Living donor liver transplantation for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma including macrovascular invasion

Patient Selection for Living Donor Liver Transplantation in Acute-on-chronic Liver Failure

Background and objectives

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is associated with high short-term mortality without liver transplantation (LT). The selection criteria for LT in these patients are not well defined. The objective of this study was to determine factors associated with post-transplant survival in ACLF.

Methods

This was a single-center retrospective study of patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for ACLF between 2012 and 2022. Out of 1093 transplants, 110 patients had underlying ACLF, based on the European Association for the Study of the Liver-Chronic Liver Failure Consortium (EASL-CLIF) criteria. We looked at factors associated with 1-year posttransplant survival.

Results

The median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was 33.5 (31-38), and the 1-year posttransplant survival was 72%. Six risk factors were associated with posttransplant survival, namely, body mass index > 30 kg/m2 [HR, 4.4; 95% CI, 1.8-10.7], platelet count < 66,000/μl [HR, 2.91; CI,1.2-6.6], poor response to medical treatment [HR, 2.6; CI, 1.1-5.7], drug-resistant bacterial or fungal cultures [HR, 4.2; CI, 1.4-12.4], serum creatinine > 2.5 mg/dl [HR, 3.4; CI, 1.5-7.7], and graft-to-recipient weight ratio < 0.7 [HR, 4.8; CI, 1.4-16.3]. The 1-year post-transplant survival was 84% in patients with 0-2 risk factors (n = 89) and was 6% with 3 risk factors (n = 15) (P < 0.001). For 1-year posttransplant survival, the area under curve (AUC) for the current model was 0.8 (0.69-0.9). The AUC for CLIF-ACLF, Chronic Liver Failure-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (CLIF-SOFA), and EASL-CLIF ACLF grades was < 0.5.

Conclusion

In LT for ACLF, acceptable survival can be achieved when less than three high-risk factors are present.

Liver transplantation for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Controversy over portal vein tumor thrombosis

Liver transplantation (LT) is considered the ideal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) concurrent with underlying cirrhotic liver disease. As well-known, LT for HCC based on the Milan criteria has shown satisfactory outcomes. However, numerous expanded transplantation criteria were proposed to benefit more patients for LT and showed comparable survivals as well. In addition, a modest expansion of transplantation criteria for HCC may be acceptable on the basis of the consensus within the transplantation community. Nonetheless, LT in patients with advanced HCC and portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) recently has received attention and has been reported by many transplantation centers despite being contraindicated. Of those, the LT outcomes in certain HCC patients with PVTT were favorable. Additionally, the advancement of multimodality treatments and the evolution of systemic therapies have emerged as promising therapeutic options for downstaging advanced HCC prior to LT. Somehow, advanced HCC with PVTT could be downstaged to become eligible for LT through these multidisciplinary approaches. Although the available evidence of LT for HCC with PVTT is limited, it is hoped that LT may soon be more widely indicated for these patients. Nevertheless, several unknown factors associated with LT for HCC remain to be explored. Herein, this review aimed to update the developments in LT for patients with advanced HCC.

Recipient blood group does not affect hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after living donor liver transplantation in Korea

PURPOSE

This study assessed whether or not the ABO blood type affects the incidence of HCC recurrence after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included 856 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent LDLT between January 2006 and December 2016 at the Asan Medical Center.

RESULTS

This study included 324 patients (37.9%) with blood type A, 215 (25.1%) with blood type B, 210 (24.5%) with blood type O, and 107 (12.5%) with blood type AB. ABO-incompatible LT was performed in 136 (15.9%) patients. The independent risk factors for the disease-free survival (DFS) were maximal tumor diameter, microvascular invasion, and Milan criteria. The only independent risk factor for the overall survival (OS) was microvascular invasion. The ABO blood group did not affect the DFS (P = 0.978) or OS (P = 0.261). The DFS according to the ABO blood group did not differ significantly between the ABO-compatible (p = 0.701) and ABO-incompatible LDLT recipients (p = 0.147). The DFS according to the ABO blood group did not differ significantly between patients within the Milan criteria (p = 0.934) and beyond the Milan criteria (p = 0.525). The DFS did not differ significantly between recipients with and without type A blood (p = 0.941).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that the ABO blood group system had no prognostic impact on the oncological outcomes of patients undergoing LT for HCC.

Liver transplantation and resection in patients with hepatocellular cancer and portal vein tumor thrombosis: Feasible and effective?

Patients with locally advanced hepatocellular cancer (HCC) and portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) have a dismal prognosis since limited treatment options are available for them. In recent years, effective systemic therapy, and advances in the understanding of technicalities and effectiveness of ablative therapies especially radiotherapy, have given some hope to prolong survival in them. This review summarized recent evidence in literature regarding the possible role of liver resection (LR) and liver transplantation (LT) in patients with locally advanced HCC and PVTT with no extrahepatic disease. Downstaging therapies have helped make curative resection or LT a reality in selected patients. This review emphasizes on the key points to focus on when considering surgery in these patients, who are usually relegated to palliative systemic therapy alone. Meticulous patient selection based on tumor biology, documented downstaging based on imaging and decrease in tumor marker levels, and an adequate waiting period to demonstrate stable disease, may help obtain satisfactory long-term outcomes post LR or LT in an intention to treat strategy in patients with HCC and PVTT.

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma beyond the Milan Criteria: A Specific Role for Living Donor Liver Transplantation after Neoadjuvant Therapy

PURPOSE

This study was designed to elucidate the various new classifications and the use of LDLT and bridging therapy for HCC in this context beyond the Milan criteria (MC).

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with HCC outside the MC who underwent LT at Jena University between January 2007 and August 2023 were retrospectively analysed. Eligible patients were classified according to various classification systems. Clinicopathological features, overall and disease-free survival rates were compared between LT and LDLT within the context of bridging therapy.

THE RESULTS

Among the 245 patients analysed, 120 patients did not meet the MC, and 125 patients met the MC. Moreover, there were comparable overall survival rates between patients outside the MC for LT versus LDLT (OS 44.3 months vs. 28.3 months; 5-year survival, 56.4% vs. 40%; p = 0.84). G3 tumour differentiation, the presence of angioinvasion and lack of bridging were statistically significant risk factors for tumour recurrence according to univariate and multivariate analyses (HR 6.34; p = 0.0002; HR 8.21; p < 0.0001; HR 7.50; p = 0.0001). Bridging therapy before transplantation provided a significant survival advantage regardless of the transplant procedure (OS: p = 0.008; DFS: p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HCC outside the MC who underwent LT or LDLT had worse outcomes compared to those of patients who met the MC but still had a survival advantage compared to patients without transplantation. Nevertheless, such patients remain disadvantaged on the waiting list, which is why LDLT represents a safe alternative to LT and should be considered in bridged HCC patients because of differences in tumour differentiation, size and tumour marker dynamics.

[Individualized curative treatment for malignant diseases through liver transplantation]

BACKGROUND

For patients with primary and secondary liver tumors that are functionally or technically nonresectable, liver transplantation remains the sole curative treatment option. Over the years the benefits of transplantation have also been validated for conditions other than hepatocellular carcinoma. Currently, amidst a period of organ shortage the broadening of transplantation indications is a topic of ongoing debate. Although recent studies have confirmed the long-term success of transplantation within multimodal treatment regimens, this approach has yet to become the standard treatment for many conditions.

OBJECTIVE

This article explores the potential of liver transplantation in individualized multimodal oncological treatment strategies.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Liver transplantation has become an integral component of the treatment regimen for hepatocellular carcinoma. In Germany there is a prioritized organ allocation facilitated by the granting of a standard exception for cases with a smaller tumor burden. Over the years numerous studies have demonstrated comparable long-term results using different listing criteria. Both intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and perihilar cholangiocarcinoma can be curatively treated with transplantation in Germany, although this is typically within the context of clinical studies. The neoadjuvant therapy and patient selection, based on tumor burden and the response to preliminary treatment, play a crucial role in influencing long-term survival and recurrence rates. The success of transplantation for liver metastases from neuroendocrine malignancies or colorectal carcinomas, which cannot be removed by partial resection, also significantly hinges on the patient selection. The role of living donor liver transplantation is becoming increasingly more pivotal in this context.

European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) Consensus Report on Downstaging, Bridging and Immunotherapy in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver transplantation offers the best chance of cure for most patients with non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although not all patients with HCC are eligible for liver transplantation at diagnosis, some can be downstaged using locoregional treatments such as ablation and transarterial chemoembolization. These aforementioned treatments are being applied as bridging therapies to keep patients within transplant criteria and to avoid them from dropping out of the waiting list while awaiting a liver transplant. Moreover, immunotherapy might have great potential to support downstaging and bridging therapies. To address the contemporary status of downstaging, bridging, and immunotherapy in liver transplantation for HCC, European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) convened a dedicated working group comprised of experts in the treatment of HCC to review literature and to develop guidelines pertaining to this cause that were subsequently discussed and voted during the Transplant Learning Journey (TLJ) 3.0 Consensus Conference that took place in person in Prague. The findings and recommendations of the working group on Downstaging, Bridging and Immunotherapy in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma are presented in this article.

Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with macroscopic vascular invasion: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of different treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and macroscopic vascular invasion.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies was performed to evaluate various treatment modalities for HCC with macroscopic vascular invasion, including liver resection (LR), liver transplantation (LT), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), transarterial radioembolization (TARE), radiotherapy (RT), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and antineoplastic systemic therapy (AnST).

RESULTS

After applying the selection criteria, 31 studies were included. The surgical resection (SR) group (including LR and LT) had a similar mortality rate to the non-surgical resection (NS) group (RD = -0.01; 95% CI -0.05 to 0.03). The SR group had a higher rate of complications (RD = 0.06; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.12) but a higher 3-year overall survival (OS) rate than the NS group (RD = 0.12; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.20). The network analysis revealed that the overall survival was lower in the AnST group. LT and LR had similar survival benefits. The meta-regression suggested that SR has a greater impact on the survival of patients with impaired liver function.

DISCUSSION

Most likely, LT has a significant impact on long-term survival and consequently would be a better option for HCC with macroscopic vascular invasion in patients with impaired liver function. LT and LR offer a higher chance of long-term survival than NS alternatives, although LR and LR are associated with a higher risk of procedure-related complications.

Are patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein tumour thrombosis candidates for liver transplantation?

In this debate, the authors consider whether patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein tumour thrombosis are candidates for liver transplantation (LT). The argument for LT in this context is based on the premise that, following successful downstaging treatment, LT confers a much greater clinical benefit in terms of survival outcomes than the available alternative (palliative systemic therapy). A major argument against relates to limitations in the quality of evidence for LT in this setting - in relation to study design, as well as heterogeneity in patient characteristics and downstaging protocols. While acknowledging the superior outcomes offered by LT for patients with portal vein tumour thrombosis, the counterargument is that expected survival in such patients is still below accepted thresholds for LT and, indeed, the levels achieved for other patients who receive transplants beyond the Milan criteria. Based on the available evidence, it seems too early for consensus guidelines to recommend such an approach, however, it is hoped that with higher quality evidence and standardised downstaging protocols, LT may soon be more widely indicated, including for this population with high unmet clinical need.

Liver transplantation and portal vein tumour thrombus: futile enterprise?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Improving eligibility without compromising outcomes

Background

In the context of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), traditional transplant criteria appear restrictive. The objective of the current study was to determine risk factors for recurrence and improve transplant eligibility in patients with HCC.

Materials and methods

This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent living donor liver transplant (LDLT) for HCC (n = 219). Largest tumor diameter, tumor number, AFP and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio were assessed. Multivariate analysis was performed to develop risk scores. The new model was compared with seven previously published transplant criteria using receiver operator curves.

Results

Largest tumor size >3.7 cm [HR:2.6, P = 0.02], and AFP > 600 ng/ml [HR:4.7, P = 0.001] were independent predictors of recurrence. Patients with risk scores of 0, 1–3, 4–6 and 7–9 had recurrence rate of 5.9%, 12.5%, 25% and 58.4% respectively. When compared with Milan criteria, Metro ticket 2.0, AFP model and Samsung criteria; transplant eligibility increased by 31.5%, 22.9%, 8.7%, and 7% respectively. Recurrence rate with the current model was 16/199 (8%) (P < 0.0001) and was comparable with other transplant criteria (6.9–9.1%). On ROC analysis, only Milan criteria (AUC = 0.7, P = 0.001) and the current model (AUC = 0.66, P = 0.01) showed significance for recurrence. All patients with high risk scores within Milan criteria had recurred at 3 years (P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Low AFP can be used to select patients for LDLT outside traditional criteria for HCC, with comparable recurrence rates.

•

There is an unmet need to expand transplant pool for hepatocellular carcinoma.

•

We developed a model, based on tumor size cutoff of 3.7 cm, any tumor number, and AFP cutoff of 600 ng/ml; and compared it with other transplant criteria.

•

There was considerable expansion in transplant pool with comparable outcomes.