| Literature DB >> 29520343 |
Mohammad Kamal Shaker1, Iman F Montasser1, Mohamed Sakr1, Mohamed Elgharib2, Hany M Dabbous1, Hend Ebada1, Ahmed El Dorry2, Mohamed Bahaa3, Mahmoud El Meteini3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The number of loco-regional therapies (LRTs) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has increased dramatically during the past decade, bridging or downstaging patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation. This study aimed to analyze the outcomes of LRTs prior to living donor liver transplantation in patients with HCC.Entities:
Keywords: HCC recurrence; LRT; Milan criteria; beyond Milan; bridge/down staging; hepatocellular carcinoma; liver transplantation; loco-regional therapy
Year: 2018 PMID: 29520343 PMCID: PMC5833771 DOI: 10.2147/JHC.S147098
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hepatocell Carcinoma ISSN: 2253-5969
Size, site, number of focal lesions and Milan Criteria according to the results of Tri-phasic spiral abdominal CT scan before intervention
| All patients (total number of focal lesions=80)
| ||
|---|---|---|
| Number | Percentage | |
| FL size (cm), mean ± SD (range) | 2.14±1.27 | (0.6–6) |
| Site of FL | ||
| Right lobe | 15 | (51.72) |
| Bilobar | 14 | (48.28) |
| Within Milan Criteria | 20 | (68.97) |
| Exceeding Milan Criteria | 9 | (31.03) |
| Single focal lesion | 10 | (34.48) |
| Two focal lesions | 14 | (48.28) |
| Three focal lesions | 2 | (6.90) |
| Four focal lesions | 1 | (3.45) |
| Multiple focal lesions (>4) | 2 | (6.90) |
Abbreviation: CT, computed tomography; FL, focal lesion.
Descriptive analysis of results of the last triphasic spiral abdominal CT after loco-regional therapy
| All patients (total number of focal lesions=80)
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Number | Percentage | ||
| Response to treatment | Complete | 52 | 65.00 |
| Partial | 28 | 35.00 | |
| Site, % | Right lobe | 15 | 51.72 |
| Bilobar | 14 | 48.28 | |
| TNM | T0 | 15 | 51.72 |
| T1 | 5 | 17.24 | |
| T2 | 5 | 17.24 | |
| T3 | 2 | 6.89 | |
| T4a | 2 | 6.89 | |
Notes:
Response to treatment: according to the mRECIST Criteria.
UNOS TNM Staging after LRT: T0 = no viable tumor; T1 = single nodule <1.9 cm, T2 = 1 nodule 2:5 cm; 2–3 nodules all <3 cm, T3 = 1 nodule >5 cm; 2–3 nodules with at least 1 >3 cm, T4a = 4 or more nodules, T4b = T2, T3, T4a plus vascular invasion.
Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; LRT, loco-regional therapy; mRECIST, modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; TNM, tumor/node/metastasis; UNOS, United Network for Organ Sharing.
Patients distribution according to Tri-phasic spiral abdominal CT scan before and after LRT and changes in Milan Criteria after LRT
| HCC criteria | Number | Percentage | HCC criteria | Number | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before LRT | Within Milan Criteria | 20 | 69 | |||
| Exceeding Milan Criteria | 9 | 31 | Meets UCSF | 4 | 13.8 | |
| Exceeding UCSF | 5 | 17.2 | ||||
| After LRT | Within Milan Criteria | 25 | 86.2 | |||
| Exceeding Milan Criteria | 4 | 13.8 | Meets UCSF | 2 | 6.9 | |
| Exceeding UCSF | 2 | 6.9 |
Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; LRT, loco-regional therapy; UCSF, University of California San Francisco Criteria.
Changes in Milan Criteria/exceeding Milan Criteria after LRTa
| HCC criteria | Before LRT | After LRT | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Within Milan | 19 (65.5) | ⇨ | MILAN | 25 (86.2) |
| Meets UCSF | 3 (10.3) | ⇨ | MILAN | |
| Exceeded UCSF | 3 (10.3) | ⇨ | MILAN | |
| Exceeded UCSF | 1 (3.4) | ⇨ | Exceed UCSF | 4 (13.8) |
| Within Milan | 1 (3.4) | ⇨ | Meets UCSF | |
| Meets UCSF | 1 (3.4) | ⇨ | Exceeds UCSF | |
| Exceeded UCSF | 1 (3.4) | ⇨ | Meets UCSF |
Note:
Values are given as number (percentage).
Abbreviations: LRT, loco-regional therapy; UCSF, University of California San Francisco Criteria.
Comparison between the results of last spiral CT (1 month before LT) and histopathological results of the explant with regard to TNM classification
| Number | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| T0 | 11 | 37.93 |
| T2 | 5 | 17.24 |
| T0 → T2 | 3 | 10.34 |
| T0 → T3 | 1 | 3.45 |
| T1 → T2 | 3 | 10.34 |
| T1 → T4b | 1 | 3.45 |
| T2 → T1 | 1 | 3.45 |
| T4a → T1 | 1 | 3.45 |
| T4a → T2 | 1 | 3.45 |
Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; LT, liver transplantation; TNM, tumor/node/metastasis.
Comparison between patients who had LRT (n=29) and those who did not (n=32)
| Patients who received | Patients who did not receive | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 52.04±7.04 | 51.23±6.09 | 0.6318 |
| Gender (male/female) | 26/3 | 28/4 | 1.0000 |
| MELD | 8.28±1.89 | 9.29±1.73 | 0.0333 |
| Fulfilling Milan Criteria | 20 | 32 | 0.0006 |
| Waiting time till LT (months) | 15.62±13.80 | 2.5±1.2 | <0.0001 |
| 1-year survival | 93% | 94.4% | 0.0446 |
| HCC recurrence during the follow-up period | 0 | 0 | 1.0000 |
Notes:
Sixty-two HCC patients received LDLT at our center over 2 years. Thirty-two patients (51.6%) had liver transplantation without LRT and 1 patient had LRT but died before transplantation and was excluded from this study.
p≤0.05 is significant.
Data presented as mean ± SD.
Abbreviations: HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; LDLT, living donor liver transplantation; LRT, loco-regional therapy; LT, liver transplantation; MELD, model for end stage liver disease.
Comparison between the results of some recent studies and the current study
| Xing et al | Agopian et al | Agopian et al | Na et al | Current study | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of patients | |||||
| Total patients transplanted for HCC who had LRT | 205 | 501 | 2,854 | 86 | 29 |
| Bridging | 111 | 401 | All | 52 | 20 |
| Downstaging | – | 100 | – | 34 | 9 |
| Type of LRT (%) | |||||
| RFA | 15.8 | 51 | 12.9 | 26.7 | 34.48 |
| Microwave | – | 63 | 53.4 | 79 | 3.4 |
| TACE/DEB-TACE | 46.1/26 | 5 | 1.3 | – | 37.9 |
| Percutaneous ethanol | – | – | 1.6 | – | – |
| Y90 Radioembolization | 6.6 | – | – | – | – |
| Bland embolization | 3.9 | – | – | – | – |
| Pre-LT MELD score (median or mean ± SD) | 15.03 | 12 | 12 | 8.9±6.5 | – |
| Pre LRT serum AFP (ng/dL) (median [IQR] or mean ± SD) | 82 cases <400; 29 cases >400 | 12 (5–45) | 21 (8–107) | 100.4±385 | 308±1,240 |
| Mean duration from HCC listing till LT, months (range) or mean ± SD | 5.92 (0.12–67.33) | – | – | 16.5±15.6 | – |
| Criteria of HFL(s) | |||||
| Number (solitary) | 52 | 356 | – | 52 | 20 |
| Within MC | 100% | 80% | 100% | 36.4% | 13.8% |
| Within UCSF | – | 13% | – | – | 6.9% |
| Percentage Downstaged to MC | – | 95% | – | – | 17.2% |
| Beyond UCSF | – | 7% | – | – | 6.9% |
| Percentage Downstaged to MC | – | 30% | – | – | – |
| Tumor size (maximum tumor diameter, cm) (mean ± SD or median and range) | 2.40±1.21 | 3 (2.4–4) | 2.5 (1.8–3.5) | 3.81±2.79 | 2.14±1.27 |
| Radiological response after LRT, % | |||||
| No viable/new lesion | – | 73.4 | – | – | 65 |
| Possible viable/new lesion | – | 20.2 | – | – | 35 |
| Definite viable/new lesion | – | 6.4 | – | – | – |
| Pathological response, n (%) | |||||
| Complete tumor necrosis | – | 126 (25) | – | 42 (48.8) | – |
| Partial tumor necrosis | – | 340 (68) | – | 44 (51.1) | – |
| No tumor necrosis | – | 35 (7) | – | – | – |
| Survival post-LTx, % | |||||
| 1 year | 91 | 86 | 85 | 85.95 | 93% |
| 3 years | 85 | 71 | 75 | 77.8 | – |
| 5 years | 72 | 63 | 68 | 75.4 | – |
Abbreviations: AFP, alpha fetoprotein; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; HFL, hepatic focal lesion; IQR, interquartile range; LRT, loco-regional therapy; LT, liver transplantation; MC, Milan Criteria; MELD, model for end-stage liver disease; UCSF, University of California San Francisco Criteria; RFA, radiofrequancy ablation; TACE/DEB, trance-arterial chemoembolization/drug eluting beads.