Cabrera, Roniel

There is a paucity of human in vitro models available to study the effects of alcohol in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). HCC cell lines are often deficient in either alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) or cytochrome P450 2E1 (CYP2E1). VL‐17a is currently the most widely studied model available. VL‐17a is derived from a HepG2 cell line engineered to overexpress mouse ADH and human CYP2E1. LH86 is a novel HCC cell line previously developed in our laboratory. Here we compare the LH86 cell line with the current model to identify a novel tool to study the effects of alcohol in HCC. The aim of this study is to evaluate the LH86 cell line as a novel human in vitro model to study the effects of alcohol in HCC. The cell lines were cultured with alcohol and gene expression and epigenomic changes were identified. The LH86 cell line was observed to have unique functional properties indicating that it is a potential novel tool to study the effects of alcohol in HCC. Support or Funding Information R01 AA19976 TO KR AND CL

Abstract The burden of HCC is substantial. To address gaps in HCC care, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) aimed to develop a standard set of process‐based measures and patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) along the HCC care continuum. We identified candidate process and outcomes measures for HCC care based on structured literature review. A 13‐member panel with content expertise across the HCC care continuum evaluated candidate measures on importance and performance gap using a modified Delphi approach (two rounds of rating) to define the final set of measures. Candidate PROs based on a structured scoping review were ranked by 74 patients with HCC across 7 diverse institutions. Out of 135 measures, 29 measures made the final set. These covered surveillance (6 measures), diagnosis (6 measures), staging (2 measures), treatment (10 measures), and outcomes (5 measures). Examples included the use of ultrasound (± alpha‐fetoprotein [AFP]) every 6 months, need for surveillance in high‐risk populations, diagnostic testing for patients with a new AFP elevation, multidisciplinary liver tumor board (MLTB) review of Liver Imaging‐Reporting and Data System 4 lesions, standard evaluation at diagnosis, treatment recommendations based on Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging, MLTB discussion of treatment options, appropriate referral for evaluation of liver transplantation candidacy, and role of palliative therapy. PROs include those related to pain, anxiety, fear of treatment, and uncertainty about the best individual treatment and the future. The AASLD PMC has developed a set of explicit quality measures in HCC care to help bridge the gap between guideline recommendations and measurable processes and outcomes. Measurement and subsequent implementation of these metrics could be a central step in the improvement of patient care and outcomes in this high‐risk population.

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare posttransplant outcomes in patients undergoing bridging locoregional therapy (LRT) with Y-90 transarterial radioembolization (TARE) based protocol compared with transarterial chemoembolization based protocol for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prior liver transplantation (LT). Materials and Methods: Patients listed for LT with HCC within the Milan criteria at our center who had bridging LRT were treated according to transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) based protocol from May 2012 to April 2014 and a TARE based protocol from October 2014 to December 2017. Early posttransplant survival and tumor recurrence were compared between the groups. Tumor response to LRT, microvascular invasion (mVI), and the rate of delisting was also evaluated. Results: One hundred three patients who were listed for LT with HCC within the Milan criteria received LRT. LT was performed in 65 patients, 28 treated with TARE protocol and 37 on TACE protocol. There were no statistical differences in baseline pretransplant characteristics and tumor recurrence. There was a trend toward improved 3-year survival in the TARE group (92.9% vs. 75.7%; P=0.052). The mVI was seen in 1/28 (3.6%) explants in the TARE group compared with 10/37 (27%) in the TACE group (P=0.013). The TARE group also required fewer LRT treatments (1.46 vs. 2.43; P=0.001) despite no difference in time on the transplant list. Conclusions: Despite requiring fewer LRT treatments, there was significantly less mVI in the explants of patients treated with TARE protocol LRT as a bridge to LT as well as a trend toward improved 3-year survival. Therefore, TARE may be associated with improved tumor control and reduced post-LT recurrence.