Intention-to-treat survival benefit of liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular cancer

The 2024 ILTS-ILCA consensus recommendations for liver transplantation for HCC and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Liver transplantation (LT) provides the best long-term survival outcomes for patients with liver cancer. As a result, the field of transplant oncology has grown greatly over the past few decades, and many centers have expanded their criteria to allow increased access to LT for liver malignancies. Center-level guidelines and practices in transplant oncology significantly vary across the world, leading to debate regarding the best course of treatment for this patient population. An international consensus conference was convened by the International Liver Transplantation Society and the International Liver Cancer Association on February 1-2, 2024, in Valencia, Spain to establish a more universal consensus regarding LT for oncologic indications. The conference followed the Delphi process, followed by an external expert review. Consensus statements were accepted regarding patient assessment and waitlisting criteria, pretransplant treatment (including immunotherapy) and downstaging, living donor LT, post-LT patient management, and patient- and caregiver-related outcomes. The multidisciplinary participants in the consensus conference provided up-to-date recommendations regarding the selection and management of patients with liver cancer being considered for LT. Although participants deferred to center protocols in many cases, there was great interest in safely expanding access to LT for patients with larger tumor burden and biologically amenable lesions.

The Italian Score for Organ Allocation: A Ten-Year Monocentric Retrospective Analysis in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The Italian Score for Organ Allocation (ISO), a transplant benefit oriented allocation system, was introduced in Italy in 2016. The main objective of this study is to identify risk factors for Drop-Out in hepatocellular (HCC) patients enlisted for LT before (Pre-ISO Era) and after ISO (ISO Era) introduction, while the secondary objective is to evaluate the survival results.

METHODS

CIFs for liver transplantation and Drop-Out were estimated and compared between eras. Factors associated with Drop-Out were identified through multivariable competing risks regression. Survival results were compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2020, 410 patients with HCC were listed for LT. We observed 103 vs. 217 LT and 49 vs. 41 Drop-Outs (p < 0.001) during the Pre-ISO and ISO Era, respectively. In the multivariable analysis, ISO ([sHR] 0.43; 95%CI 0.28-0.66, p < 0.001) and Alcoholic Cirrhosis ([sHR] 0.27, 95%CI 0.11-0.70; p = 0.007) were revealed to be protective factors for Drop-Out. One year after listing, the CI for Drop-Out decreased from 13.2% to 6.2% (p = 0.02). Despite no differences observed in post-LT survival, a significant difference in the intention-to-treat survival from enlisting was found (p = 0.0019).

CONCLUSIONS

Among other factors, ISO results were protective for the Drop-Out risk in HCC patients awaiting LT, with a benefit in ITT-OS survival.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: Revising the surgical approach in light of the concept of multiparametric therapeutic hierarchy

The clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is strongly influenced by several prognostic factors, mainly tumor stage, patient's health, liver function and specific characteristics of each intervention. The interplay between these factors should be carefully evaluated by a multidisciplinary tumor board. To support this, the novel "multiparametric therapeutic hierarchy" (MTH) concept has been recently proposed. This review will present the main features of available surgical treatments for HCC (liver transplantation, liver resection, ablation). Strengths and weaknesses are reported in the light of clinical decision making and of treatment allocation, with a special focus on the collocation of each treatment in the MTH framework and on how MTH may be useful in supporting clinical decision. Sequential treatments and their role to allow further surgical treatments will also be analyzed.

Fairness and pitfalls of the Italian waiting list for elective liver transplantation: The ECALITA registry study

BACKGROUND

The challenge of transplant waiting-lists is to provide organs for all candidates while maintaining efficiency and equity.

AIMS

We investigated the probability of being transplanted or of waiting-list dropout in Italy.

METHODS

Data from 12,749 adult patients waitlisted for primary liver-transplantation from January 2012 to December 2022 were collected from the National Transplant-Registry.The cohort was divided into Eras:1 (2012-2014);2 (2015-2018);and 3 (2019-2022).

RESULTS

The one-year probability of undergoing transplant increased (67.6 % in Era 1vs73.8 % in Era 3,p < 0001) with a complementary 46 % decrease in waiting-list failures. Patients with hepatocellular-carcinoma were transplanted more often than cirrhotics[at model for end-stage liver-disease (MELD)-15:HR = 1.28,95 %CI:1.21-1.35;at MELD-25:HR = 1.04,95 %CI:0.92-1.19) and those with other indications (at MELD-15:HR = 1.27,95 %CI:1.11-1.46) across all eras. Candidates with Hepatitis-B-virus (HBV)related disease had a greater probability of transplant than those with Hepatitis-C virus-related (HR = 1.13,95 %CI:1.07-1.20), alcohol-related (HR = 1.13,95 %CI:1.05-1.21), and metabolic-related (HR = 1.18,95 %CI:1.09-1.28)disease. Waiting-list failures increased by 27 % every 5 MELD-points and by 14 % for every 5-year increase in recipient-age and decreased by 10 % with each 10-cm increase in stature. Blood-group O patients showed the highest probability of waiting-list failure (HR = 1.28,95 %CI:1.15-1.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver-transplantation waiting-list success-rates have significantly improved in Italy, with patients with hepatocellular-carcinoma and/or HBV-related diseases being favored. High MELD-score, old-age, short-stature, and blood-group O were significant risk-factors for waiting-list failure. Efforts to improve organ-allocation and prioritization-policies are underway.

Survival benefit associated with liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma based on tumor burden scores at listing

INTRODUCTION

Liver transplantation (LT) provides significant survival benefits to patients with unresectable HCC. In the United States, organ allocation policies for HCCs within the United Network for Organ Sharing criteria do not prioritize patients based on their differences in oncological characteristics. This study assessed whether transplant-associated survival benefits (TASBs) vary among patients with different tumor burden scores (TBS) measured at the time of listing.

METHODS

We analyzed data from adults applying for HCC MELD exception points between 2002 and 2019, with follow-up until December 2023, using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. TBS was determined based on the largest tumor diameter and number of HCCs. Patients were categorized into low (≤3), intermediate (3.1-5), and high (>5) TBS groups. TASB was measured as the difference in 5-year survival with and without LT.

RESULTS

This study included 36,634 LT candidates. High-TBS patients had higher waitlist dropout rates and marginally lower post-transplant survival, resulting in a significantly greater TASB. The 5-year TASB for the low, intermediate, and high TBS groups were 15.7, 22.1, and 25.0 months, respectively. The adjusted survival benefit expressed in 5-year survival differences was 21.9%, 34.5%, and 39.4% in the low, intermediate, and high TBS groups, respectively (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher TBS during listing correlates with greater LT benefits for patients with unresectable HCC within UNOS criteria. We conclude that organ allocation policies in the United States should prioritize patients with high TBS due to their increased risk of dropout and comparable post-transplant survival when compared to patients with less advanced tumors.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults

Deaths from the majority of cancers are falling globally, but the incidence and mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in the United Kingdom and in other Western countries. HCC is a highly fatal cancer, often diagnosed late, with an incidence to mortality ratio that approaches 1. Despite there being a number of treatment options, including those associated with good medium to long-term survival, 5-year survival from HCC in the UK remains below 20%. Sex, ethnicity and deprivation are important demographics for the incidence of, and/or survival from, HCC. These clinical practice guidelines will provide evidence-based advice for the assessment and management of patients with HCC. The clinical and scientific data underpinning the recommendations we make are summarised in detail. Much of the content will have broad relevance, but the treatment algorithms are based on therapies that are available in the UK and have regulatory approval for use in the National Health Service.

Upfront multi-bipolar radiofrequency ablation for HCC in transplant-eligible cirrhotic patients with salvage transplantation in case of recurrence

INTRODUCTION

We aim to assess the long-term outcomes of percutaneous multi-bipolar radiofrequency (mbpRFA) as the first treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in transplant-eligible cirrhotic patients, followed by salvage transplantation for intrahepatic distant tumour recurrence or liver failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included transplant-eligible patients with cirrhosis and a first diagnosis of HCC within Milan criteria treated by upfront mbp RFA. Transplantability was defined by age <70 years, social support, absence of significant comorbidities, no active alcohol use and no recent extrahepatic cancer. Baseline variables were correlated with outcomes using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox models.

RESULTS

Among 435 patients with HCC, 172 were considered as transplantable with HCCs >2 cm (53%), uninodular (87%) and AFP >100 ng/mL (13%). Median overall survival was 87 months, with 75% of patients alive at 3 years, 61% at 5 years and 43% at 10 years. Age (p = .003) and MELD>10 (p = .01) were associated with the risk of death. Recurrence occurred in 118 patients within Milan criteria in 81% of cases. Local recurrence was observed in 24.5% of cases at 10 years and distant recurrence rates were observed in 69% at 10 years. After local recurrence, 69% of patients were still alive at 10 years. At the first tumour recurrence, 75 patients (65%) were considered transplantable. Forty-one patients underwent transplantation, mainly for distant intrahepatic tumour recurrence. The overall 5-year survival post-transplantation was 72%, with a tumour recurrence of 2.4%.

CONCLUSION

Upfront multi-bipolar RFA for a first diagnosis of early HCC on cirrhosis coupled with salvage liver transplantation had a favourable intention-to-treat long-term prognosis, allowing for spare grafts.

Outcomes of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in donation after circulatory death compared with donation after brain death: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Due to organ shortages, liver transplantation (LT) using donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD) grafts has become more common. There is limited and conflicting evidence on LT outcomes using DCD grafts compared to those using donation-after-brain death (DBD) grafts for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to summarize the current evidence on the outcomes of DCD-LT and DBD-LT in patients with HCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Online databases were searched for studies comparing DCD-LT and DBD-LT outcomes in patients with HCC and a meta-analysis was conducted using fixed- or random-effects models.

RESULTS

Five studies involving 487 (33.4%) HCC DCD-LT patients and 973 (66.6%) DBD-LT patients were included. The meta-analysis showed comparable 1-year [relative risk (RR)=0.99, 95%CI:0.95 to 1.03, p=0.53] and 3-year [RR=0.99, 95%CI:0.89 to 1.09, p=0.79] recurrence-free survival. The corresponding 1-year [RR=0.98, 95%CI:0.93 to 1.03, p=0.35] and 3-year [RR=0.94, 95%CI:0.87 to 1.01, p=0.08] patient survival and 1-year [RR=0.91, 95%CI:0.71 to 1.16, p=0.43] and 3-year [RR=0.92, 95%CI:0.67 to 1.26, p=0.59] graft survival were also comparable. There were no significant differences between the two cohorts regarding the tumor characteristics, donor/recipient risk factors and the incidence of post-operative complications, including acute rejection, primary non-function, biliary complications and retransplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, it has been found that comparable outcomes can be achieved in HCC patients using DCD-LT compared to DBD-LT, particularly when employing good quality graft, strict donor and recipient selection, and effective surgical management. The decision to utilize DCD-LT for HCC patients should be personalized, taking into consideration the risk of post-LT HCC recurrence. (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023445812).

Disparities in Access to Liver Transplant Referral and Evaluation among Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Georgia

Liver transplantation offers the best survival for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Prior studies have demonstrated disparities in transplant access; none have examined the early steps of the transplant process. We identified determinants of access to transplant referral and evaluation among patients with HCC with a single tumor either within Milan or meeting downstaging criteria in Georgia.Population-based cancer registry data from 2010 to 2019 were linked to liver transplant centers in Georgia. Primary cohort: adult patients with HCC with a single tumor ≤8 cm in diameter, no extrahepatic involvement, and no vascular involvement. Secondary cohort: primary cohort plus patients with multiple tumors confined to one lobe. We estimated time to transplant referral, evaluation initiation, and evaluation completion, accounting for the competing risk of death. In sensitivity analyses, we also accounted for non-transplant cancer treatment.Among 1,379 patients with early-stage HCC in Georgia, 26% were referred to liver transplant. Private insurance and younger age were associated with increased likelihood of referral, while requiring downstaging was associated with lower likelihood of referral. Patients living in census tracts with ≥20% of residents in poverty were less likely to initiate evaluation among those referred [cause-specific hazard ratio (csHR): 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42-0.94]. Medicaid patients were less likely to complete the evaluation once initiated (csHR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.89).Different sociodemographic factors were associated with each stage of the transplant process among patients with early-stage HCC in Georgia, emphasizing unique barriers to access and the need for targeted interventions at each step.

SIGNIFICANCE

Among patients with early-stage HCC in Georgia, age and insurance type were associated with referral to liver transplant, race, and poverty with evaluation initiation, and insurance type with evaluation completion. Opportunities to improve transplant access include informing referring providers about insurance requirements, addressing barriers to evaluation initiation, and streamlining the evaluation process.

Trends in Survival for Adult Organ Transplantation

Objective

Intent-to-treat analysis follows patients from listing to death, regardless of their transplant status, and aims to provide a more holistic scope of the progress made in adult solid-organ transplantation.

Background

Many studies have shown progress in waitlist and post-transplant survival for adult kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplants, but there is a need to provide a more comprehensive perspective of transplant outcomes for patients and their families.

Methods

Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to analyze factors contributing to intent-to-treat survival in 813,862 adults listed for kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplants. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to examine changes in waitlist, post-transplant, and intent-to-treat survival. Transplantation rates were compared using χ2 tests.

Results

Intent-to-treat survival has steadily increased for liver, heart, and lung transplants. The percentage of patients transplanted within 1 year significantly increased for heart (57.4% from 52.9%) and lung (73.5% from 33.2%). However, the percentage of patients transplanted within 1 year significantly decreased from 35.8% to 21.2% for kidney transplant. Notably, intent-to-treat survival has decreased for kidneys despite increases in waitlist and post-transplant survival, likely because of the decreased transplant rate.

Conclusion

Intent-to-treat survival steadily improved for liver, heart, and lung transplant over the 30-year study period. Continued advancements in allocation policy, immunosuppression, and improved care of patients on the waitlist may contribute to further progress in outcomes of all organs, but the increasing discrepancy in supply and demand of donor kidneys is alarming and has impeded the progress of kidney intent-to-treat survival.

What Is the Role of Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery in Treating Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Cirrhosis?

Minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) has been slowly introduced in the past two decades and today represents a major weapon in the fight against HCC, for several reasons. This narrative review conveys the major emerging concepts in the field. The rise in metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD)-related HCC means that patients with significant cardiovascular risk will benefit more profoundly from MILS. The advent of efficacious therapy is leading to conversion from non-resectable to resectable cases, and therefore more patients will be able to undergo MILS. In fact, resection outcomes with MILS are superior compared to open surgery both in the short and long term. Furthermore, indications to surgery may be further expanded by its use in Child B7 patients and by the use of laparoscopic ablation, a curative technique, instead of trans-arterial approaches in cases not amenable to radiofrequency. Therefore, in a promising new approach, multi-parametric treatment hierarchy, MILS is hierarchically superior to open surgery and comes second only to liver transplantation.

Expanding the Boundaries for Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of primary liver cancer, which was the third most common cause of cancer death worldwide in 2020. Transplantation remains the preferred treatment for cure in otherwise unresectable HCC. There are several areas of active research that have led to expansion of eligibility criteria for transplantation including local-regional therapy for downstaging patients presenting outside of the Milan criteria and identification of tumor biomarkers aiding in the early diagnosis, determining prognosis and likelihood of recurrence after transplantation for HCC. New neoadjuvant therapies and post-transplant immunosuppression regimens may also result in expansion of transplant eligibility criteria for HCC.

Transplant oncology - Current indications and strategies to advance the field

Liver transplantation (LT) was originally described by Starzl as a promising strategy to treat primary malignancies of the liver. Confronted with high recurrence rates, indications drifted towards non-oncologic liver diseases with LT finally evolving from a high-risk surgery to an almost routine surgical procedure. Continuously improving outcomes following LT and evolving oncological treatment strategies have driven renewed interest in transplant oncology. This is not only reflected by constant refinements to the criteria for LT in patients with HCC, but especially by efforts to expand indications to other primary and secondary liver malignancies. With new patient-centred oncological treatments on the rise and new technologies to expand the donor pool, the field has the chance to come full circle. In this review, we focus on the concept of transplant oncology, current indications, as well as technical and ethical aspects in the context of donor organs as precious resources.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Within and Outside Traditional Selection Criteria: A Multicentric North American Experience

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes of patients post-living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) within and outside standard transplantation selection criteria and the added value of the incorporation of the New York-California (NYCA) score.

BACKGROUND

LDLT offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplantation waitlist, reduce waitlist mortality, and expand selection criteria for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

Primary adult LDLT recipients between October 1999 and August 2019 were identified from a multicenter cohort of 12 North American centers. Posttransplantation and recurrence-free survival were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty LDLTs were identified. Patients within Milan criteria (MC) at transplantation had a 1, 5, and 10-year posttransplantation survival of 90.9%, 78.5%, and 64.1% versus outside MC 90.4%, 68.6%, and 57.7% ( P = 0.20), respectively. For patients within the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria, respective posttransplantation survival was 90.6%, 77.8%, and 65.0%, versus outside UCSF 92.1%, 63.8%, and 45.8% ( P = 0.08). Fifty-three (83%) patients classified as outside MC at transplantation would have been classified as either low or acceptable risk with the NYCA score. These patients had a 5-year overall survival of 72.2%. Similarly, 28(80%) patients classified as outside UCSF at transplantation would have been classified as a low or acceptable risk with a 5-year overall survival of 65.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival is excellent for patients with HCC undergoing LDLT within and outside selection criteria, exceeding the minimum recommended 5-year rate of 60% proposed by consensus guidelines. The NYCA categorization offers insight into identifying a substantial proportion of patients with HCC outside the MC and the UCSF criteria who still achieve similar post-LDLT outcomes as patients within the criteria.

Optimal Liver Transplantation Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver transplantation continues to be the optimal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Given the limited organ supply, patient selection for liver transplant must carefully balance tumor progression with risk of recurrence posttransplant. There are several pretransplant selection criteria that incorporate biomarkers as well as imaging modality to risk-stratify patients as we continue to look for the optimal transplant cutoff for patients with HCC, which should be transplant-center specific, and account for organ availability and dynamic response to locoregional therapy.

Downstaging Hepatocellular Carcinoma before Transplantation: Role of Immunotherapy Versus Locoregional Approaches

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) continues to be a leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. With advances in locoregional therapy for unresectable HCC during the last 2 decades and the recent expansion of transplant criteria for HCC, as well as ongoing organ shortages, patients are spending more time on the waitlist, which has resulted in an increased usage of locoregional therapies. The plethora of molecularly targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors under investigation represent the new horizon of treatment of HCC not only in advanced stages but also potentially at every stage of diagnosis and management.

Survival benefit from liver transplantation for patients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma

Background & Aims

In the USA, inequal liver transplantation (LT) access exists between patients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Survival benefit considers survival without and with LT and could equalise LT access. We calculated bias-corrected LT survival benefit for patients with(out) HCC who underwent a transplant, based on longitudinal data in a recent United States cohort.

Methods

Adult LT candidates with(out) HCC between 2010 and 2019 were included. Waitlist survival over time was contrasted to post-transplant survival, to estimate 5-year survival benefit from the moment of LT. Waitlist survival was modelled with a bias-corrected Cox regression, and post-transplant survival was estimated through Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results

Mean HCC survival without LT was always lower than non-HCC waitlist survival. Below model for end-stage liver disease (sodium) (MELD(-Na)) 30, patients with HCC gained more life-years from LT than patients without HCC at the same MELD(-Na) score. Only patients without HCC below MELD(-Na) 9 had negative benefit. Most patients with HCC underwent a transplant below MELD(-Na) 14, and most patients without HCC underwent a transplant above MELD(-Na) 26. Liver function [MELD(-Na), albumin] was the main predictor of 5-year benefit. Therefore, during 5 years, most patients with HCC gained 0.12 to 1.96 years from LT, whereas most patients without HCC gained 2.48 to 3.45 years.

Conclusions

On an individual level, performing a transplant in patients with HCC resulted in survival benefit. However, on a population level, benefit was indirectly decreased, as patients without HCC were likely to gain more survival owing to decreased liver function. For patients who underwent a transplant, a constructed online calculator estimates 5-year survival benefit given specific patient characteristics. Survival benefit scores could serve to equalise LT access.

Impact and implications

Benefit is a comparison of the survival with and without liver transplantation, and it is important when deciding who should undergo a transplant. Liver function is most important when predicting possible benefit from transplantation. Patients with liver cancer die sooner on the waiting list than similar patients without liver cancer. However, patients with liver cancer more often have better liver function. Most patients without liver cancer derive more benefit from transplantation than patients with liver cancer.

Downstaging hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation: A multicenter analysis of the "all-comers" protocol in the Multicenter Evaluation of Reduction in Tumor Size before Liver Transplantation (MERITS-LT) consortium

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma meeting united network for organ sharing (UNOS)-downstaging (DS) criteria have excellent liver transplantation (LT) outcomes after DS. However, outcomes for "all-comers" (AC) patients with tumors initially exceeding UNOS-DS are poorly understood. Patients meeting AC (n = 82) or UNOS-DS (n = 229) at 7 LT centers in 4 UNOS regions were prospectively followed from 2015-2020. AC patients had a lower probability of successful DS (67% vs 83% within 12 months; P < .001). The 3-year survival was 69% for UNOS-DS vs 58% for AC (P = .05) and reduced to 30% in patients with Child-Pugh B/C cirrhosis or alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥ 500. Five-year LT probability was 42% for AC vs 74% in UNOS-DS (P = .10). Thirty-eight percent were understaged on explant, with the increasing sum of the largest tumor diameter plus the number of lesions before LT (odds ratio 1.3; P = .01) and AFP ≥ 20 (odds ratio 5.9; P = .005) associated with understaging. Post-LT 3-year survival was 91% for AC vs 81% for UNOS-DS (P = .67). In this first prospective multiregional study of AC patients from the multicenter evaluation of reduction in tumor size before liver transplantation (MERITS-LT) consortium, we observed a 65% probability of successful DS. Three-year survival in AC was nearly 60%, though AC with Child-Pugh B/C or AFP ≥ 500 had poor survival. Explant pathology and 3-year post-LT outcomes were similar between cohorts, suggesting that LT is a reasonable goal in selected AC patients.

Recent updates in the use of pharmacological therapies for downstaging in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most frequent primary liver cancer, but only 20-30% of patients benefit from potentially curative treatments such as liver resection or transplantation. This article reviews conventional treatments and recent progress in pharmacotherapy for advanced HCC, with a focus on downstaging unresectable tumors to resectable status.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, conventional treatments and recent progress in pharmacotherapy for advanced HCC, aiming at downstaging from unresectable to resectable status, are reviewed. Future prospectives of combination therapies using immune checkpoint inhibitors were also introduced by reviewing recent clinical trials, paying attention to the objective response rate as its potential of downstaging treatments.

EXPERT OPINION

The newly developed pharmacological therapies showed higher responses. Although various tumor statuses in advanced HCC hamper detailed analysis of successful conversion rate, the novel combined immunotherapies are expected to provide more opportunities for subsequent curative surgery for initially unresectable advanced HCC. The conversion treatment strategies for unresectable HCC should be separately discussed for 'technically resectable but oncologically unfavorable' HCC and metastatic or invasive HCC beyond curative surgical treatments. The optimal downstaging treatment strategy for advanced HCC is awaited. Elucidation of preoperatively available factors that predict successful downstaging will allow the tailoring of promising initial treatments leading to conversion surgery.

Alpha-Fetoprotein Response after First Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) and Complete Pathologic Response in Patients with Hepatocellular Cancer

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is used as a bridging treatment in liver transplant candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) is the main tumor marker used for HCC surveillance. The aim of this study was to assess the potential of using the AFP change after the first TACE in the prediction of complete tumor necrosis. The study comprised 101 patients with HCC who underwent liver transplantation (LT) after TACE in the period between January 2011 and December 2020. The ΔAFP was defined as the difference between the AFP value before the first TACE and AFP either before the second TACE or the LT. The receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curves were used to identify an optimal cut-off value. Complete tumor necrosis was found in 26.1% (18 of 69) and 6.3% (2 of 32) of patients with an initial AFP level under and over 100 ng/mL, respectively (p = 0.020). The optimal cut-off value of ΔAFP for the prediction of complete necrosis was a decline of ≥10.2 ng/mL and ≥340.5 ng/mL in the corresponding subgroups. Complete tumor necrosis rates were: 62.5% (5 of 8) in patients with an initial AFP < 100 ng/mL and decline of ≥10.2 ng/mL; 21.3% (13 of 61) in patients with an initial AFP < 100 ng/mL and decline of <10.2 ng/mL; 16.7% (2 of 12) in patients with an initial AFP > 100 ng/mL and decline of ≥340.5 ng/mL; and null in 20 patients with an initial AFP > 100 ng/mL and decline of <340.5 ng/mL, respectively (p = 0.003). The simple scoring system, based on the initial AFP and AFP decline after the first treatment, distinguished between a high, intermediate and low probability of complete necrosis, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.699 (95% confidence intervals 0.577 to 0.821, p = 0.001). Combining the initial AFP with its change after the first treatment enables early identification of the efficacy of TACE.

Optimizing liver transplant prioritization for hepatocellular carcinoma through risk stratification

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the United States, candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) meeting standardized qualifying criteria receive similar priority on the liver transplant waiting list through Model for End-Stage Liver Disease exception points, without consideration of the dropout risk or relative expected benefit from liver transplantation. A more nuanced allocation scheme for HCC is needed to better represent the individual urgency for liver transplant and optimize organ utility. In this review, we discuss the development of HCC risk prediction models for practical use in liver allocation.

RECENT FINDINGS

HCC is a heterogenous disease that requires improved risk stratification for patients who fall within current transplant eligibility criteria. Several models have been proposed, though none have been adopted in clinical practice or liver allocation to date, due to various limitations.

SUMMARY

Improved HCC risk stratification for liver transplant candidates is needed to more accurately represent their urgency for transplant, with continued attention to the potential impact on post-liver transplant outcomes. Plans to implement a continuous distribution model for liver allocation in the United States may provide an opportunity to re-consider a more equitable allocation scheme for patients with HCC.

Evolving Landscape in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From Stage Migration to Immunotherapy Revolution

Liver transplantation (LT) represents the primary curative option for HCC. Despite the extension of transplantation criteria and conversion with down-staging loco-regional treatments, transplantation is not always possible. The introduction of new standards of care in advanced HCC including a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapies led to an improvement in response rates and could represent a promising strategy for down-staging the tumor burden. In this review, we identify reports and series, comprising a total of 43 patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors as bridging or down-staging therapies prior to LT. Overall, treated patients registered an objective response rate of 21%, and 14 patients were reduced within the Milan criteria. Graft rejection was reported in seven patients, resulting in the death of four patients; in the remaining cases, LT was performed safely after immunotherapy. Further investigations are required to define the duration of immune checkpoint inhibitors, their minimum washout period and the LT long-term safety of this strategy. Some randomized clinical trials including immunotherapy combinations, loco-regional treatment and/or tyrosine kinase inhibitors are ongoing and will likely determine the appropriateness of immune checkpoint inhibitors' administration before LT.

Rescue liver transplantation after post-hepatectomy acute liver failure: A systematic review and pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

Post-hepatectomy liver failure is a severe complication after major liver resection and is associated with a high mortality rate. Nevertheless, there is no effective treatment for severe liver failure. In such a setting, rescue liver transplantation (LT) is used only in extraordinary cases with unclear results. This systematic review aims to define indication of LT in post-hepatectomy liver failure and post-LT outcomes, in terms of patient and disease-free survivals, to assess the procedure's feasibility and effectiveness.

METHODS

A systematic review of all English language full-text articles published until September 2022 was conducted. Inclusion criteria were articles describing patients undergoing LT for post-hepatectomy liver failure after liver resection, which specified at least one outcome of interest regarding patient/graft survival, postoperative complications, tumour recurrence and cause of death. A pseudo-individual participant data meta-analysis was performed to analyse data. Study quality was assessed with MINORS system. PROSPERO CRD42022349358.

RESULTS

Postoperative complication rate was 53.6%. All patients transplanted for benign indications survived. For malignant tumours, 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival was 94.7%, 82.1% and 74.6%, respectively. The causes of death were tumour recurrence in 83.3% of cases and infection-related in 16.7% of LT recipients. At Cox regression, being transplanted for unconventional malignant indications (colorectal liver metastasis, cholangiocarcinoma) was a risk factor for death HR = 8.93 (95%CI = 1.04-76.63; P-value = 0.046). Disease-free survival differs according to different malignant tumours (P-value = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-hepatectomy liver failure is an emergent indication for rescue LT, but it is not universally accepted. In selected patients, LT can be a life-saving procedure with low short-term risks. However, special attention must be given to long-term oncological prognosis before proceeding with rescue LT in an urgent setting, considering the severity of liver malignancy, organ scarcity, the country's organ allocation policies and the resource of living-related donation.

New Insights in the Setting of Transplant Oncology

Background and Objectives: Liver transplantation (LT) is the best strategy for curing several primary and secondary hepatic malignancies. In recent years, growing interest has been observed in the enlargement of the transplant oncology indications. This paper aims to review the most recent developments in the setting of LT oncology, with particular attention to LT for unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) and cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCA). Materials and Methods: A review of the recently published literature was conducted. Results: Growing evidence exists on the efficacy of LT in curing CRLM and peri-hilar and intrahepatic CCA in well-selected patients when integrating this strategy with (neo)-adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or locoregional treatments. Conclusion: For unresectable CCA and CRLM management, several prospective protocols are forthcoming to elucidate LT's impact relative to alternative therapies. Advances in diagnosis, treatment protocols, and donor-to-recipient matching are needed to better define the oncological indications for transplantation. Prospective, multicenter trials studying these advances and their impact on outcomes are still required.

Conversion therapy in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: What's new in the era of molecular and immune therapy?

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer globally, with limited therapies and unsatisfactory prognosis once in the advanced stages. With promising advances in locoregional and systematic treatments, fast development of targeted drugs, the success of immunotherapy, as well as the emergence of the therapeutic alliance, conversion therapy has recently become more well developed and an effective therapeutic strategy. This article aimed to review recent developments in conversion therapy in liver transplantation (LT) for HCC.

DATA SOURCES

We searched for relevant publications on PubMed before September 2022, using the terms "HCC", "liver transplantation", "downstaging", "bridging treatment" and "conversion therapy."

RESULTS

Conversion therapy was frequently represented as a combination of multiple treatment modalities to downstage HCC and make patients eligible for LT. Although combining various local and systematic treatments in conversion therapy is still controversial, growing evidence has suggested that multimodal combined treatment strategies downstage HCC in a shorter time, which ultimately increases the opportunities for LT. Moreover, the recent breakthrough of immunotherapy and targeted therapy for HCC also benefit patients with advanced-stage tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

In the era of targeted therapy and immunotherapy, applying the thinking of transplant oncology to benefit HCC patients receiving LT is a new topic that has shed light on advanced-stage patients. With the expansion of conversion therapy concepts, further investigation and research is required to realize the full potential of conversion treatment strategies, including accurately selecting candidates, determining the timing of surgery, improving the conversion rate, and guaranteeing the safety and long-term efficacy of treatment.

Patient Selection for Downstaging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Prior to Liver Transplantation—Adjusting the Odds?

Background and Aims: Morphometric features such as the Milan criteria serve as standard criteria for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Since it has been recognized that these criteria are too restrictive and do not adequately display the tumor biology, additional selection parameters are emerging.

Methods: Concise review of the current literature on patient selection for downstaging and LT for HCC outside the Milan criteria.

Results: The major task in patients outside the Milan criteria is the need for higher granularity with patient selection, since the benefit through LT is not uniform. The recent literature clearly shows that beneath tumor size and number, additional selection parameters are useful in the process of patient selection for and during downstaging. For initial patient selection, the alpha fetoprotein (AFP) level adds additional information to the size and number of HCC nodules concerning the chance of successful downstaging and LT. This effect is quantifiable using newer selection tools like the WE (West-Eastern) downstaging criteria or the Metroticket 2.0 criteria. Also an initial PET-scan and/or tumor biopsy can be helpful, especially in the high risk group of patients outside the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria. After this entry selection, the clinical course during downstaging procedures concerning the tumor and the AFP response is of paramount importance and serves as an additional final selection tool.

Conclusion: Selection criteria for liver transplantation in HCC patients are becoming more and more sophisticated, but are still imperfect. The implementation of molecular knowledge will hopefully support a more specific risk prediction for HCC patients in the future, but do not provide a profound basis for clinical decision-making at present.

The Impact of Median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease at Transplant Minus 3 National Policy on Waitlist Outcomes in Patients With and Without Hepatocellular Carcinoma

As a result of ongoing regional disparities, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) implemented policy in May 2019 limiting exception points for waitlisted patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease at transplant in the area surrounding a transplant center minus 3 points (MMAT-3). The impact of this policy change remains unknown. We included adult patients with HCC (n = 4567) and without HCC (n = 19,773) in the UNOS database added to the waiting list before this policy change (May 7, 2017-May 18, 2019) and after (May 19, 2019-March 7, 2020). Cumulative incidence analysis estimated the probability of dropout within 1 year of listing decreased from 12.9% before the policy to 11.1% after the policy in candidates without HCC and from 14% to 10.7% in candidates with HCC. Incidence rates of liver transplantation (LT) and waitlist dropout varied significantly before the policy in patients with HCC and without HCC but nearly equalized in the postpolicy era. These effects were observed in both shorter and longer wait regions. With policy change being modeled as a time-dependent covariate, competing risk regression analyses estimated a decreased risk of dropout after policy change in the non-HCC group (cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.91; P = 0.02) after adjusting for demographic variables. These results suggest that the MMAT-3 policy has successfully reduced disparities in access to LT including across UNOS wait regions, although certain patients with HCC are now disadvantaged.

The Landscape Of Alpha Fetoprotein In Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Where Are We?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer and has been acknowledged as a leading cause of death among cirrhosis patients. Difficulties in early diagnosis and heterogeneity are obstacles to effective treatment, especially for advanced HCC. Liver transplantation (LT) is considered the best therapy for HCC. Although many biomarkers are being proposed, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), which was identified over 60 years ago, remains the most utilized. Recently, much hope has been placed in the immunogenicity of AFP to develop novel therapies, such as AFP vaccines and AFP-specific adoptive T-cell transfer (ACT). This review summarizes the performance of AFP as a biomarker for HCC diagnosis and prognosis, as well as its correlation with molecular classes. In addition, the role of AFP in LT is also described. Finally, we highlight the mechanism and application prospects of two immune therapies (AFP vaccine and ACT) for HCC. In general, our review points out the prevalence of AFP in HCC, accompanied by some controversies and novel directions for future research.

Transarterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation and risk of post-transplant vascular complications: a multicentre observational cohort and propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) on the waiting list for liver transplantation may be associated with an increased risk for hepatic artery complications. The present study aims to assess the risk for, primarily, intraoperative technical hepatic artery problems and, secondarily, postoperative hepatic artery complications encountered in patients who received TACE before liver transplantation.

METHODS

Available data from HCC liver transplantation recipients across six European centres from January 2007 to December 2018 were analysed in a 1 : 1 propensity score-matched cohort (TACE versus no TACE). Incidences of intraoperative hepatic artery interventions and postoperative hepatic artery complications were compared.

RESULTS

Data on postoperative hepatic artery complications were available in all 876 patients (425 patients with TACE and 451 patients without TACE). Fifty-eight (6.6 per cent) patients experienced postoperative hepatic artery complications. In total 253 patients who had undergone TACE could be matched to controls. In the matched cohort TACE was not associated with a composite of hepatic artery complications (OR 1.73, 95 per cent c.i. 0.82 to 3.63, P = 0.149). Data on intraoperative hepatic artery interventions were available in 825 patients (422 patients with TACE and 403 without TACE). Intraoperative hepatic artery interventions were necessary in 69 (8.4 per cent) patients. In the matched cohort TACE was not associated with an increased incidence of intraoperative hepatic artery interventions (OR 0.94, 95 per cent c.i. 0.49 to 1.83, P = 0.870).

CONCLUSION

In otherwise matched patients with HCC intended for liver transplantation, TACE treatment before transplantation was not associated with higher risk of technical vascular issues or hepatic artery complications.

Locoregional Treatments for Bridging and Downstaging HCC to Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) is the first-line treatment for patients diagnosed with unresectable early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the setting of cirrhosis. It is well known that HCC patients within the Milan criteria (solitary tumour ≤ 5 cm or ≤3 tumours, each <3 cm) could undergo LT with excellent results. However, there is a growing tendency to enlarge inclusion criteria since the Milan criteria are nowadays considered too restrictive and may exclude patients who would benefit from LT. On the other hand, there is a persistent shortage of donor organs. In this scenario, there is consensus about the role of loco-regional therapy (LRT) during the waiting list to select patients who would benefit more from LT, reducing the risk of drop off from the waiting list as well as decreasing tumour dimension to meet acceptable criteria for LT. In this review, current evidence on the safety, efficacy and utility of LRTs as neoadjuvant therapies before LT are summarized.

Hepatocellular cancer selection systems and liver transplantation: from the tower of babel to an ideal comprehensive score

The Milan criteria (MC) remain the cornerstone for the selection of patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) to be listed for liver transplantation (LT). Recently, several expanded criteria have been proposed to increase the transplantability of HCC patients without compromising their (oncologic) outcome. This paper aims to systematically review the different reported HCC-LT selection systems looking thereby at their ability to increase the number of transplantable patients and the overall survival and oncological outcome. A systematic review of the literature covering the period 1993 (date of the first reported HCC-LT selection system)-2021 identified 59 different inclusion criteria of HCC for LT. Among the 59 studies reporting HCC-LT selection systems, 15 (28.3%) were exclusively based on morphological aspects of the tumor; 29 (54.7%) included biologic, seven (13.2%) radiological, and two (3.8%) only included pathological tumor features. Overall, 31% more patients could be transplanted when adhering to the new HCC-LT selection systems. Despite the increased number of LT, 5-year patient and disease-free survival rates were similar between MC-IN and MC-OUT/new HCC-LT-IN criteria. A careful extension of the inclusion criteria should allow many more patients to access a potentially curative LT without compromising their outcome. The development of a widely accepted "comprehensive" HCC-LT Score able to offer a fair chance of justified transplantation to more patients should become a priority within the liver transplant community. Further studies are needed to develop internationally accepted, expanded selection criteria for liver transplantation of HCC patients.

Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence after Liver Transplantation

Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplantation (LT), occurring in 10-15% of cases, is a major concern. A lot of work has been done in order to refine the selection of LT candidates with HCC and to improve the outcome of patients with recurrence. Despite this, the prognosis of these patients remains poor, partly due to the several areas of uncertainty in their management. Even if surveillance for HCC recurrence is crucial for early detection, there is currently no evidence to support a specific and cost-effective post-LT surveillance strategy. Concerning preventive measures, consensus on the best immunosuppressive drugs has not been reached and not enough data to support adjuvant therapy are present. Several therapeutic approaches (surgical, locoregional and systemic treatments) are available in case of recurrence, but there are still few data in the post-LT setting. Moreover, the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is controversial in transplant recipients considered the risk of rejection. In this paper, the available evidence on the management of HCC recurrence after LT is comprehensively reviewed, considering pre- and post-transplant risk stratification, post-transplant surveillance, preventive strategies and treatment options.

Surveillance and Monitoring of Hepatocellular Carcinoma During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is expected to have a long-lasting impact on the approach to care for patients at risk for and with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) due to the risks from potential exposure and resource reallocation. The goal of this document is to provide recommendations on HCC surveillance and monitoring, including strategies to limit unnecessary exposure while continuing to provide high-quality care for patients. Publications and guidelines pertaining to the management of HCC during COVID-19 were reviewed for recommendations related to surveillance and monitoring practices, and any available guidance was referenced to support the authors' recommendations when applicable. Existing HCC risk stratification models should be utilized to prioritize imaging resources to those patients at highest risk of incident HCC and recurrence following therapy though surveillance can likely continue as before in settings where COVID-19 prevalence is low and adequate protections are in place. Waitlisted patients who will benefit from urgent LT should be prioritized for surveillance whereas it would be reasonable to extend surveillance interval by a short period in HCC patients with lower risk tumor features and those more than 2 years since their last treatment. For patients eligible for systemic therapy, the treatment regimen should be dictated by the risk of COVID-19 associated with route of administration, monitoring and treatment of adverse events, within the context of relative treatment efficacy.

Liver Living Donation for Cancer Patients: Benefits, Risks, Justification

LDLT covers all standard indications for liver transplantation, and the results are similar or even better than for standard DDLT. Due to the donor shortage and long waiting time, LDLT has become a relevant option for patients with liver tumors, provided the expected five-year survival rate is comparable to that of patients receiving a DDLT. Nowadays, LDLT offers the possibility to extend the standard morphometric selection by considering the biological parameters. In the setting of LDLT, we are not only faced with surgical morbidity in the donor, but long-term non-medical problems like psychological complications and financial burden also have to be considered. On the other hand, the benefits to the donor are mainly social and psychological. In LDLT, the donor's altruism is the fundamental ethical principle and it is based on the principles of (1) beneficence (doing good), (2) non-maleficence (avoiding harm), (3) respect for autonomy, and (4) respect for justice (promoting fairness). On top of that, the concept of double equipoise of living organ donation evaluates the relationship between the recipient's need, the donor's risk, and the recipient's outcome. It considers each donor-recipient pair as a unit, analyzing whether the specific recipient's benefit justifies the specific donor's risk in particular oncologic indications. In this light, it is essential to seek adequate informed consent focused on risk, benefits and outcome benefits of both donor and recipient supported by an independent living donor advocate. Finally, the transplant team must protect donors from donation if harm does not justify the expected benefit to the recipient.

What Should Be the Rules for Downstaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma?

INTRODUCTION

Liver transplantation remains the main curative treatment method for hepatocellular carcinoma. There are several criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma to be eligible for liver transplantation, and it depends on main transplantation centers worldwide. Locoregional treatments and downstaging protocols are used for either to achieve these criteria or to prevent drop outs on the transplant waiting lists. But who can benefit from these bridging therapies effectively for the main purpose of curative treatment? Main contraindications are known for locoregional treatments like cirrhosis or low hepatic function, total main portal vein occlusion, and extrahepatic metastasis. HCCs, which are confined to liver but have high tumor burden, remains the main controversial issue.

AIM

On this aspect, we reviewed the literature for downstaging protocols for hepatocellular carcinoma with their effect on survival and recurrence rates after liver transplantation.

CONCLUSION

Although candidates for downstaging is still controversial, with the absence of main contraindications, LRT can be applied to selected HCCs, which have a certain degree of tumor burden.

Liver Transplantation Selection and Allocation Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A European Perspective

For patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), liver transplantation offers the best chance of cure. Over the past two decades, selection criteria to determine eligibility for liver transplantation have been constantly refined but a fair allocation strategy of liver grafts to HCC patients remains challenging. In Europe, over a dozen transplantation networks apply different liver transplantation criteria for HCC patients. In this review, we explore and compare candidate selection and liver graft allocation strategies for patients with HCC with a European perspective and discuss the ethical and technical challenges involved. In addition, we suggest possible paths for future improvement such as transitioning from fixed selection and allocation criteria to a more flexible model of benefit, which includes criteria concerning the graft, response to treatment, the biology of the tumor, and other relevant recipient factors.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Downstaging to Liver Transplantation as Curative Therapy

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ranks among the leading cancer-related causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Downstaging of HCC has prevailed as a key method to curative therapy for patients who present with unresectable HCC outside of the listing criteria for liver transplantation (LT). Even though LT paves the way to lifesaving curative therapy for HCC, perpetually severe organ shortage limits its broader application. Debate over the optimal protocol and assessment of response to downstaging treatment has fueled immense research activity and is pushing the boundaries of LT candidate selection criteria. The implicit obligation of refining downstaging protocol is to ensure the maximization of the transplant survival benefit by taking into account the waitlist life expectancy. In the following review, we critically discuss strategies to best optimize downstaging HCC to LT on the basis of existing literature.

Effect of Mycophenolate Mofetil Therapy on Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Liver Transplantation: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplantation is associated with immunosuppressants. However, the appropriate immunosuppressant for HCC recipients is still debated. Data for this nationwide population-based cohort study were extracted from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan. A total of 1250 liver transplant recipients (LTRs) with HCC were included. We analyzed the risk factors for post-transplant HCC recurrences. Cumulative defined daily dose (cDDD) represented the exposure duration and was calculated as the amount of dispensed defined daily dose (DDD) of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). The dosage effects of MMF on HCC recurrence and liver graft complication rates were investigated. A total of 155 LTRs, having experienced post-transplant HCC recurrence, exhibited low survival probability at 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year observations. Our results demonstrated increased HCC recurrence rate after liver transplantation (p = 0.0316) following MMF administration; however, no significant increase was demonstrated following cyclosporine, tacrolimus, or sirolimus administration. Notably, our data demonstrated significantly increased HCC recurrence rate following MMF administration with cDDD > 0.4893 compared with cDDD ≤ 0.4893 or no administration of MMF (p < 0.0001). MMF administration significantly increases the risk of HCC recurrence. Moreover, a MMF-minimizing strategy (cDDD ≤ 0.4893) is recommended for recurrence-free survival.

A novel waitlist dropout score for hepatocellular carcinoma - identifying a threshold that predicts worse post-transplant survival

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It has been suggested that patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at high risk of wait-list dropout would have done poorly after liver transplantation (LT) because of tumour aggressiveness. To test this hypothesis, we analysed risk of wait-list dropout among patients with HCC in long-wait regions (LWRs) to create a dropout risk score, and applied this score in short (SWRs) and mid-wait regions (MWRs) to evaluate post-LT outcomes. We sought to identify a threshold in dropout risk that predicts worse post-LT outcome.

METHODS

Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, including all patients with T2 HCC receiving priority listing from 2010 to 2014, a dropout risk score was created from a developmental cohort of 2,092 patients in LWRs, and tested in a validation cohort of 1,735 patients in SWRs and 2,894 patients in MWRs.

RESULTS

On multivariable analysis, 1 tumour (3.1-5 cm) or 2-3 tumours, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) >20 ng/ml, and increasing Child-Pugh and model for end-stage liver disease-sodium scores significantly predicted wait-list dropout. A dropout risk score using these 4 variables (C-statistic 0.74) was able to stratify 1-year cumulative incidence of dropout from 7.1% with a score ≤7 to 39.5% with a score >23. Patients with a dropout risk score >30 had 5-year post-LT survival of 60.1% vs. 71.8% for those with a score ≤30 (p = 0.004). There were no significant differences in post-LT survival below this threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided evidence that patients with HCC with the highest dropout risk have aggressive tumour biology that would also result in poor post-LT outcomes when transplanted quickly. Below this threshold risk score of ≤30, priority status for organ allocation could be stratified based on the predicted risks of wait-list dropout without significant differences in post-LT survival.

LAY SUMMARY

Prioritising patients with hepatocellular carcinoma for liver transplant based on risk of wait-list dropout has been considered but may lead to inferior post-transplant survival. In this study of nearly 7,000 patients, we created a threshold dropout risk score based on tumour and liver-related factors beyond which patients with hepatocellular carcinoma will likely have poor post-liver transplant outcomes (60% at 5 years). For patients below this risk score threshold, priority status could be stratified based on the predicted risk of wait-list dropout without compromising post-transplant survival.

Surgical Resection vs. Percutaneous Ablation for Single Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Exploring the Impact of Li-RADS Classification on Oncological Outcomes

Background: Single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) benefits from surgical resection (SR) or US-guided percutaneous ablation (PA), although the best approach is still debated. We evaluated the impact of Li-RADS classification on the oncological outcomes of SR vs. PA as single HCC first-line treatment. Methods: We retrospectively and blindly classified treatment-naïve single HCC that underwent SR or PA between 2010 and 2016 according to Li-RADS protocol. Overall survival (OS), recurrence free survival (RFS) and local recurrence after SR and PA were compared for each Li-RADS subclass before and after propensity-score matching (PS-M). Results: Considering the general population, SR showed better 5-year OS (68.3% vs. 52.2%; p = 0.049) and RFS (42.5% vs. 29.8%; p = 0.002), with lower incidence of local recurrence (8.2% vs. 44.4%; p < 0.001), despite a significantly higher frequency of clinically-relevant complications (12.8% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.002) and a higher Comprehensive Complication Index (12.1 vs. 2.2; p < 0.001). Focusing on different Li-RADS subclasses, we highlighted better 5-year OS (67.1% vs. 46.2%; p = 0.035), RFS (45.0% vs. 27.0% RFS; p < 0.001) and lower incidence of local recurrence (9.7% vs. 48.6%; p < 0.001) after SR for Li-RADS-5 HCCs, while these outcomes did not differ for Li-RADS-3/4 subclasses; such results were confirmed after PS-M. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests a potential prognostic role of Li-RADS classification, supporting SR over PA especially for Li-RADS-5 single HCC.

Solid Organ Transplantation During COVID-19 Pandemic: An International Web-based Survey on Resources' Allocation

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Solid organ transplants (SOTs) are life-saving interventions, recently challenged by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). SOTs require a multistep process, which can be affected by COVID-19 at several phases.

Surveillance for HCC After Liver Transplantation: Increased Monitoring May Yield Aggressive Treatment Options and Improved Postrecurrence Survival

BACKGROUND

Currently, no surveillance guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) exist. In this retrospective, multicenter study, we have investigated the role of surveillance imaging on postrecurrence outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with recurrent HCC after LT from 2002 to 2016 were reviewed from 3 transplant centers (University of California San Francisco, Mayo Clinic Florida, and University of Toronto). For this study, we proposed the term cumulative exposure to surveillance (CETS) as a way to define the cumulative sum of all the protected intervals that each surveillance test provides. In our analysis, CETS has been treated as a continuous variable in months.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-three patients from 3 centers had recurrent HCC post-LT. The median follow-up was 31.3 months, and median time to recurrence was 13.3 months. Increasing CETS was associated with improved postrecurrence survival (hazard ratio, 0.94; P < 0.01) as was treatment of recurrence with resection or ablation (hazard ratio, 0.31; P < 0.001). An receiver operating characteristic curve (area under the curve, 0.64) for CETS covariate showed that 252 days of coverage (or 3 surveillance scans) within the first 24 months provided the highest probability for aggressive postrecurrence treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In this review of 223 patients with post-LT HCC recurrence, we found that increasing CETS does lead to improved postrecurrence survival as well as a higher probability for aggressive recurrence treatment. We found that 252 days of monitoring (ie, 3 surveillance scans) in the first 24 months was associated with the ability to offer potentially curative treatment.

Expanding the Limits of Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Is There a Limit?

Liver transplantation is a treatment option for hepatocellular carcinoma within Milan criteria. With careful selection practices, patients with larger tumors can do well with successful downstaging followed by liver transplantation and should not be excluded based on tumor size or number alone. When considering expanded criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma, however, survival outcomes after liver transplantation should be comparable with patients without hepatocellular carcinoma. Surrogate measures of tumor biology, such as α-fetoprotein, other biomarkers, and dynamic tumor behavior including response to locoregional therapy can aid in risk stratification of patients before liver transplantation.

The Importance of AFP in Liver Transplantation for HCC

INTRODUCTION

The most common biomarker for HCC is serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). AFP is used for screening and diagnosing HCC, and also, it is used for predicting prognosis and monitoring the response to treatment.

DISCUSSION

AFP secretion is associated with poor tumor histologic grade and aggressive tumor biological behavior. The risk of dropout on the waiting list for liver transplantation and the risk of tumor recurrence after liver transplantation are associated with high AFP serum levels. Therefore, using AFP levels for selecting patients to include on the liver transplantation waiting lists is critical. It is also known that a low AFP serum level before liver transplantation has limited informative value, but high AFP levels prior to liver transplantation indicate a higher risk for HCC recurrence.

CONCLUSION

AFP's performance as a screening, diagnostic, and prognostic marker for HCC is not ideal, but it is the most frequently used biomarker in the management of HCC.

Organ allocation in the age of the algorithm: avoiding futile transplantation - utility in allocation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review describes and questions the evolution of allocation systems from local team decisions in the 20th century to patient-oriented allocation using complex algorithm predicting transplant benefit.

RECENT FINDINGS

The opening years of the 2000s have seen the implementation of prioritization scores aiming at increasing transparency and reducing waitlist mortality. The 2010s have underlined the necessity of drawing the upper limits of how sick a patient can be while still ensuring acceptable survival. More complex algorithms evaluating transplant benefit have been implemented in allocation systems to take this issue into account.

SUMMARY

Allocation algorithms are becoming more and more complex, integrating numerous parameters from both donor and recipient to achieve optimal matching. The limitations of implementing these complex algorithms are represented by the evermoving waiting list demography, geographic disparities between recipients and donors, team policy adaptation to rule changes, and implicit biases within the transplant community. Survival as the only metric by which to define benefit may be seen as restrictive; quality of life may be a fruitful measure for better defining benefit in organ transplantation in the future.

Importance of Intraoperative Transfusions of Packed Red Blood Cells and Fresh Frozen Plasma in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Cancer

BACKGROUND The impact of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) transfusions in patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) undergoing liver transplantation has rarely been evaluated. The aim of the current study was to assess the impact of intraoperative transfusions on posttransplant outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS This retrospective cohort study was based on 229 HCC transplant recipients. The primary outcome measure was 5-year recurrence-free survival. Secondary outcome measures comprised overall and long-term survival at 5 years and 90-day mortality. Cox proportional hazard models and logistic regression were used to assess risk factors. RESULTS After adjustment for potential confounders, no association was found with respect to tumor recurrence for PRBCs (P=0.368) or FFP (P=0.081) transfusions. Similarly, PRBC transfusion (P=0.623) and FFP transfusion (P=0.460) had no impact on survival between 90 days and 5 years. PRBC transfusion increased the risk of 90-day mortality (P=0.005), while FFP transfusion was associated with a lower risk (P=0.036). CONCLUSIONS Intraoperative transfusions of blood products does not impair recurrence-free and long-term survival of patients with HCC undergoing liver transplantation. Intraoperative PRBC transfusion increases the risk of early mortality, whereas adequate supplementation of FFP plays a protective role.

A 2020 update on liver transplant for hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most frequent liver tumor and is associated with chronic liver disease in 90% of cases. In selected cases, liver transplantation represents an effective therapy with excellent overall survival.

AREA COVERED

Since the introduction of Milan criteria in 1996, numerous alternative selection systems to LT for HCC patients have been proposed. Debate remains about how best to select HCC patients for transplant and how to prioritize them on the waiting list.

EXPERT OPINION

The selection of the best scoring system to propose in the context of LT for HCC is far to be identified. In this review, we analyze and categorize the various selection systems, assessing their roles in the different decisional phases.