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

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.

Contemporary strategies in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver transplantation is the treatment of choice for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on a background of chronic liver disease. Liver resection or locoregional ablative therapies may be indicated for patients with preserved synthetic function without significant portal hypertension. Milan criteria were introduced to select suitable patients for liver transplant with low risk of tumor recurrence and 5-year survival in excess of 70%. Currently the incidence of HCC is climbing rapidly and in a current climate of organ shortage has led to the re-evaluation of locoregional therapies and resectional surgery to manage the case load. The introduction of biological therapies has had a new dimension to care, adding to the complexities of multidisciplinary team working in the management of HCC. The aim of this paper is to give a brief overview of present day management strategies and decision making.

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.

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.

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.

Donor information for living donor liver transplantation: where can comprehensive information be found?

Recently published data show that a large number of candidates for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) actively look for additional information on the Internet because today it represents the main source of information for many of them. However, little is known about the quality of the information on LDLT available on the Internet. Our aim was, therefore, to comprehensively evaluate the online information available for LDLT candidates with the expanded Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool (0-36 items). One hundred Web sites on LDLT were initially found with the Google, Bing, and Yahoo search engines, and we identified 32 Web sites that provided specific information for such candidates in English. Only 9 Web sites addressed >20 items and the scores tended to be higher for educational (P = 0.13) and scientific sites (P = 0.07) compared to hospital sites. The median number of items from the EQIP tool was only 16 (interquartile range = 13-20), and quantitative postoperative morbidity and mortality risk estimates were available on only 19% and 44% of the Web sites, respectively, despite the idea of major complications being mentioned on most Web sites. This analysis demonstrated several significant shortcomings in the quality of the information provided to potential donors for LDLT according to the EQIP instrument. We conclude that there is an urgent need to produce a Web site compliant with international standards for the quality of donor information.

Safety of living donor liver transplantation using older donors

BACKGROUND

There is limited information concerning older donors in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). In the present study, we attempted to clarify whether it is safe to use older donors in LDLT.

METHODS

A total of 129 cases were reviewed in the present study. Donors and recipients were divided into group A (donors aged ≥ 50 y, n=21) and group B (donors aged <50 y, n=108). The pre-, intra-, and postoperative variables of the two groups were statistically compared.

RESULTS

Donors' complication rates were 38.10% and 28.70% for groups A and B, respectively (P=0.719). The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-y survival rates were 90%, 80%, and 66% for group A and 86%, 83%, and 75% for group B, respectively (P=0.573). Similar Clavien III or more complication rates for recipients were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggested that LDLT using older donors had no negative influence on the outcomes of both donors and recipients.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: Western and Eastern surgeons' points of view

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Developed on a pathological liver in 90% of cases, theoretically liver transplantation (LT) is its best treatment because it cures both malignancy and cause of malignancy, the underlying pathological liver. Cadaveric donors are the main source of liver in Western countries as France and living donors are the rules in Eastern countries as Japan. Because organ shortage could impact choices in HCC treatments, it was interesting to compare a Western and Eastern surgeon's points of view about treatment of HCC to assess if the source of organs has modified therapeutic strategies. Hence, aim of this work was to compare points of view of two hepatobiliary and transplant surgeons specialized in the treatment of HCC in France and Japan concerning five keys points that are decisive to choose one of the two curative treatments in HCC on pathological liver: liver resection or LT. These questions included the definition of an oncological treatment of HCC, the assessment of liver function, the treatment of HCC recurrences, the incidence of pathological information on therapeutic strategy and potential future therapeutics strategies.

Update in liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Successful transplant outcomes require optimal patient selection and timing. This review will update clinicians with current status and challenges in liver transplantation. Currently, the major limitation facing liver transplant centers is the shortage of organs. The limited availability of organs has led to long waiting periods for liver transplantation and consequently many patients become seriously ill or die while on the waiting list.

RECENT FINDINGS

This has major implications in the selection of patients, as well as the timing of transplant, for optimal use of these scarce organs. Indications and contraindications have changed slightly over the years and will be reviewed in this article.

SUMMARY

Timing for transplantation has changed more dramatically in the recent years because major changes to organ allocation systems have been undertaken to provide clinicians with a better way to prioritize patients for liver transplant.

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.

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.

Outcomes of patients with benign liver diseases undergoing living donor versus deceased donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The number of people undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has increased rapidly in many transplant centres. Patients considering LDLT need to know whether LDLT is riskier than deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing LDLT versus DDLT.

METHODS

A total of 349 patients with benign liver diseases were recruited from 2005 to 2011 for this study. LDLT was performed in 128 patients, and DDLT was performed in 221 patients. Pre- and intra-operative variables for the two groups were compared. Statistically analysed post-operative outcomes include the postoperative incidence of complication, biliary and vascular complication, hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence, long-term survival rate and outcomes of emergency transplantation.

RESULTS

The waiting times were 22.10±15.31 days for the patients undergoing LDLT versus 35.81±29.18 days for the patients undergoing DDLT. The cold ischemia time (CIT) was 119.34±19.75 minutes for the LDLT group and 346±154.18 for DDLT group. LDLT group had higher intraoperative blood loss, but red blood cell (RBC) transfusion was not different. Similar ≥ Clavien III complications, vascular complications, hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence and long-term survival rates were noted. LDLT patients suffered a higher incidence of biliary complications in the early postoperative days. However, during the long-term follow-up period, biliary complication rates were similar between the two groups. The long-term survival rate of patients undergoing emergency transplantation was lower than of patients undergoing elective transplantation. However, no significant difference was observed between emergency LDLT and emergency DDLT.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing LDLT achieved similar outcomes to patients undergoing DDLT. Although LDLT patients may suffer a higher incidence of early biliary complications, the total biliary complication rate was similar during the long-term follow-up period.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: five steps to prevent recurrence

Liver transplantation is the best treatment of patients with unresectable early hepatocellular carcinoma, allowing disease-free survival rates of 60-80% at 5 years. Despite these good results, some 10% of recipients experience a posttransplant HCC recurrence, which leads to death in almost all patients. Recurrence is either due to the growth of occult metastases or to the engraftment of circulating tumor cells. It can be hypothesized that strategies to decrease the engraftment of circulating tumor cells could decrease the risk of recurrence and, in addition, extend access to transplantation to patients with more advanced HCC. These potential strategies can be schematized into five steps, including (1) selecting recipients with low baseline levels of circulating HCC cells, by adding biological markers (such as alpha fetoprotein or molecular signatures) to the accepted combination of morphological criteria; (2) decreasing the perioperative release of HCC cells, with careful perioperative handling of the tumors; (3) preventing the engraftment of circulating HCC cells by decreasing liver graft ischemia-reperfusion injury, which has been shown to promote cancer cell engraftment and growth; (4) using anticancer drugs, including mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors and (5) tuning immunity toward HCC clearance.

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.