Cirrhosis Is Present in Most Patients With Hepatitis B and Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA.
Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association (Impact Factor: 7.9). 01/2011; 9(1):64-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.08.019
Source: PubMed


There are few data available about the prevalence or effects of cirrhosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from viral hepatitis. We compared patients with HCC and hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections to determine the proportions of cirrhosis in each group, virologic and tumor characteristics, and overall survival.
This analysis included patients with HBV (n = 64) or HCV (n = 118) infection who were diagnosed with HCC at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota from 1994-2008; groups were matched for age and sex. The diagnosis of cirrhosis was based on histology and, if histologic information was insufficient or unavailable, clinical indicators that included ascites or varices, thrombocytopenia or splenomegaly, and radiographic configuration of cirrhosis. Virologic characteristics, tumor stage, and patient survival were also assessed.
The prevalence of histologic cirrhosis was 88% among patients with HBV infection and 93% among those with HCV infection (P = .46). When the most inclusive criteria for cirrhosis were applied, cirrhosis was present in 94% of patients with HBV and 97% with HCV (P = .24). Among HCV patients, 5.2% were negative for HCV RNA after antiviral treatment; 63.4% of HBV patients had HBV DNA <2000 IU/mL with or without treatment. Patients with HBV tended to have less surveillance and more advanced stages of HCC, without differences in survival from those with HCV infection (P = .75).
Most patients with HCC and chronic viral hepatitis had evidence of cirrhosis, including those with HBV infection and those without active viral replication.

4 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose Ascites may develop in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with coexisting liver cirrhosis. Few studies had specifically evaluated the role of ascites in HCC. This study investigated its prevalence, associated factors, prognostic impact, and staging strategy in a large HCC patient cohort. Patients and methods A total of 2,203 HCC patients were analyzed. The grading of ascites was according to the European Association for the Study of Liver. The prognostic ability of the Cancer of the liver Italian Program (CLIP), Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer, Japan Integrated Scoring system, and Taipei Integrated Scoring system in HCC patients with ascites was compared using the Akaike information criterion (AIC). Results Ascites was present in 498 (23%) patients at diagnosis. Grades 1, 2, and 3 ascites were found in 13, 5, and 5% of the patients, respectively. The severity of ascites significantly correlated with hyperbilirubinemia, hypoalbuminemia, hyponatremia, prothrombin time (PT) prolongation, and renal insufficiency (all p < 0.001). Large tumor burden and more frequent vascular invasion were often observed in patients with more severe ascites (both p < 0.001). In the Cox proportional hazard model, ascites was identified as an independent prognostic predictor with 80–94% increased risk of mortality (p < 0.001). Among HCC patients with ascites, the CLIP system had the lowest AIC value. Conclusions Ascites is often seen in HCC patients and is associated with both tumoral and cirrhosis factors and decreased long-term survival. The CLIP staging system is a more feasible prognostic model for HCC patients with ascites. The optimal treatment strategy for these patients remains to be investigated.
    Hepatology International 03/2012; 7(1). DOI:10.1007/s12072-011-9338-z · 1.78 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment of patients with hepatitis-B-related or hepatitis-C-related decompensated cirrhosis should focus on controlling the complications of cirrhosis, surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma and, if applicable, preparation for orthotopic liver transplant. Interferon-based regimens for the treatment of hepatitis C have been somewhat successful in patients with cirrhosis, although treatment of patients with decompensated cirrhosis should be approached with caution. Given the potential for exacerbation of decompensation and poor tolerance of adverse effects, treatment should be reserved for those patients awaiting liver transplantation. Eradication of HCV before liver transplantation reduces the chances of recurrent hepatitis C infection after transplant. HBV can be treated with few adverse effects in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. This treatment is associated with improvement in decompensation in some patients. Hepatocellular carcinoma remains a significant risk in all patients with cirrhosis, and control of or eradication of HBV or HCV does not remove this risk.
    Nature Reviews Gastroenterology &#38 Hepatology 05/2011; 8(5):285-95. DOI:10.1038/nrgastro.2011.57 · 12.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the effects of autologous bone marrow stem cell transplantation (AMSCT) and transarterial embolization (TAE) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and hepatic dysfunction. A 58-year-old male with HCC and hepatic function of Child's class C was treated with 8 ml of a lipiodol emulsion by injection into the artery feeding of his tumor, and >10(8) bone marrow stem cells were isolated from 400 ml bone marrow and then injected into the right hepatic artery. The patient's laboratory examinations revealed a progressive decrease in total bilirubin (from 264.8 to 77.9 μmol/L) and direct bilirubin (from 222.0 to 59.7 μmol/L) after 1 month, and a repeat CT showed that most of the tumor was filled with lipiodol. The combined treatment using AMSCT and TAE is a good choice of treatment for HCC patients who are unable to tolerate TACE due to hepatic dysfunction.
    Surgery Today 12/2011; 42(12). DOI:10.1007/s00595-011-0107-3 · 1.53 Impact Factor
Show more