Similarly, an assessment of tumor burden is required in determining the appropriateness of a patient for liver transplant. The relative shortage of donor liver grafts available has made the allocation of organs to patients with HCC somewhat of a challenge. The so called Milan criteria for receiving a higher priority

for liver transplantation requires patients to have a single tumor <5 cm in diameter, Selleckchem Quizartinib or 3 or fewer tumors, with the largest <3 cm in diameter.8 Currently, in the United States, only patients with HCC who fall within the Milan criteria are assigned a higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score to facilitate their early transplantation. They are initially assigned a MELD score of 22 (corresponding to a 10% risk of dropping out in 3 months). Additional MELD points are allocated every 3 months corresponding

to an additional 10% risk of drop-out. Some centers have accepted the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) criteria for transplantation that allows for 1 tumor up to 6.5 cm or up to three lesions, none greater than 4.5 cm with a total tumor diameter <8 cm.9, 10 Both Milan and UCSF exclude patients with evidence of vascular invasion selleck chemicals on imaging or biopsy. Patients with unresectable HCC form a heterogeneous group. For unresectable tumors, but confined to the liver and without vascular invasion, selleck chemical locally ablative approaches provide reasonable options to control the disease,

and in select cases extend survival.11, 12 For patients within Milan criteria who are also acceptable transplant candidates, locally ablative techniques including percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) are often used to control the disease and keep them within Milan criteria prior to transplant.13, 14 There is a trend to superior results with RFA over PEI.15, 16 The specific modality used is often based on institutional preference but there are also anatomical considerations. For example, exophytic lesions, subcapsular lesions, or lesions near intrahepatic vessels lend themselves less accessible to RFA, and TACE may be preferred. In addition, the failure rate for PEI and RFA is higher with increase in the size of the lesions (>3 cm).15, 16 Multifocal disease often lends itself to TACE, but in some institutions RFA is still performed. In addition, poor liver function is a contraindication to locally ablative treatment as well. For patients with a definite contraindication to transplant but with tumor confined to the liver, locally ablative treatment is the backbone of management. These patients will generally fall into BCLC Stage B.