Promoting a better standard of care for hepatology patients.

Katharine Caddick, Hepatology Clinical Nurse Specialist, North Bristol NHS Trust (katharine.caddick@nbt.nhs.uk), runner-up in the BJN Awards 2020 Hepatology/Liver Nurse of the Year category.

Differences in health-related quality of life between European and Asian patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

AIM: The aim of this study is to explore the possible effects of clinical and cultural characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma from Asian and European countries completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EORTC QLQ-HCC18. Comparisons were made using Student's t-test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test with method of false discovery to correct multiple comparisons. Multiway analysis of variance and model selection were used to assess the effects of clinical characteristics and geographic areas. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-seven patients with hepatocellular carcinoma completed questionnaires. After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, Asian patients still had significantly better HRQoL scores in emotional functioning, insomnia, (QLQ-C30) and in sexual interest (QLQ-HCC18). We also found an interaction in physical functioning (QLQ-C30) and fatigue (QLQ-HCC18) between geographic region and marital status, married European had worse HRQoL scores than Asian singles. CONCLUSIONS: Both clinical characteristics and geographic areas affected the HRQoL in with hepatocellular carcinoma. Cultural differences and clinical differences in the pattern of disease due to active surveillance of Asian countries may explain the results.

Quality of life changes in patients undergoing treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. One of the primary treatment goals for incurable advanced cases is to prolong quality of life (QoL). Thus, to determine which HCC therapies may be linked to a more favorable QoL, we assessed the association between QoL changes and different treatments in HCC patients. METHODS: We analyzed a non-randomized multicenter longitudinal study, which included 171 patients treated with surgery (n = 53), ablation (n = 53) or embolization (n = 65) from seven centers: four Asian and three European sites. All participants completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-HCC18 questionnaires before and after treatment. Propensity scores were calculated and used in addition to race for adjustment in the logistic regression model to account for the confounding effects of patient characteristics including age, gender, race, employment, living with family, at least one comorbid condition, years since diagnosis, prior treatment history, BCLC stage, Child-Pugh grade, cirrhosis, bilirubin levels and QoL score before treatment. RESULTS: After adjustment for confounders, patients tended to have higher odds of QoL deterioration when treated with ablation versus embolization (dyspnea: p = 0.019; appetite loss: p = 0.018; body image: p = 0.035) or ablation versus surgery (dyspnea: p = 0.099; appetite loss: p = 0.100; body image: p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: There were significant differences in QoL deterioration across different treatment groups. This information may assist patients and providers when selecting patient-centered treatment approaches for HCC.

International cross-cultural field validation of an European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaire module for patients with primary liver cancer, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaire HCC18.

UNLABELLED: This international field validation study examined the psychometric properties and clinical validity of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire module for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the EORTC quality-of-life questionnaire (QLQ)-HCC18. The EORTC QLQ-HCC18 was administered with the core questionnaire, the EORTC QLQ-C30, to 272 patients from seven centers in 6 countries. Patient acceptability of the module was examined with a debriefing questionnaire, and psychometric and clinical properties were assessed. Multitrait scaling analyses confirmed the hypothesized scale structure without any scaling error, and the fatigue scale demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency. The test-retest reliability scores were high for all scales, except abdominal swelling and sexual interest. The correlations between all scales of the QLQ-HCC18 and the QLQ-C30 were low or moderate, and many scales could distinguish patients with different clinical conditions. The module demonstrated responsiveness to clinical change in pain before and after surgery and some borderline change in patients undergoing systemic treatment. CONCLUSION: The EORTC QLQ-HCC18 can be used as a supplementary module for the EORTC QLQ-C30 in clinical trials for patients with HCC.

Fragility fracture risk in cirrhosis: a comparison of the fracture risk assessment tool, British Society of Gastroenterology and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: Low bone mineral density (BMD) is common in chronic liver disease and predisposes to fracture. We aimed to compare British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) osteoporosis guidelines with the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX). FRAX is a web-based algorithm used to estimate fracture risk with or without dual-emission x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Pre-BMD FRAX categorises patients to low, intermediate or high risk according to thresholds set by the National Osteoporosis Guidelines Group (NOGG) and recommends lifestyle advice, DXA or anti-osteoporosis treatment, respectively. DESIGN: The guidelines were applied to 132 patients with cirrhosis (91% Child-Pugh A). The number that would require DXA and be recommended treatment was determined. Using post-BMD FRAX/NOGG as a reference point, high-risk patients not recommended treatment and low-risk patients treated 'unnecessarily' were identified. RESULTS: BSG guidelines were applicable to 100% of the cohort, 88% required DXA and 30% would be recommended treatment. Equivalent figures for NICE guidelines were 30%, 17% and 12%, and for FRAX/NOGG guidelines were 78%, 27% and 15%, respectively. Using BSG guidance 8% of high-risk patients were not recommended treatment and 62% of those treated were low risk, compared with NICE: 3%, 60% and FRAX/NOGG: 13%, 40%, respectively. CONCLUSION: For patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis BSG guidelines are the most inclusive, but have high cost implications in terms of DXA scanning and unnecessary treatment. Risk stratification using FRAX requires fewer DXA scans with minimal impact in terms of missing high-risk patients, and yields a modest reduction in unnecessary treatment.