Easy recognition and high autoimmune hepatitis specificity of smooth muscle antibodies giving an actin microfilament immunofluorescent pattern on embryonal vascular smooth muscle cells.

Smooth muscle antibodies (SMA) with anti-microfilament actin (MF-SMA) specificity are regarded as highly specific markers of type 1 autoimmune hepatitis (AIH-1) but their recognition relying on immunofluorescence of vessel, glomeruli, and tubules (SMA-VGT pattern) in rodent kidney-tissue, is restricted by operator-dependent interpretation.A gold standard method for their identification is not available. We assessed and compared the diagnostic accuracy for AIH-1 of an embryonal-aorta vascular-smooth-muscle(VSM) cell line-based assay with those of the rodent-tissue based assay for the detection of MF-SMA pattern in AIH-1 patients and controls. Sera from 138 AIH-1 patients and 295 controls (105 primary biliary cholangitis,40 primary sclerosing cholangitis,50 chronic viral hepatitis,20 alcohol-related liver disease,40 steatotic liver disease,and 40 healthy controls) were assayed for MF-SMA and for SMA-VGT using VSM-based and rodent tissue-based assays, respectively. MF-SMA and SMA-VGT were found in 96(70%) and 87(63%) AIH-1 patients, and 2 controls (p<0.0001).Compared with SMA-VGT, MF-SMA showed similar specificity (99%), higher sensitivity (70% vs 63%,p=ns) and likelihood ratio for a positive test (70 vs 65). Nine (7%) AIH-1 patients were MF-SMA positive despite being SMA-VGT negative. Overall agreement between SMA-VGT and MF-SMA was 87% (kappa coefficient 0.870,[0.789-0.952]). MF-SMA were associated with higher serum γ-globulin [26(12-55) vs 20 g/l(13-34),p<0.005] and immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels [3155(1296-7344) vs 2050 mg/dl(1377-3357), p<0.002]. The easily recognizable IFL MF-SMA pattern on VSM cells strongly correlated with SMA-VGT and has an equally high specificity for AIH-1. Confirmation of these results in other laboratories would support the clinical application of the VSM cell-based assay for reliable detection of AIH-specific SMA.

Genetic, Immunological, Dietary, Gut Microbiota, and Environmental Determinants of Osteoporosis in the Course of Celiac Disease: Which Factor Plays the First Violin in This Orchestra?

Celiac disease (CD) is a chronic small intestinal immune-mediated enteropathy precipitated by exposure to dietary gluten in genetically predisposed individuals. The worldwide prevalence of CD is estimated to be 0.7-1.4% of the general population. Etiopathology of this disease is multifactorial, with genetic determinants being a major contributing player to CD susceptibility. Its manifestation embraces different organs, including the musculoskeletal apparat. Patients with CD have increased risk of bone disorders. According to data, bone disorders - osteopenia and osteoporosis - can affect up to 70% of patients with CD at diagnosis, and it decreases after the initiation of a gluten-free diet. Gluten consumption in patients with CD triggers an inflammatory reaction followed by tissue damage, and both; local and systemic inflammation can increase the risk of bone mass deterioration. Other theory assumes shortages of vitamin D and an impaired calcium absorption mechanism leading to secondary hyperparathyroidism. Taking into account the increasing prevalence of CD and osteoporosis, we broadly discuss genetic, immunological, dietary, gut microbiota, and environmental factors that could increase the risk of osteoporosis in CD. Furthermore, we discuss lifestyle and pharmacological preventing and treatment measures.

COVID-19: Has the Liver Been Spared?

The liver is a secondary and often collateral target of COVID-19 disease but can lead to important consequences. COVID-19 might directly cause a high number of complications in patients with pre-existing chronic liver disease, increasing their risk of hepatic decompensation. Moreover, it also determines indirect consequences in the management of patients with liver disease, especially in those suffering from decompensated cirrhosis and HCC, as well as in the execution of their follow-up and the availability of all therapeutic possibilities. Liver imaging in COVID-19 patients proved to be highly nonspecific, but it can still be useful for identifying the complications that derive from the infection. Moreover, the recent implementation of telemedicine constitutes a possible solution to both the physical distancing and the re-organizational difficulties arising from the pandemic. The present review aims to encompass the currently hypothesized pathophysiological mechanisms of liver injury in patients with COVID-19 mediated by both the direct invasion of the virus and its indirect effects and analyze the consequence of the pandemic in patients with chronic liver disease and liver tumors, with particular regard to the management strategies that have been implemented to face this worldwide emergency and that can be further improved.

The importance of liver functional reserve in the non-surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.

The aim of any oncological treatment is not just to eliminate the tumour, but to maximise patient survival and quality of life. Since the liver has a vital function, any radical treatment that severely compromises liver function will result in a shortening of life expectancy, rather than a prolongation. Furthermore, even non-severe liver damage may prevent the delivery of further effective therapies. This is particularly important in the case of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), as it is associated with underlying cirrhosis in most patients - cirrhosis itself is not only a potentially lethal disease and independent prognostic factor in HCC, but it also makes liver function fragile. Accordingly, some information about liver dysfunction is included in most staging systems for HCC and can be used to guide the selection of treatments that the functional liver reserve can tolerate. Unfortunately, the prediction of functional damage to the liver in the case of antitumor treatments is very challenging and still suboptimal in any given patient. Moreover, while the assessment of functional reserve can now be used to avoid postoperative liver failure in the surgical setting, its use has been less well clarified for non-surgical therapies, which is of particular relevance today, as several lines of effective non-surgical treatments, including systemic therapies, have become available. The present article will a) critically review the implications of the assessment of liver functional reserve in patients with HCC, b) illustrate the available tools to assess liver functional reserve and c) discuss the role of functional assessment for each type of non-surgical therapy for HCC.

Pattern of progression of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Implications for second-line clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is the second most frequent liver cancer. The overall survival of iCCA and other biliary tract cancers (BTC) remains poor. Recently, the ABC-06 trial reported the superiority of FOLFOX vs clinical observation as a second-line treatment. Still, the survival benefit was less than expected. We hypothesized that the pattern of progression of iCCA can drive post-progression survival (PPS), similar to hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Multicentre retrospective evaluation of consecutive iCCA patients who progressed after frontline systemic treatment with gemcitabine as monotherapy or in combination with platinum. Radiological assessment of progression was evaluated according to RECIST 1.1. The progression pattern was divided according to the presence/absence of new extrahepatic lesions (NEH). RESULTS: We included 206 patients from 5 centres. The median OS was 14.1 months and its independent predictors (hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]) were previous surgery 0.699 [0.509-0.961], performance status >2.445 [1.788-3.344], permanent first-line discontinuation 16.072 [5.102-50.633], registration of ascites 2.226 [1.448-3.420] or bilirubin >3 mg/dl 3.004 [1.935-4.664] during the follow-up, and disease progression 2.523 [1.261-5.050]. The appearance of NEH independently predicted OS 2.18 [1.55-3.06] in patients with radiological progression. Amongst 138 patients eligible for second-line treatment, PPS was 16.8 and 5.9 months in cases without and with NEH, respectively (P = .001). Progression owing to NEH lesions was an independent predictor of PPS 1.873 [1.333-2.662], together with performance status, time to progression to the frontline treatment, bilirubin >3 mg/dl and ascites. CONCLUSIONS: PPS of iCCA is influenced by progression pattern, with important implications for second-line trial design and analysis.

Limitation of the simplified scoring system for the diagnosis of autoimmune Hepatitis with acute onset.

Autoimmune Hepatitis (AIH) is a chronic inflammatory liver disease of unknown aetiology characterized by the presence of autoantibodies, hypergammaglobulinaemia with specific IgG increase and interface hepatitis on liver histology. The clinical course of AIH is classically characterized by fluctuating periods of decreased or increased disease activity and therefore its clinical spectrum is variable ranging from no symptoms to severe acute hepatitis and even fulminant hepatic failure. Acute presentation may not differ from acute hepatitis of other causes and diagnosis can be difficult. We describe our experience on diagnostic performance of the two AIH scoring systems in acute onset of AIH and found that revised version of the original criteria (1999) achieves the diagnosis in about 30% of patients who presented with normal IgG serum levels and lower frequency of autoantibody positivity in whom the simplified score did not allow the diagnosis.

International and multicenter real-world study of sorafenib-treated patients with hepatocellular carcinoma under dialysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Information on safety and efficacy of systemic treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) under dialysis are limited due to patient exclusion from clinical trials. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the rate, prevalence, tolerability, and outcome of sorafenib in this population. METHODS: We report a multicenter study comprising patients from Latin America and Europe. Patients treated with sorafenib were enrolled; demographics, dose modifications, adverse events (AEs), treatment duration, and outcome of patients undergoing dialysis were recorded. RESULTS: As of March 2018, 6156 HCC patients were treated in 44 centres and 22 patients were concomitantly under dialysis (0.36%). The median age was 65.5 years, 40.9% had hepatitis C, 75% had Child-Pugh A, and 85% were Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer-C. The median time to first dose modification, treatment duration and overall survival rate were 2.4 months (interquartile ranges [IQR], 0.8-3.8), 10.8 months (IQR, 4.5-16.9), and 17.5 months (95% CI, 7.2-24.5), respectively. Seventeen patients required at least 1 dose modification. The main causes of first dose modification were asthenia/worsening of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status and diarrhoea. At the time of death or last follow-up, four patients were still on treatment and 18 had discontinued sorafenib: 14 were due to tumour progression, 2 were sorafenib-related, and 2 were non-sorafenib-related AE. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes observed in this cohort seem comparable to those in the non-dialysis population. Thus, to the best of our knowledge, this is the largest and most informative dataset regarding systemic treatment outcomes in HCC patients undergoing dialysis.

Management of adverse events with tailored sorafenib dosing prolongs survival of hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Sorafenib is associated with multiple adverse events (AEs), potentially causing its permanent interruption. It is unknown how physicians' experience has impacted on the management of these AEs and consequently on clinical outcomes. We aimed to assess whether AE management changed over time and if these modifications impacted on treatment duration and overall survival (OS). METHODS: We analysed the prospectively collected data of 338 consecutive patients who started sorafenib between January 2008 and December 2017 in 3 tertiary care centres in Italy. Patients were divided according to the starting date: Group A (2008-2012; n = 154), and Group B (2013-2017, n = 184). Baseline and follow-up data were compared. In the OS analysis, patients who received second-line treatments were censored when starting the new therapy. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics, AEs, and radiological response were consistent across groups. Patients in Group B received a lower median daily dose (425 vs. 568 mg/day, p <0.001) due to more frequent dose modifications. However, treatment duration was longer (5.8 vs. 4.1 months, p = 0.021) with a trend toward a higher cumulative dose in Group B. Notably, the OS was also higher (12.0 vs. 11.0 months, p = 0.003) with a sharp increase in the 2-year survival rate (28.1 vs. 18.4%, p = 0.003) in Group B. Multivariate time-dependent Cox regression analysis confirmed later period of treatment (2013-2017) as an independent predictor of survival (HR 0.728; 95%CI 0.581-0.937; p = 0.013). Unconsidered confounders were unlikely to affect these results at the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Experience in the management of sorafenib-related AEs prolongs treatment duration and survival. This factor should be considered in the design of future randomised clinical trials including a sorafenib treatment arm, as an underestimate of sample size may derive. LAY SUMMARY: Sorafenib has been the standard frontline systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma for over a decade. Its tolerability is limited by different adverse events, which might lead to its permanent discontinuation in a sizeable proportion of patients. After a careful analysis of potential confounders, we demonstrated that the physicians' experience in managing adverse events related to sorafenib has improved over time, with longer treatment periods and less permanent discontinuation for toxicities. More importantly, these improvements also translated into longer patient survival. Our results have relevant repercussions in clinical practice and in the design of future clinical trials.

New hallmark of hepatocellular carcinoma, early hepatocellular carcinoma and high-grade dysplastic nodules on Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI in patients with cirrhosis: a new diagnostic algorithm.

OBJECTIVE: Many improvements have been made in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the radiological hallmarks of HCC have remained the same for many years. We prospectively evaluated the imaging criteria of HCC, early HCC and high-grade dysplastic nodules (HGDNs) in patients under surveillance for chronic liver disease, using gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging. DESIGN: Our study population included 420 nodules >1 cm in 228 patients. The MRI findings of each nodule were collected in all sequences/phases. The diagnosis of HCC was made according to the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) criteria; all atypical nodules were diagnosed using histology. RESULTS: A classification and regression tree was developed using three MRI findings which were independently significant correlated variables for early HCC/HCC, and the best sequence of their application in a new diagnostic algorithm (hepatobiliary hypointensity, arterial hyperintensity and diffusion restriction) was suggested. This algorithm demonstrated, both in the entire study population and for nodules ≤2 cm, higher sensitivity (96% [95% CI 93.5% to 97.6%] and 96.6% [95% CI 93.9% to 98.5%], P<0.001, respectively) and slightly lower specificity (91.8% [95% CI 88.6% to 94.1%], P=0.063, and 92.7% [95% CI 88.9% to 95.4%], P=0.125, respectively) than those of the AASLD criteria. Our new diagnostic algorithm also showed a very high sensitivity (94.7%; 95% CI 92% to 96.6%) and specificity (99.3%; 95% CI 97.7% to 99.8%) in classifying HGDN. CONCLUSION: Our new diagnostic algorithm demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity and comparable specificity than those of the AASLD imaging criteria for HCC in patients with cirrhosis evaluated using Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI, even for lesions ≤2 cm. Moreover, this diagnostic algorithm allowed evaluating other lesions which could arise in a cirrhotic liver, such as early HCC and HGDN.

Outcomes of sequential treatment with sorafenib followed by regorafenib for HCC: Additional analyses from the phase III RESORCE trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The RESORCE trial showed that regorafenib improves overall survival (OS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma progressing during sorafenib treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.78; p <0.0001). This exploratory analysis describes outcomes of sequential treatment with sorafenib followed by regorafenib. METHODS: In RESORCE, 573 patients were randomized 2:1 to regorafenib 160 mg/day or placebo for 3 weeks on/1 week off. Efficacy and safety were evaluated by last sorafenib dose. The time from the start of sorafenib to death was assessed. Time to progression (TTP) in RESORCE was analyzed by TTP during prior sorafenib treatment. RESULTS: HRs (regorafenib/placebo) for OS by last sorafenib dose were similar (0.67 for 800 mg/day; 0.68 for <800 mg/day). Rates of grade 3, 4, and 5 adverse events with regorafenib by last sorafenib dose (800 mg/day vs. <800 mg/day) were 52%, 11%, and 15% vs. 60%, 10%, and 12%, respectively. Median times (95% CI) from the start of sorafenib to death were 26.0 months (22.6-28.1) for regorafenib and 19.2 months (16.3-22.8) for placebo. Median time from the start of sorafenib to progression on sorafenib was 7.2 months for the regorafenib arm and 7.1 months for the placebo arm. An analysis of TTP in RESORCE in subgroups defined by TTP during prior sorafenib in quartiles (Q) showed HRs (regorafenib/placebo; 95% CI) of 0.66 (0.45-0.96; Q1); 0.26 (0.17-0.40; Q2); 0.40 (0.27-0.60; Q3); and 0.54 (0.36-0.81; Q4). CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory analyses show that regorafenib conferred a clinical benefit regardless of the last sorafenib dose or TTP on prior sorafenib. Rates of adverse events were generally similar regardless of the last sorafenib dose. LAY SUMMARY: This analysis examined characteristics and outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who were treated with regorafenib after they had disease progression during sorafenib treatment. Regorafenib provided clinical benefit to patients regardless of the pace of their disease progression during prior sorafenib treatment and regardless of their last sorafenib dose. The sequence of sorafenib followed by regorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma may extend survival beyond what has been previously reported. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01774344.

Regorafenib for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who progressed on sorafenib treatment (RESORCE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: There are no systemic treatments for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) whose disease progresses during sorafenib treatment. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in patients with HCC who have progressed during sorafenib treatment. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial done at 152 sites in 21 countries, adults with HCC who tolerated sorafenib (≥400 mg/day for ≥20 of last 28 days of treatment), progressed on sorafenib, and had Child-Pugh A liver function were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) by a computer-generated randomisation list and interactive voice response system and stratified by geographical region, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic disease, and α-fetoprotein level to best supportive care plus oral regorafenib 160 mg or placebo once daily during weeks 1-3 of each 4-week cycle. Investigators, patients, and the funder were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival (defined as time from randomisation to death due to any cause) and analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01774344. FINDINGS: Between May 14, 2013, and Dec 31, 2015, 843 patients were screened, of whom 573 were enrolled and randomised (379 to regorafenib and 194 to placebo; population for efficacy analyses), and 567 initiated treatment (374 received regorafenib and 193 received placebo; population for safety analyses). Regorafenib improved overall survival with a hazard ratio of 0·63 (95% CI 0·50-0·79; one-sided p<0·0001); median survival was 10·6 months (95% CI 9·1-12·1) for regorafenib versus 7·8 months (6·3-8·8) for placebo. Adverse events were reported in all regorafenib recipients (374 [100%] of 374) and 179 (93%) of 193 placebo recipients. The most common clinically relevant grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent events were hypertension (57 patients [15%] in the regorafenib group vs nine patients [5%] in the placebo group), hand-foot skin reaction (47 patients [13%] vs one [1%]), fatigue (34 patients [9%] vs nine patients [5%]), and diarrhoea (12 patients [3%] vs no patients). Of the 88 deaths (grade 5 adverse events) reported during the study (50 patients [13%] assigned to regorafenib and 38 [20%] assigned to placebo), seven (2%) were considered by the investigator to be related to study drug in the regorafenib group and two (1%) in the placebo group, including two patients (1%) with hepatic failure in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Regorafenib is the only systemic treatment shown to provide survival benefit in HCC patients progressing on sorafenib treatment. Future trials should explore combinations of regorafenib with other systemic agents and third-line treatments for patients who fail or who do not tolerate the sequence of sorafenib and regorafenib. FUNDING: Bayer.

Clinical outcomes with long-term sorafenib treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter real-life study.

AIM: This multicenter field-practice study evaluates outcomes of long-term sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. METHODS: Consecutive HCC patients on sorafenib were enrolled. We evaluated those receiving sorafenib for ≥12 months. RESULTS: Out of 800 patients on sorafenib, 81 (10%) received long-term treatment. Median duration of treatment was 22.7 months (range: 12.3-92.6). Only 21 (26%) reported grade 3/4 adverse events. Complete response was reported in 11 patients (14%). Median overall survival was 34.8 months (95% CI: 29.9-44.3). Only baseline Child-Pugh class was associated with survival. CONCLUSION: Sorafenib could result in long-term control of HCC in a relevant proportion of patients. Given the availability of regorafenib in the second-line setting, an earlier introduction of systemic therapy may be considered according to clinical indications.

Non-transplant therapies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh-Turcotte class B cirrhosis.

Underlying liver cirrhosis is present in most patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver transplantation is the only treatment strategy to cure both diseases. All other hepatocellular carcinoma treatment strategies have to take into account residual liver function that concurs with the patient's prognosis and might limit their feasibility. In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh-Turcotte class B (CPT-B), owing to borderline liver function, any intervention might be offset by liver function deterioration. In this setting, the decision for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment requires a comprehensive assessment of liver function, not restricted to the CPT classification, in addition to a careful evaluation of the prognostic effect of hepatocellular carcinoma compared with cirrhosis. In this Review, we provide an overview of the literature regarding the benefits and harms of non-transplant therapies in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and CPT-B cirrhosis.

The evolutionary scenario of hepatocellular carcinoma in Italy: an update.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma is changing worldwide. This study aimed at evaluating the changing scenario of aetiology, presentation, management and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in Italy during the last 15 years. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of the ITA.LI.CA (Italian Liver Cancer) database including 5192 hepatocellular carcinoma patients managed in 24 centres from 2000 to 2014. Patients were divided into three groups according to the date of cancer diagnosis (2000-2004, 2005-2009 and 2010-2014). RESULTS: The main results were as follows: (i) progressive patient aging; (ii) progressive expansion of non-viral cases and, namely, of "metabolic" hepatocellular carcinomas; (iii) increasing proportion of hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed during a correct (semi-annual) surveillance programme; (iv) favourable cancer stage migration; (v) increased use of radiofrequency ablation to the detriment of percutaneous ethanol injection; (vi) improved outcomes of ablative and transarterial treatments; (vii) improved overall survival (adjusted for the lead time in surveyed patients), particularly after 2009, of both viral and non-viral patients presenting with an early- or intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: During the last 15 years several aetiological and clinical features of hepatocellular carcinoma patients have changed, as their management. The observed improvement of overall survival was owing both to the wider use of semi-annual surveillance, expanding the proportion of tumours that qualified for curative treatments, and to the improved outcome of loco-regional treatments.

Yttrium-90 radioembolization vs sorafenib for intermediate-locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a cohort study with propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Sorafenib and transarterial (90) Y-radioembolization (TARE) are possible treatments for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) intermediate-advanced stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). No study directly comparing sorafenib and TARE is currently available. This single-centre retrospective study compares the outcomes achieved with sorafenib and TARE in HCC patients potentially amenable to either therapy. METHODS: Seventy-four sorafenib (71 ± 10 years, male 87%, BCLC B/C 53%/47%) and 63 TARE HCC patients (66 ± 9 years, male 79%, BCLC B/C 41%/59%) were included based on the following criteria: Child-Pugh class A/B, performance status ≤1, HCC unfit for other effective therapies, no metastases and no previous systemic chemotherapy. RESULTS: Median overall survivals of the two groups were comparable, being 14.4 months (95% CI: 4.3-24.5) in sorafenib and 13.2 months (95% CI: 6.1-20.2) in TARE patients, with 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates of 52.1%, 29.3% and 14.7% vs 51.8%, 27.8% and 21.6% respectively. Two TARE patients underwent liver transplantation after successful down-staging. To minimize the impact of confounding factors on survival analysis, propensity model matched 32 patients of each group for median age, tumour gross pathology and the independent prognostic factors (portal vein thrombosis, performance status, Model for End Liver Disease). Even after matching, the median survival did not differ between sorafenib (13.1 months; 95% CI: 1.2-25.9) and TARE patients (11.2 months; 95% CI: 6.7-15.7), with comparable 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates. CONCLUSIONS: In cirrhotic patients with intermediate-advanced or not-otherwise-treatable HCC, sorafenib and TARE provide similar survivals. Down-staging allowing liver transplantation only occurred after TARE.

Fatigue and pruritus at onset identify a more aggressive subset of primary biliary cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In recent years, primary biliary cirrhosis is mostly diagnosed in patients who are asymptomatic; however, a proportion of cases still present with typical complaints such as fatigue and/or pruritus. We compared biochemical, histological and immunological features of patients with or without fatigue and/or pruritus at onset to see whether the different clinical presentation may eventually impact on disease progression. METHODS: We analysed the Bologna cohort of 216 patients with primary biliary cirrhosis referred to our Centre between 1997 and 2007, according to symptomatic (fatigue and/or pruritus) or asymptomatic presentation. Clinical, biochemical, histological and immunological feature at diagnosis, response to ursodeoxycholic acid and progression of the disorder were compared after a mean follow-up of 81 ± 75 months. RESULTS: At diagnosis, symptomatic patients were significantly more often women (98.6% vs. 87.2%, P = 0.004), younger (mean age 49 ± 12 vs. 55 ± 12 years, P = 0.003) and with more pronounced biochemical activity, as indicated by higher alkaline phosphatase (mean 2.93 ± 2 vs. 2.12, P = 0.002) and aminotransferase (mean 1.92 ± 1 vs. 1.47 ± 1.27, P = 0.014) levels, whereas histological stage and autoantibody profile were similar. Symptomatic patients were less likely to respond to ursodeoxycholic acid therapy (63% vs. 81%, P = 0.006) and developed more often cirrhosis and its complications (31% vs. 13%, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue and/or pruritus at onset identify a subset of patients with primary biliary cirrhosis who preferentially are women, younger, with a particularly active disease, less responsive to ursodeoxycholic acid treatment, and more inclined to evolve to cirrhosis and its complications.

Cholangiocarcinoma in Cirrhosis: Value of Hepatocyte Specific Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma (ICC) remains elusive at imaging, which is a critical issue in cirrhotic patients in whom a diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be established only by imaging. AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate the potential of MRI in the diagnosis of ICC in cirrhosis using 'hepatocyte-specific' Gadolinium (Gd)-based contrast agents. METHODS: Sixteen histologically proven and retrospectively identified ICCs on cirrhosis were investigated with hepatocyte-specific magnetic resonance contrast agents (6 in Bologna with Gd-EOB-DTPA and 10 in Milan with Gd-BOPTA). The control group consisted of 41 consecutively and prospectively collected nodules (31 HCCs) imaged with Gd-EOB-DTPA. RESULTS: Fifteen ICC nodules (94%) displayed hypointensity in the hepatobiliary phase, suggesting malignancy. Thirteen cholangiocarcinomas (81%) showed hyperenhancement in the venous phase. Only 2 cholangiocarcinoma nodules showed hypoenhancement in the venous phase, corresponding to washout, in both cases preceded by rim enhancement in arterial phase. All the hepatocarcinomas showed hypointensity in hepatobiliary phase, but was always preceded by hypointensity in the venous phase; arterial rim enhancement was never observed in any hepatocarcinoma or regenerative nodule. CONCLUSIONS: MRI with hepatocyte-specific Gd-based contrast agents showed a pattern of malignancy in almost all the ICCs, concurrently avoiding misdiagnosis with hepatocarcinoma. These findings suggest a greater diagnostic capacity for this technique compared with the results of MRI with conventional contrast agents reported in the literature in this setting.

VEGF and VEGFR genotyping in the prediction of clinical outcome for HCC patients receiving sorafenib: the ALICE-1 study.

Although new treatment modalities changed the global approach to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), this disease still represents a medical challenge. Currently, the therapeutic stronghold is sorafenib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) directed against the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family. Previous observations suggested that polymorphisms of VEGF and its receptor (VEGFR) genes may regulate angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis and thus tumour growth control. The aim of our study was to evaluate the role of VEGF and VEGFR polymorphisms in determining the clinical outcome of HCC patients receiving sorafenib. From a multicentre experience 148 samples (tumour or blood samples) of HCC patients receiving sorafenib were tested for VEGF-A, VEGF-C and VEGFR-1,2,3 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Patients' progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analysed. At univariate analysis VEGF-A alleles C of rs25648, T of rs833061, C of rs699947, C of rs2010963, VEGF-C alleles T of rs4604006, G of rs664393, VEGFR-2 alleles C of rs2071559, C of rs2305948 were significant predictors of PFS and OS. At multivariate analysis rs2010963, rs4604006 and BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) stage resulted to be independent factors influencing PFS and OS. Once prospectively validated, the analysis of VEGF and VEGFR SNPs may represent a clinical tool to better identify HCC patients more likely to benefit from sorafenib. On the other hand, the availability of more accurate predictive factors could help avoiding unnecessary toxicities to potentially resistant patients who may be optimal candidates for different treatments interfering with other tumour molecular pathways.