Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in prevalence globally, and cure remains limited with non-operative treatment. Surgical intervention, through resection or transplantation, offers a potential for cure for select patients. However, many patients present with advanced or unresectable disease, and recurrence rates remain high. Recent advances in systemic therapies, particularly immune checkpoint inhibitors, have demonstrated promise in treating unresectable HCC and as adjuvant therapy. Evidence from adjuvant trials highlights the synergistic potential of combined liver-directed and systemic therapies. These findings have ignited growing interest in neoadjuvant therapy across various scenarios: (1) as a bridging strategy while awaiting transplantation, (2) for downstaging disease to enable transplantation, (3) for converting unresectable disease to a resectable state, or (4) as neoadjuvant treatment in operable cases. Early-stage trials of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable HCC have reported promising outcomes. To realize the potential of neoadjuvant treatment for HCC, thoughtfully designed, adequately powered, multi-center clinical trials are essential.

This study was conducted to examine the dose-related effects over time of oleuropein on the proliferation and area of tumor spheroids in hepatocellular carcinoma cells.

We examined the possible effects of 100 to 500 μM dose concentrations of oleuropein on HepG2 cell proliferation using a real-time cell analyzer. A 3-dimensional hepatocellular carcinoma tumor spheroid model was established by seeding HepG2 cells at a density of 160 cells/well in custom 96-well microplates with low attachment surfaces and culturing for 3 days. Tumor spheres were treated with increasing oleuropein doses for 72 hours, and images were captured every 24 hours. The dose-dependent effects of oleuropein on tumor sphere size were analyzed by measuring the area of tumor spheres with ImageJ software. We conducted oleuropein viability and cytotoxicity analyses using calcein acetoxymethyl ester-based and propidium iodide-based staining in the tumor model.

Oleuropein inhibited cell proliferation; as the dose concentration of oleuropein increased, so did its capacity to inhibit cell proliferation (P < .001). The size of untreated tumor spheres increased at 72 hours (P < .001). However, treatment with 100 to 500 μM oleuropein reduced tumor size by 63.56% to 88.06% compared with untreated cells at the end of 72 hours (P < .001). With increasing concentrations, oleuropein inhibited the viability of tumor spheres, eliminating necrotic death caused by tumor hypoxia.

Overall, oleuropein reduced the size of tumors by inhibiting tumor proliferation and viability. In this context, oleuropein could be a candidate molecule for further extensive studies to reduce hepatocellular carcinoma tumors to meet Milan criteria for liver transplant.

Patients with cirrhosis are at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but few undergo guideline-recommended semi-annual screening. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) demonstrate that mailed outreach can increase screening versus visit-based screening. We estimated the costs and cost-effectiveness of an outreach strategy versus usual care.

We built a 10-year Markov chain Monte Carlo microsimulation model to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing a mailed outreach program versus usual care for HCC screening in a cohort of 10,000 patients with cirrhosis. Model inputs were based on literature review (2005-current), and costs were based on inflation-adjusted estimates from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare claims data. We conducted one-way sensitivity analyses for HCC incidence, outreach costs, efficacy of the outreach strategy to increase screening, and efficacy of curative (versus palliative) HCC treatments.

Mailed outreach was estimated to cost $32.45 per patient in the first year and $21.90 per patient in subsequent years. The outreach program increased the number of HCC patients detected at an early stage by 48.4% and increased quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) by 300. Cost savings from these increases offset the costs of mailed outreach. Mailed outreach remained cost-effective across a wide range of HCC incidence rates, outreach costs, efficacy of the outreach strategy to increase screening, and the efficacy of curative HCC treatments. Annual out-of-pocket patient costs in the outreach arm were low at $13 per year.

Mailed outreach to encourage HCC screening in patients with cirrhosis dominates usual care and should be considered for implementation in routine practice.

National Cancer Institute and Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas.

Embolic and ablative locoregional therapies (LRTs) for hepatocellular carcinoma are widely used to cure, bridge, or downstage patients for more definitive therapies. Common ablative therapies include microwave ablation and radiofrequency ablation, while embolic options include transarterial chemoembolization and 90Y transarterial radioembolization. While these therapies can be highly effective for the appropriate stage of disease, LRTs can suffer from a high rate of posttreatment recurrences. Considerations for administration of specific therapies include disease burden and underlying liver function. Recent data on concomitant or adjuvant systemic therapy, with LRT, have the potential to improve disease control and improve outcomes in this high-risk patient population.

Liver cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounting for approximately 90% of primary liver cancers. Advances in diagnostic and therapeutic tools, along with improved understanding of their application, are transforming patient treatment. Integrating these innovations into clinical practice presents challenges and necessitates guidance. These clinical practice guidelines offer updated advice for managing patients with HCC and provide a comprehensive review of pertinent data. Key updates from the 2018 EASL guidelines include personalised surveillance based on individual risk assessment and the use of new tools, standardisation of liver imaging procedures and diagnostic criteria, use of minimally invasive surgery in complex cases together with updates on the integrated role of liver transplantation, transitions between surgical, locoregional, and systemic therapies, the role of radiation therapies, and the use of combination immunotherapies at various stages of disease. Above all, there is an absolute need for a multiparametric assessment of individual risks and benefits, considering the patient's perspective, by a multidisciplinary team encompassing various specialties.

The Milan criteria have been the subject of discussion in recent years due to their restrictive nature. Expansion of the criteria and the use of locoregional therapies to downstage patients and increase the number of transplant candidates have been proposed. Our study analyzed the results of patients that underwent transplant due to hepatocellular carcinoma, comparing those that met the Milan criteria and those that exceeded them.

A retrospective, observational, single-center study was conducted on liver transplantations due to hepatocellular carcinoma, within the time frame of 2010-2021. Demographic and clinical variables, overall survival, and disease-free survival were analyzed. The Student's t test or Mann-Whitney U test were applied for the quantitative variables and the Fisher's exact test for the categorical variables. The survival function was estimated through the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test was applied for comparing the groups.

Of the 96 transplanted patients, 78 met the Milan criteria and 18 exceeded them. Patients that did not meet the Milan criteria had a higher number of nodules (1.6 vs. 3.5 nodules; p = 0.000), larger main lesions (24.38 vs. 38.55 mm; p = 0.000), a higher bilobar hepatocellular carcinoma rate (21.79% vs. 72.22%, p = 0.000), and higher tumor burden. There were no significant differences regarding overall survival, but there was a lower rate of disease-free survival in the group exceeding the criteria.

Downstaged patients that received locoregional therapies had lower disease-free survival rates than patients that met the Milan criteria, but there were no significant differences regarding overall survival.

Transarterial radioembolization (TARE) is an effective treatment to control tumor growth and improve survival in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The role of TARE in downstaging patients to liver transplantation (LT) is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the downstaging efficacy of TARE for intermediate and advanced HCC.

Intention-to-treat analysis with multistate modeling was performed. Patients moved through 5 health states: (1) from TARE to listing, (2) from TARE to death without listing, (3) from listing to LT, (4) from listing to death without LT, and (5) from transplant to death. Factors affecting the chance of death after TARE were considered to stratify outcomes.

Two hundred fourteen patients underwent TARE. Of those, 43.9% had radiological response, 29.9% were listed, and 22.8% were transplanted. The probability of being alive without LT was 40.5% 1 y after TARE and 11.5% at 5 y. The chance of being listed was 9.4% at 1 y and 0.9% at 5 y. The probability of dying after TARE without LT was 38% at 1 y and 73% at 5 y. The overall survival of patients receiving LT was 61% at 5 y after transplant. Tumor beyond up-to-seven criteria, alfafetoprotein >400 ng/mL, and albumin-bilirubin ≥2 were associated with death. Three risk groups were associated with different response, chances of being listed, and receiving LT. Median survival was 3 y for low-risk, 1.9 y for intermediate-risk, and 9 mo for high-risk patients ( P  < 0.001).

In intermediate and advanced HCC, TARE allows for a 44% chance of response, 30% downstaging, and 23% probability of permitting LT. Patient's and tumor's characteristics allow for risk stratification and predict survival from TARE.

Liver transplantation (LT) is an established life-saving procedure. The field of LT has changed in the past 10 years from several perspectives, with the expansion of indications, transplantation of patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure, evolution of transplant oncology, the use of donations after cardiac death, new surgical techniques, and prioritisation of recipients on the waiting list. In addition, the advent of organ perfusion machines, the recognition of new forms of rejection, and the attention paid to the transition from paediatric to adult patients, have all improved the management of LT recipients. The purpose of the EASL guidelines presented here is not to cover all aspects of LT but to focus on developments since the previous EASL guidelines published in 2016.

Deaths from the majority of cancers are falling globally, but the incidence and mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing in the United Kingdom and in other Western countries. HCC is a highly fatal cancer, often diagnosed late, with an incidence to mortality ratio that approaches 1. Despite there being a number of treatment options, including those associated with good medium to long-term survival, 5-year survival from HCC in the UK remains below 20%. Sex, ethnicity and deprivation are important demographics for the incidence of, and/or survival from, HCC. These clinical practice guidelines will provide evidence-based advice for the assessment and management of patients with HCC. The clinical and scientific data underpinning the recommendations we make are summarised in detail. Much of the content will have broad relevance, but the treatment algorithms are based on therapies that are available in the UK and have regulatory approval for use in the National Health Service.

Selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) is recommended as a downstaging (DS) strategy for solitary unresectable HCC <8 cm. The aim of this study was to report the results of acquired experience in a tertiary center for all unresectable HCCs.

We conducted a retrospective, observational study using data collected from consecutive patients undergoing SIRT between October 2013 and June 2020. DS was considered achieved when a curative treatment could be proposed 6 months after SIRT.

One hundred twenty-seven patients were included (male = 90%, 64 ± 11 y), of whom 112 (n = 88%) had cirrhosis. HCC was classified as BCLC stage C in 64 patients (50%), with a median diameter of 61 mm, an infiltrative pattern in 51 patients (40%), and portal vein invasion in 62 (49%) patients. Fifty patients (39%) achieved DS 6 months following SIRT, with 29 of them (23%) undergoing curative treatment in a median time of 4.3 months: 17 (13%) were transplanted, 11 (85%) had liver resection, and 1 patient had a radiofrequency ablation. The median overall survival of patients with or without DS was 51 versus 10 months, respectively (p < 0.001). In patients who achieved DS, progression-free survival was higher in patients who underwent surgery: 47 versus 11 months (p < 0.001). Four variables were independently associated with DS: age (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: [0.92, 0.99]; p = 0.032), baseline α-fetoprotein (OR: 1.00, 95% CI: [1.00, 1.00]; p = 0.034), HCC distribution (OR: 0.3, 95% CI: [0.11, 0.75]; p = 0.012), and ALBI grade (OR: 0.34. 95% CI: [0.14, 0.80]; p = 0.014).

These results suggest that SIRT in patients with unresectable HCC could be an effective treatment: DS was achieved for around 39% of the patients and more than half of these then underwent curative treatment.

Surgical therapies in patients with early-stage HCC can afford long-term survival but are often limited by the continued risk of recurrence, underscoring an interest in (neo)adjuvant strategies. Prior attempts at adjuvant therapy using tyrosine kinase inhibitors failed to yield significant improvements in recurrence-free survival or overall survival. Advances in the efficacy of systemic therapy options, including the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors, have fueled renewed interest in this area. Indeed, the IMBrave050 trial recently demonstrated significant improvements in recurrence-free survival with 1 year of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in high-risk patients undergoing surgical resection or ablation, with several other ongoing trials in this space. There is a strong rationale for consideration of the administration of these therapies in the neoadjuvant setting, supported by early clinical data demonstrating high rates of objective responses, although larger trials examining downstream outcomes are necessary, particularly considering the possible risks of this strategy. In parallel, there has been increased interest in using systemic therapies as a bridging or downstaging strategy for liver transplantation. Current data suggest the short-term safety of this approach, with acceptable rates of rejection, so immunotherapy is not considered a contraindication to transplant; however, larger studies are needed to evaluate the incremental value of this approach over locoregional therapy. Conversely, the use of immunotherapy is currently discouraged after liver transplantation, given the high risk of graft rejection and death. The increasing complexity of HCC management and increased consideration of (neo)adjuvant strategies highlight the critical role of multidisciplinary care when making these decisions.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the most prevalent liver tumor, is usually linked with chronic liver diseases, particularly cirrhosis. As per the 2020 statistics, this cancer ranks 6th in the list of most common cancers worldwide and is the third primary source of cancer-related deaths. Asia holds the record for the highest occurrence of HCC. HCC is found three times more frequently in men than in women. The primary risk factors for HCC include chronic viral infections, excessive alcohol intake, steatotic liver disease conditions, as well as genetic and family predispositions. Roughly 40-50% of patients are identified in the late stages of the disease. Recently, there have been significant advancements in the treatment methods for advanced HCC. The selection of treatment for HCC hinges on the stage of the disease and the patient's medical status. Factors such as pre-existing liver conditions, etiology, portal hypertension, and portal vein thrombosis need critical evaluation, monitoring, and appropriate treatment. Depending on the patient and the characteristics of the disease, liver resection, ablation, or transplantation may be deemed potentially curative. For inoperable lesions, arterially directed therapy might be an option, or systemic treatment might be deemed more suitable. In specific cases, the recommendation might extend to external beam radiation therapy. For all individuals, a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach should be adopted when considering HCC treatment options. The main treatment strategies for advanced HCC patients are typically combination treatments such as immunotherapy and anti-VEGFR inhibitor, or a combination of immunotherapy and immunotherapy where appropriate, as a first-line treatment. Furthermore, some TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors may be used as single agents in cases where patients are not fit for the combination therapies. As second-line treatments, some treatment agents have been reported and can be considered.

We conducted a comprehensive review of the current literature of published data and clinical trials (MEDLINE), as well as published congress contributions and active recruiting clinical trials on targeted therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma. Combinations of different agents and medical therapy along with radiological interventions were analyzed for the setting of advanced HCC. Those settings were also analyzed in combination with adjuvant situations after resection or radiological treatments. We summarized the current knowledge for each therapeutic setting and combination that currently is or has been under clinical evaluation. We further discuss the results in the background of current treatment guidelines. In addition, we review the pathophysiological mechanisms and pathways for each of these investigated targets and drugs to further elucidate the molecular background and underlying mechanisms of action. Established and recommended targeted treatment options that already exist for patients are considered for systemic treatment: atezolizumab/bevacizumab, durvalumab/tremelimumab, sorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, regorafenib, and ramucirumab. Combination treatment for systemic treatment and local ablative treatment or transarterial chemoembolization and adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment strategies are under clinical investigation.

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has revolutionized the treatment landscape for malignant liver disease, offering localized therapy with reduced systemic toxicity. This manuscript delves into the use of degradable microspheres (DMS) in TACE, exploring its potential advantages and clinical applications. DMS-TACE emerges as a promising strategy, offering temporary vessel occlusion and optimized drug delivery. The manuscript reviews the existing literature on DMS-TACE, emphasizing its tolerability, toxicity, and efficacy. Notably, DMS-TACE demonstrates versatility in patient selection, being suitable for both intermediate and advanced stages. The unique properties of DMS provide advantages over traditional embolic agents. The manuscript discusses the DMS-TACE procedure, adverse events, and tumor response rates in HCC, ICC, and metastases.

The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the effects of conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma over 20 years regarding overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors for OS. During the period from 1996 to 2016, 836 patients with HCC were treated with cTACE. Data evaluation was performed on the basis of pre- and postinterventional MRI and CT scans. Survival analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier estimator; prognostic factors were determined by the use of Cox regression analysis. Overall, 4084 (mean 4.89 TACE sessions/patient) procedures were assessed. Median OS was 700 days (99% CI, 632.8-767.2). Depending on the indication, patients treated with a neoadjuvant intention showed the best OS (1229 days, 99% CI 983.8-1474.2) followed by curative intention (787 days, 99% CI 696.3-877.7), and then palliative intention (360 days, 99% CI 328.4-391.6). Portal vein thrombosis (HR 2.19, CI 1.63-2.96, and p < 0.01) and Child-Pugh class B or worse (HR 1.44, CI 1.11-1.86, and p < 0.001) were significantly associated with shorter OS. Patients with HCC benefit from TACE after careful patient selection. Portal vein thrombosis and Child-Pugh class B or worse are significantly unfavorable prognostic factors for patients' survival.

Liver transplantation is a highly complex and challenging field of clinical practice. Although it was originally developed in western countries, it has been further advanced in Asian countries through the use of living donor liver transplantation. This method of transplantation is the only available option in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region due to the lack of deceased organ donation. As a result of this clinical situation, there is a growing need for guidelines that are specific to the Asia-Pacific region. These guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for evidence-based management throughout the entire process of liver transplantation, covering both deceased and living donor liver transplantation. In addition, the development of these guidelines has been a collaborative effort between medical professionals from various countries in the region. This has allowed for the inclusion of diverse perspectives and experiences, leading to a more comprehensive and effective set of guidelines.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of primary liver cancer, which was the third most common cause of cancer death worldwide in 2020. Transplantation remains the preferred treatment for cure in otherwise unresectable HCC. There are several areas of active research that have led to expansion of eligibility criteria for transplantation including local-regional therapy for downstaging patients presenting outside of the Milan criteria and identification of tumor biomarkers aiding in the early diagnosis, determining prognosis and likelihood of recurrence after transplantation for HCC. New neoadjuvant therapies and post-transplant immunosuppression regimens may also result in expansion of transplant eligibility criteria for HCC.

During the last decade, downstaging for hepatocellular carcinoma has expanded the pool of patients eligible for liver transplantation. The literature is rife with attempts to elucidate best treatment strategies with novel locoregional and systemic therapies continuing to emerge. Several trials have confirmed the large-scale success of downstaging protocols, with equitable long-term survival and recurrence rates after liver transplant. We review the currently available techniques used for downstaging, including their indications, complications, and efficacies. New frontiers have focused on the potential role of immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting, although more research is needed to delineate its role in current treatment paradigms.

Liver transplantation (LT) has emerged as a standard of care for patients with end-stage liver disease, providing a life-saving intervention for patients with severely compromised liver function in both the acute and chronic setting. While LT has also become a routine procedure for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), offering a potential cure by treating both the tumor and the underlying liver disease, its relevance in the context of other malignancies such as cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCA), combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) or liver metastases is still the subject of intense debate and no definite recommendations have yet been established. This review summarizes the current therapeutic standards in the context of LT for gastrointestinal malignancies and provides a reflection and outlook on current scientific and clinical developments.

Intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) comprises a heterogeneous group of patients with varying levels of tumor burden. Transarterial chemoembolization was traditionally the mainstay of treatment for intermediate-stage HCC for almost 2 decades. New and emerging treatment options have revolutionized HCC therapy, allowing for broader application to patients with intermediate- and advanced-stage disease. Accordingly, new guidelines acknowledge these options, and intermediate stage HCC can now be treated with surgical, locoregional or systemic therapies, or a combination thereof. Patients will continue to benefit from the development of complex treatment strategies in a multidisciplinary setting to optimize individual outcomes.