We read with interest the article by Vibert et al. 1 recently published in HEPATOLOGY. The authors described their single-center experience with liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients (21 cases) and compared those patients to
Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: The impact of human immunodeficiency virus infection
✍ Scribed by Eric Vibert; Jean-Charles Duclos-Vallée; Maria-Rosa Ghigna; Emir Hoti; Chady Salloum; Catherine Guettier; Denis Castaing; Didier Samuel; René Adam
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2011
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 204 KB
- Volume
- 53
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0270-9139
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Liver transplantation (LT) has become an accepted therapy for end-stage liver disease in human immunodeficiency virus-positive (HIV+) patients, but the specific results of LT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are unknown. Between 2003 and 2008, 21 HIV+ patients and 65 HIV- patients with HCC were listed for LT at a single institution. Patient characteristics and pathological features were analyzed. Univariate analysis for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) after LT was applied to identify the impact of HIV infection. HIV+ patients were younger than HIV- patients [median age: 48 (range = 41-63 years) versus 57 years (range = 37-72 years), P < 0.001] and had a higher alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level [median AFP level: 16 (range = 3-7154 μg/L] versus 13 μg/L (range = 1-552 μg/L), P = 0.04]. There was a trend toward a higher dropout rate among HIV+ patients (5/21, 23%) versus HIV- patients (7/65, 10%, P = 0.08). Sixteen HIV+ patients and 58 HIV- patients underwent transplantation after median waiting times of 3.5 (range = 0.5-26 months) and 2.0 months (range = 0.5-24 months, P = 0.18), respectively. No significant difference was observed in the pathological features of HCC. With median follow-up times of 27 (range = 5-74 months) and 36 months (range = 3-82 months, P = 0.40), OS after LT at 1 and 3 years reached 81% and 74% in HIV+ patients and 93% and 85% in HIV- patients, respectively (P = 0.08). RFS rates at 1 and 3 years were 69% and 69% in HIV+ patients and 89% and 84% in HIV- patients, respectively (P = 0.09). In univariate analysis, HIV status did not emerge as a prognostic factor for OS or RFS.
Conclusion:
Because of a higher dropout rate among hiv+ patients, hiv infection impaired the results of lt for hcc on an intent-to-treat basis but had no significant impact on os and rfs after lt.
📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES
We read with interest the reviews by Ghouri et al. 1 and Martinez et al. 2 Ghouri et al. analyzed the association of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and concluded that although a diagnosis of NAFLD should prompt diabetes screening, it is insufficient for co
The new allocation policy of the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) based on the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) gives candidates with stage T1 or stage T2 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) a priority MELD score beyond their degree of hepatic decompensation. The aim of this study was to de
The outcome of patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) referred for liver transplantation (LT) is unknown. A high frequency of lamivudine-resistant (LAM-R) HBV infection may increase the risk of liver-related death pre-transplantation and prophylaxis failure post
Nodular regenerative hyperplasia is one of the causes of noncirrhotic portal hypertension and has recently been described in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients, and the potential role of a prothrombotic state and hepatotoxic antiretroviral medication has been suggested. Moreover, it is n
Tumor recurrence after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma is associated with a poor prognosis. Because immunosuppression is a well-known risk factor for tumor growth, it is surprising that its possible role in the outcome of liver transplantation has been poorly evaluated. We perform