Long term results of down-staging and liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the conventional criteria.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 03 2019
07 03 2019
Historique:
received:
04
10
2018
accepted:
12
02
2019
entrez:
9
3
2019
pubmed:
9
3
2019
medline:
11
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The objective of the study is to evaluate 10 years of down-staging strategy for liver transplantation (LT) with a median follow-up of 5 years. Data on long-term results are poor and less information is available for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) non-responder patients or those ineligible for down-staging. The outcome of 308 HCC candidates and the long-term results of 231 LTs for HCC performed between 2003 and 2013 were analyzed. HCCs were divided according to tumor stage and response to therapy: 145 patients were T2 (metering Milan Criteria, MC), 43 were T3 successfully down-staged to T2 (Down-Achieved), 20 were T3 not fully down-staged to T2 (Down-not Achieved), and 23 patients were T3 not receiving down-staging treatments (No-Down). The average treatment effect (ATE) of LT for T3 tumors was estimated using the outcome of 535 T3 patients undergoing non-LT therapies, using inverse probability weighting regression adjustment. The 24-month drop-out rate during waiting time was significantly higher in the down-staging groups: 27.6% vs. 9.2%, p < 0.005. After LT, the tumor recurrence rate was significantly different: MC 7.6%, Down-Achieved 20.9%, Down-not Achieved 31.6%, and No-Down 30.4% (p < 0.001). The survival rates at 5 years were: 63% in Down-Achieved, 62% in Down-not Achieved, 63% in No-Down, and 77% in MC (p = n.s.). The only variable related to a better outcome was the effective down-staging to T2 at the histological evaluation of the explanted liver: recurrence rate = 7.8% vs. 26% (p < 0.001) and 5-year patient survival = 76% vs. 67% (p < 0.05). The ATE estimation showed that the mean survival of T3-LT candidates was significantly better than that of T3 patients ineligible for LT [83.3 vs 39.2 months (+44.6 months); p < 0.001]. Long term outcome of T3 down-staged candidates was poorer than that of MC candidates, particularly for cases not achieving down-staging. However, their survival outcome was significantly better than that achieved with non-transplant therapies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30846792
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-40543-4
pii: 10.1038/s41598-019-40543-4
pmc: PMC6405768
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3781Références
Am J Transplant. 2006 Jul;6(7):1572-7
pubmed: 16827857
J Hepatocell Carcinoma. 2017 Feb 17;4:29-39
pubmed: 28255543
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Jan;13(1):e11-22
pubmed: 22047762
Am J Transplant. 2015 Oct;15(10):2552-61
pubmed: 26274338
J Hepatol. 2017 Mar;66(3):552-559
pubmed: 27899297
Am J Transplant. 2007 Apr;7(4):972-81
pubmed: 17391137
Lancet Oncol. 2009 Jan;10(1):35-43
pubmed: 19058754
Hepatology. 2005 Nov;42(5):1208-36
pubmed: 16250051
J Hepatol. 2001 Sep;35(3):421-30
pubmed: 11592607
J Am Coll Surg. 2017 Apr;224(4):610-621
pubmed: 28069527
Ann Surg. 2017 Mar;265(3):557-564
pubmed: 27611615
Hepatology. 2008 Sep;48(3):819-27
pubmed: 18688876
Liver Transpl. 2018 Mar;24(3):369-379
pubmed: 29140601
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Jun;16(6):955-964
pubmed: 29175528
Liver Transpl. 2007 Jun;13(6):857-66
pubmed: 17539006
Gastroenterology. 2015 Sep;149(3):669-80; quiz e15-6
pubmed: 26021233
Transplant Proc. 2018 Jun;50(5):1386-1395
pubmed: 29880361
Hepatology. 2009 Mar;49(3):1056
pubmed: 19241485
Am J Transplant. 2007 Nov;7(11):2587-96
pubmed: 17868066
Am J Transplant. 2008 Dec;8(12):2547-57
pubmed: 19032223
Clin Transplant. 2015 Dec;29(12):1156-63
pubmed: 26458066
Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Jul;22(7):2286-94
pubmed: 25472651
Transplantation. 2009 Sep 27;88(6):826-34
pubmed: 19920783
Hepatology. 2015 Jun;61(6):1968-77
pubmed: 25689978