The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains high globally. Surgical treatment is the best treatment for improving the prognosis of patients with HCC. Neoadjuvant therapy plays a key role in preventing tumor progression and even downstaging HCC. The liver transplantation rate and resectability rate have increased for neoadjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy is effective in different stages of HCC. In this review, we summarized the definition, methods, effects, indications and contraindications of neoadjuvant therapy in HCC, which have significance for guiding treatment.

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is a standard treatment for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this review, we summarize recent updates on the use of TACE for HCC. TACE can be performed using two techniques; conventional TACE (cTACE) and drug-eluting beads using TACE (DEB-TACE). The anti-tumor effect of the two has been reported to be similar; however, DEB-TACE carries a higher risk of hepatic artery and biliary injuries and a relatively lower risk of post-procedural pain than cTACE. TACE can be used for early stage HCC if other curative treatments are not feasible or as a neoadjuvant treatment before liver transplantation. TACE can also be considered for selected patients with limited portal vein thrombosis and preserved liver function. When deciding to repeat TACE, the ART (Assessment for Retreatment with TACE) score and ABCR (AFP, BCLC, Child-Pugh, and Response) score can guide the decision process, and TACE refractoriness needs to be considered. Studies on the combination therapy of TACE with other treatment modalities, such as local ablation, radiation therapy, or systemic therapy, have been actively conducted and are still ongoing. Recently, new prognostic models, including analysis of the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, radiomics, and deep learning, have been developed to help predict survival after TACE.

Hepatocellular carcinoma represents an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. It is the sixth most common cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer death. Liver transplantation is a key tool for the treatment of this disease in human therefore hepatocellular carcinoma is increasing as primary indication for grafting. Although liver transplantation represents an outstanding therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, due to organ shortage, the careful selection and management of patients who may have a major survival benefit after grafting remains a fundamental question. In fact, only some stages of the disease seem amenable of this therapeutic option, stimulating the debate on the appropriate criteria to select candidates. In this review we focused on current criteria to select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma for liver transplantation as well as on the strategies (bridging) to avoid disease progression and exclusion from grafting during the stay on wait list. The treatments used to bring patients within acceptable criteria (down-staging), when their tumor burden exceeds the standard criteria for transplant, are also reported. Finally, we examined tumor reappearance following liver transplantation. This occurrence is estimated to be approximately 8%-20% in different studies. The possible approaches to prevent this outcome after transplant are reported with the corresponding results.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an aggressive neoplastic disease that has been rapidly increasing in incidence. It usually occurs in the background of liver disease, and cirrhosis. Definitive therapy requires surgical resection. However, in majority of cases surgical resection is not tolerated, especially in the presence of portal hypertension and cirrhosis. Orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) in well selected candidates has been accepted as a viable option. Due to a relative scarcity of donors compared to the number of listed recipients, long waiting times are anticipated. To prevent patients with HCC from dropping out from the transplant list due to progression of their disease, most centers utilize loco-regional therapies. These loco-regional therapies(LRT) include minimally invasive treatments like percutaneous thermal ablation, trans-arterial chemoembolization, trans-arterial radio-embolization or a combination thereof. The type of therapy or combination used is determined by the size and location of the HCC and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification. The data regarding the efficacy of LRT in reducing post-transplant recurrence or disease-free survival is limited. This article reviews the available therapies, their strengths, limitations, and current use in the management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma awaiting transplant.

A debate exists over whether using preoperative transarterial chemoembolization for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation. Numerous studies have been investigating on this, but there is still no unanimous conclusion about the effect of preoperative transarterial chemoembolization. We conducted the meta-analysis of all available studies to systematically evaluate the influence of preoperative transarterial chemoembolization on liver transplant.

A systematic search was performed by two authors (Si TF. and Guan RY.) through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Science Citation Index Expanded, combined with Manual Retrieval and Cited Reference Search. The searching cut-off date was 2016/07/31, and all the data obtained were statistically analyzed using Review Manager version 5.1 software (Copenhagen, The Nordic Cochrane Center, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011) recommended by Cochrane Collaboration.

The study showed that there was no difference between the experimental group and the control group on perioperative mortality (RR = 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [0.49-2.48], P = 0.82) or biliary complications (RR = 0.96, 95%CI = [0.66-1.39], P = 0.83). Preoperative transarterial chemoembolization had no obvious effect on improving overall survival (HR = 1.05, 95%CI = [0.65-1.72], P = 0. 83) but would result in a higher rate of vascular complications (RR = 2.01, 95%CI = [1.23-3.27], P = 0.005) and a reduction of disease free survival (HR = 1.66, 95%CI = [1.02-2.70], P = 0.04). Subgroup analysis also revealed that patients from transarterial chemoembolization group in Asia had a much lower overall survival rate (HR = 2.65, 95%CI = [1.49-4.71], P = 0.0009) compared with the control group.

Considering the possible adverse impacts on liver transplantation and the variation in sensitivity to transarterial chemoembolization, clinicians should be more cautious when considering transarterial chemoembolization as the bridging therapy for patients in the waiting list.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the best treatment option for patients with early-stage tumours and accounts for ∼20-40% of all liver transplantations performed at most centres worldwide. The Milan criteria are the most common criteria to select patients with HCC for transplantation but they can be seen as too restrictive. Several proposals have been made for a moderate expansion of the criteria, which result in good outcomes but with an increase in the risk of tumour recurrence. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the outcomes after liver transplantation for HCC, focusing on tumour recurrence in terms of surveillance, prevention and treatment. Additionally, novel surgical techniques have been developed to increase the available pool of organs for liver transplantation (such as living donor liver transplantation, donation after circulatory death and split livers), but the effect of these techniques on patients with HCC is still under debate. Thus, we will describe these techniques and expose the benefits and disadvantages of each surgical approach. Finally, we will comment on the limitations of the current priority policies for liver transplantation and the need to further refine them to better serve the population.

The practice of treating candidates for liver transplantation (LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with locoregional therapies, is common in most transplant centers. However, for T1 tumors and expected waiting times to LT <6 months, there is no evidence that these treatments are beneficial. For T2 tumors and for longer waiting times, neo-adjuvant treatments are usually performed with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), ablation techniques and liver resection in selected cases. The treatment choice should be based on the BCLC staging system. At present, there is no evidence of the superiority of ablation/resection vs. TACE, but some studies showed better results of the former in achieving a complete response. The response to neo-adjuvant treatments should be evaluated through mRECIST criteria, but few studies adopted these criteria and properly analyzed factors affecting response. The simultaneous evaluation of the impact of neo-adjuvant therapies on dropout rate, post-LT HCC recurrence and patient survival is rarely reported. Tumor stage and volume, alpha-fetoprotein levels, response to treatments and liver function affect pre-LT outcomes. These same factors, together with vascular invasion and poor tumor differentiation, are major determinants of poor post-LT outcomes. Due to the low number of prospective studies with well-defined entry criteria and the variability of results, the role of downstaging is still to be defined. Novel molecular markers seem promising for the estimation of prognosis and/or response to treatments. With a persistent scarcity of organ donors, neo-adjuvant treatments can help identify patients with different probabilities of cancer progression, and consequently balance the priority of HCC and non-HCC-candidates through revised additional scores for HCC.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) often occurs in patients with chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma has the potential to eliminate both the tumor as well as the underlying cirrhosis and is the ideal treatment for HCC in cirrhotic liver as well as massive HCC in noncirrhotic liver. Limitations in organ availability, necessitate stringent selection of patients who would likely to derive most benefit. Selection criteria have considered tumor size, number, volume as well as biological features. The Milan criteria set the benchmark for tumors that would benefit from liver transplantation but were found to be excessively restrictive. Modest expansion in criteria has also been shown to be associated with equivalent survival. Microvascular invasion is the single most important adverse prognostic factor for survival. Living donor liver transplantation has expanded donor options and has the advantage of lower waiting period and not impacting the non-HCC waiting list. Acceptable outcomes have been obtained with living donor liver transplantation for larger and more numerous tumors in the absence of microvascular invasion. Downstaging of tumors to prevent progression while waiting for an organ or for reduction in size to allow enrolment for transplantation has met with variable success.

DC Bead is an embolic drug-eluting bead designed to be loaded with chemotherapeutic agents (such as doxorubicin and irinotecan), delivered intra-arterially into tumor blood vessels to block nutrient flow and then to deliver the drug locally in a sustained fashion. This product is finding increasing use in the treatment of patients with both primary and secondary liver cancers.

This review positions DC Bead in the field of targeted embolic drug delivery and with respect to other competitive technologies in the treatment of liver cancer. An overview of the studies that demonstrate the product's performance, safety and efficacy is presented. The clinical application of the doxorubicin loaded DC Bead is firstly reviewed, in the context of treatment of patients with various stages of hepatocellular carcinoma. Its combination with other therapies is also discussed, together with consideration of the treatment of other liver tumors. Secondly, the use of irinotecan loaded DC Bead, primarily for the treatment of colorectal cancer metastases to the liver, but also some additional rare metastases, is summarized.

An opinion is proffered as to how this technology and its application is evolving, illustrating a move towards synergistic combination therapies and into other cancer indications.

The drop-off risk for patients awaiting liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is 22%. Transplant liver availability is expected to worsen, resulting in longer waiting times and increased drop-off rates. Our aim was to determine whether chemoembolization can decrease this risk.

Eighty-seven consecutive HCC patients listed for liver transplant (Milan criteria) underwent statistical comparability adjustments using the propensity score (Wilcoxon, Fisher's, and chi-square tests). Forty-three nonchemoembolization patients and 22 chemoembolization patients were comparable for Child-Pugh and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores, tumor size and number, alpha fetoprotein (AFP) levels, and cause of cirrhosis. We calculated the risk of dropping off the transplant list by assigning a transplant time to those who dropped off (equal probability with patients who were on the list longer than the patient in question). The significance level was obtained by calculating the simulation distribution of the difference compared with the permutations of chemoembolization versus nonchemoembolization assignment of the patients. Kaplan-Meier estimators (log-rank test) were used to determine survival rates.

Median follow-up was 187 ± 110 weeks (range 38 to 435, date of diagnosis). The chemoembolization group had an 80% drop-off risk decrease (15% nonchemoembolization versus 3% chemoembolization, p = 0.04). Although survival was better for the chemoembolization group, it did not reach statistical significance. Two-year survival for the nonchemoembolization and chemoembolization group was 57.3% ± 7.1% and 76.0% ± 7.9%, respectively (p = 0.078).

Chemoembolization appears to result in a significant decrease in the risk of dropping off liver transplant list for patients with HCC and results in a tendency toward longer survival.

To determine the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging performed 1 month after localized chemotherapy as a measure of tumor response, before detectable changes in size.

This trial was approved by the authors' institutional review board and was compliant with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Inclusion criteria selected patients receiving chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with MR imaging within 2 months before treatment, in addition to MR imaging after treatment at 1 month and 6 months. Pathology was used as a surrogate for 6-month follow-up if the patient underwent interval transplantation. The final population consisted of 23 tumors (occurring within 21 patients). MR imaging studies were evaluated separately by two radiologists. Tumors were scored as showing complete loss of enhancement or as showing some residual tissue enhancement. Changes in T1 and T2 signal and perilesional enhancement were tabulated and recorded. Lesion size was also measured on all MR imaging studies by using a one-dimensional measure of the longest dimension. Increase in tumor size from 1-6 months of 20% or greater was used as confirmation of residual disease. In 5 of 23 tumors, review of pathology served as the surrogate standard. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were computed for each rater.

The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 1-month follow-up MR imaging were 71.4-85.7%, 100%, and 91.3-95.7%. There was a high degree of agreement between the two readers for both the 1-month (kappa = 0.88) and 6-month (kappa = 1.0) MR imaging studies.

This investigation shows high accuracy for using tumor enhancement features on 1-month posttherapy MR imaging to predict residual disease after chemoembolization of HCC.

Since it was first performed in 1963, liver transplantation has become the only effective curative treatment in patients with liver failure. During the interval between being added to the waiting list and receiving a graft, the patient's condition may deteriorate as a result of disease progression or complications of the underlying liver disease. Both may result in death, removal from the waiting list because of futility of the procedure or, a worsened outcome following transplantation. The main aims during this period are to delay or prevent further deterioration in the patient's condition, to optimize their general medical health, to prevent, detect and treat any complications, and to offer treatment for specific conditions to improve the patient's overall outcome following liver transplantation.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is frequently diagnosed at advanced stages and has a high mortality rate. With improved survival of patients with cirrhotic liver disease and increased prevalence of chronic hepatitis C viral infections, a rise in the number of HCC cases is being reported worldwide. Early diagnosis and treatment can significantly improve the prognosis of patients with HCC. Although surgical resection is an important potentially curative therapy for liver tumors, in appropriately selected patients, liver transplantation has been shown to achieve excellent survival rates for a solid tumor. Locally ablative and locoregional therapies in the form of percutaneous ethanol injection, radiofrequency ablation, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and transcatheter arterial radioembolization (TheraSphere) are viable options in patients with unresectable HCC. Unfortunately, the role of systemic therapy has been very limited in the treatment of these patients. Novel treatment options based on an improved understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of HCC are being explored. These targeted molecular therapies are aimed at growth factors and their receptors, intracellular signal transduction and cell cycle control. A substantial improvement in outcomes of intermediate and advanced stage HCC is expected with the advent of these targeted therapies, used in combination with surgical or locoregional therapies. Recent positive results from a large Phase III study of the receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, sorafenib, hold great promise in the treatment of HCC.