4.8 Review

Immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation, can we harness the power of immune checkpoint inhibitors?

Journal

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 14, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1092401

Keywords

hepatocellular carcinoma; liver transplantation; immune checkpoint inhibitor; immunosuppression; transplant tolerance

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hepatocellular carcinoma is a major cause of cancer-related death globally, and liver transplantation is the best treatment option. However, HCC recurrence after transplantation remains a challenge. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer treatment and offer a new strategy for HCC recurrence after transplantation. This review summarizes the use of immunotherapy for post-transplant HCC recurrence and evaluates its efficacy and safety.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death globally and liver transplantation (LT) can serve as the best curative treatment option. However, HCC recurrence after LT remains the major obstacle to the long-term survival of recipients. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of many cancers and provided a new treatment strategy for post-LT HCC recurrence. Evidence has been accumulated with the real-world application of ICIs in patients with post-LT HCC recurrence. Notably, the use of these agents as immunity boosters in recipients treated with immunosuppressors is still controversial. In this review, we summarized the immunotherapy for post-LT HCC recurrence and conducted an efficacy and safety evaluation based on the current experience of ICIs for post-LT HCC recurrence. In addition, we further discussed the potential mechanism of ICIs and immunosuppressive agents in regulating the balance between immune immunosuppression and lasting anti-tumor immunity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available