Liver allocation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a European Center policy in the pre-MELD era

Impact of MELD 30-allocation policy on liver transplant outcomes in Italy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In Italy, since August 2014, liver transplant (LT) candidates with model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores ≥30 receive national allocation priority. This multicenter cohort study aims to evaluate time on the waiting list, dropout rate, and graft survival before and after introducing the macro-area sharing policy.

METHODS

A total of 4,238 patients registered from 2010 to 2018 were enrolled and categorized into an ERA-1 Group (n = 2,013; before August 2014) and an ERA-2 Group (n = 2,225; during and after August 2014). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of receiving a LT or death between the two eras. The Fine-Gray model was used to estimate the HR for dropout from the waiting list and graft loss, considering death as a competing risk event. A Fine-Gray model was also used to estimate risk factors of graft loss.

RESULTS

Patients with MELD ≥30 had a lower median time on the waiting list (4 vs.12 days, p <0.001) and a higher probability of being transplanted (HR 2.27; 95% CI 1.78-2.90; p = 0.001) in ERA-2 compared to ERA-1. The subgroup analysis on 3,515 LTs confirmed ERA-2 (odds ratio 0.56; 95% CI 0.46-0.68; p = 0.001) as a protective factor for better graft survival rate. The protective variables for lower dropouts on the waiting list were: ERA-2, high-volume centers, no competition centers, male recipients, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The protective variables for graft loss were high-volume center and ERA-2, while MELD ≥30 remained related to a higher risk of graft loss.

CONCLUSIONS

The national MELD ≥30 priority allocation was associated with improved patient outcomes, although MELD ≥30 was associated with a higher risk of graft loss. Transplant center volumes and competition among centers may have a role in recipient prioritization and outcomes.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

NCT04530240 LAY SUMMARY: Italy introduced a new policy in 2014 to give national allocation priority to patients with a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥30 (i.e. very sick patients). This policy has led to more liver transplants, fewer dropouts, and shorter waiting times for patients with MELD ≥30. However, a higher risk of graft loss still burdens these cases. Transplant center volumes and competition among centers may have a role in recipient prioritization and outcomes.

Tissue miRNA 483-3p expression predicts tumor recurrence after surgical resection in histologically advanced hepatocellular carcinomas

The choice of surgical treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) depends on several prognostic variables, among which histological features, like microvascular invasion and tumor grade, are well established. This study aims to identify the tissue miRNAs predictive of recurrence after liver resection in "histologically advanced" HCC. We selected 54 patients: 15 retrospective resected patients without recurrence (group A), 19 retrospective resected patients with HCC recurrence (group B), and 20 prospective patients (group C), with 4 recurrence cases. All selected HCC were "histologically advanced" (high Edmondson grade and/or presence of microvascular invasion). A wide spectrum of miRNAs was studied with TaqMan Human microRNA Arrays; qRT-PCR assays were used to validate results on selected miRNAs; immunohistochemistry for IGF2 was applied to study the mechanism of miR-483-3p. As a result, a significant differential expression between group A and B was found for 255 miRNAs. Among them we selected miR-483-3p and miR-548e (P<0.001). As a single variable (group C), HCC with miR-483-3p downregulation (mean fold increase 0.21) had 44.4% of recurrence cases; HCC with miR-483-3p upregulation (mean fold increase 5.94) showed no recurrence cases (P=0.011). At immunohistochemistry (group C), the HCC with loss of cytoplasmic IGF2 expression showed a down-regulation of miR-483-3p (fold increase 0.57). In conclusion, in patients with "histologically advanced" HCC, the analysis of specific tissue miRNAs (particularly miR-483-3p) could help identify the recurrence risk and choose which treatment algorithm to implement (follow-up, resection or transplantation). This could have an important impact on patient survival and transplantation outcome, improving organ allocation.

Actual Risk of Using Very Aged Donors for Unselected Liver Transplant Candidates: A European Single-center Experience in the MELD Era

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the whole experience of liver transplantation (LT) with donors ≥70 years in a single center not applying specific donor/recipient matching criteria.

BACKGROUND

LT with very old donors has historically been associated with poorer outcomes. With the increasing average donor age and the advent of Model for End-stage Liver Diseases (MELD) score-based allocation criteria, an optimal donor/recipient matching is often unsuitable.

METHODS

Outcomes of all types of LTs were compared according to 4 study groups: patients transplanted between 1998 and 2003 with donors <70 (group 1, n = 396) or ≥70 years (group 2, n = 88); patients transplanted between 2004 and 2010 with donors <70 (group 3, n = 409), or ≥70 years (group 4, n = 190). From 2003, graft histology was routinely available before cross-clamping, and MELD-driven allocation was adopted.

RESULTS

Groups 1 and 2 were similar for main donor and recipient variables, and surgical details. Group 4 had shorter donor ICU stay, lower rate of moderate-to-severe graft macrosteatosis (2.3% vs 8%), and higher recipient MELD score (22 vs 19) versus group 3. After 2003, median donor age, recipient age, and MELD score significantly increased, whereas moderate-to-severe macrosteatosis and ischemia time decreased. Five-year graft survival was 63.6% in group 1 versus 59.1% in group 2 (P = 0.252) and 70.9% in group 3 versus 67.6% in group 4 (P = 0.129). Transplants performed between 1998 and 2003, recipient HCV infection, balance of risk score >18, and pre-LT renal replacement treatments were independently associated with worse graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Even without specific donor/recipient matching criteria, the outcomes of LT with donors ≥70 and <70 years are comparable with appropriate donor management.

Impact of preoperative infection on outcome after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Bacterial infection in patients with liver failure can lead to a dramatic clinical deterioration. The indications for liver transplantation and outcome in these patients is still controversial.

METHODS

All adult patients who underwent liver transplantation between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2015 were selected from an institutional database. Characteristics of the donors and recipients, and clinical, biochemical and surgical parameters were retrieved from the database. Post-transplant survival rates and complications, including grade III-IV complications according to the Dindo-Clavien classification, were compared between patients with an infection 1 month before transplantation and patients without an infection.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients with an infection had statistically significant higher Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), D-MELD and Balance of Risk (BAR) scores and a higher rate of acute-on-chronic liver failure compared with findings in 343 patients with no infection. The rate of infection after liver transplantation was higher in patients who had an infection before the operation: 48 per cent versus 30·6 per cent in those with no infection before transplantation (P = 0·003). The percentage of patients with a postoperative complication (42 versus 40·5 per cent respectively; P = 0·849) and the 90-day mortality rate (8 versus 6·4 per cent; P = 0·531) was no different between the groups. Multivariable analysis showed that a BAR score greater than 18 and acute-on-chronic liver failure were independent predictors of 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Bacterial infection 1 month before liver transplantation is related to a higher rate of infection after transplantation, but does not lead to a worse outcome.

Liver-allocation policies for patients affected by HCC in Europe

The main goal of organ allocation systems is to guarantee an equal access to the limited resource of liver grafts for every patients on the waiting list, balancing between the ethical principles of equity, utility, benefit, need, and fairness. The European heath care scenario is very complex, as it is essentially decentralized and each Nation and Regions inside the nation, operate on a significant degree of autonomy. Furthermore the epidemiology of liver diseases and HCC, which is different among European countries, clearly inpacts on indications and priorities. The aims of this review are to analyze liver allocation policies for hepatocellular carcinoma, among different European. The European area considered for this analysis included 5 macro-areas or countries, which have similar policies for liver sharing and allocation: Centro Nazionale Trapianti (CNT) in Italy; Eurotransplant (Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Hungary, Slovenia, and Croatia); Organizacion Nacional de Transplantes (ONT) in Spain; Etablissement français des Greffes (EfG) in France; NHS Blood & Transplant (NHSBT) in the United Kingdom and Ireland; Scandiatransplant (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Iceland). Each identified area, as network for organ sharing in Europe, adopts an allocation system based either on a policy center oriented or on a policy patient oriented. Priorization of patients affected by HCC in the waiting list for deceased donors liver transplant worldwide is dominated by 2 main principles: urgency and utility. Despite the absence of a common organs allocation policy over the Eurpean countries, long-term survival patients listed for transplant due to HCC are comparable to the long-term survival reported in the UNOS register. However, as the principles of allocation are being re-discussed and new proposals emerge, and the epidemiology of liver disease changes, an effort toward a common system is highly advisable.

Liver transplantation for hepatic tumors: A systematic review

Improvements in the medical and pharmacological management of liver transplantation (LT) recipients have led to a better long-term outcome and extension of the indications for this procedure. Liver tumors are relevant to LT; however, the use of LT to treat malignancies remains a debated issue because the high risk of recurrence. In this review we considered LT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), liver metastases (LM) and other rare tumors. We reviewed the literature, focusing on the past 10 years. The highly selected Milan criteria of LT for HCC (single nodule < 5 cm or up to 3 nodules < 3 cm) have been recently extended by a group from the University of S. Francisco (1 lesion < 6.5 cm or up to 3 lesions < 4.5 cm) with satisfying results in terms of recurrence-free survival and the “up-to-seven criteria”. Moreover, using these criteria, other transplant groups have recently developed downstaging protocols, including surgical or loco-regional treatments of HCC, which have increased the post-operative survival of recipients. CCA may be treated by LT in patients who cannot undergo liver resection because of underlying liver disease or for anatomical technical challenges. A well-defined protocol of chemoirradiation and staging laparotomy before LT has been developed by the Mayo Clinic, which has resulted in long term disease-free survival comparable to other indications. LT for LM has also been investigated by multicenter studies. It offers a real benefit for metastases from neuroendocrine tumors that are well differentiated and when a major extrahepatic resection is not required. If LT is an option in these selected cases, liver metastases from colorectal cancer is still a borderline indication because data concerning the disease-free survival are still lacking. Hepatoblastoma and hemangioendothelioma represent rare primary tumors for which LT is often the only possible and effective cure because of the frequent multifocal, intrahepatic nature of the disease. LT is a very promising procedure for both primary and secondary liver malignancies; however, it needs an accurate evaluation of the costs and benefits for each indication to balance the chances of cure with actual organ availability.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: results of down-staging in patients initially outside the Milan selection criteria

Conventional criteria for liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma are single HCC <or= 5 cm or less than or equal to three HCCs <or= 3 cm. We prospectively evaluated the possibility of slightly extending these criteria in a down-staging protocol, which included patients initially outside conventional criteria: single HCC 5-6 cm or two HCCs <or= 5 cm or less than six HCCs <or= 4 cm and sum diameter <or= 12 cm, but within Milan criteria in the active tumors after the down-staging procedures. The outcome of patients down-staged was compared to that of Milan criteria after liver transplantation and since the first evaluation according to an intention-to-treat principle. From 2003 to 2006, 177 patients with HCC were considered for transplantation: the transplantation rate was comparable between the Milan and down-staging groups: 88/129 cases (68%) versus 32/48 cases (67%), respectively. At a median follow-up of 2.5 years after transplantation, the 1 and 3 years' disease-free survival rates were comparable: 80% and 71% in the Milan group versus 78% and 71% in the down-staging. The actuarial intention-to-treat survival was 27/48 patients (56.3%) in the down-staging and 81/129 cases (62.8%) in the Milan group, p = n.s. The proposed down-staging criteria provide a comparable outcome to the conventional criteria.

Liver transplantations with donors aged 60 years and above: the low liver damage strategy

According to transplant registries, grafts from elderly donors have lower survival rates. During 1999-2005, we evaluated the outcomes of 89 patients who received a liver from a donor aged > or = 60 years and managed with the low liver-damage strategy (LLDS), based on the preoperative donor liver biopsy and the shortest possible ischemia time (group D > or = 60-LLDS). Group D > or = 60-LLDS was compared with 198 matched recipients, whose grafts were not managed with this strategy (89 donors < 60 years, group D < 60-no-LLDS and 89 donors aged > or =60 years, group D > or = 60-no-LLDS). In the donors proposed from the age group of > or =60 years, the number of donors rejected decreased during the study period and the LLDS was found to be responsible for this in a significant manner (47% vs. 60%, respectively P < 0.01). Among the recipients transplanted, the clinical features (age, gender, viral infection, child and model for end-stage liver disease score) were comparable among groups, but group D > or = 60-LLDS had a lower mean ischemia time: 415 +/- 106 min vs. 465 +/- 111 (D < 60-no-LLDS), P < 0.05 and vs. 476 +/- 94 (D > or = 60-no-LLDS), P < 0.05. After a median follow-up of 3 years, the 1- and 3-year graft survival rates of group D > or = 60-LLDS (84% and 76%) were comparable with group D < 60-no-LLDS (89% and 76%) and were significantly higher than group D > or = 60-no-LLDS (71% and 54%), P < 0.005. In conclusion, the LLDS optimized the use of livers from elderly donors.

Liver transplantation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma on cirrhosis after liver resection: University of Bologna experience

Liver resection (LR) for patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with preserved liver function, employing liver transplantation (LT) as a salvage procedure (SLT) in the event of HCC recurrence, is a debated strategy. From 1996 to 2005, we treated 227 cirrhotic patients with HCC transplantable: 80 LRs and 147 LTs of 293 listed for transplantation. Among 80 patients eligible for transplantation who underwent LR, 39 (49%) developed HCC recurrence and 12/39 (31%) of these patients presented HCC recurrence outside Milan criteria. Only 10 of the 39 patients underwent LT, a transplantation rate of 26% of patients with HCC recurrence. According to intention-to-treat analysis of transplantable HCC patients who underwent LR (n = 80), compared to all those listed for transplantation (n = 293), 5-year overall survival was 66% in the LR group versus 58% in patients listed for LT, respectively (p = NS); 5-year disease-free survival was 41% in the LR group versus 54% in patients listed for LT (p = NS). Comparable 5-year overall (62% vs. 73%, p = NS) and disease-free (48% vs. 71%, p = NS) survival rates were obtained for SLT and primary LT for HCC, respectively. LR is a valid treatment for small HCC and in the event of recurrence, SLT is a safe and effective procedure.

[Influence of donor age and recipient gender on survival in transplantation due to hepatocarcinoma]

Hepatocarcinoma (HCC) is one of the most frequent indications for liver transplantation. Survival in patients undergoing transplantation due to HCC is similar to that in patients undergoing this procedure for other indications. However, the current shortage of donors has led to longer waiting lists with a consequent risk of tumor progression. The use of older donors in these patients could increase the donor pool and shorten the time spent on the waiting list. We analyzed the influence of donor age on survival in 78 patients with HCC who underwent transplantation in the Santiago de Compostela Hospital between 1994 and 2003.

Improving the outcome of liver transplantation with very old donors with updated selection and management criteria

Advanced donor age is a risk factor for poor outcome in liver transplantation (LT). We reviewed 553 consecutive transplants according to donor age categories [group 1 (n = 173): <50 years; group 2 (n = 96): 50-59 years; group 3 (n = 132): 60-69 years; group 4 (n = 111): 70-79 years; group 5 (n = 41): > or =80 years]. Clinical parameters were comparable between groups. Group 5 had the highest proportion of pretransplant liver biopsy (85%), with only 1 graft showing macrovesicular steatosis > 30%, and the lowest ischemia time. Five-year graft survival was significantly higher in group 1 (75%) versus groups 3 (60%) and 4 (62%; P = 0.01 and P = 0.001, respectively) and in group 5 (81%) versus groups 3 and 4 (P = 0.04 and P = 0.01, respectively). Donor age of 60-79 years, recipient hepatitis C virus-positive status, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score > or = 25, and emergency LT were predictors of poor survival. In hepatitis C virus-positive patients, 5-year graft survival was 72% in group 1, 85% in group 2, 52% in group 3, 65% in group 4, and 71% in group 5 (group 1 versus group 3, P = 0.04; group 2 versus group 3, P = 0.03). In conclusion, older donor grafts managed with routine graft biopsy and short ischemia time may work effectively, regardless of the severity of the recipient's liver disease.

Validation of the HCC-MELD for dropout probability in patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing locoregional therapy

BACKGROUND

The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) is used in prioritizing cirrhotic patients awaiting liver transplantation. Patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are eligible candidates. An HCC-MELD equation was recently proposed to predict the dropout rate of HCC patients on the waiting list. This study aimed to validate the accuracy of this equation.

METHODS

We investigated 390 patients with small HCC who were candidates for liver transplantation and underwent locoregional therapy.

RESULTS

The estimated probability of dropout according to the equation was 8.2% for T1 stage and 13.5% for T2 stage HCC (p < 0.0001). The actual disease progression rate at three months was 2.1% for T1 and 3.0% for T2 stage HCC. At six months, the progression rate was 5.3% for T1 stage and 6.8% for T2 stage. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve of the HCC-MELD equation was 0.81 at three months and 0.80 at six months. Patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation (RFA) had significantly lower dropout rates compared with other treatment groups according to the equation (p = 0.0007). The actual tumor progression rate was also the lowest for the RFA group at both three and six months.

CONCLUSION

The HCC-MELD equation is a feasible predictive model for patients with small HCC undergoing locoregional therapy.

Increased age, male gender, and cirrhosis, but not steatosis or a positive viral serology, negatively impact the life expectancy of patients who undergo liver biopsy

Most survival studies of chronic liver disease avoid including more than one condition, often present in patients with liver disease; survival analysis of patients with liver disease in general was undertaken. Over a 9-year period, the survival experience of 365 patients who underwent liver biopsy, with a median follow-up of 3 years, was assessed. Log rank tests and Cox regression were used to evaluate risk factors. The Flemington-Harrington G(rho) family of tests compared the number of deaths expected in the U.S. population in general, adjusted for age, sex, and year of biopsy, to the observed number of deaths in the patients with cirrhosis and to the observed number of deaths in patients without cirrhosis. Twenty-two (6%) patients died. Cirrhosis (HR = 2.9; 95% c.i.: 1.2-6.7), male sex (HR = 2.7; 95% c.i.: 1.1-6.6), and an additional 20 years of age at biopsy (HR = 2.9; 95% c.i:. 1.4-6.2) each negatively impacted survival. Patients with cirrhosis experienced 4.58 times the number of expected deaths (p < 0.00001). Patients without cirrhosis experienced 1.66 times the number of expected deaths (p = 0.15). Steatosis and a positive viral serology did not increase the risk of death. Male gender, increased age, and cirrhosis increased the risk of death; increased steatosis and positive viral serologic studies did not.

Prognostic Impact of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score in Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation With Suboptimal Livers

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The aim of this retrospective study is to analyze the prognostic impact of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score in patients undergoing liver transplantation (OLT) with suboptimal livers.

METHODS

Between January 2002 and January 2006, 160 adult patients with liver cirrhosis received a whole liver for primary OLT at our institution including 81 with a suboptimal liver (SOL group) versus 79 with an optimal liver (group OL). The definition of suboptimal liver was: one major criterion (age >60 years, steatosis >20%) or at least two minor criteria: sodium >155 mEq/L, Intensive Care Unit stay >7 days, dopamine >10 microg/kg/min, abnormal liver tests, and relevant hemodynamic instability.

RESULTS

Baseline recipients characteristics were comparable in the two study groups. The SOL group had a significantly greater number of early graft deaths (<30 days) than the OL group, while the 3-year Kaplan-Meier patient survivals were similar. Using logistic regression, MELD score was significantly related to patient death only in the SOL group (P = .01), and the receiver operator characteristics curve method identified 17 as the best MELD cutoff with the 3-year survival of 93% versus 85% for MELD < or =7 versus >17, respectively (P > 05). In comparison, it was 94% and 72% in the SOL group (P < .05). Similarly, MELD >17 was significantly associated with early graft death rates only in the SOL group.

CONCLUSION

This study advised surgeons to not use suboptimal livers for patients with advanced MELD scores, thus supporting a donor-recipient matching policy.

A new priority policy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma awaiting liver transplantation within the model for end-stage liver disease system

The best prioritization of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) waiting for liver transplantation under the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) allocation system is still being debated. We analyzed the impact of a MELD adjustment for HCC, which consisted of the addition of an extra score (based on the HCC stage and waiting time) to the native MELD score. The outcome was analyzed for 301 patients with chronic liver disease listed for liver transplantation between March 1, 2001 and February 28, 2003 [United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)-Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) era, 163 patients, 28.8% with HCC] and between March 1, 2003 and February 28, 2004 (HCC-MELD era, 138 patients, 29.7% with HCC). In the HCC-MELD era, the cumulative dropout risk at 6 months was 17.6% for patients with HCC versus 22.3% for those patients without HCC (P = NS), similar to that in the UNOS-CTP era. The cumulative probability of transplantation at 6 months was 70.3% versus 39.0% (P = 0.005), being higher than that in the UNOS-CTP era for patients with HCC (P = 0.02). At the end of the HCC-MELD era, 12 patients with HCC (29.3%) versus 57 without HCC (58.8%) were still on the list (P = 0.001). Both native and adjusted MELD scores were higher (P < 0.05) and progressed more in patients with HCC who dropped out than in those who underwent transplantation or remained on the list (the initial-final native MELD scores were 17.3-23.1, 15.5-15.6, and 12.8-14.1, respectively). The patients without HCC remaining on the list showed stable MELD scores (initial-final: 15.1-15.4). In conclusion, the present data support the strategy of including the native MELD scores in the allocation system for HCC. This model allows the timely transplantation of patients with HCC without severely affecting the outcome of patients without HCC.

Liver transplantation with the Meld system: a prospective study from a single European center

The efficacy of the Meld system to allocate livers has never been investigated in European centers. The outcome of 339 patients with chronic liver disease listed according to their Meld score between 2003 and 2005 (Meld era) was compared to 224 patients listed during the previous 2 years according to their Child score (Child era). During the Meld era, hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) had a 'modified' Meld based on their real Meld, waiting time and tumor stage. The dropouts were deaths, tumor progressions and too sick patients. The rate of removals from the list due to deaths and tumor progressions was significantly lower in the Meld than in the Child era: 10% and 1.2% versus 16.1% and 4.9%, p < 0.05. The 1-year patient survival on the list was significantly higher in the Meld era (84% vs. 72%, p < 0.05). The prevalence of transplantation for HCC increased from 20.5% in the Child to 48.9% in the Meld era (p < 0.001), but between HCCs and non-HCCs of this latter era the dropouts were comparable (9.4% vs. 14.9%, p = n.s.) as was the 1-year patient survival on the list (83% vs. 84%, p = n.s.). The Meld allocation system improved the outcome of patients with or without HCC on the list.