Search

Background: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) has rising incidence and mortality rates. Outcomes from combination systemic, loco-regional therapy (LRT) and liver transplantation (LT) are improving, but more granular data are needed to inform evidence-based management, including patient selection and immunosuppression., Methods: Patients with peri-hilar (PH) and intrahepatic (IH) CCA who underwent LT at a single center between January 2008 and February 2023 were reviewed retrospectively. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) with significance determined by Cox proportional hazards model., Results: During the study period, 53 patients underwent LT for either PH (n = 27), or IH (26). Cohort had mean age 58.5 years old (IQR, 47.0-63.0), body mass index (BMI) 25.9 (IQR, 22.9-30.0) kg/m 2 , and mean biologic MELD 9 (IQR, 7-17). Most frequent etiology was PSC (n = 12, 22.6%). Forty-nine patients (92.5%) received neoadjuvant therapy, including systemic (n = 48, 90.6%) and locoregional therapy (LRT) (n = 22, 41.5%), to which PH tumors were both most and least responsive (P = .03). On explant pathology, tumor were a median size of 3.5 cm and lympho-vascular invasion (LVI) was present in 13 (24.5%) cases. Median follow-up post-transplant was 910 days (IQR, 407-1509). Probabilities of OS and RFS at 3-years post-LT were 69.2% (95% CI, 56.9%-84.2%) and 57.4% (95% CI, 43.7%-75.4%). In multivariable analysis, OS was associated with tumor type and LVI, and RFS with age, BMI, PSC and LRT. After a median post-LT period of 38 days (IQR, 27-79.5), 39 (71.7%) patients started mTOR inhibition with lowered tacrolimus goal. Cox proportional hazard model showed significant association of OS with mTOR inhibition, though this was not validated by a time-dependent co-variate approach., Conclusions: In this single center cohort of CCA, post-LT outcomes were significantly greater for patients with IH tumors and no LVI. Immunosuppression with mTOR inhibition was not consistently associated with outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2025 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (phCCA) has excellent outcomes following liver transplantation (LT). Neoadjuvant radiation-based locoregional therapy is standard-of-care. Gemcitabine and cisplatin (gem/cis) combination systemic therapies have improved outcomes in advanced settings, but their efficacy pre-LT has not been studied., Methods: We review our experience following neoadjuvant gem/cis alone versus radiation-based approaches. Patients with phCCA undergoing LT at a single center between January 2008 and February 2023 were identified retrospectively. Neoadjuvant therapy was categorized as gem/cis systemic therapy (ST) alone, or any ST and radiotherapy (RT). Outcomes were posttransplant overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), waitlist time, and pathologic tumor response., Results: During study period, 27 phCCA patients underwent LT. One patient decompensated with neoadjuvant therapy and was excluded. Median age was 61 y (interquartile range, 53-68 y) and 14 (54%) were male. Of 26 patients, 12 (46%) received ST and 14 (54%) RT. Six RT patients received gem/cis ST. Median waitlist time was 199 d (interquartile range, 98-405 d) and did not differ by neoadjuvant regimen. Explanted tumors were predominantly T1 stage, without lymphovascular invasion or nodal involvement. Neither pathologic features nor percent tumor necrosis differed by regimen. OS probabilities at 1 and 3 y were 84% and 55% for the cohort. There was no significant difference in OS and RFS when stratified by regimen., Conclusions: Post-LT OS, RFS, waitlist time, and tumor response were similar in the 2 groups. Patients with phCCA who do not undergo RT may still be considered for LT under appropriate institution-based protocols that adhere to other established criteria., (Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Purpose of Review: Transplant oncology encompasses and utilizes liver transplantation (LT) in combination with other aspects of cancer care to offer improved long-term outcomes for patients with liver cancer, but not all patients have equal access and ability to undergo LT. Social determinants of health may negatively impact a patient's ability to receive liver-related oncologic care, including LT. This review highlights recent work exposing gaps in access to LT, including transplant oncology, and interventions to ameliorate these disparities., Recent Findings: Members of racial and ethnic minorities and indigenous groups, females, socioeconomically disadvantaged persons, and patients from rural areas are less likely to undergo LT. Recent studies have also described programs that have successfully mitigated some of the barriers in access to transplant oncology that these patients experience, including targeted outreach programs and access to virtual healthcare., Summary: Disparities in access to LT for liver cancer are increasingly well described, but additional research is needed to find effective ways to ameliorate these differences., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a rising incidence and mortality in North America. Liver transplantation (LT) with adjunctive therapies offers excellent outcomes. However, HCC recurrences are associated with high mortality. We investigate whether adjuvant systemic therapy can reduce recurrence, as shown with other malignancies., Methods: Medical records of patients undergoing LT for HCC at a single center between January 2016 and December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified into 3 groups: (1) recipients of adjuvant sorafenib, (2) nonrecipients at high recurrence risk, and (3) nonrecipients at low risk by explant pathology features. The outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Adjuvant sorafenib recipients were also propensity score matched 1:2 to nonadjuvant recipients based on recurrence risk features., Results: During the study period, 273 patients with HCC underwent LT and 16 (5.9%) received adjuvant sorafenib therapy. Adjuvant sorafenib recipients were demographically similar to nonrecipients and, on explant pathology, had greater tumor burden, lymphovascular invasion, and poorer differentiation (all P  < 0.001). Adverse events were observed in 12 adjuvant sorafenib recipients (75%). OS was similar among the 3 groups ( P  = 0.2), and adjuvant sorafenib was not associated with OS in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-3.78; P  = 0.62). RFS was significantly lower in sorafenib patients (hazard ratio, 6.99; 95% confidence interval, 2.12-23.05; P  = 0.001). Following propensity matching, adjuvant sorafenib use was not associated with either OS ( P  = 0.24) or RFS rates ( P  = 0.65)., Conclusions: In this single-center analysis, adjuvant sorafenib was not associated with OS. Recipients were observed to have shorter RFS, likely due to the increased prevalence of high-risk features, and sorafenib use was associated with high frequencies of adverse events., (Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background & Aims: Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prior to liver transplantation (LT) has been reported; however, ICIs may elevate the risk of allograft rejection and impact other clinical outcomes. This study aims to summarize the impact of ICI use on post-LT outcomes., Methods: In this individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched databases to identify HCC cases treated with ICIs before LT, detailing allograft rejection, HCC recurrence, and overall survival. We performed Cox regression analysis to identify risk factors for allograft rejection., Results: Among 91 eligible patients, with a median (IQR) follow-up of 690.0 (654.5) days, there were 24 (26.4%) allograft rejections, 9 (9.9%) HCC recurrences, and 9 (9.9%) deaths. Age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] per 10 years 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.99, p = 0.044) and ICI washout time (aHR per 1 week 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.99, p = 0.022) were associated with allograft rejection. The median (IQR) washout period for patients with ≤20% probability of allograft rejection was 94 (196) days. Overall survival did not differ between cases with and without allograft rejection (log-rank test, p = 0.2). Individuals with HCC recurrence had fewer median (IQR) ICI cycles than those without recurrence (4.0 [1.8] vs. 8.0 [9.0]; p = 0.025). The proportion of patients within Milan post-ICI was lower for those with recurrence vs. without (16.7% vs. 65.3%, p = 0.032)., Conclusion: Patients have acceptable post-LT outcomes after ICI therapy. Age and ICI washout length relate to the allograft rejection risk, and a 3-month washout may reduce it to that of patients without ICI exposure. Number of ICI cycles and tumor burden may affect recurrence risk. Large prospective studies are necessary to confirm these associations., Impact and Implications: This systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of 91 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and immune checkpoint inhibitor use prior to liver transplantation suggest acceptable overall post-transplant outcomes. Older age and longer immune checkpoint inhibitor washout period have a significant inverse association with the risk of allograft rejection. A 3-month washout may reduce it to that of patients without immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure. Additionally, a higher number of immune checkpoint inhibitor cycles and tumor burden within Milan criteria at the completion of immunotherapy may predict a decreased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence, but this observation requires further validation in larger prospective studies., (Copyright © 2024 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The deceased donor shortage in the United States has led to increased utilization extended criteria donor (ECD) liver grafts. Centers often utilize ECD grafts in patients with low Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, like patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, few studies have directly examined the outcomes of using ECD grafts in patients with HCC., Methods: Adults receiving liver transplantation (LT) for HCC between 2010 and 2020 were identified in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Recipients were categorized according to donor type: standard criteria donor (SCD), extended criteria donor, donation after brain death (ECD-DBD), and donation after circulatory death (DCD). Multivariable Cox regression analysis identified variables associated with overall or graft survival at 3 years post-LT., Results: Most patients received ECD-DBD grafts (51.4%); only 8.3% received DCD grafts. The time on the waitlist was similar for ECD and SCD recipients (P = .79). SCD recipients had higher 5-year overall survival post-LT than ECD-DBD or DCD recipients (79.1%, 77.1%, and 76.8%, respectively, P < .001). Similarly, 5-year graft survival was also highest in SCD recipients (SCD = 77.8%, ECD-DBD = 75.7%, and DCD = 72.2%, P < .001). In multivariable analysis, DCD grafts increased mortality risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12-1.57, P = .001), but ECD-DBD grafts did not (HR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.00-1.22, P = .052)., Conclusions: DCD and ECD-DBD recipients had significantly lower overall and graft survival. However, the survival benefit of LT for patients with HCC greatly outweighs the small differences in patient and graft survival from using ECD grafts. Further research should investigate whether treatment of ECD grafts with machine perfusion may ameliorate this discrepancy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare for this manuscript., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Personalized and tumor-informed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing is feasible and allows for molecular residual disease (MRD) identification in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)., Methods: In this retrospective analysis of commercial cases from multiple US institutions, personalized, tumor-informed, whole-exome sequenced, and germline-controlled ctDNA levels were quantified and analyzed in patients with PDAC. Plasma samples (n = 1329) from 298 clinically validated patients were collected at diagnosis, perioperatively (MRD-window; within 2-12 weeks after surgery, before therapy), and during surveillance (>12 weeks post-surgery if no ACT or starting 4 weeks post-ACT) from November 2019 to March 2023., Results: Of the initially diagnosed patients with stages I-III PDAC who went for resection, the median follow-up time from surgery was 13 months (range 0.1-214). Positive ctDNA detection rates were 29% (29/100) and 29.6% (45/152) during the MRD and surveillance windows, respectively. Positive ctDNA detection was significantly associated with shorter DFS within the MRD window (median DFS of 6.37 months for ctDNA-positive vs 33.31 months for ctDNA-negative patients; HR: 5.45, P < .0001) as well as during the surveillance period (median DFS: 11.40 months for ctDNA-positive vs NR for ctDNA-negative; HR: 12.38, P < .0001). Additionally, DFS was significantly better with KRAS wildtype status followed by KRASG12R (HR: 0.99, P = .97), KRASG12D (HR: 1.42, P = .194), and worse with KRASG12V (HR: 2.19, P = .002) status. In multivariate analysis, ctDNA detection at surveillance was found to be the most significant prognostic factor for recurrence (HR: 24.28, P < .001)., Conclusions: Perioperative tumor-informed ctDNA detection in PDAC is feasible across all stages and is associated with patient survival outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Transplant oncology is an expanding area of cancer therapy that specifically emphasizes the use of liver transplantation (LT) as the preferred treatment for patients with manageable, but unresectable, tumors. The management and optimization of overall survival strategies, accompanied by an arguably decent quality of life, have been at the forefront of liver oncology treatment, as a plurality of all primary liver cancers are identified as either hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), which are classified as highly aggressive malignancies and frequently remain asymptomatic until they progress to advanced stages, rendering curative procedures, such as resection, impractical. This has led to an increase in utilization of neoadjuvant interventions conducted prior to surgery, which has yielded favorable outcomes. Though this treatment modality has prompted further investigations into the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) as standalone treatments and in combination with locoregional treatments (LRTs) to bridge more patients into curative eligibility. This multidisciplinary methodology and treatment planning has seen multiple successful trials of immunotherapy regimes and combinate treatments, setting the groundwork for increasing eligibility through downstaging and "bridging" previously ineligible patients within stringent LT criteria. Surveillance after LT is a crucial component of transplant oncology. The emergence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has provided a novel approach to identifying the recurrence of cancer in its early stages. Recent research has focused on liquid biopsy, a technique that effectively identifies the dynamics of cancer. This is another innovation to demonstrate the rate at which transplant oncology is rapidly advancing, making the focus of care feel disorienting. Modalities of care are constantly evolving, but when a field is changing as rapidly as this one, it is imperative to reorient to the data and the needs of the patients. In this commentary, we reflect on the update's utilization of ICPIs in neoadjuvant settings as well as the updates on the utilization of liquid biopsy in post-LT follow-up surveillance.

Background : The therapeutic landscape of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) continues to evolve. Atezolizumab, an anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI), in combination with bevacizumab, has substantially improved outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in patients who develop infections while receiving atezolizumab and bevacizumab for uHCC. Methods: Patients who received atezolizumab and bevacizumab for uHCC at a single hospital network were included. Types and rates of infections were reported. Covariates compared among infected and non-infected cohorts included age, sex, race, comorbidities, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, immunosuppressive use, chronic infections, number of cycles of ICIs given, antibiotic or antiviral therapies at ICI initiation, and line of therapy (first-line, second-line, greater than second-line). Results : Out of 810 evaluable patients, 34 uHCC patients were treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. The mean ± SD age was 66.29 ± 9.39; 28 (82.35%) were males. There were 17 (50%) patients with reported infection, with bacterial infection occurring in 12 (70.59%) patients and COVID-19 in 4 (23.5%). Of the infected patients, eight (47.06%) had one infection, five (29.41%) had two infections, and two (11.76%) had three or more infections. Infected and non-infected patients received a median of 12 (IQR: 5-17) and 4 (IQR: 3-12) ICI cycles ( p = 0.18), respectively. Infections did not negatively impact OS or PFS but resulted in treatment delays and discontinuation in 11 (64.71%) and 7 (41.18%) patients, respectively. At the last follow-up, 19 (55.88%) patients died, 9 (52.94%) in the non-infected group vs. 10 (58.82%) in the infected group ( p = 1.0). Conclusions : While a broad array of infections occurred in 50% of the patients in this cohort, it did not negatively impact survival outcomes. However, it did impact morbidity, with more all-cause admissions and treatment delays.

Background: Esophageal cancer (EC) comprises 1% of all diagnosed cancers in the USA. It is more common in other parts of the world. If there is distant metastasis, the relative survival rate is 6%. There are no standardized screening methods for EC. Case Presentation: We reported a four-year case of esophageal cancer, a P53-positive mutation with atypical distant metastasis to the cardiac and skeletal muscles. The patient was managed with multimodal therapy, including immunotherapy, which could have been a factor in prolonged survival. Conclusions: Distant metastases are typically seen postmortem, and with prolonged survival, we are able to find such unique metastases antemortem. Despite a history of negative scans, the patient's ctDNA (circulating tumor DNA) remained positive, which was a better predictor of recurrence in this case. Future research is required to establish cost-effective screening methods and standardized treatments.

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a hepatic malignancy that has a rapidly increasing incidence. CCA is anatomically classified into intrahepatic (iCCA) and extrahepatic (eCCA), which is further divided into perihilar (pCCA) and distal (dCCA) subtypes, with higher incidence rates in Asia. Despite its rarity, CCA has a low 5-year survival rate and remains the leading cause of primary liver tumor-related death over the past 10-20 years. The systemic therapy section discusses gemcitabine-based regimens as primary treatments, along with oxaliplatin-based options. Second-line therapy is limited but may include short-term infusional fluorouracil (FU) plus leucovorin (LV) and oxaliplatin. The adjuvant therapy section discusses approaches to improve overall survival (OS) post-surgery. However, only a minority of CCA patients qualify for surgical resection. In comparison to adjuvant therapies, neoadjuvant therapy for unresectable cases shows promise. Gemcitabine and cisplatin indicate potential benefits for patients awaiting liver transplantation. The addition of immunotherapies to chemotherapy in combination is discussed. Nivolumab and innovative approaches like CAR-T cells, TRBAs, and oncolytic viruses are explored. We aim in this review to provide a comprehensive report on the systemic and locoregional therapies for CCA.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is currently the fourth leading cause of death in the United States and is expected to be ranked second in the next 10 years due to poor prognosis and a rising incidence. Distant metastatic PDAC is associated with the worst prognosis among the different phases of PDAC. The diagnostic options for PDAC are convenient and available for staging, tumor response evaluation, and management of resectable or borderline resectable PDAC. However, imaging is crucial in PDAC diagnosis, monitoring, resectability appraisal, and response evaluation. The advancement of medical technologies is evolving, hence the use of imaging in PDAC treatment options has grown as well as the utilization of ctDNA as a tumor marker. Treatment options for metastatic PDAC are minimal with the primary goal of therapy limited to symptom relief or palliation, especially in patients with low functional capacity at the point of diagnosis. Molecular profiling has shown promising potential solutions that would push the treatment boundaries for patients with PDAC. In this review, we will discuss the latest updates from evidence-based guidelines regarding diagnosis, therapy response evaluation, prognosis, and surveillance, as well as illustrating novel therapies that have been recently investigated for PDAC, in addition to discussing the molecular profiling advances in PDAC., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Bugazia, Al-Najjar, Esmail, Abdelrahim, Abboud, Abdelrahim, Umoru, Rayyan, Abudayyeh, Al Moustafa and Abdelrahim.)

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths. Classically, liver transplantation (LT) can be curative for HCC tumors within the Milan criteria. Bridging strategies to reduce the dropouts from LT waiting lists and/or to downstage patients who are beyond the Milan criteria are widely utilized. We conducted a literature-based review to evaluate the role of systemic therapies as a bridging treatment to liver transplantation (LT) in HCC patients. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) can be used as a systemic bridging therapy to LT in patients with contraindications for locoregional liver-directed therapies. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment can be utilized either as a monotherapy or as a combination therapy with bevacizumab or TKIs prior to LT. Acute rejection after liver transplantation is a concern in the context of ICI treatment. Thus, a safe ICI washout period before LT and cautious post-LT immunosuppression strategies are required to reduce post-LT rejections and to optimize clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, prospective clinical trials are needed to establish definitive conclusions about the utility of systemic therapy as a bridging modality prior to LT in HCC patients.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is widely recognized as the predominant type of primary liver malignancy. Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has emerged as a highly effective treatment option for unresectable HCC. Immunotherapies as neoadjuvant options are now being actively investigated in the transplant oncology era to enhance outcomes in patients with HCC. Here, we report our experience with patients with HCC who had received Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICPI) prior to curative OLT. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort that included patients with HCC who received ICPI prior to OLT at a single institution from January 2019 to August 2023. Graft rejection was assessed and reported along with the type of ICPI, malignancy treated, and the timing of ICPI in association with OLT. Results: During this cohort period, six patients with HCC underwent OLT after neoadjuvant ICPI. All patients were male with a median age of 61 (interquartile range: 59-64) years at OLT. Etiology associated with HCC was viral ( N = 4) or Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, NASH ( N = 2). Tumor focality was multifocal ( N = 4) and unifocal ( N = 2). Lymphovascular invasion was identified in four patients. No perineural invasion was identified in any of the patients. All patients received ICPI including atezolizumab/bevacizumab ( N = 4), nivolumab/ipilimumab ( N = 1), and nivolumab as monotherapy ( N = 1). All patients received either single or combined liver-directed/locoregional therapy, including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), Yttrium-90 (Y90), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). The median washout period was 5 months. All patients responded to ICPI and achieved a safe and successful OLT. All patients received tacrolimus plus mycophenolate as immunosuppressant (IS) therapy post-OLT and one patient received prednisone as additional IS. No patient had clinical evidence of rejection. Conclusions: This cohort emphasizes the success of tumor downstaging by ICPI for OLT when employed as the neoadjuvant therapy strategy. In addition, this study illustrated the importance of timing for the administration of ICPI before OLT. Given the lack of conclusive evidence in this therapeutic area, we believe that our study lays the groundwork for prospective trials to further examine the impact of ICPI prior to OLT.

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) poses a substantial threat as it ranks as the second most prevalent primary liver tumor. The documented annual rise in intrahepatic CCA (iCCA) incidence in the United States is concerning, indicating its growing impact. Moreover, the five-year survival rate after tumor resection is only 25%, given that tumor recurrence is the leading cause of death in 53-79% of patients. Pre-operative assessments for iCCA focus on pinpointing tumor location, biliary tract involvement, vascular encasements, and metastasis detection. Numerous studies have revealed that portal vein embolization (PVE) is linked to enhanced survival rates, improved liver synthetic functions, and decreased overall mortality. The challenge in achieving clear resection margins contributes to the notable recurrence rate of iCCA, affecting approximately two-thirds of cases within one year, and results in a median survival of less than 12 months for recurrent cases. Nearly 50% of patients initially considered eligible for surgical resection in iCCA cases are ultimately deemed ineligible during surgical exploration. Therefore, staging laparoscopy has been proposed to reduce unnecessary laparotomy. Eligibility for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) requires certain criteria to be granted. OLT offers survival advantages for early-detected unresectable iCCA; it can be combined with other treatments, such as radiofrequency ablation and transarterial chemoembolization, in specific cases. We aim to comprehensively describe the surgical strategies available for treating CCA, including the preoperative measures and interventions, alongside the current options regarding liver resection and OLT.

Emerging as the most potent and durable combinational immunotherapy, dual anti-PD-1 and CTLA-4 immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy notoriously increases grade 3-5 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients. Accordingly, attempts to improve the antitumor potency of anti-PD-1+CTLA-4 ICB by including additional therapeutics have been largely discouraged due to concerns of further increasing fatal toxicity. Here, we screened ∼3,000 Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs and identified clofazimine as a potential third agent to optimize anti-PD-1+CTLA-4 ICB. Remarkably, clofazimine outperforms ICB dose reduction or steroid treatment in reversing lethality of irAEs, but unlike the detrimental effect of steroids on antitumor efficacy, clofazimine potentiates curative responses in anti-PD-1+CTLA-4 ICB. Mechanistically, clofazimine promotes E2F1 activation in CD8 + T cells to overcome resistance and counteracts pathogenic Th17 cells to abolish irAEs. Collectively, clofazimine potentiates the antitumor efficacy of anti-PD-1+CTLA-4 ICB, curbs intractable irAEs, and may fill a desperate clinical need to improve patient survival., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors declare no competing financial interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The 2023 Joint Annual Congress of the International Liver Transplantation Society, European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association, and Liver Intensive Care Group of Europe were held in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, from May 3 to 6, 2023. This year, all speakers were invited to attend the Congress in person for the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic. The congress was attended by 1159 registered delegates from 54 countries representing 5 continents, with the 10 countries comprising the bulk of the delegates. Of the 647 abstracts initially submitted, 542 were eventually presented at the meeting, coming from 38 countries (mainly North America, Europe, and Asia) and 85% of them (462 abstracts) came from only 10 countries. Fifty-three (9.8%) abstracts, originated from 17 countries, were submitted under the Basic/Translational Scientific Research category, a similar percentage as in 2022. Abstracts presented at the meeting were classified as (1) ischemia and reperfusion injury, (2) machine perfusion, (3) bioengineering and liver regeneration, (4) transplant oncology, (5) novel biomarkers in liver transplantation, (6) liver immunology (rejection and tolerance), and (7) artificial intelligence and machine learning. Finally, we evaluated the number of abstracts commented in the Basic and Translational Research Committee-International Liver Transplantation Society annual reports over the past 5 y that resulted in publications in peer-reviewed journals to measure their scientific impact in the field of liver transplantation., Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have emerged as the primary treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and have shown promise in the neoadjuvant setting prior to resection. Liver transplantation (LT) is the preferred treatment for unresectable early HCC or locally advanced disease post locoregional therapy, but the need for immunosuppression after LT conflicts with ICIs' immune augmenting effects. Neoadjuvant ICI may benefit select LT candidates, but challenges arise in understanding response indicators and managing post-LT risks. Reports of severe rejection after LT have raised concerns, though liver-specific factors may mitigate rejection risks, prompting exploration of pre-LT ICI usage. While focus has been on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, the optimal pre-LT ICI regimen remains uncertain, and trials must emphasize careful patient selection and management. Living donor LT is advantageous because ICIs can be withheld for a predefined washout period. In the post-LT setting, use of ICIs is generally avoided, though a few reports suggest that PD-L1 expression in the transplanted liver may be a safety biomarker and that, despite the risk, ICI therapy may be better than supportive care for patients with otherwise-untreatable HCC recurrence. This expert opinion highlights the complexities in the management of HCC vis-à-vis LT. Prospective studies and biomarkers are needed to define safe and effective pre- and post-LT immunotherapy protocols., (Copyright © 2024 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) of the head (H) and body/tail (B/T) differ in embryonic origin, cell composition, blood supply, lymphatic and venous drainage, and innervation. We aimed to compare the molecular and tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) profiles of PDAC of the H vs. B/T. A total of 3499 PDAC samples were analyzed via next-generation sequencing (NGS) of RNA (whole transcriptome, NovaSeq), DNA (NextSeq, 592 genes or NovaSeq, whole exome sequencing), and immunohistochemistry (Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). Significance was determined as p values adjusted for multiple corrections (q) of <0.05. Anatomic subsites of PDAC tumors were grouped by primary tumor sites into H (N = 2058) or B/T (N = 1384). There were significantly more metastatic tumors profiled from B/T vs. H (57% vs. 44%, p < 0.001). KRAS mutations (93.8% vs. 90.2%), genomic loss of heterozygosity (12.7% vs. 9.1%), and several copy number alterations (FGF3, FGF4, FGF19, CCND1, ZNF703, FLT4, MUTYH, TNFRS14) trended higher in B/T when compared to H (p < 0.05 but q > 0.05). Expression analysis of immuno-oncology (IO)-related genes showed significantly higher expression of CTLA4 and PDCD1 in H (q < 0.05, fold change 1.2 and 1.3) and IDO1 and PDCD1LG2 expression trended higher in B/T (p < 0.05, fold change 0.95). To our knowledge, this is one of the largest cohorts of PDAC tumors subjected to broad molecular profiling. Differences in IO-related gene expression and TIME cell distribution suggest that response to IO therapies may differ in PDAC arising from H vs. B/T. Subtle differences in the genomic profiles of H vs. B/T tumors were observed., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review is to both summarize the current knowledge of hepatocellular carcinoma molecular biology and to suggest a framework in which to prospectively translate this knowledge into patient care. This is timely as recent guidelines recommend increased use of these technologies to advance personalized liver cancer care., Recent Findings: The main themes covered here address germline and somatic genetic alterations recently discovered in hepatocellular carcinoma, largely owing to next generation sequencing technologies, and nascent efforts to translate these into contemporary practice., Summary: Early efforts of translating molecular profiling to hepatocellular carcinoma care demonstrate a growing number of potentially actionable alterations. Still lacking are a consensus on what biomarkers and technologies to adopt, at what scale and cost, and how to integrate them most effectively into care., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

There is evidence that the orphan nuclear receptor 4A1 (NR4A1, Nur77) is overexpressed in exhausted CD8 + T cells and regulates PD-L1 in tumors. This study investigated the effects of potent bis-indole-derived NR4A1 antagonists on reversing T-cell exhaustion and downregulating PD-L1 in colon tumors/cells. NR4A1 antagonists inhibited colon tumor growth and downregulated expression of PD-L1 in mouse colon MC-38-derived tumors and cells. TILs from MC-38 cell-derived colon tumors and splenic lymphocytes exhibited high levels of the T-cell exhaustion markers including PD-1, 2B4, TIM3+ and TIGIT and similar results were observed in the spleen, and these were inhibited by NR4A1 antagonists. In addition, treatment with NR4A1 antagonists induced cytokine activation markers interferon γ, granzyme B and perforin mRNAs and decreased TOX, TOX2 and NFAT in TIL-derived CD8 + T cells. Thus, NR4A1 antagonists decrease NR4A1-dependent pro-oncogenic activity and PD-L1 expression in colon tumors and inhibit NR4A1-dependent T-cell exhaustion in TILs and spleen and represent a novel class of mechanism-based drugs that enhance immune surveillance in tumors., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Transplant oncology is an emerging concept of cancer treatment with a promising prospective outcome. The applications of oncology, transplant medicine, and surgery are the core of transplant oncology to improve patients' survival and quality of life. The main concept of transplant oncology is to radically cure cancer by removing the diseased organ and replacing it with a healthy one, aiming to improve the survival outcomes and quality of life of cancer patients. Subsequently, it seeks to expand the treatment options and research for hepatobiliary malignancies, which have seen significantly improved survival outcomes after the implementation of liver transplantation (LT). In the case of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the transplant setting, where the liver is the most common site of metastasis of patients who are considered to have unresectable disease, initial studies have shown improved survival for LT treatment compared to palliative therapy interventions. The indications of LT for hepatobiliary malignancies have been slowly expanded over the years beyond Milan criteria in a stepwise manner. However, the outcome improvements and overall patient survival are limited to the specifics of the setting and systematic intervention options. This review aims to illustrate the representative concepts and history of transplant oncology as an emerging discipline for the management of hepatobiliary malignancies, in addition to other emerging concepts, such as the uses of immunotherapy in a peri-transplant setting as well as the use of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for surveillance post-transplantation.

Background: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) challenge the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We performed a retrospective study to evaluate response to infliximab for immune-related adverse event management, and infliximab's effect on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with a focus on melanoma and genitourinary cancers. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed records of all cancer patients exposed to infliximab after immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment from 2004 to 2021 at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. Survival was assessed utilizing the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was utilized to evaluate predictors of infliximab response, OS, and PFS. Results: We identified 185 cancer patients (93 melanoma and 37 genitourinary cancers) treated with ICI and who received infliximab to treat irAEs. Within 3 months of treatment initiation, 71% of the patients responded to infliximab, 27% had no response, and 2% had unknown response. Among different irAEs, colitis was associated with increased response to infliximab at 3 months, irrespective of the type of malignancy. We evaluated best tumor response before and after infliximab in the entire cohort and again in the melanoma and genitourinary (GU); the findings were similar in the melanoma cohort and the entire cohort, where best tumor response before and after infliximab was not significantly different. In the melanoma cohort, acute kidney injury (AKI) was associated with increased risk of death, p = 0.0109, and having response to infliximab was associated with decreased risk of death, p = 0.0383. Interestingly in GU cancer patients, myositis was associated with increased risk of death, p = 0.0041, and having a response to infliximab was marginally associated with decreased risk of death, p = 0.0992. As regards PFS, in a multivariate Cox regression model, having a history of cardiovascular disease remained significantly associated with shorter PFS in the melanoma cohort. For patients with GU cancers, response to infliximab was associated with longer PFS. Conclusions: Our study is among the largest retrospective analyses of infliximab use for irAE management. Patients with colitis were the best responders to infliximab. AKI before initiation of infliximab in the melanoma subcohort and myositis in GU subcohort are associated with higher risk of death. Our results indicate no association between infliximab and cancer progression with the exception of genitourinary cancers.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer. ICIs have a unique side effect profile, generally caused by inflammatory tissue damage, with clinical features similar to autoimmune conditions. Acute kidney injury from ICIs has been well studied; incidence ranges from 1% to 5%, with higher incidence when combination ICI therapies are used. Although the overall reported incidence of ICI-associated glomerulonephritis is less than 1%, vasculitis is the most commonly reported ICI-related glomerulonephritis. Other biopsy findings include thrombotic microangiopathy, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, minimal change disease, and IgA nephropathy with secondary amyloidosis. We report a case in which a woman previously treated with the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer with pre-existing antineutrophil cytoplasmic (anti-PR3) antibody who later developed multi-organ vasculitis after ICI exposure, which was successfully treated with rituximab, with continued cancer remission for 3 years., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Qureshi, Arani, Parvathareddy, Tchakarov, Abdelrahim, Suarez-Almazor, Zhang, Gibbons, Heymach, Altan and Abudayyeh.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest.

The rationale for administering immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the adjuvant setting is to eradicate micro-metastases and, ultimately, prolong survival. Thus far, clinical trials have demonstrated that 1-year adjuvant courses of ICIs reduce the risk of recurrence in melanoma, urothelial cancer, renal cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers. Overall survival benefit has been shown in melanoma while survival data are still not mature in other malignancies. Emerging data also show the feasibility of utilizing ICIs in the peri-transplant setting for hepatobiliary malignancies. While ICIs are generally well-tolerated, the development of chronic immune-related adverse events, typically endocrinopathies or neurotoxicities, as well as delayed immune-related adverse events, warrants further scrutiny regarding the optimal duration of adjuvant therapy and requires a thorough risk-benefit determination. The advent of blood-based, dynamic biomarkers such as circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can help detect minimal residual disease and identify the subset of patients who would likely benefit from adjuvant treatment. In addition, the characterization of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and ctDNA-adjusted blood tumor mutation burden (bTMB) has also shown promise in predicting response to immunotherapy. Until additional, prospective studies delineate the magnitude of overall survival benefit and validate the use of predictive biomarkers, a tailored, patient-centered approach to adjuvant ICIs that includes extensive patient counseling on potentially irreversible adverse effects should be routinely incorporated into clinical practice.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has significantly improved outcomes across a range of malignancies. While infections are a well-known contributor to morbidity and mortality amongst patients receiving systemic chemotherapy regimens, little is known about the impact of infections on patients receiving ICI therapy. This study aims to assess incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in patients who develop infections while on pembrolizumab-based therapies for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Patients receiving pembrolizumab for stage III/IV NSCLC from 1/1/2017-8/1/2021 across seven hospitals were identified. Incidence and type of infection were characterized. Covariates including baseline demographics, treatment information, treatment toxicities, and immunosuppressive use were collected and compared between infected and non-infected patients. Outcomes included the rate of infections, all-cause hospital admissions, median number of treatment cycles, overall survival (OS), and progression free survival (PFS). Univariable and multivariable analysis with reported odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were utilized to evaluate infection risks. OS and PFS were analyzed by Kaplan−Meier analysis and tested by log-rank test. p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There were 243 NSCLC patients that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 111 (45.7%) had one documented infection, and 36 (14.8%) had two or more. Compared to non-infected patients, infected patients had significantly more all-cause Emergency Department (ED) [37 (33.3%) vs. 26 (19.7%), p = 0.016], hospital [87 (78.4%) vs. 53 (40.1%), p < 0.001], and ICU visits [26 (23.4%) vs. 5 (3.8%), p < 0.001], and had poorer median OS (11.53 [95% CI 6.4−16.7] vs. 21.03 [95% CI: 14.7−24.2] months, p = 0.033). On multivariable analysis, anti-infective therapy (OR 3.32, [95% CI: 1.26−8.76], p = 0.015) and ECOG of >1 (OR 5.79, [95% CI 1.72−19.47], p = 0.005) at ICI initiation conferred an increased risk for infections. At last evaluation, 74 (66.7%) infected and 70 (53.0%) non-infected patients died (p = 0.041). Conclusion: Infections occurred in nearly half of patients receiving pembrolizumab-based therapies for NSCLC. Infected patients had frequent hospitalizations, treatment delays, and poorer survival. ECOG status and anti-infective use at ICI initiation conferred a higher infection risk. Infection prevention and control strategies are needed to ameliorate the risk for infections in patients receiving ICIs.

Background: More than half of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with metastatic disease or develop recurrent disease on first-line and second-line options. Treatment beyond the second line remains an area of unmet need for patients with progressive or recurrent disease., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data of adult (>18 years old) patients with mCRC who received regorafenib + 5FU combination therapy at Houston Methodist Hospital with outcomes of interest including response rate, discontinuation due to side effects, and overall survival., Results: Seven patients received regorafenib + 5FU combination therapy for mCRC after receiving at least two other lines of therapy (including at least one fluorouracil-based therapy). Four patients (57%) achieved disease control in 7-12 weeks after therapy initiation while three patients developed recurrent disease. In patients who achieved disease control, no new adverse events were reported among patients with this combination., Conclusion: Regorafenib and Fluorouracil combination could be considered an option beyond the second line for patients with treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Further studies, including a prospective trial, are needed to investigate the efficacy and safety of regorafenib plus 5FU therapy compared to other limited available therapies., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Haque, Muhsen, Esmail, Umoru, Mylavarapu, Ajewole and Abdelrahim.)

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is a primary epithelial cell malignancy of the liver with rising incidence rate globally. Its insidious presentation, heterogeneous and aggressive biology, and recalcitrance to current therapies results in unacceptably high morbidity and mortality. This has spurred research efforts in the last decade to better characterize it molecularly with translation to improved diagnostic tools and treatments. Much of this has been driven by patient advocacy. This has renewed interest in orthotopic liver transplantation (LT) with adjunctive therapies for iCCA, which was historically disparaged due to poor recipient outcomes and donor organ scarcity. However, the optimal use of LT as a treatment for iCCA care remains unclear. Here, we review the epidemiology of iCCA, the history of LT as a treatment modality, alternative approaches to iCCA local control, the evidence for peri-operative systemic therapies, and the potential roles of biomarkers and targeted agents. In doing so, we hope to prioritize areas for continued research and identify areas where multidisciplinary care can improve outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Connor, Kodali, Abdelrahim, Javle, Brombosz and Ghobrial.)

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly malignant and aggressive tumor. Despite medical advancement, the silent nature of PC results in only 20% of all cases considered resectable at the time of diagnosis. It is projected to become the second leading cause in 2030. Most pancreatic cancer cases are diagnosed in the advanced stages. Such cases are typically unresectable and are associated with a 5-year survival of less than 10%. Although there is no guideline consensus regarding recommendations for screening for pancreatic cancer, early detection has been associated with better outcomes. In addition to continued utilization of imaging and conventional tumor markers, clinicians should be aware of novel testing modalities that may be effective for early detection of pancreatic cancer in individuals with high-risk factors. The pathogenesis of PC is not well understood; however, various modifiable and non-modifiable factors have been implicated in pancreatic oncogenesis. PC detection in the earlier stages is associated with better outcomes; nevertheless, most oncological societies do not recommend universal screening as it may result in a high false-positive rate. Therefore, targeted screening for high-risk individuals represents a reasonable option. In this review, we aimed to summarize the pathogenesis, genetic risk factors, high-risk population, and screening modalities for PC.

Gastric cancer is an enigmatic malignancy that has recently been shown to be increasing in incidence globally. There has been recent progress in emerging technologies for the diagnosis and treatment of the disease. Improvements in non-invasive diagnostic techniques with serological tests and biomarkers have led to decreased use of invasive procedures such as endoscopy. A multidisciplinary approach is used to treat gastric cancer, with recent significant advancements in systemic therapies used in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapies. New therapeutic targets have been identified and clinical trials are taking place to assess their efficacy and safety. In this review, we provide an overview of the current and emerging treatment strategies and diagnostic techniques for gastric cancer.

A minority of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) can be cured by surgical intervention (i.e., liver resection (LR) and liver transplantation (LT)). When modern criteria for LT are met, this intervention along with neoadjuvant treatments may achieve unprecedented survival in selected patients. Liver resection is associated with a median overall survival (OS) of 40 months, this number drastically decreases for unresectable advanced cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), which is treated with systemic therapy. The first-line chemotherapy regimen of gemcitabine and cisplatin is associated with a median overall survival of only 11.7 months. Since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s approval of the isocitrate dehydrogenase ( IDH ) 1 inhibitor ivosidenib in August 2021, there has been increasing interest in targeted therapy for CCA patients harboring mutations in fibroblast growth factor receptor ( FGFR ) 2, neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase ( NTRK ), B-raf kinase ( BRAF ), and HER2 . At the same time, immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors isalso being used in relapsed CCA. This review looks into the most recently completed and ongoing studies of targeted therapy as monotherapy or in combination with chemo- and/or immunotherapy. Whether it is resection, liver transplant, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, or any combination of these treatment modalities, great strides are being made to improve outcomes for this challenging disease.

Transplant care continues to advance with increasing clinical experience and improvements in immunosuppressive therapy. As the population ages and long-term survival improves, transplant patient care has become more complex due to comorbidities, frailty, and the increased prevalence of cancer posttransplantation. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become a standard treatment option for many cancers in non-transplant patients, but the use of ICIs in transplant patients is challenging due to the possibility of disrupting immune tolerance. However, over the past few years, ICIs have gradually started to be used in transplant patients as well. In this study, we review the current use of ICIs after all solid organ transplantation procedures (kidney, liver, heart, and lung). Increasing data suggest that the type and number of immunosuppressants may affect the risk of rejection after immunotherapy. Immunotherapy for cancer in transplant patients may be a feasible option for selected patients; however, prospective trials in specific organ transplant recipients are needed., (Copyright © 2022 The Korean Society for Transplantation.)

Systemic combination therapy of immune checkpoint inhibitors and vascular endothelial growth factors have provided the basis for improved outcomes in select patients with unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma. However, for patients with resectable disease, surgery alone or an orthotopic liver transplant remains the standard of care. Within the realms of transplant oncology, neoadjuvant systemic therapy is currently being evaluated as a potential strategy to improve outcomes in patients with HCC. Here, we report excellent response with significant downstaging in a safe manner after neoadjuvant treatment with atezolizumab and bevacizumab in a patient diagnosed with poorly differentiated HCC. As a result of the significant response observed with safe outcomes, the patient was listed for orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) evaluation and transplanted successfully.

Background: Cholangiocarcinoma management is constantly being updated in view of existing evidence in order to establish practice guidelines and consensus statements. However, the available treatment guidelines to optimize outcomes for cholangiocarcinoma patients who require liver transplantation are still controversial. This study contributing to the cholangiocarcinoma care field by investigating a new promising neoadjuvant therapy that might be help to grant the liver transplant option to the patients with cholangiocarcinoma. Here, we evaluate and compare the potential efficacy of chemotherapy combination of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin versus non- Gemcitabine and Cisplatin regimens as a neo-adjuvant treatment for cholangiocarcinoma patients prior to liver transplantation., Methods: In this retrospective study, patients with locally advanced, unresectable, hilar, or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with no evidence of extrahepatic disease or vascular involvement were treated with either the combination of neo-adjuvant Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin with no radiation or other standard options of neo-adjuvant treatment. All patients included received chemotherapy prior to being listed for liver transplantation at a single cancer center in collaboration with the same institution's transplant center according to an open-labeled, and centers-approved clinical management protocol. Patients were listed for liver transplantation if they had a minimum of six months of scans showing response or confirmation of disease stability. The primary endpoints were the overall survival and recurrence-free survival after liver transplantation. This report, which was censored on March 18, 2022., Results: Out of a total of 707 liver transplant recipients were screened, 37 patients were confirmed with a diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma and only 18 patients (11 males and 7 females) with a median age of 61.83 [interquartile range: 58.27-68.74] met inclusion criteria. Of the 18 patients enrolled, 10 received Gemcitabine/Cisplatin, while 8 patients received either Gemcitabine monotherapy or Capecitabine or FOLFIRI. Months for recurrence after transplantation was 20.1 (IRQ: 20.1-20.1) in the Gemcitabine/Cisplatin group and 9.5 (8.9-12.47) months in the non-Gemcitabine/Cisplatin group (p-value=0.18). Median months of follow-up in the Gemcitabine/Cisplatin group was 28.35 (27.1-32.23) months versus 40.12 (20.6-56.22) months in the non-Gemcitabine/Cisplatin group (p-value=0.33). In non-Gemcitabine/Cisplatin patients, overall survival was 75% (95% CI 31-93%) at both years 1 and 2; 63% (95% CI 23-86%) at years 3 to 5. In Gemcitabine/Cisplatin patients, overall survival was 100% (95% CI 100-100%) at both years 1 and 2; 75% (95% CI 13-96%) at years 3 to 5. Three non-Gemcitabine/Cisplatin patients died at 328 days, 340 days, and 896 days, respectively. One Gemcitabine/Cisplatin patient died at 885 days., Conclusion: Our findings suggest improved overall survival outcomes with Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin as neo-adjuvant treatment with no concomitant radiation compared to non-Gemcitabine/Cisplatin regimens in patients with cholangiocarcinoma prior to liver transplantation., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Abdelrahim, Esmail, Xu, Umoru, Al-Rawi, Saharia, Abudayyeh, Victor, McMillan, Kodali and Ghobrial.)

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) represents approximately 3% of gastrointestinal malignancies worldwide and constitutes around 10-15% of all primary liver cancers, being only second to hepatocellular carcinoma. Mortality from CCA has been on the rise in recent decades, and in the United States alone there has been a 36% increase in CCA from 1999 to 2014, with over 7000 CCA mortalities since 2013. Targeted therapies, which have been gaining interest due to their greater specificity toward cancer cells, have only recently started gaining FDA approval for the treatment of CCA. In this manuscript, we will go through the timeline of current FDA-approved targeted therapies as well as those that have gained FDA breakthrough therapy designation.

Background: The management of cholangiocarcinoma is continually reviewed on a current evidence basis to develop practice guidelines and consensus statements. However, the standardized treatment guidelines are still unclear for cholangiocarcinoma patients who are listed for liver transplantation. We aimed to validate and evaluate the potential efficacy of chemotherapy combination of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin as a neo-adjuvant treatment for cholangiocarcinoma patients before liver transplantation., Methods: In this prospective case series, patients with locally advanced, unresectable, hilar, or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with no evidence of extrahepatic disease or vascular involvement were treated with a combination of neoadjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin with no radiation. All patients included received chemotherapy prior to being listed for liver transplantation at a single cancer center according to an open-labeled, and center-approved clinical management protocol. The primary endpoints were the overall survival and recurrence-free survival after liver transplantation., Results: Between 1 March 2016, and 15 March 2022, 10 patients (8 males and 2 females) with a median age of 62.71(interquartile range: 60.02-71.87) had a confirmed diagnosis of intrahepatic or hilar cholangiocarcinoma and underwent liver transplantation. Median days of neoadjuvant therapy for a given combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin were 181 (IRQ: 120-250). Nine patients (90%) were reported with no recurrence or metastasis, and only 1 patient had confirmed metastasis (10%); days for metastasis after transplantation were 612 for this patient. All patients received a combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin as neo-adjuvant while awaiting liver transplantation. The median days of follow-up were 851 (813-967). Overall survival was 100% (95% CI 100-100%) at both years one and two; 75% (95% CI 13-96%) at years three to five. One patient died at eight hundred and eighty-five days. No adverse events were reported after liver transplantation including the patient who was confirmed with recurrence., Conclusions: Our finding demonstrated that neo-adjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin with no radiation prior to liver transplantation resulted in excellent outcomes for patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted every country in the world. With more than 400 million cases and more than 5.5 million deaths. The FDA either approved or authorized the emergency use for three vaccines against COVID-19. The treatment options of COVID-19 are very limited. Multiple complementary and alternative medicine modalities were suggested to be efficacious in the treatment of COVID-19 such as Thymoquinone. The effects of Thymoquinone have been examined and multiple studies indicate a promising beneficial effect. However, the current body of research is limited in terms of its scope, quality, and quantity. While higher-quality studies are required, physicians do not routinely recommend the use of marketed supplements of natural products, including Thymoquinone for COVID-19. Given the numerous suggested positive effects of Thymoquinone, including anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial properties, additional research is required to confirm or refute these promising benefits. Complementary and alternative medicine is an area that requires additional evidence-based practice and research to confirm effects observed in clinical practice., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Abdelrahim, Esmail, Al Saadi, Zsigmond, Al Najjar, Bugazia, Al-Rawi, Alsaadi and Kaseb.)

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths and accounts for over eighty percent of primary liver cancers worldwide. Surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation in small tumors are included in the treatment options for HCC patients with good liver function profiles. According to the Milan Criteria, only a small portion of HCC patients are eligible for liver transplantation due to advanced-stage disease and large tumor size preventing/delaying organ allocation. Recently, the use of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1 and PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of cancers have evolved rapidly and these therapies have been approved for the treatment of HCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have resulted in good clinical outcomes in pre-and post-transplant HCC patients, although, some reports showed that certain recipients may face rejection and graft loss. In this review, we aim to illustrate and summarize the utilization of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies in pre-and post-liver transplants for HCC patients and discuss the assessment of immune checkpoint inhibitor regulators that might determine liver transplant outcomes.

Background: The impact of pancreatic tumor location on patient survival has been studied in large national data-based analyses which yielded controversial results., Aim: To explore if pancreatic head cancer (PHC) and pancreatic body/tail cancer (PBTC) have different overall survival (OS), molecular signature and response to chemotherapy., Methods: We retrospectively queried patient records from July 2016 to June 2020 in our institution. Patient demographics, cancer stage on diagnosis, tumor location, somatic mutations, treatment, and survival are recorded and analyzed. A test is considered statistically significant if the P value was < 0.05., Results: We reviewed 101 patients with complete records, among which 67 (66.34%) were PHC and 34 (33.66%) were PBTC. More PHC were diagnosed at younger age [61.49 vs 68.97, P = 0.010], earlier stages ( P = 0.006) and underwent surgical resection ( P = 0.025). There were no significant differences among all mutations and pathways studied except for TP53 mutations (37.0% in PHC vs 70.0% in PBTC, P = 0.03). OS was not statistically different between PHC and PBTC ( P = 0.636) in the overall population and in subgroups according to surgical resection status or stages. In terms of response to chemotherapy, chemotherapy regimens (FOLFIRINOX-based vs gemcitabine-based) didn't impact disease free interval in those who had surgical resection in either PHC ( P = 0.546) or PBTC ( P = 0.654), or the duration of response to first line palliative treatment in those with advanced disease in PHC ( P = 0.915) or PBTC ( P = 0.524)., Conclusion: Even though PHC and PBTC have similar poor OS and response to chemotherapy, the different presentations and molecular profiles indicate they are different diseases. Utilization of molecular profiling to develop targeted therapy for individualization of treatment is needed., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: There is no conflict-of-interest., (©The Author(s) 2022. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) has previously been considered a contraindication to liver transplantation (LT). However, recent series showed favorable outcomes for LT after neoadjuvant therapy. Our center developed a protocol for neoadjuvant therapy and LT for patients with locally advanced, unresectable iCCA in 2010. Patients undergoing LT were required to demonstrate disease stability for 6 months on neoadjuvant therapy with no extrahepatic disease. During the study period, 32 patients were listed for LT and 18 patients underwent LT. For transplanted patients, the median number of iCCA tumors was 2, and the median cumulative tumor diameter was 10.4 cm. Patients receiving LT had an overall survival at 1-, 3-, and 5-years of 100%, 71%, and 57%. Recurrences occurred in seven patients and were treated with systemic therapy and resection. The study population had a higher than expected proportion of patients with genetic alterations in fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) and DNA damage repair pathways. These data support LT as a treatment for highly selected patients with locally advanced, unresectable iCCA. Further studies to identify criteria for LT in iCCA and factors predicting survival are warranted., (© 2021 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Transplant oncology is an emerging field in cancer treatment that applies transplant medicine, surgery, and oncology to improve cancer patient survival and quality of life. A critical concept that must be addressed to ensure the successful application of transplant oncology to patient care is efficient monitoring of tumor burden pre-and post-transplant and transplant rejection. Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) detection has emerged as a vital tool in revolutionizing the management of cancer patients who undergo organ transplantation. The advances in cfDNA technology have provided options to perform a pre-transplant evaluation of minimal residual disease (MRD) and post-transplant evaluation of cancer recurrence and transplant rejection. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the history and emergence of cfDNA technology, its applications to specifically monitor tumor burden at pre-and post-transplant stages, and evaluate transplant rejection.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common malignancy and the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Transarterial chemoembolization has shown survival benefits in patients with early to intermediate-stage HCC, becoming the standard of care and recommended treatment modality by most clinical practice guidelines. The most recent trials of the TACE plus sorafenib combined therapy in patients with unresectable HCC have yielded inconsistent outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of HCC patients treated with the TACE sorafenib combination as opposed to TACE monotherapy., Methods: This retrospective study included all patients with unresectable HCC who underwent liver transplantation and were treated by either TACE alone or TACE plus sorafenib between July 2008-December 2019. Demographic and clinical data as well as HCC recurrence post-liver transplant (LT) were reported as frequencies and proportions for categorical variables and as the median and interquartile range (IQR) or mean. Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were performed for categorical variables and the Kruskal-Wallis test or unpaired test was performed for continuous variables. Kaplan-Meier curves present overall patient survival and HCC-free survival., Results: A total of 128 patients received LT, with a median (IQR) age of 61.4 (57.0, 66.3) years; most were males (77%). Within the TACE-only group, 79 (77%) patients met the Milan criteria and 24 (23%) were beyond the Milan criteria, while the TACE plus sorafenib group had a higher proportion of patients beyond the Milan criteria: 16 (64%) vs. 9 (36%); p = 0.01. The five-year disease-free survival (DFS) between the treatment groups approached significance, with 100% DFS in the TACE plus sorafenib group vs. 67.2% in the TACE-alone group, p = 0.07. Five-year patient survival was 77.8% in the TACE plus sorafenib group compared to 61.5% in the TACE-alone group ( p = 0.51). However, in patients who met the beyond Milan criteria, those who received TACE alone had a lower average amount of (percent) tumor necrosis on explant pathology (43.8% ± 32%) compared to patients who received TACE plus sorafenib (69.6% ± 32.8%, p = 0.03)., Conclusion: This study identified that using TACE plus sorafenib is generally well-tolerated and demonstrated improved overall survival compared to TACE only in transplant recipients with unresectable HCC. A multi-center and prospective randomized controlled trial is needed to substantiate these findings.

Cancer remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients, due to long-term immunosuppression. Salient issues to consider in decreasing the burden of malignancy among kidney transplant recipients include pretransplant recipient evaluation, post-transplant screening and monitoring, and optimal treatment strategies for the kidney transplant recipients with cancer. In this review, we address cancer incidence and outcomes, approaches to cancer screening and monitoring pretransplant and post-transplant, as well as treatment strategies, immunosuppressive management, and multidisciplinary approaches in the kidney transplant recipients with cancer., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Mutation of the BRAF proto-oncogene is found in approximately 10% of colorectal cancers (CRC), with much of the mutation conferred by a V600E mutation. Unlike other CRC subtypes, BRAF-mutant CRC have had relatively limited response to conventional therapies and overall poor survival. We present the case of a 75-year-old man with severe nonischemic cardiomyopathy on a LifeVest who was found to have a transverse colonic mass with widespread hepatic metastatic disease and was subsequently found to have BRAF V600E -mutant CRC (MSI High/dMMR). After a failed therapy with FOLFOX and pembrolizumab, the patient was started on a regimen of vemurafenib, irinotecan, and cetuximab (VIC) based on the SWOG 1406 trial which had shown improved progression-free survival and response rate for the treatment of BRAF V600E -mutant metastatic CRC. After 40 cycles of VIC, the patient attained complete response and is in remission off chemotherapy with significant improvement. This case highlights the effectiveness of the triple-regimen of vemurafenib, irinotecan, and cetuximab as a treatment option for BRAF V600E -mutant CRC, which is a treatment regimen based on the SWOG 1406 trial, and also demonstrates the synergistic role of BRAF V600E inhibitors and EGFR inhibitors in the treatment of BRAF V600E -mutant CRC., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Cho, Esmail and Abdelrahim.)

Specificity protein (Sp) transcription factors (TFs) Sp1, Sp3 and Sp4, and the orphan nuclear receptor 4A1 (NR4A1) are highly expressed in pancreatic tumors and Sp1 is a negative prognostic factor for pancreatic cancer patient survival. Results of knockdown and overexpression of Sp1, Sp3 and Sp4 in pancreatic and other cancer lines show that these TFs are individually pro-oncogenic factors and loss of one Sp TF is not compensated by other members. NR4A1 is also a pro-oncogenic factor and both NR4A1 and Sp TFs exhibit similar functions in pancreatic cancer cells and regulate cell growth, survival, migration and invasion. There is also evidence that Sp TFs and NR4A1 regulate some of the same genes including survivin, epidermal growth factor receptor, PAX3-FOXO1, α5- and α6-integrins, β1-, β3- and β4-integrins; this is due to NR4A1 acting as a cofactor and mediating NR4A1/Sp1/4-regulated gene expression through GC-rich gene promoter sites. Several studies show that drugs targeting Sp downregulation or NR4A1 antagonists are highly effective inhibitors of Sp/NR4A1-regulated pathways and genes in pancreatic and other cancer cells, and the triterpenoid celastrol is a novel dual-acting agent that targets both Sp TFs and NR4A1., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: Authors declare no conflict of interests for this article., (©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Transplant oncology is an emerging concept of cancer treatment with a promising prospective outcome. The application of oncology, transplant medicine, and surgery to improve patients' survival and quality of life is the core of transplant oncology. Hepatobiliary malignancies have been treated by liver transplantation (LT) with significant improved outcome. In addition, as the liver is the most common site of metastasis for colorectal cancer (CRC), patients with CRC who have stable unresectable liver metastases are good candidates for LT, and initial studies have shown improved survival compared to palliative systemic therapy. The indications of LT for hepatobiliary malignancies have been slowly expanded over the years in a stepwise manner; however, they have only been shown to improve patient survival in the setting of limited systemic therapy options. This review illustrates the concept and history of transplant oncology as an evolving field for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic biliary cancer, and liver-only metastasis of non-hepatobiliary carcinoma. The utility of immunotherapy in the transplant setting is discussed as well as the feasibility of using circulating tumor DNA for surveillance post-transplantation.

Background: The NAPOLI-1 trial demonstrated that liposomal irinotecan in combination with fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) prolonged survival with a manageable safety profile in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. Real-world data on clinical outcomes associated with liposomal irinotecan in NAPOLI-1-based regimens is needed to further substantiate this., Methods: This real-world, retrospective chart review study included patients with mPDAC who received NAPOLI-1-based regimens from six academic centers in the United States. Liposomal irinotecan initiation defined the index date. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed with Kaplan-Meier methodology., Results: There were 374 patients evaluated; median age was 68 years, and 51% were female. Among 326 patients with baseline ECOG information, approximately 74% had ECOG score <2. Liposomal irinotecan was administered as a doublet with 5-FU in a NAPOLI-1-based regimen in the first line (1L; 16%), 2L (42%), and 3L+ (42%) of the metastatic setting. For patients treated in 1L, 2L, and 3L+, median [95% confidence interval (CI)] OS was 8.0 [5.1, 11.2], 7.3 [5.3, 8.8], and 4.6 [4.0, 5.7] months, and median [95% CI] PFS was 4.2 [2.2, 6.6], 3.0 [2.6, 3.7], and 2.0 [1.7, 2.2] months, respectively., Conclusions: Patients in a real-world setting treated with NAPOLI-1-based liposomal irinotecan doublet regimens at academic centers were older with poorer performance status compared to trial patients yet had similar outcomes and efficacy. Furthermore, liposomal irinotecan was frequently used in the 3L+ setting where no treatment has been approved and provided clinical benefit., Competing Interests: KHY: Research Funding (BMS, Ipsen, Halozyme); Advisory Board (Ipsen). AEH: Consulting or Advisory Role (Novartis, Ipsen, Perthera, Celgene, Abbvie); Research Funding (Ipsen); Travel, Accommodations, Expenses (Halozyme). OBA: Research Funding (Taiho Oncology, Ipsen Pharmaceuticals, GSK, Bristol Myers Squibb, PCI Biotech AS, Calithera Biosciences, Inc., SynCore Biotechnology Co., Ltd., Corcept, Mabspace Biosciences); Consulting/Advisory Role (Exelixis, Conjupro BioTherapeutics, R-Pharm US LLC, Ipsen Pharmaceuticals, Natera, Taiho, Pfizer, QED therapeutics). MA: Advisory Board and Speaker (Ipsen). NB: Consultant (AstraZeneca, Exelixis, BMS, Thermo Fisher). PC is an employee of Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. and owns stock/stock options. MSD, MD, RHB, and CN are employees of Analysis Group Inc., which has received consultancy fees from Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Yu, Hendifar, Alese, Draper, Abdelrahim, Burns, Khan, Cockrum, Bhak, Nguyen, DerSarkissian, Duh and Bahary.)