Value of HCC surveillance in a landscape of emerging surveillance options: Perspectives of a multi-stakeholder modified delphi panel.

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance is recommended by liver professional societies but lacks broad acceptance by several primary care and cancer societies due to limitations in the existing data. We convened a diverse multidisciplinary group of cancer screening experts to evaluate current and future paradigms of HCC prevention and early detection using a rigorous Delphi panel approach. The experts had high agreement on twenty-one statements about primary prevention, HCC surveillance benefits, HCC surveillance harms, and the evaluation of emerging surveillance modalities. The experts agreed that current data have methodologic limitations as well as unclear generalizability to Western populations. Although a randomized clinical trial of surveillance versus no surveillance is unlikely feasible, they concurred that alternative designs such as a comparison of two surveillance modalities could provide indirect evidence of surveillance efficacy. The panel acknowledged the presence of surveillance harms, but concurred the overall value of surveillance appears high, particularly given a greater emphasis on benefits over harms by both patients and clinicians. The experts underscored the importance of a framework of measuring both benefits and harms when evaluating emerging surveillance strategies. The panel acknowledged performance metrics of emerging methods may differ from other cancer screening programs given differences in populations, including higher risk of cancer development and competing risk of morality, and differences in diagnostic workflow in patients at risk of HCC. These data provide insights into the perceived value of HCC surveillance in an era of emerging blood- and imaging-based surveillance strategies.