For factors determining recurrence after transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma, the number of tumors and tumor size have been reported (LF007391 level 4). Currently, criteria for indications based on these (Milan criteria:

solitary mass measuring 5 cm or less in diameter, multiple masses of three or fewer measuring 3 cm or less in diameter at maximum) are widely adopted (LF005402 level 2a). The results of evaluations combining Palbociclib price histopathological factors of isolated liver with these factors were practically the same. According to the report by Hemming et al., portal vein invasion, tumor diameter and degree of tumor differentiation were prognostic factors in an univariate analysis, whereas in a multivariate analysis, only vascular invasion was a significant prognostic factor (LF000173 level 4). In a report

by Jonas et al., vascular invasion and the degree of tumor differentiation were significant prognostic factors (LF000654 level 4). In a report by Klintmalm, tumor diameter, the number of tumors, vascular invasion and degree of tumor differentiation were prognostic factors in an univariate analysis, whereas in a multivariate analysis, the degree of tumor differentiation was a prognostic factor (LF003425 level 4). In a report by Tamura et al. the degree of differentiation and tumor diameter were independent prognostic factors in a multivariate analysis (LF000266 level 4). Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after transplantation is theoretically due to metastasis; therefore, the fact that vascular invasion CT99021 is a consistent prognostic factor is a medically appropriate result, and other factors (number, size and degree of differentiation) are found to be alternative factors for vascular invasion. In terms of determination Ribonucleotide reductase of candidates for transplantation, however, number and size, which are preoperative measurable factors, are clinically meaningful. Of these, there is a report strongly asserting that number is not a prognostic factor (LF117677 level 4), whereas another article insists that number is underrated as a prognostic factor for intrahepatic metastasis (pathologically

a synonym for vascular invasion) (LF117758 level 4). The reason may be that usually number has been a factor used for assessment without adequately distinguishing synchronous multicentric occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic metastasis (not a feasible item in a clinical evaluation). The clinical significance of tumor markers may be high because they are preoperatively measurable prognostic factors. In a report by Figueras et al., vascular invasion and AFP were independent factors in a multivariate analysis (LF000949 level 4). In a multicenter study on living donor liver transplantation in Japan (LF1114410 level 2b), AFP, tumor diameter, vascular invasion, and bilateral lobe multiple metastases were independent factors contributing to recurrence.