UNASSIGNED: Increasing incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in India is a matter of concern and need for adequate profiling and streamlining management strategies cannot be over-emphasized.
UNASSIGNED: This is a prospective multi-centric observational cohort study comprising of an oncology center, one university tertiary hospital with specialized hepatology service, one public hospital with gastroenterology service, and a private liver transplant center located within a 3-km radius. The demographic and clinical parameters were recorded on a prospectively maintained database. The clinical profile, demographics, characteristics of HCC and the allocated treatment were noted and compared among the four centers.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 672 patients were enrolled from June 2016 till January 2020. Abdominal pain (64.3%) and weight loss (47.3%) were the most common symptoms. Most common identified etiology was hepatitis B (39%). The cancer center received lesser patients with hepatitis C and those with advanced stage of HCC. The private transplant center reported the highest proportion of NASH, which was also significantly higher in those belonging to higher socioeconomic strata, and lowest proportion of alcoholic cirrhosis. Metastasis was seen in almost one-fifth (19%) cases at diagnosis. Portal vein thrombosis was evident in 40%. Adherence to treatment guidelines was seen in three-fourth cases (76%).
UNASSIGNED: Hepatitis B is the most common underlying cause for HCC, whereas other causes like NASH are on the rise. Etiologic profile may vary with selective specialization of centers catering to patients with HCC. Adherence to guideline while allocating treatment was high among all centers with highest non-adherence in BCLC A.

OBJECTIVE: Despite availability of diagnostic and management reference guidelines outlining standard of care for patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), national and regional guidelines are lacking, resulting in variations in patient management between regions. We retrospectively analyzed patient characteristics and management data from the Adelphi Real World NASH Disease Specific Programme™ for patients with NASH in the EU5, Canada, and the Middle East to identify gaps between real-world practice and that advocated by reference guidelines, irrespective of clinician awareness or consultation of guidelines.
METHODS: We performed an analysis of physicians (hepatologists, gastroenterologists, diabetologists) and their patients diagnosed with NASH. Physicians completed patient record forms for the next 5 consulting patients, collecting information on patient care, including diagnosis and disease management.
RESULTS: A total of 429 physicians provided data for 2,267 patients with NASH (EU5, n = 1,844; Canada, n = 130; Middle East, n = 293). Patient age, physician-defined fibrosis stage, comorbidities and symptoms, and diagnostic testing practices highlighted statistically significant differences across regions. Substantial disconnects between reference guidelines and real-world practice were observed. Use of liver function tests, non-invasive tests (e.g. ultrasound and transient elastography), and tests to exclude other conditions was suboptimal. Although lifestyle advice was widely provided, patients were less commonly referred to diet, exercise, and lifestyle specialists. Two-thirds of patients were receiving off-label treatment for NASH or associated underlying conditions with the aim of improving NASH, most commonly statins, metformin, and vitamin E.
CONCLUSIONS: Real-world NASH management approaches differ across regions and from proposed standard of care represented by reference multidisciplinary guidelines. Establishment and awareness of, and adherence to regional and national guidelines may improve identification and management of patients with NASH and potentially improve outcomes in this population.
BACKGROUND: Although reference guidelines are available to guide the management of patients with NASH, these are not widely used and there is a lack of national guidelines. Our study shows how clinical practice in the EU, Canada, and Middle East differs from proposed standard of care, particularly relating to how patients are diagnosed and treated. Wider establishment of, awareness of, and reference to guidelines may improve how physicians identify and manage patients with NASH.

This patient guideline is intended for all patients at risk of or living with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). NAFLD is the most frequent chronic liver disease worldwide and comes with a high disease burden. Yet, there is a lot of unawareness. Furthermore, many aspects of the disease are still to be unravelled, which has an important impact on the information that is given (or not) to patients. Its management requires a close interaction between patients and their many healthcare providers. It is important for patients to develop a full understanding of NAFLD in order to enable them to take an active role in their disease management. This guide summarises the current knowledge relevant to NAFLD and its management. It has been developed by patients, patient representatives, clinicians and scientists and is based on current scientific recommendations, intended to support patients in making informed decisions.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the major causes of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenditure in patients with chronic liver disease in India. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) had published its first guidelines on diagnosis and management of HCC (The Puri Recommendations) in 2014, and these guidelines were very well received by the healthcare community involved in diagnosis and management of HCC in India and neighboring countries. However, since 2014, many new developments have taken place in the field of HCC diagnosis and management, hence INASL endeavored to update its 2014 consensus guidelines. A new Task Force on HCC was constituted that reviewed the previous guidelines as well as the recent developments in various aspects of HCC that needed to be incorporated in the new guidelines. A 2-day round table discussion was held on 5th and 6th May 2018 at Puri, Odisha, to discuss, debate, and finalize the revised consensus statements. Each statement of the guideline was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation system with minor modifications. We present here the 2019 Update of INASL Consensus on Prevention, Diagnosis, and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in India: The Puri-2 Recommendations.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the major causes of morbidity, mortality and healthcare expenditure in patients with chronic liver disease. There are no consensus guidelines on diagnosis and management of HCC in India. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) set up a Task-Force on HCC in 2011, with a mandate to develop consensus guidelines for diagnosis and management of HCC, relevant to disease patterns and clinical practices in India. The Task-Force first identified various contentious issues on various aspects of HCC and these issues were allotted to individual members of the Task-Force who reviewed them in detail. The Task-Force used the Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine-Levels of Evidence of 2009 for developing an evidence-based approach. A 2-day round table discussion was held on 9th and 10th February, 2013 at Puri, Odisha, to discuss, debate, and finalize the consensus statements. The members of the Task-Force reviewed and discussed the existing literature at this meeting and formulated the INASL consensus statements for each of the issues. We present here the INASL consensus guidelines (The Puri Recommendations) on prevention, diagnosis and management of HCC in India.