Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a poor long-term prognosis due to high recurrence and cirrhosis-related mortality, even after potentially curative treatments such as liver transplantation (LT), surgical resection, or ablation. This study aimed to identify factors associated with ≥10-year survival in HCC patients. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted among HCC patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2022 using the National Cancer Database. Multivariable Cox regression was used to identify predictors of overall survival, and logistic regression was used to identify predictors of ≥10-year survival. Results: Among 249,600 HCC patients, 177,585 (71.2%) died within 5 years, 8613 (3.5%) died at 5–10 years, 54,988 (22.0%) were alive with <10 years of follow-up, and 8219 (3.3%) survived ≥10 years. LT, resection, and ablation were performed in 6.6%, 9.3%, and 11% of patients, respectively. Compared with ablation as the reference group, LT [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 11.96, 95% confidence interval (CI): 11.27–13.29] and resection (aOR: 2.83, 95% CI: 2.57–3.08) increased the odds of ≥10-year survival, while non-curative treatments reduced the odds compared with ablation (aOR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.47–0.55). Cox regression results were consistent with the logistic model, confirming the association. Decision tree analysis confirmed LT as the dominant determinant of long-term survival. Black individuals were associated with lower odds of ≥10-year survival (aOR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.820–0.96) and decreased likelihood of receiving LT (aOR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.55–0.96). Conclusions: LT offers the best chance of ≥10-year survival in HCC. Ensuring equitable access is essential, especially for Black patients who have lower transplant rates and worse outcomes.
Comparative effectiveness of immunotherapy versus lenvatinib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A real-world analysis using target trial emulation
Background and Aims: Immunotherapy has emerged as an effective treatment for advanced HCC. We aimed to investigate the real-world effectiveness of immunotherapy compared to lenvatinib in HCC. Approach and Results: From the TriNetX database, we used a target trial emulation framework and identified patients with HCC who received first-line treatment with immunotherapy (atezolizumab/bevacizumab or tremelimumab/durvalumab) or lenvatinib between or between August 2018 and December 2023. OS was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression. After propensity score matching, 1203 patients were included in each group. Immunotherapy was associated with improved OS versus lenvatinib (median survival: 545 vs. 425 d; HR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.76–0.97). Regarding treatment type, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed improved survival compared to lenvatinib (n=1070 in each group; HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.77–0.99), while the point estimate favored durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus lenvatinib (HR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.59–1.12), though this difference was not statistically significant, likely due to small sample size. Regarding etiology, immunotherapy had improved OS compared to lenvatinib in viral hepatitis (n=510 in each group; HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61–0.89) and alcohol-associated liver disease (n=190 in each group; HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.49–0.87), but not in metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver diseases (n=156 in each group; HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.70–1.31). Conclusions: In this real-world analysis, immunotherapy was associated with improved OS compared to lenvatinib in advanced HCC, with consistent benefit across most subgroups. These findings support the use of immunotherapy as a first-line treatment for advanced HCC.
The Feasibility and Usability of an Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Conversational Agent in Virtual Reality for Patients with Alcohol-Associated Cirrhosis: A Multi-Methods Study
Journal of Medical Extended Reality | November 11, 2024 | Volume: 1 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 257-270
AbstractBackgroundMuscle cramps are common among persons with cirrhosis and are associated with poor health‐related quality of life (HRQOL). Treatment options are limited. We compared stretching or meditation in a randomized‐controlled trial (RCT).PatientsWe enrolled 98 patients with a history of >4 muscle cramps in the prior month from 7/22–7/23. We randomized patients 1:1 to stretching versus meditation for 35 days. Our primary outcome was the change in cramp severity measured by the visual analogue scale for cramps (VAS‐cramps, scaled 0–10). Secondary outcomes included a patient global impression of change (PGIC), change in sleep quality and global HRQOL measured using the EQ‐5D and VAS‐global HRQOL.ResultsOverall, 48% of patients had cirrhosis, 40% had diabetes, 16% the median age was 63, most were women (67%) and 81% were college educated. Both arms experienced a reduction in cramp severity—a median of 1.44 (.58–2.29) points for stretching and 1.97 (1.01–2.93) points for meditation. These changes were significant changes from baseline (p = .001 for stretching, p < .0001 for meditation) but these changes were equivalent between arms (p = .4). The PGIC was improved: 1.33 (1.02–1.65) for stretching, 1.05 (.70–1.41) for meditation, p‐difference .2. Sleep was also improved for both. HRQOL did not change according to the Eq5D; according to the VAS, HRQOL rose for meditation by 6 (.1–11.8) points but not for stretching. More patients recommended stretching than meditation (79.2% vs. 55.3%, p = .02).ConclusionIn a randomized trial, stretching and meditation both reduced cramp severity and improved sleep quality and global impression of change. While patients preferred stretching, there was no difference in effect between arms.