RESUMEN
BACKGROUND & AIMS: According to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system, monofocal hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is classified as early (BCLC A) irrespective of its size, even though controversies still exist regarding staging and treatment of large tumours. We aimed at evaluating the appropriate staging and treatment for large (>5 cm) monofocal (HCC). METHODS: From the Italian Liver Cancer database, we selected 924 patients with small early monofocal HCC (2-5 cm; SEM-HCC), 163 patients with larger tumours (>5 cm; LEM-HCC) and 1048 intermediate stage patients (BCLC B). RESULTS: LEM-HCC patients had a worse overall survival (OS) than SEM-HCC (31.0 vs 49.0 months; P < .0001), and this was confirmed at multivariate analysis (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.29-2.05; P < .0001). The small difference in OS between LEM-HCC and BCLC B patients (31.0 vs 27.0 months; P = .03) disappeared in the multivariate model (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.77-1.25; P = .89). In all monofocal tumours, treatment was the strongest independent predictor of survival, with a progressively decreasing survival benefit moving from "curative" to "palliative" therapies. The survival of resected patients with LEM-HCC was significantly shorter than that of SEM-HCC (44.0 vs 78.0 months; P = .002), but liver resection provided the highest survival benefit in both groups compared to other treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Monofocal HCC larger than 5 cm should not be staged as BCLC A and either a different staging system or a different subgrouping of patients (e.g. BCLC AB) should be used. Liver resection, if feasible, remains the recommended treatment for all these patients.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/patología , Hepatectomía , Humanos , Italia , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
AIM: A link has been established between malnutrition, immunological status, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) has been recognized as a prognostic indicator in early-stage HCC and in patients treated with first-line therapy. However, to date, the role of the PNI in HCC patients treated with regorafenib has not been reported. METHODS: We undertook a multicentric analysis on a cohort of 284 patients affected by advanced HCC treated with regorafenib. The PNI was calculated as follows: 10 × serum albumin concentration (g/dl) + 0.005 × peripheral lymphocyte count (number/mm3 ). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to investigate the association between PNI and survival outcomes. RESULTS: A PNI cut-off value of 44.45 was calculated by a receiver operating characteristic analysis. The median overall survival was 12.8 and 7.8 months for patients with high (>44.45) and low (≤44.45) PNI, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.77; p = 0.0002). In the univariate and multivariate analyses, low PNI value and increased serum bilirubin level emerged as independent prognostic factors for overall survival. No differences were found between high and low PNI in terms of progression-free survival (p = 0.14). CONCLUSION: If validated, the PNI could represent an easy-to-use prognostic tool able to guide the clinical decision-making process in HCC patients treated with regorafenib.
Asunto(s)
Hepatopatías , Trombosis de la Vena , Anticoagulantes , Humanos , Cirrosis Hepática , Vena PortaRESUMEN
The American College of Radiology (ACR) released the Liver Imaging Report and Data System (LI-RADS) scheme, which categorizes hepatic nodules in risk classes from LR-1 to LR-5 (according to the degree of risk to be HCC) and LR-M (probable malignancy not specific for HCC). The aim of this study was to test whether HCC with different LR patterns on CEUS have different overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). We retrospectively enrolled 167 patients with the first definitive diagnosis of single HCC (by using CT/MRI or histological techniques if CT/MRI were inconclusive) for whom CEUS examination was available. The median size of HCC lesions was 2.2 cm (range 1.0-7.2 cm). According to CEUS LI-RADS classification, 28 patients were in LR-3, 48 in LR-4, 83 in LR-5, and 8 in LR-M. Patient liver function and nodule characteristics were not statistically different between CEUS LI-RADS classes. Using univariate analysis, CEUS LI-RADS class was not found to be a predictor of survival (p = 0.347). In conclusion, HCC showing the CEUS LI-RADS classes LR-3 and LR-4 have no better clinical outcome than typical HCC. Such data support the EASL policy, aimed at conclusive diagnostic investigations of indeterminate nodules up to obtaining histological proof to avoid leaving aggressive HCC not timely treated.
RESUMEN
Liver cirrhosis is an established high-risk factor for HCC and the majority of patients diagnosed with HCC have cirrhosis. However, HCC also arises in non-cirrhotic livers in approximately 20 %of all cases. HCC in non-cirrhotic patients is often clinically silent and surveillance is usually not recommended. HCC is often diagnosed at an advanced stage in these patients. Current information about HCC in patients with non-cirrhotic liver is limited. Here we review the current knowledge on epidemiology, clinical features and imaging features of those patiens.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/complicaciones , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/patología , Humanos , Hígado/diagnóstico por imagen , Hígado/patología , Cirrosis Hepática/complicaciones , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/complicacionesRESUMEN
Current literature on the role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in non-cirrhotic patients is limited. The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to analyze CEUS features of histologically proven HCC in patients with non-cirrhotic liver. In this multicenter study, 96 patients from eight medical institutions with histologically proven HCC lesions in non-cirrhotic liver were retrospectively reviewed regarding SonoVue-enhanced CEUS features. Two ultrasound experts assessed the CEUS enhancement pattern and came to a consensus using the World Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology guideline criteria. The mean size of HCC lesions included was 60.3 ± 37.8 mm (mean ± standard deviation). Most of the lesions were heterogeneous but predominantly hypo-echoic on B-mode ultrasound (64.5%, 62/96), with ill-defined margins and irregular shapes. During the arterial phase of CEUS, most of the HCC lesions in non-cirrhotic liver exhibited heterogeneous hyperenhancement (78.1%, 75/96) compared with the surrounding liver parenchyma. Almost 30% of HCC lesions (28.1%, 27/96) exhibited early wash-out (<60 s). All lesions exhibited wash-out and hypo-enhancement in the late phase. CEUS features of HCC lesions in non-cirrhotic patients typically include hyperenhancement in the arterial phase and relatively rapid wash-out in the portal venous phase, which is different from HCC in cirrhotic livers and more similar to liver metastasis.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/complicaciones , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/diagnóstico por imagen , Medios de Contraste , Humanos , Hígado/diagnóstico por imagen , Hígado/patología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/complicaciones , Neoplasias Hepáticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Retrospectivos , UltrasonografíaRESUMEN
Regorafenib was the first drug to demonstrate a survival benefit as a second-line agent after sorafenib failure in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recent studies have shown that its mechanism of action is not only limited to its very broad spectrum of inhibition of angiogenesis, tumor proliferation, spread, and metastasis, but also to its immunomodulatory properties that have favorable effects on the very intricate role that the tumor microenvironment plays in carcinogenesis and tumor growth. In this review, we discuss rationale and evidence supporting regorafenib efficacy in HCC and that led to its approval as a second-line treatment, after sorafenib failure. We also discuss the evidence from clinical practice studies that confirm the results previously achieved in clinical trials. Finally, we analyze the potential role of regorafenib in emerging combined treatment approach with immunotherapy strategies using immune checkpoint blockade and its potential extension to patient categories not included in the registrative study.
RESUMEN
Regorafenib is a diphenylurea oral multikinase inhibitor, structurally comparable to sorafenib, which targets a variety of kinases implicated in angiogenic and tumor growth-promoting pathways. Regorafenib was the first agent to positively show significant survival advantage as a second-line therapy in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who had previously failed first-line treatment with sorafenib. Recent evidence has shown that its antitumor efficacy is due to a comprehensive spectrum of tumor neo-angiogenesis and proliferation inhibition and immunomodulatory effects on the tumor microenvironment, which plays a crucial role in tumor development. This review addresses the rationale and supporting evidence for regorafenib's efficacy in HCC that led to regorafenib's approval as a second-line therapy. In addition, we review proof from clinical practice studies that validate the RESORCE trial results. We discuss regorafenib's potential role in the newly emerging therapeutic strategy based on combination with immune checkpoint blockade and its possible extensibility to patient categories not enrolled in the registrative study.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib has been approved in Italy since October 2019 as a first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and to date data on effectiveness and safety of lenvatinib are not available in our region. To fill this gap, we performed a multicentric analysis of the real-world treatment outcomes with the propensity score matching in a cohort of Italian patients with unresectable HCC who were treated with either sorafenib or lenvatinib. AIMS AND METHODS: To evaluate the effectiveness of sorafenib and lenvatinib as primary treatment of advanced HCC in clinical practice we performed a multicentric analysis of the treatment outcomes of 288 such patients recruited in 11 centers in Italy. A propensity score was used to mitigate confounding due to referral biases in the assessment of mortality and progression-free survival. RESULTS: Over a follow-up period of 11 months the Cox regression model showed 48% reduction of death risk for patients treated with lenvatinib (95% CI: 0.34-0.81; p = 0.0034), compared with those treated with sorafenib. The median PFS was 9.0 and 4.9 months for lenvatinib and sorafenib arm, respectively. Patients treated with lenvatinib showed a higher percentage of response rate (29.4% vs 2.8%; p < 0.00001) compared with patients treated with sorafenib. Sorafenib was shown to be correlated with more HFSR, diarrhea and fatigue, while lenvatinib with more hypertension and fatigue. CONCLUSION: Our study highlighted for the first time the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in an Italian cohort of patients.