Prediction of progression-free survival in patients presenting with hepatocellular carcinoma within the Milan criteria

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Management of Liver Cancer: 2022 Update

The treatment and management of hepatic malignancies can be complex because it encompasses a variety of primary and metastatic malignancies and an assortment of local and systemic treatment options. When to use each of these treatments is critical to ensure the most appropriate care for patients. Interventional radiologists have a key role to play in the delivery of a variety of liver directed treatments including percutaneous ablation, transarterial embolization with bland embolic particles alone, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with injection of a chemotherapeutic emulsion, and transarterial radioembolization (TARE). Based on 9 clinical variants, the appropriateness of each treatment is described in this document. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances in which peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Pre-Transplant Alpha-Fetoprotein > 25.5 and Its Dynamic on Waitlist Are Predictors of HCC Recurrence after Liver Transplantation for Patients Meeting Milan Criteria

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence rates after liver transplantation (LT) range between 8 and 20%. Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels at transplant can predict HCC recurrence, however a defined cut-off value is needed to better stratify patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the rate of HCC recurrence at our centre and to identify predictors, focusing on AFP.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 236 consecutive patients that were waitlisted for HCC who all met the Milan criteria from January 2001 to December 2017 at our liver transplant centre. A total of twenty-nine patients dropped out while they were waitlisted, and 207 patients were included in the final analysis. All survival analyses included the competing-risk model.

RESULTS

The mean age was 56.8 ± 6.8 years. A total of 14% were female (n = 29/207). The median MELD (model for end-stage liver disease) at LT was 12 (9-16). The median time on the waitlist was 92 (41-170) days. The HCC recurrence rate was 16.4% (n = 34/208). The mean time to recurrence was 3.3 ± 2.8 years. The median AFP levels at transplant were higher in patients with HCC recurrence (p < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, the AFP value at transplant that was greater than 25.5 ng/mL (AUC 0.69) was a strong predictor of HCC recurrence after LT [sHR 3.3 (1.6-6.81); p = 0.001]. The HCC cumulative incidence function (CIF) of recurrence at 10 years from LT was significantly higher in patients with AFP > 25.5 ng/mL [34.3% vs. 11.5% (p = 0.001)]. Moreover, an increase in AFP > 20.8%, was significantly associated with HCC recurrence (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, in our retrospective study, the AFP level at transplant > 25.5 ng/mL and its increase greater than 20.8% on the waitlist were strong predictors of HCC recurrence after LT in a cohort of patients that were waitlisted within the Milan criteria. However further studies are needed to validate these data.

High rate of complete histopathological response in hepatocellular carcinoma patients after combined transarterial chemoembolization and stereotactic body radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) presents a curative treatment option in patients with early stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are not eligible for resection or ablation therapy. Due to a risk of up 30% for waitlist drop-out upon tumor progression, bridging therapies are used to halt tumor growth. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and less commonly stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) or a combination of TACE and SBRT, are used as bridging therapies in LT. However, it remains unclear if one of those treatment options is superior. The analysis of explant livers after transplantation provides the unique opportunity to investigate treatment response by histopathology.

AIM

To analyze histopathological response to a combination of TACE and SBRT in HCC in comparison to TACE or SBRT alone.

METHODS

In this multicenter retrospective study, 27 patients who received liver transplantation for HCC were analyzed. Patients received either TACE or SBRT alone, or a combination of TACE and SBRT as bridging therapy to liver transplantation. Liver explants of all patients who received at least one TACE and/or SBRT were analyzed for the presence of residual vital tumor tissue by histopathology to assess differences in treatment response to bridging therapies. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher-Freeman-Halton exact test, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney-U tests.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients received TACE only, four patients SBRT only, and nine patients a combination therapy of TACE and SBRT. There were no significant differences between groups regarding age, sex, etiology of underlying liver disease or number and size of tumor lesions. Strikingly, analysis of liver explants revealed that almost all patients in the TACE and SBRT combination group (8/9, 89%) showed no residual vital tumor tissue by histopathology, whereas TACE or SBRT alone resulted in significantly lower rates of complete histopathological response (0/14, 0% and 1/4, 25%, respectively, P value < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggests that a combination of TACE and SBRT increases the rate of complete histopathological response compared to TACE or SBRT alone in bridging to liver transplantation.

Donation After Circulatory Death Is Associated With Similar Posttransplant Survival in All but the Highest-Risk Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients

Liver transplantation (LT) recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receive a higher proportion of livers from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors compared with non-HCC etiologies. Nevertheless, data on outcomes in patients with HCC receiving DCD grafts are limited. We evaluated the influence of DCD livers on post-LT outcome among HCC patients. We identified 7563 patients in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database who underwent LT with Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score exceptions from 2012 to 2016, including 567 (7.5%) who received a DCD donor organ and 6996 (92.5%) who received a donation after brain death (DBD) donor organ. Kaplan-Meier probabilities of post-LT HCC recurrence at 3 years were 7.6% for DCD and 6.4% for DBD recipients (P = 0.67) and post-LT survival at 3 years was 81.1% versus 85.5%, respectively (P = 0.008). On multivariate analysis, DCD donor (hazard ratio, 1.38; P = 0.005) was an independent predictor of post-LT mortality. However, a survival difference after LT was only observed in subgroups at higher risk for HCC recurrence including Risk Estimation of Tumor Recurrence After Transplant (RETREAT) score ≥4 (DCD 57.0% versus DBD 72.6%; P = 0.02), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥100 (60.1% versus 76.9%; P = 0.049), and multiple viable tumors on last imaging before LT (69.9% versus 83.1%; P = 0.002). In this analysis of HCC patients receiving DCD versus DBD livers in the UNOS database, we found that patients with a low-to-moderate risk of HCC recurrence (80%-90% of the DCD cohort) had equivalent survival regardless of donor type. It appears that DCD donation can best be used to increase the donor pool for HCC patients with decompensated cirrhosis or partial response/stable disease after locoregional therapy with AFP at LT <100 ng/mL.

Bi-directional roles of IRF-1 on autophagy diminish its prognostic value as compared with Ki67 in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

The prognostic values of IRF-1 and Ki-67 for liver transplantation (LT) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were investigated, as well as the mechanisms of IRF-1 in tumor suppression. Adult orthotropic liver transplantation cases (N = 127) were involved in the analysis. A significant decreased recurrence free survival (RFS) was found in the Ki-67 positive groups. Ki-67, tumor microemboli, the Milan and UCSF criteria were found to be independent risk factors for RFS. In LT for HCC beyond the Milan criteria, a significant decrease in RFS was found in the IRF-1 negative groups. In SK-Hep1 cells, an increase in apoptosis and decrease in autophagy were observed after IFN-γ stimulation, which was accompanied with increasing IRF-1 levels. When IRF-1 siRNA or a caspase inhibitor were used, reductions in LC3-II were diminished or disappeared after IFN-γ stimulation, suggesting that IFN-γ inhibited autophagy via IRF-1 expression and caspase activation. However, after IRF-1 siRNA was introduced, a reduction in LC3-II was found. Thus basic expression of IRF-1 was also necessary for autophagy. IRF-1 may be used as a potential target for HCC treatment based on its capacity to affect apoptosis and autophagy. Ki-67 shows great promise for the prediction of HCC recurrence in LT and can be used as an aid in the selection of LT candidates.

Impact of Pretransplant Bridging Locoregional Therapy for Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Within Milan Criteria Undergoing Liver Transplantation: Analysis of 3601 Patients From the US Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of pretransplant bridging locoregional therapy (LRT) on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence and survival after liver transplantation (LT) in patients meeting Milan criteria (MC).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Pre-LT LRT mitigates tumor progression and waitlist dropout in HCC patients within MC, but data on its impact on post-LT recurrence and survival remain limited.

METHODS

Recurrence-free survival and post-LT recurrence were compared among 3601 MC patients with and without bridging LRT utilizing competing risk Cox regression in consecutive patients from 20 US centers (2002-2013).

RESULTS

Compared with 747 LT recipients not receiving LRT, 2854 receiving LRT had similar 1, 3, and 5-year recurrence-free survival (89%, 77%, 68% vs 85%, 75%, 68%; P = 0.490) and 5-year post-LT recurrence (11.2% vs 10.1%; P = 0.474). Increasing LRT number [3 LRTs: hazard ratio (HR) 2.1, P < 0.001; 4+ LRTs: HR 2.5, P < 0.001), and unfavorable waitlist alphafetoprotein trend significantly predicted post-LT recurrence, whereas LRT modality did not. Treated patients achieving complete pathologic response (cPR) had superior 5-year RFS (72%) and lower post-LT recurrence (HR 0.52, P < 0.001) compared with both untreated patients (69%; P = 0.010; HR 1.0) and treated patients not achieving cPR (67%; P = 0.010; HR 1.31, P = 0.039), who demonstrated increased recurrence compared with untreated patients in multivariate analysis controlling for pretransplant and pathologic factors (HR 1.32, P = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Bridging LRT in HCC patients within MC does not improve post-LT survival or HCC recurrence in the majority of patients who fail to achieve cPR. The need for increasing LRT treatments and lack of alphafetoprotein response to LRT independently predict post-LT recurrence, serving as a surrogate for underlying tumor biology which can be utilized for prioritization of HCC LT candidates.

Close observation versus upfront treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma: are the exception points worth the risk?

INTRODUCTION

To assess the outcomes of immediate LDT versus observation strategies for T1 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with respect to progression beyond Milan and survival.

METHOD

T1 HCCs were retrospectively reviewed from a multidisciplinary tumour board database between September 2007 and May 2015. In the observation group, T1 lesions were observed until the tumour grew to meet T2 criteria (=2 cm). The treatment group consisted of T1 lesions treated at diagnosis with liver directed therapy (LDT). Kaplan-Meier plots were constructed for tumour progression beyond Milan and overall survival.

RESULTS

87 patients (observation n=56; LDT n=31) were included in the study. A total of 22% (n=19) of patients progressed beyond Milan with no difference in progression between treatment and observation groups (19% vs 23%, p=0.49). Median time to progression beyond Milan was 16 months. Overall transplantation rate was 22% (observation group n=16; treatment group n=3, p=0.04). Median survival was 55 months with LDT versus 36 months in the observation group (p=0.22). In patients who progressed to T2 (n=60), longer time to T2 progression was a predictor of improved survival (HR=0.94, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.99, p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate LDT of T1 lesions was not associated with increased risk of progression beyond Milan criteria when compared with an observation approach. Longer time to T2 progression was associated with increased survival and may be a surrogate for favourable tumour biology.

Treatment Options in Patients Awaiting Liver Transplantation with Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Cholangiocarcinoma

Liver transplantation (LT) provides a good chance of cure for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). Patients with HCC on a waiting list for LT are at risk for tumor progression and dropout. Treatment of HCC with locoregional therapies may lessen dropout due to tumor progression. Strict selection and adherence to the LT criteria for patients with pCCA before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy are critical for optimal outcome with LT. This article reviews the existing data for the various treatment strategies used for patients with HCC and pCCA awaiting LT.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria Radiologic Management of Hepatic Malignancy

Management of primary and secondary hepatic malignancy is a complex problem. Achieving optimal care for this challenging population often requires the involvement of multiple medical and surgical disciplines. Because of the wide variety of potential therapies, treatment protocols for various malignancies continue to evolve. Consequently, development of appropriate therapeutic algorithms necessitates consideration of medical options, such as systemic chemotherapy; surgical options, such as resection or transplantation; and loco-regional therapies, such as thermal ablation and transarterial embolization techniques. This article provides a review of treatment strategies for the three most common subtypes of hepatic malignancy treated with loco-regional therapies: hepatocellular carcinoma, neuroendocrine metastases, and colorectal metastases. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every three years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Liver-allocation policies for patients affected by HCC in Europe

The main goal of organ allocation systems is to guarantee an equal access to the limited resource of liver grafts for every patients on the waiting list, balancing between the ethical principles of equity, utility, benefit, need, and fairness. The European heath care scenario is very complex, as it is essentially decentralized and each Nation and Regions inside the nation, operate on a significant degree of autonomy. Furthermore the epidemiology of liver diseases and HCC, which is different among European countries, clearly inpacts on indications and priorities. The aims of this review are to analyze liver allocation policies for hepatocellular carcinoma, among different European. The European area considered for this analysis included 5 macro-areas or countries, which have similar policies for liver sharing and allocation: Centro Nazionale Trapianti (CNT) in Italy; Eurotransplant (Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Hungary, Slovenia, and Croatia); Organizacion Nacional de Transplantes (ONT) in Spain; Etablissement français des Greffes (EfG) in France; NHS Blood & Transplant (NHSBT) in the United Kingdom and Ireland; Scandiatransplant (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Iceland). Each identified area, as network for organ sharing in Europe, adopts an allocation system based either on a policy center oriented or on a policy patient oriented. Priorization of patients affected by HCC in the waiting list for deceased donors liver transplant worldwide is dominated by 2 main principles: urgency and utility. Despite the absence of a common organs allocation policy over the Eurpean countries, long-term survival patients listed for transplant due to HCC are comparable to the long-term survival reported in the UNOS register. However, as the principles of allocation are being re-discussed and new proposals emerge, and the epidemiology of liver disease changes, an effort toward a common system is highly advisable.

Hepatocellular carcinoma in elderly patients: challenges and solutions

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the second most common cause of death by cancer in the world. Due to the delayed HCC development in hepatitis C carriers and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, the incidence of HCC in the elderly is increasing and is becoming a global health issue. Elderly patients with HCC should be assessed through proper oncologic approach, namely, screening tools for frailty (Geriatric-8 or Vulnerable Elders Survey-13) and comprehensive geriatric assessment. This review of the literature supports the same treatment options for elderly patients as for younger patients, in elderly patients selected as fit following proper oncogeriatric assessment. Unfit patients should be managed through a multidisciplinary team involving both oncological and geriatrician professionals. Specific studies and recommendations for HCC in the elderly should be encouraged.

Liver transplantation for hepatobiliary malignancies: a new era of "Transplant Oncology" has begun

The indications of liver transplantation for hepatobiliary malignancies have been carefully expanded in a stepwise fashion, despite the fundamental limitations in oncological, immunological, and technical aspects. A new era of "Transplant Oncology," the fusion of transplant surgery and surgical oncology, has begun, and we stand at the dawn of a paradigm shift in multidisciplinary cancer treatment. For hepatocellular carcinoma, new strategies have been undertaken to select recipients based on biological and dynamic markers instead of conventional morphological and static parameters, opening the doors for a more deliberate expansion of the Milan criteria and locoregional therapies before liver transplantation. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by liver transplantation for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma developed by the Mayo Clinic provided excellent outcomes in a US multicenter study; however, the surgical indications are not necessarily universal and await international validation. Similarly, an aggressive multidisciplinary approach has been applied for other tumors, including intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, hepatoblastoma, liver metastases from colorectal and neuroendocrine primary and gastrointestinal stromal tumors as well as rare tumors, such as hepatic undifferentiated embryonal sarcoma and infantile choriocarcinoma. In conclusion, liver transplantation is an important option for hepatobiliary malignancies; however, prospective studies are urgently needed to ensure the appropriate patient selection, organ allocation and living donation policies, and administration of antineoplastic immunosuppression.

The role of 90Y-radioembolization in downstaging primary and secondary hepatic malignancies: a systematic review

Radioembolization (RE) is an emerging treatment strategy for patients with primary hepatic malignancies and metastatic liver disease. Though RE is primarily performed in the palliative setting, a shift toward the curative setting is seen. Currently, hepatic resection and in selected cases liver transplantation are the only curative options for patients with a hepatic malignancy. Unfortunately, at diagnosis most patients are not eligible for liver surgery due to the imbalance between the necessary liver resection and the remaining liver remnant. However, in borderline resectable cases, tumor volume reduction and/or increasing the future liver remnant can lead to a resectable situation. The combination of selective tumor treatment, the induction of hypertrophy of untreated liver segments, and its favourable toxicity profile make RE an appealing strategy for downstaging. The present review discusses the possibilities for RE in the preoperative setting as a downstaging tool or as a bridge to liver transplantation.

Prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma biological behavior in patient selection for liver transplantation

Morphological criteria have always been considered the benchmark for selecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients for liver transplantation (LT). These criteria, which are often inappropriate to express the tumor’s biological behavior and aggressiveness, offer only a static view of the disease burden and are frequently unable to correctly stratify the tumor recurrence risk after LT. Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and its progression as well as AFP-mRNA, AFP-L3%, des-γ-carboxyprothrombin, inflammatory markers and other serological tests appear to be correlated with post-transplant outcomes. Several other markers for patient selection including functional imaging studies such as ¹⁸F-FDG-PET imaging, histological evaluation of tumor grade, tissue-specific biomarkers, and molecular signatures have been outlined in the literature. HCC growth rate and response to pre-transplant therapies can further contribute to the transplant evaluation process of HCC patients. While AFP, its progression, and HCC response to pre-transplant therapy have already been used as a part of an integrated prognostic model for selecting patients, the utility of other markers in the transplant setting is still under investigation. This article intends to review the data in the literature concerning predictors that could be included in an integrated LT selection model and to evaluate the importance of biological aggressiveness in the evaluation process of these patients.

Strategies to improve outcome of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving a liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is the only therapeutic option which allows to treat both, the hepatocellular carcinoma and the underlying liver disease. Indeed, liver transplantation is considered the standard of care for a subset of patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. However, tumour recurrence rates are as high as 20%, and once the recurrence is established the therapeutic options are scarce and with little impact on prognosis. Strategies to minimize tumour recurrence and thus to improve outcome may be classified into 3 groups: (1) An adequate selection of candidates for liver transplantation by using the Milan criteria; (2) An optimized management within waiting list including prioritization of patients at high risk of tumour progression, and the implementation of bridging therapies, particularly when the expected length within the waiting list is longer than 6 mo; and (3) Tailored immunosuppression comprising reduced exposure to calcineurin inhibitors, particularly early after liver transplantation, and the addition of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors. In the present manuscript the available scientific evidence supporting these strategies is comprehensively reviewed, and future directions are provided for novel research approaches, which may contribute to the final target: to cure more patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and with an improved long term outcome.

Increased long-term survival among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after implementation of Model for End-stage Liver Disease score

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Assignment of Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception points to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who fall within Milan criteria, which began in 2003, increases their priority on liver transplantation waitlists. However, little is known about how this change affected survival of all patients with HCC (transplant eligible and ineligible). We compared long-term survival of HCC patients before and after this change.

METHODS

We performed a large population-based cohort study by using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry to investigate survival times of patients with HCC before those who met the Milan criteria were given MELD exception points (1998-2003) and afterward (2004-2010) by using Kaplan-Meier methods. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models evaluated independent predictors of survival.

RESULTS

During 2004-2010, a significantly higher percentage of patients with HCC survived for 5 years compared with 1998-2003 (21.9% vs 13.0%, P < .001). This difference remained significant among all treatment groups (no therapy: 15.2% vs 10.2%, P < .001; local tumor destruction: 37.6% vs 22.1%, P < .001; resection: 55.5% vs 39.2%, P < .001; transplantation: 77.2% vs 73.1%, P = .12). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, inclusive of sex, age, ethnicity, Milan criteria, number and stage of tumor, and time period, showed increased survival of patients during 2004-2010 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.91; P < .001). Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Asians (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.86; P < .001) and Hispanics (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.95; P < .001) had longer survival times, whereas blacks had a trend toward shorter survival times (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.98-1.13; P = .16).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HCC who met Milan criteria had significantly longer survival times after implementation of the MELD exception points, regardless of sex or ethnicity. Blacks continued to have the lowest rates of 5-year survival.

Neo-adjuvant therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation: Where do we stand?

Liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within Milan criteria is a widely accepted optimal therapy. Neo-adjuvant therapy before transplantation has been used as a bridging therapy to prevent dropout during the waiting period and as a down-staging method for the patient with intermediate HCC to qualify for liver transplantation. Transarterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation are the most commonly used method for locoregional therapy. The data associated with newer modalities including drug-eluting beads, radioembolization with Y90, stereotactic radiation therapy and sorafenib will be discussed as a tool for converting advanced HCC to LT candidates. The concept “ablate and wait” has gained the popularity where mandated observation period after neo-adjuvant therapy allows for tumor biology to become apparent, thus has been recommended after down-staging. The role of neo-adjuvant therapy with conjunction of “ablate and wait” in living donor liver transplantation for intermediate stage HCC is also discussed in the paper.

Validation of a dropout assessment model of candidates with/without hepatocellular carcinoma on a common liver transplant waiting list

The model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score is often used for liver graft allocation, and patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receive exception points (22 in the US). A better model is desirable for patients with HCC as they tend to have a privileged access to transplantation, without taking HCC characteristics into account. A new simpler model designed from a training set of US patients (n = 49 026) was tested on two validation sets (US and UK patient cohorts with, respectively, n = 20 475 and n = 1781). The risk of dropout was between 3.2 and 7.8% at 3 months in patients with HCC, and was captured into a score, including HCC size, HCC number, AFP, and MELD (-37.8 +1.9*MELD+5.9 if HCC Nb ≥ 2 + 5.9 if AFP > 400 + 21.2 if HCC size > 1 cm). This new model could be validated on external US and UK liver candidate cohorts. It provides a dynamic and more accurate assessment of dropout than the use of exception MELD (C-indices of 66.2-73.7% vs. 52.7-56.6%). In addition, the model shows a similar distribution as MELD for patients with non-HCC, and both scores could be used in parallel for the management of waiting-list patients with and without HCC.

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

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

Systematic review of efficacy and outcomes of salvage liver transplantation after primary hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Upfront liver transplantation is the gold standard in the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cirrhosis, but a shortage of donor organs negatively impacts on survival outcomes, with significant disease progression during long waiting lists. This systematic review evaluates the safety and efficacy of salvage liver transplantation (SLT) as treatment for recurrent HCC after initial hepatic resection.

METHODS

Electronic searches of Pubmed, Embase, and Medline databases identified 130 abstracts, from which 16 eligible studies comprising 319 patients were selected for review. Studies adopting SLT following primary hepatic resection for recurrent HCC with more than five patients were included. Demographic details, morbidity and mortality indices, and survival outcomes were collected from each study and were tabulated.

RESULTS

All patients included in the studies had liver cirrhosis, with the majority being Child-Pugh A (50%) and B (33%). The etiology of liver disease was hepatitis B in the majority of patients (84%). Disease recurrence occurred in 27-80% of patients at a median of 21.4 months (range 14.5-34) following initial resection. SLTs were performed on 41% of recurrences, and were associated with biliary complications (8%), infection (11%), bleeding (8%), and vascular complications (7%). There were 18 perioperative deaths (5.6%). The median 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall and disease-free survival was 89%, 80%, and 62%, and 86%, 68%, and 67%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Synthesis of available observational studies suggests that SLT following primary hepatic resection is a highly applicable strategy with long-term survival outcomes that are comparable to upfront liver transplantation.

Bridging and downstaging treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation

Several therapeutic procedures have been proposed as bridging treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting liver transplantation (LT). The most used treatments include transarterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation. Surgical resection has also been successfully used as a bridging procedure, and LT should be considered a rescue treatment in patients with previous HCC resection who experience tumor recurrence or post-treatment severe decompensation of liver function. The aims of bridging treatments include decreasing the waiting list dropout rate before transplantation, reducing HCC recurrence after transplantation, and improving post-transplant overall survival. To date, no data from prospective randomized studies are available; however, for HCC patients listed for LT within the Milan criteria, prolonging the waiting time over 6-12 mo is a risk factor for tumor spread. Bridging treatments are useful in containing tumor progression and decreasing dropout. Furthermore, the response to pre-LT treatments may represent a surrogate marker of tumor biological aggressiveness and could therefore be evaluated to prioritize HCC candidates for LT. Lastly, although a definitive conclusion can not be reached, the experiences reported to date suggest a positive impact of these treatments on both tumor recurrence and post-transplant patient survival. Advanced HCC may be downstaged to achieve and maintain the current conventional criteria for inclusion in the waiting list for LT. Recent studies have demonstrated that successfully downstaged patients can achieve a 5-year survival rate comparable to that of patients meeting the conventional criteria without requiring downstaging.

Hepatocellular carcinoma locoregional therapies for patients in the waiting list. Impact on transplantability and recurrence rate

The practice of treating candidates for liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with locoregional therapies, is common in most transplant centers. However, for T1 tumors and expected waiting times to LT <6 months, there is no evidence that these treatments are beneficial. For T2 tumors and for longer waiting times, neo-adjuvant treatments are usually performed with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), ablation techniques and liver resection in selected cases. The treatment choice should be based on the BCLC staging system. At present, there is no evidence of the superiority of ablation/resection vs. TACE, but some studies showed better results of the former in achieving a complete response. The response to neo-adjuvant treatments should be evaluated through mRECIST criteria, but few studies adopted these criteria and properly analyzed factors affecting response. The simultaneous evaluation of the impact of neo-adjuvant therapies on dropout rate, post-LT HCC recurrence and patient survival is rarely reported. Tumor stage and volume, alpha-fetoprotein levels, response to treatments and liver function affect pre-LT outcomes. These same factors, together with vascular invasion and poor tumor differentiation, are major determinants of poor post-LT outcomes. Due to the low number of prospective studies with well-defined entry criteria and the variability of results, the role of downstaging is still to be defined. Novel molecular markers seem promising for the estimation of prognosis and/or response to treatments. With a persistent scarcity of organ donors, neo-adjuvant treatments can help identify patients with different probabilities of cancer progression, and consequently balance the priority of HCC and non-HCC-candidates through revised additional scores for HCC.

Artificial neural network model for predicting 5-year mortality after surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma: a nationwide study

BACKGROUND

To validate the use of artificial neural network (ANN) models for predicting 5-year mortality in HCC and to compare their predictive capability with that of logistic regression (LR) models.

METHODS

This study retrospectively compared LR and ANN models based on initial clinical data for 22,926 HCC surgery patients from 1998 to 2009. A global sensitivity analysis was also performed to assess the relative significance of input parameters in the system model and to rank the importance of variables.

RESULTS

Compared to the LR models, the ANN models had a better accuracy rate in 96.57 % of cases, a better Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic in 0.34 of cases, and a better receiver operating characteristic curves in 88.51 % of cases. Surgeon volume was the most influential (sensitive) parameter affecting 5-year mortality followed by hospital volume and Charlson co-morbidity index.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with the conventional LR model, the ANN model in this study was more accurate in predicting 5-year mortality. Further studies of this model may consider the effect of a more detailed database that includes complications and clinical examination findings as well as more detailed outcome data.

Priority of candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma awaiting liver transplantation can be reduced after successful bridge therapy

The allocation rules for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are awaiting liver transplantation (LT) are a difficult issue and are continually evolving. To reduce tumor progression or down-stage advanced disease, most transplant centers have adopted the practice of treating HCC candidates with resection or locoregional therapies. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of bridge therapy in preventing removal from the waiting list for death/sickness severity or tumor progression beyond the Milan criteria and in determining posttransplant outcomes. The removal rates for 315 adult patients with HCC who were listed for LT were analyzed and were correlated to responses to bridge therapy with a competing risk analysis. The 3-, 6-, and 12-month dropout rates were 3.5%, 6.5%, and 19.9%, respectively, and they were significantly affected by the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (P = 0.032), the tumor stage at diagnosis (P = 0.041), and the response to bridge therapy (P < 0.001). The stratification of candidates by the tumor stage and the response to bridge therapy showed that patients with T2 tumors who achieved only a partial response or no response to bridge therapy had the highest dropout rates, and they were followed by patients with successfully down-staged T3-T4a tumors (P = 0.037). Patients with T2 tumors who had a complete response and patients with T1 tumors had similar dropout rates (P = 0.964). The response to bridge therapy significantly affected both the recurrence rate of 176 transplant patients (P = 0.017) and the overall intention-to-treat survival rate (P = 0.001). In conclusion, the response to therapy is a potentially effective tool for prioritizing HCC patients for LT as well as select cases with different risks of tumor recurrence after transplantation.

General overview of neo-adjuvant therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation: necessity or option?

Because of its increasing incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma, it is now recognized as a worldwide health problem affecting mostly patients with chronic liver disease. Liver transplantation is the optimal therapy and achieves its best results in patients with small tumour burden. In an effort to prevent tumour progression and patient dropout from the transplant wait list, the concept and utilization of neo-adjuvant locoregional therapies have gained relevance in the past few years. Moreover, good and maintained response to therapy is now considered a surrogate of favourable tumour biology, therefore aiding the patient transplant selection process. Herein, we review the current role of neo-adjuvant therapies and revise concepts of tumour 'downstaging' or 'bridging therapy' in the setting of liver transplantation. In addition, we explore the debate of implementing locoregional therapy for patients with small tumours and short waiting times to liver transplantation.

Liver Match, a prospective observational cohort study on liver transplantation in Italy: study design and current practice of donor-recipient matching

BACKGROUND

The Liver Match is an observational cohort study that prospectively enrolled liver transplantations performed at 20 out of 21 Italian Transplant Centres between June 2007 and May 2009. Aim of the study is to investigate the impact of donor/recipient matching on outcomes. In this report we describe the study methodology and provide a cross-sectional description of donor and recipient characteristics and of graft allocation.

METHODS

Adult primary transplants performed with deceased heart-beating donors were included. Relevant information on donors and recipients, organ procurement and allocation were prospectively entered in an ad hoc database within the National Transplant Centre web-based Network. Data were blindly analysed by an independent Biostatistical Board.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 1530 donor/recipient matches. Median donor age was 56 years. Female donors (n = 681, median 58, range 12-92 years) were older than males (n = 849, median 53, range 2-97 years, p < 0.0001). Donors older than 60 years were 42.2%, including 4.2% octogenarians. Brain death was due to non-traumatic causes in 1126 (73.6%) cases. Half of the donor population was overweight, 10.1% was obese and 7.6% diabetic. Hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) was present in 245 (16.0%) donors. The median Donor Risk Index (DRI) was 1.57 (>1.7 in 35.8%). The median cold ischaemia time was 7.3h (≥ 10 in 10.6%). Median age of recipients was 54 years, and 77.7% were males. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was the most frequent indication overall (44.4%), being a coindication in roughly 1/3 of cases, followed by viral cirrhosis without HCC (28.2%) and alcoholic cirrhosis without HCC (10.2%). Hepatitis C virus infection (with or without HCC) was the most frequent etiologic factor (45.9% of the whole population and 71.4% of viral-related cirrhosis), yet hepatitis B virus infection accounted for 28.6% of viral-related cirrhosis, and HBcAb positivity was found in 49.7% of recipients. The median Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) at transplant was 12 in patients with HCC and 18 in those without. Multivariate analysis showed a slight but significant inverse association between DRI and MELD at transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

The deceased donor population in Italy has a high-risk profile compared to other countries, mainly due to older donor age. Almost half of the grafts are transplanted in recipients with HCC. Higher risk donors tend to be preferentially allocated to recipients with HCC, who are usually less ill and older. No other relevant allocation strategy is currently adopted at national level.

Intraoperative ultrasound score to predict recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after radical treatments

Despite the high complete necrosis rate of radio-frequency ablation (RFA) or the complete removal following curative hepatic resection (HR), recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a significant problem. The aim of the study is to identify some intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) patterns, predicting intrahepatic recurrences. From January 1997 to July 2009, 410 patients with HCC were treated (162 HR and 248 RFA through a surgical access). All patients were submitted to IOUS examination: 148 IOUS were performed during the laparotomic access while 262 IOUS were performed during the laparoscopic access. Primary HCC was classified according to diameter, HCC pattern (nodular or infiltrative), echogenicity (hyper- or hypo-echoic), echotexture (homogeneous or inhomogeneous), capsular invasion, mosaic pattern, nodule in nodule aspect and infiltration of portal vessels. Number of HCC nodules was also considered. Multivariate analysis (Cox model) was performed to determine features associated with recurrent HCC using IOUS patterns that independently predicted recurrent HCC, a IOUS score was developed. The patients were followed for 3-127 months, (median follow-up: 21.5 months). In 220 patients (54%), intrahepatic recurrences occurred. In 155 patients (38%), distant intrahepatic recurrences arose in different segments at the primary tumor site. In 65 HCC cases (16%), local recurrences were found. At multivariate analysis, multiple nodules, HCC diameter (>20 mm), HCC pattern (infiltrative), hyperechoic nodule and portal infiltration were statistically significant for risk factor of intrahepatic recurrences. Therefore, a IOUS scoring system was calculated on the basis of multivariate analysis and identified three risk categories of patients: in group 1 recurrences occurred in 37%, group 2 in 46% and group 3 in 66% (p = 0.0001). IOUS is an accurate staging tool during "surgical" procedures. This study showed an added value of IOUS: it permitted to identify ultrasound patterns, which can predict the risk of HCC recurrences. The calculated IOUS score permits to intraoperatively evaluate the actual surgical choice and to program the best treatment strategies during the follow-up period.

Transfusion has no effect on recurrence in hepatitis C after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

The literature suggests that blood product transfusions have a negative impact on the survival of liver transplant patients. We investigated the impact of intraoperative blood product usage on the survival of liver transplantation patients being transplanted for hepatitis C-related end-stage liver disease. In addition, we analyzed a potentially more sensitive metric, namely disease recurrence and fibrosis progression, obtained from follow-up liver biopsies.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 194 consecutive patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) undergoing liver transplantation. To investigate the effect of red blood cell (RBC) or platelet transfusions on post-transplant HCV recurrence, hepatic biopsy data from 4 months and 1 year after transplantation were studied. In addition, survival data were analyzed.

RESULTS

There was no effect of intraoperative RBC or platelet transfusion on either 1- or 5-year patient survival following liver transplantation. There was no difference in HCV disease recurrence or progression of hepatic fibrosis at 4 months or 1 year attributable either to RBC or to platelet transfusion.

CONCLUSION

This study was not able to confirm an effect on the survival of HCV-infected liver transplant patients related to intraoperative transfusion of RBCs or platelets. In addition, these transfusions had no effect on HCV recurrence or fibrosis progression. This is not to condone a liberal transfusion practice, but rather to reassure that when clinically indicated, transfusion does not have a significant impact on patient survival or disease recurrence in HCV-infected liver transplant patients.