Citations

Abstract Background and Aims Following liver resection (LR) for HCC, the likelihood of survival is dynamic, in that multiple recurrences and/or metastases are possible, each having variable impacts on outcomes. We sought to evaluate the natural progression, pattern, and timing of various disease states after LR for HCC using multistate modeling and to create a practical calculator to provide prognostic information for patients and clinicians. Approach and Results Adult patients undergoing LR for HCC between January 2000 and December 2018 were retrospectively identified at a single center. Multistate analysis modeled post‐LR tumor progression by describing transitions between distinct disease states. In this model, the states included surgery, intrahepatic recurrence (first, second, third, fourth, fifth), distant metastasis with or without intrahepatic recurrence, and death. Of the 486 patients included, 169 (34.8%) remained recurrence‐free, 205 (42.2%) developed intrahepatic recurrence, 80 (16.5%) developed distant metastasis, and 32 (7%) died. For an average patient having undergone LR, there was a 33.1% chance of remaining disease‐free, a 31.0% chance of at least one intrahepatic recurrence, a 16.3% chance of distant metastasis, and a 19.8% chance of death within the first 60 months post‐LR. The transition probability from surgery to first intrahepatic recurrence, without a subsequent state transition, increased from 3% (3 months) to 17.4% (30 months) and 17.2% (60 months). Factors that could modify these probabilities included tumor size, satellite lesions, and microvascular invasion. The online multistate model calculator can be found on https://multistatehcc.shinyapps.io/home/. Conclusions In contrast to standard single time‐to‐event estimates, multistate modeling provides more realistic prognostication of outcomes after LR for HCC by taking into account many postoperative disease states and transitions between them. Our multistate modeling calculator can provide meaningful data to guide the management of patients undergoing postoperative surveillance and therapy.

Abstract Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) represents the second‐most common primary liver malignancy after HCC and has risen in incidence globally in the past decades. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) comprises 20% of all CCAs, with the rest being extrahepatic (including perihilar [pCCA] and distal CCA). Though long representing an absolute contraindication for liver transplantation (LT), recent analyses of outcomes of LT for iCCA have suggested that iCCA may be a potentially feasible option for highly selected patients. This has been motivated both by successes noted in outcomes of LT for other malignancies, such as HCC and pCCA, and by several retrospective reviews demonstrating favorable results with LT for a selected group of iCCA patients with small lesions. LT for iCCA is primarily relevant within two clinical scenarios. The first includes patients with very early disease (single tumor, ≤2 cm) with cirrhosis and are not candidates for liver resection (LR). The second scenario is patients with locally advanced iCCA, but where the extent of LR would be too extensive to be feasible. Preliminary single‐center reports have described LT in a selected group of patients with locally advanced tumors who have responded to neoadjuvant therapy and have a period of disease stability. Currently, there are three prospective trials underway that will help clarify the role of LT in iCCA. This review seeks to explore the available studies involving LT for iCCA, the challenges of ongoing trials, and opportunities for the future.

AbstractIntroductionAlthough surgical resection is necessary, it is not sufficient for long‐term survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We sought to evaluate survival after up‐front surgery (UFS) in anatomically resectable PDAC in the context of three critical factors: (A) margin status; (B) CA19‐9; and (C) receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy.MethodsThe National Cancer Data Base (2010–2015) was reviewed for clinically resectable (stage 0/I/II) PDAC patients. Surgical margins, pre‐operative CA19‐9, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy were evaluated. Patient overall survival was stratified based on these factors and their respective combinations. Outcomes after UFS were compared to equivalently staged patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy on an intention‐to‐treat (ITT) basis.ResultsTwelve thousand and eighty‐nine patients were included (n = 9197 UFS, n = 2892 ITT neoadjuvant). In the UFS cohort, only 20.4% had all three factors (median OS = 31.2 months). Nearly 1/3rd (32.7%) of UFS patients had none or only one factor with concomitant worst survival (median OS = 14.7 months). Survival after UFS decreased with each failing factor (two factors: 23 months, one factor: 15.5 months, no factors: 7.9 months) and this persisted after adjustment. Overall survival was superior in the ITT‐neoadjuvant cohort (27.9 vs. 22 months) to UFS.ConclusionDespite the perceived benefit of UFS, only 1‐in‐5 UFS patients actually realize maximal survival when known factors highly associated with outcomes are assessed. Patients are proportionally more likely to do worst, rather than best after UFS treatment. Similarly staged patients undergoing ITT‐neoadjuvant therapy achieve survival superior to the majority of UFS patients. Patients and providers should be aware of the false perception of ‘optimal’ survival benefit with UFS in anatomically resectable PDAC.

Abstract Background Resection with curative intent has been shown to prolong survival of patients with locoregional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, up to 33 per cent of patients are deemed unresectable at exploratory laparotomy owing to unanticipated locally advanced or metastatic disease. In these patients, prophylactic double bypass (PDB) procedures have been considered the standard of care. The aim of this study was to compare PDB with exploratory laparotomy alone in terms of impact on postoperative course, chemotherapy and overall survival. Methods This retrospective observational cohort study (2004–2013) was conducted using a prospective institutional database. Patients with histologically confirmed, unresectable PDAC were included. Relationships between PDB procedures, exploratory laparotomy alone, postoperative chemotherapy and best supportive care were investigated by means of Cox regression. Overall survival was compared using Kaplan–Meier estimations and log rank test. Results Of 503 patients with PDAC scheduled for resection with curative intent, 104 were deemed unresectable at laparotomy (resection rate 79·3 per cent). Seventy-four patients underwent PDB procedures and 30 had exploratory laparotomy alone. PDB and exploratory laparotomy were similar in terms of perioperative mortality, initiation of chemotherapy and overall survival. Compared with best supportive care, postoperative chemotherapy prolonged survival (8·0 versus 14·4 months in locally advanced PDAC, P = 0·007; 2·3 versus 8·0 months in metastatic PDAC, P < 0·001). Patients undergoing chemotherapy following exploratory laparotomy alone had longer median overall survival than patients undergoing chemotherapy following PDB procedures (16·3 versus 10·3 months; P = 0·040). Conclusion Patients with pancreatic cancer deemed unresectable at laparotomy may derive survival benefit from subsequent chemotherapy as opposed to supportive care alone. At laparotomy, proceeding with a bypass procedure for prophylactic symptom control may be prognostically unfavourable.

Abstract Background Locoregional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may progress rapidly and/or disseminate despite having an early stage at diagnostic imaging. A prolonged interval from imaging to resection might represent a risk factor for encountering tumour progression at laparotomy. The aim of this study was to determine the therapeutic window for timely surgical intervention. Methods This observational cohort study included patients with histologically confirmed PDAC scheduled for resection with curative intent from 2008 to 2014. The impact of imaging-to-resection/reassessment (IR) interval, vascular involvement and tumour size on local tumour progression or presence of metastases at reimaging or laparotomy was evaluated using univariable and multivariable regression. Risk estimates were approximated using hazard ratios (HRs). Results Median IR interval was 42 days. Of 349 patients scheduled for resection, 82 had unresectable disease (resectability rate 76·5 per cent). The unresectability rate was zero when the IR interval was 22 days or shorter, and was lower for an IR interval of 32 days or less compared with longer waiting times (13 versus 26·2 per cent; HR 0·42, P = 0·021). It was also lower for tumours smaller than 30 mm than for larger tumours (13·9 versus 32·5 per cent; HR 0·34, P < 0·001). Tumours with no or minor vascular involvement showed decreased rates of unresectable disease (20·6 per cent versus 38 per cent when there was major or combined vascular involvement; HR 0·43, P = 0·007). However, this failed to reach statistical significance on multivariable analysis (P = 0·411), in contrast to IR interval (P = 0·028) and tumour size (P < 0·001). Conclusion Operation within 32 days of diagnostic imaging reduced the risk of tumour progression to unresectable disease by half compared with a longer waiting time. The results of this study highlight the importance of efficient clinical PDAC management.

The cholangiopathies are a group of liver diseases resulting from different etiologies but with the cholangiocyte as the primary target. As a group, the cholangiopathies result in significant morbidity and mortality and represent one of the main indications for liver transplant in both children and adults. Contributing to this situation is the absence of a thorough understanding of their pathogenesis and a lack of adequate diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. MicroRNAs are small non-coding RNAs that modify gene expression post-transcriptionally. They have been implicated in the pathogenesis of many diseases, including the cholangiopathies. Thus, in this review we provide an overview of the literature on miRNAs in the cholangiopathies and discuss future research directions.