Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the major causes of cancer-related death. Although the burden of alcohol- and NASH-related HCC is growing, chronic viral hepatitis (HBV and HCV) remains a major cause of HCC development worldwide. The pathophysiology of viral-related HCC includes liver inflammation, oxidative stress, and deregulation of cell signaling pathways. HBV is particularly oncogenic because, contrary to HCV, integrates in the cell DNA and persists despite virological suppression by nucleotide analogues. Surveillance by six-month ultrasound is recommended in patients with cirrhosis and in “high-risk” patients with chronic HBV infection. Antiviral therapy reduces the risks of development and recurrence of HCC; however, patients with advanced chronic liver disease remain at risk of HCC despite virological suppression/cure and should therefore continue surveillance. Multiple scores have been developed in patients with chronic hepatitis B to predict the risk of HCC development and may be used to stratify individual patient’s risk. In patients with HCV-related liver disease who achieve sustained virological response by direct acting antivirals, there is a strong need for markers/scores to predict long-term risk of HCC. In this review, we discuss the most recent advances regarding viral-related HCC.

NLRP3 (NOD-, LRR-, and pyrin domain-containing protein 3) is an intracellular complex that upon external stimuli or contact with specific ligands, recruits other components, forming the NLRP3 inflammasome. The NLRP3 inflammasome mainly mediates pyroptosis, a highly inflammatory mode of regulated cell death, as well as IL-18 and IL-1β production. Acute and chronic liver diseases are characterized by a massive influx of pro-inflammatory stimuli enriched in reactive oxygen species (ROS) and damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) that promote the assemblage and activation of the NLRP3 inflammasome. As the major cause of inflammatory cytokine storm, the NLRP3 inflammasome exacerbates liver diseases, even though it might exert protective effects in regards to hepatitis C and B virus infection (HCV and HBV). Here, we summarize the current knowledge concerning NLRP3 inflammasome function in both acute and chronic liver disease and in the post liver transplant setting, focusing on the molecular mechanisms involved in NLRP3 activity.

Liver transplantation (LT) has significantly transformed the prognosis of patients with end-stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The traditional epidemiology of liver diseases has undergone a remarkable shift in indications for LT, marked by a decline in viral hepatitis and an increase in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), along with expanded indications for HCC. Recent advancements in surgical techniques, organ preservation and post-transplant patients’ management have opened new possibilities for LT. Conditions that were historically considered absolute contraindications have emerged as potential new indications, demonstrating promising results in terms of patient survival. While these expanding indications provide newfound hope, the ethical dilemma of organ scarcity persists. Addressing this requires careful consideration and international collaboration to ensure equitable access to LT. Multidisciplinary approaches and ongoing research efforts are crucial to navigate the evolving landscape of LT. This review aims to offer a current overview of the primary emerging indications for LT, focusing on acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), acute alcoholic hepatitis (AH), intrahepatic and perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (i- and p-CCA), colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM), and neuroendocrine tumor (NET) liver metastases.

Background and Objectives: Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) has become the leading indication for liver transplantation in many countries, with a growing rate in the Western world. NASH patients are older and share a higher risk of comorbidities and cancer than patients with viral and/or alcoholic etiologies. The aims of this study were to evaluate waiting list (WL) registration and liver transplantation rates in patients with NASH-related cirrhosis at Padua University Hospital in the last fifteen years (1.2006–6.2020) and to compare clinical characteristics and indications for liver transplantation between patients with and without NASH, as well as the WL survival and post-transplant outcome. Materials and Methods: All adult patients with cirrhosis listed for liver transplantation at Padua University Hospital between 1.2006 and 6.2020 were retrospectively collected using a prospectively updated database; patients with NASH-related cirrhosis were divided by indication for liver transplantation (Dec-NASH vs. hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-NASH) and compared with patients with other etiologies of liver disease. The outcomes in terms of waiting list survival and post-transplant outcome were assessed. Results: One thousand four hundred and ninety-one adult cirrhotic patients were waitlisted during the study period. NASH patients accounted for 12% of all WL registrations, showing an increasing trend over time (from 2.5% in 2006 to 23% in 2020). In the last five years, NASH was the third, but most rapidly growing, indication for liver transplantation at our center. This trend was confirmed both for patients with decompensated cirrhosis (from 1.8% to 18%) and HCC as leading indication for transplantation (from 4% to 30%). NASH patients were older than non-NASH ones (mean ± SD age 59 ± 9 vs. 56 ± 9 years; p < 0.01), whereas no difference was found in gender or Child-Pugh of the model for end-stage liver disease score at WL registration. A majority (60.9%) of NASH patients underwent liver transplantation, showing 1-, 5- and 10-y post-transplant survivals of 86%, 73% and 60%, respectively. Conclusion: NASH cirrhosis has become a rapidly growing indication for liver transplantation at our center, both for HCC and decompensated disease, with good post-transplant survival.

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a prevalent underlying disease, leading to liver transplantation (LT) for both decompensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The hepatitis delta virus (HDV) affects approximately 5–10% of HBsAg carriers, accelerating the progression of liver injury and HCC. The initial introduction of HBV immunoglobulins (HBIG), and then of nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs), considerably improved the survival of HBV/HDV patients post-transplantation, as they helped prevent re-infection of the graft and recurrence of liver disease. Combination therapy with HBIG and NUCs is the primary post-transplant prophylaxis strategy in patients transplanted for HBV- and HDV-related liver disease. However, monotherapy with high-barrier NUCs, such as entecavir and tenofovir, is safe and also effective in some individuals who are at low risk of HBV reactivation. To address the problems of organ shortage, last-generation NUCs have facilitated the use of anti-HBc and HBsAg-positive grafts to meet the ever-increasing demand for grafts.

Conflicting data exist regarding optimal prophylaxis for HBV recurrence (HBV-R) after liver transplantation (LT), particularly in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We assessed current practices for HBV-R prophylaxis in Italy, evaluating rates, risk factors, and the clinical impact of HBV-R and HCC-R. We performed a multicentric, retrospective study involving 20 Italian LT centers. All patients who underwent LT for HBV-related liver diseases between 2010 and 2021 were included. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of HBV-R and HCC-R. Survival curves were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. We included 1,205 LT recipients (60.8% with HCC). HBV prophylaxis was prescribed in 99.7% of recipients, mostly with lifelong hepatitis B immunoglobulin+nucleos(t)ide analogues (HBIG+NUCs) (83.9%). Rates of HBV-R were 2.1% and 3.1% in patients transplanted without and with HCC, respectively. Median times from LT were 60 [9.5–77.5] and 5.5 [1–13] months, respectively. Recipients on lifelong HBIG+NUCs experienced lower rates of HBV-R than those in whom HBIG was withdrawn, used only during LT, or in those who received NUCs alone (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 1.9% vs. 8%, respectively; p = 0.042). In recipients with HCC, HCC-R rate was 10.8% (median time from LT: 18 months). At multivariate analysis, HBV-R (odds ratio [OR] 10.329; 95% CI 3.665-29.110), Child-Pugh C (OR 3.519; 95% CI 1.305-9.484), and microvascular invasion (OR 3.088; 95% CI 1.692-5.634) were independently associated with HCC-R. Five-year survival was lower in recipients who experienced HCC-R (32.5% vs. 92.4% in those who did not; p <0.001). In Italy, HBV prophylaxis is mostly based on lifelong HBIG+NUCs. HBV-R was rare and not associated with survival in patients transplanted for decompensated cirrhosis. In patients transplanted for HCC, HBV-R was independently associated with HCC-R. The clinical implications of these findings deserve further investigation. In Italy, the combination of high-barrier nucleos(t)ide analogues and hepatitis B immunoglobulins remains the most widely used regimen for antiviral prophylaxis following liver transplantation for HBV-related liver disease. Hepatitis B recurrence after liver transplantation is a rare event and not associated with reduced survival. In transplant recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma, HBV recurrence was independently associated with hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence, though this may simply reflect an epiphenomenon without any causal relationship.