a review of the existing medical literature.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an update

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a heterogeneous malignancy with multiple etiologies, high incidence, and high mortality. The standard surgical management for patients with HCC consists of locoregional ablation, surgical resection, or liver transplantation, depending on the background state of the liver. Eighty percent of patients initially presenting with HCC are unresectable, either due to the extent of tumor or the level of underlying hepatic dysfunction. While in patients with no evidence of cirrhosis and good hepatic function resection has been the surgical treatment of choice, it is contraindicated in patients with moderate to severe cirrhosis. Liver transplantation is the optimal surgical treatment.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed search of recent articles (from January 2000 to March 2011) was performed looking for relevant articles about hepatocellular carcinoma and its treatment. Additional articles were identified by evaluating references from selected articles.

RESULTS

Here we review criteria for transplantation, the types, indications, and role of locoregional therapy in treating the cancer and in downstaging for possible later transplantation. We also summarize the contribution of immunosuppression and adjuvant chemotherapy in the management and prevention of HCC recurrence. Finally we discuss recent advances in imaging, tumor biology, and genomics as we delineate the remaining challenges for the diagnosis and treatment of this disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Much can be improved in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC. A great challenge will be to improve patient selection to criteria based on tumor biology. Another will be to incorporate systemic agents post-operatively in patients at high risk for recurrence, paying close attention to efficacy and safety. The future direction of the effort in treating HCC will be to stimulate prospective trials, develop molecular imaging of lymphovascular invasion, to improve recipient selection, and to investigate biomarkers of tumor biology.

Significance of tumor necrosis for outcome of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving locoregional therapy prior to liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Locoregional therapy has been advocated as an effective treatment for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and the majority of patients with HCC receive locoregional therapy prior to liver transplantation (LT). We herein aim to determine the prognostic factors affecting the outcome in patients who receive pretransplantation therapy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of the prospective data of patients who received locoregional therapy before undergoing LT for HCC. The clinicopathologic features of the patients were studied using univariate and multivariate analysis to determine prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Univariate and multivariate analysis of clinicopathologic features identified mean tumor necrosis (TN) ≥60% as the sole independent factor associated with lower HCC recurrence following LT. Further, the groups of patients with mean TN ≥60% who were within the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) criteria and whose tumors beyond UCSF criteria were downstaged by TN following locoregional therapy had significantly better survival rates than the opposite groups. In-depth exploration of treatment modalities and pathological features indicated that HCC showed marked TN, while tumor nodules were well treated by locoregional therapy, and no viable tumors could be detected on radiological examination.

CONCLUSIONS

Mean TN ≥60% of tumor by locoregional therapy could offer better outcomes for patients with HCC undergoing LT. Therefore, locoregional therapy should be considered for patients with HCC awaiting LT or potential candidates for LT in order to induce TN as well as leading to diminished viable tumor burden and reducing the odds of HCC recurrence following LT.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: MR staging and therapeutic decisions

Staging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents a controversial and complex topic, since prognosis is largely dependent on several variables other than tumor extension, such liver function and general clinical conditions. Up to now, there is no agreement regarding the most reliable clinical staging system for HCC. Ideally, the staging system should be simple and easily obtainable and should not be influenced by differences in patient populations. So far, in Western countries, the Barcelona Clinic for Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system represents the most frequently adopted classification. It is simple and guides the clinicians through the therapeutic decision process. Magnetic resonance imaging represents the most proper imaging modality for correct staging of HCC, providing high accuracy in evaluating tumor extension as well as tumor response to treatment (after percutaneous ablation, transarterial chemoembolization, or molecular-targeted therapy). The present review describes the most frequently used staging systems and the treatment options that are recommended for the different stages of the disease.

Role of the EASL, RECIST, and WHO response guidelines alone or in combination for hepatocellular carcinoma: radiologic-pathologic correlation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We sought to study receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) of the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), and World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for assessing response following locoregional therapies individually and in various combinations.

METHODS

Eighty-one patients with hepatocellular carcinoma underwent liver explantation following locoregional therapies. Response was assessed using EASL, RECIST, and WHO. Kappa statistics were used to determine inter-method agreement. Uni/multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the variables predicting complete pathologic necrosis. Numerical values were assigned to the response classes: complete response=0, partial response=1, stable disease=2, and progressive disease=3. Various mathematical combinations of EASL and WHO were tested to calculate scores and their ROCs were studied using pathological examination of the explant as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Median times (95% CI) to the WHO, RECIST, and EASL responses were 5.3 (4-11.5), 5.6 (4-11.5), and 1.3months (1.2-1.5), respectively. Kappa coefficients for WHO/RECIST, WHO/EASL, and RECIST/EASL were 0.78, 0.28, and 0.31, respectively. EASL response demonstrated significant odds ratios for predicting complete pathologic necrosis on uni/multivariate analyses. Calculated areas under the ROC curves were: RECIST: 0.63, WHO: 0.68, EASL: 0.82, EASL+WHO: 0.82, EASL×WHO: 0.85, EASL+(2×WHO): 0.79 and (2×EASL)+WHO: 0.85. An EASL×WHO Score of ⩽1 had 90.2% sensitivity for predicting complete pathologic necrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The product of WHO and EASL demonstrated better ROC than the individual guidelines for assessment of tumor response. EASL×WHO scoring system provides a simple and clinically applicable method of response assessment following locoregional therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Yttrium-90 (90Y) in the principal radionuclide therapies: an efficacy correlation between peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, radioimmunotherapy and transarterial radioembolization therapy. Ten years of experience (1999-2009)

The clinical application of the pure beta emitter (90)Y constitutes a fundamental advancement in non-invasive medicine. Nowadays, mainly three oncological therapies exploit the intrinsic emissive characteristic of (90)Y. Radionuclide therapies include peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) in neuroendocrine tumour (NET) treatment, radioimmunotherapy (RIT) in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) treatment and transarterial radioembolization therapy (TARET) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment. The last ten years of clinical experience from E-PubMed research have been reviewed and an efficacy correlation between (90)Y-therapies has shown a better objective response rate for RIT (ORR 80±15%; range 53-100) compared to PRRT (ORR 23.5±14%; range 9-50), and TARET (ORR for mCRC, 40±25%; range 19-91, and ORR for HCC, 42±20%; range 20-82). This review reports on the state of the art of the efficacy of (90)Y-therapies from the last decade and discusses new perspectives of therapeutic development.

Radioembolization results in longer time-to-progression and reduced toxicity compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Chemoembolization is one of several standards of care treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 microspheres is a novel, transarterial approach to radiation therapy. We performed a comparative effectiveness analysis of these therapies in patients with HCC.

METHODS

We collected data from 463 patients who were treated with transarterial locoregional therapies (chemoembolization or radioembolization) over a 9-year period. We excluded patients who were not appropriate for comparison and analyzed data from 245 (122 who received chemoembolization and 123 who received radioembolization). Patients were followed for signs of toxicity; all underwent imaging analysis at baseline and follow-up time points. Overall survival was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes included safety, response rate, and time-to-progression. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Abdominal pain and increased transaminase activity were more frequent following chemoembolization (P < .05). There was a trend that patients treated with radioembolization had a higher response rate than with chemoembolization (49% vs 36%, respectively, P = .104). Although time-to-progression was longer following radioembolization than chemoembolization (13.3 months vs 8.4 months, respectively, P = .046), median survival times were not statistically different (20.5 months vs 17.4 months, respectively, P = .232). Among patients with intermediate-stage disease, survival was similar between groups that received chemoembolization (17.5 months) and radioembolization (17.2 months, P = .42).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HCC treated by chemoembolization or radioembolization with Yttrium-90 microspheres had similar survival times. Radioembolization resulted in longer time-to-progression and less toxicity than chemoembolization. Post hoc analyses of sample size indicated that a randomized study with > 1000 patients would be required to establish equivalence of survival times between patients treated with these two therapies.

[Radioembolisation for hepatocellular carcinoma]

Hepatocellular carcinoma is now a major public health concern. In intermediate stages (one third of hepatocellular carcinoma patients), chemoembolization is the standard of care despite a poor tolerance and a moderate efficacy. Moreover, despite recent improvements, this technique seems in a dead end. Radioembolization could be an excellent tool for such patients. Currently (131)I-Lipiodol, (188)Re-Lipiodol, (90)Y-glass or resin microspheres are available. More recent and promising data come from microspheres, but phase II and III studies are needed before drawing any conclusion. In the future, the combination of radioembolization with systemic chemotherapy or targeted agents (particularly antiangiogenic drugs) seems very promising.