Living donor versus deceased donor liver transplantation for early irresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

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.

Living-donor liver transplantation associated with higher incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence than deceased-donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is becoming an important tool in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment. However, the oncologic outcome between LDLT and deceased-donor LT (DDLT) for HCC remains controversial. This study aims to compare the HCC recurrence rates after LDLT versus DDLT.

METHODS

Two hundred sixteen patients (166 LDLTs and 50 DDLTs) who underwent LT for HCC within University of California-San Francisco criteria were retrospectively reviewed. LDLT patients were divided into two groups: small living-donor graft (LDG; graft-to-recipient body weight ratio <1.0, n=59) and nonsmall LDG (graft-to-recipient body weight ratio ≥1.0, n=107). Patients were further stratified into low- and high-risk settings by the number of risk factors for recurrence.

RESULTS

The recurrence-free survival was lower in LDLT compared with DDLT (88.6% and 80.7% vs. 96.0% and 94.0% at 1 and 5 years; P=0.045). There was no significant difference between two groups regarding the majority of clinical and tumor characteristics, with the exception of a higher proportion of microvascular invasion presence in LDLT. After the adjustment for microvascular invasion, LDLT was identified as an independent risk factor for recurrence. Moreover, recurrence-free survival between small and nonsmall LDG was not statistically significant. In low-risk setting (≤1 risk factor), LDLT showed comparable outcome with DDLT. However, the risk of recurrence was higher in LDLT than DDLT in high-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, LDLT showed poorer outcome than DDLT. This should be considered to select optimal strategy for HCC.

Post-transplant endothelial progenitor cell mobilization via CXCL10/CXCR3 signaling promotes liver tumor growth

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving living donor liver transplantation appear to possess significantly higher tumor recurrence than the recipients receiving deceased donor liver transplantation. The underlying mechanism for HCC recurrence after transplantation remains unclear. Here, we aim to investigate the impact of small-for-size liver graft injury on HCC recurrence after transplantation.

METHODS

The correlation between tumor recurrence, liver graft injury, CXCL10 expression and endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) mobilization was studied in 115 liver transplant recipients and rat orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) models. The direct role of CXCL10/CXCR3 signaling on EPC mobilization was investigated in CXCL10(-/-) mice and CXCR3(-/-) mice. The role of EPCs on tumor growth and angiogenesis was further investigated in an orthotopic liver tumor model.

RESULTS

Clinically, patients with small-for-size liver grafts (<60% of standard liver weight, SLW) had significantly higher HCC recurrence (p=0.04), accompanied by more circulating EPCs and higher early-phase intragraft and plasma CXCL10 levels, than the recipients with large grafts (≥60% of SLW), which were further validated in rat OLT models. Circulatory EPC mobilization was reduced after liver injury both in CXCL10(-/-) mice and CXCR3(-/-) mice in comparison to wild-type controls. CXCL10 recruited EPCs in dose-dependent and CXCR3-dependent manners in vitro. Early-phase EPC/CXCL10 injection enhanced orthotopic liver tumor growth, angiogenesis and metastasis in nude mice.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-transplant enhanced CXCL10/CXCR3 signaling in small-for-size liver grafts directly induced EPC mobilization, differentiation and neovessel formation, which further promotes tumor growth. Targeting CXCL10/CXCR3 signaling may attenuate early-phase liver graft injury and prevent late-phase tumor recurrence/metastasis after transplantation.

Comparison of the outcomes of patients who underwent deceased-donor or living-donor liver transplantation after successful downstaging therapy

BACKGROUND

Many controversies exist on the different outcomes of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) or deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recipients.

AIMS

We aimed to determine the difference in outcomes between HCC patients who underwent LDLT or DDLT after successful downstaging therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighty-three adult patients were diagnosed with advanced HCC and received a liver transplantation after various successful downstaging therapies: 31 patients underwent LDLT and 52 patients underwent DDLT. We retrospectively collected and analyzed the data of these two groups.

RESULTS

The LDLT and DDLT groups showed similar overall complication rates and mortality rates. The overall 1-, 3- and 5-year recurrence-free rates were 77.4, 71, and 62.7% after LDLT and 80.7, 69.2, and 60.5% after DDLT (P=0.771). The overall patient survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 90.3, 74.2, and 71% after LDLT and 90.4, 71.2, and 67.3% after DDLT (P=0.860). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-transplant hepatitis B virus recurrence rates were 4, 5, and 10.5%, respectively, for the patients who underwent LDLT and 2.6, 6.7, and 10.7%, respectively, for the patients who underwent DDLT (P=0.918).

CONCLUSION

These data strongly suggest that no significant differences in postoperative complications, tumor recurrence rate, survival rate, and hepatitis B virus recurrence exist between DDLT and LDLT patients.

Deceased-donor split-liver transplantation in adult recipients: is the learning curve over?

BACKGROUND

Infants have the highest wait-list mortality of all liver transplantation candidates. Deceased-donor split-liver transplantation, a technique that provides both an adult and pediatric graft, might be the best way to decrease this disproportionate mortality. Yet concern for an increased risk to adult split recipients has discouraged its widespread adoption. We aimed to determine the current risk of graft failure in adult recipients after split-liver transplantation.

STUDY DESIGN

United Network for Organ Sharing data from 62,190 first-time adult recipients of deceased-donor liver transplants (1995-2010) were analyzed (889 split grafts). Bivariate risk factors (p < 0.2) were included in Cox proportional hazards models of the effect of transplant type on graft failure.

RESULTS

Split-liver recipients had an overall hazard ratio of graft failure of 1.26 (p < 0.001) compared with whole-liver recipients. The split-liver hazard ratio was 1.45 (p < 0.001) in the pre-Model for End-Stage Liver Disease era (1995-2002) and 1.10 (p = 0.28) in the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease era (2002-2010). Interaction analyses suggested an increased risk of split-graft failure in status 1 recipients and those given an exception for hepatocellular carcinoma. Excluding higher-risk recipients, split and whole grafts had similar outcomes (hazard ratio = 0.94; p = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of graft failure is now similar between split and whole-liver recipients in the vast majority of cases, which demonstrates that the expansion of split-liver allocation might be possible without increasing the overall risk of long-term graft failure in adult recipients. Additional prospective analysis should examine if selection bias might account for the possible increase in risk for recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma or designated status 1.

Surgical resection versus open-approach radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinomas within Milan criteria after successful transcatheter arterial chemoembolization

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of hepatic resection versus open-approach RFA (ORFA) for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) within Milan criteria after successful downstaging therapy by transcatheter arterial chemoembolization.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between February 2005 and February 2008, a total of 110 patients with advanced HCC met the Milan criteria after successful downstaging therapy; 58 patients then underwent hepatic resection and 52 received ORFA. Outcomes, including short- and long-term morbidity, 1-, 3-, and 5-year mortality and HCC-free survival, were analyzed and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Patients in the hepatic resection and ORFA groups showed similar baseline characteristics and downstaging protocols. The ORFA group showed less blood loss, lower hospital costs, shorter surgical time, and fewer hospital stay days (P < 0.05). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 94.8, 86.2, and 79.3%, respectively, with liver resection and 96.2, 82.7, and 76.9% with ORFA (P=0.772). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 93.1, 81.0, and 77.6% with resection and 94.2, 76.9, and 73.1% with ORFA (P=0.705). The ORFA patients suffered fewer postoperative complications (P=0.09), particularly among the cases of central HCC (P=0.015).

CONCLUSION

Resection and ORFA achieved similar survival benefits in the management of HCC within Milan criteria after successful downstaging. The decreased blood loss, hospital costs, surgical time, and hospital stay days, and lower complication rates in central cases render ORFA a preferred treatment option.

Survival analysis of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation in patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) ablation is a non-invasive treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). At present, data on the treatment's long-term outcome are limited. This study analysed the survival outcome of HIFU ablation for HCCs smaller than 3 cm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-seven patients with HCCs smaller than 3 cm received HIFU treatment between October 2006 and September 2010. Fifty-nine patients who received percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) were selected for comparison. The two groups of patients were compared in terms of pre-operative variables and survival.

RESULTS

More patients in the HIFU group patients had Child-Pugh B cirrhosis (34% versus 8.5%; P = 0.001). The 1- and 3-year overall survival rates of patients whose tumours were completely ablated in the HIFU group compared with the RFA group were 97.4% versus 94.6% and 81.2% versus 79.8%, respectively (P = 0.530). The corresponding 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 63.6% versus 62.4% and 25.9% versus 34.1% (P = 0.683).

CONCLUSIONS

HIFU ablation is a safe and effective method for small HCCs. It can achieve survival outcomes comparable to those of percutaneous RFA and thus serves as a good alternative ablation treatment for patients with cirrhosis.

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: Enlightening the gray zones

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been continuously evolving during recent years. HCC is a worldwide clinical and social issue and typically a complicates cirrhosis. The incidence of HCC is increasing, not only in the general population of patients with cirrhosis, but particularly in some subgroups of patients, like those with human immunodeficiency virus infection or thalassemia. Since a 3% annual HCC incidence has been estimated in cirrhosis, a bi-annual screening is generally suggested. The diagnostic criteria of HCC has recently had a dramatic evolution during recent years. HCC diagnosis is now made only on radiological criteria in the majority of the cases. In the context of cirrhosis, the universally accepted criteria for HCC diagnosis is contrast enhancement in arterial phase and washout in venous/late phase at imaging, the so called “typical pattern”. However, recently updated guidelines slightly differ in diagnostic criteria. Apart from liver transplantation, the only cure of both HCC and underlying liver cirrhosis, all the other treatments have to match with higher rate of HCC recurrence. The latter can be classified into curative (resection and percutaneous ablation) and palliative treatments. The aim of this paper was to review the current knowledge on management of HCC and to enlighten the areas of uncertainty.

Hepatobiliary malignancies: lessons from Asia

With the higher incidences of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) in the East compared with the West, Asian centers have made significant contributions to the management of these malignancies. The major risk factor for HCC is hepatitis B infection in Asia in contrast to hepatitis C in Western populations. Barcelona Clinic for Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging that guides the treatment of patients with HCC in the West is considered too conservative by many Asian centers. In Asia, liver resection is widely offered to patients with multifocal, bilobar tumor or tumor invasion to the portal vein. The criteria for liver transplantation for HCC are also often more extended in Asian centers. Asian surgeons pioneered the development of living donor liver transplantation, which plays a major role in the management of early HCC associated with severe cirrhosis in Asia due to shortage of deceased donor graft. Asian centers have also made significant contributions to the modern management of CCA. A more aggressive surgical approach is generally adopted in Asia, including radical lymphadenectomy for intrahepatic CCA and simultaneous hepatic artery and portal vein resection with hepatectomy for hilar CCA. Eastern and Western centers should collaborate in further studies to establish the optimal treatment strategies for hepatobiliary malignancies.

Scoring selection criteria including total tumour volume and pretransplant percentage of lymphocytes to predict recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation

AIM

The selection criteria for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to undergo liver transplantation should accurately predict posttransplant recurrence while not denying potential beneficiaries. In the present study, we attempted to identify risk factors associated with posttransplant recurrence and to expand the selection criteria.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients with HCC who underwent liver transplantation between November 2004 and September 2012 at our centre were recruited into the current study (N = 241). Clinical and pathological data were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who died during the perioperative period or died of non-recurrence causes were excluded from this study (N = 25). All potential risk factors were analysed using uni- and multi-variate analyses.

RESULTS

Sixty-one recipients of 216 qualified patients suffered from recurrence. Similar recurrence-free and long-term survival rates were observed between living donor liver transplant recipients (N = 60) and deceased donor liver transplant recipients (N = 156). Total tumour volume (TTV) and preoperative percentage of lymphocytes (L%) were two independent risk factors in the multivariate analysis. We propose a prognostic score model based on these two risk factors. Patients within our criteria achieved a similar recurrence-free survival to patients within the Milan criteria. Seventy-one patients who were beyond the Milan criteria but within our criteria also had comparable survival to patients within the Milan criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

TTV and L% are two risk factors that contribute to posttransplant recurrence. Selection criteria based on these two factors, which are proposed by our study, expanded the Milan criteria without increasing the risk of posttransplant recurrence.

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver transplantation (LT) may be the best curative treatment that offers a chance of cure for the tumor and the underlying cirrhosis by complete extirpation of both. In Asia, where the supply of cadaveric grafts remains scarce and the incidence of HCC combined with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV)- and hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease is high, adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been settled upon as a practical alternative to deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Even in Western countries, where adequate access to DDLT is feasible for HCC patients satisfying the Milan criteria, the necessity for LDLT is well established in particular for more advanced HCC patients who are disadvantaged by current allocation algorithms for grafts from deceased donors due to organ shortage, increasing waiting lists, and the expectation that many patients listed for LT will die while awaiting a suitable organ. In the field of LDLT in Asia, numerous technical innovations were achieved to secure donor safety, as well as to ensure patient survival. The experience with LDLT for HCC has been progressively increasing in many Asian countries to date. Although there are questions regarding the higher recurrence of HCC after LDLT than after DDLT, the application of the Milan and UCSF criteria to LDLT in high-volume multicenter cohorts from Japan and Korea has resulted in patient survival outcomes very similar to those following DDLT. Recently, inclusion of biologic tumor markers such as alpha fetoprotein (AFP), protein induced by vitamin K antagonist II (PIVKA II), and positive positron emission tomography (PET) in addition to parameters of tumor morphology might be the key to establishing the best criteria for LDLT for HCC. As pretransplant treatments, most LDLT centers in Asia cannot adopt the strategy of bridging therapy under scarcity of cadaveric organ donation but have to use those multi-modality treatments as a salvage intending for primary curative treatment or a downstaging therapy before LDLT. After LDLT, basically there is no difference in the management strategy for HCC recurrence between DDLD and LDLT.

Living vs. deceased donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Experimental studies suggest that the regenerating liver provides a "fertile field" for the growth of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, clinical studies report conflicting results comparing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for HCC. Thus, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared after LDLT and DDLT for HCC in a systematic review and meta-analysis. Twelve studies satisfied eligibility criteria for DFS, including 633 LDLT and 1232 DDLT. Twelve studies satisfied eligibility criteria for OS, including 637 LDLT and 1050 DDLT. Altogether, there were 16 unique studies; 1, 2, and 13 of these were rated as high, medium, and low quality, respectively. Studies were heterogeneous, non-randomized, and mostly retrospective. The combined hazard ratio was 1.59 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-2.49; I(2) = 50.07%) for DFS after LDLT vs. DDLT for HCC, and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.73-1.27; I(2) = 5.68%) for OS. This analysis provides evidence of lower DFS after LDLT compared with DDLT for HCC. Improved study design and reporting is required in future research to ascribe the observed difference in DFS to study bias or biological risk specifically associated with LDLT.

Hepatocellular carcinoma--resection or transplant?

Resection and liver transplantation are considered effective treatments for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). As data from randomized trials are lacking, the choice of technique is controversial. Retrospective analyses suggest that for patients with suboptimal liver function, transplantation is the preferred treatment. For patients with preserved liver function and HCC within the Milan criteria, the overall survival rate is similar for both techniques; therefore resection is the preferred treatment. For tumours beyond the Milan criteria but within acceptable expanded criteria, transplantation has a more favourable outcome than resection. As liver grafts are in short supply, resection followed by transplantation once intrahepatic recurrence is detected would spare patients with favourable or very aggressive tumours from transplantation and enable patients with moderately aggressive tumours to undergo timely transplantation. Currently, resection and transplantation are considered complementary in the management of HCC. Expanding the transplantation and resection criteria of HCC needs to be investigated.

Chow P. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an appraisal of current controversies

Cost-effective and efficacious approaches to the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) must be developed in response to the rising incidence of this disease worldwide. While surgical resection is the current standard of care, most patients afflicted with HCC are unresectable at diagnosis. Developing good therapy for these patients is thus imperative. Liver transplantation offers the possibility of extirpation of not only the tumor but also the remaining cirrhotic liver. Transplantation is hence an ideal treatment option for early HCC patients with poor liver function. When transplantation occurs within the established Milan criteria, the outcomes are good (5-year survival >60%). Current efforts are under way to expand the indications for transplantation beyond the Milan criteria. The resulting surge of new algorithms may potentially shape a new system of transplantation criteria based on personalized parameter calculations. However, this change in criteria is not without controversy, and data remains inconclusive. Current bridging strategies have been similarly hindered by lack of consensus because of the lack of randomized, controlled trials demonstrating their efficacy. In addition, debate continues on the role of transplantation in early (resectable) HCC with good liver function. Issues of reimbursement, the paucity of available donor livers, and governmental funding (or lack thereof) continue to complicate the situation. In this review, issues preventing or facilitating globally consistent treatment strategies for HCC are discussed.

Outcomes of living and deceased donor liver transplant recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the A2ALL cohort

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents an increasing fraction of liver transplant indications; the role of living donor liver transplant (LDLT) remains unclear. In the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study, patients with HCC and an LDLT or deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) for which at least one potential living donor had been evaluated were compared for recurrence and posttransplant mortality rates. Mortality from date of evaluation of each recipient's first potential living donor was also analyzed. Unadjusted 5-year HCC recurrence was significantly higher after LDLT (38%) than DDLT (11%), (p = 0.0004). After adjustment for tumor characteristics, HCC recurrence remained significantly different between LDLT and DDLT recipients (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.35; p = 0.04) for the overall cohort but not for recipients transplanted following the introduction of MELD prioritization. Five-year posttransplant survival was similar in LDLT and DDLT recipients from time of transplant (HR = 1.32; p = 0.27) and from date of LDLT evaluation (HR = 0.73; p = 0.36). We conclude that the higher recurrence observed after LDLT is likely due to differences in tumor characteristics, pretransplant HCC management and waiting time.

Recurrence of hepatocellular cancer after liver transplantation: the role of primary resection and salvage transplantation in East and West

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Greater tumor aggressiveness and different management modalities of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) before liver transplantation (LT) may explain the higher recurrence rates reported in Asia. This study investigates the prognostic factors for HCC recurrence in a Western and an Eastern HCC patient cohort in order to analyze the respective roles of tumor- and management-related factors on the incidence of post-LT HCC recurrence.

METHODS

Data of 273 HCC patients, transplanted during the period January 1999-March 2009, were obtained from the Rome Inter-University Liver Transplant Consortium (n=157) and Hong Kong University (n=116) databases. Median follow-up was 4.3 years (range: 0.2-12). Recurrence rate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on the entire population and on Milan criteria-in (MC-in) patients.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis on the entire population identified four independent risk factors for post-LT HCC recurrence: microvascular invasion (odds ratio, OR=4.88; p=0.001), poor tumor grading (OR=6.86; p=0.002), diameter of the largest tumor (OR=4.72; p=0.05), and previous liver resection (LR) (OR=3.34; p=0.04). After removal of LR, only tumor-related variables were independent risk factors for recurrence. When only MC-in patients were analyzed, no difference was observed between the two cohorts in terms of recurrence rate after LR patient removal.

CONCLUSIONS

LR followed by salvage "for HCC recurrence" LT represents the main reason for a higher HCC recurrence rate in the Hong Kong patients, but not LR followed by salvage "for liver failure" LT in the Roman group. This approach towards HCC before LT may not be universally applicable. The precise patient background must be taken into account in order to identify the best pre-LT strategy.

Developments in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a serious health problem worldwide because of its association with hepatitis B and C viruses. In this setting, liver transplantation (LT) has become one of the best treatments since it removes both the tumor and the underlying liver disease. Due to the improvement of imaging techniques and surveillance programs, HCC are being detected earlier at a stage at which effective treatment is feasible. The prerequisite for long term success of LT for HCC depends on tumor load and strict selection criteria with regard to the size and number of tumor nodules. The need to obtain the optimal benefit from the limited number of organs available has prompted the maintenance of selection criteria in order to list only those patients with early HCC who have a better long-term outcome after LT. The indications for LT and organ allocation system led to many controversies around the use of LT in HCC patients. This review aims at giving the latest updated developments in LT for HCC focusing on selection criteria, diagnostic tools, prognostic factors, treatment on the waiting list, role of living donor liver transplantation and adjuvant therapy, and the impact of immunosuppression on HCC recurrence after LT.

Living donor liver transplantation versus deceased donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis

Because of the severe organ shortage, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers a timely alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the higher recurrence rate of HCC after LDLT and the indication criteria remain controversial. By conducting a quantitative meta-analysis, we sought to compare the survival outcomes and recurrence rates with LDLT and DDLT for patients with HCC. Comparative studies of LDLT and DDLT for HCC, which were identified by a comprehensive literature search, were included in this study. The evaluated outcomes included patient survival, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and recurrence rates at defined time points. Seven studies with a total of 1310 participants were included in this study. For LDLT and DDLT recipients, we found comparable patient survival rates [1 year, odds ratio (OR) = 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.62-1.73; 3 years, OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.77-1.48; and 5 years, OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.33-1.24] and RFS rates (1 year, OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.54-1.38; 3 years, OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.69-1.58; and 5 years, OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 0.70-1.77). Moreover, we found no significant differences in the 1-, 3-, or 5-year recurrence rates between LDLT and DDLT recipients (1 year, OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 0.36-6.58; 3 years, OR = 2.57, 95% CI = 0.53-12.41; and 5 years, OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.44-3.32). A subgroup analysis revealed similar outcomes for patients with HCC meeting the Milan criteria. These findings demonstrate that for HCC patients (especially those within the Milan criteria), LDLT represents an acceptable option that does not compromise patient survival or increase HCC recurrence in comparison with DDLT.

Tolerance of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) ablation is a relatively new, noninvasive way of ablation for treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Emerging evidence has shown that it is effective for the treatment of HCC, even in patients with poor liver function. There is currently no data on the safety limit of HIFU ablation in patients with cirrhosis. However, this information is vital for the selection of appropriate patients for the procedure. We analyzed HCC patients who had undergone HIFU ablation and determined the lower limit of liver function and other patient factors with which HCC patients can tolerate this treatment modality.

METHODS

Preoperative variables of 100 patients who underwent HIFU ablation for HCC were analyzed to identify the risk factors in HIFU intolerance in terms of stress-induced complications. Factors that may contribute to postablation complications were compared.

RESULTS

Thirteen (13 %) patients developed a total of 18 complications. Morbidity was mainly due to skin and subcutaneous tissue injuries (n = 9). Five patients had first-degree skin burn, one had second-degree skin burn, and three had third-degree skin burn. Four complications were grade 3a in the Clavien classification and 14 were below this grade. Univariate analysis showed that age (p = 0.022) was the only independent factor in HIFU intolerance.

CONCLUSIONS

HIFU ablation is generally well tolerated in HCC patients with cirrhosis. It is safe for Child-Pugh A and B patients and selected Child-Pugh C patients. With this new modality, HCC patients who were deemed unsalvageable by other surgical means in the past because of simultaneous Child-Pugh B or C disease now have a new hope.

Health-related quality of life of 256 recipients after liver transplantation

AIM: To investigate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and psychological outcomes in 256 adults who had undergone liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS: A stratified random sampling method was used in this follow-up multicenter study to select a representative sample of recipients undergoing either living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) or deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). HRQoL was measured by using the Chinese version of Medical Outcome Study Short Form-36 (SF-36), and psychological outcomes by using the beck anxiety inventory (BAI) and the self-rating depression scale (SDS). Clinical and demographic data were collected from the records of the Chinese Liver Transplant Registry and via questionnaires.

RESULTS: A total of 256 patients were sampled, including 66 (25.8%) receiving LDLT and 190 (74.2%) undergoing DDLT; 15 (5.9%) recipients had anxiety and four (1.6%) developed severe depression after the operation. Compared with LDLT recipients, DDLT patients had higher scores in general health (60.33 ± 16.97 vs 66.86 ± 18.42, P = 0.012), role-physical (63.64 ± 42.55 vs 74.47 ± 36.46, P = 0.048), role-emotional (61.11 ± 44.37 vs 78.95 ± 34.31, P = 0.001), social functioning (78.60 ± 22.76 vs 88.16 ± 21.85, P = 0.003), vitality (70.30 ± 15.76 vs 75.95 ± 16.40, P = 0.016), mental health (65.88 ± 12.94 vs 71.85 ± 15.45, P = 0.005), physical component summary scale (PCS, 60.07 ± 7.36 vs 62.58 ± 6.88, P = 0.013) and mental component summary scale (MCS, 52.65 ± 7.66 vs 55.95 ± 10.14, P = 0.016). Recipients > 45 years old at the time of transplant scored higher in vitality (77.33 ± 15.64 vs 72.52 ± 16.66, P = 0.020), mental health (73.64 ± 15.06 vs 68.00 ± 14.65, P = 0.003) and MCS (56.61 ± 10.00 vs 54.05 ± 9.30, P = 0.037) than those aged ≤ 45 years. MCS was poorer in recipients with than in those without complications (52.92 ± 12.21 vs 56.06 ± 8.16, P = 0.017). Regarding MCS (55.10 ± 9.66 vs 50.0 ± 10.0, P < 0.05) and PCS (61.93 ± 7.08 vs 50.0 ± 10.0, P < 0.05), recipients scored better than the Sichuan general and had improved overall QoL compared to patients with chronic diseases. MCS and PCS significantly correlated with scores of the BAI (P < 0.001) and the SDS (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION: Age > 45 years at time of transplant, DDLT, full-time working, no complications, anxiety and depression were possible factors influencing postoperative HRQoL in liver recipients.

Is there an advantage of living over deceased donation in liver transplantation?

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a well-established strategy to decrease the mortality in the waiting list and recent studies have demonstrated its value even in patients with low MELD score. However, LDLT is still under a high level of scrutiny because of its technical complexity and ethical challenges as demonstrated by a decline in the number of procedures performed in the last decade in Western Countries. Many aspects make LDLT different from deceased donor liver transplantation, including timing of transplantation, procedure-related complications as well as immunological factors that may affect graft outcomes. Our review suggests that in selected cases, LDLT offers significant advantages over deceased donor liver transplantation and should be used more liberally.

Effect of the pringle maneuver on tumor recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection (EPTRH): a randomized, prospective, controlled multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

Hepatic resection is currently still the best choice of therapeutic strategies for liver cancer, but the long-term survival rate after surgery is unsatisfactory. Most patients develop intra- and/or extrahepatic recurrence. The reasons for this high recurrence rate are not entirely clear. Recent studies have indicated that ischemia-reperfusion injury to the liver may be a significant factor promoting tumor recurrence and metastasis in animal models. If this is also true in humans, the effects of the Pringle maneuver, which has been widely used in hepatectomy for the past century, should be examined. To date, there are no reported data or randomized controlled studies examining the relationship between use of the Pringle maneuver and local tumor recurrence. We hypothesize that the long-term prognosis of patients with liver cancer could be worsened by use of the Pringle maneuver due to an increase in the rate of tumor recurrence in the liver remnant. We designed a multicenter, prospective, randomized surgical trial to test this hypothesis.

METHODS

At least 498 eligible patients from five participating centers will be enrolled and randomized into either the Pringle group or the non-Pringle group in a ratio of 1:1 using a permuted-blocks randomization protocol. After the completion of surgical intervention, patients will be included in a 3-year follow-up program.

DISCUSSION

This multicenter surgical trial will examine whether the Pringle maneuver has a negative effect on the long-term outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma patients. The trial will also provide information about prognostic differences, safety, advantages and disadvantages between Pringle and non-Pringle surgical procedures. Ultimately, the results will increase the available information about the effects of ischemia-reperfusion injury on tumor recurrence, which will be of immense benefit to general surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00725335.

Hepatocellular carcinoma downstaging in liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the leading malignant tumor in Taiwan. The majority of HCC patients are diagnosed in late stages and therefore in eligible for potentially curative treatments. Locoregional therapy has been advocated as an effective treatment for patients with advanced HCCs.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of HCC downstaged patients after locoregional therapy to allow eligibility for liver transplantation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From January 2004 to June 2010, 161 patients with HCCs underwent liver transplantation including 51 (31.6%) who exceeded the University of California-San Francisco (UCSF) who had undergone successful locoregional therapy to be downstaged within these criteria. Among the downstaged patients, 48 (94.1%) underwent transarterial embolization; 7 (13.8%), percutaneous ethanol injection; 24 (47.1%), radiofrequency ablation; 15 (29.4%), surgical resection, and 34 (66.7%), combined treatment.

RESULTS

The overall 1- and 5-year survival rates of all HCC patients (n=161) were 93.2% and 80.5%. The overall 1- and 5-year survival rates of downstaged (n=51) versus non-downstaged (n=110) subjects were 94.1% versus 83.7% and 92.7% versus 78.9%, respectively (P=.727). There are 15 (9.2%) HCC recurrences. The overall 1- and 5-year tumor-free rates of all HCC patients were 94.8% and 87.2%. The overall 1- and 5-year tumor-free rates between downstaged versus non-downstaged patients were 93.9% and 90.1% versus 95.2% and 86.0%, respectively (P=.812).

CONCLUSION

Patients with advanced HCC exceeding the UCSF/Milan criteria can be downstaged to fit the criteria using locoregional therapy. Importantly, successfully downstaged patients who are transplanted show excellent tumor-free and overall survival rates, similar to fit-criteria group.

Survival advantage of primary liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma within the up-to-7 criteria with microvascular invasion

PURPOSE

Microvascular invasion of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is considered a poor prognostic factor of liver resection (LR) and liver transplantation (LT), but its significance for lesions within the up-to-7 criteria is unclear. This study investigated the survival benefit of primary LT against LR for HCC with microvascular invasion and within the up-to-7 criteria.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent LR or LT as the primary treatment for HCC were included for study. Patients with prior local ablation, neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy, targeted therapy, positive resection margin, or metastatic spread were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 471 LR patients and 95 LT recipients (70 with living donor, 25 with deceased donor). Seventy-seven (81.1%) LT recipients had HCC within the up-to-7 criteria. Twenty-five (26.3%) LT recipients had HCC with either macrovascular (n = 4) or microvascular (n = 21) invasion. The 5-year survival rate was 85.7% for LT recipients with HCC within the up-to-7 criteria, unaffected by the presence or absence of vascular invasion (88.2 vs. 85.1%). The rate was comparable with that of LR patients with HCC without vascular invasion (81.2%, p 0.227), but far superior to that of LR patients with lesions with vascular invasion (50.0%, p < 0.0001). Overall survivals were compromised by multiple tumors [odds ratio (OR) 1.902, confidence interval (CI) 1.374-2.633, p = 0.0001], vascular invasion (OR 2.678, CI 1.952-3.674, p < 0.0001), blood transfusion (OR 2.046, CI 1.337-3.131, p = 0.001), and being beyond the up-to-7 criteria (OR 1.457, CI 1.041-2.037, p = 0.028). LT was a favorable factor for survival (OR 0.243, CI 0.130-0.454, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Primary LT for HCC with microvascular invasion and within the up-to-7 criteria doubled the chance of cure as compared with LR.

Salvage liver transplantation is a reasonable option for selected patients who have recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after liver resection

Background

Salvage liver transplantation (SLT) has been reported as being feasible for patients who develop recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after primary liver resection, but this finding remains controversial. We retrospectively studied the clinical characteristics of SLT recipients and conducted a comparison between SLT recipients and primary liver transplantation (PLT) recipients.

Methodology and Principal Findings

A retrospective study examined data from the China Liver Transplant Registry (CLTR) for 6,975 transplants performed from January 1999 to December 2009. A total of 6,087 patients underwent PLT and 888 patients underwent SLT for recurrence. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) was performed in 389 patients, while 6,586 patients underwent deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare survival rates. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year overall survival of SLT recipients was similar to that of PLT recipients: 73.00%, 51.77%, and 45.84% vs. 74.49%, 55.10%, and 48.81%, respectively (P = 0.260). The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival of SLT recipients was inferior to that of PLT recipients: 64.79%, 45.57%, and 37.78% vs. 66.39%, 50.39%, and 43.50%, respectively (P = 0.048). Similar survival results were observed for SLT and PLT within both the LDLT and DDLT recipients. Within the SLT group, the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year overall survival for LDLT and DDLT recipients was similar: 93.33%, 74.67%, and 74.67% vs. 80.13%, 62.10%, and 54.18% (P = 0.281), as was the disease-free survival: 84.85%, 62.85%, and 62.85% vs. 70.54%, 53.94%, and 43.57% (P = 0.462).

Conclusions

Our study demonstrates that for selected patients, SLT has similar survival to that of PLT, indicating that SLT is acceptable for patients with recurrent HCC after liver resection. Given the limited organ donor pool, salvage LDLT might be considered as a possible treatment.

Multidisciplinary management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is a leading cause of death in patients with cirrhosis. Management algorithms continually are increasing in sophistication and involve application of single and multimodality treatments, including liver transplantation, hepatic resection, ablation, transarterial chemoembolization, radioembolization, and systemic chemotherapy. These treatments have been shown to increase survival times. As many as 75% of patients with limited-stage disease who are given curative therapies survive 5 years, whereas less than 20% of untreated patients survive 1 year. Treatment can be optimized based on the patient's tumor stage, hepatic reserve, and functional status. However, because of the heterogeneity in presentation among patients, a multidisciplinary approach is required to treat hepatocellular carcinoma, involving hepatologists, surgeons, interventional radiologists, and oncologists. We present each specialist's viewpoint on controversies and advances in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Living donor liver transplantation versus deceased donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparable survival and recurrence

Several studies have reported higher rates of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) versus deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). It is unclear whether this difference is due to a specific biological effect unique to the LDLT procedure or to other factors such as patient selection. We compared the overall survival (OS) rates and the rates of HCC recurrence after LDLT and DDLT at our center. Between January 1996 and September 2009, 345 patients with HCC were identified: 287 (83%) had DDLT and 58 (17%) had LDLT. The OS rates were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method, whereas competing risks methods were used to determine the HCC recurrence rates. The LDLT and DDLT groups were similar with respect to most clinical parameters, but they had different median waiting times (3.1 versus 5.3 months, P = 0.003) and median follow-up times (30 versus 38.1 months, P = 0.02). The type of transplant did not affect any of the measured cancer outcomes. The OS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were equivalent: 91.3%, 75.2%, and 75.2%, respectively, for the LDLT group and 90.5%, 79.7%, and 74.6%, respectively, for DDLT (P = 0.62). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year HCC recurrence rates were also similar: 8.8%, 10.7%, and 15.4%, respectively, for the LDLT group and 7.5%, 14.8%, and 17.0%, respectively, for the DDLT group (P = 0.54). A regression analysis identified microvascular invasion (but not the graft type) as a predictor of HCC recurrence. In conclusion, in well-matched cohorts of LDLT and DDLT recipients, LDLT and DDLT provide similarly low recurrence rates and high survival rates for the treatment of HCC.

Liver Transplantation for HCC: A Review

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) often occurs in patients with chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma has the potential to eliminate both the tumor as well as the underlying cirrhosis and is the ideal treatment for HCC in cirrhotic liver as well as massive HCC in noncirrhotic liver. Limitations in organ availability, necessitate stringent selection of patients who would likely to derive most benefit. Selection criteria have considered tumor size, number, volume as well as biological features. The Milan criteria set the benchmark for tumors that would benefit from liver transplantation but were found to be excessively restrictive. Modest expansion in criteria has also been shown to be associated with equivalent survival. Microvascular invasion is the single most important adverse prognostic factor for survival. Living donor liver transplantation has expanded donor options and has the advantage of lower waiting period and not impacting the non-HCC waiting list. Acceptable outcomes have been obtained with living donor liver transplantation for larger and more numerous tumors in the absence of microvascular invasion. Downstaging of tumors to prevent progression while waiting for an organ or for reduction in size to allow enrolment for transplantation has met with variable success.

Recommendations for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an international consensus conference report

Although liver transplantation is a widely accepted treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), much controversy remains and there is no generally accepted set of guidelines. An international consensus conference was held on Dec 2-4, 2010, in Zurich, Switzerland, with the aim of reviewing current practice regarding liver transplantation in patients with HCC and to develop internationally accepted statements and guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the Danish model. 19 working groups of experts prepared evidence-based reviews according to the Oxford classification, and drafted recommendations answering 19 specific questions. An independent jury of nine members was appointed to review these submissions and make final recommendations, after debates with the experts and audience at the conference. This report presents the final 37 statements and recommendations, covering assessment of candidates for liver transplantation, criteria for listing in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients, role of tumour downstaging, management of patients on the waiting list, role of living donation, and post-transplant management.

Recommendations for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an international consensus conference report

Although liver transplantation is a widely accepted treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), much controversy remains and there is no generally accepted set of guidelines. An international consensus conference was held on Dec 2-4, 2010, in Zurich, Switzerland, with the aim of reviewing current practice regarding liver transplantation in patients with HCC and to develop internationally accepted statements and guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the Danish model. 19 working groups of experts prepared evidence-based reviews according to the Oxford classification, and drafted recommendations answering 19 specific questions. An independent jury of nine members was appointed to review these submissions and make final recommendations, after debates with the experts and audience at the conference. This report presents the final 37 statements and recommendations, covering assessment of candidates for liver transplantation, criteria for listing in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients, role of tumour downstaging, management of patients on the waiting list, role of living donation, and post-transplant management.

Recommendations for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an international consensus conference report

Although liver transplantation is a widely accepted treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), much controversy remains and there is no generally accepted set of guidelines. An international consensus conference was held on Dec 2-4, 2010, in Zurich, Switzerland, with the aim of reviewing current practice regarding liver transplantation in patients with HCC and to develop internationally accepted statements and guidelines. The format of the conference was based on the Danish model. 19 working groups of experts prepared evidence-based reviews according to the Oxford classification, and drafted recommendations answering 19 specific questions. An independent jury of nine members was appointed to review these submissions and make final recommendations, after debates with the experts and audience at the conference. This report presents the final 37 statements and recommendations, covering assessment of candidates for liver transplantation, criteria for listing in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients, role of tumour downstaging, management of patients on the waiting list, role of living donation, and post-transplant management.

Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after living donor liver transplantation: what is the current optimal approach to prevent recurrence?

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation plays an important role in the multimodal treatment options for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there has been little information about the prognosis for HCC recurrence after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 164 HCC patients who underwent LDLT at our institution between February 1999 and March 2009.

RESULTS

In all, 23 of 164 liver recipients developed HCC recurrence 1 to 44 months (median 8 months) after LDLT. The 5-year survival was significantly lower for patients with recurrence than for patients without recurrence (14 vs. 82%; p<0.0001). The 3-year survival was significantly lower for patients with early recurrence (≤1 year) than for patients with late recurrence (>1 year) (8 vs. 40%; p=0.0082). Concerning sites of first tumor recurrence, the 3-year survival rate in patients with recurrence in the graft liver was significantly higher than that of patients with recurrence to other organs (50 vs. 17%, respectively; p=0.0421).

CONCLUSIONS

As the prognosis of patients with HCC recurrence is quite poor, currently the optimal method of preventing HCC recurrence would be the use of appropriate criteria to select candidates for LDLT.

Growth of hepatocellular carcinoma in the regenerating liver

Liver resection and liver transplantation are the treatment modalities with the greatest potential for curing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Tumor recurrence after resection for HCC is, however, a major problem, and an increased rate of recurrence after living donor transplantation versus cadaveric whole liver transplantation has been suggested. Factors involved in liver regeneration may stimulate the growth of occult tumors. The aim of this project was to test the hypothesis that a microscopic HCC tumor in the setting of partial hepatectomy would show enhanced growth and signs of increased invasiveness corresponding to the size of the liver resection. Hepatectomy was performed to various degrees in groups of Buffalo rats with the concomitant implantation of a fixed number of hepatoma cells in the remnant liver; a control group underwent only resection. After 21 days, the sizes and numbers of the tumors and the expression of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), cyclin D1, calpain small subunit 1 (CAPNS1), CD34 (a microvessel density marker), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2) were evaluated and compared between the groups. The tumor volume and number increased significantly with the size of the partial hepatectomy (P < 0.05). The largest resections were also associated with increased hepatoma cell infiltration in the lungs and significant up-regulation of cyclin D1, AFP, CAPNS1, CD34, VEGF, and VEGFR2. The results suggest that liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy facilitates the growth and malignant transformation of microscopic HCC, and this could be significant for liver resection and partial liver transplantation strategies for HCC.

Overexpression of matrix metalloproteinase-12 (MMP-12) correlates with poor prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma

Tumour recurrence and metastasis are pressing issues of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who receive surgical treatments. Matrix metalloproteinase-12 (MMP-12), previously identified from our animal model, is involved in tumour invasiveness of rat hepatoma. We aimed to investigate the significance and prognostic value of MMP-12 expression in human HCC. MMP-12 mRNA level of 139 pairs of tumour and non-tumour liver tissues of HCC patients after hepatectomy were investigated by quantitative real-time RT-PCR. MMP-12 mRNA was significantly elevated in tumour liver tissues of HCC patients compared to non-tumour and normal liver tissues. By comparing paired tumour and non-tumour liver tissues, MMP-12 mRNA was overexpressed in 58% of tumour tissue of HCC patients. Overexpression of MMP-12 mRNA was significantly correlated with presence of venous infiltration (p=0.004), high serum AFP level (p=0.012), early tumour recurrence (p=0.018) and poor overall survival (p=0.02) of HCC patients. Moreover, MMP-12 mRNA was an independent factor in predicting the 1- and 3-year overall survival of HCC patients after hepatectomy. Our data demonstrated that MMP-12 mRNA may be a valuable prognostic marker for both overall survival and tumour recurrence of HCC patients after liver resection.

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.

Does living donation have advantages over deceased donation in liver transplantation?

Liver transplantation (LT) is the best treatment option for patients with end-stage liver disease. Living donor LT (LDLT) has developed as an alternative to deceased donor LT (DDLT) in order to overcome the critical shortage of deceased organ donations, particularly in Asia. LDLT offers several advantages over DDLT. The major advantage of LDLT is the reduction in waiting time mortality. Especially among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), LDLT can shorten the waiting time and lower the dropout rate. The Hong Kong group reported that median waiting time was significantly shorter for LDLT than for DDLT. Intention-to-treat survival rates of HCC patients with voluntary live donors were significantly higher than those of patients without voluntary live donors. In contrast, a multicenter adult-to-adult LDLT retrospective cohort study reported that LDLT recipients displayed a significantly higher rate of HCC recurrence than DDLT recipients, although LDLT recipients had shorter waiting times than DDLT recipients. The advantage of LDLT involves the more liberal criteria for HCC compared with those for DDLT. Various preoperative interventions including nutritional treatment can also be planned for both the donor and recipient in LDLT. Conversely, LDLT has marked unfavorable characteristics in terms of donor risks. Donor morbidity is not infrequent and the donor mortality rate is estimated at around 0.1-0.3%. In conclusion, living donation is not necessarily advantageous over deceased donation in LT. Taking the advantages and disadvantages of each option into consideration, LDLT and DDLT should both be used to facilitate effective LT for patients requiring transplant.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: the Hong Kong experience

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is the best treatment option for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with the background of cirrhosis since this treatment modality can cure both diseases at once. Over the years, the applicability of OLT for HCC has evolved. In Asia, including Hong Kong, a shortage of deceased donor liver grafts is a universal problem having to be faced in all transplant centers. Living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) has therefore been developed to counteract organ shortage and the high prevalence of HCC. The application of LDLT for HCC is a complex process involving donor voluntarism, selection criteria for the recipient and justification with respect to long-term survival in comparison to the result of deceased donor liver transplant. This article reviews the authors' experience with OLT for HCC patients in Hong Kong, with emphasis on the applicability and outcome of LDLT for HCC. Donor voluntarism has a significant impact on the application of LDLT. "Fast-track" LDLT in the setting of recurrence following curative treatment carries a high risk of recurrence even though the tumor stage fulfills the standard criteria. Although the survival outcome may be worse following LDLT than DDLT for HCC, LDLT is still the main treatment option for patients with transplantable HCC in Hong Kong, and a reasonable survival outcome can be achieved in selected patients with extended indications. It is particularly true that LDLT provides the only hope for patients with advanced HCC under the constricting problem of organ shortage.

Response to therapy as a criterion for awarding priority to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma awaiting liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

How to prioritize patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for liver transplantation (LT) remains controversial. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a policy for prioritizing HCC patients according to their response to pre-LT therapy.

METHODS

The study period was from 2000 to 2008. Dropout criteria included macroscopic vascular invasion, metastases, and poorly differentiated grade at pre-LT biopsy. A specific treatment algorithm was adopted to treat HCC before LT, and the effect of treatment was evaluated 3 months after listing or after the diagnosis of HCC for patients diagnosed while already on the waiting list. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1, patients with disease that completely or partially responded to therapy; and group 2, patients with stable, progressive, or untreatable disease. Group 2 patients were prioritized for LT unless full restaging and repeat biopsy identified dropout criteria.

RESULTS

At the 3-month visit, 62 HCC patients (42%) were assigned to group 2 and 85 (58%) to group 1. Eleven of 12 dropouts due to tumor progression came from group 2 (P < 0.01). Response to therapy was the sole predictor of dropout probability, independent of tumor stage (competing risk analysis). The 42 patients in group 2 who were transplanted had much the same 3-year post-LT survival rate as the 57 transplanted patients in group 1 (with survival rates of 82% and 83%, respectively; P > 0.05), but a slightly higher risk of post-LT HCC recurrence (13% and 2%, respectively; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Response to therapy is a potentially effective tool for prioritizing HCC patients for LT.

[Liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma]

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most common malignancy, with a new incidence of more than 11,000 cases per year and the second most common cause of malignancy-related death in Korean males. In Korea, more than 80% of all HCCs have developed from hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related cirrhotic livers. Liver transplantation (LT) is the only treatment that offers a chance of cure for HCC and the underlying liver cirrhosis simultaneously, but the availability of liver grafts and the aggressiveness of tumor recurrence are critical limiting factors of LT for HCC patients. The serious shortage of deceased-donors on strong demand for LT leads to the development of living-donor LT (LDLT) as a practical alternative replacing deceased-donor LT. Considering that HCC recurrence is the most common cause of posttransplant patient death, recipient candidates should be prudently selected through objectively established criteria. Uniquely, some Asian major LDLT centers challenged the Milan criteria, accepting a much higher number of HCC nodules instead of tumor size expansion. The eligibility criteria of LDLT for HCC are likely to be expanded more than before, but it still requires further qualified risk-benefit analyses. The development of new effective treatment modalities for HCC recurrence will reasonably expand the selection criteria further wide without the expense of recurrence rate. This article is mainly focused on the role of LT for HCC and discussed on the validity of currently available indication criteria.

Beyond Milan criteria--chances and risks of expanding transplantation criteria for HCC patients with liver cirrhosis

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is, apart from resection, one important curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in liver cirrhosis, and especially attractive because it eliminates both the tumor and the underlying liver disease. The application of restrictive inclusion criteria for OLT in HCC patients resulted in favorable long-term recurrence-free survival. These criteria, however, exclude a subgroup of patients which, despite advanced tumor size, demonstrate an acceptable outcome. As a consequence, expansion of the strict Milan criteria has been discussed. However, this will also deteriorate the average outcome of OLT in HCC patients. Considering that we run short of donor organs, more sophisticated prediction models for survival after OLT for HCC patients are needed to identify patients who benefit best from OLT. Neoadjuvant treatment that is frequently applied as a bridging technique for patients on the waiting list for OLT could provide useful information on tumor behavior to better predict the risk of post-OLT tumor recurrence. This might also allow expansion of the Milan criteria to patients with good response to downstaging methods without negatively affecting post-OLT survival. Furthermore, alternative scoring systems have been suggested to identify HCC patients that might still benefit from resection instead of OLT, and molecular tools are being explored to provide predictive information on HCC biology. This review discusses the advantages and risks of extended inclusion criteria for OLT and the currently available data on alternative prediction models and bridging methods in HCC patients.

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Increased recurrence but improved survival

In regions with a limited deceased donor pool, living donor adult liver transplantation (LDALT) has become an important treatment modality for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cirrhosis. Studies have shown higher recurrence rates of HCC after LDALT in comparison with deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of our study was to examine the outcome results and recurrence rates for patients with HCC who underwent LDALT at our center. During an 8-year period, 139 patients underwent LDALT, of whom 28 (20.1%) had HCC in their explanted livers. The median follow-up was 40.8 months. The mean explant tumor size was 3.3 +/- 1.2, and the mean number of tumors was 1.5 +/- 0.8. Twenty-one patients (75%) had tumors within the Milan criteria, 5 patients had tumors outside the Milan criteria but within the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria, and 2 patients were beyond the UCSF criteria. The overall 1- and 5-year patient and graft survival rates were 96% and 81%, respectively. Survival following LDALT was significantly better than survival following DDLT for HCC during the same time period (P = 0.02). Eight patients (28.6%) developed tumor recurrence. Poor differentiation of tumor cells was the most significant determinant of recurrence. Despite high recurrence rates of HCC following LDALT, overall 5-year survival appears to be excellent.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the commonest primary malignancy of the liver. It usually occurs in the setting of chronic liver disease and has a poor prognosis if untreated. Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is a suitable therapeutic option for early, unresectable HCC particularly in the setting of chronic liver disease. Following on from disappointing initial results, the seminal study by Mazzaferro et al in 1996 established OLT as a viable treatment for HCC. In this study, the “Milan criteria” were applied achieving a 4-year survival rate similar to OLT for benign disease. Since then various groups have attempted to expand these criteria whilst maintaining long term survival rates. The technique of living donor liver transplantation has evolved over the past decade, particularly in Asia, and published outcome data is comparable to that of OLT. This article will review the evidence, indications, and the future direction of liver transplantation for liver cancer.