Review Article
Treatment Response Evaluation and Follow-up in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jceh.2014.05.005Get rights and content

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the major causes of morbidity, mortality and healthcare expenditure in patients with chronic liver disease. The management of HCC is evolving because of recently introduced novel therapeutic approaches. Optimal outcome requires an early and accurate assessment of tumor response to therapy. Current imaging modalities, such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging; provide reliable and reproducible anatomical data in order to demonstrate tumor burden changes. However, in the setting of novel targeted therapies and liver directed treatments, simple tumor anatomical changes can be less informative and usually appear later than biological changes. There has been a growing interest to monitor the therapeutic response, at an early phase of treatment, by measuring tumor viability and/or perfusion. Therefore the importance of tumor viability assessment is increasingly being recognized. The tumor viability measurement guidelines have recently been amended to include the measurement of only the longest diameter of the enhancing tumors to formally amend RECIST to modified RECIST (mRECIST). Viable tumor should be defined as uptake of contrast agent in the arterial phase. In this review, we discuss criteria of response evaluation in HCC and further follow-up of patients receiving curative and palliative treatment.

Section snippets

Treatment response evaluation for hepatocellular carcinoma

The most important parameter for any cancer treatment response evaluation is overall survival. Nonetheless, tumor response and time-to-progression have been considered pivotal for surrogate assessment of efficacy.

Follow-up After Curative Treatment

After the initial response evaluation at 4 weeks, the further follow-up of patients who underwent resection or RFA should consist of the clinical evaluation of liver decompensation and the early detection of recurrence by dynamic CT or MRI studies every 3 months the first 2 years and surveillance every 6 months later on.12 In case of tumor recurrence after curative treatments, re-assessment of the patient should be done using the BCLC staging system and re-treatment should be planned

Conclusions

With the growing recognition that the treatment for HCC be tailored to suit the needs of each individual patient, an early and accurate assessment of tumor response to therapy is mandatory. An ideal imaging modality should be able to detect an immediate response to any therapeutic regimen in one examination. Since liver directed therapies and newer targeted drugs induce biologic changes much earlier than size-based alterations in tumor burden, reliance on tumor viability for response assessment

Conflicts of interest

All authors have none to declare.

References (16)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (0)

View full text