Options for the treatment of intrahepatic recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: Salvage liver transplantation or rehepatectomy?

Radiofrequency ablation versus stereotactic body radiotherapy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter, propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed at analyzing and comparing the clinical efficacy and prognosis of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC).

METHODS

Clinicopathological data of RHCC patients who underwent RFA or SBRT as treatment from three medical centers were retrospectively reviewed. The survival outcomes of patients who underwent SBRT were compared with those who underwent RFA. Using the Kaplan-Meier method, survival curves for the two groups of patients were generated, and the log-rank test was used to compare survival differences. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to match patients of the SBRT and RFA groups in a 1:1 ratio.

RESULTS

The SBRT group had a significantly better overall survival (OS) than the RFA group and no statistical differences were found in disease-free survival (DFS) in the two groups before and after PSM. After PSM, subgroup analysis demonstrated that, compared with the RFA group, the SBRT group had a significantly better OS in terms of tumor location in the subphrenic or subcapsular area, tumor size > 2.5 cm, and tumor proximity to major vessels ≤ 1 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT appears to be an effective priority to RFA for RHCC patients especially when RFA is not feasible due to tumor location, size, and proximity to major vessels.

Efficacy and prognostic impact of preoperative risk factors for salvage liver transplantation and repeat hepatectomy in patients with early-stage recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment strategy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) remains unclear. This study is based on cases of rHCC after liver resection, aiming to evaluate the influence of preoperative risk factors on the long-term prognosis of patients with rHCC by comparing patients who underwent salvage liver transplantation (SLT) with those who underwent repeat hepatectomy (RH).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 401 consecutive patients with rHCC who underwent SLT or RH between March 2015 and December 2022. Next, we performed propensity score matching, subgroup analyses, and both univariate and multivariate analyses. In addition, Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate the overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) after recurrence.

RESULTS

The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS and RFS rates in the SLT group were significantly higher than those in the RH group (p=0.0131 and p=0.0010, respectively), and similar results were observed after propensity score matching. In the presence of zero or one risk factors, the OS and RFS in the SLT group were significantly better than those in the RH group (p=0.0386 and p=0.0117, respectively). However, in the presence of two to four risk factors, no significant differences in OS or RFS were detected between the two groups (p=0.1119 and p=0.1035, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis identified a number of risk factors that were strongly correlated with a long term prognosis for patients with rHCC who underwent SLT and RH: multiple tumors, a maximum tumor diameter ≥5 cm, microvascular invasion, and a recurrence time ≤2 years. Our findings provide important reference guidelines for organ allocation and clinical decision-making.

Salvage liver transplantation versus curative treatment for patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Salvage liver transplantation (SLT) is an effective treatment option for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) following primary curative treatment (CUR). However, its efficacy remains controversial compared to that of CURs, including repeat liver resection (RLR) and local ablation. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of these procedures.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for studies investigating SLT and CUR was performed. Outcome data, including overall and disease-free survival, tumor response, and operative and postoperative outcomes, were independently extracted and analyzed by two authors using a standardized protocol.

RESULTS

Fifteen cohort studies comprising 508 and 2050 patients with rHCC, who underwent SLT or CUR, respectively, were included. SLT achieved significantly longer overall survival than both CUR (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.56, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.68; I2 = 34.6 %, p = 0.105) and RLR (HR: 0.64, 95 % CI: 0.49-0.84; I2 = 0.0 %, p = 0.639). Similar significantly better survival benefits were observed compared with CUR (HR: 0.30, 95 % CI: 0.20-0.45; I2 = 51.1 %, p = 0.038) or RLR (HR: 0.31, 95 % CI: 0.18-0.56; I2 = 65.7 %, p = 0.005) regarding disease-free survival. However, SLT resulted in a longer operative duration and hospital stay, larger amount of blood loss, higher rate of transfusion and postoperative morbidity, and slightly higher postoperative mortality than CUR.

CONCLUSION

SLT was associated with better long-term survival than CUR or RLR in patients with rHCC after primary curative treatment.

Combining local regional therapy and systemic therapy: Expected changes in the treatment landscape of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma

Improvements in early screening, new diagnostic techniques, and surgical treatment have led to continuous downward trends in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) morbidity and mortality rates. However, high recurrence and refractory cancer after hepatectomy remain important factors affecting the long-term prognosis of HCC. The clinical characteristics and prognosis of recurrent HCC are heterogeneous, and guidelines on treatment strategies for recurrent HCC are lacking. Therapies such as surgical resection, radiofrequency ablation, and transhepatic arterial chemoembolization are effective for tumors confined to the liver, and targeted therapy is a very important treatment for unresectable recurrent HCC with systemic metastasis. With the deepening of the understanding of the immune microenvironment of HCC, blocking immune checkpoints to enhance the antitumor immune response has become a new direction for the treatment of HCC. In addition, improvements in the tumor immune microenvironment caused by local treatment may provide an opportunity to improve the therapeutic effect of HCC treatment. Ongoing and future clinical trial data of combined therapy may develop the new treatment scheme for recurrent HCC. This paper reviews the pattern of recurrent HCC and the characteristics of the immune microenvironment, demonstrates the basis for combining local treatment and systemic treatment, and reports current evidence to better understand current progress and future approaches in the treatment of recurrent HCC.

Surgical Strategies for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Resection: A Review of Current Evidence

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer, and both liver resection and liver transplantation are considered potentially curative options. However, high recurrence rates affect the prognosis depending both on the primary HCC pathology characteristics or on the type and time of the relapse. While great attention has been usually posted on treatment algorithms for the first HCC, treatment algorithms for recurrent HCC (rHCC) are lacking. In these cases, surgery still represents a curative option with both redo hepatectomy and/or salvage liver transplantation, which are considered valid treatments in selected patients. In the current era of personalised medicine with promises of new systemic-targeted immuno-chemotherapies, we wished to perform a narrative review of the literature on the role of surgical strategies for rHCC.

The largest western experience on salvage hepatectomy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: propensity score-matched analysis on behalf of He.RC.O.Le.Study Group

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate, in a large Western cohort, perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of salvage hepatectomy (SH) for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after primary hepatectomy (PH) or locoregional treatments.

METHODS

Data were collected from the Hepatocarcinoma Recurrence on the Liver Study Group (He.RC.O.Le.S.) Italian Registry. After 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis (PSM), two groups were compared: the PH group (patients submitted to resection for a first HCC) and the SH group (patients resected for intrahepatic rHCC after previous HCC-related treatments).

RESULTS

2689 patients were enrolled. PH included 2339 patients, SH 350. After PSM, 263 patients were selected in each group with major resected nodule median size, intraoperative blood loss and minimally invasive approach significantly lower in the SH group. Long-term outcomes were compared, with no difference in OS and DFS. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed only microvascular invasion as an independent prognostic factor for OS.

CONCLUSION

SH proved to be equivalent to PH in terms of safety, feasibility and long-term outcomes, consistent with data gathered from East Asia. In the awaiting of reliable treatment-allocating algorithms for rHCC, SH appears to be a suitable alternative in patients fit for surgery, regardless of the previous therapeutic modality implemented.

Effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation versus transarterial chemoembolization for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis

Background

Both transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are effective methods for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC). Thus far, it is unclear which method is more satisfactory in short- and long-term survival benefits.

Purpose

To compare the overall survival (OS) and complications of TACE and RFA used for the management of RHCC.

Material and Methods

A literature search was carried out using PubMed, the Cochrane Library and, Embase databases, and Google Scholar, keywords including “RHCC,” “TACEC,” and “RFA” with a cutoff date of 30 April 2021. Used Review Manager software was to calculate short- and long-term OS. The clinical outcomes are major complications and complete response (CR).

Results

Finally, nine clinical trials met the research standard, including 1326 subjects, of which 518 received RFA and 808 received TACE. The analysis showed that patients who underwent RFA had significantly higher 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS (OR_1-year = 1.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.27–2.91, p = .002; OR_3-year = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.30–2.08, p <.0001; OR_5-year = 3.22, 95% CI = 1.34–7.72, p=.009). Besides, the patients who chose RFA had an obvious higher rate of CR than those receiving TACE (OR = 33.75, 95% CI = 1.73–658.24, p = .002). However, the major complications were consistency between these two groups.

Conclusion

Our study discovered that RFA had greater CR and incidence in both the short-term and long-term OS than TACE. In addition, obvious difference was not found in major complications in these two methods.