Waitlist Outcomes for Exception and Non-exception Liver Transplant Candidates in the United States Following Implementation of the Median MELD at Transplant (MMaT)/250-mile Policy.

BACKGROUND: Since February 2020, exception points have been allocated equivalent to the median model for end-stage liver disease at transplant within 250 nautical miles of the transplant center (MMaT/250). We compared transplant rate and waitlist mortality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exception, non-HCC exception, and non-exception candidates to determine whether MMaT/250 advantages (or disadvantages) exception candidates. METHODS: Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we identified 23 686 adult, first-time, active, deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) candidates between February 4, 2020, and February 3, 2022. We compared DDLT rates using Cox regression, and waitlist mortality/dropout using competing risks regression in non-exception versus HCC versus non-HCC candidates. RESULTS: Within 24 mo of study entry, 58.4% of non-exception candidates received DDLT, compared with 57.8% for HCC candidates and 70.5% for non-HCC candidates. After adjustment, HCC candidates had 27% lower DDLT rate (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.680.730.77) compared with non-exception candidates. However, waitlist mortality for HCC was comparable to non-exception candidates (adjusted subhazard ratio [asHR] = 0.931.031.15). Non-HCC candidates with pulmonary complications of cirrhosis or cholangiocarcinoma had substantially higher risk of waitlist mortality compared with non-exception candidates (asHR = 1.271.702.29 for pulmonary complications of cirrhosis, 1.352.043.07 for cholangiocarcinoma). The same was not true of non-HCC candidates with exceptions for other reasons (asHR = 0.540.881.44). CONCLUSIONS: Under MMaT/250, HCC, and non-exception candidates have comparable risks of dying before receiving liver transplant, despite lower transplant rates for HCC. However, non-HCC candidates with pulmonary complications of cirrhosis or cholangiocarcinoma have substantially higher risk of dying before receiving liver transplant; these candidates may merit increased allocation priority.

Is Repeat Resection for Recurrent Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Warranted? Outcomes of an International Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) after liver resection (LR) remains high, and optimal therapy for recurrent ICC is challenging. Herein, we assess the outcomes of patients undergoing repeat resection for recurrent ICC in a large, international multicenter cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Outcomes of adults from six large hepatobiliary centers in North America, Europe, and Asia with recurrent ICC following primary LR between 2001 and 2015 were analyzed. Cox models determined predictors of post-recurrence survival. RESULTS: Of patients undergoing LR for ICC, 499 developed recurrence. The median time to recurrence was 10 months, and 47% were intrahepatic. Overall 3-year post-recurrence survival rate was 28.6%. In total, 121 patients (25%) underwent repeat resection, including 74 (61%) repeat LRs. Surgically treated patients were more likely to have solitary intrahepatic recurrences and significantly prolonged survival compared with those receiving locoregional or systemic therapy alone with a 3-year post-recurrence survival rate of 47%. Independent predictors of post-recurrence death included time to recurrence < 1 year [HR 1.66 (1.32-2.10), p < 0.001], site of recurrence [HR 1.74 (1.28-2.38), p < 0.001], macrovascular invasion [HR 1.43 (1.05-1.95), p = 0.024], and size of recurrence > 3 cm [HR 1.68 (1.24-2.29), p = 0.001]. Repeat resection was independently associated with decreased post-recurrence death [HR 0.58 0.43-0.78), p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat resection for recurrent ICC in select patients can result in extended survival. Thus, challenging the paradigm of offering these patients locoregional or chemo/palliative therapy alone as the mainstay of treatment.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Within and Outside Traditional Selection Criteria: A Multicentric North American Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes of patients post-living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) within and outside standard transplantation selection criteria and the added value of the incorporation of the New York-California (NYCA) score. BACKGROUND: LDLT offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplantation waitlist, reduce waitlist mortality, and expand selection criteria for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Primary adult LDLT recipients between October 1999 and August 2019 were identified from a multicenter cohort of 12 North American centers. Posttransplantation and recurrence-free survival were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty LDLTs were identified. Patients within Milan criteria (MC) at transplantation had a 1, 5, and 10-year posttransplantation survival of 90.9%, 78.5%, and 64.1% versus outside MC 90.4%, 68.6%, and 57.7% ( P = 0.20), respectively. For patients within the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria, respective posttransplantation survival was 90.6%, 77.8%, and 65.0%, versus outside UCSF 92.1%, 63.8%, and 45.8% ( P = 0.08). Fifty-three (83%) patients classified as outside MC at transplantation would have been classified as either low or acceptable risk with the NYCA score. These patients had a 5-year overall survival of 72.2%. Similarly, 28(80%) patients classified as outside UCSF at transplantation would have been classified as a low or acceptable risk with a 5-year overall survival of 65.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival is excellent for patients with HCC undergoing LDLT within and outside selection criteria, exceeding the minimum recommended 5-year rate of 60% proposed by consensus guidelines. The NYCA categorization offers insight into identifying a substantial proportion of patients with HCC outside the MC and the UCSF criteria who still achieve similar post-LDLT outcomes as patients within the criteria.

Development and validation of a REcurrent Liver cAncer Prediction ScorE (RELAPSE) following liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Analysis of the US Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium.

HCC recurrence following liver transplantation (LT) is highly morbid and occurs despite strict patient selection criteria. Individualized prediction of post-LT HCC recurrence risk remains an important need. Clinico-radiologic and pathologic data of 4981 patients with HCC undergoing LT from the US Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium (UMHTC) were analyzed to develop a REcurrent Liver cAncer Prediction ScorE (RELAPSE). Multivariable Fine and Gray competing risk analysis and machine learning algorithms (Random Survival Forest and Classification and Regression Tree models) identified variables to model HCC recurrence. RELAPSE was externally validated in 1160 HCC LT recipients from the European Hepatocellular Cancer Liver Transplant study group. Of 4981 UMHTC patients with HCC undergoing LT, 71.9% were within Milan criteria, 16.1% were initially beyond Milan criteria with 9.4% downstaged before LT, and 12.0% had incidental HCC on explant pathology. Overall and recurrence-free survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 89.7%, 78.6%, and 69.8% and 86.8%, 74.9%, and 66.7%, respectively, with a 5-year incidence of HCC recurrence of 12.5% (median 16 months) and non-HCC mortality of 20.8%. A multivariable model identified maximum alpha-fetoprotein (HR = 1.35 per-log SD, 95% CI,1.22-1.50, p < 0.001), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (HR = 1.16 per-log SD, 95% CI,1.04-1.28, p < 0.006), pathologic maximum tumor diameter (HR = 1.53 per-log SD, 95% CI, 1.35-1.73, p < 0.001), microvascular (HR = 2.37, 95%-CI, 1.87-2.99, p < 0.001) and macrovascular (HR = 3.38, 95% CI, 2.41-4.75, p < 0.001) invasion, and tumor differentiation (moderate HR = 1.75, 95% CI, 1.29-2.37, p < 0.001; poor HR = 2.62, 95% CI, 1.54-3.32, p < 0.001) as independent variables predicting post-LT HCC recurrence (C-statistic = 0.78). Machine learning algorithms incorporating additional covariates improved prediction of recurrence (Random Survival Forest C-statistic = 0.81). Despite significant differences in European Hepatocellular Cancer Liver Transplant recipient radiologic, treatment, and pathologic characteristics, external validation of RELAPSE demonstrated consistent 2- and 5-year recurrence risk discrimination (AUCs 0.77 and 0.75, respectively). We developed and externally validated a RELAPSE score that accurately discriminates post-LT HCC recurrence risk and may allow for individualized post-LT surveillance, immunosuppression modification, and selection of high-risk patients for adjuvant therapies.

Outcomes in liver transplant recipients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-related HCC: results from the US multicenter HCC transplant consortium.

NAFLD will soon be the most common indication for liver transplantation (LT). In NAFLD, HCC may occur at earlier stages of fibrosis and present with more advanced tumor stage, raising concern for aggressive disease. Thus, adult LT recipients with HCC from 20 US centers transplanted between 2002 and 2013 were analyzed to determine whether NAFLD impacts recurrence-free post-LT survival. Five hundred and thirty-eight (10.8%) of 4981 total patients had NAFLD. Patients with NAFLD were significantly older (63 vs. 58, p<0.001), had higher body mass index (30.5 vs. 27.4, p<0.001), and were more likely to have diabetes (57.3% vs. 28.8%, p<0.001). Patients with NAFLD were less likely to receive pre-LT locoregional therapy (63.6% vs. 72.9%, p<0.001), had higher median lab MELD (15 vs. 13, p<0.001) and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (3.8 vs. 2.9, p<0.001), and were more likely to have their maximum pre-LT alpha fetoprotein at time of LT (44.1% vs. 36.1%, p<0.001). NAFLD patients were more likely to have an incidental HCC on explant (19.4% vs. 10.4%, p<0.001); however, explant characteristics including tumor differentiation and vascular invasion were not different between groups. Comparing NAFLD and non-NAFLD patients, the 1, 3, and 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence (3.1%, 9.1%, 11.5% vs. 4.9%, 10.1%, 12.6%, p=0.36) and recurrence-free survival rates (87%, 76%, and 67% vs. 87%, 75%, and 67%, p=0.97) were not different. In competing risks analysis, NAFLD did not significantly impact recurrence in univariable (HR: 0.88, p=0.36) nor in adjusted analysis (HR: 0.91, p=0.49). With NAFLD among the most common causes of HCC and poised to become the leading indication for LT, a better understanding of disease-specific models to predict recurrence is needed. In this NAFLD cohort, incidental HCCs were common, raising concerns about early detection. However, despite less locoregional therapy and high neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, explant tumor characteristics and post-transplant recurrence-free survival were not different compared to non-NAFLD patients.

Black patients and women have reduced access to liver transplantation for alcohol-associated liver disease.

Although sex and racial disparities for liver transplantation (LT) are known, it is unclear if disparities exist for patients with alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD). We aimed to compare sex and racial/ethnic differences in mortality, LT listing, and LT rates in patients with and without ALD. We analyzed patients who were listed for LT and/or died of end-stage liver disease (ESLD) between 2014 and 2018 using the United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging OnLine Data for Epidemiologic Research databases, respectively. Patients with ALD were compared with non-ALD patients. Our primary outcome was the ratio of listings for LT to deaths from ESLD-listing-to-death ratio (LDR)-a previously derived metric to assess access to the waiting list. Differences between sex and race/ethnicity were analyzed with chi-square tests and multivariable linear regression. There were 65,588 deaths and 16,133 listings for ALD compared with 75,020 deaths and 40,194 listings for non-ALD. LDR was lower for ALD (0.25 vs. 0.54; p < 0.001). Black patients had the lowest LDR in both ALD and non-ALD (0.13 and 0.39 for Black patients vs. 0.26 and 0.54 for White patients; p < 0.001). Women with ALD had a lower LDR (0.21 vs. 0.26; p < 0.001), whereas women without ALD had higher LDR than men (0.69 vs. 0.47; p < 0.001). There were significant negative interactions between women and ALD in LDR and the transplant-to-death ratio. Multivariable analysis and a sensitivity analysis, with more liberal definitions of ALD and non-ALD, confirmed these findings. Patients with ALD have lower access to LT. Among those with ALD, female and Black patients have the lowest access. New initiatives are needed to eliminate these inequities.

Safety and Efficacy of Robotic vs Open Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Importance: Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery remain a hotly debated topic in surgical oncology, but sparse data have been published thus far. Objective: To analyze short- and long-term outcomes of robotic liver resection (RLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from Western high-volume centers to assess the safety, reproducibility, and oncologic efficacy of this technique. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated the outcomes of patients receiving RLR vs open liver resection (OLR) for HCC between 2010 and 2020 in 5 high-volume centers. After 1:1 propensity score matching, a group of patients who underwent RLR was compared with a validation cohort of OLR patients from a high-volume center that did not perform RLR. Main Outcomes and Measures: A retrospective analysis was performed of prospectively maintained databases at 2 European and 2 US institutions of patients who underwent RLR for HCC between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2020. The main outcomes were safety and feasibility of RLR for HCC and its oncologic outcomes compared with a European OLR validation cohort. A 2-sided P < .05 was considered significant. Results: The study included 398 patients (RLR group: 125 men, 33 women, median [IQR] age, 66 [58-71] years; OLR group: 315 men, 83 women; median [IQR] age, 70 [64-74] years), and 106 RLR patients were compared with 106 OLR patients after propensity score matching. The RLR patients had a significantly longer operative time (median [IQR], 295 [190-370] minutes vs 200 [165-255] minutes, including docking; P < .001) but a significantly shorter hospital length of stay (median [IQR], 4 [3-6] days vs 10 [7-13] days; P < .001) and a lower number of admissions to the intensive care unit (7 [6.6%] vs 21 [19.8%]; P = .002). Incidence of posthepatectomy liver failure was significantly lower in the RLR group (8 [7.5%] vs 30 [28.3%]; P = .001), with no cases of grade C failure. The 90-day overall survival rate was comparable between the 2 groups (RLR, 99.1% [95% CI, 93.5%-99.9%]; OLR, 97.1% [95% CI, 91.3%-99.1%]), as was the cumulative incidence of death related to tumor recurrence (RLR, 8.8% [95% CI, 3.1%-18.3%]; OLR, 10.2% [95% CI, 4.9%-17.7%]). Conclusions and Relevance: This study represents the largest Western experience to date of full RLR for HCC. Compared with OLR, RLR performed in tertiary centers represents a safe treatment strategy for patients with HCC and those with compromised liver function while achieving oncologic efficacy.

Ten-Year Outcomes of Liver Transplant and Downstaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Importance: National guidelines on transplant selection have adopted successful downstaging to within Milan criteria (MC) as a viable option for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) before liver transplant (LT). Recurrence of HCC after LT carries a poor prognosis, and treatment modalities remain challenging. Objective: To establish the 10-year outcomes of patients with HCC after LT in a large, multicenter US study based on individual data; provide robust data on the long-term role of downstaging; and evaluate the association of treatment modalities with postrecurrence survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, a retrospective, multicenter analysis of prospectively collected data was conducted for 2645 adults who had undergone LT for HCC at 5 US academic centers between January 2001 and December 2015. The analysis was performed from May 2019 through June 2021. Outcomes of 341 patients whose disease was downstaged to within MC were compared with those in 2122 patients whose disease was always within MC and 182 patients whose disease was not downstaged. The associations of tumor and treatment factors on postrecurrence survival were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression and multivariable logistic regression models. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival for the whole cohort and according to downstaging status. Secondary outcomes were time to recurrence, recurrence-free survival, and recurrence after specific post-LT therapies. Results: Of the 2645 patients studied, the median age was 59.9 years (IQR, 54.7-64.7 years). The majority of the patients were men (2028 [76.7%] vs 617 [23.3%] women). The 10-year post-LT survival and recurrence rates were, respectively, 52.1% and 20.6% among those whose disease was downstaged; 61.5% and 13.3% in those always within MC; and 43.3% and 41.1% in those whose disease was not downstaged. Independent variables associated with downstaging failure were tumor size greater than 7 cm at diagnosis (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.20-5.75; P = .02), more than 3 tumors at diagnosis (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.22-4.50; P = .01), and α-fetoprotein response of at least 20 ng/mL with less than 50% improvement from maximum α-fetoprotein before LT (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.14-3.46; P = .02). Surgically treated patients with recurrent HCC differed in clinicopathologic characteristics and had improved 5-year postrecurrence survival rates (31.6% vs 7.3%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In a large, multicenter cohort of patients with HCC successfully downstaged to within MC, 10-year post-LT outcomes were excellent, validating national downstaging policies and showing a clear utility benefit for LT prioritization decision making. Surgical management of HCC recurrence after LT was associated with improved survival in well-selected patients and should be pursued, if feasible.

Low-dose aspirin confers protection against acute cellular allograft rejection after primary liver transplantation.

This study investigated the effect of low-dose aspirin in primary adult liver transplantation (LT) on acute cellular rejection (ACR) as well as arterial patency rates. The use of low-dose aspirin after LT is practiced by many transplant centers to minimize the risk of hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT), although solid recommendations do not exist. However, aspirin also possesses potent anti-inflammatory properties and might mitigate inflammatory processes after LT, such as rejection. Therefore, we hypothesized that the use of aspirin after LT has a protective effect against ACR. This is an international, multicenter cohort study of primary adult deceased donor LT. The study included 17 high-volume LT centers and covered the 3-year period from 2013 to 2015 to allow a minimum 5-year follow-up. In this cohort of 2365 patients, prophylactic antiplatelet therapy with low-dose aspirin was administered in 1436 recipients (61%). The 1-year rejection-free survival rate was 89% in the aspirin group versus 82% in the no-aspirin group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.94; p = 0.01). The 1-year primary arterial patency rates were 99% in the aspirin group and 96% in the no-aspirin group with an HR of 0.23 (95% CI, 0.13-0.40; p < 0.001). Low-dose aspirin was associated with a lower risk of ACR and HAT after LT, especially in the first vulnerable year after transplantation. Therefore, low-dose aspirin use after primary LT should be evaluated to protect the liver graft from ACR and to maintain arterial patency.

Sociodemographic characteristics of living liver donors: Few changes over 20 years.

INTRODUCTION: Although there are well-documented challenges in access to living donor liver transplant (LDLT) among recipients, it is unclear whether living liver donors (LLDs) face similar challenges. METHODS: We analyzed the UNOS Standard Transplant Analysis and Research database, including LLDs ≥ 18 years in the United States from 1/1998 to 12/2018. We compared sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, education level, employment status, BMI, and relationship to recipient) of LLDs across three eras-pre-MELD (1998-2002), MELD (2003-2013), and post-direct acting antivirals (DAA) (2014-2018). We also described sociodemographic characteristics of living donor recipients and waitlisted patients. Chi-squared and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS: From 1998 to 2018, 4756 LDLTs and 99 765 DDLTs were performed. Across the three eras, LLD age did not change significantly (P = .3), but donors were generally young (mean age 37 ± 11). While men comprised most LLDs in the pre-MELD era (55.2%), women surpassed them in the post-DAA era (52.9%), P < .001. In total, White donors comprised 81.5% of total LLDs, while Black and Asian donors were a small minority of total donors (3.7% and 2.5%, respectively). Most donors had at least a college education and were employed. Educational attainment and employment did not significantly change over the study period. CONCLUSION: During the last 20 years, LLDs have remained White, employed, highly educated, and young with increasing numbers of women LLDs. The relative lack of change in the characteristics of donors is likely attributable largely to socioeconomic factors, which should be assessed in future investigation.

Are Current National Review Board Downstaging Protocols for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Too Restrictive?

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation (LT) is an effective strategy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). To qualify for standardized LT model for end-stage liver disease exception points, the United Network for Organ Sharing National Liver Review Board (NLRB) requires that the presenting and final HCC tumor burden be within the University of California San Francisco criteria, which were recently expanded (within expanded UCSF [W-eUCSF]). Current NLRB criteria may be too restrictive because it has been shown previously that the initial burden does not predict LT failure when tumors downstage to UCSF. This study aims to assess LT outcomes for HCC initially presenting beyond expanded UCSF (B-eUCSF) criteria in a large multicenter collaboration. STUDY DESIGN: Comparisons of B-eUCSF and W-eUCSF candidates undergoing LT at seven academic institutions between 2001 and 2017 were made from a multi-institutional database. Survival outcomes were compared by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 1,846 LT recipients with HCC, 86 (5%) met B-eUCSF criteria at initial presentation, with the remainder meeting W-eUCSF criteria. Despite differences in tumor burden, B-eUCSF candidates achieved comparable 1-, 5- and 10-year overall (89%, 70%, and 55% vs 91%, 74%, and 60%, respectively; p = 0.2) and disease-free (82%, 60%, and 53% vs 89%, 71%, and 59%, respectively; p = 0.07) survival to patients meeting W-eUCSF criteria after LT. Despite increased tumor recurrence in B-eUCSF vs W-eUCSF patients (24% vs 10%, p = 0.0002), post-recurrence survival was similar in both groups (p = 0.69). CONCLUSION: Transplantation for patients initially presenting with HCC B-eUSCF criteria offers a survival advantage similar to those with tumors meeting W-eUCSF criteria at presentation. The current NLRB policy is too stringent, and considerations to expand criteria should be discussed.

Offer Acceptance Patterns for Liver Donors Aged 70 and Older.

Despite a documented survival benefit, older liver donor (OLD, age ≥70) graft offers are frequently declined, with utilization worsening over the last decade. To understand how offer acceptance varies by center, we studied 1113 eventually transplanted OLD grafts from 2009 to 2017 using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data and random-intercept multilevel logistic regression. To understand how center-level acceptance of OLD graft offers might be associated with waitlist and posttransplant outcomes, we studied all adult, actively listed, liver-only candidates and recipients during the study period using Poisson regression (transplant rate), competing risks regression (waitlist mortality), and Cox regression (posttransplant mortality). Among 117 centers, OLD offer acceptance ranged from 0 (23 centers) to 95 acceptances, with a median odds ratio of 2.88. Thus, a candidate may be three times as likely to receive an OLD graft simply by listing at a different center. Centers in the highest quartile (Q4) of OLD acceptance (accepted 39% of OLD offers) accepted more nationally shared organs (Q4 versus Q1: 14.1% versus 0.0%, P < 0.001) and had higher annual liver transplant volume (Q4 versus Q1: 80 versus 21, P < 0.001). After adjustment, nationally shared OLD offers (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.20) and offers to centers with higher median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) at transplant (aOR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62-0.87) were less likely to be accepted. OLD offers to centers with higher annual transplant volume were more likely to be accepted (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.14-1.30). Additionally, candidates listed at centers within the highest quartile of OLD graft offer acceptance had higher deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) rates (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.41-1.50), lower waitlist mortality (adjusted subhazard ratio: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.72-0.76), and similar posttransplant survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.86-1.01) when compared with those listed at centers in the lowest quartile of OLD graft offer acceptance. The wide variation in OLD offer acceptance supports the need for optimizing the organ offer process and efficiently directing OLD offers to centers more likely to use them.

Liver transplantation for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases: the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association consensus guidelines.

Colorectal cancer is a prevalent disease worldwide, with more than 50% of patients developing metastases to the liver. Despite advances in improving resectability, most patients present with non-resectable colorectal liver metastases requiring palliative systemic therapy and locoregional disease control strategies. There is a growing interest in the use of liver transplantation to treat non-resectable colorectal liver metastases in well selected patients, leading to a surge in the number of studies and prospective trials worldwide, thereby fuelling the emerging field of transplant oncology. The interdisciplinary nature of this field requires domain-specific evidence and expertise to be drawn from multiple clinical specialities and the basic sciences. Importantly, the wider societal implication of liver transplantation for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases, such as the effect on the allocation of resources and national transplant waitlists, should be considered. To address the urgent need for a consensus approach, the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association commissioned the Liver Transplantation for Colorectal liver Metastases 2021 working group, consisting of international leaders in the areas of hepatobiliary surgery, colorectal oncology, liver transplantation, hepatology, and bioethics. The aim of this study was to standardise nomenclature and define management principles in five key domains: patient selection, evaluation of biological behaviour, graft selection, recipient considerations, and outcomes. An extensive literature review was done within the five domains identified. Between November, 2020, and January, 2021, a three-step modified Delphi consensus process was undertaken by the workgroup, who were further subgrouped into the Scientific Committee, Expert Panel, and Transplant Centre Representatives. A final consensus of 44 statements, standardised nomenclature, and a practical management algorithm is presented. Specific criteria for clinico-patho-radiological assessments with molecular profiling is crucial in this setting. After this, the careful evaluation of biological behaviour with bridging therapy to transplantation with an appropriate assessment of the response is required. The sequencing of treatment in synchronous metastatic disease requires special consideration and is highlighted here. Some ethical dilemmas within organ allocation for malignant indications are discussed and the role for extended criteria grafts, living donor transplantation, and machine perfusion technologies for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases are reviewed. Appropriate immunosuppressive regimens and strategies for the follow-up and treatment of recurrent disease are proposed. This consensus guideline provides a framework by which liver transplantation for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases might be safely instituted and is a meaningful step towards future evidenced-based practice for better patient selection and organ allocation to improve the survival for patients with this disease.

Evaluation of the LI-RADS treatment response algorithm in hepatocellular carcinoma after trans-arterial chemoembolization.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS treatment response algorithm (LR-TRA) and modified RECIST (mRECIST) for the detection of viable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on MRI after trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study includes cirrhotic patients that underwent trans-arterial chemoembolization prior to liver transplantation from 2013 to 2017 with a pre- and post-treatment MRI available. Three blinded readers assigned a LR-TRA and mRECIST category to each lesion. Lesions on MRI and explant pathology were matched and characterized as complete (100% necrosis) or incomplete necrosis (≤99% necrosis). Diagnostic performance of LR-TRA and mRECIST were calculated with a generalized estimating equation. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients with 71 lesions were included, 47 with incomplete and 24 with complete necrosis. In consensus, 45 lesions were categorized as LR-TR Nonviable, of which 62.2% (28/45) had incomplete and 37.8% (17/45) had complete necrosis. Six lesions were categorized as LR-TR Equivocal, of which 33.3% (2/6) had incomplete and 66.7% (4/6) had complete necrosis. Twenty lesions were categorized as LR-TR Viable of which 85.0% (17/20) had incomplete and 15.0% (3/20) had complete necrosis. The sensitivity of LR-TR Viable for detecting incompletely necrotic tumor when LR-TR Equivocal was considered as viable, in consensus was 40.4%; specificity 70.8%; accuracy 50.7%. The sensitivity of mRECIST for detecting incompletely necrotic tumor was 37.0%; specificity 79.2%; accuracy 51.4%. There was no significant difference in diagnostic performance between mRECIST and LR-TRA (p = 0.14-0.33). Agreement for LR-TRA category was moderate (k = 0.53 [95% CI: 0.45, 0.67]). CONCLUSION: LI-RADS treatment response algorithm demonstrates high specificity and low to moderate sensitivity for the detection of viable HCC after TACE in a North American cirrhotic cohort, without significant difference in diagnostic performance between LR-TRA and mRECIST.

Evaluation of the Intention-to-Treat Benefit of Living Donation in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Awaiting a Liver Transplant.

Importance: Living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) offers advantages over deceased-donor liver transplant (DDLT) of improved intention-to-treat outcomes and management of the shortage of deceased-donor allografts. However, conflicting data still exist on the outcomes of LDLT in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Objective: To investigate the potential survival benefit of an LDLT in patients with HCC from the time of waiting list inscription. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study with an intention-to-treat design analyzed the data of patients aged 18 years or older who had an HCC diagnosis and were on a waiting list for a first transplant. Patients from 12 collaborative centers in Europe, Asia, and the US who were on a transplant waiting list between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2017, composed the international cohort. The Toronto cohort comprised patients from 1 transplant center in Toronto, Ontario, Canada who were on a waiting list between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2015. The international cohort centers performed either an LDLT or a DDLT, whereas the Toronto cohort center was selected for its capability to perform both LDLT and DDLT. The benefit of LDLT was tested in the 2 cohorts before and after undergoing an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis. Data were analyzed from February 1 to May 31, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Intention-to-treat death was defined as a patient death that occurred for any reason and was calculated from the time of waiting list inscription for liver transplant to the last follow-up date (December 31, 2019). Four multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models for intention-to-treat death were created. Results: A total of 3052 patients were analyzed in the international cohort, of whom 2447 were men (80.2%) and the median (IQR) age at first referral was 58 (53-63) years. The Toronto cohort comprised 906 patients, of whom 743 were men (82.0%) and the median (IQR) age at first referral was 59 (53-63) years. In all the settings, LDLT was an independent protective factor, reducing the risk of overall death by 49% in the pre-IPTW analysis for the international cohort (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.71; P < .001), 33% in the post-IPTW analysis for the international cohort (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.85; P = .001), 43% in the pre-IPTW analysis for the Toronto cohort (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.73; P < .001), and 48% in the post-IPTW analysis for the Toronto cohort (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P < .001). The discriminatory ability of the mathematical models further improved in all of the cases in which LDLT was incorporated. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that having a potential live donor could decrease the intention-to-treat risk of death in patients with HCC who are on a waiting list for a liver transplant. This benefit is associated with the elimination of the dropout risk and has been reported in centers in which both LDLT and DDLT options are equally available.

Rare Histological Variants of Liver Cancer and Their Management: A Single-Institution Experience.

Primary liver malignancies, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cholangiocarcinoma, are a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. There are several histologically and biologically distinct subtypes of liver cancer that have previously been reported. However, literature regarding the nonsurgical management of these patients upon disease recurrence remains limited. These variants include combined HCC-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CC), Epstein-Barr virus- (EBV-) associated carcinoma, undifferentiated carcinoma, and clear cell or thyroid-like variants of HCC. Here, we aim to highlight the pathologic features, clinical course, and outcomes of five patients with these unusual hepatic tumors and explain the rationale behind the choice of their systemic therapies upon disease recurrence. All patients underwent surgical resection as the standard of care for localized disease, and upon relapse, they were treated with either chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or active surveillance based on the clinical context and tumor histology. These rare variants are important to recognize as they have prognostic and therapeutic implications, and there are currently insufficient data in the literature to guide further therapy.

Dynamic α-Fetoprotein Response and Outcomes After Liver Transplant for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Importance: Accurate preoperative prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplant is the mainstay of selection tools used by transplant-governing bodies to discern candidacy for patients with HCC. Although progress has been made, few tools incorporate objective measures of tumor biological characteristics, resulting in inclusion of patients with high recurrence rates and exclusion of others who could otherwise be cured. Objective: To externally validate the New York/California (NYCA) score, a recently published multi-institutional US HCC selection tool that was the first model incorporating a dynamic α-fetoprotein response (AFP-R) and compare the validated score with currently accepted HCC selection tools, namely, the Milan Criteria (MC), the French-AFP (F-AFP), and Metroticket 2.0 models. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective, multicenter prognostic analysis of prospectively collected databases of 2236 adults undergoing liver transplant for HCC was conducted at 3 US, 1 Canadian, and 4 European centers from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2013. The AFP-R was measured as the difference between maximum and final pre-liver transplant AFP level. Cox proportional hazards regression and competing risk regression analyses examined recurrence-free and overall survival. Receiver operating characteristic analyses and net reclassification index were used to compare NYCA with MC, F-AFP, and Metroticket 2.0. Data analysis was performed from June 2019 to April 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary study outcome was 5-year recurrence-free survival; overall survival was the secondary outcome. Results: Of 2236 patients, 1808 (80.9%) were men; mean (SD) age was 58.3 (7.96) years. A total of 545 patients (24.4%) did not meet the MC. The NYCA score proved valid on competing risk regression analysis, accurately predicting recurrence-free and overall survival (5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence risk in NYCA risk categories was 9.5% for low-, 20.5%, for acceptable-, and 40.5% for high-risk categories; P < .001 for all). The NYCA also predicted recurrence-free survival on a center-specific level: 453 of 545 patients (83.1%) who did not meet MC, 213 of 308 (69.2%) who did not meet the French-AFP, 292 of 384 (76.1%) who did not meet Metroticket 2.0 would be recategorized into NYCA low- and acceptable-risk groups (>75% 5-year recurrence-free survival). The Harrell C statistic for the validated NYCA score was 0.66 compared with 0.59 for the MC and 0.57 for the F-AFP models (P < .001). The net reclassification index for NYCA was 8.1 vs MC, 12.9 vs F-AFP, and 10.1 vs Metroticket 2.0. Conclusions and Relevance: This study appears to externally validate the importance of AFP-R in the selection of patients with HCC for liver transplant. The AFP-R represents one of the truly objective measures of biological characteristics available before transplantation. Incorporation of AFP-R into selection criteria allows safe expansion of MC and other models, offering liver transplant to patients with acceptable tumor biological characteristics who would otherwise be denied potential cure.

Black Patients Have Unequal Access to Listing for Liver Transplantation in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score may have eliminated racial disparities on the waitlist for liver transplantation (LT), but disparities prior to waitlist placement have not been adequately quantified. We aimed to analyze differences in patients who are listed for LT, undergo transplantation, and die from end-stage liver disease (ESLD), stratified by state and race/ethnicity. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We analyzed two databases retrospectively, the Center for Disease Control Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) and the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) databases, from 2014 to 2018. We included patients aged 25-64 years who had a primary cause of death of ESLD and were listed for transplant in the CDC WONDER or UNOS database. Our primary outcome was the ratio of listing for LT to death from ESLD-listing to death ratio (LDR). Our secondary outcome was the transplant to listing and transplant to death ratios. Chi-squared and multivariable linear regression evaluated for differences between races/ethnicities. There were 135,367 patients who died of ESLD, 54,734 patients who were listed for transplant, and 26,571 who underwent transplant. Patients were mostly male and White. The national LDR was 0.40, significantly lowest in Black patients (0.30), P < 0.001. The national transplant to listing ratio was 0.48, highest in Black patients (0.53), P < 0.01. The national transplant to death ratio was 0.20, lowest in Black patients (0.16), P < 0.001. States that had an above-mean LDR had a lower transplant to listing ratio but a higher transplant to death ratio. Multivariable analysis confirmed that Black race is significantly associated with a lower LDR and transplant to death ratio. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients face a disparity in access to LT due to low listing rates for transplant relative to deaths from ESLD.

Multi-Center Analysis of Liver Transplantation for Combined Hepatocellular Carcinoma-Cholangiocarcinoma Liver Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma liver tumors (cHCC-CCA) with pathologic differentiation of both hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma within the same tumor are not traditionally considered for liver transplantation due to perceived poor outcomes. Published results are from small cohorts and single centers. Through a multicenter collaboration, we performed the largest analysis to date of the utility of liver transplantation for cHCC-CCA. STUDY DESIGN: Liver transplant and resection outcomes for HCC (n = 2,998) and cHCC-CCA (n = 208) were compared in a 12-center retrospective review (2009 to 2017). Pathology defined tumor type. Tumor burden was based on radiologic Milan criteria at time of diagnosis and applied to cHCC-CCA for uniform analysis. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank test were used to determine overall survival and disease-free survival. Cox regression was used for multivariate survival analysis. RESULTS: Liver transplantation for cHCC-CCA (n = 67) and HCC (n = 1,814) within Milan had no significant difference in overall survival (5-year cHCC-CCA 70.1%, HCC 73.4%, p = 0.806), despite higher cHCC-CCA recurrence rates (23.1% vs 11.5% 5 years, p < 0.001). Irrespective of tumor burden, cHCC-CCA tumor patient undergoing liver transplant had significantly superior overall survival (p = 0.047) and disease-free survival (p < 0.001) than those having resection. For cHCC-CCA within Milan, liver transplant was associated with improved disease-free survival over resection (70.3% vs 33.6% 5 years, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of tumor burden, outcomes after liver transplantation are superior to resection for patients with cHCC-CCA. Within Milan criteria, liver transplant for cHCC-CCA and HCC result in similar overall survival, justifying consideration of transplantation due to the higher chance of cure with liver transplantation in this traditionally excluded population.