Is Cell-Free DNA Testing in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Ready for Prime Time?

Revamping the current biomarker landscape of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with cell-free DNA (cfDNA) could improve overall outcomes. The use of commercially available cfDNA testing (also known as liquid biopsy) is limited by the low prevalence of targetable mutations and does not have any prognostic or predictive value. Thus, current cfDNA testing cannot be relied upon for perioperative risk stratification (POR), including early detection of recurrence, long-term surveillance, predicting outcomes, and treatment response. Prior evidence on cfDNA mutation profiling (non-specific detection or gene panel testing) suggests that it can be a reliable tool for POR and prognostication, but it still requires significant improvements. cfDNA methylation changes or epigenetic markers have not been explored extensively, but early studies have shown potential for it to be a prognostic biomarker tool. The predictive value of cfDNA (mutations and EM) to assist treatment selection (systemic therapy, immune-checkpoint inhibitor vs. tyrosine kinase inhibitor) and to monitor response to systemic and locoregional therapies should be a future area of focus. We highlighted the unmet needs in the HCC management and the current role of cfDNA testing in HCC in addressing them.

Balloon-Occluded Retrograde Transvenous Obliteration (BRTO) Versus Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS) for Treatment of Gastric Varices Because of Portal Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although gastric variceal (GV) bleeding is less common than esophageal variceal bleeding, the severity of GV bleeding is often greater with higher morbidity and mortality rates. Minimally invasive endovascular treatments such as balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) have been used for the management of GVs with varying results, and individual and institutional differences exist in the use of BRTO and TIPS. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of BRTO and TIPS for the treatment of GVs because of portal hypertension. METHODS: Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases were performed from inception through March 2019. Summary odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was estimated for technical success, hemostasis rate, postprocedural complications, rebleeding rate, incidence of hepatic encephalopathy, and mortality rate at 1 year utilizing a random-effects model. RESULTS: Seven studies with a total of 676 patients (BRTO: 462 and TIPS: 214) were included. There was no difference in pooled technical success rate (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.28-2.73; P=0.81), hemostasis rate (OR, 2.74; 95% CI, 0.61-12.26; P=0.19), and postoperative procedure-related complications (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.44-8.72; P=0.38). However, treatment with BRTO was associated with lower rates of postoperative rebleeding (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.18-0.48; P<0.00001), postoperative encephalopathy (OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.02-0.15; P < 0.00001), and mortality at 1 year (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.21-0.87; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: BRTO was associated with lower rates of rebleeding, postprocedure hepatic encephalopathy, and mortality at 1 year. BRTO should be considered first-line modality for the treatment of GVs because of portal hypertension.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in inflammatory bowel disease flare-ups.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a set of chronic inflammatory diseases associated with significant morbidity. Generally, IBD patients have twice the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared to healthy controls. VTE in IBD is associated with greater morbidity and mortality. This is compounded by the underutilization of pharmacological anticoagulation in hospitalized patients with IBD. One study showed that half the IBD patients who developed VTE were not receiving any thrombotic prophylaxis. METHOD: We carried out a retrospective chart review of VTE prophylaxis use and safety in patients admitted with IBD flare-up between 2014 and 2017. RESULTS: We evaluated 233 patients (mean age 36.7 years; 53.6% male). Of these patients, 55.2% were Caucasian and 40.5% were African American; 72.5% had Crohn's disease and 21% ulcerative colitis. About one-third of our patients were on chronic steroids. Pharmacological prophylaxis was used in 39.7% of the patients. This significantly correlated with male sex, recent surgery, history of VTE, smoking, and chronic steroid use. Meanwhile, hematochezia, aspirin use, and a history of gastrointestinal bleeding were correlated with less use of pharmacological prophylaxis. Patients receiving pharmacological prophylaxis showed no difference in the incidence of bleeding events. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors were associated with the use of pharmacological prophylaxis in hospitalized patients, including sex, steroid use, history of VTE events or gastrointestinal bleeding, and hematochezia. The incidence of major bleeding was not significantly greater in IBD patients receiving pharmacological prophylaxis.