Abdelhakeem, Ahmed

Liver transplantation has emerged as a curative treatment option for selected patients with unresectable hepatic malignancies beyond hepatocellular carcinoma, marking a paradigm shift in transplant oncology. For colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM), prospective trials have demonstrated that highly selected patients achieve 5-year OS rates of 60–83%, with the Oslo score identifying optimal candidates for transplantation. Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) has been successfully treated using strict patient selection criteria combined with neoadjuvant therapy, achieving 5-year OS rates of 50–68%, though emerging data suggests chemotherapy-based approaches may be preferable to radiation in selected cases. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), previously considered a contraindication to transplantation, can now achieve excellent long-term outcomes (79.5% 5-year OS) in patients demonstrating sustained response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radioembolization, with metabolic tumor volume < 70 cm3 serving as an objective prognostic marker. Across these three emerging indications, successful outcomes depend on strict patient selection based on tumor biology, intensive multimodal neoadjuvant therapy, multidisciplinary evaluation in high-volume centers, and careful observation during treatment to exclude patients with aggressive disease. This evolution in transplant practice offers curative intent therapy to patients that previously only had palliative therapeutic options, fundamentally transforming hepatobiliary and oncologic surgery.

PURPOSE To compare overall survival (OS) in patients with baseline metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) with and without ovarian metastasis (OM). Furthermore, within the group that had ovarian metastases, we aimed to assess whether there was a survival benefit (SB) with palliative oophorectomy (PO). PATIENTS AND METHODS This is a single-institution retrospective analysis of the clinicopathological features of women diagnosed with metastatic GA with a comparison of outcomes based on PO status. We identified 240 women with baseline metastatic GAs who were treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center between February 2003 and September 2022. Among these women, we categorized a subgroup of 102 women who had OM from their primary GA. Patients were analyzed whether they underwent PO. RESULTS Patients who developed OM were most often non-Caucasian, had peritoneal involvement, and had tumors that were both human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative and PD-L1–negative, with signet ring cell features and diffuse histological type. Among patients with ovarian metastases, those who had PO had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group = 0, more comprehensive molecular and immunohistochemical profiling, lower percentage of family history of gastroesophageal malignancies, and lower interval between diagnosis of the GA primary and the OM. PO was associated with significantly improved OS in this subgroup (hazard ratio, 0.5 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.81]; P = .005). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the largest multiethnic population study assessing SB of PO in patients with GA with OM. Additionally, it is the largest study analyzing survival in this population according to the patient's multiethnic characteristics and metastasis timing and growth patterns. PO presents as a therapeutic option for women with GAs with OM if the patient is clinically suitable for surgical resection.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a prevalent liver cancer with poor prognosis, often linked to hepatitis B (HBV) and C (HCV) infections. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of immunotherapy in HCC, particularly in cases arising from viral hepatitis. Methods: In adherence to PRISMA Statement 2020 guidelines, the immunotherapeutic outcomes comprised objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Data were analyzed from randomized controlled trials up to April 2024 using the fixed-effects models in R (V.4.3.3.) and RevMan (Cochrane). Results: This study included 9 trials with 5316 patients. The ORR was slightly higher in the viral group at 27.93% compared to 24.07% in the non-viral group, though this difference was not significant (p = 0.15). Viral HCC patients exhibited a median PFS of 7.3 months (IQR: 6.2–8.4) compared to 5.8 months (IQR: 5.48–6.13) in non-viral patients, a significant improvement (p = 0.005). Similarly, median OS was longer in the viral group at 16.8 months (IQR: 12.99–20.61) versus 15.2 months (IQR: 13.25–17.15) for non-viral HCC, which was also significant (p < 0.0001). The median OS for viral HCC was 16.8 months (IQR: 14.11–19.49 months), with HBV patients experiencing slightly higher survival at 17.15 months (IQR: 14.3–20 months) compared to 16.8 months (IQR: 12.99–20.61 months) for HCV patients; this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.89). Conclusions: Immunotherapy shows potential in treating HCC, with significantly better outcomes in viral HCC, particularly HBV-associated cases. The heterogeneity highlights the need for personalized treatment approaches based on the viral background of HCC patients. Further research should aim to optimize these therapies to improve survival rates.

We present the case of an elderly man with a history of diastolic congestive heart failure, severe aortic stenosis and atrial fibrillation, who presented with fatigue, weakness, coffee ground emesis and black tarry stool. Haemoglobin was 68 g/L. Lactate dehydrogenase was elevated at 1038. Evaluation by cardiology and gastroenterology specialists revealed reflux oesophagitis and a mild hiatal hernia on oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, normal colonoscopy and small bowel series without obstruction. Capsule endoscopy identified angiodysplasia in the small intestine. The patient was diagnosed with Heyde’s syndrome based on the triad of severe aortic stenosis, gastrointestinal bleeding from angiodysplasia and acquired von Willebrand syndrome. The patient underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement, resulting in the resolution of symptoms. Heyde’s syndrome represents a challenging clinical entity requiring a multidisciplinary approach for accurate diagnosis and management. Early recognition, prompt intervention and interdisciplinary collaboration are crucial in optimising patient outcomes.