Downstaging hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and pooled analysis

The role of interventional radiology in the pre-liver transplant patient

Each year approximately 8500 patients undergo liver transplantation in the USA for acute and chronic liver failure. Over the years, the success of liver transplantation has led to more clinical indications for liver transplantation. These expanded indications, without a proportionate increase in donors, result in increased competition for the limited pool of transplantable whole or partial grafts. The likelihood of receiving a deceased donor graft depends on many clinical variables, including the acute and chronic fitness of the candidate aligning with the timing of donor organ availability. Several types of patients are candidates for transplant: patients with acute fulminant hepatic failure who will die without a transplant, patients with decompensated cirrhosis, and patients with HCC and compensated cirrhosis. Interventional radiology can preserve equity between these subgroups and reduce patient dropout by increasing the physiologic and anatomic fitness of the candidate before and after formal listing. The primary determinants of candidacy fitness and dropout are the severity of clinical symptoms related to portal hypertension and the presence of hepatocellular cancer. There is a subgroup of patients whose disease severity is not accurately reflected by the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), such as patients with chronic cholestasis that also may benefit from IR management.

LI-RADS and transplantation: challenges and controversies

Patients with early stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be cured by liver transplantation. HCC imaging features on CT or MRI are specific enough to allow for definitive diagnosis and treatment without the need of confirmatory biopsy. When applied to the appropriate at-risk population the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) imaging criteria achieve high specificity and positive predictive value for the diagnosis of HCC. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) is the United States organization that aims to assure the adequate and fair distribution of livers across candidates. Given the importance of fair organ allocation, OPTN also provides stringent imaging criteria for the diagnosis of HCC aiming to avoid false positive diagnosis. Although most imaging criteria are identical for both systems, discrepancies between LI-RADS and the current OPTN classification system for HCC diagnosis exists. Main differences include, but are not limited to, the binary approach of OPTN to classify lesions as HCC or not, versus the probabilistic algorithmic approach of LI-RADS, technical and interpretation considerations, and the approach towards treated lesions. The purpose of this article is to highlight the similarities and discrepancies between LI-RADS and the current OPTN criteria for HCC diagnosis and the implications that these differences may have on the management of patients who are transplant candidates.

Liver Transplantation Outcomes in a U.S. Multicenter Cohort of 789 Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Presenting Beyond Milan Criteria

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network recently approved liver transplant (LT) prioritization for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond Milan Criteria (MC) who are down-staged (DS) with locoregional therapy (LRT). We evaluated post-LT outcomes, predictors of down-staging, and the impact of LRT in patients with beyond-MC HCC from the U.S. Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium (20 centers, 2002-2013).

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Clinicopathologic characteristics, overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and HCC recurrence (HCC-R) were compared between patients within MC (n = 3,570) and beyond MC (n = 789) who were down-staged (DS, n = 465), treated with LRT and not down-staged (LRT-NoDS, n = 242), or untreated (NoLRT-NoDS, n = 82). Five-year post-LT OS and RFS was higher in MC (71.3% and 68.2%) compared with DS (64.3% and 59.5%) and was lowest in NoDS (n = 324; 60.2% and 53.8%; overall P < 0.001). DS patients had superior RFS (60% vs. 54%, P = 0.043) and lower 5-year HCC-R (18% vs. 32%, P < 0.001) compared with NoDS, with further stratification by maximum radiologic tumor diameter (5-year HCC-R of 15.5% in DS/<5 cm and 39.1% in NoDS/>5 cm, P < 0.001). Multivariate predictors of down-staging included alpha-fetoprotein response to LRT, pathologic tumor number and size, and wait time >12 months. LRT-NoDS had greater HCC-R compared with NoLRT-NoDS (34.1% vs. 26.1%, P < 0.001), even after controlling for clinicopathologic variables (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.33, P < 0.001) and inverse probability of treatment-weighted propensity matching (HR = 1.82, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In LT recipients with HCC presenting beyond MC, successful down-staging is predicted by wait time, alpha-fetoprotein response to LRT, and tumor burden and results in excellent post-LT outcomes, justifying expansion of LT criteria. In LRT-NoDS patients, higher HCC-R compared with NoLRT-NoDS cannot be explained by clinicopathologic differences, suggesting a potentially aggravating role of LRT in patients with poor tumor biology that warrants further investigation.

The Real Impact of Bridging or Downstaging on Survival Outcomes after Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

There is no consensus regarding selection criteria on liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), especially for living donor liver transplantation, although emerging evidence has been found for the effectiveness of bridging or downstaging.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the long-term outcomes of patients who underwent LT with or without bridging or downstaging for HCC.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 896 LT recipients with HCC between June 2005 and May 2015. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and their associated factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

The 5-year RFS in the full cohort of 896 patients was 82.4%, and the OS was 85.3%. In patients with initial Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) T1 and T2, the 5-year RFS and OS did not significantly differ between LT groups with and without bridging (all p ≥ 0.05). The 5-year RFS and OS of OPTN T3 patients with successful downstaging were not significantly different from those of patients with OPTN T2 with primary LT (p = 0.070 and p = 0.185), but were significantly higher than in patients with OPTN T3 with downstaging failure and initial OPTN T1 or T2 with progression (all p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, last alpha-fetoprotein before LT ≥70 ng/mL (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.77, p = 0.001; HR: 1.72, p = 0.004), pretransplant HCC status exceeding the Milan criteria (HR: 5.12, p < 0.001; HR: 3.31, p < 0.001), and positron emission tomography positivity (HR: 2.57, p < 0.001; HR: 2.57, p < 0.001) were independent predictors for worse RFS and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of bridging therapy on survival outcomes is limited in patients with early-stage HCC, whereas OPTN T1 or T2 with progression provides worse prognosis. OPTN T3 should undergo LT after successful downstaging, and OPTN T3 with successful downstaging allows for acceptable long-term posttransplant outcomes.

Liver Transplantation for Extended Criteria Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Stable Response to Locoregional Therapy and Alpha-Fetoprotein as Selection Criteria

INTRODUCTION

Current practice to only prioritize hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that fulfill the Milan criteria (INMC) is changing, since it causes the exclusion of patients who could benefit from liver transplantation. To select patients outside MC (OUTMC) for transplantation, we implemented extended selection criteria without up-front morphometric restrictions containing surrogate parameters of tumor biology.

METHODS

OUTMC patients were considered without restrictions of morphometrics and received locoregional treatment after interdisciplinary consultation. Our dynamic selection criteria for OUTMC patients required (INMUC): (1) treatment response over (2) at least 6 months and (3) alpha-fetoprotein ≤400 ng/mL over the entire evaluation period. Patients with INMC tumors served as control and internal validation cohort.

RESULTS

31 of 170 liver transplant candidates were OUTMC. Of these, 8 dropped out. The remaining 23 patients met the selection criteria and underwent transplantation. Recurrence-free survival was higher in patients transplanted INMC compared to those OUTMC INMUC (92.2% vs. 70.8%; p = 0.026) after 5 years of follow-up. Overall survival showed no significant difference (p = 0.552). With dynamic selection of transplant candidates, recurrence could also be predicted for the INMC patients as internal validation cohort (c-index: 0.896; CI 0.588-0.981, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Dynamic selection criteria for the stratification of patients with OUTMC HCCs is feasible and allows for excellent long-term results and acceptable tumor recurrence rates comparable to INMC patients.

Effect of Mandatory 6-Month Waiting Period on Waitlist and Transplant Outcomes in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing (OPTN/UNOS) policy mandates a 6-month waiting period before exception scores are granted to liver transplant candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aims to evaluate waitlist and posttransplant outcomes in patients with HCC, before and after implementation of the 6-month waiting rule.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We examined two groups from the UNOS registry: Group 1 (pre-6-month rule) consisted of patients registered as transplant candidates with HCC from January 1, 2013, to October 7, 2015 (n = 4,814); group 2 (post-6-month rule) consisted of patients registered from October 8, 2015, to June 30, 2018 (n = 3,287). As expected, the transplant probability was higher in the first 6 months after listing in group 1 than group 2 at 42.0% versus 6.3% (P < 0.001). However, the 6-month waitlist mortality/dropout rate was lower in group 2 at 1.2% than group 1 at 4.1% (P < 0.001). To assess regional parity of transplant, UNOS regions were categorized into three groups based on Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at transplant: lower-score (regions 3, 10, and 11), middle-score (1, 2, 6, 8, and 9), and higher-score region groups (4, 5, and 7). Outcomes were compared from the time exception points were given, which we defined as conditional waitlist outcomes. Conditional waitlist mortality/dropout decreased, and transplant probability increased in all region groups, but the benefits of the policy were more pronounced in the higher and middle-score groups, compared with the lower-score group. The decline in waitlist mortality/dropout was only significant in the high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease group (P < 0.001). No effect was observed on posttransplant mortality or percent of patients within Milan criteria on explant.

CONCLUSIONS

The HCC policy change was associated with decreased waitlist mortality/dropout and increased transplant probability. The policy helped to decrease but did not eliminate regional disparities in transplant opportunity without an effect on posttransplant outcomes.

Downstaging to Liver Transplant: Success Involves Choosing the Right Patient

Hepatocellular carcinoma is a rising indication for liver transplantation in the United States. Downstaging, defined as the reduction of tumor burden using local-regional therapy into Milan criteria, opens an avenue to access cure through transplant for patients who traditionally would not qualify. Approaching the selection of downstaging candidates through an assessment of hepatic function, staying within a modest expansion of tumor burden, and incorporation of serologic/imaging markers for tumor biology provide the best chance for successful downstaging. Following well-defined downstaging protocols with built-in failure criteria ensures excellent post-transplant outcomes.

Difference in treatment algorithms for hepatocellular carcinoma between world's principal guidelines

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death globally. Clinical guidelines for HCC have been established and revised by many countries and regions. We summarized and compared the treatment algorithms in the updated HCC guidelines established by Japan, China, Hong Kong, the Asian-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, and the European Association for the Study of the Liver and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Variations in treatment algorithms between the guidelines is inevitable, considering the differences in the prevalence and etiology of HCC, local clinical practice, and medical and insurance systems between countries or regions, and this might be confusing for practitioners worldwide. A comprehensive understanding of the guidelines that are globally available might be useful for future improvement of each guideline.

Striving for more just allocation of liver allografts between patients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma: successes and challenges

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recently the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) adopted new rules for the allocation of liver allografts for recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in hopes of removing regional variation in HCC practice and regional differences in patient survival. Understanding how previous changes to HCC allocation have both succeeded and failed to match the pretransplant mortality of HCC and non-HCC patients on the waitlist will help us to better evaluate these changes and predict where we may again fail.

RECENT FINDINGS

Previous revisions of the HCC allocation rules were successful in more accurately matching the waitlist mortality of HCC and non-HCC patients. Efforts to select for less aggressive tumor biology have resulted in better disease free and patient survival. Several articles have also supported the practice of using locoregional therapies to downstage the patients to within Milan criteria. New rules seek to reduce the amount of geographic disparity in the allocation system.

SUMMARY

Over time UNOS has steady improved the liver allocation polices to attempt to match pretransplant mortality for patients with HCC and without HCC. The latest changes to the organ allocation rules succeed in implementing some of these best practices. However, one can also predict several ongoing challenges to fair allocation that may not have been addressed by recent changes.

Argentinian clinical practice guideline for surveillance, diagnosis, staging and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

The A.A.E.E.H has developed this guideline for the best care of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from Argentina. It was done from May 2018 to March 2020. Specific clinical research questions were systematically searched. The quality of evidence and level of recommendations were organized according to GRADE. HCC surveillance is strongly recommended with abdominal ultrasound (US) every six months in the population at risk for HCC (cirrhosis, hepatitis B or hepatitis C); it is suggested to add alpha-feto protein (AFP) levels in case of inexeperienced sonographers. Imaging diagnosis in patients at risk for HCC has high specificity and tumor biopsy is not mandatory. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer algorithm is strongly recommended for HCC staging and treatment-decision processes. Liver resection is strongly recommended for patients without portal hypertension and preserved liver function. Composite models are suggested for liver transplant selection criteria. Therapies for HCC with robust clinical evidence include transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and first to second line systemic treatment options (sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, cabozantinib and ramucirumab). Immunotherapy with nivolumab and pembrolizumab has failed to show statistical benefit but the novel combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has recently shown survival benefit over sorafenib in frontline.

Pathologic response translates to improved patient survival after locoregional treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma: the importance of minimally invasive microwave ablation

BACKGROUND

Hepatectomy or transplantation can serve as curative treatment for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Unfortunately, as progression remains a reality, locoregional therapies (LRT) for curative or bridging intent have become common. Efficacy on viability, outcomes, and accuracy of imaging should be defined to guide treatment.

METHODS

Patients with HCC who underwent minimally invasive (MIS) microwave ablation (MWA), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), or both (MIS-MWA-TACE) prior to hepatectomy or transplantation were identified. Tumor response and preoperative computed tomography (CT) accuracy were assessed and compared to pathology. Clinical and oncologic outcomes were compared between MIS-MWA, TACE, and MIS-MWA-TACE.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients, with tumors from all stages of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging, were identified who underwent LRT prior to resection or transplant. Fourteen patients underwent MIS-MWA, 46 underwent TACE, and 31 underwent both neoadjuvantly. TACE population was older; otherwise, there were no differences in demographics. Fifty-seven percent of MIS-MWA patients had no viable tumor on pathology whereas only 13% of TACE patients and 29% of MIS-MWA-TACE patients had complete destruction (p = 0.004). The amount of remaining viable tumor in the explant was also significantly different between groups (MIS-MWA: 17.2%, TACE: 48.7%, MIS-MWA-TACE: 18.6%; p ≤ 0.0001). Compared with TACE, the MIS-MWA and MIS-MWA-TACE groups had significantly improved overall survival (MIS-MWA: 99.94 months, TACE: 75.35 months, MIS-MWA-TACE: 140 months; p = 0.017). This survival remained significant with stratification by tumor size. CT accuracy was found to be 50% sensitive and 86% specific for MIS-MWA. For TACE, CT had an 82% sensitivity and 33% specificity and for MIS-MWA-TACE, there was a 42% sensitivity and 78% specificity.

CONCLUSION

The impact of locoregional treatments on tumor viability is distinct and superior with MIS-MWA alone and MIS-MWA-TACE offering significant advantage over TACE alone. The extent of this effect may be implicated in the improved overall survival.

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Working Group Report from the ILTS Transplant Oncology Consensus Conference

Liver transplantation (LT) offers excellent long-term outcome for certain patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with a push to not simply rely on tumor size and number. Selection criteria should also consider tumor biology (including alpha-fetoprotein), probability of waitlist and post-LT survival (ie, transplant benefit), organ availability, and waitlist composition. These criteria may be expanded for live donor LT (LDLT) compared to deceased donor LT though this should not adversely affect the double equipoise in LDLT, namely ensuring both acceptable recipient outcomes and donor safety. HCC patients with compensated liver disease and minimal tumor burden have low urgency for LT, especially after local-regional therapy with complete response, and do not appear to derive the same benefit from LT as other waitlist candidates. These guidelines were developed to assist in selecting appropriate HCC patients for both deceased donor LT and LDLT.

Embolotherapy for Hepatic Oncology: Current Perspectives and Future Directions

Primary and secondary liver cancers are a major cause of mortality worldwide. Transarterial liver-directed therapy, or embolotherapy, represents an important locoregional treatment strategy for primary and secondary liver tumors. Embolotherapeutic modalities include bland embolization (transarterial embolization), chemoembolization (transarterial chemoembolization), and radioembolization or selective internal radiotherapy. A brief technical overview of embolotherapeutic modalities as well as supportive evidence for the treatment of most common primary and secondary liver tumors will be discussed in this review. Several potential future applications, including synergy with systemic therapy, interventional theranostics, and artificial intelligence will also be reviewed briefly.

Evolving thresholds for liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma: A Western experience

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Once considered an experimental treatment with dismal survival rates, liver transplantation for HCC entered a new era with the establishment of the Milan criteria over 20 years ago. In the modern post-Milan-criteria era, 5-year survival outcomes are now upwards of 70% in select patients. Liver transplantation (LT) is now considered the optimal treatment for patients with moderate to severe cirrhosis and HCC, and the rates of transplantation in the United States are continuing to rise. Several expanded selection criteria have been proposed for determining which patients with HCC should be candidates for undergoing LT with similar overall and recurrence-free survival rates to patients within the Milan criteria. There is also a growing experience with downstaging of patients who fall outside conventional LT criteria at the time of HCC diagnosis with the goal of tumor shrinkage via locoregional therapies to become a candidate for transplantation. The aim of this review article is to characterize the various patient selection criteria for LT, discuss balancing organ stewardship with outcome measures in HCC patients, present evidence on the role of downstaging for large tumors, and explore future directions of LT for HCC.

Essential updates 2018/2019: Liver transplantation

Among the recent topics in the field of liver transplantation (LT), one of the significant therapeutic breakthroughs is the introduction of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) against hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. With cure rates close to 100%, a better proportion of LT candidates and recipients can be cured of HCV infection by DAA therapies that are simple and well-tolerated. Other critical topics include the issue of indication of LT for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, which has been continuously studied. Several expanded criteria beyond the Milan criteria with acceptable results have been recently reported. The role of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) in intractable rejection is also an important matter that has been studied. Although long recognized as an important factor in antibody-mediated rejection and even graft survival in renal transplantation, the impact of DSAs on graft and patient survival in LT remains to be elucidated. Including the issues described above, this article focuses on recent advances in LT, management to avoid recurrence of primary diseases, optimization of immunosuppressive treatment, and extended donor criteria.

Embolotherapeutic Strategies for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 2020 Update

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents a significant contributor to cancer-related morbidity and mortality with increasing incidence in both developing and developed countries. Embolotherapy as a locoregional therapeutic strategy consists of trans-arterial or "bland" embolization (TAE), trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE), and selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT). Trans-catheter arterial therapies can be applied along all stages of HCC, either as an alternative or neoadjuvant to surgical resection/transplantation in very early and early stage HCC or as a palliative option for local disease control in unresectable and advanced stage HCC. In advanced stage HCC, SIRT did not demonstrate superiority in comparison to systemic treatment options in several recent large prospective trials, though for carefully selected patients, may confer improved tolerability with similar disease control rates. The latest embolotherapeutic techniques and literature as they pertain to the management of HCC, as well as future directions, are reviewed in this article.

Curative-Intent Therapies in Localized Hepatocellular Carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The high mortality rate for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) relative to its prevalence underscores the need for curative-intent therapies. Image-guided therapies such as ablation and embolization have an established role as primary or neoadjuvants preparing patients for curative treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

For HCC < 3 cm, percutaneous thermal ablation provides oncologic outcomes similar to surgical resection and is now a recommended first-line therapy in the EASL guidelines. Both ablation and embolization are recommended as bridging therapies for HCC patients awaiting liver transplantation. T3 HCC can be downstaged by embolization to T2, allowing liver transplantation with similar outcomes to patients transplanted within Milan criteria. New and evolving techniques such as SBRT, radiation segmentectomy and lobectomy, and combination therapies show promise but require further prospective data before they can be integrated into treatment algorithms. Combinations of embolic, ablative, and extirpative therapies can increase access to curative-intent treatment of HCC. Multidisciplinary treatment decisions are required to craft optimal treatment strategies considering tumor size, location, and underlying liver cirrhosis.

BRAZILIAN SOCIETY OF HEPATOLOGY UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality worldwide. The Brazilian Society of Hepatology (SBH) published in 2015 its first recommendations about the management of HCC. Since then, new data have emerged in the literature, prompting the governing board of SBH to sponsor a single-topic meeting in August 2018 in São Paulo. All the invited experts were asked to make a systematic review of the literature reviewing the management of HCC in subjects with cirrhosis. After the meeting, all panelists gathered together for the discussion of the topics and the elaboration of updated recommendations. The text was subsequently submitted for suggestions and approval of all members of the Brazilian Society of Hepatology through its homepage. The present manuscript is the final version of the reviewed manuscript containing the recommendations of SBH.

National Experience on Down-Staging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Before Liver Transplant: Influence of Tumor Burden, Alpha-Fetoprotein, and Wait Time

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) recently implemented a national policy granting priority listing for liver transplantation (LT) in patients who achieved down-staging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to Milan criteria. We aimed to evaluate the national experience on down-staging by comparing two down-staging groups with (1) tumor burden meeting UNOS down-staging (UNOS-DS) inclusion criteria and (2) "all-comers" (AC-DS) with initial tumor burden beyond UNOS-DS criteria versus patients always within Milan.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

This is a retrospective analysis of the UNOS database of 3,819 patients who underwent LT from 2012 to 2015, classified as always within Milan (n = 3,276), UNOS-DS (n = 422), and AC-DS (n = 121). Median time to LT was 12.8 months in long wait regions, 6.5 months in mid wait regions (MWR), and 2.6 months in short wait regions (SWR). On explant, vascular invasion was found in 23.7% of AC-DS versus 16.9% of UNOS-DS and 14.4% of Milan (P = 0.002). Kaplan-Meier 3-year post-LT survival was 83.2% for Milan, 79.1% for UNOS-DS (P = 0.17 vs. Milan), and 71.4% for AC-DS (P = 0.04 vs. Milan). Within down-staging groups, risk of post-LT death in multivariable analysis was increased in SWR or MWR (hazard ratio [HR], 3.1; P = 0.005) and with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥ 100 ng/mL at LT (HR, 2.4; P = 0.009). The 3-year HCC recurrence probability was 6.9% for Milan, 12.8% for UNOS-DS, and 16.7% for AC-DS (P < 0.001). In down-staging groups, AFP ≥ 100 (HR, 2.6; P = 0.02) was the only independent predictor of HCC recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results validated UNOS-DS criteria based on comparable 3-year survival between UNOS-DS and Milan groups. Additional refinements based on AFP and wait time may further improve post-LT outcomes in down-staging groups, especially given that reported 3-year recurrence was higher than in those always within Milan criteria.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma-How to Determine Therapeutic Options

Deciding on specific treatment strategies involves not only tumor stage, performance status, and severity of underlying liver disease, but additional factors such as biomarkers, organ availability, and radiographic tumor response to treatment. In this review, we present hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases to highlight how to determine therapeutic options for HCC in specific scenarios, including resection versus liver transplant, choice of initial local regional treatment, tumor downstaging, and systemic therapies for advanced HCC.

Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Era of Individualized Therapy: The Experience of a Greek Tertiary Center

Background: The treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the era of individualized therapy mandates a multidisciplinary approach and therefore the cooperation of physicians from multiple medical specialties. Treatment selection is based on the stage of the disease. The most prominent staging system is the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification system. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with HCC treated in our department. Patients were originally staged based on the BCLC classification system. However, a multidisciplinary team refined the BCLC classes, using clinical data and biomarkers to tailor an individualized course of treatment. Results: The study population was 63 patients who were BCLC staged at diagnosis as follows: very early (5 patients, 7.9%), early (38 patients, 60.3%), intermediate (14 patients, 22.2%), and advanced (6 patients, 9.5%). Thirty-two patients (50.8%) were treated with surgery and 31 patients (49.2%) with locoregional treatments. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates in the surgery group were 81.3%, 52.9%, and 18.9%, respectively, whereas in the locoregional treatment group, the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates were 71.0%, 38.7%, and 19.0%, respectively. The mean overall survival was 35.42 ± 23.54 months for the surgery group and 28.42 ± 23.0 months for the locoregional treatment group. In the surgery group, the mean overall survival of the patients treated with surgery alone was 26.68 ± 21.97 months compared to 48.18 ± 20.26 months for the patients treated with surgery followed by locoregional treatment for recurrence. Conclusion: In this study, patients treated with hepatic resection had higher survival rates than patients treated with locoregional treatments. However, this superiority did not reach statistical significance (P=0.426). Thus, locoregional treatments are highlighted as a valuable alternative to surgery, particularly when hepatic resection is not feasible. Finally, patients who received locoregional treatment following surgery had significantly higher survival compared to patients treated with surgery alone (P=0.038).

Assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma treatment response with LI-RADS: a pictorial review

Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) play critical roles for assessing treatment response of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after locoregional therapy. Interpretation is challenging because posttreatment imaging findings depend on the type of treatment, magnitude of treatment response, time interval after treatment, and other factors. To help radiologists interpret and report treatment response in a clear, simple, and standardized manner, the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) has developed a Treatment Response (LR-TR) algorithm. Introduced in 2017, the system provides criteria to categorize response of HCC to locoregional treatment (e.g., chemical ablation, energy-based ablation, transcatheter therapy, and radiation therapy). LR-TR categories include Nonevaluable, Nonviable, Equivocal, and Viable. LR-TR does not apply to patients on systemic therapies. This article reviews the LR-TR algorithm; discusses locoregional therapies for HCC, treatment concepts, and expected posttreatment findings; and illustrates LI-RADS treatment response assessment with CT and MRI.

Are There Upper Limits in Tumor Burden for Down-Staging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma to Liver Transplant? Analysis of the All-Comers Protocol

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within the University of California, San Francisco down-staging (UCSF-DS) criteria (one lesion > 5 cm and ≤ 8 cm; two to three lesions each ≤ 5 cm; or four to five lesions each ≤ 3 cm with total tumor diameter ≤ 8 cm) who achieved successful down-staging (DS) to Milan criteria had similar outcomes after liver transplantation (LT) compared with HCC initially meeting the Milan criteria. Nevertheless, little is known about the outcome of DS in patients with initial tumor burden exceeding the UCSF-DS criteria, defined as "all-comers" (AC). We compared the intention-to-treat (ITT) outcomes of DS in 74 patients in the AC group and 133 patients in the UCSF-DS group. Successful DS to Milan was observed in 64.8% of the AC group versus 84.2% of the UCSF-DS group (P < 0.001). The sum of tumor number and largest tumor diameter was significantly associated with successful DS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, P < 0.05). The cumulative probability of dropout within 1 year and 3 years was 53.5% and 80.0%, respectively, for AC versus 25.0% and 36.1%, respectively, for UCSF-DS (P < 0.0001). Factors predicting dropout included sum of tumor number and largest tumor diameter greater than 8 (HR 1.79, P = 0.049) and Child class B and C (HR 2.54, P = 0.001). The AC group also had a significantly lower liver transplant (LT) rate (13.5% versus 59.0%, P < 0.001). ITT survival at 1 year and 5 years was 77.4% and 21.1%, respectively, in AC versus 85.5% and 56.0%, respectively, in UCSF-DS (P < 0.001). Three of 10 patients in the AC group who underwent LT developed HCC recurrence. Conclusion: We observed a significantly lower LT probability and inferior ITT survival with DS in the AC group versus the UCSF-DS group. Our results suggest that an upper limit in tumor burden exists beyond which successful LT after DS becomes an unrealistic goal.

Expanding the Surgical Pool for Hepatic Resection to Treat Biliary and Primary Liver Tumors

Surgical management of primary liver and biliary tract tumors has evolved over the past several decades, resulting in improved outcomes in these malignancies with historically poor prognoses. Expansion of patient selection criteria, progress in neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies, development of techniques to increase future liver remnant, and the select utilization of liver transplantation have all contributed to increasing the patient pool for surgical intervention. Ongoing and future studies need to focus on improving multimodality treatment regimens and further refining the selection criteria for transplantation in order to optimize utilization of limited organ resources.

Favourable outcome of pathologic downstaging by locoregional treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplantation

No distinct guidelines are available regarding the effect of pretransplant locoregional treatment (LRT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) staging system. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognosis of pathologic downstaging (PDS) by the exclusion of total necrosis after liver transplantation. We conducted a study of 326 HCC patients who underwent liver transplantation between September 2005 and December 2016. Two hundred twenty-two patients received pretransplant LRT and 102 patients did not. Among the former group, 74 (33.0%) achieved PDS while 150 (67.0%) showed unchanged T stage after the exclusion of total necrosis. Five-year HCC recurrent free survival (RFS) of PDS group (85.1%) was similar to that of the no LRT group (88.8%) but higher than that of the non-PDS group (68.9%; P < 0.001). Based on T stage adjusted with total necrosis and PDS status, RFS was similar in the PDS T1 (82.4%) and non-PDS T1 (86.5%) groups. Non-PDS T2 cancers had worse outcome regardless of the Milan (P = 0.982) or University of California San Francisco criteria (P = 0.466). On preoperative examination, parameters like less than 1 viable tumor, less than 1 cm of tumor size, and less than 20 ng/mL of serum alpha fetoprotein were associated with PDS. This study showed that PDS by LRT was associated with favorable outcome in HCC patients after liver transplantation.

2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer globally and the fourth most common cancer in men in Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle-aged and elderly patients. These practice guidelines will provide useful and constructive advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 44 experts in hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2014 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Where do we stand?

Hepatocellular carcinoma represents an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. It is the sixth most common cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer death. Liver transplantation is a key tool for the treatment of this disease in human therefore hepatocellular carcinoma is increasing as primary indication for grafting. Although liver transplantation represents an outstanding therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, due to organ shortage, the careful selection and management of patients who may have a major survival benefit after grafting remains a fundamental question. In fact, only some stages of the disease seem amenable of this therapeutic option, stimulating the debate on the appropriate criteria to select candidates. In this review we focused on current criteria to select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma for liver transplantation as well as on the strategies (bridging) to avoid disease progression and exclusion from grafting during the stay on wait list. The treatments used to bring patients within acceptable criteria (down-staging), when their tumor burden exceeds the standard criteria for transplant, are also reported. Finally, we examined tumor reappearance following liver transplantation. This occurrence is estimated to be approximately 8%-20% in different studies. The possible approaches to prevent this outcome after transplant are reported with the corresponding results.

2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer globally and the fourth most common cancer in men in Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle-aged and elderly patients. These practice guidelines will provide useful and constructive advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 44 experts in hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology and radiation oncology in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2014 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions.

Reappraisal of Failures in Downstaging Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Prior to Liver Transplant-Preliminary Report on the Impact of Underestimations of Tumor Numbers and Tumor Sizes as Measured From Imaging Before Transplant

Downstaging treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prior to liver transplant (LT) is an accepted strategy to meet the Milan criteria. However, after transplant surgery, a reality is noted that the number or/and the size of some HCCs measured from the liver explants is different from that measured from the pre-LT imaging. If tumor number or tumor size measured from the liver explants was beyond that measured from pre-LT imaging, we define it as "failed downstaging." Among 27 patients who received downstaging therapies, there are 11 "number reduction failures" and 6 "size reduction failures." We attribute the discrepancy to 2 possible reasons; one is that the pre-LT imaging after downstaging could not completely detect all the HCC; the other is that the time interval between the downstaging and LT is long enough to develop new HCCs. After follow-up, 6 patients developed HCC recurrence. The significant factors affecting recurrence include tumor size from postdownstaging imaging (P = .048), tumor number ≥ 2 (P = .007), multiple sessions of downstaging (P = .03), ratio of neutrophil to lymphocyte (P = .047), and tumor number from liver explant (borderline P = .05). Tumor recurrence after LT is significantly higher in those with "size reduction failure" (P = .048). The interval between LT and tumor recurrence is significantly shorter in those with "size reduction failure" (P = .04). To decrease underestimations of HCC, combining various imaging studies including the computed tomographic scan, magnetic resonance imaging, and contrast ultrasonography is needed to increase the accuracy before LT. Repeated imaging studies at short intervals of no more than 3 months are necessary during a long wait. How to minimize the underestimations of HCC to determine the appropriate candidacy for LT is an important goal for transplantation surgeons.

Update on transarterial approaches to locoregional treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review explores current knowledge and recent data about vascular-centered locoregional treatments and proposes alternate algorithms.

RECENT FINDINGS

Hepatocellular carcinoma represents the sixth most common neoplasm worldwide. Currently, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging is the most commonly used in Europe for treatment allocation. According to this classification, European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines currently recommend transarterial chemoembolization for intermediate stage HCC and systemic treatments, such as, sorafenib in more advanced stages. However, strong evidences are still lacking to conclude to the superiority of one technique over another, as the optimal treatment choice remains challenging and should take into consideration more clinical, biological and imaging findings than reported in the BCLC staging system, such as patient age or clinical status, tumor characteristics (including distribution and heterogeneity), tumor vascularization and concomitant portal hypertension or biliary anomalies.

SUMMARY

Many controversies remain, in particular, the relative place of bland embolization versus chemoembolization, the clinical benefit of drug-eluting bead chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) over conventional chemoembolization (cTACE), as well as the real place of radioembolization in general setting as well as innovative applications, such as radiation segmentectomy and radiation lobectomy.

The Role of Radioembolization in Bridging and Downstaging Hepatocellular Carcinoma to Curative Therapy

Radioembolization with yttrium-90 microspheres has a growing role in the interventional oncological management of patient's with hepatocellular carcinoma. Patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer early or intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma may be offered radioembolization in order to control tumor burden while awaiting a transplant organ-referred to as "bridging" a patient to transplantation-or to reduce tumor burden such that patients will subsequently meet criteria for curative therapies-known as "downstaging" a patient to eligible tumor characteristics. More specific applications of radioembolization have been developed over the past two decades. Radioembolization may be employed to perform a radiation "lobectomy" in order to induce regression of the treated segments and hypertrophy of the untreated liver lobe such that the future liver remnant is sizeable enough to sustain life following resection. Similarly, the concept of radiation "segmentectomy"-involving the more selective administration of yttrium-90 microspheres with the intention of treating tumor and leading to the regression of the treated segment over time-has been proposed as a potential curative application of radioembolization. These radioembolization applications combine to augment the treatment options available to hepatocellular carcinoma patients both within and beyond transplantation criteria.

Goals and targets for personalized therapy for HCC

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide and its incidence continues to rise. While cirrhosis underlies most cases of HCC, many molecular pathways are implicated in HCC carcinogenesis, including the TERT promoter mutation, Wnt/β-catenin, P53, Akt/mTOR, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), and endothelial growth factor receptor (EGFR)/RAS/MAPK pathways. While the most widely used staging and treatment algorithm for HCC-the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) system-does not recommend systemic molecular therapy for early HCC, a variety of treatment options are available depending upon the stage of HCC at diagnosis. Determining the best treatment options must take into account not only the burden and extent of HCC, but also the patient's performance status, underlying liver function, extra-hepatic disease and co-morbidities. Radiofrequency or microwave ablation, liver resection, or liver transplantation, all potential curative therapies for HCC, should be the first-line treatments when possible. For patients who are not candidates of curative treatments, locoregional therapies such as transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), transarterial radioembolization (TARE), and stereotactic body radiation (SBRT) can improve survival and quality of life. Sorafenib, a multi-kinase VEGF inhibitor, is the most widely used systemic chemotherapy approved as a first-line agent for unresectable or advanced HCC. Clinical trials are underway directed towards molecular therapies that target different aspects of the hepatocellular carcinogenesis cascade. Ideally, the goal of future therapy should be to target multiple pathways in the HCC cascade with combination treatments to achieve personalized care aimed at improving overall survival.

Epidemiology and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

The major risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in contemporary clinical practice are becoming increasingly related to sustained virological response after hepatitis C, suppressed hepatitis B virus during treatment, and alcoholic and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. We review the emerging data on the risk and determinants of HCC in these conditions and the implications of HCC surveillance. However, from a public health perspective, active hepatitis C and B continue to drive most of the global burden of HCC. In United States, the age-adjusted incidence rates of HCC in Hispanics have surpassed those of HCC in Asians. Prognosis in HCC is complex because of the competing risk imposed by underlying cirrhosis and presence of malignancy. In addition to tumor burden, liver function and performance status; additional parameters including tumor biopsy, serum markers, and subclassification of current staging systems; and taking into account patterns of tumor progression may improve patient selection for therapy. Advancements in the treatment of HCC have included identification of patients who are most likely to derive a clinically significant benefit from the available therapeutic options. Additionally, the combination strategies of locoregional therapies and/or systemic therapy are being investigated.

Selecting patients with hepatocellular carcinoma for liver transplantation: incorporating tumor biology criteria

Liver transplantation (LT) is the optimal therapeutic option for patients with liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Due to universal donor shortage, only the patients with limited tumor burden (under the so-called Milan criteria) are considered as potential candidates for LT in most institutions. It is expected that in the near future, more liver grafts will be available for patients with HCC due to the implementation of new direct antivirals against hepatitis C, leaving a prone scenario to consider expanding Milan criteria. A moderate expansion of Milan criteria could be implemented without increasing the risk of tumor recurrence if patients with favorable biological behavior are carefully selected. Incorporating information regarding tumor biology in the decision-making algorithm would result in a more rational use of LT in patients with HCC. In the present review, surrogate markers of tumor biology are critically evaluated as potential tools to be combined with existing radiological criteria. In addition, the current state of liquid biopsy is discussed, as this cutting-edge technology may reshape the management of HCC in the upcoming years.

Clinical Case Panel: Treatment Alternatives for Inoperable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Surgical resection or liver transplantation offers the best chance of cure for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Unfortunately, most patients are not good candidates for liver resection due to locally advanced disease or compromised liver function. Moreover, liver transplantation waiting lists are long. For those cases not amenable for resection, a variety of local treatment modalities are available, such as image-guided ablative procedures, transarterial chemoembolization, and radioembolization, as well as external beam radiation. HCC presentation can vary considerably in size, number, and location of lesions. The management of inoperable HCC is, therefore, quite complex, and there is a lack of consensus on the best local treatment modality for each type tumor presentation. Here, we present 4 clinical case scenarios representative of commonly seen cases in the clinical setting, with different therapeutic perspectives from institutions with high expertise in the management of HCC.

Transplantation After Successful Downstaging by Multimodal Treatments of American Joint Committee on Cancer Stage IIIB Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Portal Vein Thrombi: A Case Report

The effective treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIIB remains controversial and challenging because of the high recurrence rate after resection and low survival rate. The median survival of those with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) is short. We reported such a case which received liver transplantation (LT) after successful consecutive downstaging therapies. A 40-year-old man with alcohol related liver cirrhosis and repeated esophageal varices bleeding had HCC with tumor thrombi in right main portal vein and the second portal branch of segment VI (stage IIIB). The received percutaneous alcohol injection, radiofrequency ablation, 8 sessions of transcatheter hepatic arterial chemoembolization, radiotherapy, and target therapy with sorafenib. Computed tomography (CT) scan and magnetic resonance imaging after treatments showed no viable fragments in the tumor and revealed both the right main portal vein and V1 branch were patent. One month later, the patient received a deceased LT. The perioperative course was rather smooth. After discharge, the interval follow-up CT studies of the chest and liver and whole body bone scan showed no tumor recurrence or metastasis up to 20 months postoperation.

Multidisciplinary meetings specific to hepatocellular carcinoma: How to proceed?

The French "cancer plan" has created a framework for good practice in the course of care for cancer patients. Decisions must be made in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDM) and an individualized care plan (ICP) is to be established for each patient. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common cancer with complex treatments that warrant a dedicated meeting. Cancer coordination centers (3C) ensure the organization and the functioning of MDMs. Multidisciplinary, standardized and systematic assessment of HCC patients allows for personalized management and orients them toward treatment that is either curative (transplantation, surgical resection, ablathermy) or palliative (chemoembolization, radiotherapy, systemic treatment, supportive care). MDMs bring together all the professionals treating the disease, and who are tasked with producing an enforceable document effective that justifies decisions and is often an essential step towardinclusion of patients in a clinical trial. It must be carried out according to a systematic schema in an approach applied from initial diagnosis to treatment outset and throughout the treatment. Numerous advances in HCC treatments have rendered their management complex, with the possibility of liver transplantation, twhose access is regulated by the Biomedicine Agency requiring the submission of MDM reports. MDMs must meet specific quality criteria to ensure effective management based on general guidelines and yet specifically tailored to each patient.

Microvascular Invasion in HCC: The Molecular Imaging Perspective

Hepatocellular carcinoma represents the most frequent primary liver tumor; curative options are only surgical resection and liver transplantation. From 1996, Milan Criteria are applied in consideration of patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular for liver transplantation; nonetheless, more recently, Milan Criteria have been criticized because they appear over conservative. Apart from number and size of lesions and biomarker levels, which already have been associated with poorer prognosis, overall survival and recurrence rates after transplantation are affected also by the presence of vascular invasion. Microvascular invasion suggests a poor prognosis but it is often hard to detect before transplant. Diagnostic imaging and tumor markers may play an important role and become the main tools to define microvascular invasion. In particular, a possible role could be found for computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. In this paper, we analyze the possible role of positron emission tomography as a preoperative imaging biomarker capable of predicting microvascular invasion in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and thus selecting optimal candidates for liver transplantation.

Association between AKT rs2494752 single nucleotide polymorphism and the risk of metastasis in hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common types of human tumors, which is characterized by high morbidity and mortality rates. AKT1 transcriptional activity is implicated in HCC initiation and development. In the present study, the effects of rs2494752 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) on AKT1 transcriptional activity in the progression of HCC cells were investigated. A case-control study was analyzed in 1,056 HCC patients and 1,080 healthy individuals using the PCR assay method. Results indicated AKT1 expression levels were up-regulated in HCC tissue compared to adjacent normal tissues. Furthermore, a higher frequency of AKT rs2494752 AG and AA genotypes were observed in HCC cases (P=0.0046). Gene polymorphism identified C and T alleles were frequency in HCC patients compared to healthy individuals. Individuals harboring AKT rs2494752 AG/AA genotype had a vital increased susceptibility to HCC in the dominant model (P=0.0028). In addition, AKT1 rs2494752 GG genotype showed an increasing of AKT1 promoter activity determined by the luciferase assay. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that AKT1 rs2494752 GG and C polymorphism was more aggressive than other AKT1 rs2494752 cancer cells. Moreover, AKT1 rs2494752 GG markedly increased rates of response to NCT chemotherapy. Additionally, results revealed that AKT1 rs2494752 GG and C increased the risk factors of HCC. In conclusion, these results indicate that AKT1 rs2494752 polymorphisms may be regarded as a candidate gene in assessing the susceptibility, metastasis and responses to chemotherapy in the progression of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Specific issues concerning the management of patients on the waiting list and after liver transplantation

The present document is a second contribution collecting the recommendations of an expert panel of transplant hepatologists appointed by the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF) concerning the management of certain aspects of liver transplantation, including: the issue of prompt referral; the management of difficult candidates; malnutrition; living related liver transplants; hepatocellular carcinoma; and the role of direct acting antiviral agents before and after transplantation. The statements on each topic were approved by participants at the AISF Transplant Hepatology Expert Meeting organized by the Permanent Liver Transplant Commission in Mondello on 12-13 May 2017. They are graded according to the GRADE grading system.