Benefit of initial resection of hepatocellular carcinoma followed by transplantation in case of recurrence: an intention-to-treat analysis

Liver resection (LR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as the first-line treatment in transplantable patients followed by "salvage transplantation" (ST) in case of recurrence is an attractive concept. The aim was to identify patients who gain benefit from this approach in an intention-to-treat study. From 1998 to 2008, among 329 potential candidates for liver transplantation (LT) with HCC within the Milan criteria (MC), 138 with good liver function were resected (LR group) from a perspective of ST in case of recurrence, and 191 were listed for LT first (LT group). The two groups were compared on an intention-to-treat basis with special reference to management of recurrences and transplantability after LR. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify resected patients who developed recurrence beyond MC. Five-year overall and disease-free survival was similar in both groups: LT versus LR group, 60% versus 77% and 56% versus 40%, respectively. Among the 138 patients in the LR group, 20 underwent LT before recurrence, 39 (28%) had ST, and 51 (37%) with recurrence were not transplanted including 21 within MC who were excluded for advanced age, acquired comorbidities, or refusal and 30 (22%) with recurrence beyond MC. Predictive factors for nontransplantability due to recurrence beyond MC included microscopic vascular invasion (hazard ratio [HR] 2.38 [range, 1.10-7.29]), satellite nodules (HR 2.46 [range, 1.01-6.68]), tumor size > 3 cm (HR 1.34 [range, 1.03-3.12]), poorly differentiated tumor (HR 3.18 [range, 1.31-7.70]), and liver cirrhosis (HR 1.90 [range, 1.04-3.12]). CONCLUSION: The high risk of failure of ST after initial LR for HCC within MC suggests the use of tissue analysis as a selection criterion. The salvage LT strategy should be restricted to patients with favorable oncological factors.     

Recent advances in the surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy. The treatment of HCC is complex and complicated by the severity of associated chronic liver disease, the stage of HCC, and the clinical condition of the patient. Liver resection (LR) is one of the most efficient treatments for patients with HCC, with an expected 5-year survival of 38%-61% depending on the stage of the disease. Improved liver function assessment, increased understanding of segmental liver anatomy from advanced imaging studies, and surgical technical progress are important factors that have led to reduced mortality in patients with HCC. The indication for LR may be expanded due to emerging evidences from laparoscopic hepatectomies and combined treatments with newly developed chemotherapies. Liver transplantation (LT) is considered as an ideal treatment for removal of existing tumors and the injured/preneoplastic underlying liver tissue with impaired liver function and the risk of multicentric carcinogenesis that results from chronically injured liver. However, LT is restricted to patients with minimal risk of tumor recurrence under immunosuppression. The expansion of criteria for LT in HCC patients is still under trial and discussion. Limited availability of grafts, as well as the risk and the cost of transplantation have led to considerable interest in expansion of the donor pool, living donor-related transplantation, and combined treatment involving LR and LT. This highlight presents evidence concerning recent studies evaluating LR and LT in HCC patients. In addition, alternative therapies for the treatment of early stage tumors and the management of patients on transplant waiting lists are discussed.     

Liver transplantation for HCC: its role

Liver transplantation (LT) is the only treatment that offers a chance of cure for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and the underlying liver cirrhosis simultaneously, but the availability of liver grafts and the aggressiveness of tumor recurrence are critical limiting factors of LT for patients with HCC. In most Asian countries, the serious shortage of deceased donors and the strong demand for LT has lead to the development of living-donor LT (LDLT) as a practical alternative replacing deceased-donor LT (DDLT). Grafts in Western countries are issued from DDLT and graft allocations are under the responsibilities of state agencies which apply strict rules based on the MELD (model for end-stage liver disease) score. Considering that HCC recurrence is the most common cause of post-transplant patient death, recipient candidates should be prudently selected through objectively established criteria. Points in addition to the MELD score can be allotted to patients with HCC providing that the HCC remains within the Milan criteria. The increasing number of LT candidates with HCC results in increasing waiting periods, which necessitate the consideration of pretransplant treatment of HCC, including partial liver resection. Both specific Western units and some Asian major LDLT centers have challenged the Milan criteria. The eligibility criteria of both DDLT and LDLT for HCC are likely to be expanded more than before, but this still requires further qualified risk–benefit analyses. The development of new effective treatment modalities before LT and for HCC recurrence might expand the selection criteria further without incurring an increased recurrence rate.     

Surgical treatment of intra hepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma

Recurrence after hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) is frequent.Currently,there are no recommendations on therapeutic strategy after recurrence of HCC.Whereas the 5 year-recurrence rate after resection of HCC is 100%,this drops to 15% after primary liver transplantation.Repeat hepatectomy and salvage liver transplantation(SLT) could be performed in selected patients to treat recurrent HCC and enable prolonged overall survival after treatment of recurrence.Other therapies such as local ablation,chemoembolization or sorafenib could be proposed to those patients unable to benefit from resection or SLT.A clear definition of the place of SLT and "prophylactic" liver transplantation is required.Indeed,identifying risks factors for recurrence at time of primary liver resection of HCC may help to avoid recurrence beyond Milan criteria and non-resectable situations.In this review,we summarize the recent data available in the literature on the feasibility and outcomes of repeat hepatectomy and SLT as treatment for recurrent HCC.     

Hepatocellular carcinoma： Defining the place of surgery in an era of organ shortage

Liver resection （LR） and transplantation offer the only potential chance of cure for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma （HCC）. Historically, all patients were treated by hepatic resection. With the advent of liver transplantation （LT） patients with HCC were preferentially placed on the waiting list for LT. However, early experience with LT was associated with a high rate of tumour recurrence and poor long-term survival. The increasing scarcity of donor livers resulted in restrictions being placed on tumour size, and an improvement in patient survival. To date there have been no randomised clinical trials comparing LR to LT. We review the evidence supporting LR and/or LT for HCC and discuss the role of neoadjuvant therapy. The decision of whether to resect or transplant remains debatable and is often determined by centre experience, availability of LT and donor organs.     

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.     

Loco-regional therapy in patients with Milan Criteria-compliant hepatocellular carcinoma and short waitlist time to transplant: an outcome analysis

Objectives

Liver transplantation (LT) in Milan Criteria (MC) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has excellent outcomes. Pre-transplant loco-regional therapy (LRT) has been used to downstage HCC to meet the MC. However, its benefit in patients with a brief waiting time to transplant remains unclear. This study evaluated outcomes in patients with short waitlist times to LT for MC-compliant HCC.

Methods

Patients undergoing LT for MC HCC at either of two transplant centres between 2002 and 2009 were retrospectively evaluated for outcome. Patients for whom post-transplant follow-up amounted to <12 months were excluded.

Results

A total of 225 patients were included, 93 (41.3%) of whom received neoadjuvant LRT. The median waiting time to transplant was 48 days. Mean post-transplant follow-up was 32.2 months. Overall and disease-free survival at 1 year, 3 years and 5 years were 93.1%, 82.4% and 72.6%, and 91.3%, 79.3% and 70.6%, respectively. There was no difference in overall (P = 0.94) and disease-free survival (P = 0.94) between groups who received and did not receive pre-LT LRT. There were also no disparities in survival or tumour recurrence among categories of patients (with single tumours measuring <3 cm, with single tumours measuring 3–5 cm, with multiple tumours).

Conclusions

Loco-regional therapy followed by rapid transplantation in MC HCC appears not to have an impact on post-transplant outcome.     

Surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) includes partial liver resection (LR) and liver transplantation (LT). Although LT represents the most efficient treatment in patients with small HCC, <30% of patients are eligible for LT because of restrictive criteria (one nodule <5 cm or two to three nodules <3 cm without macroscopic vascular invasion), graft unavailability and the high cost of the procedure. For large HCC, LR remains the only potential curative treatment. LR is now safer, with a low rate of mortality. Selective preoperative morphological assessment, preoperative use of portal vein embolization for increasing future remnant liver volume and the improvement of surgical techniques such as the use of intermittent clamping and anterior approach are factors that improve the safety and tolerance of LR. In patients with small HCCs and a preserved liver function (Child-Pugh grade A), good long-term survival can be achieved after anatomical resection that removes the tumor(s) and its portal vein territory. These good results of LR for small HCC and the increasing duration of the waiting list for candidates of LT have renewed the place of LR as a bridge treatment before LT.     

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.     

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria: A review

Liver transplantation(LT) has been accepted as an effective therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC). The Milan criteria(MC) are widely used across the world to select LT candidates in HCC patients. However, the MC may be too strict because a substantial subset of patients who have HCC exceed the MC and who would benefit from LT may be unnecessarily excluded from the waiting list. In recent years, many extended criteria beyond the MC were raised, which were proved to be able to yield similar outcomes compared with those patients meeting the MC. Because the simple use of tumor size and number was insufficient to indicate HCC biological features and to predict the risk of tumor recurrence, some biological markers such as Alphafetoprotein, Des-Gamma-carboxy prothrombin and the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio were useful in selecting LT candidates in HCC patients beyond the MC. For patients with advanced HCC, downstaging therapy is an effective way to reduce the tumor stage to fulfill the MC by using liver-directed therapy such as transarterial chemoembolization, radiofrequency ablation and percutaneous ethanol injection. This article reviews the recent advances in LT for HCC beyond the MC.     

Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Liver Transplantation: State of the Art

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an aggressive tumor that often occurs in chronic liver disease and cirrhosis. The incidence of HCC is growing worldwide.With respect to any other available treatment for liver cancer, liver transplantation (LT) has the highest potential to cure. LT allows for removal at once of both the tumor (“seed”) and the damaged-hepatic tissue (“soil”) where cancerogenesis and chronic liver disorders have progressed together. The Milan criteria (MC) have been applied worldwide to select patients with HCC for LT, yielding a 4-year survival rate of 75%. These criteria represent the benchmark for patient selection and are the basis for comparison with any other suggested criteria.However, MC are often considered to be too restrictive, and recent data show that between 25% and 50% of patients with HCC are currently transplanted beyond conventional indications. Consequently, any unrestricted expansion of selection criteria will increase the need for donor organs, lengthen waiting periods, increase drop-out rates, and impair outcomes on intention-to-treat analysis. Management of HCC recurrence after LT is challenging. There are a few reports available regarding the safety and efficacy of sorafenib for HCC recurrence after LT, but the data are heterogeneous. A multi-center prospective randomized controlled trial comparing placebo with sorafenib is advised. Alternatively, a meta-analysis of patient survival with sorafenib for HCC recurrence after LT could be helpful to characterize the therapeutic benefit and safety of sorafenib.Here, we review the use of LT for HCC, with particular emphasis on the selection criteria for transplantation in patients with HCC and management of HCC recurrence after LT.     

Liver transplantation for T3 lesions has higher waiting list mortality but similar survival compared to T1 and T2 lesions

Background. Restrictive staging criteria for liver transplant (LT) patients with HCC in the U.S. have resulted in favorable long-term recurrence-free survival, but these criteria exclude a subgroup of patients who, despite tumor size beyond T2 stage, demonstrate an acceptable outcome. The aim of this study was to assess the waiting list and post-transplant mortality of patients with HCC tumors greater than Milan T2 stage.Methods. The U.S. OPTN standard transplant dataset was analyzed for patients with a diagnosis of HCC who were listed for liver transplantation between February 2002 and 2008. Those patients with Milan T3 stage tumors were compared to patients with T1 and T2 lesions. Multivariate survival models were developed to investigate independent predictors of death or tumor recurrence post-transplant.Results. 7,391 patients with HCC were identified. 351 (4.75%) had T3 lesions. Compared to non-T3 patients, total tumor burden was greater and total alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) was higher in the T3 patients. T3 patients also were more likely to receive pretransplant locoregional therapy. There were no significant differences between T3 patients and non-T3 patients in demographic variables or physiologic MELD score at the time of transplant, waiting time, or donor risk index. Waiting list mortality was increased for T3 patients compared to non-T3 and tumor progression while waiting was higher. Independent predictors of waiting list mortality included physiologic MELD score at the time of listing, total tumor burden, and serum AFP. There was significant regional variation in the utilization of exceptions for T3 patients and UNOS regions 4, 9, and 10 performed a higher percentage of their transplants in T3 patients compared to other regions. There was no difference in post transplant survival between T3 and non-T3 patients. Independent predictors of post-transplant mortality included physiologic MELD score at the time of transplant, recipient age, and donor risk index. In patients with T3 tumors, total tumor burden was not an independent predictor of post transplant survival.Conclusions. Patients who are listed for liver transplantation with Milan stage T3 HCC have higher waiting list mor-tality but have similar post-transplant survival compared to patients with T1 and T2 HCC.     

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

The role of liver transplantation (LT) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has evolved over the past two decades, and transplantation has become one of the few curative treatment modalities for patients with HCC. Early results were poor, but the current restrictive selection criteria can yield excellent results. This review will discuss recent issues in the field, including (1) factors affecting the recurrence of HCC after LT; (2) the effect of downstaging HCC before LT, including transarterial catheter chemoembolization (TACE) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA); and (3) living-donor versus deceased-donor liver transplantation for HCC patients. The most important factors that have been described to affect LT survival include the tumor size, vascular invasion, and the degree of tumor differentiation. Recently, tumor markers, including alpha-fetoprotein and des-gamma carboxy prothrombin, were reported as predictors of HCC recurrence after LT. Furthermore, the experience accumulated with locoregional therapies such as TACE and RFA as bridging procedures to LT, along with the reduced waiting time under the HCC-adjusted MELD (model for endstage liver disease) system for organ allocation has led to improved outcomes. With the recent advances in adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT), there may be a marked change in the role of liver transplantation for hepatic malignancies, in particular for HCC.     

Biological markers of hepatocellular carcinoma for use as selection criteria in liver transplantation

The Milan criteria (MC) have been widely accepted as an effective way of selecting patients with early‐stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for curative liver transplantation (LT). However, since a substantial subset of HCC patients exists that is beyond the MC but with the potential for good outcomes after LT, several institutions have recently proposed new extended criteria. To explore optimal criteria that can reasonably predict the risk of recurrence, it is considered that new markers of biological behavior are needed in addition to morphological tumor size and number. Several promising candidates for such biological markers have been reported, including serum tumor markers such as alpha‐fetoprotein and des‐gamma‐carboxy prothrombin, inflammatory markers such as C‐reactive protein and neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio, response to pre‐transplant treatments for bridging therapy or down‐staging, and fluorine‐18‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. However, the role of these biological markers in patient selection criteria for LT has yet to be clarified. This review article aims to summarize the results of recent reported studies and to display perspectives for the establishment of optimal criteria that incorporate such biological markers.     

Impact of non-oncological factors on tumor recurrence after liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary neoplasm of the liver and is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Liver transplantation (LT) has become one of the best curative therapeutic options for patients with HCC, although tumor recurrence after LT is a major and unaddressed cause of mortality. Furthermore, the factors that are associated with recurrence are not fully understood, and most previous studies have focused on the biological properties of HCC, such as the number and size of the HCC nodules, the degree of differentiation, the presence of hepatic vascular invasion, elevated serum levels of alpha-fetoprotein, and the tumor stage outside of the Milan criteria. Thus, little attention has been given to factors that are not directly related to HCC (i.e., “non-oncological factors”), which have emerged as predictors of tumor recurrence. This review was performed to assess the effects of non-oncological factors on tumor recurrence after LT. The identification of these factors may provide new research directions and clinical strategies for the prophylaxis and surveillance of tumor recurrence after LT, which can help reduce recurrence and improve patient survival.     

Survival analysis of patients with stage I and II hepatocellular carcinoma after a liver transplantation or liver resection

IntroductionLiver transplantation (LT) is a treatment option in select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of the present study was to compare survival in Stage I or II HCC patients undergoing either liver transplant (LT) or a liver resection (LR).MethodThe study is a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Data Base (1998–2011). In total, 148 882 patients with liver cancer were identified, of which 5-year survival data (1998–2006) were available for 64 227 patients. Patients were stratified by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) clinical stage I and II. Kaplan–Meier curves and log-rank tests were used for statistical analysis.Results3340 HCC patients met analysis criteria. Among stage I HCC, 860 had LT and 871 had LR. Among stage II HCC, 833 had LT and 776 LR. In stage I patients the median survival for LT and LR were 127.9 and 56.7 months, respectively, (P < 0.0001) and in stage II patients the median survival was 110.8 and 42.8 months (P < 0.0001). Unlike LT patients, LR patients with Stage I HCC had a longer median survival compared with Stage II patients (P = 0.0002).ConclusionLiver transplantation offers a survival advantage compared with a liver resection among patients with Stage I and II HCC. LT is the best surgical treatment for early stage (I/II) HCC in patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis, whereas LR provides equivalent outcomes to LT in patients without advanced fibrosis and should be considered as the first surgical option.     

Transplantation vs resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with compensated liver function after downstaging therapy

AIM:Our study aimed to compare the results of liver transplantation (LT) and liver resection (LR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that met the Milan criteria after successful downstaging therapy. METHODS:From February 2004 to August 2010, a consecutive series of 102 patients were diagnosed with advanced-stage HCC that met the modified UCSF down-staging protocol inclusion criteria. All of the patients accepted various down-staging therapies. The types and numbers of treatments were tailored to each patient according to the tumor characteristics, location, liver function and response. After various downstaging therapies, 66 patients had tumor characteristics that met the Milan criteria; 31 patients accepted LT in our center, and 35 patients accepted LR. The baseline characteristics, down-staging protocols, postoperative complications, overall survival and tumor free survival rate, and tumor recurrence rate were compared between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate the long-term overall survival and tumor-free survival rate. Meanwhile, a Cox proportional hazards model was used for the multivariate analyses of overall survival and disease-free survival rate. RESULTS:No significant difference was observed between the LT and LR groups with respect to the downstaging protocol, target tumor characteristics, and baseline patient characteristics. Fifteen patients suffered various complications after LT, and 8 patients had complications after LR. The overall complication rate for the LT group was 48.4%, which was significantly higher than the LR group (22.9%) (P = 0.031). The overall in-hospital mortality in hospital for the LT group was 12.9% vs 2.9% for the LR group (P = 0.172). The overall patient survival rates at 1-, 3and 5-years were 87.1%, 80.6% and 77.4%, respectively, after LT and 91.4%, 77.1% and 68.6%, respectively, after LR (P = 0.498). The overall 1-, 3and 5-year tumor recurrencefree rates were also comparable (P = 0.656). Poorer tumor differentiation (P = 0.041) and a hi     

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.