Survival benefit of second line therapies for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: repeated hepatectomy, thermoablation and second-line transplant referral in a real life national scenario.

BACKGROUND: Despite second-line transplant(SLT) for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma(rHCC) leads to the longest survival after recurrence(SAR), its real applicability has never been reported. The aim was to compare the SAR of SLT versus repeated hepatectomy and thermoablation(CUR group). METHODS: Patients were enrolled from the Italian register HE.RC.O.LE.S. between 2008 and 2021. Two groups were created: CUR versus SLT. A propensity score matching (PSM) was run to balance the groups. RESULTS: 743 patients were enrolled, CUR = 611 and SLT = 132. Median age at recurrence was 71(IQR 6575) years old and 60(IQR 53-64, p < 0.001) for CUR and SLT respectively. After PSM, median SAR for CUR was 43 months(95%CI = 37 - 93) and not reached for SLT(p < 0.001). SLT patients gained a survival benefit of 9.4 months if compared with CUR. MilanCriteria(MC)-In patients were 82.7% of the CUR group. SLT(HR 0.386, 95%CI = 0.23 - 0.63, p < 0.001) and the MELD score(HR 1.169, 95%CI = 1.07 - 1.27, p < 0.001) were the only predictors of mortality. In case of MC-Out, the only predictor of mortality was the number of nodules at recurrence(HR 1.45, 95%CI= 1.09 - 1.93, p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: It emerged an important transplant under referral in favour of repeated hepatectomy or thermoablation. In patients with MC-Out relapse, the benefit of SLT over CUR was not observed.

The largest western experience on salvage hepatectomy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: propensity score-matched analysis on behalf of He.RC.O.Le.Study Group.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate, in a large Western cohort, perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of salvage hepatectomy (SH) for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after primary hepatectomy (PH) or locoregional treatments. METHODS: Data were collected from the Hepatocarcinoma Recurrence on the Liver Study Group (He.RC.O.Le.S.) Italian Registry. After 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis (PSM), two groups were compared: the PH group (patients submitted to resection for a first HCC) and the SH group (patients resected for intrahepatic rHCC after previous HCC-related treatments). RESULTS: 2689 patients were enrolled. PH included 2339 patients, SH 350. After PSM, 263 patients were selected in each group with major resected nodule median size, intraoperative blood loss and minimally invasive approach significantly lower in the SH group. Long-term outcomes were compared, with no difference in OS and DFS. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed only microvascular invasion as an independent prognostic factor for OS. CONCLUSION: SH proved to be equivalent to PH in terms of safety, feasibility and long-term outcomes, consistent with data gathered from East Asia. In the awaiting of reliable treatment-allocating algorithms for rHCC, SH appears to be a suitable alternative in patients fit for surgery, regardless of the previous therapeutic modality implemented.

Benchmarking postoperative outcomes after open liver surgery for cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in a national cohort.

BACKGROUND: Benchmark analysis for open liver surgery for cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is still undefined. METHODS: Patients were identified from the Italian national registry HE.RC.O.LE.S. The Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC) method was employed to identify the benchmarks. The outcomes assessed were the rate of complications, major comorbidities, post-operative ascites (POA), post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), 90-day mortality. Benchmarking was stratified for surgical complexity (CP1, CP2 and CP3). RESULTS: A total of 978 of 2698 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 431 (44.1%) patients were treated with CP1 procedures, 239 (24.4%) with CP2 and 308 (31.5%) with CP3 procedures. Patients submitted to CP1 had a worse underlying liver function, while the tumor burden was more severe in CP3 cases. The ABC for complications (13.1%, 19.2% and 28.1% for CP1, CP2 and CP3 respectively), major complications (7.6%, 11.1%, 12.5%) and 90-day mortality (0%, 3.3%, 3.6%) increased with the surgical difficulty, but not POA (4.4%, 3.3% and 2.6% respectively) and PHLF (0% for all groups). CONCLUSION: We propose benchmarks for open liver resections in HCC cirrhotic patients, stratified for surgical complexity. The difference between the benchmark values and the results obtained during everyday practice reflects the room for potential growth, with the aim to encourage constant improvement among liver surgeons.

Curative versus palliative treatments for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicentric weighted comparison.

BACKGROUND: Management of recurrence after surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) is still a debate. The aim was to compare the Survival after Recurrence (SAR) of curative (surgery or thermoablation) versus palliative (TACE or Sorafenib) treatments for patients with rHCC. METHODS: This is a multicentric Italian study, which collected data between 2007 and 2018 from 16 centers. Selected patients were then divided according to treatment allocation in Curative (CUR) or Palliative (PAL) Group. Inverse Probability Weighting (IPW) was used to weight the groups. RESULTS: 1,560 patients were evaluated, of which 421 experienced recurrence and were then eligible: 156 in CUR group and 256 in PAL group. Tumor burden and liver function were weighted by IPW, and two pseudo-population were obtained (CUR = 397.5 and PAL = 415.38). SAR rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were respectively 98.3%, 76.7%, 63.8% for CUR and 91.7%, 64.2% and 48.9% for PAL (p = 0.007). Median DFS was 43 months (95%CI = 32-74) for CUR group, while it was 23 months (95%CI = 18-27) for PAL (p = 0.017). Being treated by palliative approach (HR = 1.75; 95%CI = 1.14-2.67; p = 0.01) and having a median size of the recurrent nodule>5 cm (HR = 1.875; 95%CI = 1.22-2.86; p = 0.004) were the only predictors of mortality after recurrence, while time to recurrence was the only protective factor (HR = 0.616; 95%CI = 0.54-0.69; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Curative approaches may guarantee long-term survival in case of recurrence.

Machine Learning Predictive Model to Guide Treatment Allocation for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Surgery.

Importance: Clear indications on how to select retreatments for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are still lacking. Objective: To create a machine learning predictive model of survival after HCC recurrence to allocate patients to their best potential treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Real-life data were obtained from an Italian registry of hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2008 and December 2019 after a median (IQR) follow-up of 27 (12-51) months. External validation was made on data derived by another Italian cohort and a Japanese cohort. Patients who experienced a recurrent HCC after a first surgical approach were included. Patients were profiled, and factors predicting survival after recurrence under different treatments that acted also as treatment effect modifiers were assessed. The model was then fitted individually to identify the best potential treatment. Analysis took place between January and April 2021. Exposures: Patients were enrolled if treated by reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, chemoembolization, or sorafenib. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival after recurrence was the end point. Results: A total of 701 patients with recurrent HCC were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 71 [9] years; 151 [21.5%] female). Of those, 293 patients (41.8%) received reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, 188 (26.8%) received sorafenib, and 220 (31.4%) received chemoembolization. Treatment, age, cirrhosis, number, size, and lobar localization of the recurrent nodules, extrahepatic spread, and time to recurrence were all treatment effect modifiers and survival after recurrence predictors. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the predictive model was 78.5% (95% CI, 71.7%-85.3%) at 5 years after recurrence. According to the model, 611 patients (87.2%) would have benefited from reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, 37 (5.2%) from sorafenib, and 53 (7.6%) from chemoembolization in terms of potential survival after recurrence. Compared with patients for which the best potential treatment was reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, sorafenib and chemoembolization would be the best potential treatment for older patients (median [IQR] age, 78.5 [75.2-83.4] years, 77.02 [73.89-80.46] years, and 71.59 [64.76-76.06] years for sorafenib, chemoembolization, and reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, respectively), with a lower median (IQR) number of multiple recurrent nodules (1.00 [1.00-2.00] for sorafenib, 1.00 [1.00-2.00] for chemoembolization, and 2.00 [1.00-3.00] for reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation). Extrahepatic recurrence was observed in 43.2% (n = 16) for sorafenib as the best potential treatment vs 14.6% (n = 89) for reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation as the best potential treatment and 0% for chemoembolization as the best potential treatment. Those profiles were used to constitute a patient-tailored algorithm for the best potential treatment allocation. Conclusions and Relevance: The herein presented algorithm should help in allocating patients with recurrent HCC to the best potential treatment according to their specific characteristics in a treatment hierarchy fashion.

Hepatectomy for Metabolic Associated Fatty Liver Disease (MAFLD) related HCC: Propensity case-matched analysis with viral- and alcohol-related HCC.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We investigated the clinical impact of the newly defined metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) in patients undergoing hepatectomy for HCC (MAFLD-HCC) comparing the characteristics and outcomes of patients with MAFLD-HCC to viral- and alcoholic-related HCC (HCV-HCC, HBV-HCC, A-HCC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients included in the He.RC.O.Le.S. Group registry was performed. The characteristics, short- and long-term outcomes of 1315 patients included were compared according to the study group before and after an exact propensity score match (PSM). RESULTS: Among the whole study population, 264 (20.1%) had MAFLD-HCC, 205 (15.6%) had HBV-HCC, 671 (51.0%) had HCV-HCC and 175 (13.3%) had A-HCC. MAFLD-HCC patients had higher BMI (p < 0.001), Charlson Comorbidities Index (p < 0.001), size of tumour (p < 0.001), and presence of cirrhosis (p < 0.001). After PSM, the 90-day mortality and severe morbidity rates were 5.9% and 7.1% in MAFLD-HCC, 2.3% and 7.1% in HBV-HCC, 3.5% and 11.7% in HCV-HCC, and 1.2% and 8.2% in A-HCC (p = 0.061 and p = 0.447, respectively). The 5-year OS and RFS rates were 54.4% and 37.1% in MAFLD-HCC, 64.9% and 32.2% in HBV-HCC, 53.4% and 24.7% in HCV-HCC and 62.0% and 37.8% in A-HCC (p = 0.345 and p = 0.389, respectively). Cirrhosis, multiple tumours, size and satellitosis seems to be the independent predictors of OS. CONCLUSION: Hepatectomy for MAFLD-HCC seems to have a higher but acceptable operative risk. However, long-term outcomes seems to be related to clinical and pathological factors rather than aetiological risk factors.

The Impact of Postoperative Ascites on Survival After Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a National Study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative ascites (POA) is the most common complication after liver surgery for hepatocarcinoma (HCC), but its impact on survival is not reported. The aim of the study is to investigate its impact on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), and secondarily to identify the factors that may predict the occurrence. METHOD: Data were collected from 23 centers participating in the Italian Surgical HCC Register (HE.RC.O.LE.S. Group) between 2008 and 2018. POA was defined as ≥500 ml of ascites in the drainage after surgery. Survival analysis was conducted by the Kaplan Meier method. Risk adjustment analysis was conducted by Cox regression to investigate the risk factors for mortality and recurrence. RESULTS: Among 2144 patients resected for HCC, 1871(88.5%) patients did not experience POA while 243(11.5%) had the complication. Median OS for NO-POA group was not reached, while it was 50 months (95%CI = 41-71) for those with POA (p < 0.001). POA independently increased the risk of mortality (HR = 1.696, 95%CI = 1.352-2.129, p < 0.001). Relapse risk after surgery was not predicted by the occurrence of POA. Presence of varices (OR = 2.562, 95%CI = 0.921-1.822, p < 0.001) and bilobar disease (OR = 1.940, 95%CI = 0.921-1.822, p: 0.004) were predictors of POA, while laparoscopic surgery was protective (OR = 0.445, 95%CI = 0.295-0.668, p < 0.001). Ninety-day mortality was higher in the POA group (9.1% vs 1.9% in NO-POA group, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The occurrence of POA after surgery for HCC strongly increases the risk of long-term mortality and its occurrence is relatively frequent. More efforts in surgical planning should be made to limit its occurrence.

Performance of Comprehensive Complication Index and Clavien-Dindo Complication Scoring System in Liver Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the ability of comprehensive complication index (CCI) and Clavien-Dindo complication (CDC) scale to predict excessive length of hospital stay (e-LOS) in patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Patients were identified from an Italian multi-institutional database and randomly selected to be included in either a derivation or validation set. Multivariate logistic regression models and ROC curve analysis including either CCI or CDC as predictors of e-LOS were fitted to compare predictive performance. E-LOS was defined as a LOS longer than the 75th percentile among patients with at least one complication. RESULTS: A total of 2669 patients were analyzed (1345 for derivation and 1324 for validation). The odds ratio (OR) was 5.590 (95%CI 4.201; 7.438) for CCI and 5.507 (4.152; 7.304) for CDC. The AUC was 0.964 for CCI and 0.893 for CDC in the derivation set and 0.962 vs. 0.890 in the validation set, respectively. In patients with at least two complications, the OR was 2.793 (1.896; 4.115) for CCI and 2.439 (1.666; 3.570) for CDC with an AUC of 0.850 and 0.673, respectively in the derivation cohort. The AUC was 0.806 for CCI and 0.658 for CDC in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: When reporting postoperative morbidity in liver surgery, CCI is a preferable scale.

Hepatocellular carcinoma surgical and oncological trends in a national multicentric population: the HERCOLES experience.

Liver surgery is the first line treatment for hepatocarcinoma. Hepatocarcinoma Recurrence on the Liver Study (HERCOLES) Group was established in 2018 with the goal to create a network of Italian centres sharing data and promoting scientific research on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the surgical field. This is the first national report that analyses the trends in surgical and oncological outcomes. Register data were collected by 22 Italian centres between 2008 and 2018. One hundred sixty-four variables were collected, regarding liver functional status, tumour burden, radiological, intraoperative and perioperative data, histological features and oncological follow-up. 2381 Patients were enrolled. Median age was 70 (IQR 63-75) years old. Cirrhosis was present in 1491 patients (62.6%), and Child-A were 89.9% of cases. HCC was staged as BCLC0-A in almost 50% of cases, while BCLC B and C were 20.7% and 17.9% respectively. Major liver resections were 481 (20.2%), and laparoscopy was employed in 753 (31.6%) cases. Severe complications occurred only in 5%. Postoperative ascites was recorded in 10.5% of patients, while posthepatectomy liver failure was observed in 4.9%. Ninety-day mortality was 2.5%. At 5 years, overall survival was 66.1% and disease-free survival was 40.9%. Recurrence was intrahepatic in 74.6% of cases. Redo-surgery and thermoablation for recurrence were performed up to 32% of cases. This is the most updated Italian report of the national experience in surgical treatment for HCC. This dataset is consistently allowing the participating centres in creating multicentric analysis which are already running with a very large sample size and strong power.