How to improve HCC surveillance outcomes

Summary: Outside of expert centres, surveillance programmes for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not well executed. There are deficiencies in every stage of the process. Overcoming these obstacles is the most important method for improving surveillance. However, even if these obstacles were overco...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Morris Sherman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2019-12-01
Series:JHEP Reports
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589555919301296
id doaj-8ca227b42f7b4762a8c965af57a66711
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8ca227b42f7b4762a8c965af57a667112020-11-25T00:45:35ZengElsevierJHEP Reports2589-55592019-12-0116460467How to improve HCC surveillance outcomesMorris Sherman0University Health Network, Toronto; Corresponding author. Address: 560 Briar Hill Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5N 1M9, Canada. Tel.: +1 416 804 1146.Summary: Outside of expert centres, surveillance programmes for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not well executed. There are deficiencies in every stage of the process. Overcoming these obstacles is the most important method for improving surveillance. However, even if these obstacles were overcome, there would still be room for improvement. Assessing who is at risk of developing HCC remains incompletely validated. At present, risk scores have been developed for different causes of liver disease, but scores developed in different parts of the world for the same disease do not always agree. Furthermore, most scores stratify patients by risk but do not examine what level of risk should trigger surveillance. Which surveillance tools to use remains controversial – schemes have been proposed that use biomarkers alone, ultrasound alone, or a combination of both. However, the requisite level of test sensitivity that would be associated with high cure rates has not been defined, so at this point it is not clear whether surveillance requires both ultrasound and biomarkers, or whether the use of biomarkers alone is sufficient. Finally, surveillance should result in the identification of HCC at a very early stage. Diagnosing these lesions is difficult and optimal algorithms for lesions that are atypical on radiology have yet to be developed. Algorithms for the follow-up of abnormal biomarkers in the absence of ultrasound have also not been developed yet. Keywords: hepatocellular carcinoma, Risk Score, Surveillance, LI-RADShttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589555919301296
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Morris Sherman
spellingShingle Morris Sherman
How to improve HCC surveillance outcomes
JHEP Reports
author_facet Morris Sherman
author_sort Morris Sherman
title How to improve HCC surveillance outcomes
title_short How to improve HCC surveillance outcomes
title_full How to improve HCC surveillance outcomes
title_fullStr How to improve HCC surveillance outcomes
title_full_unstemmed How to improve HCC surveillance outcomes
title_sort how to improve hcc surveillance outcomes
publisher Elsevier
series JHEP Reports
issn 2589-5559
publishDate 2019-12-01
description Summary: Outside of expert centres, surveillance programmes for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not well executed. There are deficiencies in every stage of the process. Overcoming these obstacles is the most important method for improving surveillance. However, even if these obstacles were overcome, there would still be room for improvement. Assessing who is at risk of developing HCC remains incompletely validated. At present, risk scores have been developed for different causes of liver disease, but scores developed in different parts of the world for the same disease do not always agree. Furthermore, most scores stratify patients by risk but do not examine what level of risk should trigger surveillance. Which surveillance tools to use remains controversial – schemes have been proposed that use biomarkers alone, ultrasound alone, or a combination of both. However, the requisite level of test sensitivity that would be associated with high cure rates has not been defined, so at this point it is not clear whether surveillance requires both ultrasound and biomarkers, or whether the use of biomarkers alone is sufficient. Finally, surveillance should result in the identification of HCC at a very early stage. Diagnosing these lesions is difficult and optimal algorithms for lesions that are atypical on radiology have yet to be developed. Algorithms for the follow-up of abnormal biomarkers in the absence of ultrasound have also not been developed yet. Keywords: hepatocellular carcinoma, Risk Score, Surveillance, LI-RADS
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589555919301296
work_keys_str_mv AT morrissherman howtoimprovehccsurveillanceoutcomes
_version_ 1725269316206592000