Living or Brain-dead Donor Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter, Western, Intent-to-treat Cohort Study

SIMAP500: A novel risk score to identify recipients at higher risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following liver transplantation (LT) has a devastating influence on recipients’ survival; however, the risk of recurrence is not routinely stratified. Risk stratification is vital with a long LT waiting time, as that could influence the recurrence despite strict listing criteria.

AIM

This study aims to identify predictors of recurrence and develop a novel risk prediction score to forecast HCC recurrence following LT.

METHODS

A retrospective review of LT for HCC recipients at University Hospitals Birmingham between July 2011 and February 2020. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify recurrence predictors, based on which the novel SIMAP500 (satellite nodules, increase in size, microvascular invasion, AFP > 500, poor differentiation) risk score was proposed.

RESULTS

234 LTs for HCC were performed with a median follow-up of 5.3 years. Recurrence developed in 25 patients (10.7%). On univariate analyses, RETREAT score > 3, α-fetoprotein (AFP) at listing 100-500 and > 500, bridging, increased tumour size between imaging at the listing time and explant histology, increase in the size of viable tumour between listing and explant, presence of satellite nodules, micro- and macrovascular invasion on explant and poor differentiation of tumours were significantly associated with recurrence, based on which, the SIMAP500 risk score is proposed. The SIMAP500 demonstrated an excellent predictive ability (c-index = 0.803) and outperformed the RETREAT score (c-index = 0.73). SIMAP500 is indicative of the time to disease recurrence.

CONCLUSION

SIMAP500 risk score identifies the LT recipients at risk of HCC recurrence. Risk stratification allows patient-centric post-transplant surveillance programs. Further validation of the score is recommended.

Pursuing living donor liver transplantation improves outcomes of patients with autoimmune liver diseases: An intention-to-treat analysis

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers the opportunity to decrease waitlist time and mortality for patients with autoimmune liver disease (AILD), autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cholangitis, and primary sclerosing cholangitis. We compared the survival of patients with a potential living donor (pLDLT) on the waitlist versus no potential living donor (pDDLT) on an intention-to-treat basis. Our retrospective cohort study investigated adults with AILD listed for a liver transplant in our program between 2000 and 2021. The pLDLT group comprised recipients with a potential living donor. Otherwise, they were included in the pDDLT group. Intention-to-treat survival was assessed from the time of listing. Of the 533 patients included, 244 (43.8%) had a potential living donor. Waitlist dropout was higher for the pDDLT groups among all AILDs (pDDLT 85 [29.4%] vs. pLDLT 9 [3.7%], p < 0.001). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year intention-to-treat survival rates were higher for pLDLT versus pDDLT among all AILDs (95.7% vs. 78.1%, 89.0% vs. 70.1%, and 87.1% vs. 65.5%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, pLDLT was associated with a 38% reduction in the risk of death among the AILD cohort (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.42-0.93 [ p <0.05]), and 60% among the primary sclerosing cholangitis cohort (HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.22-0.74 [ p <0.05]). There were no differences in the 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-transplant survival between LDLT and DDLT (AILD: 95.6% vs. 92.1%, 89.9% vs. 89.4%, and 89.1% vs. 87.1%, p =0.41). This was consistent after adjusting for covariates (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.56-1.68 [ p >0.9]). Our study suggests that having a potential living donor could decrease the risk of death in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis on the waitlist. Importantly, the post-transplant outcomes in this population are similar between the LDLT and DDLT groups.

Small graft size and hepatocellular carcinoma outcomes in living donor liver transplantation: a retrospective multicentric cohort study

INTRODUCTION

This study examined associations between the graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) for adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from patients in the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry who underwent LDLT for HCC from 2014 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized using the cutoff GRWR for HCC recurrence determined by an adjusted cubic spline (GRWR <0.7% vs. GRWR ≥0.7%). Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and HCC recurrence were analyzed in the entire and a 1:5 propensity-matched cohort.

RESULTS

The eligible cohort consisted of 2005 LDLT recipients [GRWR <0.7 ( n =59) vs. GRWR ≥0.7 ( n =1946)]. In the entire cohort, 5-year RFS was significantly lower in the GRWR <0.7 than in the GRWR ≥0.7 group (66.7% vs. 76.7%, P =0.019), although HCC recurrence was not different between groups (77.1% vs. 80.7%, P =0.234). This trend was similar in the matched cohort ( P =0.014 for RFS and P =0.096 for HCC recurrence). In multivariable analyses, GRWR <0.7 was an independent risk factor for RFS [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.89, P =0.012], but the result was marginal for HCC recurrence (aHR 1.61, P =0.066). In the pretransplant tumor burden subgroup analysis, GRWR <0.7 was a significant risk factor for both RFS and HCC recurrence only for tumors exceeding the Milan criteria (aHR 3.10, P <0.001 for RFS; aHR 2.92, P =0.003 for HCC recurrence) or with MoRAL scores in the fourth quartile (aHR 3.33, P <0.001 for RFS; aHR 2.61, P =0.019 for HCC recurrence).

CONCLUSIONS

A GRWR <0.7 potentially leads to lower RFS and higher HCC recurrence after LDLT when the pretransplant tumor burden is high.

Constructing an Intent-to-Treat Score Index to Predict Survival Outcomes in Pediatric Liver Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Waitlist and posttransplant outcomes have been widely reported for pediatric liver transplantation. Yet, analyzing these metrics individually fails to provide a holistic perspective for patients and their families. Intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis fills this gap by studying the associations between waitlist outcomes, organ availability, and posttransplant outcomes. Our study aimed to construct a predictive index utilizing ITT analysis for pediatric liver transplant recipients (Pedi-ITT).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis utilizing de-identified data provided by the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) from March 1, 2002, to December 31, 2021. We analyzed data for 12 926 pediatric recipients (age <18). We conducted a univariate and multivariable logistic regression to find the significant predictive factors affecting ITT survival. A scoring index was constructed to stratify outcome risk on the basis of the significant factors identified by regression analysis.

RESULTS

Multivariable analysis found the following factors to be significantly associated with death on the waitlist or after transplant: gender, diagnosis, UNOS region, ascites, diabetes mellitus, age at the time of listing, serum sodium at the time of listing, total bilirubin at the time of listing, serum creatinine at the time of listing, INR at the time of listing, history of ventilator use, and history of re-transplantation. Using receiver operator characteristic analysis, the Pedi-ITT index had a c-statistic of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-0.82). The c-statistics of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease/Pediatric for End-Stage Liver Disease and pediatric version of the Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation score indices were 0.74 (CI: 0.71-0.76) and 0.69 (CI: 0.66-0.72), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Pedi-ITT index provides an additional prognostic model with moderate predictive power to assess outcomes associated with pediatric liver transplantation. Further analysis should focus on increasing the predictive power of the index.

Indications and results of right-lobe living donor liver transplantation

The shortage of deceased liver donor organs over the years has always posed the need to expand the donor pool. A viable alternative to deceased donors is that of the living donor. Indeed, the living donor in liver transplantation, initially in pediatric transplantation, but for several years now also in adult transplantation, is a more than viable alternative to deceased liver donation. In fact, right liver lobe donation has proven to be a surgical procedure with low impact on the donor's life in terms of morbidity and mortality, with excellent results in recipients of such organs. In recent years, an increasing number of studies have been published that show excellent results in right-lobe living donor liver transplantation, encouraging this practice not only in countries that have historically had a shortage of deceased donor organs, such as Asian countries, but making it a practice of increasing use in Western countries as well. In addition, thanks to improvements in surgical technique and the experience of high-volume centers, this surgery has also begun to be performed using minimally invasive surgical techniques, allowing us to envision ever better outcomes for both donor and recipient in the coming years.

Current role and perspectives of living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review of the past 20 years

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) poses a significant global health challenge, and liver transplantation (LT) remains the best curative option. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) emerged as a potential solution to organ scarcity, reducing waitlist times. This comprehensive review explores LDLT practices, focusing on patient selection criteria and oncologic outcomes. A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines included 50 studies (2004-2023) with 8062 patients. Data encompassed baseline characteristics, HCC features, and oncologic outcomes. Further analysis categorized results by geography and publication year. Heterogeneity in patient demographics, tumor burden, and transplant characteristics was observed. Recent LDLT series demonstrated a shift towards refined selection criteria, increased neoadjuvant treatment, and improved oncologic outcomes. Geographic disparities revealed unique challenges in Eastern and Western practices. LDLT proves effective for HCC, addressing donor shortages. Evolving practices highlight the importance of refining inclusion criteria and optimizing tumor management. While geographic differences exist, LDLT, when judiciously applied, offers promising outcomes.

Rescue Liver Transplantation for Posthepatectomy Liver Failure: A Systematic Review and Survey of an International Experience

BACKGROUND

Rescue liver transplantation (LT) is the only life-saving option for posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) whenever it is deemed as irreversible and likely to be fatal. The goals were to perform a qualitative systematic review of rescue LT for PHLF and a survey among various international LT experts.

METHODS

A literature search was performed from 2000 to 2022 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome framework, and to this, the authors' experience was added. The international online open survey included 6 cases of PHLF extracted from the literature and submitted to 976 LT experts. The primary outcome was whether experts would consider rescue LT for each case. Interrater agreement among experts was calculated using the free-marginal multirater kappa methodology.

RESULTS

The review included 40 patients. Post-LT mortality occurred in 8 (20%) cases (7/28 with proven cancer and 1/12 with benign disease). In the long term, 6 of 21 (28.6%) survivors with cancer died of recurrence (median = 38 mo) and 15 (71.4%) were alive with no recurrence (median = 111 mo). All 11 survivors with benign disease were alive and well (median = 39 mo). In the international survey among experts in LT, the percentage agreement to consider rescue LT was 28%-98%, higher for benign than for malignant disease ( P = 0.011). Interrater agreement for the primary endpoint was low, expected 5-y survival >50% being the strongest independent predictor to consider LT.

CONCLUSIONS

Rescue LT for PHLF may achieve good results in selected patients. Considerable inconsistencies of decision-making exist among LT experts when considering LT for PHLF.

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Narrative Review and A Glimpse into The Future

Liver transplantation (LT) is a highly effective treatment for carefully selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this review, we explored the development of LT selection criteria and organ allocation policies, comparing original data to underscore their historical progression into the intricate task of quantitatively estimating pre- and post-LT survivals. We emphasized the role of biomarkers such as serum alpha-fetoprotein, Des-gamma-carboxy-prothrombin, circulating tumor cells, and circulating tumor DNA in predicting patient outcomes. Additionally, we examined the transplant-associated survival benefits and the difficulties in accurately calculating these benefits. We also reviewed recent advancements in targeted therapy and checkpoint inhibitors for advanced, inoperable HCC and projected their integration into LT for HCC. We further discussed the growing use of living donor liver transplants in the United States and compared its outcomes with those of deceased donor liver transplants. Furthermore, we examined the progress in machine perfusion techniques, which have shown potential in improving patient outcomes and enlarging the donor pool. These advancements present opportunities to enhance LT patient survivals, refine selection criteria, establish new priority metrics, develop innovative bridging and downstaging strategies, and formulate redesigned LT strategies for HCC treatments.

Association between Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence and Graft Size in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review

The aim of this work was to assess the association between graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR) in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence. A search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was performed until December 2022 for studies comparing different GRWRs in the prognosis of HCC recipients in LDLT. Data were pooled to evaluate 1- and 3-year survival rates. We identified three studies, including a total of 782 patients (168 GRWR < 0.8 vs. 614 GRWR ≥ 0.8%). The pooled overall survival was 85% and 77% at one year and 90% and 83% at three years for GRWR < 0.8 and GRWR ≥ 0.8, respectively. The largest series found that, in patients within Milan criteria, the GRWR was not associated with lower oncological outcomes. However, patients with HCC outside the Milan criteria with a GRWR < 0.8% had lower survival and higher tumor recurrence rates. The GRWR < 0.8% appears to be associated with lower survival rates in HCC recipients, particularly for candidates with tumors outside established HCC criteria. Although the data are scarce, the results of this study suggest that considering the individual GRWR not only as risk factor for small-for-size-syndrome but also as contributor to HCC recurrence in patients undergoing LDLT would be beneficial. Novel perfusion technologies and pharmacological interventions may contribute to improving outcomes.

Can living donor liver transplantation provide similar outcomes to deceased-donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A potential solution to the deceased organ shortage is to include live organ donations and to identify patients with lower rates of HCC recurrence to fairly allocate liver grafts. Our aims were to detect the long-term outcomes of LDLT versus DDLT for HCC and predictors of recurrence after transplantation.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane library were searched for eligible studies from inception to July 2021 and a systematic review and meta-analysis were done.

RESULTS

35 studies with a total of 7822 patients were included. The 1-, 3-, 4 year-OS showed trivial improvement for LDLT recipients. However, the two modalities had similar 5-, 6- and 10-year OS. A significant improvement in the ITT-OS was observed for LDLT recipients. Regarding the DFS and recurrence after transplantation, no significant difference was observed between LDLT and DDLT. In addition to that, the pooled hazard ratio of the included studies showed that Milan criteria, level of AFP, presence of vascular invasion, tumor differentiation were significant predictors of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The cancer biology (not the graft type) is the most important determinant of recurrence and survival after LT. However, LDLT provided much better survival benefits to HCC patients especially in regions that suffer from low deceased organ availability.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

Living Donor Liver Transplant Center Volume Influences Waiting List Survival Among Children Listed for Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Pediatric living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) remains infrequently performed in the United States and localized to a few centers. This study aimed to compare pediatric waiting list and posttransplant outcomes by LDLT center volume.

METHODS

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database was retrospectively reviewed for all pediatric (age <18 y) liver transplant candidates listed between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2019. The average annual number of LDLT, deceased donor partial liver transplant (DDPLT), and overall (ie, LDLT + DDPLT + whole liver transplants) pediatric liver transplants performed by each transplant center during the study period was calculated.

RESULTS

Of 88 transplant centers, only 44 (50%) performed at least 1 pediatric LDLT during the study period. LDLT, DDPLT, and overall transplant center volume were all positively correlated. LDLT center volume was protective against waiting list dropout after adjusting for confounding variables (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.97; P = 0.004), whereas DDPLT and overall center volume were not (P > 0.05); however, DDPLT center volume was significantly protective against both recipient death and graft loss, whereas overall volume was only protective against graft loss and LDLT volume was not protective for either.

CONCLUSIONS

High-volume pediatric LDLT center can improve waiting list survival, whereas DDPLT and overall volume are associated with posttransplant survival. Expertise in all types of pediatric liver transplant options is important to optimize outcomes.

Predicting the Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Primary Living Donor Liver Transplantation Using Metabolic Parameters Obtained from 18F-FDG PET/CT

This study evaluated the prognostic value of metabolic parameters based on the standardized uptake value (SUV) normalized by total body weight (bwSUV) and by lean body mass (SUL) measured on ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) for predicting tumor recurrence after primary living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) without transplantation locoregional therapy. This retrospective study enrolled 49 patients with HCC. The maximum tumor bwSUV (T-bwSUVmax) and SUL (T-SULmax) were measured on PET. The maximum bwSUV (L-bwSUVmax), mean bwSUV (L-bwSUVmean), maximum SUL (L-SULmax), and mean SUL (L-SULmean) were measured in the liver. All metabolic parameters were evaluated using survival analyses and compared to clinicopathological factors. Tumor recurrence occurred in 16/49 patients. Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed that all metabolic parameters were significant (p < 0.05). Univariate analysis revealed that prothrombin-induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist-II; T-stage; tumor number; tumor size; microvascular invasion; the Milan criteria, University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), and up-to-seven criteria; T-bwSUVmax/L-bwSUVmean; T-SULmax; T-SULmax/L-SULmax; and T-SULmax/L-SULmean were significant predictors. Multivariate analysis revealed that the T-SULmax/L-SULmean (hazard ratio = 115.6; p = 0.001; cut-off, 1.81) and UCSF criteria (hazard ratio = 172.1; p = 0.010) were independent predictors of tumor recurrence. SUL-based metabolic parameters, especially T-SULmax/L-SULmean, were significant, independent predictors of HCC recurrence post-LDLT.

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria: outcome of expanded criteria in tumor size

Background

The Milan criteria are the universal standard of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Numerous expanded criteria have shown outcomes as good as the Milan criteria. In Taiwan, living donor liver transplant (LDLT) accounts for the majority of transplantations due to organ shortages.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled 155 patients who underwent LDLT for HCC from July 2005 to June 2017 and were followed up for at least 2 years. Patients beyond the Milan criteria (n = 78) were grouped as recurrent or nonrecurrent, and we established new expanded criteria based on these data.

Results

Patients beyond the Milan criteria with recurrence (n = 31) had a significantly larger maximal tumor diameter (4.13 ± 1.96 cm versus 6.10 ± 3.41 cm, p = 0.006) and total tumor diameter (7.19 ± 4.13 cm versus 10.21 ± 5.01 cm, p = 0.005). Therefore, we established expanded criteria involving maximal tumor diameter ≤ 6 cm and total tumor diameter < 10 cm. The 5-year survival rate of patients who met these criteria (n = 134) was 77.3%, and the 5-year recurrence rate was 20.5%; both showed no significant differences from those of the Milan criteria. Under the expanded criteria, the pool of eligible recipients was 35% larger than that of the Milan criteria.

Conclusion

Currently, patients with HCC who undergo LDLT can achieve good outcomes even when they are beyond the Milan criteria. Under the new expanded criteria, patients can achieve outcomes as good as those with the Milan criteria and more patients can benefit.

CANLI KARACİĞER DONÖRLERİNDE YAŞAM KALİTESİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Objective: In this study, it was aimed to examine the effect of transplantation on physical, mental and psychosocial health of donors by evaluating the quality of life of living liver donors after transplantation. Methods: The study was conducted with three groups at XXXX University Faculty of Medicine Organ Transplantation and Research Center. 43 living donors from 2017 and 43 living donors from 2007-2016 who underwent liver transplantation were randomly selected to participate in the study. Also 43 control subjects were selected randomly from the community. The study was conducted by a single interviewer between 01.02.2018 and 31.05.2018 by telephone or e-mail. The socio-demographic data questionnaire, Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Hospital Anxiety-Depression Scale (HADS) prepared by the researchers were applied to all participants. Results: The mean age of the participants was 38.04 ± 9.84 years, and of these participants 48.1% (n= 62) of them were female. When donors and control group were evaluated in terms of their quality of life, no significant difference was found between physical role, energy(vitality) and mental health subgroups(p> 0.05). However, donors have a better quality of life in physical functioning, emotional aspect, social functioning, pain and general health subgroups. It was detected that the quality of life was not affected by age, gender, marital status, educational status, economic status, job loss, comorbidity or disturbance by presence of operational scar. Only sexual problems and the loss of the recipient’s life were observed to have a negative impact on the quality of life. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of anxiety and depression (p

Evaluation of the Intention-to-Treat Benefit of Living Donation in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Awaiting a Liver Transplant

Importance

Living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) offers advantages over deceased-donor liver transplant (DDLT) of improved intention-to-treat outcomes and management of the shortage of deceased-donor allografts. However, conflicting data still exist on the outcomes of LDLT in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Objective

To investigate the potential survival benefit of an LDLT in patients with HCC from the time of waiting list inscription.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter cohort study with an intention-to-treat design analyzed the data of patients aged 18 years or older who had an HCC diagnosis and were on a waiting list for a first transplant. Patients from 12 collaborative centers in Europe, Asia, and the US who were on a transplant waiting list between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2017, composed the international cohort. The Toronto cohort comprised patients from 1 transplant center in Toronto, Ontario, Canada who were on a waiting list between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2015. The international cohort centers performed either an LDLT or a DDLT, whereas the Toronto cohort center was selected for its capability to perform both LDLT and DDLT. The benefit of LDLT was tested in the 2 cohorts before and after undergoing an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis. Data were analyzed from February 1 to May 31, 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Intention-to-treat death was defined as a patient death that occurred for any reason and was calculated from the time of waiting list inscription for liver transplant to the last follow-up date (December 31, 2019). Four multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models for intention-to-treat death were created.

Results

A total of 3052 patients were analyzed in the international cohort, of whom 2447 were men (80.2%) and the median (IQR) age at first referral was 58 (53-63) years. The Toronto cohort comprised 906 patients, of whom 743 were men (82.0%) and the median (IQR) age at first referral was 59 (53-63) years. In all the settings, LDLT was an independent protective factor, reducing the risk of overall death by 49% in the pre-IPTW analysis for the international cohort (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.71; P < .001), 33% in the post-IPTW analysis for the international cohort (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.85; P = .001), 43% in the pre-IPTW analysis for the Toronto cohort (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.73; P < .001), and 48% in the post-IPTW analysis for the Toronto cohort (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P < .001). The discriminatory ability of the mathematical models further improved in all of the cases in which LDLT was incorporated.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that having a potential live donor could decrease the intention-to-treat risk of death in patients with HCC who are on a waiting list for a liver transplant. This benefit is associated with the elimination of the dropout risk and has been reported in centers in which both LDLT and DDLT options are equally available.

Meta-analysis and meta-regression of outcomes for adult living donor liver transplantation versus deceased donor liver transplantation

Prior single center or registry studies have shown that living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) decreases waitlist mortality and offers superior patient survival over deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of this study was to compare outcomes for adult LDLT and DDLT via systematic review. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine patient survival and graft survival, MELD, waiting time, technical complications, and postoperative infections. Out of 8600 abstracts, 19 international studies comparing adult LDLT and DDLT published between 1/2005 and 12/2017 were included. U.S. outcomes were analyzed using registry data. Overall, 4571 LDLT and 66,826 DDLT patients were examined. LDLT was associated with lower mortality at 1, 3, and 5 years posttransplant (5-year HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.81-0.93], p < .0001), similar graft survival, lower MELD at transplant (p < .04), shorter waiting time (p < .0001), and lower risk of rejection (p = .02), with a higher risk of biliary complications (OR 2.14, p < .0001). No differences were observed in rates of hepatic artery thrombosis. In meta-regression analysis, MELD difference was significantly associated with posttransplant survival (R² 0.56, p = .02). In conclusion, LDLT is associated with improved patient survival, less waiting time, and lower MELD at LT, despite posing a higher risk of biliary complications that did not affect survival posttransplant.

Recent advances in the surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing, despite effective antiviral treatment for hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus infection and the application of preventive measures such as vaccination at birth against HBV infection. This is mainly due to the increase in metabolic syndrome and its hepatic components, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and steatohepatitis. Liver resection and transplantation are the main treatment options, offering long-term survival and potential cure. In this review, the recent advances in the surgical management of HCC are presented. More specifically, the role of liver resection in the intermediate and advanced stages, according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification, is analyzed. In addition, the roles of minimally invasive surgery and of living-related liver transplantation in the management of patients with HCC are discussed. Finally, recent data on the role of molecular markers in the early diagnosis and recurrence of HCC are presented. The management of HCC is complex, as there are several options for each stage of the disease. In order for, each patient to get the maximum benefit, an individualized approach is suggested, in specialized liver units, where cases are discussed in multidisciplinary tumor boards.

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.

Socioeconomic Deprivation Does Not Impact Liver Transplantation Outcome for HCC: A Survival Analysis From a National Database

BACKGROUND

To investigate the value of European deprivation index (EDI) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) characteristics and their relationships with outcome after liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

Patients undergoing LT for HCC were included from a national database (from "Agence de la Biomédecine" between 2006 and 2016. Characteristics of the patients were blindly extracted from the database. Thus, EDI was calculated in 5 quintiles and prognosis factors of survival were determined according to a Cox model.

RESULTS

Among the 3865 included patients, 33.9% were in the fifth quintile (quintile 1, N = 562 [14.5%]; quintile 2, N = 647 [16.7%]; quintile 3, N = 654 [16.9%]; quintile 4, N = 688 [17.8%]). Patients in each quintile were comparable regarding HCC history, especially median size of HCC, number of nodules of HCC and alpha-fetoprotein score. In the univariate analysis of the crude survival, having >2 nodules of HCC before LT and time on waiting list were associated with a higher risk of death (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.03, respectively). EDI, size of HCC, model for end-stage liver disease score, Child-Pugh score were not statistically significant in the crude and net survival. In both survival, time on waiting list and number of HCC ≥2 were independent factor of mortality after LT for HCC (P = 0.009 and 0.001, respectively, and P = 0.03 and 0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

EDI does not impact overall survival after LT for HCC. Number of HCC and time on waiting list are independent prognostic factors of survival after LT for HCC.

Survival After Treatable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence in Liver Recipients: A Nationwide Cohort Analysis

Background

Survival after post-transplant recurrence of HCC is dismal, and almost all treatments for recurrent HCC are off-labeled, without an extensive large-scale analysis. We aimed to delineate their post-recurrence courses and define benchmarks for comparing future treatment effectiveness.

Methods

Three national databases, including health insurance, catastrophic illness, and the cause of death, were linked for cohort establishment and data collection during the period from 2005 to 2016. Patients with HCC recurrence ≥6 months after transplant surgery and under treatment were recruited for survival analysis. Selection of treatment strategies for HCC recurrence after liver transplant was based on the same criteria for those without liver transplant.

Results

Of 2,123 liver transplant recipients, 349 developed HCC recurrence ≥6 months after liver transplant, and the median recurrence time was 17.8 months post-transplant. Within 2 years of treatment, 61% patients showed recurrence (early recurrence group), and survival in these patients was poorer than in the late recurrence group. According to a multivariable analysis, the transplant era before 2008 and radiofrequency ablation were associated with good prognosis, whereas receiving sorafenib and radiotherapy was associated with poor prognosis. The effect of transplant era became insignificant after stratification by recently receiving pretransplant transarterial chemoembolization.

Conclusion

Timing of recurrence and interventions used were associated with the outcomes of patients with post-transplant HCC recurrence. These data provide the benchmark and indicate the critical period and high-risk factors for further therapeutic trial consideration.

Surgical Treatments of Hepatobiliary Cancers

Hepatobiliary cancers which include hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and biliary tract cancers (i.e., cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality based on the stage of the disease at presentation. With improved screening for hepatobiliary malignancies in patients with risk factors and with widespread use of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, hepatobiliary malignancies, including incidental diagnosis of gallbladder carcinoma, are on the rise. Definitive treatment of hepatobiliary malignancies include surgical resection, ablation, and liver transplantation. However, management of these cancers is challenging due to the complex hepatobiliary anatomy and the need for meticulous perioperative management especially in patients with advanced liver disease. The management and prognosis of hepatobiliary malignancies vary widely based on the stage of presentation, with surgical options providing the possibility of definitive cure in patients presenting with early-stage disease. Surgical resection for HCC results in good outcomes if performed in ideal candidates. For patients with early HCC who are not candidates for surgical resection, ablation and liver transplantation should be considered. Similarly, surgical resection is also the definitive treatment for biliary tract cancers, and liver transplantation can be curative in selected patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The role of routine adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy is not clearly established, but adjuvant therapies can offer better outcomes in patients with advanced disease at presentation. Outcomes of surgical management of hepatobiliary cancers seem to be improving. Given the complex decision-making process involved, multidisciplinary evaluation is essential to provide and coordinate the best treatments for these patients.

[Living related liver transplantation]

Liver transplantation has become established as a standard procedure in the treatment of end-stage liver diseases. Despite intense efforts by all parties involved up to the amendment of the German Transplantation Act, the lack of suitable donor organs was still one of the limiting factors of this therapeutic procedure. One way out of this problem is to make so-called marginal organs usable, e.g. with the help of machine perfusion or by utilizing living liver donation, which are used in some countries for more than 90% of organ donations. In general, there is no difference in the indications for liver transplantation between a (partial) organ obtained by post-mortem or living donation. Before any living donation, a thorough evaluation of the donor is carried out in order to minimize postoperative morbidity as far as possible. Technically the partial liver donation is based on the oncological liver resection, while the partial liver transplantation is a further development of split liver transplantation after post-mortem liver donation. In specialized centers comparable or even better results can nowadays be achieved using living liver donation instead of post-mortem donation.

Increased Surgical Complications but Improved Overall Survival with Adult Living Donor Compared to Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) provides an alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for patients with end-stage liver disease in the circumstance of scarcity of deceased grafts. However, the outcomes of LDLT remain controversial.

Method

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the outcomes of LDLT with DDLT. Twelve outcomes were assessed.

Results

Thirty-nine studies involving 38563 patients were included. LDLT was comparable in red blood cell transfusion, perioperative mortality, length of hospital stay, retransplantation rate, hepatitis C virus recurrence rate, and hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence rate with DDLT. Cold ischemia time was shorter and duration of recipient operation was longer in LDLT. Postoperative intra-abdominal bleeding rate occurred less frequently in LDLT recipients (odds ratio (OR) = 0.64, 95%confidence interval (CI) = 0.46 − 0.88, P = 0.006), but this did not decrease the perioperative mortality. LDLT was associated with significantly higher biliary (OR = 2.23, 95%CI = 1.59 − 3.13, P < 0.00001) and vascular (OR = 2.00, 95%CI = 1.31 − 3.07, P = 0.001) complication rates and better overall survival (OS) (1 year: OR = 1.32, 95%CI = 1.01 − 1.72, P = 0.04; 3 years: OR = 1.39, 95%CI = 1.14 − 1.69, P = 0.0010; and 5 years: OR = 1.33, 95%CI = 1.04 − 1.70, P = 0.02). According to subgroup analysis, biliary complication rate and OS improved dramatically as experience increased, while vascular complication rate could not be improved because it was mainly caused by the difference of the donor type itself.

Conclusions

LDLT remains a valuable option for patients in need of liver transplantation for it provides an excellent alternative to DDLT without compromising recipient outcomes. Further refinement in biliary and vascular reconstruction techniques and the accumulation of liver transplantation centers' experience are the key factors in expanding the application of LDLT.

New frontiers in liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver resection is one of the main curative options for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis and is the treatment of choice in non-cirrhotic patients. However, careful patient selection is required to balance the risk of postoperative liver failure and the potential benefit on long-term outcomes. In the last decades, improved surgical techniques and perioperative management, as well as better patient selection, have enabled the indications for liver resection to be expanded. In this review, we aim to describe the main indications for liver resection in the management of HCC, its role compared to percutaneous ablation and liver transplantation in the therapeutic algorithm, as well as the recent advances in liver surgery that could be used to improve the prognosis of patients with HCC.

Predictors of outcome after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond Milan criteria

The Milan criteria have been the cornerstone of selection policies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting liver transplantation (LT) globally for over two decades. Many groups have proposed the transplantation of patients with larger and more numerous tumors achieving comparable results. Many of these use radiologic morphometric criteria as surrogates for explant pathology to predict outcomes. Several other indices have been developed both within and beyond Milan incorporating biological indices as well as dynamic markers of response to pre-transplant locoregional treatments and waiting time. These have allowed for successful expansion of transplant selection criteria without compromising outcomes with limited organ supplies. In this review we will discuss the predictors of outcome in patients beyond Milan criteria.

Living donor liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As experience grows, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has become an effective treatment option to overcome the deceased donor organ shortage.

RECENT FINDINGS

Donor safety is the highest priority in LDLT. Strict donor selection according to structured protocols and center experience are the main factors that determine donor safety. However, with increased experience, many centers have explored increasing organ availability within living donation by means of ABO incompatible LDLT, dual graft LDLT, and anonymous living donation. Also, this growing experience in LDLT has allowed the transplant community to cautiously explore the role of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma outside of Milan criteria and patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases.

SUMMARY

LDLT has become established as a viable strategy to ameliorate the organ shortage experienced by centers around the world. Improved understanding of this technique has allowed the improved utilization of live donor graft resources, without compromising donor safety. Moreover, LDLT may offer some advantages over deceased donor liver transplantation and a unique opportunity to assess the broader applicability of liver transplantation.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Management after the transplant

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an increasingly common indication for liver transplantation (LT) in the United States and in many parts of the world. In the last decade, significant work has been done to better understand how to risk stratify LT candidates for recurrence of HCC following transplant using a combination of biomarker and imaging findings. However, despite the high frequency of HCC in the LT population, guidance regarding posttransplant management is lacking. In particular, there is no current evidence to support specific post-LT surveillance strategies, leading to significant heterogeneity in practices. In addition, there are no current recommendations regarding recurrence prevention, including immunosuppression regimen or secondary prevention with adjuvant chemotherapy. Finally, guidance on treatment of disease recurrence is also lacking and there is significant controversy about the use of immunotherapy in transplant recipients due to the risk of rejection. Thus, outcomes for patients with recurrence are poor. This paper therefore provides a comprehensive review of the current literature on post-LT management of patients with HCC and identifies gaps in our current knowledge that are in urgent need of further investigation.

Liver transplantation as therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver transplantation can provide curative therapy in selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Well-established criteria include tumours that are within the Milan criteria and without evidence of vascular or extrahepatic involvement. Modest expansion of the original Milan criteria has been shown to achieve similar recurrence-free survival rates. Overall, HCC recurrence occurs in about 10%-15% of LT recipients, most within the first 2 years. Predictors of post-transplant recurrence include high alpha-foetoprotein, macrovascular invasion, as well as tumour size and number. Once HCC recurs after transplantation, prognosis is poor, though better if detected early. There is no established role for systemic prophylactic post-transplant chemotherapy.

Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence in living and deceased donor liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

Background:

Although a number of technical problems and donor safety issues associated with living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have been resolved, some initial clinical studies showed an increased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence in LDLT. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess differences in tumor recurrence between LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT).

Methods:

After systematic retrievals of studies about LDLT and DDLT for HCC, articles were selected with a rationale of emphasizing inter-group comparability. Results from multivariate analyses were combined and discussed together with univariate analyses. In subgroup analysis, the impact of organ allocation policy was taken into consideration.

Results:

Seven articles were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, a salient result that emerged from the seven studies was a significant increased risk of HCC recurrence in the LDLT group than in the DDLT group (P = 0.01). The most significant increase in hazard ratio was found in studies where organs tended to be allocated to non-tumor patients.

Conclusions:

An increased risk for HCC recurrence in LDLT as compared with DDLT patients was found. The relatively shorter preoperative observation windows in LDLT may lead to fewer cases of HCC with invasive features being screened out, which may provide a possible explanation for the high rates of HCC recurrence.

Liver Transplantation with "Hors Tour" Allocated Versus Standard MELD Allocated Grafts: Single-Center Audit and Impact on the Liver Pool in France

BACKGROUND

The French transplant governing system defined "Rescue" (the so-called "Hors Tour") livers as those livers which were declined for the five top-listed patients. This study compares the outcomes following liver transplantation (LT) in patients who received a donor liver through a rescue allocation (RA) procedure or according to MELD score priority (standard allocation, SA) and evaluates the impact on the graft pool of a proactive policy to accept RA grafts.

METHODS

Data from all consecutive patients who underwent LT with SA or RA grafts from 2011 to 2015 were compared in terms of short- and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

The 249 elective first LTs were performed with 64 (25.7%) RA and 185 (74.3%) SA grafts. RA grafts were obtained from older donors and were associated with a longer cold ischemia time. Recipients of RA livers were older and had lower MELD scores. The rates of delayed graft function, primary nonfunction, retransplantation, complications, and mortality were similar between the RA and SA groups. At 1 and 3 and 5 years, graft and patient survival rates were similar between the groups. These results were maintained after matching on recipient characteristics. Our proactive policy to accept RA grafts increased the liver pool for elective first transplantation by 25%.

CONCLUSIONS

RA livers can be safely transplanted into selected recipients and significantly expand the liver pool.

Recent advances in liver transplantation for cancer: The future of transplant oncology

Liver transplantation is widely indicated as a curative treatment for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. However, with recent therapeutic advances, as well as efforts to increase the donor pool, liver transplantation has been carefully expanded to patients with other primary or secondary malignancies in the liver. Cholangiocarcinoma, colorectal and neuroendocrine liver metastases, and hepatic epithelioid haemangioendothelioma are amongst the most relevant new indications. In this review we discuss the fundamental concepts of this ambitious undertaking, as well as the newest indications for liver transplantation, with a special focus on future perspectives within the recently established concept of transplant oncology.

2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer globally and the fourth most common cancer in men in Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle-aged and elderly patients. These practice guidelines will provide useful and constructive advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 44 experts in hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2014 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions.

2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer globally and the fourth most common cancer in men in Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle-aged and elderly patients. These practice guidelines will provide useful and constructive advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 44 experts in hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology and radiation oncology in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2014 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions.

Live donor liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma offers increased survival vs. deceased donation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There are conflicting reports on the outcomes after live donor liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare the survival of patients with HCC, with a potential live donor (pLDLT) at listing vs. no potential donor (pDDLT), on an intention-to-treat basis.

METHODS

All patients with HCC listed for liver transplantation between 2000-2015 were included. The pLDLT group was comprised of recipients with a potential live donor identified at listing. Patients without a live donor were included in the pDDLT group. Survival was assessed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox regression was applied to identify potential predictors of mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 219 patients were included in the pLDLT group and 632 patients in the pDDLT group. In the pLDLT group, 57 patients (26%) were beyond the UCSF criteria whereas 119 patients (19%) in the pDDLT group were beyond (p = 0.02). Time on the waiting list was shorter for the pLDLT than the pDDLT group (4.8 [2.9-8.5] months vs. 6.2 [3.0-12.0] months, respectively, p = 0.02). The dropout rate was 32/219 (14.6%) in the pLDLT and 174/632 (27.5%) in the pDDLT group, p <0.001. The 1-, 3- and 5-year intention-to-treat survival rates were 86%, 72% and 68% in the pLDLT vs. 82%, 63% and 57% in the pDDLT group, p = 0.02. Having a potential live donor was a protective factor for death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 95% CI 0.53-0.86). Waiting times of 9-12 months (HR 1.53; 95% CI 1.02-2.31) and ≥12 months (HR 1.69; 95% CI 1.23-2.32) were predictors of death.

CONCLUSION

Having a potential live donor at listing was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of death in patients with HCC in this intention-to-treat analysis. This benefit is related to a lower dropout rate and a shorter waiting period.

LAY SUMMARY

Liver transplantation (LT) offers the best chance of survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and can be performed using grafts from deceased donors or live donors. In this work, we aimed to assess the differences in survival after live donor LT when compared to deceased donor LT. We studied 219 patients listed for live donor LT and 632 patients listed for deceased donor LT. Patients who had a potential live donor at the time of listing had a higher survival rate. Therefore, being listed for a live donor LT was a protective factor against death.

Living or deceased organ donors in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) versus deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for HCC patients were not well defined and it was necessary to reassess.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and WanFang database for eligible studies. Perioperative and survival outcomes of HCC patients underwent LDLT were pooled and compared to those underwent DDLT.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies with 5376 HCC patients were included. For HCC patients underwent LDLT and DDLT, there were comparable rates of overall survival (OS) (1-year, RR = 1.04, 95%CI = 1.00-1.09, P = 0.03; 3-year, RR = 1.03, 95%CI = 0.96-1.11, P = 0.39; 5-year, RR = 1.04, 95%CI = 0.95-1.13, P = 0.43), disease free survival (DFS) (1-year, RR = 1.00, 95%CI = 0.95-1.05, P = 0.99; 3-year, RR = 1.00, 95%CI = 0.94-1.08, P = 0.89; 5-year, RR = 1.01, 95%CI = 0.93-1.09, P = 0.85), recurrence (1-year, RR = 1.41, 95%CI = 0.72-2.77, P = 0.32; 3-year, RR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.57-1.39, P = 0.60; and 5-year, RR = 0.85, 95%CI = 0.56-1.31, P = 0.47), perioperative mortality within 3 months (RR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.50-1.59, p = 0.70) and postoperative complication (RR = 0.99, 95%CI = 0.70-1.39, P = 0.94). LDLT was associated with better 5-year intention-to-treat patient survival (ITT-OS) than DDLT (RR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.01-1.22, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggested that LDLT was not inferior to DDLT in consideration of comparable perioperative and survival outcomes. However, in terms of 5-year ITT-OS, LDLT was a possibly better choice for HCC patients.

Ischemia-reperfusion injury and the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after deceased donor liver transplantation

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplantation. Data of 195 patients were retrospectively analysed. Post-reperfusion aspartate (AST), alanine transaminase, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels were the primary measures of IRI. Tumour recurrence was the primary endpoint. Post-reperfusion AST was a continuous risk factor for tumour recurrence in patients within Milan criteria (p = 0.035), with an optimal cut-off of 1896 U/L. Recurrence-free survival of patients within Milan criteria and post-reperfusion AST of <1896 and ≥1896 U/L was 96.6% and 71.9% at 5 and 3.7 years, respectively (p = 0.006). Additionally, post-reperfusion AST and LDH exceeding the upper quartile significantly increased the risk of HCC recurrence in patients within Milan criteria (p = 0.039, hazard ratio [HR] = 5.99 and p = 0.040, HR = 6.08, respectively) and to a lesser extent, in patients within Up-to-7 criteria (p = 0.028, HR = 3.58 and p = 0.039, HR = 3.33, respectively). No other significant IRI effects were found in patients beyond the Up-to-7 criteria and in analyses stratified for independent risk factors for recurrence: tumour number and differentiation, alpha-fetoprotein, and microvascular invasion. Thus, IRI exerts major negative effects on the risk of HCC recurrence after liver transplantation in patients within standard and extended criteria.

Curative salvage liver transplantation in patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma: An intention-to-treat analysis

The salvage liver transplantation (SLT) strategy was conceived for initially resectable and transplantable (R&T) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, to try to obviate upfront liver transplantation, with the "safety net" of SLT in case of postresection recurrence. The SLT strategy is successful or curative when patients are recurrence free following primary resection alone, or after SLT for recurrence. The aim of the current study was to determine the SLT strategy's potential for cure in R&T HCC patients, and to identify predictors for its success. From 1994 to 2012, all R&T HCC patients with cirrhosis were enrolled in the SLT strategy. An intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was used to determine this strategy's outcomes and predictors of success according to the above definition. In total, 110 patients were enrolled in the SLT strategy. Sixty-three patients (57%) had tumor recurrence after initial resection, and in 30 patients SLT could be performed (recurrence transplantability rate = 48%). From the time of initial resection, ITT 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 69% and 60%, respectively. The SLT strategy was successful in 60 patients (56%), either by resection alone (36%), or by SLT for recurrence (19%). Preresection predictors of successful SLT strategy at multivariate analysis included Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score >10, and absence of neoadjuvant transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Additional postresection predictive factors were absence of postresection morbidity, and T-stage 1-2 at the resection specimen.

CONCLUSION

The SLT strategy is curative in only 56% of cases. Higher MELD score at inception of the strategy and no pre-resection TACE are predictors of successful SLT strategy. (Hepatology 2018;67:204-215).

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular cancer: an (almost) exclusive Eastern procedure?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most prevalent cancer and it is linked with chronic liver disease. Liver transplantation (LT) is the best curative treatment modality, since it can cure simultaneously the underlying liver disease and HCC. Milan criteria (MC) are the benchmark for selecting patients with HCC for LT, achieving up to 91% 1-year survival post transplantation. However, when considering intention-to-treat (ITT) rates are substantially lower, mainly due dropout. Additionally, Milan criteria (MC) are too restrictive and more inclusive criteria have been reported with good outcomes. Mainly, in Eastern countries, deceased donors are scarce, therefore Asian centers have developed living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) to a state-of-art status. There are many eastern centers reporting huge numbers of LDLT with outstanding results. Regarding HCC patients, they have reported many criteria including more advanced tumors achieving reasonable outcomes. Western countries have well-established deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) programs. However, organ shortage and restrictive criteria for listing patients with HCC endorses LDLT as a good option to offer curative treatment to more HCC patients. However, there are some controversial reports claiming higher rates of HCC recurrence after LDLT than DDLT. An extensive review included 30 studies with cohorts of HCC patients who underwent LDLT in both East and West countries. We reported also the results of our Institution, in Brazil, where it was performed the first LDLT. This review also addresses the eligibility criteria for transplanting patients with HCC developed in Western and Eastern countries.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: early-stage management challenges

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of cancer death and is increasing in incidence. This review focuses on HCC surveillance and treatment of early-stage disease, which are essential to improving outcomes. Multiple societies have published HCC surveillance guidelines, but screening efforts have been limited by noncompliance and overall lack of testing for patients with undiagnosed chronic liver disease. Treatment of early-stage HCC has become increasingly complex due to expanding therapeutic options and better outcomes with established treatments. Surgical indications for HCC have broadened with improved preoperative liver testing, neoadjuvant therapy, portal vein embolization, and perioperative care. Advances in post-procedural monitoring have improved efficacies of transarterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation, and novel therapies involving delivery of radiochemicals are being studied in small trials. Finally, advances in liver transplantation have allowed for expanded indications beyond Milan criteria with non-inferior outcomes. More clinical trials evaluating new therapies and multimodal regimens are necessary to help clinicians design better treatment algorithms and improve outcomes.