Clinical transplantation · 2026
Risk-Stratified Surveillance for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Liver Transplantation: A Comparison With the RETREAT-Guided Surveillance Protocol.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dharia Ishaan P, Leven Emily A, Schmidt Natalia, Waite Haley, Ni Pu, Fiel M Isabel, Facciuto Marcelo E, Schiano Thomas D, Grinspan Lauren T
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) is uncommon but associated with poor outcomes, requiring effective surveillance. We assessed adherence to and effectiveness of a risk-stratified surveillance protocol and compared it with the RETREAT-guided surveillance protocol.
METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective review of patients with HCC on explant after LT (2013-2023). Patients were assigned low- or high-risk surveillance based on explant pathology (AJCC tumor stage, grade, and vascular invasion). Protocol performance, modified surveillance strategies, and comparison with RETREAT across multiple cutoffs were assessed.
RESULTS: Among 480 patients, 55 (11.5%) developed recurrence; 23 (41.8%) of these died, with median post-recurrence survival of 14 months. Only 15.8% were fully adherent, with higher adherence in low-risk patients (p<0.001). The protocol appropriately stratified risk (sensitivity 80.0%, specificity 54.1%) and retained substantially higher specificity than RETREAT even at RETREAT's conventional low-risk cutoff (32.0%) despite matching sensitivity; the two systems captured different patients (McNemar's test, p<0.001). Extrahepatic disease at recurrence was more common in high-risk patients (56.8% vs. 18.2%, p = 0.040). Fully adherent patients had earlier recurrence detection (206.4 vs. 666.9 days, p = 0.015). Modified protocols improved adherence but delayed some diagnoses; most low-risk recurrences occurred within 1 year and high-risk recurrences within 2 years.
CONCLUSIONS: This protocol effectively stratifies recurrence risk and is more sensitive than the RETREAT-guided surveillance protocol. Modified strategies may improve adherence and reduce cost while maintaining effectiveness, particularly in low-risk patients.
METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective review of patients with HCC on explant after LT (2013-2023). Patients were assigned low- or high-risk surveillance based on explant pathology (AJCC tumor stage, grade, and vascular invasion). Protocol performance, modified surveillance strategies, and comparison with RETREAT across multiple cutoffs were assessed.
RESULTS: Among 480 patients, 55 (11.5%) developed recurrence; 23 (41.8%) of these died, with median post-recurrence survival of 14 months. Only 15.8% were fully adherent, with higher adherence in low-risk patients (p<0.001). The protocol appropriately stratified risk (sensitivity 80.0%, specificity 54.1%) and retained substantially higher specificity than RETREAT even at RETREAT's conventional low-risk cutoff (32.0%) despite matching sensitivity; the two systems captured different patients (McNemar's test, p<0.001). Extrahepatic disease at recurrence was more common in high-risk patients (56.8% vs. 18.2%, p = 0.040). Fully adherent patients had earlier recurrence detection (206.4 vs. 666.9 days, p = 0.015). Modified protocols improved adherence but delayed some diagnoses; most low-risk recurrences occurred within 1 year and high-risk recurrences within 2 years.
CONCLUSIONS: This protocol effectively stratifies recurrence risk and is more sensitive than the RETREAT-guided surveillance protocol. Modified strategies may improve adherence and reduce cost while maintaining effectiveness, particularly in low-risk patients.