Citations

Background : Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a major cause of cancer-related mortality. Optimal treatment decisions are challenging, and existing treatment allocation frameworks may not fully reflect the evolving therapeutic landscape or contemporary clinical practices in North America. Methods : Using a modified Delphi process, a multidisciplinary panel of 20 North American experts in hepatology, medical oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology developed a consensus-based treatment framework for HCC, termed the BEACON-HCC system. The framework was informed by current evidence and expert opinion through iterative discussion and voting. In a pilot study using 29 real-world patient cases, we assessed concordance between external expert recommendations and BEACON-HCC recommendations and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) 2025 treatment recommendations. Results : The BEACON-HCC treatment allocation framework diverges from prior frameworks by incorporating nuanced clinical features such as degree of intrahepatic tumor burden and vascular invasion, and adverse tumor prognostic markers, to align treatment allocation with tumor biology and therapeutic potential. Key innovations include the incorporation of emerging modalities such as external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), transarterial radioembolization (TARE), and systemic-locoregional combination therapies. In the pilot exercise, expert treatment decisions showed 96.6% concordance with BEACON-HCC recommendations and 72.4% concordance with BCLC recommendations. Conclusions : BEACON-HCC is a consensus-based framework for treatment allocation that incorporates the expanding range of therapeutic options available to patients in the North American HCC population. Expert treatment decisions showed a high concordance with the BEACON-HCC system; further validation using empiric clinical data is planned through the HCC-Live Consortium.

Background and Aims: Liver transplantation has evolved from a treatment restricted to patients with end-stage liver disease to a therapeutic option for selected patients with primary and metastatic liver malignancies. This review explores the rapidly expanding field of transplant oncology, highlighting its role in hepatocellular carcinoma, colorectal liver metastasis, neuroendocrine liver metastasis, and intrahepatic and perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Emphasis is placed on strategies to broaden eligibility, optimize donor organ use, and improve oncologic outcomes. Approach and Results: We synthesized current evidence from clinical series, registries, and experimental protocols to evaluate patient selection criteria, outcomes, and peri-transplant management. Key topics include downstaging approaches to meet transplant criteria, such as locoregional therapies and systemic regimens, and their prognostic implications. Advances in donor utilization have been analyzed for their capacity to expand the graft pool. In addition, the review addresses the integration of oncologic principles into immunosuppression regimens, balancing graft protection with cancer control. Collectively, the reported studies demonstrate improved survival and reduced recurrence when stringent selection and multimodal therapy were applied. Conclusions: Transplant oncology reshapes the therapeutic landscape of liver malignancies, with growing evidence supporting liver transplantation in carefully selected patients beyond traditional indications. Optimized downstaging, innovative donor strategies, and tailored immunosuppression are pivotal for safe expansion. Continued collaboration between the transplant and oncology disciplines, along with prospective trials, is essential to further define standardized protocols and solidify transplantation as a cornerstone of multidisciplinary cancer care.

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

Objective: To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes of patients post–living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) within and outside standard transplantation selection criteria and the added value of the incorporation of the New York-California (NYCA) score. Background: LDLT offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplantation waitlist, reduce waitlist mortality, and expand selection criteria for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: Primary adult LDLT recipients between October 1999 and August 2019 were identified from a multicenter cohort of 12 North American centers. Posttransplantation and recurrence-free survival were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Three hundred sixty LDLTs were identified. Patients within Milan criteria (MC) at transplantation had a 1, 5, and 10-year posttransplantation survival of 90.9%, 78.5%, and 64.1% versus outside MC 90.4%, 68.6%, and 57.7% (P = 0.20), respectively. For patients within the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria, respective posttransplantation survival was 90.6%, 77.8%, and 65.0%, versus outside UCSF 92.1%, 63.8%, and 45.8% (P = 0.08). Fifty-three (83%) patients classified as outside MC at transplantation would have been classified as either low or acceptable risk with the NYCA score. These patients had a 5-year overall survival of 72.2%. Similarly, 28(80%) patients classified as outside UCSF at transplantation would have been classified as a low or acceptable risk with a 5-year overall survival of 65.3%. Conclusions: Long-term survival is excellent for patients with HCC undergoing LDLT within and outside selection criteria, exceeding the minimum recommended 5-year rate of 60% proposed by consensus guidelines. The NYCA categorization offers insight into identifying a substantial proportion of patients with HCC outside the MC and the UCSF criteria who still achieve similar post-LDLT outcomes as patients within the criteria.

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.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation (LT) is an effective strategy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). To qualify for standardized LT model for end-stage liver disease exception points, the United Network for Organ Sharing National Liver Review Board (NLRB) requires that the presenting and final HCC tumor burden be within the University of California San Francisco criteria, which were recently expanded (within expanded UCSF [W-eUCSF]). Current NLRB criteria may be too restrictive because it has been shown previously that the initial burden does not predict LT failure when tumors downstage to UCSF. This study aims to assess LT outcomes for HCC initially presenting beyond expanded UCSF (B-eUCSF) criteria in a large multicenter collaboration. STUDY DESIGN: Comparisons of B-eUCSF and W-eUCSF candidates undergoing LT at seven academic institutions between 2001 and 2017 were made from a multi-institutional database. Survival outcomes were compared by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 1,846 LT recipients with HCC, 86 (5%) met B-eUCSF criteria at initial presentation, with the remainder meeting W-eUCSF criteria. Despite differences in tumor burden, B-eUCSF candidates achieved comparable 1-, 5- and 10-year overall (89%, 70%, and 55% vs 91%, 74%, and 60%, respectively; p = 0.2) and disease-free (82%, 60%, and 53% vs 89%, 71%, and 59%, respectively; p = 0.07) survival to patients meeting W-eUCSF criteria after LT. Despite increased tumor recurrence in B-eUCSF vs W-eUCSF patients (24% vs 10%, p = 0.0002), post-recurrence survival was similar in both groups (p = 0.69). CONCLUSION: Transplantation for patients initially presenting with HCC B-eUSCF criteria offers a survival advantage similar to those with tumors meeting W-eUCSF criteria at presentation. The current NLRB policy is too stringent, and considerations to expand criteria should be discussed.

De novo malignancies (DNMs) following liver transplantation (LT) have been reported as 1 of the major causes of late mortality, being the most common cause of death in the second decade after LT. The overall incidence of DNMs is reported to be in the range of 3.1% to 14.4%, and the incidence is 2- to 3-fold higher in transplant recipients than in age- and sex-matched healthy controls. Long-term immunosuppressive therapy, which is the key in maintaining host tolerance and achieving good long-term outcomes, is known to contribute to a higher risk of DNMs. However, the incidence and type of DNM also depends on different risk factors, including patient demographics, cause of the underlying chronic liver disease, behavior (smoking and alcohol abuse), and pre-existing premalignant conditions. The estimated standardized incidence ratio for different DNMs is also variable. The International Liver Transplantation Society–Spanish Society of Liver Transplantation Consensus Conference working group on DNM has summarized and discussed the current available literature on epidemiology, risk factors, management, and survival after DNMs. Recommendations for screening and surveillance for specific tumors, as well as immunosuppression and cancer-specific management in patients with DNM, are summarized.

Objective: The aim of the study was to determine the rate, predictors, and impact of complete pathologic response (cPR) to pretransplant locoregional therapy (LRT) in a large, multicenter cohort of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT). Background: LRT is used to mitigate waitlist dropout for patients with HCC awaiting LT. Degree of tumor necrosis found on explant has been associated with recurrence and overall survival, but has not been evaluated in a large, multicenter study. Methods: Comparisons were made among patients receiving pre-LT LRT with (n = 802) and without (n = 2637) cPR from the United States Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium (UMHTC), and multivariable predictors of cPR were identified using logistic regression. Results: Of 3439 patients, 802 (23%) had cPR on explant. Compared with patients without cPR, cPR patients were younger; had lower Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, AFP levels, and neutrophil–lymphocyte ratios (NLR); were more likely to have tumors within Milan criteria and fewer LRT treatments; and had significantly lower 1-, 3-, and 5-year incidence of post-LT recurrence (1.3%, 3.5%, and 5.2% vs 6.2%, 13.5%, and 16.4%; P < 0.001) and superior overall survival (92%, 84%, and 75% vs 90%, 78%, and 68%; P < 0.001). Multivariable predictors of cPR included age, sex, liver disease diagnosis, MELD, AFP, NLR, radiographic Milan status, and number of LRT treatments (C-statistic 0.67). Conclusions: For LT recipients with HCC receiving pretransplant LRT, achieving cPR portends significantly lower posttransplant recurrence and superior survival. Factors predicting cPR are identified, which may help prioritize patients and guide LRT strategies to optimize posttransplant cancer outcomes.

Abstract Background and Aims: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most common primary hepatic malignancy. Based on its anatomical location, CCA can be divided into intrahepatic (iCCA) or extrahepatic (eCCA), with differences in etiology, pathogenesis and clinical management. Few studies have focused on the molecular profiling of eCCA as a single entity, even though it accounts for the most prevalent subtype. Thus, integrative genomic analysis of eCCA would provide critical understanding for the biological traits of this tumor. Methods: 189 FFPE primary eCCA treated by resection were collected at seven international centers from 1995 to 2015. Median survival of the cohort was of 48.5mo. Whole gene-expression profiles were submitted to unsupervised clustering by NMF consensus. Clusters were characterized by Gene Set Enrichment Analysis and Ingenuity Pathway Analysis. Activation of signaling pathways (mTOR/pRPS6 and HER2) was assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Molecular features were correlated with clinico-pathological data. Screening of most prevalent somatic mutations and copy number aberrations is ongoing. Results: We have identified four distinct molecular subtypes of eCCA (cophenetic coefficient=0.995). Tumors classified within the metabolic class (18.7%) were enriched by gene signatures defining bile and fatty acid metabolism (p&lt;0.001) and presented overexpression of classic hepatocyte markers, with HNF4A as the major activated upstream transcription factor (p&lt;0.001). The proliferation class (22.5%) was associated with papillary histology (p=0.004) and presented enrichment of MYC (p&lt;0.001), mTOR (p=0.018) and HER2 (p=0.024) signaling. Subclass mapping identified similarity with the iCCA proliferation subclass (p&lt;0.001). The mesenchymal class (47.3%) was associated with signatures defining epithelial-mesenchymal transition (p&lt;0.001) as well as stromal activation (p&lt;0.001), which was in accordance with TGFB1 as the major activated upstream regulator (p&lt;0.001) and the presence of higher desmoplasia at pathological analysis (p=0.046). Moreover, mesenchymal tumors were significantly associated with poor prognosis in terms of OS (33.2 vs 55.5mo, HR=2.02, p=0.022). Finally, tumors classified as immune class (11.5%) presented increased tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (p=0.001) and were characterized by enrichment of IFNγ signaling (p&lt;0.001). Conclusions: Transcriptome-based subtyping of eCCA identifies four distinct molecular classes (metabolic, proliferation, mesenchymal and immune) that correlate with clinical-pathological characteristics. These findings enhance the opportunities for therapeutic development in this tumor with dismal prognosis and without approved molecular treatments. Citation Format: Robert Montal, Wei Qiang Leow, Carla Montironi, Laia Bassaganyas, Agrin Moeini, Daniela Sia, Roser Pinyol, Laia Cabellos, Judit Peix, Miho Maeda, Carlos Villacorta, Parissa Tabrizian, Christine Sempoux, Beatriz Minguez, Tim Pawlik, Ismail Labgaa, Lewis Roberts, Manel Sole, Maria Isabel Fiel, Swan Thung, Sasan Roayaie, Augusto Villanueva, Myron Schwartz, Josep Maria Llovet. Integrative molecular classification of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4618.