Jihyun An, Young Chang, Gwang Hyeon Choi, Won Sohn, Jeong Eun Song, Hyunjae Shin, Jae Hyun Yoon, Jun Sik Yoon, Hye Young Jang, Eun Ju Cho, Ji Won Han, Suk Kyun Hong, Ju-Yeon Cho, Kyu-Won Jung, Eun Hye Park, Eunyang Kim, Bo Hyun Kim
J Liver Cancer. 2025;25(1):109-122. Published online March 4, 2025
Backgrounds/Aims Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in South Korea. This study evaluated the characteristics of Korean patients newly diagnosed with HCC in 2016-2018.
Methods Data from the Korean Primary Liver Cancer Registry (KPLCR), a representative database of patients newly diagnosed with HCC in South Korea, were analyzed. This study investigated 4,462 patients with HCC registered in the KPLCR in 2016-2018.
Results The median patient age was 63 years (interquartile range, 55-72). 79.7% of patients were male. Hepatitis B infection was the most common underlying liver disease (54.5%). The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system classified patients as follows: stage 0 (14.9%), A (28.8%), B (7.5%), C (39.0%), and D (9.8%). The median overall survival was 3.72 years (95% confidence interval, 3.47-4.14), with 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates of 71.3%, 54.1%, and 44.3%, respectively. In 2016-2018, there was a significant shift toward BCLC stage 0-A and Child-Turcotte-Pugh liver function class A (P<0.05), although survival rates did not differ by diagnosis year. In the treatment group (n=4,389), the most common initial treatments were transarterial therapy (31.7%), surgical resection (24.9%), best supportive care (18.9%), and local ablation therapy (10.5%).
Conclusions Between 2016 and 2018, HCC tended to be diagnosed at earlier stages, with better liver function in later years. However, since approximately half of the patients remained diagnosed at an advanced stage, more rigorous and optimized HCC screening strategies should be implemented.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Real-World Treatment Efficacy and Safety Profile of Sofosbuvir- and Velpatasvir-Based HCV Treatment in South Korea: Multicenter Prospective Study Jae Hyun Yoon, Chang Hun Lee, Hoon Gil Jo, Ju-Yeon Cho, Jin Dong Kim, Jin Won Kim, Ga Ram You, Sung Bum Cho, Sung Kyu Choi Viruses.2025; 17(7): 949. CrossRef
Many guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been published and are regularly updated worldwide. HCC management involves a broad range of treatment options and requires multidisciplinary care, resulting in significant heterogeneity in management practices across international communities. To support standardized care for HCC, we systematically appraised 13 globally recognized guidelines and expert consensus statements, including five from Asia, four from Europe, and four from the United States. These guidelines share similarities but reveal notable discrepancies in surveillance strategies, treatment allocation, and other recommendations. Geographic differences in tumor biology (e.g., prevalence of viral hepatitis, alcohol-related liver disease, or metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease) and disparities in available medical resources (e.g., organ availability, healthcare infrastructure, and treatment accessibility) complicate the creation of universally applicable guidelines. Previously, significant gaps existed between Asian and Western guidelines, particularly regarding treatment strategies. However, these differences have diminished over the years. Presently, variations are often more attributable to publication dates than to regional differences. Nonetheless, Asia-Pacific experts continue to diverge from the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer system, particularly with respect to surgical resection and locoregional therapies, which are viewed as overly conservative in Western guidelines. Advancements in systemic therapies have prompted ongoing updates to these guidelines. Given that each set of guidelines reflects distinct regional characteristics, strengths, and limitations, fostering collaboration and mutual complementarity is essential for addressing discrepancies and advancing global HCC care.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Radiofrequency Ablation Technology in Liver Malignancies: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations Amirreza Taherkhani, Hoornaz Molana, Mahsa Taremi, Ghader Mohammadnezhad Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
In Vitro and In Vivo Efficacy of the Essential Oil from the Leaves of Annona amazonica R.E. Fries (Annonaceae) Against Liver Cancer Maria V. L. de Castro, Milena C. F. de Lima, Gabriela A. da C. Barbosa, Sabrine G. Carvalho, Amanda M. R. M. Coelho, Luciano de S. Santos, Valdenizia R. Silva, Rosane B. Dias, Milena B. P. Soares, Emmanoel V. Costa, Daniel P. Bezerra Molecules.2025; 30(15): 3248. CrossRef
Spectrum of therapeutic options in hepatocellular carcinoma Hyun Phil Shin, Moonhyung Lee, Jung Won Jeon Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation.2025; 21(4): 190. CrossRef
Re-evaluating surgical strategies in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer-B hepatocellular carcinoma Ioannis Liapis, Ioannis A Ziogas, Charalampos Theocharopoulos, Dimitrios P Moris, Trevor L Nydam, Ana L Gleisner, Richard D Schulick, Georgios Tsoulfas World Journal of Hepatology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Predicting early progression to atezolizumab–bevacizumab in hepatocellular carcinoma: a clinical and imaging-based scoring system Jae Hyon Park, Myung Ji Goh, Dong Hyun Sinn, Jaeseung Shin, Hyungjin Rhee European Radiology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Unraveling the role of flotillin-1 in driving hepatocellular carcinoma progression through transcription factor E3-mediated Golgi stress response Chiara Mazziotta, John Charles Rotondo World Journal of Gastroenterology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
The synergistic action of HDAC inhibitor with cisplatin impedes survival and proliferation of drug-tolerant persister in gastric and liver cancer cells Anjali Singh, Abhiram Natu, Flevia Anthony, Hemalatha Muthu, Bharat Khade, Duane T. Smoot, Hassan Ashktorab, Sanjay Gupta Clinical Epigenetics.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Repurposing HIV-Protease Inhibitor Precursors as Anticancer Agents: The Synthetic Molecule RDD-142 Delays Cell Cycle Progression and Induces Autophagy in HepG2 Cells with Enhanced Efficacy via Liposomal Formulation Fabiana Crispo, Antonio Vassallo, Immacolata Faraone, Alessandro Santarsiere, Lucia Chiummiento, Mara Martinelli, Nicoletta Cascelli, Xavier Fernàndez-Busquets, Rocchina Miglionico, Ilaria Nigro, Carla Caddeo, Maria Francesca Armentano International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2025; 26(21): 10305. CrossRef
Jeayeon Park, Yun Bin Lee, Yunmi Ko, Youngsu Park, Hyunjae Shin, Moon Haeng Hur, Min Kyung Park, Dae-Won Lee, Eun Ju Cho, Kyung-Hun Lee, Jeong-Hoon Lee, Su Jong Yu, Tae-Yong Kim, Yoon Jun Kim, Tae-You Kim, Jung-Hwan Yoon
J Liver Cancer. 2024;24(1):81-91. Published online January 19, 2024
Background/Aim Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib are currently available as first-line therapy for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, comparative efficacy studies are still limited. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of these treatments in HCC patients with portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT).
Methods We retrospectively included patients who received either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or lenvatinib as first-line systemic therapy for HCC with PVTT. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included progressionfree survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR) determined by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors, version 1.1.
Results A total of 52 patients were included: 30 received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 22 received lenvatinib. The median follow-up duration was 6.4 months (interquartile range, 3.9-9.8). The median OS was 10.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.7 to not estimated) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 5.8 months (95% CI, 4.8 to not estimated) with lenvatinib (P=0.26 by log-rank test). There was no statistically significant difference in OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.34-1.49; P=0.37). The median PFS was similar (P=0.63 by log-rank test), with 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.3-7.7) for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 4.3 months (95% CI, 2.6-5.8) for lenvatinib (aHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.51-1.69; P=0.80). HRs were similar after inverse probability treatment weighting. The DCRs were 23.3% and 18.2% in patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib, respectively (P=0.74).
Conclusion The effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib was comparable for the treatment of HCC with PVTT.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Management strategies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with
portal vein tumor thrombosis Jeayeon Park, Su Jong Yu The Ewha Medical Journal.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Portal vein tumor thrombosis in hepatocellular carcinoma patients: Is it the end? Walaa Abdelhamed, Hend Shousha, Mohamed El-Kassas Liver Research.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Reappraisal of transarterial radioembolization for liver-confined hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis: Editorial on “Transarterial radioembolization versus tyrosine kinase inhibitor in hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein throm Jin Hyoung Kim, Gun Ha Kim, Dong Il Gwon Clinical and Molecular Hepatology.2024; 30(4): 659. CrossRef
Current perspectives on the pharmacological treatment of advanced
hepatocellular carcinoma: a narrative review Hye-Jin Yoo, Jeong-Ju Yoo, Sang Gyune Kim, Young Seok Kim The Ewha Medical Journal.2024;[Epub] CrossRef