Resection of Retro-Hepatic Vena Cava (RHVC) En-bloc with Caudate Lobe without Vascular Exclusion for a Low Grade Leiomyosarcoma of Inferior Vena Cava.

BACKGROUND: Leiomyosarcomas (LMS) of the inferior vena cava (IVC) originate in the retrohepatic (RHVC) portion in 15% of cases.1 Due to complex anatomy and need to preserve venous outflow from the infra-diaphragmatic viscera, the operation may require total vascular exclusion, veno-venous bypass and hypothermic liver resections.2,3 In this video, virtual planning of the operation allowed a parenchyma-sparing radical resection in a patient with limited liver reserve. METHODS: A 12-cm LMS of RHVC invading the entire segment 1 (i.e., Spiegel's lobe, paracaval portion, and caudate process) was diagnosed in a man with metabolic steato-hepatitis (BMI: 34). He had no response to previous chemotherapy. Major hepatectomy was excluded considering the high risk of postoperative liver failure. 3D-reconstruction of regional anatomy allowed planning of a parenchymal-sparing, en bloc resection of tumor, RHVC, and caudate lobe while avoiding hilar and suprahepatic venous clamping. RESULTS: The operation strategy relied on the en bloc separation of caudate lobe, RHVC, and tumor from the hepatic veins confluence and the posterior segments after complete mobilization of the liver. Vessel loop-assisted hanging maneuver, encircling tumor, and RHVC with superimposed 3D-reconstructions guided the parenchymal transection, while preserving the middle hepatic vein outflow. RHVC was replaced with prosthetic material. CONCLUSIONS: Complex resection of primary tumor of the IVC en bloc with caudate lobe and RHVC can be attempted in chronic liver diseases at-risk of postoperative failure. Preservations of transhepatic flow and liver function depends on tumor size and preservation of noninvaded hepatic-veins confluence. Preoperative virtual 3D reconstruction is crucial in surgical planning.

Liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma after tumour downstaging (XXL): a randomised, controlled, phase 2b/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Indications for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma are evolving and so-called expanded criteria remain debated. Locoregional therapies are able to downstage hepatocellular carcinoma from beyond to within the Milan criteria. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of liver transplantation after successful hepatocellular carcinoma downstaging. METHODS: We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial designed in two phases, 2b and 3, at nine Italian tertiary care and transplantation centres. Patients aged 18-65 years with hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria, absence of macrovascular invasion or extrahepatic spread, 5-year estimated post-transplantation survival of at least 50%, and good liver function (Child-Pugh A-B7) were recruited and underwent tumour downstaging with locoregional, surgical, or systemic therapies according to multidisciplinary decision. After an observation period of 3 months, during which sorafenib was allowed, patients with partial or complete responses according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web-response system to liver transplantation or non-transplantation therapies (control group). A block randomisation (block size of 2), stratified by centre and compliance to sorafenib treatment, was applied. Liver transplantation was done with whole or split organs procured from brain-dead donors. The control group received sequences of locoregional and systemic treatment at the time of demonstrated tumour progression. The primary outcomes were 5-year tumour event-free survival for phase 2b and overall survival for phase 3. Analyses were by intention to treat. Organ allocation policy changed during the course of the study and restricted patient accrual to 4 years. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01387503. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2011, and March 31, 2015, 74 patients were enrolled. Median duration of downstaging was 6 months (IQR 4-11). 29 patients dropped out before randomisation and 45 were randomly assigned: 23 to the transplantation group versus 22 to the control group. At data cutoff on July 31, 2019, median follow-up was 71 months (IQR 60-85). 5-year tumour event-free survival was 76·8% (95% CI 60·8-96·9) in the transplantation group versus 18·3% (7·1-47·0) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·20, 95% CI 0·07-0·57; p=0·003). 5-year overall survival was 77·5% (95% CI 61·9-97·1) in the transplantation group versus 31·2% (16·6-58·5) in the control group (HR 0·32, 95% CI 0·11-0·92; p=0·035). The most common registered grade 3-4 serious adverse events were hepatitis C virus recurrence (three [13%] of 23 patients) and acute transplant rejection (two [9%]) in the transplantation group, and post-embolisation syndrome (two [9%] of 22 patients) in the control group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in four patients: two (8%) of 23 patients in the transplantation group (myocardial infarction and multi-organ failure) versus two (9%) of 22 patients in the control group (liver decompensation). INTERPRETATION: Although results must be interpreted with caution owing to the early closing of the trial, after effective and sustained downstaging of eligible hepatocellular carcinomas beyond the Milan criteria, liver transplantation improved tumour event-free survival and overall survival compared with non-transplantation therapies Post-downstaging tumour response could contribute to the expansion of hepatocellular carcinoma transplantation criteria. FUNDING: Italian Ministry of Health.

Liver resection and transplantation for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

The incidence of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is increasing worldwide. Although several advances have been made in the past decades to better understand this complex malignancy and to develop new treatment strategies, the prognosis of iCCA remains dismal. Liver resection (LR) is the mainstay of treatment but only a minority of patients are amenable to surgery. In most cases, patients with iCCA will require a major hepatectomy for complete resection of the tumour. This may be contraindicated or increase the surgical burden in patients with chronic liver disease and small remnant liver volume. Lymphadenectomy with a minimal harvest of 6 lymph nodes is considered adequate, as microscopic nodal metastases have been shown in more than 40% of patients. Current 5-year overall survival following LR is in the range of 25%-40%. For locally advanced disease not amenable to upfront LR, neoadjuvant locoregional therapies may be used with the aim of converting these patients to resectability or even to transplantation in well-selected cases. Recent studies have shown that liver transplantation (LT) might be a treatment option for patients with unresectable very-early iCCA (i.e. ≤2 cm), with survival outcomes comparable to those of hepatocellular carcinoma. In patients with unresectable, advanced tumours, confined to the liver who achieve sustained response to neoadjuvant treatment, LT may be considered an option within prospective protocols. The role of adjuvant therapies in iCCA is still under debate. Herein, we review the recent advances in the surgical treatment of iCCA and examine its correlation with locoregional therapies, adjuvant and neo-adjuvant strategies.

Antitumor Activity of a Novel Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitor for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

Fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) might have an important role in the pathogenesis and biology of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). We examined FGFR expression in CCA tumor specimens obtained from patients and CCA cell lines, and then determined the effects of the novel FGFR inhibitor, derazantinib (DZB; formally, ARQ 087), which is currently in clinical phase 2 trials for intrahepatic CCA. DZB inhibited the growth of CCA cell lines in a dose-dependent manner, and extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 and AKT. It also activated apoptotic and cell growth arrest signaling. DZB reduced the in vitro invasiveness and the expression of key epithelial-mesenchymal transition genes. The in vitro data correlated with the expression of FGFRs in human CCA specimens by immunohistochemistry (FGFR1, 30% positive; and FGFR2, 65% positive) and the CCA cell lines assayed by Western blot analysis. These correlated in vitro studies suggest that FGFR may play an important role in the pathogenesis and biology of CCA. Our findings support the notion that FGFR inhibitors, like DZB, should be further evaluated at the clinical stage as targeted therapy for CCA treatment.

Derazantinib (ARQ 087) in advanced or inoperable FGFR2 gene fusion-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Next-generation sequencing has identified actionable genetic aberrations in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (iCCA), including the fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) fusions. Derazantinib (ARQ 087), an orally bioavailable, multi-kinase inhibitor with potent pan-FGFR activity, has shown preliminary therapeutic activity against FGFR2 fusion-positive iCCA. METHODS: This multicentre, phase 1/2, open-label study enrolled adult patients with unresectable iCCA with FGFR2 fusion, who progressed, were intolerant or not eligible to first-line chemotherapy (NCT01752920). Subjects received derazantinib in continuous daily doses. Tumour response was assessed according to RECIST 1.1 every 8 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (18 women/11 men; median age, 58.7 years), 2 treatment-naive and 27 who progressed after at least one prior systemic therapy, were enrolled. Overall response rate was 20.7%, disease control rate was 82.8%. Estimated median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.04-9.2 months). Treatment-related adverse events (AE) were observed in 27 patients (93.1%, all grades), including asthenia/fatigue (69.0%), eye toxicity (41.4%), and hyperphosphatemia (75.9%). Grade ≥ 3 AEs occurred in 8 patients (27.6%). CONCLUSION: Derazantinib demonstrated encouraging anti-tumour activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced, unresectable iCCA with FGFR2 fusion who progressed after chemotherapy. A pivotal trial of derazantinib in iCCA is ongoing (NCT03230318).

Permanent Pancreatic Duct Occlusion With Neoprene-based Glue Injection After Pancreatoduodenectomy at High Risk of Pancreatic Fistula: A Prospective Clinical Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess safety and efficacy of pancreatic duct occlusion (PDO) with neoprene-based glue in selected patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) at high risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). BACKGROUND DATA: PD is the reference standard approach for tumors of the pancreaticoduodenal region. POPF is the most relevant complication after PD. PDO has been proposed as an alternative to anastomosis to manage the pancreatic stump. METHODS: A single-center, prospective, nonrandomized trial enrolled 100 consecutive PD for cancer. Patients at high risk for POPF according to Fistula Risk Score (FRS) >15% (≥6 points) were treated with PDO using neoprene glue (study cohort); patients with FRS ≤15% (≤5 points) received pancreaticojejunal anastomosis (PJA: control cohort). Primary endpoint was complication rate grade ≥3 according to Dindo-Clavien Classification (DCC). Other postoperative outcomes were monitored (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03738787). RESULTS: Fifty-one patients underwent PDO and 49 PJA. DCC ≥3, postoperative mortality, and POPF grade B-C were 25.5% versus 24.5% (P = 0.91), 5.9% versus 2% (P = 0.62), and 11.8% versus 16.3% (P = 0.51) in the study versus control cohort, respectively. At 1 and 3 years, new-onset diabetes was diagnosed in 13.7% and 36.7% of the study cohort versu 4.2% and 12.2% in controls (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: PDO with neoprene-based glue is a safe technique that equalizes early outcome of selected patients at high risk of POPF to those at low risk undergoing PJA. Neoprene-based PDO, however, triples the risk of diabetes at 1 and 3 years.

The place of liver transplantation in the treatment of hepatic metastases from neuroendocrine tumors: Pros and cons.

Liver metastases occur in nearly half of NET patients (MNETs) and heavily affect prognosis, with 5-yr. OS around 19-38%. Although it is difficult to show outcome differences for available treatments, due to the long course of disease, surgery for MNETs remains the most effective option in terms of survival and symptom control. Since MNETs frequently present as an oligo-metastatic, liver-limited disease, unresectable in 80% of cases, liver transplantation (LT) has emerged as a potential curative treatment. Nevertheless, experience with LT for MNETs is limited and burdened by highly heterogeneous outcomes and significant recurrence rate, mostly explained by the variability of selection criteria. Several prognostic factors have been identified: extended surgery on primary tumor associated to LT, elderly patients, pancreatic primary (pNET), extensive liver involvement, poorly differentiated tumors, high Ki67 levels and short wait time to LT. A proper patients' selection based on these data (Milan NET criteria) allows a significant survival advantage over non-transplant strategies, with excellent outcomes in recent series (69-97.2% 5-yr. OS) as opposed to patients undergoing non-surgical treatments (34-50.9%). Evidence indicates LT as the best option for selected patients with MNETs. The use of organs for MNETs is therefore justified.

NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, and Gemcitabine With Nab-Paclitaxel as First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: The NAPOLI 3 trial showed the superiority of fluorouracil, leucovorin, liposomal irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (NALIRIFOX) over the combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NABP) as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Analyses comparing NALIRIFOX and GEM-NABP with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) have not yet been reported. Objective: To derive survival, response, and toxic effects data from phase 3 clinical trials and compare NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, and GEM-NABP. Data Sources: After a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology meetings' libraries, Kaplan-Meier curves were extracted from phase 3 clinical trials conducted from January 1, 2011, until September 12, 2023. Study Selection: Phase 3 clinical trials that tested NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, or GEM-NABP as first-line treatment of metastatic PDAC and reported overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) curves were selected. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Individual Participant Data reporting guidelines. Data Extraction And Synthesis: Individual patient OS and PFS data were extracted from Kaplan-Meier plots of original trials via a graphic reconstructive algorithm. Overall response rates (ORRs) and grade 3 or higher toxic effects rates were also collected. A pooled analysis was conducted, and results were validated via a network meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was OS. Secondary outcomes included PFS, ORR, and toxic effects rates. Results: A total of 7 trials with data on 2581 patients were analyzed, including 383 patients treated with NALIRIFOX, 433 patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, and 1756 patients treated with GEM-NABP. Median PFS was longer in patients treated with NALIRIFOX (7.4 [95% CI, 6.1-7.7] months) or FOLFIRINOX (7.3 [95% CI, 6.5-7.9] months; [HR], 1.21 [95% CI, 0.86-1.70]; P = .28) compared with patients treated with GEM-NABP (5.7 [95% CI, 5.6-6.1] months; HR vs NALIRIFOX, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.22-1.73]; P < .001). Similarly, GEM-NABP was associated with poorer OS (10.4 [95% CI, 9.8-10.8]; months) compared with NALIRIFOX (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.00-1.39]; P = .05], while no difference was observed between FOLFIRINOX (11.7 [95% CI, 10.4-13.0] months) and NALIRIFOX (11.1 [95% CI, 10.1-12.3] months; HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.81-1.39]; P = .65). There were no statistically significant differences in ORR among NALIRIFOX (41.8%), FOLFIRINOX (31.6%), and GEM-NABP (35.0%). NALIRIFOX was associated with lower incidence of grade 3 or higher hematological toxic effects (eg, platelet count decreased 1.6% vs 11.8% with FOLFIRINOX and 10.8% with GEM-NABP), but higher rates of severe diarrhea compared with GEM-NABP (20.3% vs 15.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, NALIRIFOX and FOLFIRINOX were associated with similar PFS and OS as first-line treatment of advanced PDAC, although NALIRIFOX was associated with a different toxicity profile. Careful patient selection, financial toxic effects consideration, and direct comparison between FOLFIRINOX and NALIRIFOX are warranted.

Therapeutic strategies for post-transplant recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Despite stringent selection criteria, hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) still occurs in up to 20% of cases, mostly within the first 2-3 years. No adjuvant treatments to prevent such an occurrence have been developed so far. However, a balanced use of immunosuppression with minimal dose of calcineurin inhibitors and possible addition of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors is strongly advisable. Moreover, several pre- and post-transplant predictors of recurrence have been identified and may help determine the frequency and duration of post-transplant follow-up. When recurrence occurs, the outcomes are poor with a median survival of 12 mo according to most retrospective studies. The factor that most impacts survival after recurrence is timing (within 1-2 years from LT according to different authors). Several therapeutic options may be chosen in case of recurrence, according to timing and disease presentation. Surgical treatment seems to provide a survival benefit, especially in case of late recurrence, while the benefit of locoregional treatments has been suggested only in small retrospective studies. When systemic treatment is indicated, sorafenib has been proved safe and effective, while only few data are available for lenvatinib and regorafenib in second line. The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is controversial in this setting, given the safety warnings for the risk of acute rejection.

The role of lymphadenectomy in the surgical treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A review.

Cholangiocarcinoma is the second most common primary tumor of the liver. The incidence and mortality of its intrahepatic form has been increasing over the past 2 decades. Currently, the only available curative treatment for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is surgical resection. There is still no prospective evidence to support neoadjuvant systemic treatments in resectable disease, while adjuvant chemotherapy with Capecitabine is currently the only recommended systemic treatment after liver resection based on the results of randomised trial. Despite the implementation of perioperative treatments and improvements in resective surgery, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma remains a disease characterized by high incidence of recurrence and poor long-term survival. Lymph node metastases can be found in 45-65% of patients and are one of the most impacting prognostic factors after surgical resection. Preoperative imaging is not always sufficient in assessing lymph node status, thus hepatic pedicle lymphadenectomy can be important to ensure precise staging in surgical patients. An increasing trend in performing lymph node dissection during liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma has been observed in the last 20 years, although its actual efficacy compared to the potential complications remains debated. The current evidence on the prognostic role of the lymph node status, its preoperative predictability, the basis for a correct hepatic pedicle lymphadenectomy and its prognostic role in the surgical treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma are presented.

Perioperative Bevacizumab-based Triplet Chemotherapy in Patients With Potentially Resectable Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.

BACKGROUND: In colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM), bevacizumab-based neoadjuvant strategies provide increased pathologic response. We aimed at assessing the activity of perioperative capecitabine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab (COI-B regimen) in patients with potentially resectable CRCLM, and investigating biomarkers for early prediction of pathologic response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a single-center phase II study enrolling patients with liver-limited, borderline resectable disease and/or high-risk features. Patients received 5 preoperative and 4 postoperative cycles of biweekly COI-B (irinotecan 180 mg/m2 and bevacizumab 5 mg/Kg on day 1, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on day 2, and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice a day on days 2 to 6). The primary endpoint was pathologic response rate in the intention-to-treat population. A Simon 2-stage design was adopted to detect an increase from 30% to 50% with a power of 90%. Dynamic imaging biomarkers (early tumor shrinkage [ETS], deepness of response, maximum standardized uptake volume [SUVmax]/regression index) and next generation sequencing data were explored as surrogates. RESULTS: From June 2013 to March 2017, 46 patients were enrolled. Pathologic response was achieved in 63% patients (endpoint met), and responders achieved significantly better survival outcomes with respect to non-responders. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events were diarrhea and neutropenia (8.7%) in the preoperative phase and thromboembolic events (5.9%) in the postoperative phase. ETS and lower SUV-2 were significantly associated with pathologic response. CONCLUSION: The COI-B regimen is a feasible and highly active perioperative strategy in patients with molecularly unselected, potentially resectable CRCLM. ETS and SUV-2 have a promising role as imaging-based biomarkers for pathologic response.

Ki-67 and presence of liver metastases identify different progression-risk classes in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNEN) undergoing resection.

In pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNEN), size ≤2 cm and Ki-67 < 3% suggest indolent behavior, but no factor alone predicts prognosis. We investigated factors predictive of tumor progression in 80 pNENs surgically resected in a single Institution from 1995 to 2015. At multivariable analysis the only two independent variables related to PFS were Ki-67 (HR 2.97; 95%CI 1.26-7.02) and presence of synchronous liver metastases (HR 3.60; 95%CI 1.70-7.61). Using Ki-67 < 3% and M0 as reference, the HR for tumor progression was 3.21 (95%CI 1.18-8.74) for M0 patients with Ki-67 3-20%, 5.06 (2.29-11.2) for M1 patients with Ki-67 ≤ 20% and 24.3 (6.64-89.2) for those with Ki-67 > 20%. Tumor size (≤2 vs. >2 cm) was not a predictive factor at any analysis. Intra-class correlation of Ki-67 values on pre-surgical biopsies vs. surgical specimens was 0.99 and Ki-67 classes were correctly identified in 97% of biopsies. Ki-67 and presence of liver metastases are the major prognostic factors in pNEN and identify different progression risks regardless of tumor size. Pre-surgical pNEN biopsy for Ki-67 assessment should be included in the evaluation of patients with 1-2 cm tumors to help in the decision on whether to perform surgical resection.

Proposal of Prognostic Survival Models before and after Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Potentially Transplantable Patients.

BACKGROUND: Transplantable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents a highly debated issue due to the overlap between indications for liver resection (LR) and transplantation (LT) in patients suitable for both. STUDY DESIGN: Between January 2000 and December 2012, five hundred and twenty-four transplantable patients affected by HCC were identified among resected patients. Two regression models were constructed to classify patients into 2 groups pre-low and pre-high risk based on preoperative variables and then to reclassify pre-low-risk patients according to postoperative variables into either post-low or post-high-risk. Additionally, a cohort of patients with comparable baseline characteristics who underwent LT were similarly classified into pre-low and pre-high-risk groups and compared with the resected patients in terms of survival. RESULTS: Cirrhosis, aspartate transaminase, α-fetoprotein, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, number of nodules, and diameter of the largest nodule were preoperatively found to be significantly related to overall survival post-LR. Microvascular invasion and satellites were selected to reclassify prognosis in the resulting preoperative low-risk group into post-high risk. The converted group (post-high) demonstrated the same 5-year survival as the pre-high group. Patients undergoing LT had better survival overall than those undergoing LR, with the exception of pre-low LT and post-low LR (confirmed low-risk LR) who had similar outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The new models were strongly predictive of patients' likelihood of survival after LR for HCC on liver cirrhosis. Liver transplantation offers a survival advantage over LR, except in low-risk groups where both modalities might be comparable.