SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.37 issue2Microscopic colitis: Case series and literature reviewErgonomics in digestive endoscopy: Prevalence, types of musculoskeletal disorders, and risk factors in endoscopists in Colombia author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Revista colombiana de Gastroenterología

Print version ISSN 0120-9957On-line version ISSN 2500-7440

Rev. colomb. Gastroenterol. vol.37 no.2 Bogotá Jan./June 2022  Epub Aug 23, 2022

https://doi.org/10.22516/25007440.823 

Original article

Hepatocellular carcinoma: A real-life experience in a specialized center in Bogotá, Colombia

Jhon Edison Prieto-Ortiz1  * 
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8009-5999

Nathaly Garzón-Orjuela2 
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6181-8154

Santiago Sánchez-Pardo3 
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3869-6907

Robin Germán Prieto-Ortiz4 
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7605-760X

Javier Eslava-Schmalbach5 
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1502-2918

1MD Specialist in Internal Medicine, Gastroenterology and Hepatology. Centro de enfermedades hepáticas y digestivas (CEHYD) - Center for Liver and Digestive Diseases Bogotá, Colombia.

2ND, MSc in Clinical Epidemiology. Researcher associated with the Equity in Health group of the Faculty of Medicine. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Hospital Universitario Nacional de Colombia. Bogotá, Colombia.

3MD Specialist in Internal Medicine, Fellow Infectious Diseases Universidad Javeriana. Bogotá, Colombia.

4MD Specialist in General Surgery and Gastroenterology (CEHYD). Hospital Central de la Policía (HOCEN). Bogotá, Colombia.

5MD, MSc, PhD in Public Health. Leader of the Health Equity Group, School of Medicine, Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Hospital Universitario Nacional de Colombia. Bogotá, Colombia.


Abstract

Introduction:

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most frequent malignant primary liver tumor globally. In 2018, it ranked sixth and represented the fourth cause of death from cancer; the five-year overall survival is 18 %. Most cases of HCC develop in patients with cirrhosis of any etiology, especially because of hepatitis B and C viruses, alcohol, and recently nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH).

Aim:

To analyze the clinical characteristics, diagnostic methods, treatments, prognostic variables, and survival.

Materials and methods:

This retrospective descriptive study was conducted on a cohort of patients diagnosed with cirrhosis and treated between January 2011 and December 2020 at a health care center in Bogotá. The diagnosis of HCC was confirmed radiologically or by biopsy. We analyzed the information descriptively with absolute frequency measures in the case of categorical variables. For continuous variables, the information was summarized with measures of central tendency (mean or median) and their relevant measures of dispersion.

Results:

We included 152 patients diagnosed with HCC, with a mean age of 69.4 years; 51.3 % were men. The leading cause of HCC was nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), which accounted for almost a third of cases (32 %); other causes were alcohol (15 %) and hepatitis C virus (14 %). The median manifestation of the tumor was two nodules with a size close to 4 cm. Besides, 35 % of patients had a BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) stage with curative options, and 25 % received curative treatment options. The first-line systemic therapy used in this cohort was sorafenib®, used in 35 patients (33.7 %). Survival curves showed that women, Child-Pugh class A, and BCLC stage 0 had higher median survival. Multivariate analysis showed a higher risk of death for males (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.16; confidence interval [CI]: 1.24-3.76), Child-Pugh class B (HR: 2.14; CI 1.16-3.95), and Child-Pugh class C (HR: 7.52; CI 2.88-19.57).

Conclusions:

NAFLD is the leading cause of HCC in this cohort. A third of patients are diagnosed in early BCLC stages with a curative treatment option, and 25 % are treated with curative therapies. Sorafenib was the first-line therapy in advanced HCC. Overall survival after diagnosis of HCC remains low, being necessary to join forces in the follow-up of patients with cirrhosis to improve these outcomes.

Keywords: Hepatocellular carcinoma; real life; survival; sorafenib

Resumen

Introducción:

el hepatocarcinoma (HCC) es el tumor hepático primario maligno más frecuente en el mundo: en 2018 ocupó la sexta posición y representó la cuarta causa de muerte por cáncer; la supervivencia global a 5 años es del 18 %. La mayoría de los casos de HCC se desarrolla en pacientes con cirrosis de cualquier etiología, especialmente por virus de la hepatitis B y C, alcohol y, recientemente, por la esteatohepatitis no alcohólica (NASH).

Objetivo:

analizar las características clínicas, métodos de diagnóstico, tratamientos, variables pronósticas y supervivencia.

Metodología:

estudio descriptivo retrospectivo de una cohorte de pacientes con diagnóstico de cirrosis atendidos entre enero de 2011 y diciembre de 2020 en un centro de atención médica de Bogotá, con diagnóstico de HCC confirmado radiológicamente o por biopsia. La información se analizó de forma descriptiva con medidas de frecuencia absoluta en el caso de las variables categóricas; para las variables continuas se resumió la información con medidas de tendencia central (media o medianas) y su respectiva medida de dispersión.

Resultados:

se incluyeron 152 pacientes diagnosticados con HCC, con edad promedio de 69,4 años, 51,3 % eran hombres. La principal causa de HCC fue el hígado graso no alcohólico (NAFLD), que representó casi una tercera parte de los casos (32 %); otras causas fueron el alcohol (15 %) y el virus de la hepatitis C (14 %). La mediana de presentación del tumor fue de 2 nódulos con un tamaño cercano a 4 cm. El 35 % de los pacientes tenía un estadio BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) con opciones curativas y el 25 % de los pacientes recibió opciones curativas de tratamiento. La terapia sistémica de primera línea utilizada en esta cohorte fue el sorafenib®, que se utilizó en 35 pacientes (33,7 %). Las curvas de supervivencia mostraron que las mujeres, el estadio Child-Pugh A y el estadio BCLC 0 presentaron mayores medianas de supervivencia. El análisis multivariado evidenció un mayor riesgo de muerte al ser hombre (Hazard ratio [HR]: 2,16; intervalo de confianza [IC]: 1,24 a 3,76), estar en los estadios Child-Pugh B (HR: 2,14; IC: 1,16 a 3,95) y Child-Pugh C (HR: 7,52; IC: 2,88 a 19,57).

Conclusiones:

el NAFLD es la principal causa de HCC en la presente cohorte, una tercera parte de los pacientes se diagnostica en estadios BCLC tempranos con opción curativa de tratamiento, y un 25 % se trata con terapias curativas. El sorafenib fue la terapia de primera línea en HCC avanzado. La supervivencia global luego del diagnóstico de HCC sigue siendo baja, y es necesario aunar esfuerzos en el seguimiento de los pacientes con cirrosis para mejorar estos resultados.

Palabras clave: Hepatocarcinoma; vida real; supervivencia; sorafenib

Introduction

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or hepatocarcinoma (HCC) is the world’s most common primary liver cancer. In 2018, HCC was the sixth most diagnosed cancer and represented the fourth cause of death from cancer, with 841,000 new cases and 782,000 deaths, respectively1. Men’s incidence and mortality rate are 2 to 3 times higher in most regions worldwide, representing the fifth highest number of global cases and the second leading cause of death1,2. Overall survival at 5 years is 18%3. Seventy-two percent of HCC cases occur in Asia, 10% in Europe, 8% in Africa, and 5% in North and Latin America. Zonal etiological differences explain these differences in prevalence1,4. Between 2007 and 2013, Colombia ranked seventh in mortality with a prevalence of 2.8 to 3.2/100,000 inhabitants, responsible for more than 10,000 of the 234,763 cancer deaths5.

Cirrhosis of any etiology has a prevalence of 85% to 95% in patients with HCC and represents a significant risk factor for tumor development6,7. The incidence rate of HCC in patients with cirrhosis is estimated to be 2% to 4% per year8, while it is believed that about one-third of patients with cirrhosis develop HCC at some point in their lives9. Globally, approximately 90% of HCCs are associated with a known etiology2,10, 54% of cases are attributed to chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, 31% to infection by the hepatitis C virus (HCV), and 15% to other causes such as alcohol intake and exposure to aflatoxins. However, these calculations are rough estimates that do not reflect comorbidities and underestimate the impact of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)/metabolic syndrome10. Recent data from the United States show that non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in its form of NASH and metabolic syndrome contribute more to the burden of HCC than any other risk factor, including HCV11 infection, mainly due to the high prevalence of NAFLD in the general population.

Radiological studies are essential for diagnosing liver tumors and contribute to their typing and staging. The non-invasive radiology diagnosis of HCC in the context of a patient with cirrhosis was accepted in 2001 when dynamic images demonstrated the typical pattern12, which was updated in 200513, and which is the result of the characteristic vascular derangement that occurs during hepatic carcinogenesis14, plus a high pretest probability of HCC before testing in the setting of cirrhosis. Typical findings include hypervascularity in the late arterial phase, defined as arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE), according to the LI-RADS classification (Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System), and washout in the portal venous or portal delayed venous phases14-16.

In patients at high risk of developing HCC (cirrhosis plus HBV or HCV, among others) and the presence of one or more lesions, the diagnosis can be made with contrast-enhanced and dynamic computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with liver injury protocols, if the injury shows imaging criteria and is read as LI-RADS 5 (LR 5), is conclusive of HCC. In specialized centers, contrast-enhanced abdominal ultrasound can also be used for solitary lesions if the modality is available, although it is more widely used in Europe15,16. High-risk patients who do not have liver lesions can be monitored periodically by performing ultrasound with or without alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels every 6 months15-17.

The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system has been widely used for the HCC18) approach, classifying patients into 5 categories or stages (0, A, B, C, and D) according to treatment and survival recommendations. Stages 0 and A have curative treatment options, with survival rates greater than 5 years. In stages B and C (intermediate and advanced), the therapeutic possibilities focus on slowing down the progression of the disease with survival between 1 and 5 years. Stage D (terminal) receives palliative care with survival of nearly 3 months19.

We presented a cohort of patients diagnosed with HCC. They were monitored for 10 years in a specialized center in Bogotá, D. C., with the primary objective of analyzing the clinical characteristics, diagnostic methods, treatments, prognostic variables, and survival.

Methodology

A retrospective descriptive study of a cohort of patients treated between January 2011 and December 2020 at Centro de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (Center for Liver and Digestive Diseases, CEHYD, by its abbreviation in Spanish) in the city of Bogotá.

As inclusion criteria, the confirmed cirrhosis and the concurrent diagnosis of HCC, confirmed radiologically or by liver biopsy, were considered. Radiologically, HCC was defined by CT or MRI before 2016 as an arterial phase hyperenhancement with portal venous or delayed phase washout reported on imaging8,13. Beginning in 2016, the LI-RADS liver imaging data and reporting system (standardized terminology and criteria system for interpreting and reporting liver CT and MRI exam results in patients with cirrhosis or at increased risk for HCC)20 was used, and an LI-RADS 5 reading was required.

The medical records of the patients who met the inclusion criteria were reviewed, tabulating each patient’s clinical history, laboratory data, and Child-Pugh staging. Regarding the tumor, we tabulated its cause, maximum size in cm according to the largest nodule, number of nodules, presence of vascular invasion, extrahepatic invasion, the primary treatment used, number of ablation sessions or transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), treatment duration in months with sorafenib as systemic therapy, and whether or not palliative treatment was indicated.

The information was analyzed using descriptive methods with absolute frequency measures in the case of categorical variables. Pearson’s or Fisher’s exact tests were used to evaluate the differences between the two groups. For continuous variables, the information was summarized with measures of central tendency (mean or median) and their respective dispersion measure according to the normality of the distribution of each variable evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Additionally, the Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney U) test was used to assess differences between two groups for mean and median estimates, respectively.

Survival assessment was performed using Kaplan Meier analysis and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis. Time 0 was the date of diagnosis of cirrhosis, first decompensation, or diagnosis of HCC. The time of the event was the date of death. Patients were censored at the date of the last assessment. All analyzes were performed with the Stata version 13 statistical software package.

Ethical considerations

This project was evaluated and approved by the ethics committee of the School of Medicine of Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá campus (minute No. 009-073 of May 13, 2021).

Results

When analyzing the cohort of patients with cirrhosis and HCC, 238 were initially considered, and 86 were discarded due to inconclusive diagnosis or lack of complete clinical history data. Finally, 152 patients diagnosed with HCC were included, with a mean age of 69.4 years, 51.3% of whom were men. Clinical and laboratory characteristics are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 General Characteristics of Patients with HCC 

Variable Total n = 152 n (%) Women n = 74 (48.6) n (%) Men n = 78 (51.3) n (%) Value p
Age at diagnosis Mean (SD)
69.4 (9.4) 70.9 (8.4) 67.9 (10.0) 0.054*
Background n (%)
- Alcohol Consumption 72 (47.4) 7 (9.5) 65 (83.4) < 0.001**
- DM 62 (40.7) 28 (37.8) 34 (43.5) 0.471***
- HTN 61 (40.1) 31 (41.8) 30 (38.4) 0.666***
- Obesity 49 (32.2) 25 (33.7) 24 (30.7) 0.691***
- Dyslipidemia 23 (15.1) 8 (10.8) 15 (19.2) 0.148***
- Coronary Disease 15 (9.8) 5 (6.7) 10 (12.8) 0.279**
Laboratories (n = 151) Median (IQR)
- Leukocytes 5610 (4490-6990) 5050 (4075-6462) 5830 (4835-7870) 0.0019****
- Neutrophils (%) 56 (50-66) 55 (50-65) 56 (49-66) 0.945****
- Lymphocytes (%) 28 (21-34) 30 (21-35) 27 (20-34) 0.436****
- Platelets 130k (91k-176k) 132.5k (91.7k-170k) 127k (90k-186k) 0.968****
- AST 61 (41.7-100.7) 61 (42-92.7) 63.5 (40.2-114) 0.504****
- ALT 49 (34-74) 48 (28-68) 52 (37-75) 0.083****
- GGT 164 (106-259) 150 (92-245) 190 (122-283) 0.032****
- Alkaline Phosphatase 166 (117-260) 158 (118-232) 190 (115-280) 0.299****
- INR 1.1 (1-1.3) 1.1 (1-1.3) 1.1 (1-1.2) 0.196****
- Total Bilirubin 1.2 (0.8-2) 1.1 (0.8-1.9) 1.3 (0.8-2.2) 0.216****
- Albumin 3.7 (3.1-4) 3.7 (3.1-4) 3.6 (3-4.1) 0.869****
- AFP 25.5 (5- 466) 20 (5-245) 27 (5-855) 0.89****
Esophageal Varicose Veins n ( %) 0.745***
- No 59 (38.8) 31 (41.9) 28 (35.9)
- Small 34 (22.4) 16 (21.6) 18 (32.1)
- Large 59 (38.8) 27 (36.5) 32 (41)
Child-Pugh (n = 143) n ( %) 0.864***
- A 65 (45.5) 30 (43.5) 35 (47.3)
- B 63 (44.0) 32 (46.4) 31 (41.9)
- C 15 (10.5) 7 (10.1) 8 (10.8)

*Two-sample t-test with equal variances.

**Fisher’s exact test.

***X2-Test.

**** Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney U) test.

ALT: Alanine aminotransferase, AST: Aspartate aminotransferase, GGT: γ-glutamyltransferase, SD: Standard deviation, DM: Diabetes mellitus; HTN: Hypertension, INR: International normalized ratio, IQR: Interquartile range (p25-p75), Me = median.

The leading cause of HCC was NAFLD, in its form of NASH, which represented almost a third of the cases (32%), even more frequent in the group of women, where it reached 39% of the cases. In men, the leading cause was alcohol, followed by NASH (29.4% and 25.6%, respectively) (Table 2).

Table 2 Characteristics of HCC 

Variable Total n = 152 n (%) Women n = 74 (48.6) n (%) Men n = 78 (51.3) n (%) Value p
Causes of HCC n (%) < 0.001*
- NASH 49 (32.2) 29 (39.1) 20 (25.6)
- Alcohol 24 (15.7) 1 (1.3) 23 (29.4)
- HCV 21 (13.8) 16 (21.6) 5 (6.4)
- NASH + alcohol 17 (11.1) 1 (1.3) 16 (20.5)
- Cholestasis 13 (8.5) 11 (14.9) 2 (2.6)
- Others 28 (18.4) 16 (21.6) 12 (15.38)
HCC data Median (IQR)
Number of nodes 2 (1-3) 1 (2-3) 1 (1-3) 0.0021**
Size in cm 3.85 (2.2-7) 3.4 (2-7.2) 4 (2.7-7) 0.34**
BCLC Stage n (%) 0.407*
- 0 10 (6.5) 6 (8.1) 4 (5.1)
- A 45 (29.6) 26 (35.4) 19 (24.3)
- B 49 (32.2) 22 (29.7) 27 (34.6)
- C 35 (23.0) 16 (21.6) 19 (24.36)
- D 13 (8.5) 4 (5.4) 9 (11.5)
Terminal Stage n (%) 0.154*
- Dead 95 (62.5) 42 (56.8) 53 (67.9)
- Live 57 (37.5) 32 (43.2) 25 (32.1)

*Fisher’s exact test.

**Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney U) test.

Regarding the tumor, the median presentation was 2 nodules close to 4 cm. Based on the BCLC system, 35% of patients had a stage with curative options (Table 2), and 25% received remedial treatment options. Of these, 11 patients received transplantation (Table 3). The first-line systemic therapy used in this cohort was sorafenib, used in 35 patients (33.7%) as primary treatment. Other 14 patients received sorafenib as secondary treatment, accounting for 49 patients treated. Of them, 15 reported side effects. Most side effects included hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, and other gastrointestinal effects. In addition, variceal bleeding occurred in a patient treated with sorafenib (Table 3). As the primary non-curative treatment, palliative care was given to 17.3% of patients and 13.4% in 13.4%.

Table 3 Treatment of HCC 

Variable Total n = 104 n (%) Women n = 49 n (%) Men n = 55 n (%) Value p
Main Treatment
- Transplant 11 (10.6) 3 (6.1) 8 (14.5) 0.051*
- Radiofrequency ablation 26 (25) 18 (36.7) 8 (14.5)
- TACE 18 (17.3) 10 (20.4) 8 (14.6)
- Sorafenib 35 (33.7) 13 (26.5) 22 (40)
- Palliative 14 (13.4) 5 (10.2) 9 (16.4)
Me (IQR)
Radiofrequency ablation sessions 1 (1-2) 1 (1-2.5) 1 (1-1.5) 0.3106**
Sessions with TACE 1 (1-2) 1 (1-2.2) 2 (1-2) 0.591**
Months with sorafenib 4 (2.25-8) 4 (3-10) 4 (2-8) 0.779**
Side effects of sorafenib n = 15 n = 7 n = 8 0.627*
- Hand-foot syndrome 6 (40.0) 4 (57.1) 2 (25)
- Diarrhea 2 (13.3) 1 (14.3) 1 (12.5)
- Other dermatological 1 (6.6) 0 1 (12.5)
- Bleeding during intake 2 (13.3) 0 2 (25)
- Other gastrointestinal 3 (20.0) 1 (14.3) 2 (25)
- Others 1 (6.6) 1 (14.3) 0

*Fisher’s exact test.

** Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney U) test.

The results of the survival analysis are detailed in Table 4. There was evidence of 1.2, 2.4, and 3.2 deaths in 100 patients one month after the diagnosis of cirrhosis, first decompensation, and diagnosis of HCC, respectively. The survival curves from the diagnosis of HCC by Child-Pugh, BCLC stage, and primary treatment presented significant differences (Figures 1 and 2). The groups of women, Child-Pugh A and BCLC stage 0, showed higher median survival (Figure 1), as well as patients with transplant and radiofrequency ablation treatments (Figure 2), all with significant statistical differences.

Tabla 4 Survival Analysis 

Incidence rate * 100 (95%CI) Median survival (months) Percentile 25%-75% Percentile (months)
Cirrhosis Diagnosis 1.2 (0.9 to 1.4) 49.8 17.1 - 158.9
First Decompensation 2.4 (2.0 to 3.0) 26.3 8.8-63.3
HCC Diagnosis 3.2 (2.6 to 3.9) 15.9 6.4-50.2

Figure 1 Survival curves of the risk of death from the diagnosis of HCC by gender, Child-Pugh, BCLC stage, and esophageal varicose veins. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. *Log-rank test for equality of survival functions. Md: median. 

Figure 2 Survival curves of the risk of death from diagnosing hepatocarcinoma by primary treatment. Transplantation = 1 patient died after transplantation. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. *Log-rank test for equality of survival functions. Md: median. 

The multivariate analysis (Table 5) showed an increased risk of death from the diagnosis of HCC in males (Hazard ratio [HR]: 2;16; confidence interval [CI]: 1.24-3 .76), fall under the B stage in the Child-Pugh (HR: 2.14; CI: 1.16 to 3.95) and Child-Pugh C (HR: 7.52, CI: 2.88 to 19.57), and having been treated with ablation (HR 4.27 CI 0.51 to 35.73), TACE (HR 10.74 CI 1.35 to 84.85), sorafenib (HR 17 .59 CI 2.31 to 133.79), and palliative care (HR 25.93 CI 3.17 to 211.48).

Table 5 Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of the Risk of Death from the Diagnosis of HCC. 

Univariate Analysis HR (95%CI) Multivariate Analysis HR (95%CI)
Gender
- Women Reference Reference
- Men 1.31 (0.87 to 1.97) 2.16 (1.24 to 3.76)*
Child-Pugh al diagnóstico HCC
- A Reference Reference
- B 2.23 (1.41 to 3.54)* 2.14 (1.16 to 3.95)*
- C 11.39 (5.52 to 23.50)* 7.52 (2.88 to 19.57)*
Estadio BCLC
- 0 Reference ***
- A 2.75 (0.63 to 11.97)
- B 7.03 (1.67 to 29.55)*
- C 10.89 (2.56 to 46.34)*
- D 146.92 (28.79 to 749.58)**
Várices esofágicas
- No Reference Reference
- Pequeñas 0.98 (0.58 to 1.68) 0.64 (0.29 to 1.37)
- Grandes 0.99 (0.62 to 1.57) 1.18 (0.65 to 2.13)
Por tratamiento principal
- Trasplante**** Reference Reference
- Radioablación 2.20 (0.27 to 17.37) 4.27 (0.51 to 35.73)
- TACE 6.47 (0.83 to 49.95) 10.74 (1.35 to 84.85)*±
- Sorafenib 9.40 (1.27 to 69.19)* 17.59 (2.31 to 133.79)*±
- Paliativo 22.25 (2.88 to 171.79)* 25.93 (3.17 to 211.48)*±

*p < 0.05.

** Imprecise estimator due to the number of patients in this group (n = 13).

***Variable not included in the multivariate analysis due to imprecise estimators.

****1 patient died after the transplant. ± Inaccurate estimators due to the number of patients included.

Discussion

The experience of a center specializing in hepatology is presented in this study. The average age of the patients in this cohort agrees with that reported in the European guidelines (70 years)16. Furthermore, the age is similar to that recorded in a Latin American series (64 years)21. In this investigation, 51 % of patients were men, showing a ratio of almost 1:1 with women, data that contrasts with the international literature, where the ratio favors men 2 to 3 times1,2 according to White in a series with 236,290 cases of HCC diagnosed between 2000 and 2012 in the United States, where 73% were men22 and these figures are mainly explained by the HCV epidemic. We diagnosed more fatty liver and alcohol and proportionally less HCV, which is consistent with the trend shown in national registries5, possibly explaining the male-female relationship found in our research.

In this cohort, the leading cause of HCC was NAFLD in its form of NASH, with a history of metabolic syndrome between 15% and 40%. In a study of cirrhosis published in 2016 with 419 patients, fatty liver was also the primary cause of cirrhosis (25%)23. Currently, this cohort of cirrhotic patients under follow-up reaches 1800, and fatty liver remains the primary cause24. In another cohort of Colombian patients, alcohol and NASH ranked as the first and second causes of HCC, respectively25. This is similar to data obtained in this study in males.

The Latin American series of HCC with 1336 patients shows HCC as the cause of HCV (48%), followed by alcoholic cirrhosis (22%), HBV infection (14%), and fatty liver (9%)21. However, it is worth mentioning that an estimated 25% of the world’s adult population has NAFLD, according to a meta-analysis including more than 8 million people. The prevalence rate in South America is 31%26. Therefore, NASH causing HCC may also be underdiagnosed. Additionally, recent data suggest that NASH cirrhosis contributes to developing HCC and is an increasingly important risk factor for its etiology in Western countries10,27-29. Accordingly, Singal AG et al. estimated an annual incidence rate of HCC in patients with NASH cirrhosis of 1% to 2%27. Another fatty liver study with many patients showed an HCC incidence with a follow-up rate of 1 per 100 person/years29.

We monitor patients with cirrhosis in our center using abdominal ultrasound and AFP every 6 months16,17. The therapeutic approach follows the BCLC guidelines19. This surveillance accounts for 35% of patients diagnosed at treatable stages. Of the 104 patients for whom treatment data were available, approximately 35% received treatment (transplantation: 10.6% and radiofrequency ablation: 25%).

About 2 thirds of patients received non-curative therapies: TACE (17.3%), systemic therapy (33.7%), and palliative treatment (13.4%). About 64% of patients received this treatment, indicating a late diagnosis. From the first decompensation event, variceal bleeding, or presence of a mass on imaging, many patients are diagnosed with cirrhosis, data supported by a median HCC survival of 9.5 months after diagnosis. The median fluctuates between 6 and 20 months in the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) study30.

Since 2006, sorafenib has been approved as systemic therapy for HCC in Colombia31. Sorafenib was the only therapy available until the second half of 2018 when regorafenib was approved as a second-line treatment32. In this study, 35 patients received sorafenib as their primary treatment and 14 as a second or third option, with an average of 6.8 months of use for the 49 patients. Average survival rates between 4.6 and 12 months are mentioned in the literature33-35. Of the 14 patients with combined therapies, 8 had previously received radiofrequency ablation (5 later received TACE), and 6 had previously received TACE. Fifteen patients (30.6%) reported the usual side effects31,34 in the following order a) hand-foot syndrome, b) gastrointestinal issues, and c) diarrhea.

Interestingly, 2 patients with platelets above 100,000 and regular INR experienced variceal bleeding while taking sorafenib. The first patient had large varicose veins with red dots that were not initially ligated due to administrative problems. The second patient, who had previously ligated varicose veins, bled at the beginning of the treatment, with unclear bleeding, after which he received sorafenib for 12 months without new episodes. On the other hand, although 54.5% of the patients had varicose veins, this was not statistically significant in the overall survival of the patients. A study in Italy identified tumor deep vein thrombosis (DVT) as the strongest independent predictor of bleeding (HR: 15.4; 95 % CI: 1.84-129.6)35, but none of the 2 patients in this study had it. The meta-analysis by Dai et al., with 4720 patients who received sorafenib to treat HCC36, showed a significant increase in the risk of low-grade bleeding events (relative risk [RR]: 1.99; 95% CI: 1 59-2.49; p < 0.00001), the second patient in our series could be in this group. Thus, we could say that one patient (2%) experienced low-grade bleeding associated with sorafenib in this cohort.

We acknowledge the limitations of the study as it is retrospective. However, this is a cohort of patients with HCC monitored for an extended period in Bogotá, drawing attention to the etiology, fatty liver, a frequent condition in our population. In the future, this condition could change the guidelines on its screening and follow-up as a risk factor for the development of HCC.

Conclusions

In this cohort, the leading cause of HCC is NAFLD, more than a third of patients are diagnosed in early BCLC stages with a curative treatment option, and 25% are treated with curative therapies. Sorafenib was the first line of treatment for advanced HCC. However, overall survival after diagnosis of HCC remains low, and it is necessary to join efforts in the follow-up of patients with cirrhosis to improve early diagnosis rates.

Referencias

1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492Links ]

2. Global Burden of Disease Liver Cancer Collaboration, Akinyemiju T, Abera S, Ahmed M, Alam N, Alemayohu MA, et al. The Burden of Primary Liver Cancer and Underlying Etiologies From 1990 to 2015 at the Global, Regional, and National Level: Results From the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(12):1683-1691. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.3055Links ]

3. Jemal A, Ward EM, Johnson CJ, Cronin KA, Ma J, Ryerson B, et al. Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975-2014, Featuring Survival. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017;109(9):djx030. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx030Links ]

4. Kulik L, El-Serag HB. Epidemiology and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Gastroenterology. 2019;156(2):477-491.e1. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2018.08.065Links ]

5. Pardo C, de Vries E, Buitrago L, Gamboa O. Atlas de mortalidad por cáncer en Colombia. 4.a edición. Bogotá D. C.: Instituto Nacional de Cancerología; 2017. p. 124. [ Links ]

6. Fattovich G, Stroffolini T, Zagni I, Donato F. Hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: incidence and risk factors. Gastroenterology. 2004;127(5 Suppl 1):S35-50. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2004.09.014Links ]

7. Kanwal F, Hoang T, Kramer JR, Asch SM, Goetz MB, Zeringue A, et al. Increasing prevalence of HCC and cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection. Gastroenterology . 2011;140(4):1182-1188.e1. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2010.12.032Links ]

8. El-Serag HB. Hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(12):1118-27. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1001683Links ]

9. Sangiovanni A, Prati GM, Fasani P, Ronchi G, Romeo R, Manini M, et al. The natural history of compensated cirrhosis due to hepatitis C virus: A 17-year cohort study of 214 patients. Hepatology. 2006;43(6):1303-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.21176Links ]

10. Suresh D, Srinivas AN, Kumar DP. Etiology of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Special Focus on Fatty Liver Disease. Front Oncol. 2020;10:601710. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.601710Links ]

11. Makarova-Rusher OV, Altekruse SF, McNeel TS, Ulahannan S, Duffy AG, Graubard BI, et al. Population attributable fractions of risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States. Cancer. 2016;122(11):1757-65. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29971Links ]

12. Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM, Beaugrand M, Lencioni R, Burroughs AK, et al. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver. J Hepatol. 2001;35(3):421-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-8278(01)00130-1Links ]

13. Bruix J, Sherman M; Practice Guidelines Committee, American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2005;42(5):1208-36. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.20933Links ]

14. Matsui O, Kobayashi S, Sanada J, Kouda W, Ryu Y, Kozaka K, et al. Hepatocelluar nodules in liver cirrhosis: hemodynamic evaluation (angiography-assisted CT) with special reference to multi-step hepatocarcinogenesis. Abdom Imaging. 2011;36(3):264-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-011-9685-1Links ]

15. Marrero JA, Kulik LM, Sirlin CB, Zhu AX, Finn RS, Abecassis MM, et al. Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 2018 Practice Guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology. 2018;68(2):723-750. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.29913Links ]

16. European Association for the Study of the Liver. Electronic address: easloffice@easloffice.eu; European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2018;69(1):182-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2018.03.019Links ]

17. Heimbach JK, Kulik LM, Finn RS, Sirlin CB, Abecassis MM, Roberts LR, et al. AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2018;67(1):358-380. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.29086Links ]

18. Llovet JM, Di Bisceglie AM, Bruix J, Kramer BS, Lencioni R, Zhu AX, et al. Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(10):698-711. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djn134Links ]

19. Forner A, Reig M, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet. 2018;391(10127):1301-1314. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30010-2Links ]

20. Jha RC, Mitchell DG, Weinreb JC, Santillan CS, Yeh BM, Francois R, et al. LI-RADS categorization of benign and likely benign findings in patients at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma: a pictorial atlas. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203(1):W48-69. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.12169Links ]

21. Debes JD, Chan AJ, Balderramo D, Kikuchi L, Gonzalez Ballerga E, Prieto JE, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in South America: Evaluation of risk factors, demographics and therapy. Liver Int. 2018;38(1):136-143. https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.13502Links ]

22. White DL, Thrift AP, Kanwal F, Davila J, El-Serag HB. Incidence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in All 50 United States, From 2000 Through 2012. Gastroenterology . 2017;152(4):812-820.e5. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2016.11.020Links ]

23. Prieto JE, Sánchez S, Prieto RG, Rojas E, González L, Mendivelso F. Características clínicas y descompensación en pacientes con cirrosis hepática atendidos en dos centros de hepatología en la ciudad de Bogotá D.C., 2010-2014. Rev Col Gastroenterol. 2016;31(1):1-8. https://doi.org/10.22516/25007440.66Links ]

24. Prieto-Ortiz JE, Garzón-Orjuela N, Sánchez Pardo S, Prieto-Ortiz RG, Eslava-Schmalbach J. Sobrevida en pacientes con cirrosis de acuerdo con su etiología. Cohorte retrospectiva. Rev Colomb Gastroenterol. 2022;37(1):24-32. https://doi.org/10.22516/25007440.703Links ]

25. Marín-Zuluaga JI, Vergara-Cadavid J, Cajiao-Castro L, Arroyave-Zuluaga D, Castro-Sánchez S, Ceballos-Ramírez L, et al. Caracterización, manejo y pronóstico de una cohorte de pacientes cirróticos con carcinoma hepatocelular. Hospital Pablo Tobón Uribe 2012-2018. Hepatología. 2020;1(2):134-44. [ Links ]

26. Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, Fazel Y, Henry L, Wymer M. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-Meta-analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology. 2016;64(1):73-84. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.28431Links ]

27. Singal AG, Lampertico P, Nahon P. Epidemiology and surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma: New trends. J Hepatol. 2020;72(2):250-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2019.08.025Links ]

28. Ascha MS, Hanouneh IA, Lopez R, Tamimi TA, Feldstein AF, Zein NN. The incidence and risk factors of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Hepatology. 2010;51(6):1972-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.23527Links ]

29. Kanwal F, Kramer JR, Mapakshi S, Natarajan Y, Chayanupatkul M, Richardson PA, et al. Risk of Hepatocellular Cancer in Patients With Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Gastroenterology . 2018;155(6):1828-1837.e2. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2018.08.024Links ]

30. The Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) investigators. A new prognostic system for hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study of 435 patients. Hepatology. 1998;28(3):751-5. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.510280322Links ]

31. Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V, Hilgard P, Gane E, Blanc JF, et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(4):378-90. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0708857Links ]

32. Bruix J, Qin S, Merle P, Granito A, Huang YH, Bodoky G, et al. Regorafenib for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who progressed on sorafenib treatment (RESORCE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10064):56-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32453-9Links ]

33. Leal CRG, Magalhães C, Barbosa D, Aquino D, Carvalho B, Balbi E, et al. Survival and tolerance to sorafenib in Child-Pugh B patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective study. Invest New Drugs. 2018;36(5):911-918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10637-018-0621-xLinks ]

34. McNamara MG, Slagter AE, Nuttall C, Frizziero M, Pihlak R, Lamarca A, et al. Sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with advanced Child-Pugh B hepatocellular carcinoma-a meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2018;105:1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2018.09.031Links ]

35. Iavarone M, Primignani M, Vavassori S, Sangiovanni A, La Mura V, Romeo R, et al. Determinants of esophageal varices bleeding in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib. United European Gastroenterol J. 2016;4(3):363-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050640615615041Links ]

36. Dai C, Zhou F, Shao JH, Wu LQ, Yu X, Yin XB. Bleeding risk in cancer patients treated with sorafenib: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Cancer Res Ther. 2018;14(Supplement):S948-S956. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1482.188430Links ]

Citation: Prieto-Ortiz JE, Garzón-Orjuela N, Sánchez-Pardo S, Prieto-Ortiz RG, Eslava-Schmalbach J. Hepatocellular carcinoma: A real-life experience in a specialized center in Bogotá, Colombia. Rev Colomb Gastroenterol. 2022;37(2):163-173. https://doi.org/10.22516/25007440.823

Funding sources This study was funded by an investigator grant provided by Bayer Laboratories

Received: September 02, 2021; Accepted: January 21, 2022

*Correspondence: Jhon Edison Prieto-Ortiz. prieto.jhon@gmail.com

Disclosure

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest in this study

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License