Search

Background & Aims: Two recently developed composite models, the alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) score and Metroticket 2.0, could be used to select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are candidates for liver transplantation (LT). The aim of this study was to compare the predictive performance of both models and to evaluate the net risk reclassification of post-LT recurrence between them using each model’s original thresholds. Methods: This multicenter cohort study included 2,444 adult patients who underwent LT for HCC in 47 centers from Europe and Latin America. A competing risk regression analysis estimating sub-distribution hazard ratios (SHRs) and 95% CIs for recurrence was used (Fine and Gray method). Harrell’s adapted c-statistics were estimated. The net reclassification index for recurrence was compared based on each model’s original thresholds. Results: During a median follow-up of 3.8 years, there were 310 recurrences and 496 competing events (20.3%). Both models predicted recurrence, HCC survival and survival better than Milan criteria (p

Background & Aims: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are selected for liver transplantation (LT) based on pre-LT imaging ± alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) level, but discrepancies between pre-LT tumour assessment and explant are frequent. Our aim was to design an explant-based recurrence risk reassessment score to refine prediction of recurrence after LT and provide a framework to guide post-LT management. Methods: Adult patients who underwent transplantation between 2000 and 2018 for HCC in 47 centres were included. A prediction model for recurrence was developed using competing-risk regression analysis in a European training cohort (TC; n = 1,359) and tested in a Latin American validation cohort (VC; n=1,085). Results: In the TC, 76.4% of patients with HCC met the Milan criteria, and 89.9% had an AFP score of ≤2 points. The recurrence risk reassessment (R3)-AFP model was designed based on variables independently associated with recurrence in the TC (with associated weights): ≥4 nodules (sub-distribution of hazard ratio [SHR] = 1.88, 1 point), size of largest nodule (3–6 cm: SHR = 1.83, 1 point; >6 cm: SHR = 5.82, 5 points), presence of microvascular invasion (MVI; SHR = 2.69, 2 points), nuclear grade >II (SHR = 1.20, 1 point), and last pre-LT AFP value (101–1,000 ng/ml: SHR = 1.57, 1 point; >1,000 ng/ml: SHR = 2.83, 2 points). Wolber’s c-index was 0.76 (95% CI 0.72–0.80), significantly superior to an R3 model without AFP (0.75; 95% CI 0.72–0.79; p = 0.01). Four 5-year recurrence risk categories were identified: very low (score = 0; 5.5%), low (1–2 points; 15.1%), high (3–6 points; 39.1%), and very high (>6 points; 73.9%). The R3-AFP score performed well in the VC (Wolber’s c-index of 0.78; 95% CI 0.73–0.83). Conclusions: The R3 score including the last pre-LT AFP value (R3-AFP score) provides a user-friendly, standardised framework to design post-LT surveillance strategies, protocols, or adjuvant therapy trials for HCC not limited to the Milan criteria. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT03775863. Lay summary: Considering discrepancies between pre-LT tumour assessment and explant are frequent, reassessing the risk of recurrence after LT is critical to further refine the management of patients with HCC. In a large and international cohort of patients who underwent transplantation for HCC, we designed and validated the R3-AFP model based on variables independently associated with recurrence post-LT (number of nodules, size of largest nodule, presence of MVI, nuclear grade, and last pre-LT AFP value). The R3-AFP model including last available pre-LT AFP value outperformed the original R3 model only based on explant features. The final R3-AFP scoring system provides a robust framework to design post-LT surveillance strategies, protocols, or adjuvant therapy trials, irrespective of criteria used to select patients with HCC for LT.

Background & Aims: Good outcomes after liver transplantation (LT) have been reported after successfully downstaging to Milan criteria in more advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare post-LT outcomes in patients receiving locoregional therapies (LRT) before LT according to Milan criteria and University of California San Francisco downstaging (UCSF-DS) protocol and ‘all-comers’. Methods: This multicentre cohort study included patients who received any LRT before LT from Europe and Latin America (2000–2018). We excluded patients with alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) above 1,000 ng/ml. Competing risk regression analysis for HCC recurrence was conducted, estimating subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) and corresponding 95% CIs. Results: From 2,441 LT patients, 70.1% received LRT before LT (n = 1,711). Of these, 80.6% were within Milan, 12.0% within UCSF-DS, and 7.4% all-comers. Successful downstaging was achieved in 45.2% (CI 34.8–55.8) and 38.2% (CI 25.4–52.3) of the UCSF-DS group and all-comers, respectively. The risk of recurrence was higher for all-comers (SHR 6.01 [p

Introduction: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy-oxaliplatin (PIPAC-OX) induces direct DNA damage and immunogenic cell death in patients with gastric cancer peritoneal metastases (GCPM). Combining PIPAC-OX with immune checkpoint inhibition remains untested. We conducted a phase I first-in-human trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of PIPAC-OX combined with systemic nivolumab (NCT03172416)., Methods: Patients with GCPM who experienced disease progression on at least first-line systemic therapy were recruited across three centers in Singapore and Belgium. Patients received PIPAC-OX at 90 mg/m 2 every 6 weeks and i.v. nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks. Translational studies were carried out on GCPM samples acquired during PIPAC-OX procedures., Results: In total, 18 patients with GCPM were prospectively recruited. The PIPAC-OX and nivolumab combination was well tolerated with manageable treatment-related adverse events, although one patient suffered from grade 4 vomiting. At second and third PIPAC-OX, respectively, the median decrease in peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was -5 (interquartile range: -12 to +1) and -7 (interquartile range: -6 to -20) and peritoneal regression grade 1 or 2 was observed in 66.7% (6/9) and 100% (3/3). Translational analyses of 43 GCPM samples revealed enrichment of immune/stromal infiltration and inflammatory signatures in peritoneal tumors after PIPAC-OX and nivolumab. M2 macrophages were reduced in treated peritoneal tumor samples while memory CD4+, CD8+ central memory and naive CD8+ T-cells were increased., Conclusions: The first-in-human trial combining PIPAC-OX and nivolumab demonstrated safety and tolerability, coupled with enhanced T-cell infiltration within peritoneal tumors. This trial sets the stage for future combinations of systemic immunotherapy with locoregional intraperitoneal treatments., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess whether coaching doctors to enhance ethical decision-making in teams improves (1) goal-oriented care operationalized via written do-not-intubate and do-not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNI-DNACPR) orders in adult patients potentially receiving excessive treatment (PET) during their first hospital stay and (2) the quality of the ethical climate., Methods: We carried out a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) and 9 referring internal medicine departments of Ghent University Hospital between February 2022 and February 2023. Doctors and nurses in charge of hospitalized patients filled out the ethical decision-making climate questionnaire (ethical decision-making climate questionnaire, EDMCQ) before and after the study, and anonymously identified PET via an electronic alert during the entire study period. All departments were randomly assigned to a 4-month coaching. At least one month of coaching was compared to less than one month coaching and usual care. The first primary endpoint was the incidence of written DNI-DNACPR decisions. The second primary endpoint was the EDMCQ before and after the study period. Because clinicians identified less PET than required to detect a difference in written DNI-DNACPR decisions, a post-hoc analysis on the overall population was performed. To reduce type I errors, we further restricted the analysis to one of our predefined secondary endpoints (mortality up to 1 year)., Results: Of the 442 and 423 clinicians working before and after the study period, respectively 270 (61%) and 261 (61.7%) filled out the EDMCQ. Fifty of the 93 (53.7%) doctors participated in the coaching for a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of 4.36 (2.55) sessions. Of the 7254 patients, 125 (1.7%) were identified as PET, with 16 missing outcome data. Twenty-six of the PET and 624 of the overall population already had a written DNI-DNACPR decision at study entry, resulting in 83 and 6614 patients who were included in the main and post hoc analysis, respectively. The estimated incidence of written DNI-DNACPR decisions in the intervention vs. control arm was, respectively, 29.7% vs. 19.6% (odds ratio 4.24, 95% confidence interval 4.21-4.27; P < 0.001) in PET and 3.4% vs. 1.9% (1.65, 1.12-2.43; P = 0.011) in the overall study population. The estimated mortality at one year was respectively 85% vs. 83.7% (hazard ratio 2.76, 1.26-6.04; P = 0.011) and 14.5% vs. 15.1% (0.89, 0.72-1.09; P = 0.251). The mean difference in EDMCQ before and after the study period was 0.02 points (- 0.18 to 0.23; P = 0.815)., Conclusion: This study suggests that coaching doctors regarding ethical decision-making in teams safely improves goal-oriented care operationalized via written DNI-DNACPR decisions in hospitalized patients, however without concomitantly improving the quality of the ethical climate., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a procedure for minimally invasive drug administration in patients with peritoneal metastasis. Previous studies have emphasized the importance of uniformity in treatment protocols and standardization of this practice. This study aimed to reach a consensus on eligibility, patient selection, and choice of chemotherapy for PIPAC., Methods: A three-round modified Delphi study was conducted. A steering group formulated a list of baseline statements, addressing the objectives. The steering group consisted of seven expert surgical and medical oncologists. Available evidence and published key opinions were critically reviewed. An international expert panel scored those statements on a 4-point Likert scale. The statements were submitted electronically and anonymously. Consensus was reached if the agreement rate was ≥75%. A minimum Cronbach's alpha of >0.8 was set., Results: Forty-five (45/58; 77.6%) experts participated and completed all rounds. Experts were digestive surgeons (n = 28), surgical oncologists (n = 7), gynecologists (n = 5), medical oncologists (n = 4), and one clinical researcher. Their assessment of 81 preliminary statements in the first round resulted in 41 consolidated statements. In round two, consensus was reached on 40 statements (40/41; 97.6%) with a consensus of ≥80% for each individual statement. In the third round, 40 statements were unanimously approved as definitive. The choice of first- and second-line chemotherapy remained controversial and could not reach consensus., Conclusions: This International Delphi study provides practical guidance on eligibility and patient selection for PIPAC. Ongoing trial data and long-term results that could contribute to the further standardization of PIPAC are eagerly awaited., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ∼ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent studies indicate that a group of patients with cirrhosis receiving a liver transplantation for hepatocellular cancer (HCC) beyond the Milan Criteria (MC) can achieve a similar outcome compared to patients within these criteria. This study aims to investigate the value of the Asan critera (AC), up-to-7 criteria (UT7), French alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) model and Metroticket 2.0 (MT2.0) model compared to the MC., Methods: 526 patients transplanted for non-metastatic HCC were analyzed. Patient groups within and beyond MC and extended criteria were determined according to radiological assessment and AFP value at listing., Results: Overall survival (OS) and recurrence (RR) rates were similar between patients within MC and all extended criteria. Five-year OS within MC was 71.3% compared to 70.9% for AC, 71.4% for UT7, 69.7% for AFP-model and 71.0% for MT2.0 criteria. Five-year RR within MC was 12.3% compared to 13.5% for AC, 13.0% for UT7, 14.3% for AFP-model and 13.2% for MT2.0 criteria. Patients beyond MC but within the extended criteria had tendency towards higher recurrence., Conclusions: All validated extended criteria (AC, UT7, AFP-model and MT2.0) could be proposed as alternatives to the MC with similar outcome. Prospective data are awaited to assess recurrence beyond MC., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest No conflict of interest reported in relation to the presented work., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Non-V600E BRAF mutated colorectal cancer (CRC) is a rare disease entity with specific clinical features. These tumors are less likely to have microsatellite instability than CRC with a V600E BRAF mutation and often harbor a KRAS or NRAS mutation. Notably, median overall survival is longer than in wild-type BRAF CRC. Little is known about treatment possibilities in these patients., Case Presentation: We present the case of a 59 year old patient with a rare mutation in BRAF codon 594, who progressed rapidly on all classical therapies but experienced a clear and long lasting response on treatment with Regorafenib., Conclusion: Little is known about therapies that can be effective in the rare non-V600E BRAF mutated CRCs. We present a patient who had a definite response to treatment with Regorafenib. There are no predictive markers that define a subset of CRC patients who benefit most from Regorafenib. The specific features of this non-V600E BRAF mutated CRC may be relevant in the exploration of predictive biomarkers for the efficacy of Regorafenib.