Short-Term Out-of-Pocket and Total Costs of Care After Ablation, Resection, or Transplant for Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A National SEER-Medicare Cost Comparison.

BACKGROUND. Differences in survival and morbidity among treatment options (ablation, surgical resection, and transplant) for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been well studied. Additional understanding of the costs of such care would help to identify drivers of high costs and potential barriers to care delivery. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to quantify total and patient out-of-pocket costs for ablation, surgical resection, and transplant in the management of early-stage HCC and to identify factors predictive of these costs. METHODS. This retrospective U.S. population-based study used the SEER-Medicare linked dataset to identify a sample of 1067 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age, 73 years; 674 men, 393 women) diagnosed with early-stage HCC (size ≤ 5 cm) treated with ablation (n = 623), resection (n = 201), or transplant (n = 243) between January 2009 and December 2016. Total costs and patient out-of-pocket costs for the index procedure as well as for any care within 30 and 90 days after the procedure were identified and stratified by treatment modality. Additional comparisons were performed among propensity score-matched subgroups of patients treated by ablation or resection (each n = 172). Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify factors predictive of total costs and out-of-pocket costs for index procedures as well as for 30- and 90-day post-procedure periods. RESULTS. For ablation, resection, and transplant, median index-procedure total cost was US$6689, US$25,614, and US$66,034; index-procedure out-of-pocket cost was US$1235, US$1650, and US$1317; 30-day total cost was US$9456, US$29,754, and US$69,856; 30-day out-of-pocket cost was US$1646, US$2208, and US$3198; 90-day total cost was US$14,572, US$34,984, and US$88,103; and 90-day out-of-pocket cost was US$2138, US$2462, and US$3876, respectively (all p < .001). In propensity score-matched subgroups, ablation and resection had median index-procedure, 30-day, and 90-day total costs of US$6690 and US$25,716, US$9995 and US$30,365, and US$15,851 and US$34,455, respectively. In multivariable analysis adjusting for socioeconomic factors, comorbidities, and liver-disease prognostic indicators, surgical treatment (resection or transplant) was predictive of significantly greater costs compared with ablation at all time points. CONCLUSION. Total and out-of-pocket costs for index procedures as well as for 30-day and 90-day postprocedure periods were lowest for ablation, followed by resection and then transplant. CLINICAL IMPACT. This comprehensive cost analysis could help inform future cost-effectiveness analyses.

The Impact of Metabolic Health and Obesity on Liver Transplant Candidates and Recipients.

Poor metabolic health and obesity have significant impacts on the outcomes of patients suffering from chronic liver disease, particularly those with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. Patients with such comorbidities who require liver transplant evaluation for advancing liver disease or liver failure require special consideration due to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, renal dysfunction, sarcopenic obesity, and cancer. Those who have had a history of prior bariatric surgery pose specific anatomical constraints and may also be at increased risk of alcohol use disorder. Pre-operative risk assessment as well as strict control of metabolic risk factors are essential to reduce intra-operative and post-liver transplant complications. As immunosuppressive therapy exacerbates metabolic dysfunction and risk for cancer, post-liver transplant care must focus on balancing the need to prevent rejection and the impact of progressive metabolic dysfunction in this unique, but growing, patient population.

Predictors for Early Liver Cancer Survival After Ablation and Surgical Resection: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare Study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify independent predictors of all-cause and cancer-specific mortality after ablation or surgical resection (SR) for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), after adjusting for key confounders. METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare, HCCs less than 5 cm treated with ablation or SR in 2009 to 2016 (n = 956) were identified. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression models for all-cause and cancer-specific mortality were performed including demographics, clinical factors (tumor size, medical comorbidities, and liver disease factors), social determinants of health, and treatment characteristics. We also determined the most influential predictors of survival using a random forest analysis. RESULTS: Larger tumor size (3-5 cm) is predictive of all-cause (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, P = .002) and cancer-specific mortality (HR 1.59, P < .001). Furthermore, chronic kidney disease is predictive of all-cause mortality (HR 1.43, P = .013), though it is not predictive of cancer-specific death. Multiple liver disease factors are predictive of all-cause and cancer-specific mortality including portal hypertension and esophageal varices (HRs > 1, P < .05). Though Asian race is protective in univariate models, in fully adjusted, multivariable models, Asian race is not a significant protective factor. Likewise, other social determinants of health are not significantly predictive of all-cause or cancer-specific mortality. Finally, treatment with SR, in later procedure years or at high-volume centers, is protective for all-cause and cancer-specific mortality. In machine learning models, year procedure was performed, ascites, portal hypertension, and treatment choice were the most influential factors. DISCUSSION: Treatment characteristics, liver disease factors, and tumor size are more important predictors of all-cause and cancer-specific death than social determinants of health for small HCCs.

Impact of Race and Neighborhood Socioeconomic Characteristics on Liver Cancer Diagnosis in Patients with Viral Hepatitis and Cirrhosis.

Background: Concerning data have revealed that viral hepatitis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) disproportionally impact non-White patients and those from lower socioeconomic status. A recent study found that HCC clusters were more likely to be in high poverty areas in New York City. Aims: We aim to investigate the impacts of neighborhood characteristics on those with viral hepatitis and cirrhosis, particularly with advanced HCC diagnosis. Methods: Patients with cirrhosis and viral hepatitis admitted to a New York City health system between 2012 and 2019 were included. Those with prior liver transplants were excluded. Neighborhood characteristics were obtained from US Census. Our primary outcome was HCC and advanced HCC diagnosis. Results: This study included 348 patients; 209 without history of HCC, 20 with early HCC, 98 with advanced HCC, and 21 patients with HCC but no staging information. Patients with advanced HCC were more likely to be older, male, Asian, history of HBV, and increased mortality. They were more likely to live in areas with more foreign-born, limited English speakers, and less than high school education. After adjusting for age, sex, and payor type, Asian race and low income were independent risk factors for advanced HCC. Neighborhood factors were not associated with mortality or readmissions. Conclusion: We observed that in addition to age and sex, Asian race, lower household income, lower education, and lower English proficiency were associated with increased risk of advanced HCC. These disparities likely reflect suboptimal screening programs and linkage to care among vulnerable populations. Further efforts are crucial to validate and address these concerning disparities.

Beyond Survival: Adverse Events and Care Delivery Outcomes after Early Liver Cancer Treatment in a Nationally Representative Cohort.

PURPOSE: To compare secondary outcomes after ablation (AB), surgical resection (SR), and liver transplant (LT) for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs), including resource utilization and adverse event (AE) rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER)-Medicare, HCCs <5 cm that were treated with AB, SR, or LT in 2009-2016 (n = 1,067) were identified using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes through Medicare claims. Index procedure length of stay, need for intensive care unit (ICU) level care, readmission rates, and AE rates at 30 and 90 days were compared using chi-square tests or Fisher exact tests. Examined AEs included hemorrhage, abscess formation, biliary injury, pneumonia, sepsis, liver disease-related AEs, liver failure, and anesthesia-related AEs, identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/10th Revision, codes. RESULTS: The median length of stay for initial treatment was 1 day, 6 days, and 7 days for AB, SR, and LT, respectively (P < .001). During initial hospital stay, 5.0%, 40.8%, and 63.4% of AB, SR, and LT cohorts, respectively, received ICU-level care (P < .001). By 30 and 90 days, there were significant differences among the AB, SR, and LT cohorts in the rate of postprocedural hemorrhage, abscess formation, biliary injury, pneumonia, sepsis, liver disease-related AEs, and anesthesia-related AEs (P < .05). By 90 days, the readmission rates after AB, SR, and LT were 18.6%, 28.2%, and 40.6% (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: AB results in significantly less healthcare utilization during the initial 90 days after procedure compared with that after SR and LT due to shorter length of stay, lower intensity care, fewer readmissions, and fewer AEs.

Procedural-Related Bleeding in Hospitalized Patients With Liver Disease (PROC-BLeeD): An International, Prospective, Multicenter Observational Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hospitalized patients with cirrhosis frequently undergo multiple procedures. The risk of procedural-related bleeding remains unclear, and management is not standardized. We conducted an international, prospective, multicenter study of hospitalized patients with cirrhosis undergoing nonsurgical procedures to establish the incidence of procedural-related bleeding and to identify bleeding risk factors. METHODS: Hospitalized patients were prospectively enrolled and monitored until surgery, transplantation, death, or 28 days from admission. The study enrolled 1187 patients undergoing 3006 nonsurgical procedures from 20 centers. RESULTS: A total of 93 procedural-related bleeding events were identified. Bleeding was reported in 6.9% of patient admissions and in 3.0% of the procedures. Major bleeding was reported in 2.3% of patient admissions and in 0.9% of the procedures. Patients with bleeding were more likely to have nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (43.9% vs 30%) and higher body mass index (BMI; 31.2 vs 29.5). Patients with bleeding had a higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at admission (24.5 vs 18.5). A multivariable analysis controlling for center variation found that high-risk procedures (odds ratio [OR], 4.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.44-8.84), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.46-3.86), and higher BMI (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.10-1.80) independently predicted bleeding. Preprocedure international normalized ratio, platelet level, and antithrombotic use were not predictive of bleeding. Bleeding prophylaxis was used more routinely in patients with bleeding (19.4% vs 7.4%). Patients with bleeding had a significantly higher 28-day risk of death (hazard ratio, 6.91; 95% CI, 4.22-11.31). CONCLUSIONS: Procedural-related bleeding occurs rarely in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. Patients with elevated BMI and decompensated liver disease who undergo high-risk procedures may be at risk to bleed. Bleeding is not associated with conventional hemostasis tests, preprocedure prophylaxis, or recent antithrombotic therapy.

Prevention of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC). White Paper of the Texas Collaborative Center for Hepatocellular Cancer (TeCH) Multi-stakeholder Conference.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Texas has the highest age-adjusted incidence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the United States. The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas has funded the Texas Collaborative Center for Hepatocellular Cancer (TeCH) to facilitate HCC research, education, and advocacy activities with the overall goal of reducing HCC mortality in Texas through coordination, collaboration, and advocacy. METHODS: On September 17, 2022, TeCH co-sponsored a multi-stakeholder conference on HCC with the Baker Institute Center for Health and Biosciences. This conference was attended by HCC researchers, policy makers, payers, members from pharmaceutical industry and patient advocacy groups in and outside of Texas. This report summarizes the results of the conference. RESULTS: The goal of this meeting was to identify different strategies for preventing HCC and evaluate their readiness for implementation. CONCLUSIONS: We call for a statewide (1) viral hepatitis elimination program; (2) program to increase nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and obesity awareness; (3) research program to develop health care models that integrate alcohol associated liver disease treatment and treatment for alcohol use disorder; and (4) demonstration projects to evaluate the effectiveness of identifying and linking patient with advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis to clinical care.

Patient-centered care: Key elements applicable to chronic liver disease.

Chronic liver disease (CLD) is a progressive illness with high symptom burden and functional and cognitive impairment, often with comorbid mental and substance use disorders. These factors lead to significant deterioration in quality of life, with immense burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare. The current healthcare system in the United States does not adequately meet the needs of patients with CLD or control costs given the episodic, reactive, and fee-for-service structure. There is also a need for clinical and financial accountability for CLD care. In this context, we describe the key elements required to shift the CLD care paradigm to a patient-centered and value-based system built upon the Porter model of value-based health care. The key elements include (1) organization into integrated practice units, (2) measuring and incorporating meaningful patient-reported outcomes, (3) enabling technology to allow innovation, (4) bundled care payments, (5) integrating palliative care within routine care, and (6) formalizing centers of excellence. These elements have been shown to improve outcomes, reduce costs, and improve overall patient experience for other chronic illnesses and should have similar benefits for CLD. Payers need to partner with providers and systems to build upon these elements and help align reimbursements with patients' values and outcomes. The national organizations such as the American Association for Study of Liver Diseases need to guide key stakeholders in standardizing these elements to optimize patient-centered care for CLD.

Interventional Management of Portal Hypertension in Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview of the classifications and clinical hallmarks of common cancer-related conditions that contribute to the high incidence of portal hypertension in this population and provide an update on currently available interventional radiology therapeutic approaches. RECENT FINDINGS: In the last few decades, there have been significant advancements in understanding the pathophysiology of portal hypertension. This knowledge has led to the development of safer and more effective minimally invasive approaches. The main objective is to provide alternatives to prevent life-threatening complications from clinically significant portal hypertension and to allow the continuation of cancer treatment interventions that would otherwise be stopped. Clinicians involved in cancer care should be aware of risk factors, associated complications, and management of portal hypertension in cancer patients. Interventional radiology offers minimally invasive alternatives that play a central role in improving clinical outcomes and survival of these patients, allowing the continuation of cancer treatments.

Simultaneous EUS-guided portosystemic pressure measurement and liver biopsy sampling correlate with clinically meaningful outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The measurement of the portosystemic pressure gradient (PSG) in patients with advanced liver disease is helpful to assess the severity of portal hypertension (PH) and predict adverse clinical outcomes. EUS-guided PSG (EUS-PSG) measurement is a novel tool to assess PSG in all patients with advanced liver disease. We sought to assess the safety, feasibility, and technical success of simultaneous EUS-PSG measurement and EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling using a single-center experience. METHODS: Patients with suspected liver disease or cirrhosis were enrolled prospectively from 2020 to 2021. EUS-PSG was measured by calculating the difference between the mean portal pressure and the mean hepatic vein pressure. PH was defined as PSG >5 mm Hg and clinically significant PH as PSG ≥10 mm Hg. The primary outcomes were procedural technical success rate and correlation of EUS-PSG with fibrosis stage obtained from concurrent EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling and the correlation of EUS-PSG with patients' imaging, clinical, and laboratory findings. The secondary outcome was occurrence of procedural adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were included in the study. PSG measurement and EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling were successful in 23 patients (technical success rate of 96%) and 24 patients (100% success), respectively. Analysis revealed a significant association between both PSG and liver stiffness measured on transient elastography (P = .011) and fibrosis-4 score (P = .026). No significant correlation was found between the fibrosis stage on histology and measured PSG (P = .559). One mild AE of abdominal pain was noted. Additionally, EUS-PSG was predictive of clinically evident PH. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous EUS-PSG measurement and EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling were both feasible and safe and correlated with clinically evident PH and noninvasive markers of fibrosis.

Effect of Statin Use on Cancer-related Mortality in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Prospective United States Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Indications for use of statins are common among patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Epidemiologic studies have suggested a possible association between statins and decreased risk of malignancies. We hypothesized that statin use has a protective effect on cancer mortality in patients with NAFLD. METHODS: Participants with NAFLD in 8 rounds of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were included in this study. Mortality data were obtained by linking the NHANES data to National Death Index. NAFLD was defined using the previously validated Hepatic Steatosis Index model. RESULTS: A total of 10,821 participants with NAFLD were included and 23% were statin users (n=2523). Statin use was associated with a 43% lower risk of cancer mortality [hazard ratio (HR)=0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43-0.75, P<0.001] in multivariable analysis. Statin use under 1 year did not show a significant effect on cancer mortality (HR=0.72, 95% CI: 0.46-1.12), while statin use for 1 to 5 years decreased cancer mortality by 35% (HR=0.65, 95% CI: 0.42-0.99, P=0.46), and statin use >5 years decreased cancer mortality by 56% (HR=0.44, 95% CI: 0.29-0.66, P<0.001). Statin use was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of cancer mortality in NAFLD patients with both low and high risk of liver fibrosis (HR=0.55, 95% CI: 0.38-0.81; and HR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.31-0.89, respectively). CONCLUSION: Using a large US prospective cohort, we showed statin use is associated with a considerable decrease in cancer-related mortality among patients with NAFLD. These results are important for clinical decision making, as statin indications are prevalent among NAFLD patients, but many do not receive benefit in the event that the statin is discontinued due to liver test abnormalities.

North American Practice-Based Recommendations for Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts in Portal Hypertension.

Complications of portal hypertension, including ascites, gastrointestinal bleeding, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatic encephalopathy, are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite few high-quality randomized controlled trials to guide therapeutic decisions, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation has emerged as a crucial therapeutic option to treat complications of portal hypertension. In North America, the decision to perform TIPS involves gastroenterologists, hepatologists, and interventional radiologists, but TIPS creation is performed by interventional radiologists. This is in contrast to other parts of the world where TIPS creation is performed primarily by hepatologists. Thus, the successful use of TIPS in North America is dependent on a multidisciplinary approach and technical expertise, so as to optimize outcomes. Recently, new procedural techniques, TIPS stent technology, and indications for TIPS have emerged. As a result, practices and outcomes vary greatly across institutions and significant knowledge gaps exist. In this consensus statement, the Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches group critically reviews the application of TIPS in the management of portal hypertension. Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches convened a multidisciplinary group of North American experts from hepatology, interventional radiology, transplant surgery, nephrology, cardiology, pulmonology, and hematology to critically review existing literature and develop practice-based recommendations for the use of TIPS in patients with any cause of portal hypertension in terms of candidate selection, procedural best practices and, post-TIPS management; and to develop areas of consensus for TIPS indications and the prevention of complications. Finally, future research directions are identified related to TIPS for the management of portal hypertension.

Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Matched Case-Control Study.

INTRODUCTION: Although current literature has addressed gastrointestinal presentations including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abnormal liver chemistries, and hyperlipasemia as possible coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifestations, the risk and type of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in this population is not well characterized. METHODS: This is a matched case-control (1:2) study with 41 cases of GIB (31 upper and 10 lower) in patients with COVID-19 and 82 matched controls of patients with COVID-19 without GIB. The primary objective was to characterize bleeding etiologies, and our secondary aim was to discuss outcomes and therapeutic approaches. RESULTS: There was no difference in the presenting symptoms of the cases and controls, and no difference in severity of COVID-19 manifestations (P > 0.05) was observed. Ten (32%) patients with upper GIB underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and 5 (50%) patients with lower GIBs underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. The most common upper and lower GIB etiologies were gastric or duodenal ulcers (80%) and rectal ulcers related to rectal tubes (60%), respectively. Four of the esophagogastroduodenoscopies resulted in therapeutic interventions, and the 3 patients with rectal ulcers were referred to colorectal surgery for rectal packing. Successful hemostasis was achieved in all 7 cases that required interventions. Transfusion requirements between patients who underwent endoscopic therapy and those who were conservatively managed were not significantly different. Anticoagulation and rectal tube usage trended toward being a risk factor for GIB, although it did not reach statistical significance. DISCUSSION: In COVID-19 patients with GIB, compared with matched controls of COVID-19 patients without GIB, there seemed to be no difference in initial presenting symptoms. Of those with upper and lower GIB, the most common etiology was peptic ulcer disease and rectal ulcers from rectal tubes, respectively. Conservative management seems to be a reasonable initial approach in managing these complex cases, but larger studies are needed to guide management.

Longterm Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation for Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure.

Recent data have demonstrated >80% 1-year survival probability after liver transplantation (LT) for patients with severe acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). However, longterm outcomes and complications are still unknown for this population. Our aim was to compare longterm patient and graft survival among patients transplanted across all grades of ACLF. We analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing database for the years 2004-2017. Patients with ACLF were identified using the European Association for the Study of the Liver-Chronic Liver Failure criteria. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods were used to determine patient and graft survival and associated predictors of mortality in adjusted models. A total of 56,801 patients underwent transplantation of which 31,024 (54.6%) had no ACLF, 8757 (15.4%) had ACLF grade 1, 9039 (15.9%) had ACLF grade 2, and 7891 (14.1%) had ACLF grade 3. The 5-year patient survival after LT was lower in the ACLF grade 3 patients compared with the other groups (67.7%; P < 0.001), although after year 1, the percentage decrease in survival was similar among all groups. Infection was the primary cause of death among all patient groups in the first year. Infection was the primary cause of death among all patient groups in the first year. After the first year, infection was the main cause of death in patients transplanted with ACLF grade 1 (32.1%), ACLF grade 2 (33.9%), and ACLF grade 3 (37.6%), whereas malignancy was the predominant cause of death in those transplanted with no ACLF (28.5%). In conclusion, patients transplanted with ACLF grade 3 had lower 5-year survival as compared with patients with ACLF grades 0-2, but mortality rates were not significantly different after the first year following LT. Graft survival was excellent across all ACLF groups.

De-novo hepatocellular carcinoma after pediatric living donor liver transplantation.

De-novo malignancies carry an incidence ranging between 3%-26% after transplant and account for the second highest cause of post-transplant mortality behind cardiovascular disease. While the majority of de-novo malignancies after transplant usually consist of skin cancers, there has been an increasing rate of solid tumor cancers over the last 15 years. Although, recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is well understood among patients transplanted for HCC, there are increasing reports of de-novo HCC in those transplanted for a non-HCC indication. The proposed pathophysiology for these cases has been mainly connected to the presence of advanced graft fibrosis or cirrhosis and always associated with the presence of hepatitis B or C virus. We report the first known case of de-novo HCC in a recipient, 14 years after a pediatric living related donor liver transplantation for end-stage liver disease due to biliary atresia without the presence of hepatitis B or C virus before and after transplant. We present this case report to increase the awareness of this phenomenon and address on the utility for screening and surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma among these individuals. One recommendation is to use similar guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and treatment for HCC as those used for primary HCC in the pre-transplant patient, focusing on those recipients who have advanced fibrosis in the allograft, regardless of etiology.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a surgical perspective.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. Early detection and timely treatment of HCC is critical for better patient outcomes. Curative therapy consists of surgical hepatic resection or liver transplantation (LTx); however, both are restricted to explicit selective criteria. Liver resection is the gold standard of treatment for noncirrhotic patients but can be done in only a small fraction of cirrhotic patients depending on synthetic dysfunction, degree of portal hypertension, and number and location(s) of tumor(s). Therefore, the best treatment modality in cirrhotic patients with HCC is LTx as it will cure both HCC and the underlying cirrhosis. The limitation to offer transplant to all cirrhotic patients with HCC is the shortage of available donor organs. While these patients are waiting for transplant, their tumors may progress and develop distant metastases and may lead to patients losing their candidacy for LTx. Various ablation therapies can be used to treat HCC, prevent tumor progression, and thus, avoid patients losing the option of LTx. Future directions to improve HCC patient outcomes include advancement in tumor gene analysis and histopathology for better prediction of tumor behavior, improved immunosuppression regimens to reduce tumor recurrence in the posttransplant setting, and efficient use of an expanded donor pool that includes living donor organs. This paper will review the current methods of HCC diagnosis, selection for either hepatic resection or LTx, and will also summarize posttreatment outcomes. We will suggest future directions for the field as we strive to improve outcomes for our HCC patients.

Fixed-dose-rate gemcitabine in combination with oxaliplatin in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer refractory to standard-dose-rate gemcitabine: a single-institute study.

OBJECTIVES: There is a paucity of data exploring treatment options for refractory pancreatic cancer. Oxaliplatin has interesting activity in second-line therapy. Fixed-dose-rate gemcitabine (GFDR, 10 mg/m(2)/min) has shown promising results in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer over standard-dose-rate (30 min) gemcitabine (GSDR). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the experience of our cancer center with GFDR and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) in patients who failed GSDR. GEMOX consisted of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) over 100 min on day 1 and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) over 2 h on day 2 every 2 weeks. Eligible patients were required to have measurable metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas and to have failed prior GSDR. RESULTS: Seventeen patients (median age 62 years) who were treated at the Ohio State University with GEMOX following GSDR failure between November 2003 and January 2008 were included in this study. Twenty-four percent of all patients had a partial response, 29% had stable disease and 47% had progressive disease. The median progression-free survival was 2.6 months and the median overall survival was 6.4 months. There were no unexpected toxicities. CONCLUSION: GEMOX shows interesting activity and acceptable tolerability in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who failed prior GSDR. Our results are consistent with previously published results.