Schnickel, Gabriel T

ABSTRACT Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have emerged as promising agents for the management of advanced HCC. By reducing tumour burden, ICIs may serve as a downstaging/bridging tool to improve transplant candidacy. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of patients receiving pre‐LT ICIs. Methods Multicenter, retrospective cohort study from January 2018 to December 2024, including 48 patients who received ICIs prior to LT (ICI cohort). A control cohort (non‐ICI cohort) was built (1:3) using propensity score matching including 144 patients who underwent LT for HCC without prior ICI. Results Within the ICI cohort ( N = 48) rejection occurred in 9 patients (18.8%), all biopsy‐proven, with a median onset of 31 days post‐LT (12.0–182.0). The median washout period was 60 days (13–96). Patients experiencing rejection had shorter washout periods ( p = 0.029). All rejection episodes were successfully managed; two were steroid‐resistant, one requiring re‐transplantation. There were no rejection‐related deaths. Of the 5 patients with HCC recurrence, 60% received ICI for < 90 days ( p = 0.027). Comparison between the ICI and non‐ICI cohort revealed no significant differences in rejection rates (18.8% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.916), graft failure, HCC recurrence, or overall mortality. Overall survival (OS) did not differ between ICI and non‐ICI patients ( p = 0.625) or between those with and without rejection ( p = 0.119). Rejection was not associated with increased mortality, with deaths primarily attributed to infection or HCC recurrence. Conclusion Our results demonstrate that rejection rates were similar in patients receiving ICIs pre‐LT and it can be safely managed.

614 Background: Liver transplantation (LT) offers a 5-year survival exceeding 70% for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may be used to downstage or bridge to transplantation. This study aims to evaluate the safety of ICIs prior to LT. Methods: Multicenter retrospective study, involving 9 centers, included adults who received ICIs and, subsequent LT, between 2019 and 2023. The ICI cohort was matched by age, sex, liver diseases and transplant date (1:3) with a similar cohort of HCC transplanted patients that did not receive ICIs. Results: The ICI cohort included 45 patients (Table part 1). The most common underlying liver diseases were viral. 15.5% of patients had macrovascular invasion and, 62.2% multifocal disease. The most commonly used ICI was nivolumab (75.6%), followed by atezolizumab-bevacizumab (17.8%). The median follow up was 32.5 months (17.4 - 47.6). The median ICI duration was 147 days (129.5-276.5), with a median interval of 58 days (22–193) between the last ICI dose and LT. There were 8 (17.8%) cases of graft rejection, 2 steroid-resistant leading to 1 graft failure. There were 4 (8%) HCC recurrences. During follow-up there were 6 deaths, 2 related to HCC recurrence and 4 non liver related. When compared with 135 non-ICI cohort patients, there were no differences within the groups (Table part 2). Importantly, we found no significant differences in crude rejection rates (p=0.5). Conclusions: Our study suggest that ICI treatment prior to LT is safe. ICI rejection primarily occurs in the acute post-transplant period (within 3 months), with a low risk of death due to graft failure. Further clinical trials are needed. Part 1: ICI cohort descriptive analysis. N (%); Median (IQR); Part 2: Comparison between cohorts. N (%); Mean (SD). (part 1) ICI-cohort n=45 General data Male 38 (84.4) Age 61.2 (7.6) Etiology of liver diseases Hepatitis C 17 (37.8)Hepatitis B 6 (13.3)MASLD 6 (13.3)Viral +Alcohol 5 (11.1)Alcohol 3 (6.7)Autoimmune 3 (6.7)Other 3 (6.7)Combined viral 2 (4.4) Largest tumor (mm) 39 (22) Macrovascular invasion 7 (15.5) Multifocal 28 (62.2) Locoregional therapy 36 (80.0) Number of locoregional therapies 2 (2) Immunotherapy Nivolumab 34 (75.6) Atezolizumab/bevacizumab 8 (17.8) Pembrolizumab 1 (2.2) Nivolumab+pembrolizumab 1 (2.2) PD1 inhibitor clinical trial 1 (2.2) Days of ICI treatment 147 (203) Radiological tumor response ICI No 17 (37.8) Transplant Deceased donor 43 (95.6) Washout period (days) 58 (171) Induction therapy (anti-thymoglobulin) 8 (17.8) Outcomes Rejection Biopsy proven 8 (17.8) 8 (100) Time to rejection (days) 43 (102) Graft failure Rejection 2 (4.4)1 (2.2) HCC recurrence 4 (8) Deaths 6 (13.3) Follow up Since transplant (months) 32.5 (30.2) (part 2) ICI-cohort (n=45) Non-ICI cohort (n= 135) P Post transplant rejection rate 8 (17.8) 32 (23.7) 0.53 Time to rejection (days) 180.1 (SD 218) 62.2 (SD 62.8) 0.25 Overall deaths 6 (13.3) 10 (7.4) 0.36

Importance Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) is an emerging recovery modality for transplantable allografts from controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) donors. In the US, only 11.4% of liver recipients who are transplanted from a deceased donor receive a cDCD liver. NRP has the potential to safely expand the US donor pool with improved transplant outcomes as compared with standard super rapid recovery (SRR). Objective To assess outcomes of US liver transplants using controlled donation after circulatory death livers recovered with normothermic regional perfusion vs standard super rapid recovery. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a retrospective, observational cohort study comparing liver transplant outcomes from cDCD donors recovered by NRP vs SRR. Outcomes of cDCD liver transplant from January 2017 to May 2023 were collated from 17 US transplant centers and included livers recovered by SRR and NRP (thoracoabdominal NRP [TA-NRP] and abdominal NRP [A-NRP]). Seven transplant centers used NRP, allowing for liver allografts to be transplanted at 17 centers; 10 centers imported livers recovered via NRP from other centers. Exposures cDCD livers were recovered by either NRP or SRR. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was ischemic cholangiopathy (IC). Secondary end points included primary nonfunction (PNF), early allograft dysfunction (EAD), biliary anastomotic strictures, posttransplant length of stay (LOS), and patient and graft survival. Results A total of 242 cDCD livers were included in this study: 136 recovered by SRR and 106 recovered by NRP (TA-NRP, 79 and A-NRP, 27). Median (IQR) NRP and SRR donor age was 30.5 (22-44) years and 36 (27-49) years, respectively. Median (IQR) posttransplant LOS was significantly shorter in the NRP cohort (7 [5-11] days vs 10 [7-16] days; P &amp;lt; .001). PNF occurred only in the SRR allografts group (n = 2). EAD was more common in the SRR cohort (123 of 136 [56.1%] vs 77 of 106 [36.4%]; P = .007). Biliary anastomotic strictures were increased 2.8-fold in SRR recipients (7 of 105 [6.7%] vs 30 of 134 [22.4%]; P = .001). Only SRR recipients had IC (0 vs 12 of 133 [9.0%]; P = .002); IC-free survival by Kaplan-Meier was significantly improved in NRP recipients. Patient and graft survival were comparable between cohorts. Conclusion and Relevance There was comparable patient and graft survival in liver transplant recipients of cDCD donors recovered by NRP vs SRR, with reduced rates of IC, biliary complications, and EAD in NRP recipients. The feasibility of A-NRP and TA-NRP implementation across multiple US transplant centers supports increasing adoption of NRP to improve organ use, access to transplant, and risk of wait-list mortality.

HCC recurrence following liver transplantation (LT) is highly morbid and occurs despite strict patient selection criteria. Individualized prediction of post-LT HCC recurrence risk remains an important need. Clinico-radiologic and pathologic data of 4981 patients with HCC undergoing LT from the US Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium (UMHTC) were analyzed to develop a REcurrent Liver cAncer Prediction ScorE (RELAPSE). Multivariable Fine and Gray competing risk analysis and machine learning algorithms (Random Survival Forest and Classification and Regression Tree models) identified variables to model HCC recurrence. RELAPSE was externally validated in 1160 HCC LT recipients from the European Hepatocellular Cancer Liver Transplant study group. Of 4981 UMHTC patients with HCC undergoing LT, 71.9% were within Milan criteria, 16.1% were initially beyond Milan criteria with 9.4% downstaged before LT, and 12.0% had incidental HCC on explant pathology. Overall and recurrence-free survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 89.7%, 78.6%, and 69.8% and 86.8%, 74.9%, and 66.7%, respectively, with a 5-year incidence of HCC recurrence of 12.5% (median 16 months) and non-HCC mortality of 20.8%. A multivariable model identified maximum alpha-fetoprotein (HR = 1.35 per-log SD, 95% CI,1.22–1.50, p < 0.001), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (HR = 1.16 per-log SD, 95% CI,1.04–1.28, p < 0.006), pathologic maximum tumor diameter (HR = 1.53 per-log SD, 95% CI, 1.35–1.73, p < 0.001), microvascular (HR = 2.37, 95%–CI, 1.87–2.99, p < 0.001) and macrovascular (HR = 3.38, 95% CI, 2.41–4.75, p < 0.001) invasion, and tumor differentiation (moderate HR = 1.75, 95% CI, 1.29–2.37, p < 0.001; poor HR = 2.62, 95% CI, 1.54–3.32, p < 0.001) as independent variables predicting post-LT HCC recurrence (C-statistic = 0.78). Machine learning algorithms incorporating additional covariates improved prediction of recurrence (Random Survival Forest C-statistic = 0.81). Despite significant differences in European Hepatocellular Cancer Liver Transplant recipient radiologic, treatment, and pathologic characteristics, external validation of RELAPSE demonstrated consistent 2- and 5-year recurrence risk discrimination (AUCs 0.77 and 0.75, respectively). We developed and externally validated a RELAPSE score that accurately discriminates post-LT HCC recurrence risk and may allow for individualized post-LT surveillance, immunosuppression modification, and selection of high-risk patients for adjuvant therapies.

NAFLD will soon be the most common indication for liver transplantation (LT). In NAFLD, HCC may occur at earlier stages of fibrosis and present with more advanced tumor stage, raising concern for aggressive disease. Thus, adult LT recipients with HCC from 20 US centers transplanted between 2002 and 2013 were analyzed to determine whether NAFLD impacts recurrence-free post-LT survival. Five hundred and thirty-eight (10.8%) of 4981 total patients had NAFLD. Patients with NAFLD were significantly older (63 vs. 58, p<0.001), had higher body mass index (30.5 vs. 27.4, p<0.001), and were more likely to have diabetes (57.3% vs. 28.8%, p<0.001). Patients with NAFLD were less likely to receive pre-LT locoregional therapy (63.6% vs. 72.9%, p<0.001), had higher median lab MELD (15 vs. 13, p<0.001) and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (3.8 vs. 2.9, p<0.001), and were more likely to have their maximum pre-LT alpha fetoprotein at time of LT (44.1% vs. 36.1%, p<0.001). NAFLD patients were more likely to have an incidental HCC on explant (19.4% vs. 10.4%, p<0.001); however, explant characteristics including tumor differentiation and vascular invasion were not different between groups. Comparing NAFLD and non-NAFLD patients, the 1, 3, and 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence (3.1%, 9.1%, 11.5% vs. 4.9%, 10.1%, 12.6%, p=0.36) and recurrence-free survival rates (87%, 76%, and 67% vs. 87%, 75%, and 67%, p=0.97) were not different. In competing risks analysis, NAFLD did not significantly impact recurrence in univariable (HR: 0.88, p=0.36) nor in adjusted analysis (HR: 0.91, p=0.49). With NAFLD among the most common causes of HCC and poised to become the leading indication for LT, a better understanding of disease-specific models to predict recurrence is needed. In this NAFLD cohort, incidental HCCs were common, raising concerns about early detection. However, despite less locoregional therapy and high neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, explant tumor characteristics and post-transplant recurrence-free survival were not different compared to non-NAFLD patients.

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is growing in the United States, especially among the elderly. Older patients are increasingly receiving transplants as a result of HCC, but the impact of advancing age on long‐term posttransplant outcomes is not clear. To study this, we used data from the US Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium of 4980 patients. We divided the patients into 4 groups by age at transplantation: 18 to 64 years (n = 4001), 65 to 69 years (n = 683), 70 to 74 years (n = 252), and ≥75 years (n = 44). There were no differences in HCC tumor stage, type of bridging locoregional therapy, or explant residual tumor between the groups. Older age was confirmed to be an independent and significant predictor of overall survival even after adjusting for demographic, etiologic, and cancer‐related factors on multivariable analysis. A dose‐response effect of age on survival was observed, with every 5‐year increase in age older than 50 years resulting in an absolute increase of 8.3% in the mortality rate. Competing risk analysis revealed that older patients experienced higher rates of non–HCC‐related mortality (P = 0.004), and not HCC‐related death (P = 0.24). To delineate the precise cause of death, we further analyzed a single‐center cohort of patients who received a transplant as a result of HCC (n = 302). Patients older than 65 years had a higher incidence of de novo cancer (18.1% versus 7.6%; P = 0.006) after transplantation and higher overall cancer‐related mortality (14.3% versus 6.6%; P = 0.03). Even carefully selected elderly patients with HCC have significantly worse posttransplant survival rates, which are mostly driven by non–HCC‐related causes. Minimizing immunosuppression and closer surveillance for de novo cancers can potentially improve the outcomes in elderly patients who received a transplant as a result of HCC.