Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence in hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis treated with direct-acting antivirals: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) therapy against hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection has markedly improved the sustained viral response. However, recent studies have suggested an unsuspected high rate of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was carried out to investigate the impact of DAAs on tumor recurrence in patients with complete response to HCC treatment within our HCV-related cirrhosis cohort. Patients who received [group 1 (G1), n=22] or not [group 2 (G2), n=49] a DAAs therapy were matched 1 : 2 for age, sex, liver function, HCC stage, and treatment. RESULTS: Initial HCC were mostly Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage A (95% G1, 94% G2). Sustained viral response with DAAs was achieved in 86% of patients. After a similar median overall follow-up time with similar radiologic surveillance after HCC treatment, 41% of patients developed radiologic tumor recurrence in G1 versus 35% of patients in G2 (P=0.7904). There was no significant difference in time to progression between the two groups [12 (9-16) months G1 vs. 14 (8-21) months G2, P=0.7688], or Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage at recurrence. However, the interval between HCC treatment and antiviral therapy was significantly different among DAAs patients with recurrence and those without recurrence [7.0 (2.5-9.0) months vs. 36.0 (9.0-58.0) months, P=0.0235, respectively]. CONCLUSION: In our case-control study, HCV therapy with DAAs does not accelerate or prevent early HCC recurrence compared with untreated patients. The rate of recurrence, time to progression, and HCC pattern are similar. Early DAAs treatment (<12 months) after HCC cure should be discouraged considering the HCC recurrence rate during this period.

Clinical outcome after biliary drainage for metastatic colorectal cancer: Survival analysis and prognostic factors.

INTRODUCTION: Biliary obstruction secondary to colorectal cancer liver metastases is associated with a poor prognosis especially when chemotherapy cannot be re-started. The aim of this study was to determine the survival after biliary drainage and the associated prognostic factors. METHODS: Patients from two French centers were included retrospectively after first biliary endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography drainage for biliary obstruction secondary to liver metastases of colorectal cancer, occurring during chemotherapy. RESULTS: The final analysis included 69 patients. Overall median survival was 115 days. In univariate analysis, a previous liver surgery, technical and functional success of drainage and restarted chemotherapy were significantly associated with an improved survival. Chemotherapy was restarted after a median of 27 days. When drainage was efficient, survival improved from 33 to 262days (p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, significant protective factors for survival included previous a hepatectomy (HR 0.41) and functional success of the drainage (HR 0.29). Predictive factors for death included increased lines of chemotherapy (HR 1.68) and fever before drainage (HR 2.97). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study concerning the benefits of biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction during the course of chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. A successful biliary drainage leads to improved survival and allows achievement of chemotherapy for 70% of patients.

Impact of Full Spectrum Endoscopy® (Fuse®, EndoChoice®) on adenoma detection: a prospective French pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, colonoscopy and polypectomy are the gold standard methods for the prevention of incident cases of colorectal cancer. The use of a new colonoscope (Fuse®, EndoChoice®) with a larger view of up to 330° appears to improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR). We performed a prospective observational study concerning this scope. The primary endpoint was potentially omitted adenomas (POA), i.e. adenomas seen on the side screens that will not appear on the central display during colonoscopy withdrawal without oriented movements. Secondary endpoints included our ADR, Fuse® impact on ADR, time to cecal intubation and withdrawal time. METHODS: We performed a single-center prospective study in one French center. We enrolled patients over 18 years of age between January 2015 and March 2016. RESULTS: We included 141 patients; 3 were excluded because their colonoscopies were incomplete. Our study included 78 men and 60 women (sex ratio 1.3). The mean age was 60.4 years. A total of 130 polyps were resected. In all, 88/130 were adenomas (68%) and 34/88 adenomas (39%) were POA. The mean time to cecum was 10 min, and the mean withdrawal time was 12 min. ADR was 35% for men and 31% for women. The estimated ADR without POA was 29% for men and 19% for women. CONCLUSIONS: The Fuse® system appears to be safe and efficient. POA represented 39% of all adenomas. The impact of the panoramic view on the ADR was considered substantial. The main limitations are the lack of randomization and the absence of a control group.