A Meta-Analysis on the Rate of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence after Liver Transplant and Associations to Etiology, Alpha-Fetoprotein, Income and Ethnicity

• Main Authors: Darren J. H. Tan, Chloe Wong, Cheng Han Ng, Chen Wei Poh, Sneha Rajiv Jain, Daniel Q. Huang, Mark D. Muthiah
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: MDPI AG 2021-01-01
• Series: Journal of Clinical Medicine
• Subjects: deceased donor liver transplant; ethnicity; epidemiology; HCC recurrence; living donor liver transplant; meta-analysis
• Online Access: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/2/238

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplant is associated with a poor prognosis and significantly increases morbidity and mortality among liver transplant patients. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to evaluate the overall prevalence of HCC recurrence following liver transplant. Medline and Embase databases were searched, and a meta-analysis of proportions was conducted. Observational studies reporting the prevalence of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplant were included, with the analysis being stratified by adherence to Milan criteria, ethnicity, socio-economic status, alpha fetoprotein (AFP) levels, living donor vs. deceased donor, and the underlying aetiology of the liver disease. A meta-regression on the date of the study completion was also performed. Of a total 40,495 patients, 3888 developed an HCC recurrence. The overall prevalence of recurrent HCC was 13% (CI: 0.12–0.15). Patients beyond the Milan criteria (MC) were more likely to recur than patients within MC. Asian populations had the greatest prevalence of HCC recurrence (19%; CI: 0.15–0.24) when compared to Western (12%; CI: 0.11–0.13) and Latin American populations (11%; CI: 0.09–0.14). The prevalence of recurrent HCC was the highest in patients infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) (18%; CI: 0.11–0.27) compared to other aetiologies. A higher AFP also resulted in an increased recurrence. This highlights interesting differences based on ethnicity, income, and aetiology, and further studies are needed to determine the reasons for the disparity.