Search

PTTG1 is almost undetectable in adult livers but is highly expressed in hepatocarcinoma. While little is known about its involvement in liver fibrosis, PTTG1 expression is associated with DLK1. We assessed the role of the PTTG1/DLK1 pathway in fibrosis progression and the potential therapeutic effect of PTTG1 silencing in fibrosis.Pttg1 and Dlk1 were studied in liver and isolated cell populations of control and fibrotic rats and in human liver biopsies. The fibrotic molecular signature was analysed in Pttg1Pttg1 and Dlk1 mRNA selectively increased in fibrotic rats paralleling fibrosis progression. Serum DLK1 concentrations correlated with hepatic collagen content and systemic and portal haemodynamics. Human cirrhotic livers showed greater PTTG1 and DLK1 transcript abundance than non-cirrhotic, and reduced collagen was observed in Pttg1 Pttg1Pttg1/Dlk1 are selectively overexpressed in the cirrhotic liver and participate in ECM turnover regulation. Pttg1 disruption decreases Dlk1 transcription and attenuates collagen deposition. PTTG1/DLK1 signalling is a novel pathway for targeting the progression of liver fibrosis.

Background Despite atezolizumab and bevacizumab (A + B) is currently the first‐line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, some patients will not be adequate for this combination. In the setting of sorafenib some adverse events have been proposed as prognostic factors. Objective To characterize the early diarrhoea development as prognostic factor in 344 HCC patients. Methods The development of early diarrhoea in sorafenib treatment defined as patients who developed diarrhoea and needed dose modification within the first 60 days of treatment (e‐diarrhoea) and 3‐grouping variables were analysed: Patients with e‐diarrhoea, patients who developed diarrhoea after the first 60 days of treatment (L‐diarrhoea) and patients that never developed diarrhoea (never diarrhoea). Results The median overall survival in sorafenib treated patients was significantly different across groups (6.8 months for e‐diarrhoea, 26.7 months for L‐diarrhoea and 13.3 months for never‐diarrhoea). The emergence of e‐diarrhoea was associated with poor outcomes (hazard ratio [HR] 1.84 [95%CI 1.15–2.95]), while there was no increased/decreased risk of dismal evolution in patients with L‐diarrhoea (HR 0.66 [95%CI 0.42–1.03]). Conclusion The emergence of e‐diarrhoea in HCC patients treated with sorafenib is an early predictor of dismal evolution under this therapy. Thus, prompt identification of these non‐responders may be useful for an early switch to second‐line therapies., Key Summary Established knowledge on this subject Diarrhoea is a frequent adverse event of sorafenib and its emergence has been associated to better outcomes. What are the significant and/or new findings of this study? Early diarrhoea (e‐diarrhoea) in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib is an early predictor of dismal evolution.Diarrhoea under sorafenib should not be taken as a predictive parameter of lack of benefit.E‐diarrhoea could be used as clinical biomarker for switching to second‐line therapies.

Background & aims Sorafenib and lenvatinib are the first-line treatments approved in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but information is lacking about the relationships between their pharmacokinetics, patients pharmacogenetic profiles, adverse events (AE) and overall survival. We aimed to elucidate these relationships of tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors, such as sorafenib, in order to improve the design of trials testing it in combination with checkpoint inhibitors. Methods We assessed the pharmacokinetics of sorafenib and its N-oxide metabolite at day-0, day-7, day-30, day-60, day-90, day-120, day-150 and day-180 and nine single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in five genes related to sorafenib metabolism/transport to identify the best point for starting the combination between tyrosine kinases and checkpoint inhibitors. Results We prospectively included 49 patients (96% cirrhotic, 37% hepatitis-C, 82% Child-Pugh-A and 59% BCLC-C). Pharmacokinetic values peaked at day-7 and progressively declined until day-60. In the 16 patients without further dose modifications after day-60, pharmacokinetic values remained stable through day-180 (sorafenib P = .90; N-oxide P = .93). Pharmacokinetic values were higher in patients with early dermatological adverse events and lower in patients with early diarrhoea. Sorafenib and N-oxide pharmacokinetic values varied linearly with different alleles of MRP2*3972. Conclusions Sorafenib's pharmacokinetics is heterogeneous across HCC patients. This heterogeneity affects adverse events development and must be taken into account in setting the dose and timing of its combination with checkpoint inhibitors.

Background & Aims: Information on safety and efficacy of systemic treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) under dialysis are limited due to patient exclusion from clinical trials. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the rate, prevalence, tolerability, and outcome of sorafenib in this population. Methods: We report a multicenter study comprising patients from Latin America and Europe. Patients treated with sorafenib were enrolled; demographics, dose modifications, adverse events (AEs), treatment duration, and outcome of patients undergoing dialysis were recorded. Results: As of March 2018, 6156 HCC patients were treated in 44 centres and 22 patients were concomitantly under dialysis (0.36%). The median age was 65.5years, 40.9% had hepatitis C, 75% had Child-Pugh A, and 85% were Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer-C. The median time to first dose modification, treatment duration and overall survival rate were 2.4months (interquartile ranges [IQR], 0.8-3.8), 10.8months (IQR, 4.5-16.9), and 17.5months (95% CI, 7.2-24.5), respectively. Seventeen patients required at least 1 dose modification. The main causes of first dose modification were asthenia/worsening of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status and diarrhoea. At the time of death or last follow-up, four patients were still on treatment and 18 had discontinued sorafenib: 14 were due to tumour progression, 2 were sorafenib-related, and 2 were non-sorafenib-related AE. Conclusions: The outcomes observed in this cohort seem comparable to those in the non-dialysis population. Thus, to the best of our knowledge, this is the largest and most informative dataset regarding systemic treatment outcomes in HCC patients undergoing dialysis.

Background The positive results of the REFLECT trial in terms of survival (sorafenib vs lenvatinib) offer a new first-line option for hepatocellular carcinoma. Additionally, the expected results of immunotherapy could change the first-line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma or the clinical trial design in first and second-line. Aims To evaluate the impact of dermatologic adverse events under sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma patients as a clinical marker to predict prognosis and critically evaluate outcomes within trials. Methods A systematic search of original articles published until October 2018 was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE and a meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Results A total of 393 studies were identified and 13 articles with 2035 patients (79.5% Child-Pugh-A, 73.2% BCLC-C) were selected for qualitative and quantitative analysis. The main type of dermatologic adverse events was hand-foot skin reaction (47.7%) but other dermatologic adverse events were reported in 31.7% of the cases. Presence of dermatologic adverse events was associated with a lower mortality when compared with those patients without them (pooled Hazard Ratio for the univariate analysis 0.45 (95% CI: 0.38-0.53) and there was no heterogeneity for the analysis (P = 0.511; I2 = 0.0%). Refuting this association would require the future report of 1370 negative studies. Conclusions This meta-analysis shows a clinically meaningful association between dermatologic adverse events and a higher probability of longer survival. These data support the use of dermatologic adverse events in the clinical decision-making when informing the prognosis and when systemic treatment is decided.

Direct antiviral agents mark a major progress for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection. The rate of cure is higher than 90% in most populations and the safety profile is good. However, like any treatment, there are potential unexpected adverse events. Several reports have indicated that antiviral therapy may be associated with the reactivation of hepatitis B virus or the emergence of herpes virus in a time-related manner. Recently, several studies have described a potential unexpected incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in treated patients, both in those without a prior history of cancer and those who have been successfully treated and were disease-free for different periods of time. Furthermore, the emergence of cancer is also characterized by a more aggressive and faster progression to advanced stages, making treatment impossible. Thus, a careful risk-benefit analysis must be made when considering antiviral treatment with the new agents in patients with hepatitis C virus.

Summary. Worldwide, the hepatitis B virus (HBV) and the hepatitis C virus (HCV) cause, respectively, 600 000 and 350 000 deaths each year. Viral hepatitis is the leading cause of cirrhosis and liver cancer, which in turn ranks as the third cause of cancer death worldwide. Within the WHO European region, approximately 14 million people are chronically infected with HBV, and nine million people are chronically infected with HCV. Lack of reliable epidemiological data on HBV and HCV is one of the biggest hurdles to advancing policy. Risk groups such as migrants and injecting drug users (IDU) tend to be under-represented in existing prevalence studies; thus, targeted surveillance is urgently needed to correctly estimate the burden of HBV and HCV. The most effective means of prevention against HBV is vaccination, and most European Union (EU) countries have universal vaccination programmes. For both HBV and HCV, screening of individuals who present a high risk of contracting the virus is critical given the asymptomatic, and thereby silent, nature of disease. Screening of migrants and IDUs has been shown to be effective and potentially cost-effective. There have been significant advances in the treatment of HCV and HBV in recent years, but health care professionals remain poorly aware of treatment options. Greater professional training is needed on the management of hepatitis including the treatment of liver cancer to encourage adherence to guidelines and offer patients the best possible outcomes. Viral hepatitis knows no borders. EU Member States, guided by the EU, need to work in a concerted manner to implement lasting, effective policies and programmes and make tackling viral hepatitis a public health priority.

Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma has dramatically changed in the last years. The better knowledge of the molecular mechanisms responsible of tumor initiation and progression has allowed the development of molecular targeted therapies that specifically block the disrupted pathways. Among all these new agents, Sorafenib is the only one that has shown efficacy in terms of survival in advanced stage in two randomized, double-blind, controlled trials. The positive result of these two trials are the proof of the efficacy of molecular targeted therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma and opens the door to multipathway blockade and the use of these targeted therapies in the adjuvant setting. Other agents have shown promising results in phase 1-2 trials but further studies are needed to demonstrate their efficacy. In the next years, efforts should be directed to identifying genomic and proteomic profiling that will help us to assess the prognosis and to define what treatment benefits whom, ultimately giving way to personalized medicine.

We describe three patients who developed ascites during the course of acute viral hepatitis B. Two of them had exudative ascites, with a high protein and cell content, and the other transudative ascites, with low protein and cell content. Both patients with exudative ascites had a benign clinical course, and their liver disease was milder than in the patient with transudative ascites, who had signs of severe liver failure and a submassive hepatic necrosis on liver biopsy. Moreover, the patient with transudative ascites had evidence of portal hypertension (as indicated by a hepatic vein pressure gradient of 12.5 mmHg, normal 1-6 mmHg), whereas patients with exudative ascites did not (hepatic vein pressure gradient of 5 and 5.5 mmHg, respectively). These data support our previous suggestion that "exudative" ascites during acute viral hepatitis B represents a self-limited immunopathetic sign that is not related to portal hypertension or severe hepatic disease.

The knowledge of the natural history of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma is important to estimate the prognosis at diagnosis and indicate the best therapy. Prognosis is related to tumour stage at diagnosis, degree of liver function impairment induced either by the tumour itself or by the underlying cirrhosis, general physical condition of the patients, and potential impact of therapy. Prognostic estimation should take into account all four aspects. Treatment is very relevant to be considered in patients with early stage tumours since surgical resection, transplantation or percutaneous ablation provide a high rate of complete responses and thus, improve survival. This might be as high as 50-75% at 5 years. Patients diagnosed at an intermediate/advanced stage will receive palliative treatment and prospective studies have recently redefined the outcome predictors of this stratum. Asymptomatic patients in whom the tumour has not invaded vessels or disseminated may reach a 50% survival at 3 years, while those with adverse predictors do not reach this time point. These data have to be taken into account not only in the conventional clinical practice, but also in the design and evaluation of prospective investigations that should be properly powered to reach an informative sample size. To achieve both aims, within the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Group we have developed a staging system that combines prognosis prediction with decision making, thus becoming a useful tool both for practice and research.

Purpose We compared the usefulness of Levovist-enhanced power Doppler imaging (PDI) and helical CT in the depiction of tumor vascularity before and after percutaneous ablation of small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs). Methods Thirty-one cirrhotic patients with solitary unresectable HCCs smaller than 5 cm (mean size, 2.7 ± 0.8 cm; range, 1.5–5.0 cm) recruited over a 15-month period were treated with percutaneous ethanol injection (n = 9) or radiofrequency ablation (n = 22). PDI, contrast-enhanced PDI (using Levovist), and multiphase contrast-enhanced helical CT were performed before and after percutaneous ablation, and vascularity findings were compared. Results Levovist significantly increased baseline intratumoral Doppler signals on PDI compared to non-contrast PDI. The most frequent tumor vascularity pattern was heterogeneous (45%). Vascularity was identified in all tumors by both contrast-enhanced PDI and helical CT before ablation. After percutaneous ablation, intratumoral vascularity was detected in 11 tumors by contrast-enhanced PDI and in 15 tumors by CT. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced PDI in demonstrating intratumoral vascularity, with CT being the gold standard, were 66%, 93%, and 81%, respectively. There was significant agreement between the 2 modalities in the depiction of tumor vascularity after ablation (κ = 0.6, p = 0.001). However, there were 5 false negatives and 1 false positive with contrast-enhanced PDI. Complete tumor necrosis was achieved in 21 patients (68%). Conclusions There was a good concordance between contrast-enhanced PDI and helical CT in the depiction of HCC vascularity before and after percutaneous ablation. However, although contrast-enhanced PDI may be useful for real-time guidance of treatment, its low sensitivity makes it inadequate to accurately assess the completeness of ablation. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound 31:119–128, 2003

The influence of hepatitis B virus infection, alcohol consumption, tobacco smoking and use of oral contraceptives on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was evaluated in a hospital-based case-control study in Catalonia, in the Mediterranean coastal area of north-eastern Spain. A total of 96 HCC cases (86.5% of them with associated liver cirrhosis) and 190 age- and sex-matched controls were studied. The odds ratio of HCC and 95% confidence interval among hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) carriers was 4.9 (1.3-21.9). The OR was not significantly elevated in smokers, and a marginally significant increased risk was found among users of oral contraceptives based on 6 female cases. There was a significant dose-response relationship between alcohol consumption and risk of HCC (chi 2 for trend: 24.3, p less than 0.001). Although hepatitis B infection was strongly associated with HCC, alcohol abuse leading to cirrhosis appears to be one of the main causes of HCC in this region.

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a complex issue, as it needs to take into account the liver disease, the cancer stage and the performance status of the patient. The treatment decision has to be based on robust scientific evidence and for this it is instrumental to have a proper staging system linked to the treatment indication. The BCLC proposal serves these two purposes and has been validated worldwide and endorsed by several scientific associations. The sole systemic therapy that has shown efficacy in improving the survival of HCC patients is sorafenib, an oral kinase inhibitor that blocks the Raf/MEK/ERK pathway and the receptor for VEGFR 2 and PDGFR-beta. Sorafenib has been recognized as the standard of care for patients who cannot benefit from treatments of higher priority and established efficacy, such as surgical resection, transplantation, ablation and transarterial chemoembolization. Sorafenib has changed the management of HCC, opening the path to combination therapies for patients at advanced stages and to evaluation as an adjuvant for those in earlier evolutionary stages.

The clinical benefit of sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been undervalued due to the absence of complete responses, even though patients who develop early dermatologic reactions have shown to have a positive outcome. In addition, sorafenib is described as an antiangiogenic drug, but it also acts on immunological cells. Thus, the goal of this study was to assess the complete response rate in a retrospective cohort of HCC patients treated with sorafenib and to describe the profile of the patients who achieve complete response for identifying factors related to this event and their connection with the immunological profile of sorafenib. Ten Spanish centers submitted cases of complete response under sorafenib. The baseline characteristics, development of early dermatologic reactions, and cause of treatment discontinuation were annotated. Radiological images taken before starting sorafenib, at first control, after starting sorafenib, at the time of complete response, and at least 1 month after treatment were centrally reviewed. Of the 1119 patients studied, 20 had been classified as complete responders by the centers, but eight of these patients were excluded after central review. Ten patients had complete disappearance of all tumor sites, and two had just a small residual fibrotic scar. Thus, 12 patients were classified as complete responders (58% HCV, median age 59.7 years, 83.4% Child-Pugh class A, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 91.7%, and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C 83.3%). The median overall survival and treatment duration were 85.8 and 40.1 months, respectively. All but one patient developed early dermatologic reactions, and seven patients discontinued sorafenib after achieving complete response due to adverse events, patient decision, or liver decompensation. Conclusion: Complete response affects 1% of patients with HCC who are treated with sorafenib. The association of complete response with early dermatologic reactions supports the role of a specific immune/inflammatory patient profile in the improved response to sorafenib. (Hepatology 2018;67:612-622).

Background & Aims Information about the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in patients with liver cancer is lacking. This study characterizes the outcomes and mortality risk in this population. Methods Multicentre retrospective, cross-sectional, international study of liver cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection registered between February and December 2020. Clinical data at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and outcomes were registered. Results Two hundred fifty patients from 38 centres were included, 218 with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and 32 with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA). The median age was 66.5 and 64.5 years, and 84.9% and 21.9% had cirrhosis in the HCC and iCCA cohorts respectively. Patients had advanced cancer stage at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in 39.0% of the HCC and 71.9% of the iCCA patients. After a median follow-up of 7.20 (IQR: 1.84–11.24) months, 100 (40%) patients have died, 48% of the deaths were SARS-CoV-2-related. Forty (18.4%) HCC patients died within 30-days. The death rate increase was significantly different according to the BCLC stage (6.10% [95% CI 2.24–12.74], 11.76% [95% CI 4.73–22.30], 20.69% [95% CI 11.35–31.96] and 34.52% [95% CI 17.03–52.78] for BCLC 0/A, B, C and D, respectively; p = .0017). The hazard ratio was 1.45 (95% CI 0.49–4.31; p = .5032) in BCLC-B versus 0/A, and 3.13 (95% CI 1.29–7.62; p = .0118) in BCLC-C versus 0/A in the competing risk Cox regression model. Nineteen out of 32 iCCA (59.4%) died, and 12 deaths were related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Conclusions This is the largest cohort of liver cancer patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. It characterizes the 30-day mortality risk of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with HCC during this period., Spanish Health Ministry; Ricerca Corrente, Grant/Award Number: RC2019/105-01, RC2018/105-01 and RC2017/105-01; European Association for the Study of the Liver (Andrew Burroughs Fellowship); Cancer Treatment and Research Trust (CTRT); Wellcome Trust Strategic Fund, Grant/Award Number: PS3416; Cancer Research UK (CR UK) centre, Grant/Award Number: C9380/A26813, C18342/A23390 and C9380/A18084; Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Grant/Award Number: PI18/0358, PI15/00145, CD18/00126, PI19/00819, FI19/00222, 16-0026, PI044031, PI18/00768, PI18/00542 and PI13/01229; Bristol Myers Squibb and Celgene; Cancer Research UK, Grant/Award Number: RCCPDB-Nov21/100008