Adult living donor liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: extending UNOS priority criteria

Survival benefit of living donor liver transplant for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

With the increasing incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in both the United States and globally, the role of liver transplantation in management continues to be an area of active conversation as it is often considered the gold standard in the treatment of HCC. The use of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and the indications in the setting of malignancy, both generally and in HCC specifically, are frequently debated. In terms of both overall survival and recurrence-free survival, LDLT is at least equivalent to DDLT, especially when performed for disease within Milan criteria. Emerging and compelling evidence suggests that LDLT is superior to DDLT in treating HCC as there is a significant decrease in waitlist mortality. As the oncologic indications for liver transplantation continue to expand and the gap between organ demand and organ availability continues to worsen, high volumes centers should consider using LDLT to shrink the ever-expanding waitlist.

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults

Deaths from the majority of cancers are falling globally, but the incidence and mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in the United Kingdom and in other Western countries. HCC is a highly fatal cancer, often diagnosed late, with an incidence to mortality ratio that approaches 1. Despite there being a number of treatment options, including those associated with good medium to long-term survival, 5-year survival from HCC in the UK remains below 20%. Sex, ethnicity and deprivation are important demographics for the incidence of, and/or survival from, HCC. These clinical practice guidelines will provide evidence-based advice for the assessment and management of patients with HCC. The clinical and scientific data underpinning the recommendations we make are summarised in detail. Much of the content will have broad relevance, but the treatment algorithms are based on therapies that are available in the UK and have regulatory approval for use in the National Health Service.

Current role and perspectives of living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review of the past 20 years

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) poses a significant global health challenge, and liver transplantation (LT) remains the best curative option. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) emerged as a potential solution to organ scarcity, reducing waitlist times. This comprehensive review explores LDLT practices, focusing on patient selection criteria and oncologic outcomes. A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines included 50 studies (2004-2023) with 8062 patients. Data encompassed baseline characteristics, HCC features, and oncologic outcomes. Further analysis categorized results by geography and publication year. Heterogeneity in patient demographics, tumor burden, and transplant characteristics was observed. Recent LDLT series demonstrated a shift towards refined selection criteria, increased neoadjuvant treatment, and improved oncologic outcomes. Geographic disparities revealed unique challenges in Eastern and Western practices. LDLT proves effective for HCC, addressing donor shortages. Evolving practices highlight the importance of refining inclusion criteria and optimizing tumor management. While geographic differences exist, LDLT, when judiciously applied, offers promising outcomes.

Can living donor liver transplantation provide similar outcomes to deceased-donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A potential solution to the deceased organ shortage is to include live organ donations and to identify patients with lower rates of HCC recurrence to fairly allocate liver grafts. Our aims were to detect the long-term outcomes of LDLT versus DDLT for HCC and predictors of recurrence after transplantation.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane library were searched for eligible studies from inception to July 2021 and a systematic review and meta-analysis were done.

RESULTS

35 studies with a total of 7822 patients were included. The 1-, 3-, 4 year-OS showed trivial improvement for LDLT recipients. However, the two modalities had similar 5-, 6- and 10-year OS. A significant improvement in the ITT-OS was observed for LDLT recipients. Regarding the DFS and recurrence after transplantation, no significant difference was observed between LDLT and DDLT. In addition to that, the pooled hazard ratio of the included studies showed that Milan criteria, level of AFP, presence of vascular invasion, tumor differentiation were significant predictors of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The cancer biology (not the graft type) is the most important determinant of recurrence and survival after LT. However, LDLT provided much better survival benefits to HCC patients especially in regions that suffer from low deceased organ availability.

Liver transplantation: would it be the best and last chance of cure for hepatocellular carcinoma with major venous invasion?

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumour thrombus (PVTT) signifies advanced disease, whether LT confers any survival superiority over resection remains uncertain.

METHODS

A propensity score matched (PSM) analysis of liver transplantation (LT) and liver resection (LR) for HCC with PVTT was performed.

RESULTS

A consecutive series of 88 patients who received either LT (10 DDLTs and 3 LDLTs) or LR (n=75) respectively were recruited. Before PSM, the LT group has a higher MELD score (17.3 vs. 7.8, P<0.001), lower serum AFP levels (96 vs. 2,164 ng/mL, P=0.017) and smaller tumour size (4 vs. 10 cm, P<0.001). The 5-year overall survival for LT and LR were 55.4% and 15.9% respectively (P=0.007). After matching for serum AFP levels and tumour size, 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival for LT were 81 ng/mL, 3.9 cm, 80%, 70% and 70% and the corresponding rates for LR were 1,417 ng/mL, 5.3 cm, 51.8%, 19,6% and 9.8% (P value =0.12, 0.27 and 0.009 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

LT is associated with significantly better oncological outcomes in HCC patients with PVTT involving the lobar or segmental level. A modest expansion of selection criteria to include small HCC with segmental PVTT should be considered.

Living Donor Versus Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation for HCC

INTRODUCTION

Liver transplantation is the definitive treatment modality of the patients having an end-stage liver disease with hepatocellular carcinoma.

DISCUSSION

The number of living donor liver transplantations has been increased because of the deceased donor organ shortage, especially in Asian countries.

CONCLUSION

Reports of different clinics about the postoperative course and tumor recurrence rates comparing living donor versus deceased donor liver transplantations, besides patient selection criteria, are reviewed along with our clinic's experiences.

Outcomes of hemi- versus whole liver transplantation in patients from mainland china with high model for end-stage liver disease scores: a matched analysis

Background

Adult hemiliver transplantation (AHLT) is an important approach given the current shortage of donor livers. However, the suitability of AHLT versus adult whole liver transplantation (AWLT) for recipients with high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores remains controversial.

Methods

We divided patients undergoing AHLT and AWLT into subgroups according to their MELD scores (≥ 30: AHLT, n = 35; AWLT, n = 88; and < 30: AHLT, n = 323; AWLT, n = 323). Patients were matched by demographic data and perioperative conditions according to propensity scores. A cut-off value of 30 for MELD scores was determined by comparing the overall survival data of 735 cases of nontumor liver transplantation.

Results

Among patients with an MELD score ≥ 30 and < 30, AHLT was found to be associated with increased warm ischemia time, operative time, hospitalization time, and intraoperative blood loss compared with AWLT (P < 0.05). In the MELD ≥ 30 group, although the 5-year survival rate was significantly higher for AWLT than for AHLT (P = 0.037), there was no significant difference between AWLT and AHLT in the MELD < 30 group (P = 0.832); however, we did not observe a significant increase in specific complications following AHLT among patients with a high MELD score (≥ 30). Among these patients, the incidence of complications classified as Clavien-Dindo grade III or above was significantly higher in patients undergoing AHLT than in those undergoing AWLT (25.7% vs. 11.4%, P = 0.047). For the MELD < 30 group, there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications classified as Clavien-Dindo grade III or above for patients undergoing AHLT or AWLT.

Conclusion

In patients with an MELD score < 30, AHLT can achieve rates of mortality and overall survival comparable to AWLT. In those with an MELD score ≥ 30, the prognosis and incidence of complications classified as Clavien-Dindo III or above are significantly worse for AHLT than for AWLT; therefore, we may need to be more cautious regarding the conclusion that patients with a high MELD score can safely undergo AHLT.

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.

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

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

Comparison of Models for Tumor Recurrence after Liver Transplantation for the Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Long-Term Follow-Up Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Several models have been developed to predict tumor the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplantation besides the conventional Milan criteria (MC), including the MoRAL score. This study aimed to compare the prognostication power of the MoRAL score to most models designed so far in the Eastern and Western countries.

METHODS

This study included 564 patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in three large-volume hospitals in Korea. The primary and secondary endpoints were time-to-recurrence, and overall survival (OS), respectively. The performance of the MoRAL score was compared with those of other various Liver transplantation (LT) criteria, including the Milan criteria, University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria, up-to-seven criteria, Kyoto criteria, AFP model, total tumor volume/AFP criteria, Metroticket 2.0 model, and Weill Cornell Medical College group model.

RESULTS

The median follow-up duration was 78.1 months. Among all models assessed, the MoRAL score showed the best discrimination function for predicting the risk of tumor recurrence after LT, with c-index of 0.78, compared to other models (all p < 0.001). The MoRAL score also represented the best calibration function by Hosmer-Lemeshow test (p = 0.15). Especially in the beyond-MC sub-cohort, the MoRAL score predicted tumor recurrence (c-index, 0.80) and overall survival (OS) (c-index, 0.70) significantly better than any other models (all p < 0.001). When the MoRAL score was low (<314.8), the five-year cumulative risks of tumor recurrence and death were excellent in beyond-MC (27.8%, and 20.5%, respectively) and within-MC (16.3%, and 21.1%, respectively) sub-cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

The MoRAL score provides the most refined prognostication for predicting HCC recurrence after LDLT.

Yttrium-90 trans-arterial radioembolization in advanced-stage HCC: The impact of portal vein thrombosis on survival

PURPOSE

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is generally recognized as a prognostic factor in HCC. Our purpose is to assess and compare the survival of patients with PVT and without PVT, after Y-90 Trans-Arterial Radio-Embolization (TARE) of unresectable HCC, unresponsive to other loco-regional treatments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between November 2005 and November 2012, Y-90 resin-based TARE was performed in an IRB-approved prospective protocol, on 89 patients with unresectable HCC. 33/89 patients had PVT, the remaining 56 were resistant-to-cTACE or underwent TARE as a downstaging therapy. All patients were studied with Multi-Detector Computed Tomography (MDCT), angiography, 99mTc-MAA-scintigraphy and liver biopsy. Gastro-duodenal artery was embolized in most cases. Proton-Pump Inhibitors were administered to prevent gastritis and ulcers. χ2 test with Yates correction and log rank test were used to compare the two proportions and Kaplan-Meier survival curves, respectively.

RESULTS

The average activity administered was 1.7 ± 0.4 GBq. After the treatment, CTCAE grade 2 adverse events occurred in 46% (41/89) patients: in particular, fever and abdominal pain were found in 25 and 16 patients, respectively. No major side-effect was observed. According to mRECIST criteria, partial response or complete response was found in 70% of patient three months after the treatment, and in 90.5% nine months after the treatment. No significant difference was found in survival of patients with PVT compared to those without PVT (p-value = 0.672). A complete regression of PVT was observed in almost half patients (13/27, 48.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Portal vein invasion does not affect survival in advanced stage HCC-patients undergoing TARE using Y-90 resin-based microspheres. Y90 procedure is associated with regression of portal vein tumor thrombus.

Living or deceased organ donors in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) versus deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for HCC patients were not well defined and it was necessary to reassess.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and WanFang database for eligible studies. Perioperative and survival outcomes of HCC patients underwent LDLT were pooled and compared to those underwent DDLT.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies with 5376 HCC patients were included. For HCC patients underwent LDLT and DDLT, there were comparable rates of overall survival (OS) (1-year, RR = 1.04, 95%CI = 1.00-1.09, P = 0.03; 3-year, RR = 1.03, 95%CI = 0.96-1.11, P = 0.39; 5-year, RR = 1.04, 95%CI = 0.95-1.13, P = 0.43), disease free survival (DFS) (1-year, RR = 1.00, 95%CI = 0.95-1.05, P = 0.99; 3-year, RR = 1.00, 95%CI = 0.94-1.08, P = 0.89; 5-year, RR = 1.01, 95%CI = 0.93-1.09, P = 0.85), recurrence (1-year, RR = 1.41, 95%CI = 0.72-2.77, P = 0.32; 3-year, RR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.57-1.39, P = 0.60; and 5-year, RR = 0.85, 95%CI = 0.56-1.31, P = 0.47), perioperative mortality within 3 months (RR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.50-1.59, p = 0.70) and postoperative complication (RR = 0.99, 95%CI = 0.70-1.39, P = 0.94). LDLT was associated with better 5-year intention-to-treat patient survival (ITT-OS) than DDLT (RR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.01-1.22, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggested that LDLT was not inferior to DDLT in consideration of comparable perioperative and survival outcomes. However, in terms of 5-year ITT-OS, LDLT was a possibly better choice for HCC patients.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma with live donors or extended criteria donors: a propensity score-matched comparison

Background

To compare patient survival after liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from live donors (LD) or extended criteria donors (ECD).

Methods

Data from consecutive LT procedures for HCC involving either LD or ECD were reviewed. Patient survival was our primary outcome. Re-transplantation (Re-LT), ischemic type bile lesions (ITBL), and tumor recurrence represented secondary outcomes. The primary outcome was statistically analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards regression; logistic regression analyses were used for statistical analysis of the secondary outcomes. Propensity score was calculated based on patient age, sex, hepatitis C viral infection (HCV), laboratory model for end-stage liver disease (labMELD) score, bridging treatment, Milan criteria, α-fetoprotein levels, and tumor grade.

Results

The study evaluated 109 recipients undergoing LT from either LD (n=57) or ECD (n=52). LT procedure (hazard ratio [HR] 2.349, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.151-4.794, P=0.0190), age (HR 1.075, 95%CI 1.020-1.133, P=0.0074) and labMELD score (HR 1.082, 95%CI 1.021-1.147, P=0.0075) reached significance by Cox proportional hazards regression. After adjustment with the propensity score (stratification with 5 strata), the LT procedure was still significant (HR 2.401, 95%CI 1.114-5.175, P=0.0253). Tumor grade (odds ratio [OR] 9.628, 95%CI 1.120-82.752, P=0.0391), labMELD score (OR 1.224, 95%CI 1.019-1.471, P=0.0306), and Milan criteria (OR 6.375, 95%CI 1.239-32.796, P=0.0267) gained statistical significance by logistic regression analysis for Re-LT, ITBL, and tumor recurrence, respectively.

Conclusions

LT for HCC showed superior patient survival with ECD rather than LD grafts. Re-LT, ITBL, and tumor recurrence showed no significant differences between the two groups. However, the diverging criteria for the definition of ECD grafts represent a considerable limitation for the wide application of this policy.

Intraoperative abortion of adult living donor liver transplantation: 15 cases from 1,179 cases in 20 years of experience in a single center

Purpose

This study aimed to report intraoperative abortion of adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

Methods

From June 1997 to December 2016, 1,179 adult LDLT cases were performed. 15 cases (1.3%) of intraoperative abortions in LDLT were described.

Results

Among 15 cases, 5 intraoperative abortions were donor-related, and remaining 10 cases were recipient-related. All donor-related abortions were due to unexpected steatohepatitis. Among remaining 10 recipient-related intraoperative abortions, unexpected extension of hepatocellular carcinoma was related in 5 cases. Two cases of intraoperative abortions were related to bowel inflammation, and 2 cases were associated with severe adhesion related to previous treatment. One recipient with severe pulmonary hypertension was also aborted.

Conclusion

Complete prevention of aborted LDLT is still not feasible. In this regard, further efforts to minimize intraoperative abortion are required.

Impact of ABO-incompatibility on hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after living donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

ABO-incompatible (ABO-I) living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been reported to have acceptable outcomes in the era of rituximab-based prophylaxis. However, the outcomes of ABO-I LDLT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain to be elucidated. This study aimed to clarify the impact of ABO-Incompatibility on oncologic outcomes of LDLT for HCC.

METHODS

Patients with HCC who underwent ABO-I LDLT were randomly matched by 1:2 ratio to those who underwent ABO-compatible (ABO-C) LDLT according to propensity score. HCC recurrence and patient survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test.

RESULTS

Between January 2012 and December 2015, a total of 160 patients underwent LDLT for HCC confirmed by pathology analysis of liver explants. Thirty-nine consecutive patients underwent ABO-I LDLT for HCC, and 78 ABO-C LDLT patients were selected by propensity score matching, which made no significant difference between the two groups in baseline, perioperative, and tumor characteristics. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates in the ABO-I and ABO-C LDLT groups were 76.9%, 68.5%, 63.6% and 74.4%, 70.5%, 70.5%, respectively (p = 0.77). The site distribution of initial recurrence showed no significant difference between the two groups. The overall survival rates over the same period in the ABO-I and ABO-C LDLT groups were 82.1%, 73.5%, 73.5% and 92.2%, 80.3%, 80.3%, respectively (p = 0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

ABO-I LDLT, having no adverse impact on oncological outcomes, can be a feasible transplant option for HCC.

Outcome of ABO-incompatible adult living-donor liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) can simultaneously cure hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and underlying liver cirrhosis, improving long-term results in patients with HCC. ABO-incompatible LDLT could expand the living-donor pool, reduce waiting times for deceased-donor liver transplantation, and improve long-term survival for some patients with HCC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients undergoing LDLT for HCC from November 2008 to December 2015 at a single institution in Korea. In total, 165 patients underwent ABO-incompatible and 753 patients underwent ABO-compatible LDLT for HCC. ABO-incompatible recipients underwent desensitization to overcome the ABO blood group barrier, including pretransplant plasma exchange and rituximab administration (300-375 mg/m² /body surface area).

RESULTS

We performed 1:1 propensity score matching and included 165 patients in each group. 82.4% of ABO-incompatible and 83.0% of -compatible LDLT groups had HCC within conventional Milan criteria, respectively, and 92.1% and 92.7% of patients in each group had a Child-Pugh score of A or B. ABO-incompatible and -compatible LDLT groups were followed up for 48.0 and 48.7 months, respectively, with both groups showing comparable recurrence-free survival rates (hazard ratio [HR] 1.14; 95% CI 0.68-1.90; p = 0.630) and overall patient-survival outcomes (HR 1.10; 95% CI 0.60-2.00; p = 0.763).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggested that ABO-incompatible liver transplantation is a feasible option for patients with HCC, especially for those with compensated cirrhosis with HCC within conventional Milan criteria.

LAY SUMMARY

Despite hypothetical immunological concerns that the desensitization protocol for breaking through the ABO blood group barrier might have a negative impact on the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma, our experience demonstrated no significant differences in the long-term overall survival and recurrence-free survival rates between patients receiving ABO-compatible or ABO-incompatible liver transplantation. In conclusion, results from our institution indicated that ABO-incompatible living-donor liver transplantation constitutes a potentially feasible option for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, especially those with compensated cirrhosis with hepatocellular carcinoma within conventional Milan criteria.

Surgical Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of cancer-related death worldwide. In select patients, surgical treatment in the form of either resection or transplantation offers a curative option. The aims of this review are to (1) review the current American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases/European Association for the Study of the Liver guidelines on the surgical management of HCC and (2) review the proposed changes to these guidelines and analyze the strength of evidence underlying these proposals. Three authors identified the most relevant publications in the literature on liver resection and transplantation for HCC and analyzed the strength of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) classification. In the United States, the liver allocation system provides priority for liver transplantation to patients with HCC within the Milan criteria. Current evidence suggests that liver transplantation may also be indicated in certain patient groups beyond Milan criteria, such as pediatric patients with large tumor burden or adult patients who are successfully downstaged. Patients with no underlying liver disease may also benefit from liver transplantation if the HCC is unresectable. In patients with no or minimal (compensated) liver disease and solitary HCC ≥2 cm, liver resection is warranted. If liver transplantation is not available or contraindicated, liver resection can be offered to patients with multinodular HCC, provided that the underlying liver disease is not decompensated. Many patients may benefit from surgical strategies adapted to local resources and policies (hepatitis B prevalence, organ availability, etc). Although current low-quality evidence shows better overall survival with aggressive surgical strategies, this approach is limited to select patients. Larger and well-designed prospective studies are needed to better define the benefits and limits of such approach.

Small-for-size grafts increase recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplantation beyond milan criteria

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been reported to have high rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence compared with deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). This has been assumed to be due to the frequent use of small-for-size grafts (SFSGs) in LDLT rather than DDLT, but the relationship between graft size and prognosis remains controversial. This study aimed to clarify the effect of SFSGs on the oncologic outcomes of patients with HCC who underwent LDLT. Between January 2005 and December 2015, 597 consecutive patients underwent LDLT. Among these patients, those with HCC who underwent LDLT were randomly matched at a 1:3 ratio (graft-to-recipient body weight ratio [GRWR] < 0.8%:GRWR > 0.8%) according to propensity score. HCC recurrence and patient survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. In addition, stratified subgroup analysis based on the Milan criteria was performed. SFSG was defined as a GRWR < 0.8%. Using propensity score matching, 82 patients with GRWR < 0.8% and 246 patients with GRWR ≥ 0.8% were selected. For patients with HCC within the Milan criteria, no significant difference of HCC recurrence (P = 0.82) and patient survival (P = 0.95) was found based on GRWR. However, for patients with HCC beyond the Milan criteria, 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 52.4%, 49.3%, and 49.3%, respectively, for patients with GRWR < 0.8%, and 76.5%, 68.3%, and 64.3%, respectively, for patients with GRWR ≥ 0.8% (P = 0.049). The former group exhibited poor patient survival rates (P = 0.047). In conclusion, for patients with HCC within the Milan criteria, no significant difference in oncologic outcomes was found based on liver graft size. However, among the patients with HCC beyond the Milan criteria, SFSG recipients showed poor oncologic outcomes. Because extended criteria are frequently used in LDLT for HCC, a recipient's prognosis can be improved if a liver graft of appropriate size is carefully selected during donor selection. Liver Transplantation 24 35-43 2018 AASLD.

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular cancer: an (almost) exclusive Eastern procedure?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most prevalent cancer and it is linked with chronic liver disease. Liver transplantation (LT) is the best curative treatment modality, since it can cure simultaneously the underlying liver disease and HCC. Milan criteria (MC) are the benchmark for selecting patients with HCC for LT, achieving up to 91% 1-year survival post transplantation. However, when considering intention-to-treat (ITT) rates are substantially lower, mainly due dropout. Additionally, Milan criteria (MC) are too restrictive and more inclusive criteria have been reported with good outcomes. Mainly, in Eastern countries, deceased donors are scarce, therefore Asian centers have developed living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) to a state-of-art status. There are many eastern centers reporting huge numbers of LDLT with outstanding results. Regarding HCC patients, they have reported many criteria including more advanced tumors achieving reasonable outcomes. Western countries have well-established deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) programs. However, organ shortage and restrictive criteria for listing patients with HCC endorses LDLT as a good option to offer curative treatment to more HCC patients. However, there are some controversial reports claiming higher rates of HCC recurrence after LDLT than DDLT. An extensive review included 30 studies with cohorts of HCC patients who underwent LDLT in both East and West countries. We reported also the results of our Institution, in Brazil, where it was performed the first LDLT. This review also addresses the eligibility criteria for transplanting patients with HCC developed in Western and Eastern countries.

Comparison of treatment outcome between living donor liver transplantation and sorafenib for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria

For patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), sorafenib is the only systemic treatment recommended by international guidelines. We recently reported that HCC patients with a low MoRAL (model to predict tumor recurrence after LDLT) score (≤ 314.8) have excellent treatment outcomes after living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT), even though they are beyond the Milan criteria. In the present study, we investigated whether LDLT offers a better treatment outcome than sorafenib for patients with HCC beyond the Milan criteria according to the MoRAL score. A retrospective cohort study of 325 consecutive patients who were treated with either LDLT (n = 122) or sorafenib (n = 203) for HCC beyond the Milan criteria from 2005 to 2014 at a tertiary hospital was performed. The primary and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and time-to-progression. When baseline characteristics were balanced using inverse probability weighting, OS was significantly longer in the LDLT group than in the sorafenib group (5-year OS rate, 71.9% vs. 4.9%; HR=0.1; P < 0.001). The LDLT group exhibited a significantly lower risk of tumor progression (5-year recurrence rate, 34.7% vs. 96%; HR=0.14; P < 0.001) than the sorafenib group. The increase in OS with LDLT was predominantly among patients with a low MoRAL score (5-year OS rate, 81.1% vs. 5.8%; HR=0.06; P < 0.001) compared with those with a high MoRAL score (5-year OS rate, 28.3% vs. 4.3%; HR = 0.42; P = 0.047). Patients with a low MoRAL score and without extrahepatic metastasis or hepatic vein invasion might be good candidates for LDLT instead of sorafenib treatment if there is a willing living related donor.

Prognosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Liver Transplantation: Comparative Analysis with Partial Hepatectomy

Background

Liver transplantation (LT) is the treatment of choice for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to investigate the recurrence rate of HCC after LT and prognostic factors for recurrence by comparing LT with non-transplanted resection.

Methods

The participants were 338 patients who underwent LT between 1996 and 2012 at Seoul National University Hospital (LT group) and 520 HCC patients who underwent partial hepatectomy between 1995 and 2006 (control group, non-LT group).

Results

In the LT group, 68 of 338 patients (19.8%) showed relapse, and the recurrence rate was lower than that in the non-LT group (64.9%, 357/520, p < .001). Stratification analysis by American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage showed that the stage I-II LT group had a lower recurrence rate than the non-LT group. Univariate comparative analysis demonstrated that multiplicity of tumor, tumor size, gross type, Edmondson- Steiner (ES) nuclear grade, extent of tumor, angioinvasion, AJCC stage, Milan criteria, University of California at San Francisco criteria on explant pathology (all p < .001), positive expression of cytokeratin 19 (p = .002), and preoperative α-fetoprotein (AFP) (p < .001) were predictors of tumor recurrence. In multivariate analysis, LT, preoperative AFP, multiplicity of tumor, extent of tumor, size of tumor, and ES nuclear grade were independent prognostic factors.

Conclusions

LT might have a protective effect against the late recurrence of stage I-II HCC compared to non-LT, and the prognostic factors for recurrence were similar to previously well-known prognostic factors for HCC.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma from living-donor vs. deceased donor

With the increasing prevalence of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the possible increased recurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in LDLT recipients in comparison with deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) recipients has become a matter of debate. The aim of this review is to encompass current opinions and clinical reports regarding differences in the outcome, especially the recurrence of HCC, between LDLT and DDLT. In reviewing literatures, some studies reported increased recurrence rates among LDLT recipients, a majority of authors, including large database studies, reported comparable recurrence-free survival and recurrence rates between LDLT and DDLT. The postulated reasons for the increased recurrence in LDLT were the effect of graft regeneration on tumor progression, fast-tracking of patients into liver transplantation, and the more aggressive tumor characteristics in LDLT, however, many Asian LDLT centers have reported the comparable outcomes with those of DDLT in Western countries, even with the expanded criteria for HCC. In the absence of a prospective study regarding the use of LDLT versus DDLT for HCC patients, there is no evidence to support the higher HCC recurrence after LDLT than DDLT, and LDLT remains a reasonable treatment option for HCC patients with cirrhosis, especially in Asian countries where the number of deceased donor is scarce.

Serum Tumor Markers Provide Refined Prognostication in Selecting Liver Transplantation Candidate for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Beyond the Milan Criteria

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a model to predict tumor recurrence after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) (MoRAL) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond the Milan criteria (MC).

BACKGROUND

Some subgroups of HCC exceeding the MC experience substantial benefit from LDLT.

METHODS

This multicenter study included a total of 566 consecutive patients who underwent LDLT in Korea: the beyond-MC cohort (n = 205, the derivation [n = 92] and validation [n = 113] sets) and the within-MC cohort (n = 361). The primary endpoint was time-to-recurrence.

RESULTS

Using multivariate Cox proportional hazard model, we derived the MoRAL score using serum levels of protein induced by vitamin K absence-II and alpha-fetoprotein, which provided a good discriminant function on time-to-recurrence (concordance index = 0.88). Concordance index was maintained similarly on both internal and external validations (mean 0.87 and 0.84, respectively). At cut off of 314.8 (75th percentile value), a low MoRAL score (≤314.8) was associated with significantly longer recurrence-free (versus > 314.8, HR = 5.29, P < 0.001) and overall survivals (HR = 2.59, P = 0.001) in the beyond-MC cohort. The 5-year recurrence-free and overall survival rates of beyond-MC patients with a low MoRAL score were as high as 66.3% and 82.6%, respectively. The within-MC patients with a high MoRAL score showed a higher risk of recurrence than beyond-MC patients with a low MoRAL score (HR = 2.56, P = 0.035). The MoRAL score was significantly correlated with explant histology.

CONCLUSIONS

This new model using protein induced by vitamin K absence-II and alpha-fetoprotein provides refined prognostication. Among beyond-MC HCC patients, those with a MoRAL score ≤314.8 and without extrahepatic metastasis might be potential candidates for LDLT.

Smaller grafts do not imply early recurrence in recipients transplanted for hepatocellular carcinoma: A Chinese experience

Liver graft size has long been a critical issue in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We analyzed China Liver Transplant Registry data (January 2007-December 2009), identifying 295 patients who underwent LDLT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The recipients were divided into two groups: A, graft-to-recipient body weight ratio (GRWR) ≤ 0.8% (n = 56); B, GRWR > 0.8% (n = 239). We evaluated donor, recipient, and operative factors and analyzed survival outcome and the risk factors affecting overall and recurrence survival. As a result, the overall survival rates of group B were significantly higher than that of group A (p = 0.009); the corresponding tumor-free survival rates did not differ significantly (p = 0.133). The overall survival rates among the 151 recipients who met the Hangzhou criteria did not differ significantly (p = 0.953), nor did the corresponding tumor-free survival rates (p = 0.893). Multivariate analysis determined that GRWR was a significant risk factor for poor survival but not for early recurrence. In conclusion, small grafts may predict poorer survival outcome but do not indicate earlier HCC recurrence in recipients transplanted for HCC, and survival outcome with smaller grafts is merely acceptable in selected recipients.

Living vs. deceased-donor liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

With the scarcity of deceased donor liver grafts, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is gaining popularity as an alternative to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, as the evidence of cases of LDLT accumulates, several authors have reported higher HCC recurrence rates after LDLT. The suggested reasons for the higher recurrence rates following LDLT are related to the small-for-size graft in LDLT, surgical procedures that are specific to LDLT, and the fast-track to LDLT. Fast-tracking to LDLT may not allow sufficient time for evaluation of the biological aggressiveness of tumors, which may result in high recurrence rates due to inclusion of patients with more inherently aggressive tumors. Actually, some studies that reported higher recurrence rates with LDLT included a larger number of cases of HCC with microvascular invasion or poorly differentiated HCC. In order to exclude biologically aggressive HCC preoperatively, selection criteria incorporating tumor markers, such as alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and des-gamma-carboxyprothrombin (DCP), as well as morphological tumor number and size have been proposed. With more reliable selection criteria incorporating biological markers to eliminate biologically aggressive HCC, LDLT can be a viable treatment option for patients with HCC, providing similar recurrence rates as those achieved with DDLT.

[Diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Update consensus document from the AEEH, SEOM, SERAM, SERVEI and SETH]

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common primary malignancy of the liver and one of the most frequent causes of death in patients with liver cirrhosis. Simultaneously with the recognition of the clinical relevance of this neoplasm, in recent years there have been important developments in the diagnosis, staging and treatment of HCC. Consequently, the Asociación Española para el Estudio del Hígado has driven the need to update clinical practice guidelines, continuing to invite all the societies involved in the diagnosis and treatment of this disease to participate in the drafting and approval of the document (Sociedad Española de Trasplante Hepático, Sociedad Española de Radiología Médica, Sociedad Española de Radiología Vascular e Intervencionista y Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica). The clinical practice guidelines published in 2009 accepted as Clinical Practice Guidelines of the National Health System has been taken as reference document, incorporating the most important advances that have been made in recent years. The scientific evidence for the treatment of HCC has been evaluated according to the recommendations of the National Cancer Institute (www.cancer.gov) and the strength of recommendation is based on the GRADE system.

Current developments in pediatric liver transplantation

In 1953, the pioneer of human orthotopic liver transplantation (LT), Thomas E Starzl, was the first to attempt an orthotopic liver transplant into a 3 years old patient suffering from biliary atresia. Thus, the first LT in humans was attempted in a disease, which, up until today, remains the main indication for pediatric LT (pLT). During the last sixty years, refinements in diagnostics and surgical technique, the introduction of new immunosuppressive medications and improvements in perioperative pediatric care have established LT as routine procedure for childhood acute and chronic liver failure as well as inherited liver diseases. In contrast to adult recipients, pLT differs greatly in indications for LT, allocation practice, surgical technique, immunosuppression and post-operative life-long aftercare. Many aspects are focus of ongoing preclinical and clinical research. The present review gives an overview of current developments and the clinical outcome of pLT, with a focus on alternatives to full-size deceased-donor organ transplantation.

Liver transplantation as a management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide and has a poor prognosis if untreated. It is ranked the third among the causes of cancer-related death. There are multiple etiologic factors that can lead to HCC. Screening for early HCC is challenging due to the lack of well specific biomarkers. However, early diagnosis through successful screening is very important to provide cure rate. Liver transplantation (LT) did not gain wide acceptance until the mid-1980s, after the effective immunosuppression with cyclosporine became available. Orthotopic LT is the best therapeutic option for early, unresectable HCC. It is limited by both, graft shortage and the need for appropriate patient selection. It provides both, the removal of tumor and the remaining cirrhotic liver. In Milan, a prospective cohort study defined restrictive selection criteria known as Milan criteria (MC) that led to superior survival for transplant patients in comparison with any other previous experience with transplantation or other options for HCC. When transplantation occurs within the established MC, the outcomes are similar to those for nonmalignant liver disease after transplantation. The shortage of organs from deceased donors has led to the problems of long waiting times and dropouts. This has led to the adoption of extended criteria by many centers. Several measures have been taken to solve these problems including prioritization of patients with HCC, use of pretransplant adjuvant treatment, and living donor LT.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma comparing the Milan, UCSF, and Asan criteria: long-term follow-up of a Western single institutional experience

BACKGROUND

In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the outcome after liver transplantation (LT) is excellent if tumor characteristics are within the Milan criteria (MC). Expanded Asan criteria (AC) have not yet been validated in Western countries.

METHODS

A total of 76 patients with HCC underwent LT. Patients were divided and compared according to Milan, UCSF, and Asan criteria. Differences between pre- and post-operative assessment were evaluated. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between groups. Predictors of recurrence were investigated.

RESULTS

Asan criteria provided 26% and 15% more criteria-fitting patients than MC and UCSF pre-operatively while 49% and 35% at pathological evaluation. Discrepancy between pre- and post-operative evaluation was 32% for MC, 33% for UCSF, and 18% for AC (p = 0.06). After a median follow-up of 70.5 months, patients exceeding MC but fulfilling Asan had comparable 5-yr OS and DFS to patients fulfilling MC (p = 0.17; p = 0.29). Patients exceeding UCSF but fulfilling AC had comparable 5-yr OS and DFS to patients fulfilling UCSF (p = 0.26; p = 0.32). Number of nodules, macro-vascular invasion, capsular invasion, and exceeding AC predicted recurrence at multivariate analysis (p = 0.01, 0.03, 0.01, 0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The extension to AC allows increasing the number of patients eligible for LT without affecting OS and DFS.

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein thrombosis

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is complex and requires an understanding of multiple therapeutic options. PVT is present in 10%-40% of HCC at the time of diagnosis, and is an adverse prognostic factor. Management options are limited, as transplantation is generally contraindicated, and surgical resection is only rarely performed in select centers. Systemic medical therapy with sorafenib has been shown to modestly prolong survival. Transarterial chemoembolization has been performed in select cases but has shown a high incidence of complications. Emerging data on treatment of PVT with Y-90 radioembolization suggest that this modality is well-tolerated and associated with favorable overall survival. Current society guidelines do not yet specifically recommend radioembolization for patients with PVT, but this may change with the development of newer staging systems and treatment algorithms. In this comprehensive literature review, we present current and available management options with the relative advantages, disadvantages and contraindications of these treatment options with summarized data on overall survival.

Expanded criteria for liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver transplantation (LT) is one of the few effective treatment options for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our aim in this study was to evaluate the risk factors for HCC recurrence and propose new criteria for LT based on pretransplantation findings. One hundred eighty patients who underwent LT for HCC between 2002 and 2008 were reviewed retrospectively. Outcome measures included maximal tumor size and number of tumors revealed by radiological studies before transplantation, demographics, and tumor recurrence. Maximal tumor size >6 cm, >7 tumors, and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels >1000 ng/mL were identified as independent prognostic factors of HCC recurrence in univariate and multivariate analysis. Disease-free survival rate in patients with a maximal tumor size ≤6 cm, ≤7 tumors, and/or AFP levels ≤1000 ng/mL at 1, 3, and 5 years was 97.9%, 91.5%, and 90.0%, respectively, but the 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rate of patients who had a maximal tumor size >6 cm, >7 tumors, and/or AFP levels >1000 ng/mL was 61.9%, 47.6%, and 47.6%, respectively (P < .001). In conclusion, LT can improve the survival of patients with advanced HCC if they have a maximal tumor size ≤6 cm, tumor number ≤7, and/or AFP levels ≤1000 ng/mL.

Living-donor vs deceased-donor liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

With the increasing prevalence of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), some authors have reported a potential increase in the HCC recurrence rates among LDLT recipients compared to deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) recipients. The aim of this review is to encompass current opinions and clinical reports regarding differences in the outcome, especially the recurrence of HCC, between LDLT and DDLT. While some studies report impaired recurrence - free survival and increased recurrence rates among LDLT recipients, others, including large database studies, report comparable recurrence - free survival and recurrence rates between LDLT and DDLT. Studies supporting the increased recurrence in LDLT have linked graft regeneration to tumor progression, but we found no association between graft regeneration/initial graft volume and tumor recurrence among our 125 consecutive LDLTs for HCC cases. In the absence of a prospective study regarding the use of LDLT vs DDLT for HCC patients, there is no evidence to support the higher HCC recurrence after LDLT than DDLT, and LDLT remains a reasonable treatment option for HCC patients with cirrhosis.

Current management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer worldwide and leading cause of death among patients with cirrhosis. Treatment guidelines are based according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system. The choice among therapeutic options that include liver resection, liver transplantation, locoregional, and systemic treatments must be individualized for each patient. The aim of this paper is to review the outcomes that can be achieved in the treatment of HCC with the heterogeneous therapeutic options currently available in clinical practice.

Role of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

This review evaluates the available evidence to establish the role of liver transplantation in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in India. Most liver transplants in India are living donor transplants due to the paucity of brain dead organ donors. There is sufficient evidence to permit allocation of organs to patients with tumors within the Milan criteria. If the waiting list time is more than 6 months, a down-staging locoregional treatment modality such a trans-arterial chemoembolization, radiofrequency ablation, resection or percutaneous ethanol injection may be used to prevent disease progression. Allocating scarce livers to patients with more advanced tumors may not be justifiable. However, living donor liver transplantation may be offered to medically fit patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with cirrhosis, offering a guarded prognosis to patients beyond the Milan or UCSF criteria. Vascular invasion and extra-hepatic disease should be absolute contraindications to liver transplantation.

Time to transplantation as a predictor of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation

In the United States, there are significant geographic disparities in the time to transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); it is possible that rapid transplantation contributes to higher rates of posttransplant HCC recurrence because there is insufficient time for the tumor biology to manifest. In this study, we compared HCC recurrence in rapid transplant patients and their slower transplant counterparts. We identified adult liver transplantation (LT) candidates in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data set who were granted an initial exception for an HCC diagnosis between January 1, 2006 and September 30, 2010 and underwent transplantation in the same time window. Patients were followed until HCC recurrence, non-HCC-related death, or last follow-up. The cumulative incidence of HCC recurrence was compared for patients waiting ≤ 120 days and patients waiting >120 days from an HCC exception to LT. The association between the risk of posttransplant recurrence and the wait time was further evaluated via competing risks regression with the Fine and Gray model. For 5002 LT recipients with HCC, the median wait time from an exception to LT was 77 days, and it varied from 30 to 169 days by UNOS region. The cumulative incidence of posttransplant HCC recurrence was 3.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.8%-3.8%] and 5.6% (95% CI = 5.0%-6.3%) within 1 and 2 years, respectively. The rate of observed recurrence within 1 year of transplantation was significantly lower for patients waiting >120 days versus patients waiting ≤ 120 days (2.2% versus 3.9%, P = 0.002); however, the difference did not persist at 2 years (5.0% versus 5.9%, P = 0.09). After we accounted for clinical factors, the HCC recurrence risk was reduced by 40% for patients waiting >120 days (subhazard ratio = 0.6, P = 0.005). In conclusion, the risk of HCC recurrence within the first year after transplantation may be lessened by the institution of a mandatory waiting time after an exception is granted.

Liver transplantation for malignancy: Current treatment strategies and future perspectives

In 1967, Starzl et al performed the first successful liver transplantation for a patient diagnosed with hepatoblastoma. In the following, liver transplantation was considered ideal for complete tumor resection and potential cure from primary hepatic malignancies. Several reports of liver transplantation for primary and metastatic liver cancer however showed disappointing results and the strategy was soon dismissed. In 1996, Mazzaferro et al introduced the Milan criteria, offering liver transplantation to patients diagnosed with limited hepatocellular carcinoma. Since then, liver transplantation for malignant disease is an ongoing subject of preclinical and clinical research. In this context, several aspects must be considered: (1) Given the shortage of deceased-donor organs, long-term overall and disease free survival should be comparable with results obtained in patients transplanted for non-malignant disease; (2) In this regard, living-donor liver transplantation may in selected patients help to solve the ethical dilemma of optimal individual patient treatment vs organ allocation justice; and (3) Ongoing research focusing on perioperative therapy and anti-proliferative immunosuppressive regimens may further reduce tumor recurrence in patients transplanted for malignant disease and thus improve overall survival. The present review gives an overview of current indications and future perspectives of liver transplantation for malignant disease.

Histological differentiation predicts post-liver transplantation survival time

OBJECTIVES

Although liver transplantation is the most effective long-term treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the recurrence of HCC remains an issue. Current research examining recurrence after liver transplantation primarily focuses on patients' clinical characteristics. There is no consensus regarding the factors that may relate to predict the survival time and recurrence rates for patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-associated HCC transplantation using clinicopathological analysis.

METHODS

One hundred and three patients with HCC were enrolled in the study. All data were collected from the China Liver Transplant Registry. The independent variables were as follows: age, gender, etiology, preoperative alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels, body mass index (BMI), Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) and Child-Pugh scores, primary tumor, regional nodes, metastasis (TNM) classification, number of tumors, the size for the largest tumor, multifocality, portal vein tumor thrombosis and histological differentiation, and prognostic staging score criteria (Milan criteria). All of the patients had previously undergone liver transplantation. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to determine the factors related to the survival time and recurrence.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up period of 41.05±28.90 months, the 5-year overall survival rate was 46.60%, and the 5-year recurrence rate was 45.63%. Forty-seven patients (45.63%) died due to HCC recurrence during the follow-up period. Patients within Milan criteria exhibited excellent post-transplantation survival times. Univariate analysis suggested that patients with poor tumor differentiation, AFP≥400ng/ml, portal vein tumor thrombosis, and TNM staging of I+II had significantly predicted shorter survival times and higher recurrence than patients displaying good or moderate tumor differentiation, AFP<400ng/ml, no portal vein thrombosis and TNM staging of III+IV for HBV-associated HCC. However, multivariate analysis revealed that poor tumor differentiation and high serum AFP were associated with a shorter survival time. Moreover, poor tumor differentiation suggested high recurrence. In addition, patients' survival time with AFP<400ng/ml was longer than that of patients with AFP≥400ng/ml even in patients with HCC beyond Milan criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor biological characteristics especially histological differentiation and serum AFP level should be considered before performing liver transplantation (LT) for patients with HBV-associated HCC. Furthermore, the AFP level and histological differentiation provide a new method for assessing HCC patient survival time after LT. Histological differentiation independently predicted post-transplantation survival time and recurrence rate for patients with HBV-associated HCC.

ZIP4, a novel determinant of tumor invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma, contributes to tumor recurrence after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Recently, evidence that Zinc transporter ZRT/IRT-like protein 4 (ZIP4) is involved in invasiveness and apoptosis has emerged in pancreatic cancer and prostate cancer. Our aim was to assess the role of ZIP4 in invasiveness, migration and apoptosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The prognostic value of ZIP4 in HCC after liver transplantation was evaluated.

METHODS

The role of ZIP4 in HCC was investigated by overexpressing ZIP4 in BEL7402 and HepG2 cells and inhibiting ZIP4 in HuH-7 and HepG2 cells, using overexpression and shRNA plasmids in vitro studies. Immunohistochemical analysis was used to evaluate ZIP4 expression in HCC tissues from 60 patients undergoing liver transplantation, 36 cirrhotic tissue samples, and 6 normal tissue samples. Prognostic significance was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Specific suppression of ZIP4 reduced cell migration and invasiveness, whereas ZIP4 overexpression caused increases in cell migration and invasiveness. Furthermore, overexpression of ZIP4 resulted in increased expression of pro-metastatic genes (MMP-2, MMP-9) and decreased expression of pro-apoptotic genes (caspase-3, caspase-9, Bax). In contrast, suppression of ZIP4 resulted in an opposite effect. ZIP4 was more highly expressed in tumor tissues than non-tumor tissues (P < 0.0001). ZIP4 expression was significantly associated with tumor recurrence (P = 0.002), tumor node metastasis stage (P = 0.044), Child-Turcotte-Pugh score (P = 0.042), and tumor size (P = 0.022). Univariate analysis showed that ZIP4 expression was significantly associated with overall survival (P = 0.020) and tumor-free survival (P = 0.049). Multivariate analysis revealed that ZIP4 was an independent predictor of overall survival (P = 0.037) after liver transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

ZIP4 could promote migration, invasiveness, and suppress apoptosis in hepatocellular carcinoma, and represent a novel predictor of poor prognosis and therapeutic target for patients with HCC who undergo liver transplantation.

Up-to-seven criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma liver transplantation: A single center analysis

AIM: To detect whether the up-to-seven should be used as inclusion criteria for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS: Between April 2002 and July 2008, 220 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who were diagnosed with HCC and underwent liver transplantation (LT) at our liver transplantation center were included. These patients were divided into three groups according to the characteristics of their tumors (tumor diameter, tumor number): the Milan criteria group (Group 1), the in up-to-seven group (Group 2) and the out up-to-seven group (Group 3). Then, we compared long-term survival and tumor recurrence of these three groups.

RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of transplant recipients were comparable among these three groups, except for the type of liver graft (deceased donor liver transplant or live donor liver transplantation). There were also no significant differences in the pre-operative α-fetoprotein level. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival and tumor-free survival rate for the Milan criteria group were 94.8%, 91.4%, 89.7% and 91.4%, 86.2%, and 86.2% respectively; in the up-to-seven criteria group, these rates were 87.8%, 77.8%, and 76.6% and 85.6%, 75.6%, and 75.6% respectively (P < 0.05). However, the advanced HCC patients’ (in the group out of up-to-seven criteria) overall and tumor-free survival rates were much lower, at 75%, 53.3%, and 50% and 65.8%, 42.5%, and 41.7%, respectively (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: Considering that patients in the up-to-seven criteria group exhibited a considerable but lower survival rate compared with the Milan criteria group, the up-to-seven criteria should be used carefully and selectively.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a surgical perspective

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. Early detection and timely treatment of HCC is critical for better patient outcomes. Curative therapy consists of surgical hepatic resection or liver transplantation (LTx); however, both are restricted to explicit selective criteria. Liver resection is the gold standard of treatment for noncirrhotic patients but can be done in only a small fraction of cirrhotic patients depending on synthetic dysfunction, degree of portal hypertension, and number and location(s) of tumor(s). Therefore, the best treatment modality in cirrhotic patients with HCC is LTx as it will cure both HCC and the underlying cirrhosis. The limitation to offer transplant to all cirrhotic patients with HCC is the shortage of available donor organs. While these patients are waiting for transplant, their tumors may progress and develop distant metastases and may lead to patients losing their candidacy for LTx. Various ablation therapies can be used to treat HCC, prevent tumor progression, and thus, avoid patients losing the option of LTx. Future directions to improve HCC patient outcomes include advancement in tumor gene analysis and histopathology for better prediction of tumor behavior, improved immunosuppression regimens to reduce tumor recurrence in the posttransplant setting, and efficient use of an expanded donor pool that includes living donor organs. This paper will review the current methods of HCC diagnosis, selection for either hepatic resection or LTx, and will also summarize posttreatment outcomes. We will suggest future directions for the field as we strive to improve outcomes for our HCC patients.

Liver transplantation and expanded Milan criteria: does it really work?

CONTEXT

Orthotopic liver transplantation is an excellent treatment approach for hepatocellular carcinoma in well-selected candidates. Nowadays some institutions tend to Expand the Milan Criteria including tumor with more than 5 cm and also associate with multiple tumors none larger than 3 cm in order to benefit more patients with the orthotopic liver transplantation.

METHODS

The data collected were based on the online database PubMED. The key words applied on the search were "expanded Milan criteria" limited to the period from 2000 to 2009. We excluded 19 papers due to: irrelevance of the subject, lack of information and incompatibility of the language (English only). We compiled patient survival and tumor recurrence free rate from 1 to 5-years in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma submitted to orthotopic liver transplantation according to expanded the Milan criteria from different centers.

RESULTS

Review compiled data from 23 articles. Fourteen different criteria were found and they are also described in detail, however the University of California - San Francisco was the most studied one among them.

CONCLUSION

Expanded the Milan criteria is a useful attempt for widening the preexistent protocol for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in waiting-list for orthotopic liver transplantation. However there is no significant difference in patient survival rate and tumor recurrence free rate from those patients that followed the Milan criteria.

Living donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver transplantation (LT) may be the best curative treatment that offers a chance of cure for the tumor and the underlying cirrhosis by complete extirpation of both. In Asia, where the supply of cadaveric grafts remains scarce and the incidence of HCC combined with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV)- and hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease is high, adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been settled upon as a practical alternative to deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Even in Western countries, where adequate access to DDLT is feasible for HCC patients satisfying the Milan criteria, the necessity for LDLT is well established in particular for more advanced HCC patients who are disadvantaged by current allocation algorithms for grafts from deceased donors due to organ shortage, increasing waiting lists, and the expectation that many patients listed for LT will die while awaiting a suitable organ. In the field of LDLT in Asia, numerous technical innovations were achieved to secure donor safety, as well as to ensure patient survival. The experience with LDLT for HCC has been progressively increasing in many Asian countries to date. Although there are questions regarding the higher recurrence of HCC after LDLT than after DDLT, the application of the Milan and UCSF criteria to LDLT in high-volume multicenter cohorts from Japan and Korea has resulted in patient survival outcomes very similar to those following DDLT. Recently, inclusion of biologic tumor markers such as alpha fetoprotein (AFP), protein induced by vitamin K antagonist II (PIVKA II), and positive positron emission tomography (PET) in addition to parameters of tumor morphology might be the key to establishing the best criteria for LDLT for HCC. As pretransplant treatments, most LDLT centers in Asia cannot adopt the strategy of bridging therapy under scarcity of cadaveric organ donation but have to use those multi-modality treatments as a salvage intending for primary curative treatment or a downstaging therapy before LDLT. After LDLT, basically there is no difference in the management strategy for HCC recurrence between DDLD and LDLT.

Living vs. deceased donor liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Experimental studies suggest that the regenerating liver provides a "fertile field" for the growth of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, clinical studies report conflicting results comparing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) for HCC. Thus, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared after LDLT and DDLT for HCC in a systematic review and meta-analysis. Twelve studies satisfied eligibility criteria for DFS, including 633 LDLT and 1232 DDLT. Twelve studies satisfied eligibility criteria for OS, including 637 LDLT and 1050 DDLT. Altogether, there were 16 unique studies; 1, 2, and 13 of these were rated as high, medium, and low quality, respectively. Studies were heterogeneous, non-randomized, and mostly retrospective. The combined hazard ratio was 1.59 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-2.49; I(2) = 50.07%) for DFS after LDLT vs. DDLT for HCC, and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.73-1.27; I(2) = 5.68%) for OS. This analysis provides evidence of lower DFS after LDLT compared with DDLT for HCC. Improved study design and reporting is required in future research to ascribe the observed difference in DFS to study bias or biological risk specifically associated with LDLT.

The survival benefit of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma patients with hepatitis B virus infection and cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

A precise predictive survival model of liver transplantation (LT) with antiviral prophylaxis for hepatitis B virus (HBV)-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cirrhosis has not been established. The aim of our study was to identify predictors of outcome after LT in these patients based on tumor staging systems, antitumor therapy pre-LT, and antiviral prophylaxis in patients considered to be unfit by Milan or UCSF criteria.

METHODS

From 2002 to 2008, 917 LTs with antiviral prophylaxis were performed on patients with HBV-cirrhosis, and 313 had concurrent HCC.

RESULTS

Stratified univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated that independent predictors for poor survival were tumor size >7.5 cm (P = 0.001), tumor number >1 (P = 0.005), vascular invasion (P = 0.001), pre-LT serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level ≥1000 ng/ml (P = 0.009), and pre-LT aspartate aminotransferase (AST) level ≥120 IU/L (P = 0.044). Pre-LT therapy for HCC was an independent predictor of better survival (P = 0.028). Based on CLIP and TNM tumor staging systems, HCC patients with HBV-cirrhosis who met the following criteria: solitary tumor ≤7.5 cm, or ≤4 multifocal nodules, the largest lesion ≤5 cm and total tumor diameter ≤10 cm, or more nodules with the largest lesion ≤3 cm, and pre-LT serum AFP level <1000 µg/L and AST level <120 IU/L without vascular invasion and lymph node metastasis who were unfit for UCSF, had survival rates of 89% at 5 years. There was a 47% 5-year survival rate for patients with HCC exceeding the revised criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The current criteria for LT based on tumor size, number and levels of AFP and AST may be modestly expanded while still preserving excellent survival after LT. The expanded criteria combined with antiviral prophylaxis and pre-LT adjuvant therapy for HCC may be a rational strategy to prolong survival after LT for HCC patients with HBV-associated cirrhosis.

Salvage liver transplantation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma within UCSF criteria after liver resection

Background

Salvage liver transplantation (SLT) is restricted to patients who develop hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence within Milan criteria (MC). Little is known about outcomes for SLT in patients with recurrent HCC within University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria after liver resection (LR).

Methods

Between January 2001 and December 2011, 380 patients with HCC meeting UCSF criteria, 200 of which were resected (LR group) from a perspective of SLT in case of recurrence, and 180 directly underwent LT (PLT). We compared patient characteristics, perioperative and long-term outcomes between SLT and PLT groups. We also assessed the outcome of LR and PLT groups.

Results

Among the 200 patients in LR group, 86 (43%) developed HCC recurrence and 15/86 (17%) of these patients presented HCC recurrence outside UCSF criteria. Only 39 of the 86 patients underwent SLT, a transplantation rate of 45% of patients with HCC recurrence. Compared with PLT group, LR group showed lower overall survival rate (P = 0.005) and higher recurrence rate (P = 0.006). Although intraoperative blood loss and required blood transfusion were more frequent in SLT group, the perioperative mortality and posttransplant complications were similar in SLT and PLT groups. The overall survival and recurrence rates did not significantly differ between the two groups. When stratifying by graft type in the SLT group, overall survival and recurrence rates did not significantly differ between deceased donor LT (DDLT) and living donor LT (LDLT) groups. In the subgroup analysis by MC, similar results were observed between patients with recurrent HCC meeting MC and patients with recurrent HCC beyond MC but within UCSF criteria.

Conclusion

Our single institution experience demonstrated that prior hepatectomy and SLT for recurrent HCC within UCSF criteria was feasible and SLT could achieve the same outcome as PLT.

Is there an advantage of living over deceased donation in liver transplantation?

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a well-established strategy to decrease the mortality in the waiting list and recent studies have demonstrated its value even in patients with low MELD score. However, LDLT is still under a high level of scrutiny because of its technical complexity and ethical challenges as demonstrated by a decline in the number of procedures performed in the last decade in Western Countries. Many aspects make LDLT different from deceased donor liver transplantation, including timing of transplantation, procedure-related complications as well as immunological factors that may affect graft outcomes. Our review suggests that in selected cases, LDLT offers significant advantages over deceased donor liver transplantation and should be used more liberally.