2015•Translational gastrointestinal cancerRequires access

Response to “Influence on the other patients in the waiting list when expanding the Milan criteria” and “Can Milan criteria be expanded effectively for liver transplantation in patients with HCC?”

Xiao Li Xu, Di Lu, Shusen Zheng

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

We thank Dr. Sugawara Y and Dr. Kim R for their insightful comments on our recent study (1). Organ allocation and selection of eligible candidates have always been a dilemma in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Milan criteria successfully defined a subset of patients with acceptable outcomes. However, several groups have presented excellent outcomes when extending Milan criteria. And strict adherence to Milan criteria denies access to a possible curative liver transplant in around 1/3 of potential recipients (2). To approach an optimized patient selection criteria, our group proposed Hangzhou criteria, which use a strategy combining tumor biological behavior and morphology (3). About Hangzhou criteria, both the two commentaries provide interesting but incisive insights, which are noteworthy.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

We thank Dr. Sugawara Y and Dr. Kim R for their insightful comments on our recent study (1). Organ allocation and selection of eligible candidates have always been a dilemma in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Milan criteria successfully defined a subset of patients with acceptable outcomes. However, several groups have presented excellent outcomes when extending Milan criteria. And strict adherence to Milan criteria denies access to a possible curative liver transplant in around 1/3 of potential recipients (2). To approach an optimized patient selection criteria, our group proposed Hangzhou criteria, which use a strategy combining tumor biological behavior and morphology (3). About Hangzhou criteria, both the two commentaries provide interesting but incisive insights, which are noteworthy.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

We thank Dr. Sugawara Y and Dr. Kim R for their insightful comments on our recent study (1). Organ allocation and selection of eligible candidates have always been a dilemma in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Milan criteria successfully defined a subset of patients with acceptable outcomes. However, several groups have presented excellent outcomes when extending Milan criteria. And strict adherence to Milan criteria denies access to a possible curative liver transplant in around 1/3 of potential recipients (2). To approach an optimized patient selection criteria, our group proposed Hangzhou criteria, which use a strategy combining tumor biological behavior and morphology (3). About Hangzhou criteria, both the two commentaries provide interesting but incisive insights, which are noteworthy.

Key concepts: Milan criteria, Medicine, Waiting list, Hepatocellular carcinoma, Liver transplantation, Selection (genetic algorithm), Liver cancer, Transplantation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Response to “Influence on the other patients in the waiting list when expanding the Milan criteria” and “Can Milan criteria be expanded effectively for liver transplantation in patients with HCC?” — Research Paper | ScholarLens