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

Indian National Association for the Study of Liver (INASL) Guidance Statements for Determining Futility in Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) is a life-saving procedure for patients with end-stage liver disease; however, with the growing shortage of organ donors, the need to identify futile transplants has become increasingly urgent. Futility in liver transplantation refers to situations where the expected post-transplant survival or quality of life is poor, making the procedure unlikely to yield a meaningful benefit. Various definitions of futility are used across different countries and transplant centers, with criteria often based on clinical factors such as age, comorbidities, MELD score, and functional status. For hepatologists and transplant surgeons, clearer guidelines are essential to make informed decisions and avoid unnecessary transplants that may place patients at risk without improving their prognosis. While some studies have proposed futility scores, there is currently no universal consensus on a standardized definition or set of criteria. This highlights the need for further prospective trials to evaluate the predictors of futility in liver transplantation, aiming to refine decision-making processes, optimize organ allocation, and improve patient outcomes. Future research should focus on the development of universally accepted futility criteria and explore interventions to mitigate the factors contributing to transplant futility.

Role of Liver Transplant in Primary and Secondary Liver Malignancies

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cholangiocarcinoma are the primary hepatic malignancies with established pathways to transplantation and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) exception points. Other tumors managed with liver transplantation (LT) include hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma and fibrolamellar HCC. LT for metastatic neuroendocrine tumor has been established with patient selection criteria and a path to MELD exception points. Additionally, recent data on LT for patients with unresectable hepatic colorectal metastases demonstrate increasingly encouraging initial results.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma and the Role of Liver Transplantation: An Update and Review

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Multiple treatment modalities are available for the management of HCC, depending on its stage as determined by the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system. Because liver transplantation (LT) theoretically removes the cancer and replaces the organ at risk for future malignancy, LT is often considered the most definitive and one of the most efficacious treatment options for HCC. Nevertheless, the success and efficacy of liver transplantation depend on various tumor characteristics. As a result, multiple criteria have been developed to assess the appropriateness of a case of HCC for LT, with the pioneering Milan Criteria established in 1996. Over the past 20 to 30 years, these criteria have been critically evaluated, expanded, and often liberalized to make LT for patients with HCC a more universally applicable option. Furthermore, the development of other treatment modalities has enabled downstaging and bridging strategies for HCC prior to LT. In this narrative and comprehensive review, we provided an update on recent trends in the epidemiology of HCC, selection criteria for LT, implementation of LT across different regions, treatment modalities available as bridges, downstaging strategies, alternatives to LT, and, finally, post-LT surveillance.

Criteria and prognostic models for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing liver transplantation

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-associated death globally. Liver transplantation (LT) has emerged as a key treatment for patients with HCC, and the Milan criteria have been adopted as the cornerstone of the selection policy. To allow more patients to benefit from LT, a number of expanded criteria have been proposed, many of which use radiologic morphological characteristics with larger and more tumors as surrogates to predict outcomes. Other groups developed indices incorporating biological variables and dynamic markers of response to locoregional treatment. These expanded selection criteria achieved satisfactory results with limited liver supplies. In addition, a number of prognostic models have been developed using clinicopathological characteristics, imaging radiomics features, genetic data, and advanced techniques such as artificial intelligence. These models could improve prognostic estimation, establish surveillance strategies, and bolster long-term outcomes in patients with HCC. In this study, we reviewed the latest findings and achievements regarding the selection criteria and post-transplant prognostic models for LT in patients with HCC.

Hepatic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatic resection has long been considered the preferred treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) when feasible, but its role, as well as the outcomes is evolving rapidly. This article explores the impact of the changing demographics of HCC, reviews current criteria for resection, considers the roles of liver transplantation and nonsurgical locoregional therapies vis-a-vis resection, highlights the potential of new systemic therapies (particularly immune checkpoint inhibitors) to improve outcomes, details the common complications associated with resection, and discusses recurrence of HCC after resection and its management.

The Role of Liver Transplantation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver transplantation (LT) is the standard-of-care for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Current selection criteria depend primarily on measures of tumor burden and alpha-fetoprotein levels. Evolving strategies include the application of prognostic scores and the development of specialized molecular markers to predict recurrence. New technologies such as machine perfusion of donor organs are expected to dramatically improve the availability and access to LT in HCC.

Downstaging of hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation: Results from a national multicenter prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients with HCC meeting United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)-downstaging (DS) criteria have excellent post-liver transplantation (LT) outcomes. Studies on HCC beyond UNOS-DS criteria ("All-Comers" [AC]) have been limited by small sample size and short follow-up time, prompting this analysis.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-six patients meeting UNOS-DS and 190 meeting AC criteria from 9 LT centers across 5 UNOS regions were enrolled from 2015 to 2023 and prospectively followed. Competing risk analysis and Kaplan-Meier method were used to evaluate DS and LT outcomes, and Fine-and-Gray and Cox models were used to identify predictors of outcomes. AC and UNOS-DS had similar median alpha-fetoprotein (15 vs. 12 ng/mL; p =0.08), MELD (9 vs. 9; p =0.52), and Child-Pugh (A vs. A; p =0.30). Two years after the first local regional therapy, 82% of UNOS-DS and 66% of AC were successfully downstaged ( p <0.001). In AC, DS rates were 72% for tumor number plus diameter of largest lesion <10, 51% for sum 10-12, and 39% for sum >12 ( p =0.01). Yttrium-90 achieved higher DS success than transarterial chemoembolization in AC (74% vs. 65%; p <0.001). 48% of UNOS-DS and 40% of AC underwent LT ( p =0.10). Five-year post-LT survival was similar between UNOS-DS and AC (74% vs. 72%; p =0.77), although 5-year post-LT recurrence was higher in AC (30% vs. 14%; p =0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite higher HCC recurrence and lower intention-to-treat survival in AC, post-LT survival was comparable between UNOS-DS and AC. Yttrium-90 attained higher DS success than transarterial chemoembolization in AC. LT after DS is feasible in AC, though defining an upper limit in tumor burden may be necessary.

Challenges in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Review of Current Controversies

Liver transplantation (LT) remains one of the most effective treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and significantly enhances patient survival. However, the application of LT for HCC faces challenges owing to advancements in cancer-specific treatment modalities and the increased burden of patients' comorbidities. This narrative review explores current controversies and advancements in LT for HCC. Key areas of focus include the management of comorbidities and patient education by advanced practice nurses, impacts of frailty on waitlists and post-LT outcomes, selection criteria for LT in the era of new downstaging tools, role of radiology in patient selection, and implications of potential immunotherapy use both before and after LT. Additionally, the importance of immunosuppression management with strategies aimed at minimizing rejection while considering the risk of HCC recurrence and the role of surveillance for HCC recurrence is highlighted. This review also underscores the importance of a multidisciplinary approach for optimizing outcomes in patients with HCC undergoing LT.

Downstaging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Before Liver Transplantation: Current Advances in Selection Criteria and Therapeutic Options

Liver transplantation (LT) is an ideal therapeutic option for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The selection criteria of HCC for LT have evolved in recent decades. Downstaging therapy is a promising strategy for patients with tumor burden beyond transplant criteria to increase the chance of receiving LT and improve posttransplant survival. Downstaging therapy is also a selection tool that refines the conventional selection criteria based on tumor morphology. Recently, the success of systemic treatment, including immune checkpoint inhibitors, antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and VEGF inhibitors, in advanced HCC has prompted the discussion regarding the role of systemic therapies for HCC downstaging before transplantation. In this review, we aimed to summarize the current advances in selection criteria and therapeutic options of downstaging therapy for HCC before LT.

Transplant oncology - Current indications and strategies to advance the field

Liver transplantation (LT) was originally described by Starzl as a promising strategy to treat primary malignancies of the liver. Confronted with high recurrence rates, indications drifted towards non-oncologic liver diseases with LT finally evolving from a high-risk surgery to an almost routine surgical procedure. Continuously improving outcomes following LT and evolving oncological treatment strategies have driven renewed interest in transplant oncology. This is not only reflected by constant refinements to the criteria for LT in patients with HCC, but especially by efforts to expand indications to other primary and secondary liver malignancies. With new patient-centred oncological treatments on the rise and new technologies to expand the donor pool, the field has the chance to come full circle. In this review, we focus on the concept of transplant oncology, current indications, as well as technical and ethical aspects in the context of donor organs as precious resources.

Optimal Liver Transplantation Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver transplantation continues to be the optimal treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Given the limited organ supply, patient selection for liver transplant must carefully balance tumor progression with risk of recurrence posttransplant. There are several pretransplant selection criteria that incorporate biomarkers as well as imaging modality to risk-stratify patients as we continue to look for the optimal transplant cutoff for patients with HCC, which should be transplant-center specific, and account for organ availability and dynamic response to locoregional therapy.

Downstaging hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation: A multicenter analysis of the "all-comers" protocol in the Multicenter Evaluation of Reduction in Tumor Size before Liver Transplantation (MERITS-LT) consortium

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma meeting united network for organ sharing (UNOS)-downstaging (DS) criteria have excellent liver transplantation (LT) outcomes after DS. However, outcomes for "all-comers" (AC) patients with tumors initially exceeding UNOS-DS are poorly understood. Patients meeting AC (n = 82) or UNOS-DS (n = 229) at 7 LT centers in 4 UNOS regions were prospectively followed from 2015-2020. AC patients had a lower probability of successful DS (67% vs 83% within 12 months; P < .001). The 3-year survival was 69% for UNOS-DS vs 58% for AC (P = .05) and reduced to 30% in patients with Child-Pugh B/C cirrhosis or alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥ 500. Five-year LT probability was 42% for AC vs 74% in UNOS-DS (P = .10). Thirty-eight percent were understaged on explant, with the increasing sum of the largest tumor diameter plus the number of lesions before LT (odds ratio 1.3; P = .01) and AFP ≥ 20 (odds ratio 5.9; P = .005) associated with understaging. Post-LT 3-year survival was 91% for AC vs 81% for UNOS-DS (P = .67). In this first prospective multiregional study of AC patients from the multicenter evaluation of reduction in tumor size before liver transplantation (MERITS-LT) consortium, we observed a 65% probability of successful DS. Three-year survival in AC was nearly 60%, though AC with Child-Pugh B/C or AFP ≥ 500 had poor survival. Explant pathology and 3-year post-LT outcomes were similar between cohorts, suggesting that LT is a reasonable goal in selected AC patients.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: New Developments

This is a review of current practices and upcoming developments regarding hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This includes a contemporary review of the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of HCC. Furthermore, the authors provide a review of certain ongoing trials and future directions of various treatment modalities for HCC.

Beyond Milan

1_erimb8idKaltura.

Hepatocellular carcinoma downstaging for liver transplantation in the era of systemic combined therapy with anti-VEGF/TKI and immunotherapy

Hepatocellular carcinoma remains a global health challenge affecting close to 1 million cases yearly. Liver transplantation provides the best long-term outcomes for those meeting strict criteria. Efforts have been made to expand these criteria, whereas others have attempted downstaging approaches. Although locoregional approaches to downstaging are appealing and have demonstrated efficacy, limitations and challenges exists including poor imaging modality to assess response and appropriate endpoints along the process. Recent advances in systemic treatments including immune checkpoint inhibitors alone or in combination with tyrosine kinase inhibitors have prompted the discussion regarding their role for downstaging disease prior to transplantation. Here, we provide a review of prior locoregional approaches for downstaging, new systemic agents and their role for downstaging, and finally, key and critical considerations of the assessment, endpoints, and optimal designs in clinical trials to address this key question.

Mutational and transcriptional alterations and clinicopathological factors predict the prognosis of stage I hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

The prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been extensively studied. However, the impact on prognosis of stage I HCC has not been well studied at clincopathological, mutational and transcriptional levels.

Methods

Here we first characterized the influencing factors of prognosis of stage I HCC patients by downloading and analyzing the whole-exome somatic mutation data, messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) transcription data, along with demographic and clinical information of 163 stage I HCC patients from the TCGA database. The relationship between the influencing factors and HCC prognosis was studied in detail, and a prediction Nomogram model was established. Figures and tables were plotted using the R software.

Results

TP53, CTNNB1, TTN, MUC16 and ALB were the top mutated genes in stage I HCC. A series of co-mutations and mutually exclusive mutations were identified. Twenty-nine genes with significant stratification on prognosis were identified, including highly mutated LRP1B, ARID1A and PTPRQ. Patients with wild type (WT) genes unanimously exhibited significantly better overall survival rate than those with mutants. Patients with the top 10% tumor mutational burden (TMB) exhibited significantly worse prognosis than the rest 90%. Further characterization of transcriptional profile revealed that membrane functions, cell skeleton proteins, ion channels, receptor function and cell cycle were comprehensively altered in stage I HCC. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed at clinicopathological, mutational and transcriptional levels. The combined analysis revealed sex, race, TMB, neoplasm histologic grade, Child–Pugh grade, MMRN1, OXT and COX6A2 transcription as independent risk factors. These factors were used to establish a Nomogram model to predict the prognosis of individual HCC patients.

Conclusions

The influencing factors of prognosis of stage I HCC have been characterized for the first time at clinicopathological, mutational and transcriptional levels. A Nomogram model has been established to predict the prognosis. Further validation is needed to confirm the effectiveness and reliability of the model.

National Experience on Waitlist Outcomes for Down-Staging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: High Dropout Rate in All-Comers

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) grants priority listing for liver transplant for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after successful down-staging to Milan criteria. We evaluated the national experience on down-staging by comparing 2 down-staging groups: tumor burden meeting UNOS down-staging (UNOS-DS) inclusion criteria, and all-comers (AC)-DS with initial tumor burden beyond UNOS-DS criteria vs patients always within Milan criteria.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the UNOS database of 23,398 patients listed for liver transplant who had submitted a hepatocellular carcinoma Model for End-Stage Liver Disease exception application from 2010 to 2019, classified as always within Milan (n = 20,579), UNOS-DS (n = 2151), and AC-DS (n = 668).

RESULTS

The 2-year cumulative probabilities of dropout were 19% for Milan, 25% for UNOS-DS (P < .001), and 30% for AC-DS (P < .001). In multivariate analysis of the down-staging groups, factors predicting dropout included Model for End-Stage Liver Disease at listing (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; P < .001) and initial total tumor diameter (HR, 1.04; P = .002). Compared with α-fetoprotein (AFP) level ≤20 ng/mL, AFP levels of 21 to 100, 101 to 1000, and greater than 1000 ng/mL were associated with a higher risk of dropout (HRs, 1.63, 2.06, and 4.58, respectively; P < .001). A subset of all-comers with AFP levels greater than 100 ng/mL had a 2-year probability of dropout of 52% vs 26% for all others beyond Milan criteria (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

All-comers had a significantly higher risk for waitlist dropout compared with the UNOS-DS and Milan groups after initial successful down-staging to Milan criteria. In particular, the subgroup of AC-DS with an AFP level greater than 100 ng/mL had a greater than 50% probability of dropout in the next 2 years. These observations suggest a high likelihood of failure when expanding the indications for down-staging.

Evaluation of liver transplant candidates with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis

Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is anticipated to become the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT) in the United States in the near future. LT is indicated in patients with NASH-related cirrhosis who have medically refractory hepatic decompensation, synthetic dysfunction, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) meeting certain criteria. The objective of LT evaluation is to determine which patient will derive the most benefit from LT with the least risk, thus maximizing the societal benefits of a limited resource. LT evaluation is a multidisciplinary undertaking involving several specialists, assessment tools, and diagnostic testing. Although the steps involved in LT evaluation are relatively similar across different liver diseases, patients with NASH-related cirrhosis have unique demographic and clinical features that affect transplant outcomes and influence their LT evaluation. LT candidates with NASH should be assessed for metabolic syndrome and obesity, malnutrition and sarcopenia, frailty, and cardiovascular disease. Interventions that treat cardiometabolic co-morbidities and improve patients' nutrition and functionality should be considered in order to improve patient outcomes in the waitlist and after LT.

Liver-Directed and Systemic Therapy Options for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver transplant and resection are preferable for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma, but ultimately, tumor location, biology, and patient condition dictate treatment decisions. At the NCCN 2022 Annual Conference, a panel of experts used 3 case studies to develop an evidence-based approach to the treatment of similar patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Moderated by Daniel B. Brown, MD, FSIR, the session focused on current research regarding liver-directed and systemic therapy options.

Patient Selection for Downstaging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Prior to Liver Transplantation—Adjusting the Odds?

Background and Aims: Morphometric features such as the Milan criteria serve as standard criteria for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Since it has been recognized that these criteria are too restrictive and do not adequately display the tumor biology, additional selection parameters are emerging.

Methods: Concise review of the current literature on patient selection for downstaging and LT for HCC outside the Milan criteria.

Results: The major task in patients outside the Milan criteria is the need for higher granularity with patient selection, since the benefit through LT is not uniform. The recent literature clearly shows that beneath tumor size and number, additional selection parameters are useful in the process of patient selection for and during downstaging. For initial patient selection, the alpha fetoprotein (AFP) level adds additional information to the size and number of HCC nodules concerning the chance of successful downstaging and LT. This effect is quantifiable using newer selection tools like the WE (West-Eastern) downstaging criteria or the Metroticket 2.0 criteria. Also an initial PET-scan and/or tumor biopsy can be helpful, especially in the high risk group of patients outside the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria. After this entry selection, the clinical course during downstaging procedures concerning the tumor and the AFP response is of paramount importance and serves as an additional final selection tool.

Conclusion: Selection criteria for liver transplantation in HCC patients are becoming more and more sophisticated, but are still imperfect. The implementation of molecular knowledge will hopefully support a more specific risk prediction for HCC patients in the future, but do not provide a profound basis for clinical decision-making at present.

UNOS Down-Staging Criteria for Liver Transplantation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 25 Studies

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Down-staging is commonly used to select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond Milan criteria (MC) for liver transplantation (LT), but outcomes are heterogenous. We aimed to estimate pooled down-staging success rates, HCC recurrence, and overall survival (OS), stratified by criteria used for baseline tumor burden.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed and EMBASE databases from inception until August 2021 for studies reporting down-staging success (reduction of tumor burden to within MC) and outcomes of adult HCC patients. In addition, we performed a pooled analysis using reconstructed individual participant data to obtain robust estimates for OS.

RESULTS

We screened 1059 articles and included 25 articles involving 3997 patients. Overall, 55.16% (45.49%-64.46%) underwent successful down-staging, and 31.52% (24.03%-40.11%) received LT (by intention-to-treat analysis [ITT]). Among patients who received LT, 16.01% (11.80%-21.37%) developed HCC recurrence. Comparing studies that used the United Network for Organ Sharing Down-Staging (UNOS-DS) criteria versus studies beyond UNOS-DS or did not specify criteria, down-staging success (by ITT) was 83.21% versus 45.93%, P < .001; the proportion who received LT (by ITT) was 48.61% vs 28.60%, P = .030; and HCC recurrence (among patients who received LT) occurred in 9.06% versus 20.42%, P < .001. Among studies that used UNOS-DS criteria, ITT 1- and 5-year OS from the initiation of down-staging treatment was 86% and 58%, respectively, whereas 1- and 5-year post-LT OS was 94% and 74%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Among studies that adhered to UNOS-DS criteria, down-staging was successful in four-fifths of patients, >50% received LT, and post-LT outcomes were excellent. These data provide clinical validation for the utilization of UNOS-DS criteria.

Role of Pretransplant Treatments for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Waiting for Liver Transplantation

Simple Summary

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer in men worldwide and the second leading cause of cancer death. Liver transplantation (LT) is one of the treatment options for patients with HCC. Recently, there have been many reports of the usefulness of locoregional therapy, such as transarterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation, for HCC as pretreatment before LT. In Western countries, locoregional therapy is used to bridge until transplantation to prevent drop-outs from the waiting list or for downstaging to treat patients with advanced HCC who initially exceed the criteria for LT. With the progress of locoregional therapy, new reports on the effects of bridging and downstaging locoregional therapy as pretransplant treatment are increasing in number.

Abstract

Recently, there have been many reports of the usefulness of locoregional therapy such as transarterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as pretreatment before liver transplantation (LT). Locoregional therapy is performed with curative intent in Japan, where living donor LT constitutes the majority of LT due to the critical shortage of deceased donors. However, in Western countries, where deceased donor LT is the main procedure, LT is indicated for early-stage HCC regardless of liver functional reserve, and locoregional therapy is used for bridging until transplantation to prevent drop-outs from the waiting list or for downstaging to treat patients with advanced HCC who initially exceed the criteria for LT. There are many reports of the effect of bridging and downstaging locoregional therapy before LT, and its indications and efficacy are becoming clear. Responses to locoregional therapy, such as changes in tumor markers, the avidity of FDG-PET, etc., are considered useful for successful bridging and downstaging. In this review, the effects of bridging and downstaging locoregional therapy as a pretransplant treatment on the results of transplantation are clarified, focusing on recent reports.

Upper Limits of Downstaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Liver Transplantation

In Europe and the United States, approximately 1100 and 1800 liver transplantations, respectively, are performed every year for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), compared with an annual incidence of 65,000 and 39,000 new cases, respectively. Because of organ shortages, proper patient selection is crucial, especially for those exceeding the Milan criteria. Downstaging is the reduction of the HCC burden to meet the eligibility criteria for liver transplantation. Many techniques can be used in downstaging, including ablation, chemoembolisation, radioembolisation and systemic treatments, with a reported success rate of 60-70%. In recent years, an increasing number of patient responders to downstaging procedures has been included in the waitlist, generally with a comparable five-year post-transplant survival but with a higher probability of dropout than HCC patients within the Milan criteria. While the Milan criteria are generally accepted as the endpoint of downstaging, the upper limits of tumour burden for downstaging HCC for liver transplantation are controversial. Very challenging situations involve HCC patients with large nodules, macrovascular invasion or even extrahepatic metastasis at baseline who respond to increasingly more effective downstaging procedures and who aspire to be placed on the waitlist for transplantation. This narrative review analyses the most important evidence available on cohorts subjected to "extended" downstaging, including HCC patients over the up-to-seven criteria and over the University of California San Francisco downstaging criteria. We also address surrogate markers of biological aggressiveness, such as alpha-fetoprotein and the response stability to locoregional treatments, which are very useful in selecting responders to downstaging procedures for waitlisting inclusion.

Downstaging Outcomes for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results From the Multicenter Evaluation of Reduction in Tumor Size before Liver Transplantation (MERITS-LT) Consortium

BACKGROUND & AIMS

United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) has adopted uniform criteria for downstaging (UNOS-DS) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) before liver transplantation (LT), but the downstaging success rate and intention-to-treat outcomes across broad geographic regions are unknown.

METHODS

In this first multiregional study (7 centers, 4 UNOS regions), 209 consecutive patients with HCC undergoing downstaging based on UNOS-DS criteria were prospectively evaluated from 2016 to 2019.

RESULTS

Probability of successful downstaging to Milan criteria and dropout at 2 years from the initial downstaging procedure was 87.7% and 37.3%, respectively. Pretreatment with lectin-reactive α-fetoprotein ≥10% (hazard ratio, 3.7; P = .02) was associated with increased dropout risk. When chemoembolization (n = 132) and yttrium-90 radioembolization (n = 62) were compared as the initial downstaging treatment, there were no differences in Modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors response, probability of or time to successful downstaging, waiting list dropout, or LT. Probability of LT at 3 years was 46.6% after a median of 17.2 months. In the explant, 17.5% had vascular invasion, and 42.8% exceeded Milan criteria (understaging). The only factor associated with understaging was the sum of the number of lesions plus largest tumor diameter on the last pre-LT imaging, and the odds of understaging increased by 35% per 1-unit increase in this sum. Post-LT survival at 2 years was 95%, and HCC recurrence occurred in 7.9%.

CONCLUSION

In this first prospective multiregional study based on UNOS-DS criteria, we observed a successful downstaging rate of >80% and similar efficacy of chemoembolization and yttrium-90 radioembolization as the initial downstaging treatment. A high rate of tumor understaging was observed despite excellent 2-year post-LT survival of 95%. Additional LRT to reduce viable tumor burden may reduce tumor understaging.

International study on the outcome of locoregional therapy for liver transplant in hepatocellular carcinoma beyond Milan criteria

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Good outcomes after liver transplantation (LT) have been reported after successfully downstaging to Milan criteria in more advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare post-LT outcomes in patients receiving locoregional therapies (LRT) before LT according to Milan criteria and University of California San Francisco downstaging (UCSF-DS) protocol and 'all-comers'.

METHODS

This multicentre cohort study included patients who received any LRT before LT from Europe and Latin America (2000-2018). We excluded patients with alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) above 1,000 ng/ml. Competing risk regression analysis for HCC recurrence was conducted, estimating subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) and corresponding 95% CIs.

RESULTS

From 2,441 LT patients, 70.1% received LRT before LT (n = 1,711). Of these, 80.6% were within Milan, 12.0% within UCSF-DS, and 7.4% all-comers. Successful downstaging was achieved in 45.2% (CI 34.8-55.8) and 38.2% (CI 25.4-52.3) of the UCSF-DS group and all-comers, respectively. The risk of recurrence was higher for all-comers (SHR 6.01 [p <0.0001]) and not significantly higher for the UCSF-DS group (SHR 1.60 [p = 0.32]), compared with patients remaining within Milan. The all-comers presented more frequent features of aggressive HCC and higher tumour burden at explant. Among the UCSF-DS group, an AFP value of ≤20 ng/ml at listing was associated with lower recurrence (SHR 2.01 [p = 0.006]) and better survival. However, recurrence was still significantly high irrespective of AFP ≤20 ng/ml in all-comers.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients within the UCSF-DS protocol at listing have similar post-transplant outcomes compared with those within Milan when successfully downstaged. Meanwhile, all-comers have a higher recurrence and inferior survival irrespective of response to LRT. Additionally, in the UCSF-DS group, an ALP of ≤20 ng/ml might be a novel tool to optimise selection of candidates for LT.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

This study was registered as part of an open public registry (NCT03775863).

LAY SUMMARY

Patients with more extended HCC (within the UCSF-DS protocol) successfully downstaged to the conventional Milan criteria do not have a higher recurrence rate after LT compared with the group remaining in the Milan criteria from listing to transplantation. Moreover, in the UCSF-DS patient group, an ALP value equal to or below 20 ng/ml at listing might be a novel tool to further optimise selection of candidates for LT.

Immunological Markers, Prognostic Factors and Challenges Following Curative Treatments for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortalities worldwide. Patients with early-stage HCC are eligible for curative treatments, such as surgical resection, liver transplantation (LT) and percutaneous ablation. Although curative treatments provide excellent long-term survival, almost 70-80% of patients experience HCC recurrence after curative treatments. Tumor-related factors, including tumor size, number and differentiation, and underlying liver disease, are well-known risk factors for recurrence following curative therapies. Moreover, the tumor microenvironment (TME) also plays a key role in the recurrence of HCC. Many immunosuppressive mechanisms, such as an increase in regulatory T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells with a decrease in cytotoxic T cells, are implicated in HCC recurrence. These suppressive TMEs are also modulated by several factors and pathways, including mammalian target of rapamycin signaling, vascular endothelial growth factor, programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand 1. Based on these mechanisms and the promising results of immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) in advanced HCC, there have been several ongoing adjuvant studies using a single or combination of ICB following curative treatments in HCC. In this review, we strive to provide biologic and immunological markers, prognostic factors, and challenges associated with clinical outcomes after curative treatments, including resection, LT and ablation.

Neutrophil-to-Apolipoprotein A1 Ratio Predicted Overall Survival in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Receiving Transarterial Chemoembolization

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the predictive capability of neutrophil-to-apolipoprotein A1 ratio (NAR) for predicting overall survival (OS) among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We investigated the clinical features of 554 patients with HCC receiving TACE and assessed NAR's predictive value for OS with 222 patients (the discovery cohort) and 332 patients (the validation cohort). The association of NAR with circulation lectin-type oxidized low-density lipoprotein receptor-1-positive (LOX-1+ ) polymorphonuclear myeloid-derived suppressor cells (PMN-MDSCs) was illustrated.

RESULTS

Multivariate Cox regression revealed that lymphocyte count; Tumor, Node, Metastasis (TNM) stage; and NAR were independent prognostic factors in the discovery cohort. The validation cohort confirmed the independent prognostic value of TNM stage and NAR. Patients with low NAR (<2.7) displayed significantly increased OS in the discovery cohort (59.8 months vs. 21 months), the validation group (38.0 months vs. 23.6 months), and the total cohort (44.1 months vs. 22.0 months). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to combine Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) score with discretized NAR. C-index illustrated that NAR-integrated CLIP score was the best model compared with NAR and CLIP score. Furthermore, NAR-CLIP presented superior predictive capacity for 10-, 20-, 30-, 40-, 50-, and 60-month survival compared with CLIP score by survival receiver-operator characteristic analysis in the discovery cohort, validation cohort, and total cohort. NAR was significantly associated with LOX-1+ PMN-MDSCs by linear regression.

CONCLUSION

This study identified NAR as an independent predictor for OS among patients with HCC receiving TACE. NAR reflected circulation LOX-1+ PMN-MDSC level.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The present study identified neutrophil-to-apolipoprotein A1 ratio (NAR) as an independent predictor for overall survival among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving transarterial chemoembolization. NAR reflected circulation level of lectin-type oxidized low-density lipoprotein receptor-1-positive polymorphonuclear myeloid-derived suppressor cells.

The Key Role of Staging Definitions for Assessment of Downstaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

The success of liver transplant (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is dependent on accurate tumor staging using validated imaging criteria, and adherence to acceptable criteria based on tumor size and number. Other factors including α-fetoprotein (AFP) and response to local regional therapy (LRT) have now played a larger role in candidate selection. Tumor downstaging is defined as reduction in the size of viable tumors using LRT to meet acceptable criteria for LT, and serves as a selection tool for a subgroup of HCC with more favorable biology. The application of tumor downstaging requires a structured approach involving three key components in tumor staging-initial tumor stage and eligibility criteria, tumor viability assessment following LRT, and target tumor stage prior to LT-and incorporation of AFP into staging and treatment response assessments. In this review, we provide in-depth discussions of the key role of these staging definitions in ensuring successful outcome.

Expanding the Limits of Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Is There a Limit?

Liver transplantation is a treatment option for hepatocellular carcinoma within Milan criteria. With careful selection practices, patients with larger tumors can do well with successful downstaging followed by liver transplantation and should not be excluded based on tumor size or number alone. When considering expanded criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma, however, survival outcomes after liver transplantation should be comparable with patients without hepatocellular carcinoma. Surrogate measures of tumor biology, such as α-fetoprotein, other biomarkers, and dynamic tumor behavior including response to locoregional therapy can aid in risk stratification of patients before liver transplantation.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: impact of expansion criteria in a multicenter cohort study from a high waitlist mortality region

This study aimed to compare liver transplantation (LT) outcomes and evaluate the potential rise in numbers of LT candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) of different allocation policies in a high waitlist mortality region. Three policies were applied in two Latin American cohorts (1085 HCC transplanted patients and 917 listed patients for HCC): (i) Milan criteria with expansion according to UCSF downstaging (UCSF-DS), (ii) the AFP score, and (iii) restrictive policy or Double Eligibility Criteria (DEC; within Milan + AFP score ≤2). Increase in HCC patient numbers was evaluated in an Argentinian prospective validation set (INCUCAI; NCT03775863). Expansion criteria in policy A showed that UCSF-DS [28.4% (CI 12.8-56.2)] or "all-comers" [32.9% (CI 11.9-71.3)] had higher 5-year recurrence rates compared to Milan, with 10.9% increase in HCC patients for LT. The policy B showed lower recurrence rates for AFP scores ≤2 points, even expanding beyond Milan criteria, with a 3.3% increase. Patients within DEC had lower 5-year recurrence rates compared with those beyond DEC [13.3% (CI 10.1-17.3) vs 24.2% (CI 17.4-33.1; P = 0.0006], without significant HCC expansion. In conclusion, although the application of a stricter policy may optimize the selection process, this restrictive policy may lead to ethical concerns in organ allocation (NCT03775863).

Role of Locoregional Therapies in Patients With Hepatocellular Cancer Awaiting Liver Transplantation

Hepatocellular cancer (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer in the world and the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths. The United Network for Organ Sharing has its own staging criteria for organ allocation, which is a modification of tumor-node-metastasis staging of American Joint Committee on Cancer. For the purpose of clarity, United Network for Organ Sharing staging will be described as uT1, uT2 (Milan criteria), and uT3 (eligible for downstaging) in this review. For those with unresectable HCC or those with advanced liver disease and HCC but within the Milan criteria, liver transplantation is the treatment of choice. Because of prolonged waiting period on the liver transplant list in many parts of the world for deceased donor liver transplantation, there is a serious risk of dropout from the liver transplant list because of tumor progression. For those patients, locoregional therapies might need to be considered, and moreover, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that tumor progression after locoregional therapies might be a surrogate marker of unfavorable tumor biology. There is no consensus on the role or type of locoregional therapies in the management of patients with uT1 and uT2 eligible for liver transplant and of those with lesions larger than uT2 but eligible for downstaging protocol (uT3 lesions). In this review, we examine the role of locoregional therapies in these patients stratified by staging and propose treatment options based on the current evidence of tumor progression rates while awaiting liver transplantation and tumor recurrence rates after liver transplantation.

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.

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.

A 2020 update on liver transplant for hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most frequent liver tumor and is associated with chronic liver disease in 90% of cases. In selected cases, liver transplantation represents an effective therapy with excellent overall survival.

AREA COVERED

Since the introduction of Milan criteria in 1996, numerous alternative selection systems to LT for HCC patients have been proposed. Debate remains about how best to select HCC patients for transplant and how to prioritize them on the waiting list.

EXPERT OPINION

The selection of the best scoring system to propose in the context of LT for HCC is far to be identified. In this review, we analyze and categorize the various selection systems, assessing their roles in the different decisional phases.

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.

Hangzhou criteria as downstaging criteria in hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation: A multicenter study from China

BACKGROUND

The downstaging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been confirmed to benefit liver transplantation (LT) patients whose tumors are beyond the transplantation criteria. Milan criteria (MC), a tumor size and number-based assessment, is currently used as the endpoint in these patients. However, many studies believe that tumor biological behavior should be added to the evaluation criteria for downstaging efficacy. Hence, this study aimed to explore the feasibility of Hangzhou criteria (HC), which introduced tumor grading and alpha-fetoprotein in addition to tumor size and number, as an endpoint of downstaging.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter and retrospective study of 206 patients accepted locoregional therapy (LRT) as downstaging/bridge treatment prior to LT in three centers of China.

RESULTS

Recipients were divided into four groups: failed downstaging to the HC (group A, n = 46), successful downstaging to the HC (group B, n = 30), remained within the HC all the time (group C, n = 113), and tumor progressed (group D, n = 17). The 3-year HCC recurrence probabilities of groups B and C were not significantly different (10.3% vs. 11.6%, P = 0.87). The HCC recurrent rate was significantly higher in group A (52.3%) compared with that in group B/C (P < 0.05). Seven patients (7/76, 9.2%) whose tumor exceeded the the HC were successfully downstaged to the MC, and 39.5% (30/76) to the the HC. In group B, 23 patients remained beyond the MC and their survivals were as well as those of patients within the MC.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to the MC, HC downstaging criteria can give more HCC patients access to LT and furthermore, the outcome of these patients is the same as those matching MC downstaging criteria. Hangzhou downstaging criteria therefore is applicable in clinical practice.

Predictors of outcome after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond Milan criteria

The Milan criteria have been the cornerstone of selection policies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting liver transplantation (LT) globally for over two decades. Many groups have proposed the transplantation of patients with larger and more numerous tumors achieving comparable results. Many of these use radiologic morphometric criteria as surrogates for explant pathology to predict outcomes. Several other indices have been developed both within and beyond Milan incorporating biological indices as well as dynamic markers of response to pre-transplant locoregional treatments and waiting time. These have allowed for successful expansion of transplant selection criteria without compromising outcomes with limited organ supplies. In this review we will discuss the predictors of outcome in patients beyond Milan criteria.

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.

Biomarkers in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Diagnosis, Prognosis and Treatment Response Assessment

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the main cancer-related causes of death worldwide. Thus, there is a constant search for improvement in screening, diagnosis, and treatment strategies to improve the prognosis of this malignancy. The identification of useful biomarkers for surveillance and early HCC diagnosis is still deficient, with available serum biomarkers showing low sensitivity and heterogeneous specificity despite different cut-off points, even when assessed longitudinally, or with a combination of serum biomarkers. In contrast, HCC biomarkers used for prognostic (when associated with clinical outcomes) or predictive purposes (when associated with treatment response) may have an increased clinical role in the near future. Furthermore, some serum biomarkers are already implicated as a treatment selection tool, whether to provide access to certain therapies or to assess clinical benefit after treatment. In the present review we will discuss the clinical utility and foreseen future of HCC biomarkers implicated in surveillance, diagnosis, prognosis, and post-treatment assessment.

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.