Clinical features of hemodialysis patients treated for hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparison between resection and radiofrequency ablation

Outcomes of radiofrequency ablation for liver tumors in patients on hemodialysis: Results from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample 2005-2020

OBJECTIVE

Few studies have examined the outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for liver tumors in patients on hemodialysis. This study aimed to investigate short-term outcomes following RFA for liver tumors in patients on hemodialysis.

METHODS

Data of patients ≥ 20 years old diagnosed with liver tumors who underwent RFA were extracted from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database 2005-2020. The study population was divided into two groups: patients on hemodialysis and those not on hemodialysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to address baseline differences. Associations between hemodialysis and in-hospital outcomes, including prolonged length of stay (LOS), in-hospital mortality, unfavorable discharge, and complications were determined using logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 12,749 patients constituted the study population, with 550 remaining after 1:4 PSM (110 on hemodialysis and 440 without hemodialysis). After adjustment in the multivariable analyses, patients on maintenance hemodialysis showed significantly higher risks of prolonged LOS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.88, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.78-4.65), in-hospital mortality (aOR=31.90, 95 % CI: 17.68-57.58), unfavorable discharge (aOR=3.79, 95 % CI: 2.05-7.01), at least one complications (aOR=3.68, 95 % CI: 2.49-5.44), and greater total hospital costs (adjusted Beta [aBeta] = 126.75, 95 % CI: 113.68-139.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients on hemodialysis undergoing RFA for liver tumors have greater risks of adverse short-term outcomes including in-hospital mortality, prolonged LOS, complications, and unfavorable discharge. Careful consideration and close monitoring are warranted for patients on hemodialysis when planning for RFA.3.

Ablative and non-surgical therapies for early and very early hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

A wide range of ablative and non-surgical therapies are available for treating small hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with very early or early-stage disease and preserved liver function.

Objective

To review and compare the effectiveness of all current ablative and non-surgical therapies for patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma (≤ 3 cm).

Design

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data sources

Nine databases (March 2021), two trial registries (April 2021) and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews.

Review methods

Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials of ablative and non-surgical therapies, versus any comparator, for small hepatocellular carcinoma. Randomised controlled trials were quality assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and mapped. The comparative effectiveness of therapies was assessed using network meta-analysis. A threshold analysis was used to identify which comparisons were sensitive to potential changes in the evidence. Where comparisons based on randomised controlled trial evidence were not robust or no randomised controlled trials were identified, a targeted systematic review of non-randomised, prospective comparative studies provided additional data for repeat network meta-analysis and threshold analysis. The feasibility of undertaking economic modelling was explored. A workshop with patients and clinicians was held to discuss the findings and identify key priorities for future research.

Results

Thirty-seven randomised controlled trials (with over 3700 relevant patients) were included in the review. The majority were conducted in China or Japan and most had a high risk of bias or some risk of bias concerns. The results of the network meta-analysis were uncertain for most comparisons. There was evidence that percutaneous ethanol injection is inferior to radiofrequency ablation for overall survival (hazard ratio 1.45, 95% credible interval 1.16 to 1.82), progression-free survival (hazard ratio 1.36, 95% credible interval 1.11 to 1.67), overall recurrence (relative risk 1.19, 95% credible interval 1.02 to 1.39) and local recurrence (relative risk 1.80, 95% credible interval 1.19 to 2.71). Percutaneous acid injection was also inferior to radiofrequency ablation for progression-free survival (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% credible interval 1.05 to 2.51). Threshold analysis showed that further evidence could plausibly change the result for some comparisons. Fourteen eligible non-randomised studies were identified (n ≥ 2316); twelve had a high risk of bias so were not included in updated network meta-analyses. Additional non-randomised data, made available by a clinical advisor, were also included (n = 303). There remained a high level of uncertainty in treatment rankings after the network meta-analyses were updated. However, the updated analyses suggested that microwave ablation and resection are superior to percutaneous ethanol injection and percutaneous acid injection for some outcomes. Further research on stereotactic ablative radiotherapy was recommended at the workshop, although it is only appropriate for certain patient subgroups, limiting opportunities for adequately powered trials.

Limitations

Many studies were small and of poor quality. No comparative studies were found for some therapies.

Conclusions

The existing evidence base has limitations; the uptake of specific ablative therapies in the United Kingdom appears to be based more on technological advancements and ease of use than strong evidence of clinical effectiveness. However, there is evidence that percutaneous ethanol injection and percutaneous acid injection are inferior to radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation and resection.

Study registration

PROSPERO CRD42020221357.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR131224) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 29. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with renal dysfunction: Pathophysiology, prognosis, and treatment challenges

The population of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) overlaps to a high degree with those for chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The degrees of renal dysfunction vary, from the various stages of CKD to dialysis-dependent ESRD, which often affects the prognosis and treatment choice of patients with HCC. In addition, renal dysfunction makes treatment more difficult and may negatively affect treatment outcomes. This study summarized the possible causes of the high comorbidity of HCC and renal dysfunction. The possible mechanisms of CKD causing HCC involve uremia itself, long-term dialysis status, immunosuppressive agents for postrenal transplant status, and miscellaneous factors such as hormone alterations and dysbiosis. The possible mechanisms of HCC affecting renal function include direct tumor invasion and hepatorenal syndrome. Finally, we categorized the risk factors that could lead to both HCC and CKD into four categories: Environmental toxins, viral hepatitis, metabolic syndrome, and vasoactive factors. Both CKD and ESRD have been reported to negatively affect HCC prognosis, but more research is warranted to confirm this. Furthermore, ESRD status itself ought not to prevent patients receiving aggressive treatments. This study then adopted the well-known Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer guidelines as a framework to discuss the indicators for each stage of HCC treatment, treatment-related adverse renal effects, and concerns that are specific to patients with pre-existing renal dysfunction when undergoing aggressive treatments against CKD and ESRD. Such aggressive treatments include liver resection, simultaneous liver kidney transplantation, radiofrequency ablation, and transarterial chemoembolization. Finally, focusing on patients unable to receive active treatment, this study compiled information on the latest systemic pharmacological therapies, including targeted and immunotherapeutic drugs. Based on available clinical studies and Food and Drug Administration labels, this study details the drug indications, side effects, and dose adjustments for patients with renal dysfunction. It also provides a comprehensive review of information on HCC patients with renal dysfunction from disease onset to treatment.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of radio frequency ablation and routine resection in the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

This study sought to conduct a meta-analysis of the relevant literature on radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and routine resection in the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma (SHCC) in recent years, and to examine the clinical efficacy and safety of different schemes.

Methods

PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, Chinese biomedical literature, VIP Chinese journal and the Wanfang Database were used to comprehensively search for relevant papers on clinical control studies of RFA and the routine resection SHCC published between January 2008 and December 2019. The clinical efficacy and safety of different schemes in the treatment of SHCC were compared, including the overall survival rate within 1, 3, and 5 years, and the incidence of complications during treatment. A meta-analysis was undertaken using methods provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and RevMan 5.3 software.

Results

A total of 13 publications of studies were retrieved in which 2,384 patients participated. Of these patients, 1,256 (52.68%) were allocated to the RFA group and 1,128 patients (47.32%) to the conventional resection group. The effect size of the 1-year overall survival rate for the two groups was odds ratio (OR): 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.43-1.38]; Z test: P=0.32. The effect size of the overall survival rate within 3 years was OR: 0.71 (95% CI, 0.48-1.05); Z test: P=0.07. The difference was not statistically significant. The 5-year overall survival rate of the RFA group and conventional resection group was OR: 0.55 (95% CI, 0.40-0.72). The OR value fell within the CI, excluding 1; Z test: P<0.0001. The difference was statistically significant. The incidence of complications in the RFA group during treatment was lower than that in the conventional resection group (OR: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.32-0.69). The OR value was within the CI, excluding 1; Z test: P=0.0002. The difference was statistically significant.

Conclusions

The short-term effect of RFA in the treatment of SHCC is basically the same as that of routine resection; however, the long-term effect is significantly lower than that of routine resection. RFA has a lower incidence of complications during treatment, and thus better clinical safety.

Differences between exhausted CD8+ T cells in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with and without uremia

The purpose of this study was to explore the differences between exhausted CD8+ T cells in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with and without uremia. We enrolled 45 uremic patients who were recently diagnosed with HCC into the HCC + uremia cohort and similar patients with HCC but without uremia into the HCC-only cohort. Lymphocytes were obtained from the two cohorts, and exhausted CD8+ T cells, comprising PD-1+CD8+, TIM-3+CD8+, and LAG-3+CD8+ T cells, were sorted and expanded in vitro. After expansion, the proportions of PD-1+CD8+, TIM-3+CD8+, and LAG-3+CD8+ T cells were significantly higher in the HCC-only cohort than in the HCC + uremia cohort. CD8+ T cells expressing PD-1, TIM-3, or LAG-3 showed increased tumor reactivity and release of interferon-γ in vitro; however, these cells demonstrated weaker anti-tumor activity in HCC + uremia patients than in HCC-only patients. Among the expanded lymphocytes, only the decreased proportion of PD-1+CD8+ T cells significantly correlated with the HCC + uremia cohort (odds ratio of 2.731, p = 0.009). We concluded that peripheral CD8+ T cells expressing PD-1, TIM-3, or LAG-3 from the HCC + uremia cohort were dysfunctional in vitro. Among these populations, PD-1+CD8+ T cells were most evident in HCC patients with uremia.

Hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic renal disease: Challenges of interventional treatment

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common malignancy worldwide, recognized as the fourth most common cause of cancer related death. Many risk factors, leading to liver cirrhosis and associated HCC, have been recognized, among them viral hepatitis infections play an important role worldwide. Patients suffering from chronic kidney disease (CKD), especially those on maintenance dialysis, show a higher prevalence of viral hepatitis than the general population what increases the risk of HCC onset. In addition, renal dysfunction may have a negative prognostic impact on both immediate and long-term outcomes after malignancy treatment. Several interventional procedures for the treatment of HCC are currently available: thermal ablation, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, liver surgery or even liver transplantation. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer system provides an evidence-based treatment algorithm to address different categories of patients to the most-effective treatment in consideration of the extension of disease, liver function and performance status. Liver resection and transplantation are usually reserved to patients with early stage HCC and acceptable performance status, while the other treatments are more indicated in case of impaired liver function or locally advanced or unresectable tumors. However, there is no validated treatment algorithm for HCC in CKD patients, mainly due to the rarity of reports in this cohort of patients. Hereby we discuss the available evidences on interventional HCC treatments in CKD patients, and briefly report up-to-date pharmacological therapy for HCC patients affected by viral hepatitis.