-
Revista Do Colegio Brasileiro de... 2020primary liver sarcoma is a rare type of tumor, more common in children. Among adults, it represents a spectrum of neoplasms with reserved prognosis. There is no...
INTRODUCTION
primary liver sarcoma is a rare type of tumor, more common in children. Among adults, it represents a spectrum of neoplasms with reserved prognosis. There is no consensus on the treatment of choice of these lesions, justifying a systematic review of the literature on treatment options, prognostic factors, and survival.
MATERIAL/METHODS
a systematic review of articles published in Pubmed, Medline, LiLacs e SciElo, from 1966 to March/2019, presenting the keywords: primary-liver-sarcoma and primary-hepatic-sarcoma was undertaken. Studies including patients older than 18 years, and published in English, Portuguese and Spanish were included. Case reports, metastatic tumors and multiple oncologic diagnosis were excluded. The initial search listed 1,318 articles. 1,206 did not meet the inclusion criteria. After reviewing 112 eligible articles, 15 were selected (14 case series and 1 retrospective-cohort).
RESULTS
proposed treatment modalities for primary liver sarcoma included surgery and/or chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy or liver transplantation. The most common histological types were angiosarcoma (32%), leiomyosarcoma (29%), epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (15%) and embryonal sarcoma (7%). Histology, degree of differentiation and R0 resection were mentioned positive prognostic factors. Median survival ranged from two to 23 months. Five-year survival rate varied from 0% to 64%, on average 21%.
CONCLUSION
surgical resection (R0 resection) is the main treatment for primary liver sarcomas. Development of effective systemic therapies are required to improve prognosis of patients harboring this type of tumor.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Sarcoma
PubMed: 33263653
DOI: 10.1590/0100-6991e-20202647 -
EBioMedicine Jul 2023Various studies have reported cell-free RNAs (cfRNAs) as noninvasive biomarkers for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, they have not been independently...
BACKGROUND
Various studies have reported cell-free RNAs (cfRNAs) as noninvasive biomarkers for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, they have not been independently validated, and some results are contradictory. We provided a comprehensive evaluation of various types of cfRNA biomarkers and a full mining of the biomarker potential of new features of cfRNA.
METHODS
We first systematically reviewed reported cfRNA biomarkers and calculated dysregulated post-transcriptional events and cfRNA fragments. In 3 independent multicentre cohorts, we further selected 6 cfRNAs using RT-qPCR, built a panel called HCCMDP with AFP using machine learning, and internally and externally validated HCCMDP's performance.
FINDINGS
We identified 23 cfRNA biomarker candidates from a systematic review and analysis of 5 cfRNA-seq datasets. Notably, we defined the cfRNA domain to describe cfRNA fragments systematically. In the verification cohort (n = 183), cfRNA fragments were more likely to be verified, while circRNA and chimeric RNA candidates were neither abundant nor stable as qPCR-based biomarkers. In the algorithm development cohort (n = 287), we build and test the panel HCCMDP with 6 cfRNA markers and AFP. In the independent validation cohort (n = 171), HCCMDP can distinguish HCC patients from control groups (all: AUC = 0.925; CHB: AUC = 0.909; LC: AUC = 0.916), and performs well in distinguishing early-stage HCC patients (all: AUC = 0.936; CHB: AUC = 0.917; LC: AUC = 0.928).
INTERPRETATION
This study comprehensively evaluated full-spectrum cfRNA biomarker types for HCC detection, highlighted the cfRNA fragment as a promising biomarker type in HCC detection, and provided a panel HCCMDP.
FUNDING
National Natural Science Foundation of China, and The National Key Basic Research Program (973 program).
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms; alpha-Fetoproteins; Cell-Free Nucleic Acids; Biomarkers, Tumor; ROC Curve; MicroRNAs
PubMed: 37315449
DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2023.104645 -
Liver Cancer Jan 2020Hepatocholangiocarcinoma (HCC-CC) is a rare liver malignancy that contains features of both hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (MFCCC).... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hepatocholangiocarcinoma (HCC-CC) is a rare liver malignancy that contains features of both hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (MFCCC). Three classification systems for HCC-CC are described in literature and the majority of these tumors appear to be of the transitional type. The aim of this study is to evaluate the characteristics of transitional HCC-CC and to compare long-term oncological outcomes with HCC and MFCCC in surgically treated patients.
SUMMARY
A systematic literature search was conducted to identify relevant studies analyzing demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with transitional HCC-CC and evaluating treatments and outcomes associated with this neoplasm. Only comparative, retrospective analyses were included. A total of 14 studies, involving 13,613 patients with primary liver malignancy, were analyzed. All patients underwent surgery, either liver resection or transplantation. Four hundred and thirty-seven patients were affected by transitional HCC-CC (3.2%). For further analysis, patients with transitional HCC-CC were divided into 2 groups, the resection group and the transplantation group. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of these patients were analyzed and compared to long-term oncological outcomes of patients with HCC and/or MFCCC, who underwent the same treatment. In the resection group, DFS rate at 5-year was 15, 31.6, and 20.3% for patients with transitional HCC-CC, HCC, and MFCCC, respectively; OS rate at 5-year was 32.7, 47.5, and 30.3% for patients with transitional HCC-CC, HCC, and MFCCC, respectively. In the transplantation group, DFS rate at 5-year was 40.9 and 87.4% for patients with transitional HCC-CC and HCC, respectively; OS rate at 5-year was 49.4 and 80.3% for patients with transitional HCC-CC and HCC, respectively.
KEY MESSAGES
Transitional HCC-CC patients have significantly worse DFS and OS rates compared to HCC patients in both the resection group and the transplantation group. However, in the resection group, both DFS and OS rates of transitional HCC-CC patients are not statistically different from those of MFCCC patients.
PubMed: 32071906
DOI: 10.1159/000503719 -
International Journal of Surgery... Sep 2023Despite retrospective studies comparing anatomical liver resection (AR) and non-anatomical liver resection (NAR), the efficacy and benefits of AR for hepatocellular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Despite retrospective studies comparing anatomical liver resection (AR) and non-anatomical liver resection (NAR), the efficacy and benefits of AR for hepatocellular carcinoma remain unclear.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The authors systemically reviewed MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library for propensity score matched cohort studies that compared AR and NAR for hepatocellular carcinoma. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes were recurrence patterns and perioperative outcomes.
RESULTS
Overall, 22 propensity score matched studies (AR, n =2,496; NAR, n =2590) were included. AR including systemic segmentectomy was superior to NAR regarding the 3-year and 5-year OS. AR showed significantly better 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year RFS than NAR, with low local and multiple intrahepatic recurrence rates. In the subgroup analyses of tumour diameter less than or equal to 5 cm and tumours with microscopic spread, the RFS in the AR group was significantly better than that in the NAR group. Patients with cirrhotic liver in the AR group showed comparable 3-year and 5-year RFS with the NAR group. Postoperative overall complications were comparable between AR and NAR.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis demonstrated that AR showed better OS and RFS with a low local and multiple intra-hepatic recurrence rate than NAR, especially in patients with tumour diameter less than or equal to 5 cm and non-cirrhotic liver.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Hepatectomy; Propensity Score; Postoperative Complications; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
PubMed: 37247010
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000503 -
Cells Oct 2023Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is a potential biomarker that could contribute to more judicious patient selection for personalised treatment. This review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is a potential biomarker that could contribute to more judicious patient selection for personalised treatment. This review and meta-analysis gives an overview of the current knowledge in the literature investigating the value of ctDNA in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases for studies published prior to the 26th of May 2023. Studies investigating the association between ctDNA and oncological outcomes in patients undergoing curative-intent local therapy for CRLM were included. Meta-analyses were performed to pool hazard ratios (HR) for the recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). A total of eleven studies were included and nine were eligible for meta-analyses. Patients with detectable ctDNA after surgery experienced a significantly higher chance of recurrence (HR 3.12, 95% CI 2.27-4.28, < 0.000010) and shorter OS (HR 5.04, 95% CI 2.53-10.04, < 0.00001) compared to patients without detectable ctDNA. A similar association for recurrence was found in patients with detectable ctDNA after the completion of adjuvant therapy (HR 6.39, 95% CI 2.13-19.17, < 0.0009). The meta-analyses revealed no association between detectable ctDNA before surgery and the RFS and OS. These meta-analyses demonstrate the strong association between detectable ctDNA after treatment and oncological outcomes in CRLM patients.
Topics: Humans; Circulating Tumor DNA; Biomarkers; Combined Modality Therapy; Liver Neoplasms; Colorectal Neoplasms
PubMed: 37947598
DOI: 10.3390/cells12212520 -
Cancer Jun 2022The 5-year overall survival rate of a patient with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer is poor at approximately 14%. Similarly, historical data on liver... (Review)
Review
The 5-year overall survival rate of a patient with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer is poor at approximately 14%. Similarly, historical data on liver transplantation (LT) in those with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) showed poor outcomes, with 5-year survival rates between 12% and 21%. More recently, limited data have shown improved outcomes in select patients with 5-year overall survival rates of approximately 60%. Despite these reported survival improvements, there is no significant improvement in disease-free survival. Given the uncertain benefit with this therapeutic approach and a renewed investigational interest, we aimed to conduct a contemporary systematic review on LT for CRLM. A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis statement. English articles reporting on data regarding LT for CRLM were identified through the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases (last search date: December 16th, 2021) by 2 researchers independently. A total of 58 studies (45 published and 13 ongoing) were included. Although early retrospective studies suggest the possibility that some carefully selected patients may benefit from LT, there is minimal prospective data on the topic and LT remains exploratory in the setting of CRLM. Additionally, several other challenges, such as the limited availability of deceased donor organs and defining appropriate selection criteria, remain when considering the implementation of LT for these patients. Further evidence from ongoing prospective trials is needed to determine if and to what extent there is a role for LT in patients with surgically unresectable CRLM.
Topics: Colorectal Neoplasms; Hepatectomy; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Liver Transplantation; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35285949
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34170 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Nov 2022Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are often diagnosed when metastatic. The liver is the main site of metastases. Unfortunately, optimal management of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are often diagnosed when metastatic. The liver is the main site of metastases. Unfortunately, optimal management of neuroendocrine liver metastases remains a topic of debate. The aim of this study was to make a systematic review of the current literature about the results of the different treatments of neuroendocrine liver metastases.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted for English language publications from 1995 to 2021. Outcomes were analyzed according to survival, disease-free survival, and in the case of systemic therapies, progression-free survival.
RESULTS
5509 patients were analyzed in the review. 67% of patients underwent surgery achieving 5 years overall survival despite only 30% percent without a recurrence. 60% of patients that had received a transplant reached 5 years survival with a low disease-free survival rate (20%). Five-year survival rate was 36.2% for patients undergoing loco-regional therapies.
CONCLUSION
Surgical resection is the best treatment when metastases are resectable, with the highest rate of survival, although liver transplantation shows good results for patients not eligible for surgery. Loco-regional therapies may be useful when surgical resection is contraindicated, or selectively used as a bridge to surgery or transplantation. Systemic therapies are indicated in patients for whom curative treatment cannot be obtained.
Topics: Humans; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Liver Neoplasms; Intestinal Neoplasms; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Liver Transplantation
PubMed: 35794053
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2022.06.009 -
BJS Open Nov 2022Many patients with bi-lobar liver tumours are not eligible for liver resection due to an insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). To reduce the risk of posthepatectomy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Many patients with bi-lobar liver tumours are not eligible for liver resection due to an insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). To reduce the risk of posthepatectomy liver failure and the primary cause of death, regenerative procedures intent to increase the FLR before surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of the available literature and outcomes on the effectiveness of simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization (PVE/HVE) versus portal vein embolization (PVE) alone.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase up to September 2022. The primary outcome was resectability and the secondary outcome was the FLR volume increase.
RESULTS
Eight studies comparing PVE/HVE with PVE and six retrospective PVE/HVE case series were included. Pooled resectability within the comparative studies was 75 per cent in the PVE group (n = 252) versus 87 per cent in the PVE/HVE group (n = 166, OR 1.92 (95% c.i., 1.13-3.25)) favouring PVE/HVE (P = 0.015). After PVE, FLR hypertrophy between 12 per cent and 48 per cent (after a median of 21-30 days) was observed, whereas growth between 36 per cent and 67 per cent was reported after PVE/HVE (after a median of 17-31 days). In the comparative studies, 90-day primary cause of death was similar between groups (2.5 per cent after PVE versus 2.2 per cent after PVE/HVE), but a higher 90-day primary cause of death was reported in single-arm PVE/HVE cohort studies (6.9 per cent, 12 of 175 patients).
CONCLUSION
Based on moderate/weak evidence, PVE/HVE seems to increase resectability of bi-lobar liver tumours with a comparable safety profile. Additionally, PVE/HVE resulted in faster and more pronounced hypertrophy compared with PVE alone.
Topics: Humans; Portal Vein; Hepatic Veins; Retrospective Studies; Liver Neoplasms; Hypertrophy
PubMed: 36437731
DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrac141 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2021Primary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma are two of the most common malignant tumours to affect the liver. The liver is second only to the...
BACKGROUND
Primary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma are two of the most common malignant tumours to affect the liver. The liver is second only to the lymph nodes as the most common site for metastatic disease. More than half of the people with metastatic liver disease will die from metastatic complications. Electrocoagulation by diathermy is a method used to destroy tumour tissue, using a high-frequency electric current generating high temperatures, applied locally with an electrode (needle, blade, or ball). The objective of this method is to destroy the tumour completely, if possible, in a single session. With the time, electrocoagulation by diathermy has been replaced by other techniques, but the evidence is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation by diathermy, administered alone or with another intervention, versus no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP, and FDA to October 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered all randomised trials that assessed beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation by diathermy, administered alone or with another intervention, versus comparators, in people with liver metastases, regardless of the location of the primary tumour.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias of the included trial using predefined risk of bias domains, and presented the review results incorporating the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included one randomised clinical trial with 306 participants (175 males; 131 females) who had undergone resection of the sigmoid colon, and who had five or more visible and palpable hepatic metastases. The diagnosis was confirmed by histological assessment (biopsy) and by carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level. The trial was conducted in Iraq. The age of participants ranged between 38 and 79 years. The participants were randomised to four different study groups. The liver metastases were biopsied and treated (only once) in three of the groups: 75 received electrocoagulation by diathermy alone, 76 received electrocoagulation plus allopurinol, 78 received electrocoagulation plus dimethyl sulphoxide. In the fourth intervention group, 77 participants functioning as controls received a vehicle solution of allopurinol 5 mL 4 x a day by mouth; the metastases were left untouched. The status of the liver and lungs was followed by ultrasound investigations, without the use of a contrast agent. Participants were followed for five years. The analyses are based on per-protocol data only analysing 223 participants. We judged the trial to be at high risk of bias. After excluding 'nonevaluable patients', the groups seemed comparable for baseline characteristics. Mortality due to disease spread at five-year follow-up was 98% in the electrocoagulation group (57/58 evaluable people); 87% in the electrocoagulation plus allopurinol group (46/53 evaluable people); 86% in the electrocoagulation plus dimethyl sulphoxide group (49/57 evaluable people); and 100% in the control group (55/55 evaluable people). We observed no difference in mortality between the electrocoagulation alone group versus the control group (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.03; 113 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We observed lower mortality in the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide group versus the control group (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; 165 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain regarding post-operative deaths between the electrocoagulation alone group versus the control group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.12; 152 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and between the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide groups versus the control group (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09 to 10.86; 231 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial authors did not report data on number of participants with other adverse events and complications, recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, and health-related quality of life. Data on failure to clear liver metastases were not provided for the control group. There was no information on funding or conflict of interest. We identified no ongoing trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence on the beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation alone or in combination with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide in people with liver metastases is insufficient, as it is based on one randomised clinical trial at low to very low certainty. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in all-cause mortality and post-operative mortality between electrocoagulation alone versus control. It is also uncertain if electrocoagulation in combination with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide may result in a slight reduction of all-cause mortality in comparison with a vehicle solution of allopurinol (control). It is very uncertain if there is a difference in post-operative mortality between the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide group versus control. Data on other adverse events and complications, failure to clear liver metastases or recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, and health-related quality of life were most lacking or insufficiently reported for analysis. Electrocoagulation by diathermy is no longer used in the described way, and this may explain the lack of further trials.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Allopurinol; Cause of Death; Colonic Neoplasms; Dimethyl Sulfoxide; Electrocoagulation; Female; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Solvents
PubMed: 33507555
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009497.pub3 -
World Journal of Surgery Nov 2021Colorectal liver metastases were historically considered a contraindication to liver transplantation, but dismal outcomes for those with metastatic colorectal cancer and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUNDS
Colorectal liver metastases were historically considered a contraindication to liver transplantation, but dismal outcomes for those with metastatic colorectal cancer and advancements in liver transplantation (LT) have led to a renewed interest in the topic. We aim to compare the current evidence for liver transplantation for non-resectable colorectal liver metastases (NRCLM) with the current standard treatment of palliative chemotherapy.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of proportions was conducted following screening of MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and CENTRAL for studies reporting liver transplantation for colorectal liver metastases. Post-operative outcomes measured included one-, three- and five-year survival, overall survival, disease-free survival and complication rate.
RESULTS
Three non-randomised studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting a total of 48 patients receiving LT for NRCLM. Survival at one-, three- and five-years was 83.3-100%, 58.3-80% and 50-80%, respectively, with no significant difference detected (p = 0.22, p = 0.48, p = 0.26). Disease-free survival was 35-56% with the most common site of recurrence being lung. Thirteen out of fourteen deaths were due to disease recurrence.
CONCLUSION
Although current evidence suggests a survival benefit conferred by LT in NRCLM compared to palliative chemotherapy, the ethical implications of organ availability and allocation demand rigorous justification. Concomitant improvements in the management of patients following liver resection and of palliative chemotherapy regimens is paramount.
Topics: Colorectal Neoplasms; Hepatectomy; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Liver Transplantation; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
PubMed: 34322717
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-021-06248-4