Financial Burden of Liver Transplant vs Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Case Report: ALPPS hepatectomy, an alternative to liver transplantation in central PRETEXT III hepatoblastomas: a case series

Introduction

Hepatoblastoma is the most common malignant primary liver tumor in the pediatric population, accounting for 67% of cases in the United States. Surgical resection is the only curative treatment option; however, it can be performed in only 10% of patients with primary tumors. The two most common limitations for resection are the need for extensive resections and tumors in central locations. The therapeutic hypertrophy of healthy tissue achieved with ALPPS (Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein ligation for Staged Hepatectomy) enables larger resections and has been successfully employed in the pediatric population in recent years.

Objective

To present three cases of patients with centrally located PRETEXT II or III hepatoblastomas who underwent ALPPS procedure as a viable therapeutic alternative to liver transplantation.

Discussion and results

Central PRETEXT III hepatoblastomas are typically indications for liver transplantation. Transplantation offers high five-year survival rates (73%). However, the associated morbidity, healthcare system costs, and limited availability make it necessary to explore alternative options. Series have reported the successful application of the ALPPS procedure in PRETEXT II and PRETEXT III hepatoblastomas in other locations. Therapeutically induced hypertrophy, characterized by an increase in the volume of healthy tissue in unaffected lobes or segments, enabled the resection of previously deemed unresectable lesions. The patients experienced uncomplicated postoperative courses and expected reduction in tumor markers. Chemotherapy selection followed the guidelines outlined in Block C of the SIOPEL IV protocol.

Conclusions

ALPPS hepatectomy is a viable therapeutic option for patients with centrally located PRETEXT III or II hepatoblastomas.

Patients Benefit from Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma beyond Milan Criteria without Harming the Health Care System

Liver transplantation (LT) is the only definitive treatment to cure hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhosis. Waiting-list candidates are selected by the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD). However, many indications are not sufficiently represented by labMELD. For HCC, patients are selected by Milan-criteria: Milan-in qualifies for standard exception (SE) and better organ access on the waiting list; while Milan-out patients are restricted to labMELD and might benefit from extended criteria donor (ECD)-grafts. We analyzed a cohort of 102 patients (2011−2020). Patients with labMELD (no SE, Milan-out, n = 56) and matchMELD (SE-HCC, Milan-in, n = 46) were compared. The median overall survival was not significantly different (p = 0.759). No difference was found in time on the waiting list (p = 0.881), donor risk index (p = 0.697) or median costs (p = 0.204, EUR 43,500 (EUR 17,800−185,000) for labMELD and EUR 30,300 (EUR 17,200−395,900) for matchMELD). Costs were triggered by a cut-off labMELD of 12 points. Overall, the deficit increased by EUR 580 per labMELD point. Cost drivers were re-operation (p < 0.001), infection with multiresistant germs (p = 0.020), dialysis (p = 0.017), operation time (p = 0.012) and transfusions (p < 0.001). In conclusion, this study demonstrates that LT for HCC is successful and cost-effective in low labMELD patients independent of Milan-criteria. Therefore, ECD-grafts are favorized in Milan-out HCC patients with low labMELD.

Emerging therapies for the treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: A systematic review

To describe the mechanism, efficacy, and safety of novel agents that have reached phase 3 clinical trials for the treatment of biopsy-proven nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). A literature search was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines of MEDLINE databases (1990 to October 2020) with the following MeSH terms: NASH, nonalcoholic liver disease, fatty liver, liver diseases, steatohepatitis, liver fibrosis; combined with obeticholic acid, FXR agonist, cenicriviroc, CCR5 receptor antagonist, elafibranor, PPAR, selonsertib, ASK-1 inhibitor, resmetirom, THR-β receptor, arachidyl amido cholanoic acid (Aramchol™), and SCD-1 modulator. Results were verified via clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar, and Google. Articles were included if the medications of interest had ongoing or completed phase 3 trials in biopsy-proven NASH with outcomes directly related to NASH resolution. Eleven studies were identified involving obeticholic acid (OCA), elafibranor, cenicriviroc, Aramchol, and resmetirom. Two agents have reported data from phase 3 trials: OCA and elafibranor. OCA demonstrated safety and efficacy in NASH with a primary end point of improvement or NASH resolution; a new drug approval has been submitted. Elafibranor failed to show efficacy in NASH in the preliminary report from the RESOLVE-IT trial; however, the study is being extended to reassess outcomes. The remaining agents demonstrated positive results in phase 2b studies and have initiated phase 3 trials. With projections for increased prevalence of patients with NASH and the current lack of treatment options, novel agents with targeted mechanisms could potentially change the treatment landscape. The manufacturer of OCA is first to submit a new drug application for the treatment of NASH. These novel agents may fill a pharmacotherapy gap in patients with NASH and possibly prevent progression to advanced liver disease.