Outcome of supraselective transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Long-term posttransplant survival outcome following bridging locoregional therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim

Liver transplantation (LT) is essential due to its curative efficacy, but liver-graft shortages have limited its widespread application. Bridging locoregional therapy (LRT) before LT has been performed to prevent tumor progression, and a recent literature review revealed that it is associated with a nonsignificant trend toward better survival outcomes. However, much more information on bridging therapy has become available since then. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the posttransplant survival and HCC recurrence between patients with and without pretransplant bridging LRT.

Methods

Studies were identified in MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Library. Two independent researchers screened titles and full articles, extracted relevant data, and conducted a parametric survival analysis.

Results

Out of 4794 studies, 18 cohort studies were eligible. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 93.1%, 85.0%, and 79.1% for those in the bridging LRT group, while they were 91.8%, 81.1%, and 75.5% for those who did not receive LRT, respectively. There were no differences in overall survival between these groups (HR 0.90; 0.78-1.05, P = 0.17). Interestingly, we discovered that bridging therapy helped prolong survival significantly in a high-risk population with a long waiting time (HR 0.76; 0.60-0.96, P = 0.02). Unfortunately, bridging LRT did not improve disease-free survival (HR 0.98; 0.86-1.11, P = 0.70).

Conclusions

The results indicate that bridging LRT does not generally change post-LT outcomes. However, bridging LRT can significantly improve survival in patients with a long waiting time for LT.

Association between bridging therapy and posttransplant outcomes in patients with HCC within Milan criteria: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Liver transplantation is the curative therapy of choice for patients with early-stage HCC. Locoregional therapies are often employed as a bridge to reduce the risk of waitlist dropout; however, their association with posttransplant outcomes is unclear. We conducted a systematic review using Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify studies published between database inception and August 2, 2023, which reported posttransplant recurrence-free survival and overall survival among patients transplanted for HCC within Milan criteria, stratified by receipt of bridging therapy. Pooled HRs were calculated for each outcome using the DerSimonian and Laird method for a random-effects model. We identified 38 studies, including 19,671 patients who received and 20,148 patients who did not receive bridging therapy. Bridging therapy was not associated with significant differences in recurrence-free survival (pooled HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.77-1.08; I2 =39%) or overall survival (pooled HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.95-1.24; I2 =47%). Results were relatively consistent across subgroups, including geographic location and study period. Studies were discordant regarding the differential strength of association by pretreatment tumor burden and pathologic response, but potential benefits of locoregional therapy were mitigated in those who received 3 or more treatments. Adverse events were reported in a minority of studies, but when reported occurred in 6%-15% of the patients. Few studies reported loss to follow-up and most had a risk of residual confounding. Bridging therapy is not associated with improvements in posttransplant recurrence-free or overall survival among patients with HCC within Milan criteria. The risk-benefit ratio of bridging therapy likely differs based on the risk of waitlist dropout.

Addressing hepatic metastases in ovarian cancer: Recent advances in treatment algorithms and the need for a multidisciplinary approach

The lifetime risk for ovarian cancer incidence is 1.39% and the lifetime risk of death is 1.04%. Most ovarian cancer patients are diagnosed at advanced stages (III, IV) because there were no specific symptoms or existing screening tests. Liver metastases have been found in up to 50% of patients dying of advanced ovarian cancer. Recent studies indicate the need for a multidisciplinary approach from initial diagnosis to oncologic surgery and chemotherapy treatment, mandating the involvement of gynecologic oncologists, surgical oncologist, medical oncologists, hepatobiliary surgeons, and interventional radiologists.

Transplantation versus liver resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common solid cancers in the world. Its treatment strategies have evolved significantly over the past few decades but the best treatment outcomes remain in the surgical arena. Especially for early HCCs, the options are abundant. However, surgical resection and liver transplantation provide the best long-term survival. In addition, there are evidence the ablative therapy such as radiofrequency ablation, could provide equivalent outcome as compared to resection. However, HCC is a unique malignancy as the majority of patients develop this cancer in the background of cirrhotic livers. As such, the treatment consideration should not only look at the oncological perspective but also the functional status of the liver parenchyma, i.e., the state of cirrhosis and presence of portal hypertension. Even with the most widely adopted staging systems for HCC such as the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system and many other staging systems, none of them are ideal in including the various considerations for patients with HCCs. In this article, the key issues between choosing surgical resection and liver transplantation are discussed. A comprehensive review of the current surgical options are outlined in order to explore the pros and cons of each option.

Therapies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma awaiting liver transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are listed for liver transplantation (LT) are often treated while on the waiting list with locoregional therapy (LRT), which is aimed at either preventing progression of HCC or reducing the measurable disease burden of HCC in order to receive increased allocation priority. We aimed to synthesize evidence regarding the effectiveness of LRT in the management of patients with HCC who were on the LT waitlist. We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple databases from 1996 to April 25, 2016, for studies that enrolled adults with cirrhosis awaiting LT and treated with bridging or down-staging therapies before LT. Therapies included transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, transarterial radioembolization, ablation, and radiotherapy. We included both comparative and noncomparative studies. There were no randomized controlled trials identified. For adults with T1 HCC and waiting for LT, there were only two nonrandomized comparative studies, both with a high risk of bias, which reported the outcome of interest. In one series, the rate of dropout from all causes at 6 months in T1 HCC patients who underwent LRT was 5.3%, while in the other series of T1 HCC patients who did not receive LRT, the dropout rate at median follow-up of 2.4 years and the progression rate to T2 HCC were 30% and 88%, respectively. For adults with T2 HCC awaiting LT, transplant with any bridging therapy showed a nonsignificant reduction in the risk of waitlist dropout due to progression (relative risk [RR], 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-1.85; I² = 0%) and of waitlist dropout from all causes (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.060-2.370; I² = 85.7%) compared to no therapy based on three comparative studies. The quality of evidence is very low due to high risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. There were five comparative studies which reported on posttransplant survival rates and 10 comparative studies which reported on posttransplant recurrence, and there was no significant difference seen in either of these endpoints. For adults initially with stage T3 HCC who received LRT, there were three studies reporting on transplant with any down-staging therapy versus no downstaging, and this showed a significant increase in 1-year (two studies, RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.23) and 5-year (1 study, RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.03-1.32) post-LT survival rates for patients who received LRT. The quality of evidence is very low due to serious risk of bias and imprecision.

CONCLUSION

In patients with HCC listed for LT, the use of LRT is associated with a nonsignificant trend toward improved waitlist and posttransplant outcomes, though there is a high risk of selection bias in the available evidence. (Hepatology 2018;67:381-400).