Clinical features and comorbidity pattern of HCV infected migrants compared to native patients in care in Italy: A real-life evaluation of the PITER cohort

Background: Direct-acting antivirals are highly effective for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, regardless race/ethnicity. We aimed to evaluate demographic, virological and clinical data of HCV-infected migrants vs. natives consecutively enrolled in the PITER cohort. Methods: Migrants were defined by country of birth and nationality that was different from Italy. Mann-Whitney U test, Chi-squared test and multiple logistic regression were used. Results: Of 10,669 enrolled patients, 301 (2.8%) were migrants: median age 47 vs. 62 years, (p < 0.001), females 56.5% vs. 45.3%, (p < 0.001), HBsAg positivity 3.8% vs. 1.4%, (p < 0.05). Genotype 1b was prevalent in both groups, whereas genotype 4 was more prevalent in migrants (p < 0.05). Liver disease severity and sustained virologic response (SVR) were similar. A higher prevalence of comorbidities was reported for natives compared to migrants (p < 0.05). Liver disease progression cofactors (HBsAg, HIV coinfection, alcohol abuse, potential metabolic syndrome) were present in 39.1% and 47.1% (p > 0.05) of migrants and natives who eradicated HCV, respectively. Conclusion: Compared to natives, HCV-infected migrants in care have different demographics, HCV genotypes, viral coinfections and comorbidities and similar disease severity, SVR and cofactors for disease progression after HCV eradication. A periodic clinical assessment after HCV eradication in Italians and migrants with cofactors for disease progression is warranted

Curative therapies are superior to standard of care (transarterial chemoembolization) for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma

Background & Aims: The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer intermediate stage (BCLC-B) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) includes extremely heterogeneous patients in terms of tumour burden and liver function. Transarterial-chemoembolization (TACE) is the first-line treatment for these patients although it may be risky/useless for someone, while others could undergo curative treatments. This study assesses the treatment type performed in a large cohort of BCLC-B patients and its outcome. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 485 consecutive BCLC-B patients from the ITA.LI.CA database diagnosed with naïve HCC after 1999. Patients were stratified by treatment. Results: 29 patients (6%) were lost to follow-up before receiving treatment. Treatment distribution was: TACE (233, 51.1%), curative treatments (145 patients, 31.8%), sorafenib (18, 3.9%), other (39, 8.5%), best supportive care (BSC) (21, 4.6%). Median survival (95% CI) was 45 months (37.4–52.7) for curative treatments, 30 (24.7–35.3) for TACE, 14 (10.5–17.5) for sorafenib, 14 (5.2–22.7) for other treatments and 10 (6.0–14.2) for BSC (P<.0001). Independent prognosticators were gender and treatment. Curative treatments reduced mortality (HR 0.197, 95%CI: 0.098–0.395) more than TACE (HR 0.408, 95%CI: 0.211–0.789) (P<.0001) as compared with BSC. Propensity score matching confirmed the superiority of curative therapies over TACE. Conclusions: In everyday practice TACE represents the first-line therapy in an half of patients with naïve BCLC-B HCC since treatment choice is driven not only by liver function and nodule characteristics, but also by contraindications to procedures, comorbidities, age and patient opinion. The treatment type is an independent prognostic factor in BCLC-B patients and curative options offer the best outcome

Curative therapies are superior to standard of care (transarterial chemoembolization) for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer intermediate stage (BCLC-B) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) includes extremely heterogeneous patients in terms of tumour burden and liver function. Transarterial-chemoembolization (TACE) is the first-line treatment for these patients although it may be risky/useless for someone, while others could undergo curative treatments. This study assesses the treatment type performed in a large cohort of BCLC-B patients and its outcome. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 485 consecutive BCLC-B patients from the ITA.LI.CA database diagnosed with naïve HCC after 1999. Patients were stratified by treatment. RESULTS: 29 patients (6%) were lost to follow-up before receiving treatment. Treatment distribution was: TACE (233, 51.1%), curative treatments (145 patients, 31.8%), sorafenib (18, 3.9%), other (39, 8.5%), best supportive care (BSC) (21, 4.6%). Median survival (95% CI) was 45 months (37.4-52.7) for curative treatments, 30 (24.7-35.3) for TACE, 14 (10.5-17.5) for sorafenib, 14 (5.2-22.7) for other treatments and 10 (6.0-14.2) for BSC (P<.0001). Independent prognosticators were gender and treatment. Curative treatments reduced mortality (HR 0.197, 95%CI: 0.098-0.395) more than TACE (HR 0.408, 95%CI: 0.211-0.789) (P<.0001) as compared with BSC. Propensity score matching confirmed the superiority of curative therapies over TACE. CONCLUSIONS: In everyday practice TACE represents the first-line therapy in an half of patients with naïve BCLC-B HCC since treatment choice is driven not only by liver function and nodule characteristics, but also by contraindications to procedures, comorbidities, age and patient opinion. The treatment type is an independent prognostic factor in BCLC-B patients and curative options offer the best outcome

Development and Validation of a New Prognostic System for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background: Prognostic assessment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. Using the Italian Liver Cancer (ITA.LI.CA) database as a training set, we sought to develop and validate a new prognostic system for patients with HCC. Methods and Findings: Prospective collected databases from Italy (training cohort, n = 3,628; internal validation cohort, n = 1,555) and Taiwan (external validation cohort, n = 2,651) were used to develop the ITA.LI.CA prognostic system. We first defined ITA.LI.CA stages (0, A, B1, B2, B3, C) using only tumor characteristics (largest tumor diameter, number of nodules, intra- and extrahepatic macroscopic vascular invasion, extrahepatic metastases). A parametric multivariable survival model was then used to calculate the relative prognostic value of ITA.LI.CA tumor stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, Child–Pugh score (CPS), and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) in predicting individual survival. Based on the model results, an ITA.LI.CA integrated prognostic score (from 0 to 13 points) was constructed, and its prognostic power compared with that of other integrated systems (BCLC, HKLC, MESIAH, CLIP, JIS). Median follow-up was 58 mo for Italian patients (interquartile range, 26–106 mo) and 39 mo for Taiwanese patients (interquartile range, 12–61 mo). The ITA.LI.CA integrated prognostic score showed optimal discrimination and calibration abilities in Italian patients. Observed median survival in the training and internal validation sets was 57 and 61 mo, respectively, in quartile 1 (ITA.LI.CA score ≤ 1), 43 and 38 mo in quartile 2 (ITA.LI.CA score 2–3), 23 and 23 mo in quartile 3 (ITA.LI.CA score 4–5), and 9 and 8 mo in quartile 4 (ITA.LI.CA score &gt; 5). Observed and predicted median survival in the training and internal validation sets largely coincided. Although observed and predicted survival estimations were significantly lower (log-rank test, p &lt; 0.001) in Italian than in Taiwanese patients, the ITA.LI.CA score maintained very high discrimination and calibration features also in the external validation cohort. The concordance index (C index) of the ITA.LI.CA score in the internal and external validation cohorts was 0.71 and 0.78, respectively. The ITA.LI.CA score’s prognostic ability was significantly better (p &lt; 0.001) than that of BCLC stage (respective C indexes of 0.64 and 0.73), CLIP score (0.68 and 0.75), JIS stage (0.67 and 0.70), MESIAH score (0.69 and 0.77), and HKLC stage (0.68 and 0.75). The main limitations of this study are its retrospective nature and the intrinsically significant differences between the Taiwanese and Italian groups. Conclusions: The ITA.LI.CA prognostic system includes both a tumor staging—stratifying patients with HCC into six main stages (0, A, B1, B2, B3, and C)—and a prognostic score—integrating ITA.LI.CA tumor staging, CPS, ECOG performance status, and AFP. The ITA.LI.CA prognostic system shows a strong ability to predict individual survival in European and Asian populations

Years of life that could be saved from prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) causes premature death and loss of life expectancy worldwide. Its primary and secondary prevention can result in a significant number of years of life saved. Aim: To assess how many years of life are lost after HCC diagnosis. Methods: Data from 5346 patients with first HCC diagnosis were used to estimate lifespan and number of years of life lost after tumour onset, using a semi-parametric extrapolation having as reference an age-, sex- and year-of-onset-matched population derived from national life tables. Results: Between 1986 and 2014, HCC lead to an average of 11.5 years-of-life lost for each patient. The youngest age-quartile group (18-61 years) had the highest number of years-of-life lost, representing approximately 41% of the overall benefit obtainable from prevention. Advancements in HCC management have progressively reduced the number of years-of-life lost from 12.6 years in 1986-1999, to 10.7 in 2000-2006 and 7.4 years in 2007-2014. Currently, an HCC diagnosis when a single tumour &lt;2 cm results in 3.7 years-of-life lost while the diagnosis when a single tumour ≥2 cm or 2/3 nodules still within the Milan criteria, results in 5.0 years-of-life lost, representing the loss of only approximately 5.5% and 7.2%, respectively, of the entire lifespan from birth. Conclusions: Hepatocellular carcinoma occurrence results in the loss of a considerable number of years-of-life, especially for younger patients. In recent years, the increased possibility of effectively treating this tumour has improved life expectancy, thus reducing years-of-life lost

Correlation between LDH levels and response to sorafenib in HCC patients: An analysis of the ITA.LI.CA database

Background: Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) is a predictor of clinical outcome in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. However, its predictive role in the clinical outcomes of sorafenib treatment has been poorly documented. The correlation between LDH levels and clinical outcomes in HCC patients treated with sorafenib and included in the nationwide Italian database ITA.LI.CA was investigated here. Patients and methods: The ITA.LI.CA database contains data for 5,136 HCC patients. All patients treated with sorafenib treatment and with available LDH values were considered. Overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP) were compared in patients with LDH levels above and below a defined threshold, determined through an ROC analysis. An explorative analysis investigated the relationship between the variation of LDH levels during treatment and response to sorafenib. Results: Baseline LDH levels were available for 97 patients. The most accurate cutoff value for LDH concentration was 297 U/L. Patients with LDH values above (n=45) and below (n=52) this threshold showed equal OS (12.0 months) and TTP (4.0 months) values. Data on LDH levels during sorafenib treatment were reported for 10 patients. LDH values decreased in 3 patients (mean difference = -219 U/L) who also reported a prolonged OS and TTP versus those with unmodified/increased LDH (OS: NE (not evaluated) vs. 8.0 months, p=0.0083; TTP: 19.0 vs. 3.0 months, p=0.008). Conclusions: The clinical benefits of sorafenib do not seem to be influenced by baseline LDH. According to the results of an explorative analysis, however, a decreased LDH concentration during sorafenib might be associated with improved clinical outcomes