Expanded criteria for liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a report from the International Registry of Hepatic Tumors in Liver Transplantation

Prognostic role of plasma vascular endothelial growth factor in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing liver transplantation

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is pivotal in the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Studies have demonstrated the prognostic value of circulating VEGF levels in patients undergoing liver resection or locoregional therapy (LRT) for HCC. We investigated the significance of preoperative plasma VEGF levels in patients with HCC undergoing liver transplantation (LT) at a Western transplant center. Pre-LT plasma VEGF levels were measured with an enzyme-linked immunoassay for 164 patients with HCC undergoing LT. The preoperative plasma VEGF level was correlated with clinicopathological variables and overall and recurrence-free post-LT survival. A higher pre-LT plasma VEGF level was significantly associated with pre-LT LRT (P = 0.01), multiple tumors (P = 0.02), a total tumor diameter ≥ 5 cm (P = 0.01), bilobar tumor distribution (P = 0.03), tumor vascular invasion (VI; P < 0.001), and HCC beyond the Milan criteria (P < 0.001). Patients with a plasma VEGF level > 44 pg/mL had significantly worse overall and disease-free survival than those with VEGF levels ≤ 44 pg/mL (P = 0.04 and P = 0.02, respectively). In a multivariate analysis, a plasma VEGF level > 44 pg/mL was independently associated with tumor VI (P < 0.001) and recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio = 2.12, 95% confidence interval = 1.08-4.14, P = 0.03). In conclusion, in patients with chronic end-stage liver disease and HCC, a pre-LT plasma VEGF level > 44 pg/mL may be a predictor of tumor VI and recurrence-free post-LT survival.

Intent-to-treat analysis of liver transplant for hepatocellular carcinoma in the MELD era: impact of hepatitis C and advanced status

BACKGROUND/AIM

Liver transplantation is a well-recognized treatment for non-resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, the overall survival and waiting list removal rates for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related HCC have not been assessed.

METHODS

The present study included 11,146 patients with HCC and 64,788 patients without HCC, listed for liver transplantation on the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database between 2003 and 2010.

RESULTS

In a multivariate analysis, HCV infection was an independent predictor of being transplanted or remaining on the waiting list in HCC candidates (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.60-0.71, p < 0.001). However, patients in the advanced status (model for end-stage liver disease score over 20, tumor stage exceed tumor-node-metastasis stage II, or alpha fetoprotein lover 400 ng/ml) but without HCV had better post-transplant survival than patients in the advanced status and with HCV (64 vs. 47% at 5 years, p < 0.001), and comparable survival to patients with HCV but not in the advanced status (62%, p = 0.461).

CONCLUSIONS

HCC candidates with HCV infection are more likely to be transplanted, remain on the waiting list for longer, and have worse post-transplant survival. Patients in the advanced status but without HCV also could share a similar post-transplant survival to those not in the advanced status but with HCV.

Current surgical treatment strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma in North America

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an aggressive tumor that often occurs in the setting of chronic liver disease. Many patients do not initially manifest any symptoms of HCC and present late when cure with surgical resection or transplantation is no longer possible. For this reason, patients at high risk for developing HCC are subjected to frequent screening processes. The surgical management of HCC is complex and requires an inter-disciplinary approach. Hepatic resection is the treatment of choice for HCC in patients without cirrhosis and is indicated in some patients with early cirrhosis (Child-Pugh A). Liver transplantation has emerged in the past decade as the standard of care for patients with cirrhosis and HCC meeting Milan criteria and in select patients with HCC beyond Milan criteria. Loco-regional therapy with transarterial chemoembolization, transarterial embolization, radiofrequency ablation and other similar local treatments can be used as neo-adjuvant therapy to downstage HCC to within Milan criteria or as a bridge to transplantation in patients on transplant wait list.

Review article: liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma - a critical appraisal of the current worldwide listing criteria

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) plays an important role in the management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although early results following LT for HCC were poor, since the introduction of the Milan criteria in 1996 morphological criteria have since been well established. Thereafter, various expansions of the Milan criteria were introduced worldwide. Listing criteria for LT for HCC in the United Kingdom (UK) initially conformed to the Milan criteria but were re-defined in 2009 by expansion of the Milan criteria.

AIMS

To look at the evidence in literature on listing criteria and management of HCC worldwide in comparison with the UK. Secondly, we aim to review worldwide vs. UK literature on prioritisation models, loco-regional therapy protocols and role of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) in LT for HCC.

METHODS

An electronic literature search with Medline was carried out to identify articles related to LT for HCC.

RESULTS

Although various expansions of the Milan criteria have been described, they remain the gold standard against which other criteria are measured. The UK criteria are an expansion of the Milan criteria that go beyond Milan and University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) criteria. The current UK listing criteria for LT for HCC when compared to the worldwide criteria have a worse survival benefit (projected 5-year survival between 35-50%) when plotted on the metroticket calculator.

CONCLUSIONS

In keeping with most transplant centres worldwide, the UK have adopted expansions to Milan to allow more patients to benefit from LT. However, currently, as it stands the UK criteria when plotted in the modification of the Metroticket model project worse survival that would seem unjustified.

Current challenges in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver transplantation (LT) is the best option of cure for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Notwithstanding several alternatives, Milan Criteria remain the cornerstone for patient selection. Currently, expanded criteria patients are unsuitable for LT without taking downstaging approaches and response to therapies into consideration. Relative weight of HCC as indication to LT is increasing and that generates competition with MELD-described non-cancer indications. Allocation policies should be adjusted accordingly, considering principles of urgency and utility in the management of the waiting list and including transplant benefit to craft equitable criteria to deal with the limited resource of donated grafts. Maximization of cost-effectiveness of LT in HCC can be also pursued through changes in immunosuppression policies and multimodal management of post-transplant recurrences. This review is focused on those constantly mutating challenges that have to be faced by anyone dealing with the management of HCC in the context of liver transplantation.

Is resectable hepatocellular carcinoma a contraindication to liver transplantation? A novel decision model based on "number of patients needed to transplant" as measure of transplant benefit

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Number-needed-to-treat is used in assessing the effectiveness of a health-care intervention, and reports the number of patients who need to be treated to prevent one additional bad outcome. Although largely used in medical literature, there are no studies measuring the benefit of liver transplantation (LT) over hepatic resection (HR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in terms of "Number of patients needed to transplant (NTT)."

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) Classes B-C, very large (>10 cm) and multi-nodular (>2 nodules) tumours, macroscopic vascular invasion and extra-hepatic metastases.

STUDY POPULATION

1028 HCC cirrhotic patients from one Eastern (n=441) and two Western (n=587) surgical units. Patient survival observed after HR by proportional hazard regression model was compared to that predicted after LT by the Metroticket calculator. The benefit obtainable from LT compared to resection was analysed in relationship with number of nodules (modelled as ordinal variable: single vs. oligonodular), size of largest nodule (modelled as a continuous variable), presence of microscopic vascular invasion (MVI), and time horizon from surgery (5-year vs. 10-year).

RESULTS

330 patients were beyond the Milan criteria (32%) and 597 (58%) had MVI. The prevalence of MVI was 52% in patients within Milan criteria and 71% in those beyond (p<0.0001). In the 5-year transplant benefit analysis, nodule size and HCC number were positive predictors of transplant benefit, while MVI had a strong negative impact on NTT. Transplantation performed as an effective therapy (NTT <5) only in oligonodular HCC with largest diameter >3cm (beyond conventional LT criteria) when MVI was absent. The 10-year scenario increased drastically the transplant benefit in all subgroups of resectable patients, and LT became an effective therapy (NTT <5) for all patients without MVI whenever tumor extension and for oligonodular HCC with MVI within conventional LT criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on NTT analysis, the adopted time horizon (5-year vs. 10-year scenario) is the main factor influencing the benefit of LT in patients with resectable HCC and Child A cirrhosis.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation Outcomes for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Beyond Milan or UCSF Criteria

Liver transplantation (LT) is the most effective treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that arises from cirrhosis. The Milan and the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) selection criteria have resulted in major improvements in patient survival. We assessed our outcomes for patients with HCC that were beyond the Milan and UCSF criteria after living donor liver transplantation. We reviewed the data for 109 patients with cirrhosis and HCC who underwent living donor right lobe liver transplantation (living donor liver transplantation; LDLT) during the period from July 2004 to July 2012. Sixteen (14.7 %) patients had HCC recurrences during a mean follow-up of 35.4 ± 26.2 months (range 4-100 months). The mean time to recurrence was 11 ± 9.4 months (range 4-26 months). Survival rates were not significantly different between patients with HCC that met and were beyond the Milan and UCSF criteria (p = 0.761 and p = 0.861, respectively). The Milan and UCSF criteria were not independent risk factors for HCC recurrence or patient survival. Only poorly differentiated tumors were associated with a lower survival rate (OR = 8.656, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.01-37.16; p = 0.004). Survival rates for patients with HCC that were beyond conventional selection criteria should encourage reconsidering the acceptable thresholds of these criteria so that more HCC patients may undergo LT without affecting outcomes.

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma beyond Milan Criteria: Multidisciplinary Approach to Improve Outcome

The implementation of the Milan criteria (MC) in 1996 has dramatically improved prognosis after liver transplantation (LT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Liver transplantation has, thereby, become the standard therapy for patients with "early-stage" HCC on liver cirrhosis. The MC were consequently adopted by United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) and Eurotransplant for prioritization of patients with HCC. Recent advancements in the knowledge about tumor biology, radiographic imaging techniques, locoregional interventional treatments, and immunosuppressive medications have raised a critical discussion, if the MC might be too restrictive and unjustified keeping away many patients from potentially curative LT. Numerous transplant groups have, therefore, increasingly focussed on a stepwise expansion of selection criteria, mainly based on tumor macromorphology, such as size and number of HCC nodules. Against the background of a dramatic shortage of donor organs, however, simple expansion of tumor macromorphology may not be appropriate to create a safe extended criteria system. In contrast, rather the implementation of reliable prognostic parameters of tumor biology into selection process prior to LT is mandatory. Furthermore, a multidisciplinary approach of pre-, peri-, and posttransplant modulating of the tumor and/or the patient has to be established for improving prognosis in this special subset of patients.

Locoregional therapy and recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplant

OBJECTIVES

Locoregional therapy may decrease the tumor stage and enable liver transplant in patients who have hepatocellular cancer. The purpose of the present study was to assess the relation between locoregional therapy and recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after transplant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 50 patients who had liver transplant for treatment of end-stage liver disease from hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhosis, outcomes were evaluated for associations with locoregional therapy before transplant and Milan criteria.

RESULTS

Most patients had locoregional therapy before transplant (31 patients [62%]: transarterial catheter radiofrequency ablation alone, 16 patients; chemoembolization alone, 10 patients; both transarterial catheter radiofrequency ablation and chemoembolization, 5 patients). Follow-up at median 90 months after transplant showed that 9 patients (18%) had recurrence at median 45 months (range, 120 ± 12 mo) (recurrence: locoregional therapy, 5 of 31 patients [16%]; no locoregional therapy, 4 of 19 patients [21%]; not significant). Locoregional therapy was associated with a significantly lower frequency of recurrence in patients who were outside the Milan criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who have liver transplant for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma, preoperative locoregional therapy may decrease recurrence in patients who are outside the Milan criteria.

Hangzhou criteria for liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The inclusion criteria for liver transplantation (LT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are being expanded, and the Hangzhou criteria are the most accepted criteria in China. The aim of our study was to evaluate the Hangzhou criteria for LT in HCC with respect to the Milan criteria.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data of 298 cases of LT in HCC in our center from August 2000 to December 2010, and then divided these patients into three groups according to the tumor characteristics: the Milan criteria group (n=97), the Hangzhou criteria group (n=172), and the out of Hangzhou criteria group (n=126). We compared the baseline characteristics and outcome of these three groups of patients.

RESULTS

Baseline patient characteristics showed no significant difference among the three groups, except for younger age in the out of Hangzhou group (P<0.05). Overall the 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 91.8, 88.7, and 86.6%, respectively, for the Milan criteria group; 86.6, 76.7, and 73.8% for the Hangzhou criteria group; and 76.2, 57.1, and 56.3% for the out of Hangzhou criteria group (P<0.05). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year tumor-free survival rates were 88.7, 86.6, and 86.6%, respectively, for the Milan criteria group; 83.7, 73.8, and 73.3% for the Hangzhou criteria group (P=0.014); and 63.5, 48.4, and 48.4% for the out of Hangzhou group, which was significantly lower than the rates in the other two groups (P=0.000).

CONCLUSION

Although the Hangzhou criteria lead to lower overall survival and tumor-free survival rates compared with the Milan criteria, the Hangzhou criteria indicate more HCC patients for LT and are associated with a considerable long-term outcome. The Hangzhou criteria should be accepted as the inclusion criteria for LT in HCC.

A mathematical model for optimizing the indications of liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The criteria for organ sharing has developed a system that prioritizes liver transplantation (LT) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who have the highest risk of wait-list mortality. In some countries this model allows patients only within the Milan Criteria (MC, defined by the presence of a single nodule up to 5 cm, up to three nodules none larger than 3 cm, with no evidence of extrahepatic spread or macrovascular invasion) to be evaluated for liver transplantation. This police implies that some patients with HCC slightly more advanced than those allowed by the current strict selection criteria will be excluded, even though LT for these patients might be associated with acceptable long-term outcomes.

METHODS

We propose a mathematical approach to study the consequences of relaxing the MC for patients with HCC that do not comply with the current rules for inclusion in the transplantation candidate list. We consider overall 5-years survival rates compatible with the ones reported in the literature. We calculate the best strategy that would minimize the total mortality of the affected population, that is, the total number of people in both groups of HCC patients that die after 5 years of the implementation of the strategy, either by post-transplantation death or by death due to the basic HCC. We illustrate the above analysis with a simulation of a theoretical population of 1,500 HCC patients with tumor size exponentially. The parameter λ obtained from the literature was equal to 0.3. As the total number of patients in these real samples was 327 patients, this implied in an average size of 3.3 cm and a 95% confidence interval of [2.9; 3.7]. The total number of available livers to be grafted was assumed to be 500.

RESULTS

With 1500 patients in the waiting list and 500 grafts available we simulated the total number of deaths in both transplanted and non-transplanted HCC patients after 5 years as a function of the tumor size of transplanted patients. The total number of deaths drops down monotonically with tumor size, reaching a minimum at size equals to 7 cm, increasing from thereafter. With tumor size equals to 10 cm the total mortality is equal to the 5 cm threshold of the Milan criteria.

CONCLUSION

We concluded that it is possible to include patients with tumor size up to 10 cm without increasing the total mortality of this population.

Surgical resection versus liver transplant for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma is a major worldwide health problem, involving more than half a million new patients yearly, with a different incidence in different parts of the world. Hepatocellular carcinoma develops in about 80% of cirrhotic patients, and cirrhosis is considered the strongest predisposing factor for it. Surgical resection and liver transplantation are conventional treatment modalities that can offer long-term survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of surgical resection compared with those of liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) at ISI Web of Science (last search February 2013). We also searched the abstracts from annual meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), and the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), provided through The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group until February 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing surgical resection and hepatic transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The search strategies were run and two authors individually evaluated whether the retrieved studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

No randomised clinical trials comparing surgical resection and liver transplantation as the major methods of treating hepatocellular carcinoma were found.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no randomised clinical trials comparing surgical resection and liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment.

Evaluation of total tumor volume and pretransplantation α-fetoprotein level as selection criteria for liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular cancer

INTRODUCTION

Appropriate selection of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) patients for liver transplantation is crucial to minimize the risk of recurrence and provide long-term outcomes comparable with those for other indications. Selection criteria based on total tumor volume (TTV) and α-fetoprotein (AFP) concentrations were proposed in a recent large study. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of liver transplantation for HCC within and beyond these criteria.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 104 patients with HCC who underwent liver transplantation. Risk factors for overall survival and tumor recurrence were evaluated. Overall survival and cumulative tumor recurrence rate for patients with TTV <115 cm(3), AFP concentration <400 ng/mL, and no macrovascular invasion (76/104; 73.1%) were evaluated and compared with those for the remaining patients (28/104; 26.9%).

RESULTS

Pretransplantation AFP concentration >400 ng/mL (P = .016; hazard ratio [HR], 3.36; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.25-9.03) was the only risk factor for overall survival. TTV >115 cm(3) (P = .021; HR 4.29; 95% CI, 1.24-14.81) and AFP concentration >400 ng/mL (P = .002; HR 6.97; 95% CI, 2.02-24.03) were independent risk factors for recurrence. The estimated 3-year tumor recurrence rate was 4.2% for patients with TTV <115 cm(3), AFP concentration <400 ng/mL, and no macrovascular invasion compared with 57.2% for the remaining patients (P < .00001). The 3-year overall survival rate of patients within and beyond this criteria was 81.7% and 64.6%, respectively (P = .0628).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to other criteria, selection of HCC patients for liver transplantation on the basis of TTV and AFP concentration relates to both morphological features and tumor biology. Although fulfillment of these criteria was more than 1.5-fold higher than that of the Milan criteria, the rate of tumor recurrence was exceptionally low.

Liver transplantation and expanded Milan criteria: does it really work?

CONTEXT

Orthotopic liver transplantation is an excellent treatment approach for hepatocellular carcinoma in well-selected candidates. Nowadays some institutions tend to Expand the Milan Criteria including tumor with more than 5 cm and also associate with multiple tumors none larger than 3 cm in order to benefit more patients with the orthotopic liver transplantation.

METHODS

The data collected were based on the online database PubMED. The key words applied on the search were "expanded Milan criteria" limited to the period from 2000 to 2009. We excluded 19 papers due to: irrelevance of the subject, lack of information and incompatibility of the language (English only). We compiled patient survival and tumor recurrence free rate from 1 to 5-years in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma submitted to orthotopic liver transplantation according to expanded the Milan criteria from different centers.

RESULTS

Review compiled data from 23 articles. Fourteen different criteria were found and they are also described in detail, however the University of California - San Francisco was the most studied one among them.

CONCLUSION

Expanded the Milan criteria is a useful attempt for widening the preexistent protocol for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in waiting-list for orthotopic liver transplantation. However there is no significant difference in patient survival rate and tumor recurrence free rate from those patients that followed the Milan criteria.

Transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: the North American experience

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in North America has undergone substantial change since its inception. Transplantation for large tumors led to near universal tumor recurrence and despite its theoretical benefit, complete liver replacement for primary hepatic malignancy was all but abandoned outside of clinical trials. With the publication of the Milan criteria interest was renewed and results of transplant for HCC began to mirror those for non-malignant indications. The adoption of MELD-based allocation led to a substantial increase in the number of transplants for HCC as MELD priority points were given to patients who met the restrictive criteria. As results of transplantation improved, several groups have pushed the boundaries of Milan and found similar results. To further possibility of transplantation for patients with tumors outside of criteria, locoregional therapies have been utilized to downstage these tumors. As the number of patients awaiting a deceased donor allograft continues to increase while the number of available deceased donor organs remains relatively constant, the roles of living donor transplantation, adjuvant, and neoadjuvant therapy will continue to evolve.

Impact of preoperative α-fetoprotein level on disease-free survival after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Preoperative α-fetoprotein (AFP) levels may have an influence on disease-free survival (DFS) of patients after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located on a cirrhotic liver.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2009, two groups were distinguished according to preoperative AFP level: normal-level group (<10 ng/ml) and increased-level group (>10 ng/ml). The increased-level group was further divided into three levels of preoperative AFP: 10-150, 150-500, and ≥ 500 ng/ml. DFS and recurrence rates were compared. All patients underwent transplantation using the preoperative 5/5 criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 122 patients in this study, 63 had normal and 59 had increased preoperative AFP. There were no differences between the two groups concerning perioperative or pathologic data. Those with an increased preoperative AFP level had a significantly shorter 5-year DFS, and their recurrence rate was higher than that of the normal AFP group. The 5-year DFS and recurrence rates were 71 and 4 %, respectively, for those with normal AFP; 57 and 10 %, respectively, for those with AFP 10-150 ng/ml; 46 and 24 %, respectively, for those with AFP 150-500 ng/ml; and 28 and 62 %, respectively, for those with AFP ≥ 500 ng/ml.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the prognostic value of preoperative AFP levels on DFS after a liver transplant for HCC in a population of patients undergoing transplantation with the same preoperative criteria.

Salvage liver transplantation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma within UCSF criteria after liver resection

Background

Salvage liver transplantation (SLT) is restricted to patients who develop hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence within Milan criteria (MC). Little is known about outcomes for SLT in patients with recurrent HCC within University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria after liver resection (LR).

Methods

Between January 2001 and December 2011, 380 patients with HCC meeting UCSF criteria, 200 of which were resected (LR group) from a perspective of SLT in case of recurrence, and 180 directly underwent LT (PLT). We compared patient characteristics, perioperative and long-term outcomes between SLT and PLT groups. We also assessed the outcome of LR and PLT groups.

Results

Among the 200 patients in LR group, 86 (43%) developed HCC recurrence and 15/86 (17%) of these patients presented HCC recurrence outside UCSF criteria. Only 39 of the 86 patients underwent SLT, a transplantation rate of 45% of patients with HCC recurrence. Compared with PLT group, LR group showed lower overall survival rate (P = 0.005) and higher recurrence rate (P = 0.006). Although intraoperative blood loss and required blood transfusion were more frequent in SLT group, the perioperative mortality and posttransplant complications were similar in SLT and PLT groups. The overall survival and recurrence rates did not significantly differ between the two groups. When stratifying by graft type in the SLT group, overall survival and recurrence rates did not significantly differ between deceased donor LT (DDLT) and living donor LT (LDLT) groups. In the subgroup analysis by MC, similar results were observed between patients with recurrent HCC meeting MC and patients with recurrent HCC beyond MC but within UCSF criteria.

Conclusion

Our single institution experience demonstrated that prior hepatectomy and SLT for recurrent HCC within UCSF criteria was feasible and SLT could achieve the same outcome as PLT.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a model including α-fetoprotein improves the performance of Milan criteria

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The aim of this study was to generate an improved prognostic model for predicting recurrence in liver transplant candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

Predictors of recurrence were tested by a Cox model analysis in a training cohort of 537 patients transplanted for HCC. A prognostic score was developed and validated in a national cohort of 435 patients followed up prospectively.

RESULTS

α-Fetoprotein (AFP) independently predicted tumor recurrence and correlated with vascular invasion and differentiation. At a Cox score threshold of 0.7 (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.701; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.76; accuracy, 75.8%), a model combining log(10) AFP, tumor size, and number was highly predictive of tumor recurrence and death. By using a simplified version of the model, with untransformed AFP values, a cut-off value of 2 was identified. In the validation cohort, a score greater than 2 predicted a marked increase in 5-year risk of recurrence (50.6% ± 10.2% vs 8.8% ± 1.7%; P < .001) and decreased survival (47.5% ± 8.1% vs 67.8% ± 3.4%; P = .002) as compared with others. Among patients exceeding Milan criteria, a score of 2 or lower identified a subgroup of patients with AFP levels less than 100 ng/mL with a low 5-year risk of recurrence (14.4% ± 5.3% vs 47.6% ± 11.1%; P = .006). Among patients within Milan criteria, a score greater than 2 identified a subgroup of patients with AFP levels greater than 1000 ng/mL at high risk of recurrence (37.1% ± 8.9% vs 13.3% ± 2.0%; P < .001). Net reclassification improvement showed that predictability of the AFP model was superior to Milan criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Prediction of tumor recurrence is improved significantly by a model that incorporates AFP. We propose the adoption of new selection criteria for HCC transplant candidates, taking into account AFP.

New concepts and best practices for management of pre- and post-transplantation cancer

Solid-organ transplant recipients are at increased risk of developing cancer compared with the general population. Tumours can arise de novo, as a recurrence of a preexisting malignancy, or from the donated organ. The ATOS (Aula sobre Trasplantes de Órganos Sólidos; the Solid-Organ Transplantation Working Group) group, integrated by Spanish transplant experts, meets annually to discuss current advances in the field. In 2011, the 11th edition covered a range of new topics on cancer and transplantation. In this review we have highlighted the new concepts and best practices for managing cancer in the pre-transplant and post-transplant settings that were presented at the ATOS meeting. Immunosuppression plays a major role in oncogenesis in the transplant recipient, both through impaired immunosurveillance and through direct oncogenic activity. It is possible to transplant organs obtained from donors with a history of cancer as long as an effective minimization of malignancy transmission strategy is followed. Tumour-specific wait-periods have been proposed for the increased number of transplantation candidates with a history of malignancy; however, the patient's individual risk of death from organ failure must be taken into consideration. It is important to actively prevent tumour recurrence, especially the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplant recipients. To effectively manage post-transplant malignancies, it is essential to proactively monitor patients, with long-term intensive screening programs showing a reduced incidence of cancer post-transplantation. Proposed management strategies for post-transplantation malignancies include viral monitoring and prophylaxis to decrease infection-related cancer, immunosuppression modulation with lower doses of calcineurin inhibitors, and addition of or conversion to inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin.

Liver transplantation in adults: Choosing the appropriate timing

Liver transplantation is indicated in patients with acute liver failure, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and rare liver-based genetic defects that trigger damage of other organs. Early referral to a transplant center is crucial in acute liver failure due to the high mortality with medical therapy and its unpredictable evolution. Referral to a transplant center should be considered when at least one complication of cirrhosis occurs during its natural history. However, because of the shortage of organ donors and the short-term mortality after liver transplantation on one hand and the possibility of managing the complications of cirrhosis with other treatments on the other, patients are carefully selected by the transplant center to ensure that transplantation is indicated and that there are no medical, surgical and psychological contraindications. Patients approved for transplantation are placed on the transplant waiting list and prioritized according to disease severity. Thus, the appropriate timing of transplantation depends on recipient disease severity and, although this is still a matter of debate, also on donor quality. These two variables are known to determine the “transplant benefit” (i.e., when the expected patient survival is better with, than without, transplantation) and should guide donor allocation.

Surgical treatment for large hepatocellular carcinoma: does size matter?

Despite significant progress in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), patients with large HCC (defined as >10 cm) continue to present a significant challenge. The goal of this paper is to review the existing literature regarding large HCC, with emphasis on identifying the issues and challenges involved in approaching these tumours surgically. A computerized search was made of the Medline database from January 1992 to December 2010. The MESH heading 'large' or 'huge' in combination with the keyword 'hepatocellular carcinoma' was used. After excluding further studies that identified 'large' HCC as less than 10 cm and/or sequential publications with overlapping patient populations, the search produced a study population of 22 non-duplicated papers, reporting on a total of 5223 patients with HCC tumours >10 cm. Regarding resection for large HCC, the overall 5-year survival in these studies ranged from 25% to 45%, with few outliers on both sides, whereas in most studies, the 5-year disease-free survival ranged between 15% and 35%, with the only exception being studies with patients with single lesions and no cirrhosis showing disease-free survival of 41% and 56%, respectively. Risk factors identified included vascular invasion, cirrhosis, high level of alpha-fetoprotein and the presence of multiple lesions. Finally, liver transplantation, although an attractive concept, did not appear to offer a survival benefit in any of the studies. In conclusion, identifying the risk factors that affect the outcome in patients undergoing surgery for large HCC is critical. The reason is that surgical resection can have excellent outcomes in carefully selected patients.

Alpha-fetoprotein and novel tumor biomarkers as predictors of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after surgery: a brilliant star raises again

Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), des-γ-carboxy prothrombin (DCP), and lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive fraction of AFP (AFP-L3) have been developed with the intent to detect hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and for the surveillance of at-risk patients. However, at present, none of these tests can be recommended to survey cirrhotic patients at risk for HCC development because of their suboptimal ability for routine clinical practice in HCC diagnosis. Starting from these considerations, these markers have been therefore routinely and successfully used as predictors of survival and HCC recurrence in patients treated with curative intent. All these markers have been largely used as predictors in patients treated with hepatic resection or locoregional therapies, mainly in Eastern countries. In recent studies, AFP has been proposed as predictor of recurrence after liver transplantation and as selector of patients in the waiting list. Use of AFP modification during the waiting list for LT is still under investigation, potentially representing a very interesting tool for patient selection. The development of a new predictive model combining radiological and biological features based on biological markers is strongly required. New genetic markers are continuously discovered, but they are not already fully available in the clinical practice.

Management of HCC

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a highly prevalent and lethal neoplasia, the management of which has significantly improved during the last few years. A better knowledge of the natural history of the tumor and the development of staging systems that stratify patients according to the characteristics of the tumor, the liver disease, and the performance status, such as the BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) system, have led to a better prediction of prognosis and to a most appropriate treatment approach. Today curative therapies (resection, transplantation, ablation) can improve survival in patients diagnosed at an early HCC stage and offer a potential long-term cure. Patients with intermediate stage HCC benefit from chemoembolization and those diagnosed at advanced stage benefit from sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic and antiproliferative effects. In this article we review the current management in HCC and the new advances in this field.

Liver transplantation in septuagenarians receiving model for end-stage liver disease exception points for hepatocellular carcinoma: the national experience

Current liver allocation policy in the United States grants liver transplant candidates with stage T2 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) a priority Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of 22, regardless of age. Because advanced age may portend an increase in all-cause mortality after transplantation for any diagnosis, the aim of this study was to examine overall posttransplant survival in elderly patients with HCC versus younger cohorts. Based on Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data, Kaplan-Meier 5-year survival rates were compared. Recipients undergoing primary liver transplantation were stratified into cohorts based on age (<70 or ≥ 70 years) and the receipt of MELD exception points for HCC. Log-rank and Wilcoxon tests were used for statistical comparisons. In 2009, 143 transplants were performed for patients who were 70 years old or older. Forty-two percent of these patients received a MELD exception for HCC. Regardless of the diagnosis, the overall survival rate was significantly attenuated for the septuagenarians versus the younger cohort. After 5 years of follow-up, this disparity exceeded 10% to 15% depending on the populations being compared. The 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year actuarial survival rates were 88.4%, 83.2%, 79.6%, 76.1%, and 72.7%, respectively, for the patients who were younger than 70 years and 81.1%, 73.8%, 67.1%, 61.9%, and 55.2%, respectively, for the patients who were 70 years old or older. Five-year survival was negatively affected for patients with HCC who were younger than 70 years; this disparity was not observed for patients with HCC who were 70 years old or older. In conclusion, although patients who are 70 years old or older compose a small fraction of transplant recipients in the United States, patients in this group undergoing transplantation for HCC form an even smaller subset. Overall, transplantation in this age group yields outcomes inferior to those for younger cohorts. However, unlike patients who are less than 70 years old and receive MELD exception points, overall liver transplant survival is not affected by HCC at an advanced age.

Quality of life following liver transplantation in patients with liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma

PURPOSE

To study quality of life (QoL) in patients with liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma (CRC) following liver transplantation (Ltx).

METHODS

Ten patients participated in a prospective explorative pilot study. Inclusion criteria were nonresectable liver-only metastases determined by CT/MRI-, PET/CT- scans and colonoscopy, and ECOG 0-1. Primary outcome was QoL assessed by the EORTC-C30 questionnaires at baseline, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after Ltx.

RESULTS

The patients' age ranged from 50 to 63 years. Nine of 10 patients were observed for 12 months. One patient did not return the form at 6 months and died shortly after because of recurrence of the malignant disease. Compared to baseline, Ltx resulted in sustained excellent global health status scale (score of 100) in one patient, improved scores in 4 and unchanged scores in 3 patients at 12 months. The majority of the patients also reported good functional scores at follow-ups. Although two patients had marked symptoms both before and after Ltx, the patients in general reported low levels of pain and fatigue before and after surgery.

CONCLUSION

The present study indicates that CRC patients with liver-only metastases who receive Ltx have good QoL and have mostly minor symptoms the first year after Ltx.

Combination of biological and morphological parameters for the selection of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma waiting for liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

In the last several years, there has been no agreement on how to possibly expand the Milan criteria (MC) in the selection of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for listing for liver transplant (LT). The aim of the study is to evaluate morphological and biological tumor parameters to identify new expanded criteria for the selection of patients with HCC as candidates for LT.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 158 consecutive patients with HCC who underwent LT.

RESULTS

Twelve (7.6%) recurrences were observed. At multivariate analysis, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) >400 ng/mL (odds ratio [OR] 8.4, p<0.01) and total tumor diameter (TTD) >8 cm (OR 7.4, p=0.01) were the strongest predictors for recurrence. AFP-TTD criteria resulted in a low five-yr recurrence rate (4.9%) and an increased number of LT compared with the MC (22.2% increase). The five-yr disease-free survival rate was 74.4% in AFP-TTD criteria in patients, with a higher effectiveness in stratifying the cohort with respect to the MC.

CONCLUSIONS

Both AFP and TTD are good independent predictors of HCC recurrence. Their combination appears to obtain a better selection of candidates for LT without worsening patient survival and recurrence rates. This approach allows for an increase in the number of potentially transplantable patients.

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: the Japanese experience

Treatment strategies against hepatocellular carcinoma have progressed remarkably over the past decade. In Asia, evidence-based guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma have evolved, including the option of liver transplantation. Due to severe organ shortage, however, living donor liver transplantation has become mainstream in Japan. Unlike deceased donor transplantation, living donor transplantation is not limited by the restrictions imposed by the nationwide allocation system. The decision for transplantation often depends on institutional or case-by-case considerations, balancing the will of the donor, the operative risk, and the overall survival benefit for the recipient. Cumulative data from the national multicenter registry analysis as well as individual center experience suggest that expansion of the Milan criteria is warranted.

Comparative analysis of outcome in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma exceeding the milan criteria treated with liver transplantation versus partial hepatectomy

INTRODUCTION

Proponents of orthotopic liver transplantation (TXP) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) advocate expanding the Milan criteria. We performed a matched analysis comparing patients treated with TXP to patients treated with partial hepatectomy (PHX) for HCC exceeding the Milan criteria.

METHODS

From the United Network for Organ Sharing registry, we identified 92 US patients with HCC exceeding the Milan criteria who underwent TXP between 2002 and 2005. During the same period, 94 patients with similar tumor size criteria underwent PHX at a single center. Data were analyzed using χ(2), parametric, nonparametric, and Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

TXP patients were more commonly male (82% vs. 65%, P=0.01) and had a higher Model for End Stage Liver Disease score (median 11 vs. 7, P<0.001). Pathologic cirrhosis (79% TXP vs. 38% PHX, P<0.001), particularly secondary to hepatitis C virus (29% TXP vs. 5% PHX, P<0.001), was more common among TXP patients. Mean cumulative tumor size was 10.0 cm (63% exceeding University of California at San Francisco criteria) among PHX patients compared with 6.4 cm (20% exceeding University of California at San Francisco criteria) for TXP patients (P<0.001). With a median follow-up of 34 months (range, 1-86), 3-year survival was similar between the cohorts (66%±10% for TXP vs. 66%±10% for PHX, P=0.97). Cancer deaths (26/37, 70%) were more prevalent among PHX patients, whereas noncancer deaths (25/37, 68%) were common in TXP patients (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among heterogeneous patients with HCC who exceed the Milan criteria, TXP and PHX achieve similar overall survival. Further study is needed to ensure appropriate patient selection for these disparate therapies.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: management of an increasingly common problem

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common cancer that typically occurs in the setting of cirrhosis and chronic hepatitis virus infections. Hepatitis B and C account for approximately 80% of cases worldwide. HCC is currently the fifth most common malignancy in men and the eighth in women worldwide; its incidence is increasing dramatically in many parts of the world. Recognition of those at risk and early diagnosis by surveillance with imaging, with or without serologic testing, are extremely important. Many highly effective and even curative therapies are now available and include resection, liver transplantation, and local ablation. Appropriate application of these interventions offers hope of prolonged survival to many patients with this otherwise lethal complication of liver disease.

Criteria for liver transplantation for HCC: what should the limits be?

Liver transplantation is a well-established treatment in a subset of patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. The Milan criteria (single nodule up to 5 cm, up to three nodules none larger than 3 cm, with no evidence of extrahepatic spread or macrovascular invasion) have been traditionally accepted as standard of care. However, some groups have proposed that these criteria are too restrictive, and exclude some patients from transplantation who might benefit from this procedure. Transplanting patients with tumors beyond the established criteria falls into two categories, those whose tumors are beyond the Milan criteria at presentation without the use of treatment prior to transplantation (expanded criteria), and those in whom treatment allows the Milan Criteria to be fulfilled (down-staging). Currently, however, there is no international consensus regarding these approaches in clinical practice. The purpose of this systematic review is to clarify this debate through a critical analysis of available data. Finally, some comments on predictive factors apart from morphological characteristics are also addressed.

Toward optimizing the indications for orthotopic liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma

1. Liver transplantation is currently an effective therapy for patients with HCC who meet the Milan criteria. 2. The proportion of patients on waiting lists for liver transplantation who have HCC has increased substantially in recent years. HCC is currently one of the major indications for liver transplantation; it is the indication for approximately one-third of liver transplants. 3. If the Milan criteria are not met, the survival rates after liver transplantation for HCC tend to decrease, mainly because of the catastrophic consequences of HCC recurrence. 4. A few studies have supported liver transplantation when the Milan criteria are exceeded, but extensions beyond the Milan criteria remain controversial. Even if an individual patient with HCC who does not meet the Milan criteria might benefit from liver transplantation, the limited number of currently available donor organs limits the indications for liver transplantation to those patients with HCC who have the greatest likelihood of survival after the procedure. 5. To patients with early-stage HCC, surgical resection can be offered if the hepatocellular function is well maintained and severe portal hypertension is not present. 6. To enable patients with HCC to have access to liver transplantation that is similar to the access for other patients without HCC in the MELD allocation system, additional points based on the number and size of HCC lesions are assigned to patients on the waiting list. However, this system requires further refinement to ensure that it is as fair as possible. 7. Liver transplantation for HCC should be restricted to those patients who are expected to have the same posttransplant survival as that of patients with nonneoplastic end-stage chronic liver disease. 8. On the basis of these considerations, a 5-year survival rate of 50% after liver transplantation for HCC seems too low.

Favorable outcome of primary liver transplantation in children with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma

The outcome of HCC after transplantation (OLT) in children is not well known. Unfavorable features based on adult reports may lead to contraindicate OLT even in children. We reviewed a cohort of children with cirrhosis and HCC to evaluate their outcome after primary transplantation. We considered children with cirrhosis and HCC who had a primary OLT. We retrospectively recorded demographic, medical and surgical features, and MC as predictors of outcome. Among 456 children transplanted in the last 15 yr, 10 (2%), median age at diagnosis 1.8 yr (range 0.5-7.2), had HCC in biliary atresia (3), BSEP deficiency (3), tyrosinemia type 1 (2), complications of choledocal cyst and glycogen storage disease type IV (1 each). At HCC discovery, median AFP was 2322 ng/mL (3-35,000), high or rising in 9/10 patients. Six patients were outside the MC. Median time on the waiting list was 38 days (1-152). Two patients died from early complications of OLT. In the other eight patients, there was no tumor recurrence after a median follow-up of four yr. Children with cirrhosis may develop HCC at a very young age. The outcome appears excellent even outside MC. Primary liver transplantation is advisable for children with cirrhosis, HCC, and no extrahepatic disease.

Improving Outcomes with Surgical Resection and Other Ablative Therapies in HCC

With rising incidence and emergence of effective treatment options, the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a complex multidisciplinary process. There is still little consensus and uniformity about clinicopathological staging systems. Resection and liver transplantation have been the cornerstone of curative surgical treatments with recent emergence of ablative techniques. Improvements in diagnostics, surgical techniques, and postoperative care have lead to dramatically improved results over the years. The most appropriate treatment plan has to be individualised and depends on a variety of patient and tumour-related factors. Very small HCCs discovered on surveillance have the best outcomes. Patients with advanced cirrhosis and tumours within Milan criteria should be offered transplantation. Resection is best for small solitary tumours with preserved liver function. Ablative techniques are suitable for low volume tumours in patients unfit for either resection or transplantation. The role of downstaging and bridging therapy is not clearly established.

Intention-to-treat analysis of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: living versus deceased donor transplantation

For patients who have cirrhosis with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) reduces waiting time and dropout rates. We performed a comparative intention-to-treat analysis of recurrence rates and survival outcomes after LDLT and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) in HCC patients. Our study included 183 consecutive patients with HCC who were listed for liver transplantation over a 9-year period at our institution. Tumor recurrence was the primary endpoint. At listing, patient and tumor characteristics were comparable in the two groups (LDLT, n = 36; DDLT, n = 147). Twenty-seven (18.4%) patients dropped out, all from the DDLT waiting list, mainly due to tumor progression (19/27 [70%] patients). The mean waiting time was shorter in the LDLT group (2.6 months versus 7.9 months; P = 0.001). The recurrence rates in the two groups were similar (12.9% and 12.7%, P = 0.78), and there was a trend toward a longer time to recurrence after LDLT (38 ± 27 months versus 16 ± 13 months, P = 0.06). Tumors exceeding the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) criteria, tumor grade, and microvascular invasion were independent predictive factors for recurrence. On an intention-to-treat basis, the overall survival (OS) in the two groups was comparable. Patients beyond the Milan and UCSF criteria showed a trend toward worse outcomes with LDLT compared with DDLT (P = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

The recurrence and survival outcomes after LDLT and DDLT were comparable on an intent-to-treat analysis. Shorter waiting time preventing dropouts is an additional advantage with LDLT. LDLT for HCC patients beyond validated criteria should be proposed with caution.

MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common malignancy typically associated with chronic liver disease and is a leading cause of mortality among these patients. Prognosis is improved when detected early. MRI is the best imaging examination for accurate diagnosis. Although arterial enhancement with delayed washout, increased T2-weighted signal intensity, delayed capsular enhancement, restricted diffusion, and tumor thrombus are typical features, not all lesions demonstrate these findings. The radiologist must be familiar with these typical imaging characteristics, and less common appearances and associated findings of HCC, and must be able to differentiate them from those of lesions that mimic HCC. Knowledge of therapeutic options and how those are related to imaging findings is imperative to assist clinicians in managing these patients.

An early regional experience with expansion of Milan Criteria for liver transplant recipients

The Milan Criteria (MC) showed that orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) was an effective treatment for patients with nonresectable, nonmetastatic HCC. There is growing evidence that expanding the MC does not adversely affect patient or allograft survival following OLT. The adult OLT programs in UNOS Region 4 reached an agreement allowing lesions outside MC (one lesion <6 cm, ≤3 lesions, none >5 cm and total diameter <9 cm-[R4 T3]) to receive the same exception points as MC lesions. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used to compare survival data. Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare patient data. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. All statistical analyses were performed on SPSS 15 (SPSS, Chicago, IL). Four hundred and forty-five patients were transplanted for HCC (363-MC and 82-R4 T3). Patient demographics were found to be similar between the two groups. Three year patient, allograft and recurrence free survival between MC and R4 T3 were found to be 72.9% and 77.1%, 71% and 70.2% and 90.5% and 86.9%, respectively (all p > 0.05). We report the first regionalized multicenter, prospective study showing benefit of OLT in patients exceeding MC based on preoperative imaging.

The survival benefit of liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

BACKGROUND

There are no studies evaluating the survival benefit of liver transplantation over alternative therapies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

The short- to mid-term survival benefit (study group=135 aggressively treated patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, 52% beyond Milan criteria at pathology) was calculated by comparing the mortality rates of liver transplantation vs alternative therapies patients. A Markov prediction model was then created to estimate the long-term survival benefit of liver transplantation (gain in life expectancy) over alternative therapies. The long-term survival rates in the liver transplantation group were calculated using the Metroticket website calculator (http://89.96.76.14/metroticket/calculator/).

RESULTS

The short- to mid-term analysis indicated that liver transplantation afforded no significant survival benefit in the group of patients with hepatoma as a whole (hazard ratio=1.229, 95% confidence interval 0.544-2.773, p=.6200). The benefit was concentrated in patients with a poor initial response to alternative therapies (hazard ratio=3.137, 95% confidence interval 1.428-6.891, p=.0044). In the long-term analysis, the gain in life expectancy of liver transplantation vs alternative therapies was 6.115 years (base-case analysis) and the main determinants of gain in life expectancy were the 5-year survival prospects after alternative therapies and the patient's age.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival benefit of liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma is strongly related to the patient's age and the effectiveness of available alternative therapies.

Patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma beyond Milan criteria: should we perform transarterial chemoembolization or liver transplantation?

Patients with unresectable, beyond Milan criteria, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) invariably undergo palliative transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of conventional TACE versus liver transplantation (LT) in unresectable (beyond Milan criteria) HCC. Twelve patients underwent LT and 86 TACE for unresectable, beyond Milan criteria HCC. The inclusion criteria were a single tumor<or=6.5 cm or <or=5 tumors and all tumors<or=5 cm based on initial radiologic findings. We excluded patients with double primary cancers, age>60 years, vascular invasion, or extrahepatic spread. Survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis showed that TACE was a prognostic factor for survival (hazard ratio, 16.66, P=.000). The LT group showed significantly better survival than the TACE cohort. Two cases (16.7%) in the LT group recurred at a median time of 13.5 months. Survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 100%, 88.9%, and 76.2% in the LT group, and 85.6%, 45.6%, and 21.4% in the TACE group, respectively. Patients with unresectable, beyond Milan criteria HCC should be given the option to receive LDLT, because LT offers a significantly better likelihood of survival than TACE.

Current controversies surrounding liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has progressed rapidly over the last decade from a futile therapy to the first choice therapy for suitable patients. Excellent outcomes of LT for HCC can be largely attributed to the use of the Milan Criteria, which have restricted LT to patients with early stage tumors. These criteria may be conservative, and it is likely that a subset of patients with tumors beyond these criteria can have acceptable outcomes. However, there is currently insufficient data to accept more liberal criteria as a standard of care, and a higher quality evidence base must be achieved to prevent poor utilization of valuable donor liver resources. In the future, it is probable that more sophisticated selection criteria will emerge incorporating aspects of tumor biology beyond tumor size and number. Dropout from the waiting list due to tumor progression remains a clinical challenge particularly in regions with prolonged waiting times. Priority allocation using HCC MELD points is a practical and transparent solution that has successfully reduced waitlist dropout for HCC patients. Further refinements of the HCC MELD point system are required to ensure equity of access to LT for non-HCC patients and prioritization of HCC patients with the highest risk of dropout. Improving the evidence base for pre-LT locoregional therapy to prevent waitlist dropout is an urgent and difficult challenge for the LT community. In the interim transplant clinicians must restrict the use of these therapies to those patients who are most likely to benefit from them.

The challenges of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma on cirrhosis

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of cancer mortality worldwide and liver transplantation (LT) has potentials to improve survival for patients with HCC. However, expansion of indications beyond Milan Criteria (MC) and use of bridging/downstaging procedures to convert intermediate-advanced stages of HCC within MC limits are counterbalanced by graft shortage and increasing use of marginal donors, partially limited by the use of donor-division protocols applied to the cadaveric and living-donor settings. Several challenges in technique, indications, pre-LT treatments and prioritization policies of patients on the waiting list have to be precised through prospective investigations that have to include individualization of prognosis, biological variables and pathology surrogates as stratification criteria. Also, liver resection has to be rejuvenated in the general algorithm of HCC treatment in the light of salvage transplantation strategies, while benefit of LT for HCC should be determined through newly designed composite scores that are able to capture both efficiency and equity endpoints. Innovative treatments such as radioembolization for HCC associated with portal vein thrombosis and molecular targeted compounds are likely to influence future strategies. Accepting this challenge has been part of the history of LT and will endure so also for the future.