This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. “
“What is the appropriate selection standard for the treatment methods for hepatocellular carcinoma? The “Makuuchi group’s algorithm” (Fig. 2) is recommended as the basis for selecting appropriate Compound Library in vitro treatment methods for

hepatocellular carcinoma (grade B). We specified a treatment algorithm for hepatocellular carcinoma based on three factors: degree of liver damage, number of tumors and tumor diameter. For patients with the severity of the liver damage categorized into class A or B, first, hepatectomy is recommended, regardless of tumor diameter, if a single tumor is present. However, local ablation therapy can also be selected if the severity of liver damage is class B and the tumor diameter is 2 cm or less (LF001781 level 2b). Second, hepatectomy or local ablation therapy is recommended when the number of tumors is two or three and their diameter is 3 cm or less (LF001781 level 2b). Third, hepatectomy or transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) is recommended when the number of tumors is two or three and their diameter Birinapant ic50 is larger than 3 cm (LF062832 level 1b). Fourth, TAE or hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy is recommended when the number of tumors is four or more (LF062832 level 1b; LF100333 level 3). For patients with class C liver damage, first, liver transplantation is recommended when the number of tumors is three or fewer and their diameter is 3 cm

or less (or a single tumor measuring ≤5 cm in diameter) and patients are 65 years of age or younger (LF005404 level 2a; LF111445 level 2b). Second, palliative treatment is recommended when the number of tumors is four or more. For patients with class A liver damage accompanied by vascular invasion, hepatectomy, TAE or hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy may be selected, and for those with extrahepatic metastasis, chemotherapy is an option. Choosing between hepatectomy and local ablation therapy for patients with class A or B liver damage was specified based on Arii’s article that described the results of a multicenter study having the 上海皓元医药股份有限公司 largest scale of such an investigation

performed in Japan to date (LF001781 level 2b). The rationale for the selection of TAE was based on Llovet’s article on a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that demonstrated significant improvement in the prognosis of Child–Pugh class A or B patients with multiple hepatocellular carcinoma (LF062832 level 1b). For the selection of liver transplantation, Mazzaferro’s article on a prospective cohort study presenting the Milan Criteria (LF005404 level 2a) and Todo’s article on living donor liver transplantation (LF111445 level 2b) were used as rationales. Two RCTs of hepatectomy and local ablation therapy encountered problems with study designs, such that they were used only as references (LF101346 level 1b) (LF101357 level 1b). “
“We read with great interest the report by Serste et al.