Disparities in Access to Liver Transplant Referral and Evaluation among Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Georgia.

Liver transplantation offers the best survival for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Prior studies have demonstrated disparities in transplant access; none have examined the early steps of the transplant process. We identified determinants of access to transplant referral and evaluation among patients with HCC with a single tumor either within Milan or meeting downstaging criteria in Georgia.Population-based cancer registry data from 2010 to 2019 were linked to liver transplant centers in Georgia. Primary cohort: adult patients with HCC with a single tumor ≤8 cm in diameter, no extrahepatic involvement, and no vascular involvement. Secondary cohort: primary cohort plus patients with multiple tumors confined to one lobe. We estimated time to transplant referral, evaluation initiation, and evaluation completion, accounting for the competing risk of death. In sensitivity analyses, we also accounted for non-transplant cancer treatment.Among 1,379 patients with early-stage HCC in Georgia, 26% were referred to liver transplant. Private insurance and younger age were associated with increased likelihood of referral, while requiring downstaging was associated with lower likelihood of referral. Patients living in census tracts with ≥20% of residents in poverty were less likely to initiate evaluation among those referred [cause-specific hazard ratio (csHR): 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42-0.94]. Medicaid patients were less likely to complete the evaluation once initiated (csHR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.89).Different sociodemographic factors were associated with each stage of the transplant process among patients with early-stage HCC in Georgia, emphasizing unique barriers to access and the need for targeted interventions at each step. SIGNIFICANCE: Among patients with early-stage HCC in Georgia, age and insurance type were associated with referral to liver transplant, race, and poverty with evaluation initiation, and insurance type with evaluation completion. Opportunities to improve transplant access include informing referring providers about insurance requirements, addressing barriers to evaluation initiation, and streamlining the evaluation process.

Prospective Multicenter Study of Early Antiviral Therapy in Liver and Kidney Transplant Recipients of HCV-Viremic Donors.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Organs from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic donors have been used in HCV-uninfected recipients (D+/R-), but the optimal treatment approach has not been defined. We evaluated the kinetics of HCV infection following transplant in D+/R- kidney-transplant (KT) and liver-transplant (LT) recipients when a preemptive antiviral strategy was used. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Six US transplant programs prospectively treated D+/R- primary LT and KT recipients with sofosbuvir-velpastasvir for 12 weeks starting once viremia was confirmed following transplant and the patients were judged to be clinically stable, including estimated glomerular filtration rate >30 mL/min. Primary endpoints were sustained virologic response at 12 weeks following transplant and safety (assessed by proportion of treatment-related adverse and serious adverse events). Of the 24 patients transplanted (13 liver, of whom 2 had prior-treated HCV infection; 11 kidney), 23 became viremic after transplant. The median (interquartile range) time from transplant to start of antiviral therapy was 7.0 (6.0, 12.0) versus 16.5 (9.8, 24.5) days, and the median (interquartile range) HCV-RNA level 3 days after transplant was 6.5 (3.9, 7.1) versus 3.6 (2.9, 4.0) log10  IU/mL in LT versus KT recipients, respectively. By week 4 of treatment, 10 of 13 (77%) LT, but only 2 of 10 (20%) KT, had undetectable HCV RNA (P = 0.01). At the end of treatment, all LT recipients were HCV RNA-undetectable, whereas 3 (30%) of the kidney recipients still had detectable, but not quantifiable, viremia. All achieved sustained virologic response at 12 weeks following transplant (lower 95% confidence interval bound: 85%). Serious adverse events considered possibly related to treatment were antibody-mediated rejection, biliary sclerosis, cardiomyopathy, and graft-versus-host disease, with the latter associated with multiorgan failure, premature treatment discontinuation, and death. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differing kinetics of early HCV infection in liver versus non-liver recipients, a preemptive antiviral strategy is effective. Vigilance for adverse immunologic events is warranted.

End-hole Versus Microvalve Infusion Catheters in Patients Undergoing Drug-Eluting Microspheres-TACE for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma Tumors: A Retrospective Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Pre-transplant locoregional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) during bridge-to-transplant impacts recurrence and survival rates following liver transplantation. Optimizing the effectiveness of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in this population is imperative, and microvalve infusion catheters offer a means of such improvement. METHODS: All treatment-naive patients with solitary HCC tumors < 6.5 cm who underwent drug-eluting microspheres (DEM) TACE between 04/2015 and 08/2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Eighty-eight included patients underwent DEM-TACE with either standard end-hole catheters (EH) or microvalve infusion catheters (MVI). The EH (n = 70) and MVI (n = 18) cohorts had similar baseline tumor size, laboratory values, and tumor etiologies. RESULTS: Initial objective response rates were significantly higher in MVI vs. EH (100% vs. 76.5%, p = 0.019). There was no difference in adverse events between groups (p = 0.265). MVI patients exhibited lower AST (p = 0.003) and ALT (p = 0.044) at 6 months. Blinded pathological analysis of explanted livers showed greater concentrations of microspheres within the tumor relative to the surrounding tissue in MVI explants (88.7 ± 10.6%) versus the EH explants (55.3 ± 32.7%) (p = 0.002). There was significantly higher percentage tumor necrosis in the MVI group (89.0 ± 2.2%) compared with the EH group (56.1 ± 44.5%) (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study of a single-center cohort, DEM-TACE procedures with MVI were associated with improved tumor response, increased deposition of microspheres within tumor tissue, and higher percentage tumor necrosis at explant relative to those performed using EH catheters.

Donor-Derived Hepatic Neuroendocrine Tumor: Pause Before Proceeding With Liver Retransplantation.

Gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (NET) are rare but the age-adjusted incidence in the United States has increased, possibly due to improved radiographic and endoscopic detection. In advanced NET, hepatic metastases are common. Orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) is currently considered an acceptable therapy for selected patients with limited hepatic disease or liver metastases where complete resection is thought to have curative intent. The development of NET of donor origin is very uncommon after organ transplant, and it is unclear if the same treatment strategies applied to hepatic NET would also be efficacious after OLT. Here, we describe a unique case of an OLT recipient with a donor-derived NET that was treated with redo OLT as the primary therapy. The donor-derived NET recurred in the recipient's second liver allograft suggesting an extrahepatic reservoir. This case describes the natural history of such a rare event. Here, we highlight the treatment options for hepatic NET and challenge the role of OLT for a donor-derived hepatic NET.