Dear Editor,
We sincerely appreciate the thoughtful letter from Dr. Wang and colleagues [
1] and are grateful for their insightful comments and kind suggestions regarding our recent nationwide cohort study [
2]. In our study, we demonstrated that achieving a sustained virological response (SVR) through direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for chronic hepatitis C virus infection significantly improves survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), across various stages of the disease. In their letter, Dr. Wang et al. raised several important concerns about the limitations of our study, including the lack of stratification based on the biological heterogeneity of HCC, the assessment of liver functional reserve, the optimal timing of DAA therapy, and the potential immunological effects of DAA treatment. They also suggested the application of competing risk analysis in the Cox subdistribution hazards model. We address their concerns as follows:
First, while certain molecular or clinical parameters, such as poor tumor differentiation, microvascular invasion, or specific gene mutations, may indeed offer additional prognostic value or help predict lower SVR rates within the same HCC stage [
3], these variables are not routinely available in real-world clinical settings, including within our nationwide database. Currently, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system remains the most validated and widely used framework for prognostication and clinical decision-making in HCC [
4]. Furthermore, although tumor aggressiveness may be associated with reduced SVR rates [
5], the introduction of DAAs, particularly pangenotypic DAA regimens, appears to have mitigated much of this effect [
6-
8]. As the data provided in our previous correspondence to the Editorial [
9], SVR rates reached as high as 94.9% even among patients with advanced HCC features, including portal vein thrombosis and extrahepatic metastasis (BCLC stage C). Nonetheless, we agree that future investigations focusing on distinct molecular or clinical subgroups, particularly patients with limited life expectancy, are warranted to further refine treatment strategies.
Second, Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) classification could be the most appropriate system for evaluating liver decompensation in our study. Although alternative models may offer additional insights into liver functional reserve, they may not directly assess the clinical manifestations of liver decompensation. For example, albumin-bilirubin grade 2 may include patients with a CTP score of 5–6 (Class A) [
10]. Furthermore, the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease is primarily applied in patients with end-stage liver disease and is therefore unsuitable for our study population, as patients with CTP Class C (BCLC stage D) were excluded [
2]. While data on transient elastography were unavailable in our nationwide database, we evaluated liver fibrosis using the fibrosis-4 index. As shown in
Table 1, we chose not to include these data in the main manuscript due to a lack of statistically significant findings. However, we concur with Dr. Wang et al. that the dynamic interplay between SVR, liver function preservation, and HCC progression deserves further exploration to better understand the mechanisms underlying SVR-associated survival benefits.
Third, the optimal timing of DAA therapy relative to HCC treatment remains uncertain. For those in BCLC stage 0/A, HCC is potentially curable, and guidelines recommend initiating DAA therapy after curative intervention [
4,
11]. Although early concerns emerged regarding increased HCC occurrence following DAA therapy, subsequent robust evidence has largely dispelled these fears [
12]. DAA treatment has been shown to reduce the risks of cirrhosis-related complications, HCC development, liver-related mortality, and overall mortality, thus supporting its role in early-stage HCC [
4,
11]. However, whether initiating DAAs before curative treatment confers added benefit remains to be determined. For patients with BCLC stage B/C disease, who typically receive palliative care, the sequencing of DAA therapy relative to HCC treatment is poorly studied [
6,
9,
13]. Our findings indicate that achieving SVR is associated with improved overall survival even in this group, highlighting the need for further research on the optimal integration of DAA therapy into the treatment algorithm for intermediate to advanced HCC.
Fourth, the role of DAA therapy in patients receiving immunotherapy is currently unexplored. As previously stated [
9], immunotherapeutic agents were not reimbursed under Taiwan’s National Health Insurance system during our study period (December 2013 to December 2020), which precluded evaluation of this potential interaction. Nevertheless, in the contemporary era of immunotherapy for unresectable HCC, studies examining DAA use in this context are urgently needed. The inclusion of immune-related biomarkers in such studies would be particularly valuable for elucidating the immunological consequences of DAA therapy.
Finally, we considered the application of competing risk analysis but ultimately determined that it was not necessary, as overall survival (OS) was our primary endpoint. Competing risks become relevant when the event of interest may be precluded by other events, such as death occurring before tumor development or progression [
14,
15]. However, when OS is used as the endpoint, death is the event of interest itself, eliminating the need for competing risk models. Moreover, distinguishing between liver failure–related death and HCC-related death is notoriously difficult in clinical settings, even in prospective trials [
16], due to the shared contributions of cirrhosis and malignancy. For these reasons, OS remains the most objective and reliable outcome measure to assess survival benefits associated with therapeutic interventions.
In conclusion, we thank Dr. Wang and colleagues for the opportunity to engage in this meaningful academic dialogue. While our study provides compelling evidence supporting the survival benefit of DAA therapy in patients with HCC, we acknowledge the limitations raised and agree that further research is essential to optimize treatment strategies and personalize care for this complex patient population.
FOOTNOTES
-
Authors’ contribution
Study conception and design: T.Y.L., M.L.Y. Data acquisition, analysis and interpretation: T.Y.L., P.C.T., S.W.L., M.L.Y. Manuscript drafting: T.Y.L., P.C.T., M.L.Y. Critical revision for important intellectual content: T.Y.L., P.C.T., S.W.L., M.L.Y. All authors contributed to the revision of the final manuscript.
-
Conflicts of Interest
TY Lee: research support from Gilead, Merck and Roche diagnostics; consultant of BMS, Gilead, and AstraZeneca
and speaker of Abbvie, BMS, Eisai, Gilead, Roche and AstraZeneca.
ML Yu: research support from Abbvie, Abbott Diagnostic, BMS, Gilead, Merck and Roche diagnostics; consultant of Abbvie, Abbott Diagnostic, BMS, Gilead, Roche and Roche diagnostics and speaker of Abbvie, BMS, Eisai, Gilead, Roche and Roche diagnostics. Other authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Table 1.Additional data from the logistic regression model for evaluating risk factors of SVR in HCC patients receiving DAA therapy
Table 1.
|
Variable |
|
Number |
SVR, number (%) |
Crude
|
|
OR (95% CI) |
P-value |
|
AST (IU/L) |
≤80 |
1,413 |
1,372 (97.1) |
1 |
|
|
>80 |
792 |
757 (95.6) |
0.65 (0.41–1.02) |
0.063 |
|
ALT (IU/L) |
≤80 |
1,410 |
1,368 (97.0) |
1 |
|
|
>80 |
795 |
761 (95.7) |
0.69 (0.43–1.09) |
0.110 |
|
Fibrosis-4 index |
≤3.25 |
559 |
539 (96.4) |
1 |
|
|
>3.25 |
1,646 |
1,590 (96.6) |
1.05 (0.63–1.77) |
0.844 |
|
Liver cirrhosis |
No |
800 |
778 (97.3) |
1 |
|
|
Yes |
1,405 |
1,351 (96.2) |
0.71 (0.43–1.17) |
0.178 |
|
eGFR (mL/min/1.73m2) |
≥60 |
1,715 |
1,652 (96.3) |
1 |
|
|
<60 |
490 |
477 (97.3) |
1.40 (0.76–2.56) |
0.278 |
Abbreviations
aspartate aminotransferase
Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer
estimated glomerular filtration rate
sustained virological response
REFERENCES
- 1. Wang Q, Qian Z, Yang X, Chen D, Wang X, Chen F. Letter “Direct-acting antiviral therapy for patients with HCV-related hepatocellular carcinoma: A nationwide cohort study”. Clin Mol Hepatol 2025 Mar 24;doi: 10.3350/cmh.2025.0291.
- 2. Lee SW, Yang SS, Tsai PC, Huang CF, Chen CY, Hung CH, et al. Direct-acting antiviral therapy for patients with hepatitis C virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma: A nationwide cohort study. Clin Mol Hepatol 2025;31:899-913.
- 3. Huang CF, Awad MH, Gal-Tanamy M, Yu ML. Unmet needs in the post-direct-acting antivirals era: The risk and molecular mechanisms of hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatitis C virus eradication. Clin Mol Hepatol 2024;30:326-344.
- 4. European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL clinical practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2025;82:315-374.
- 5. Lo CC, Huang CF, Cheng PN, Tseng KC, Chen CY, Kuo HT, et al. Ledipasvir/sofosbuvir for HCV genotype 1, 2, 4-6 infection: real-world evidence from a nationwide registry in Taiwan. J Formos Med Assoc 2022;121:1567-1578.
- 6. Chen LS, Lee SW, Yang SS, Tsai HJ, Lee TY. Advances in the era of direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Dig Dis 2022;40:616-624.
- 7. Cheng PN, Mo LR, Chen CT, Chen CY, Huang CF, Kuo HT, et al. Sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for hepatitis C Virus infection: real-world effectiveness and safety from a nationwide registry in Taiwan. Infect Dis Ther 2022;11:485-500.
- 8. Huang CF, Kuo HT, Chang TS, Lo CC, Hung CH, Huang CW, et al. Nationwide registry of glecaprevir plus pibrentasvir in the treatment of HCV in Taiwan. Sci Rep 2021;11:23473.
- 9. Lee TY, Tsai PC, Lee SW, Yu ML. Emerging evidence supports direct-acting antiviral therapy for HCC patients beyond the early stage. Clin Mol Hepatol 2025 Mar 4;doi: 10.3350/cmh.2025.0235.
- 10. Hiraoka A, Michitaka K, Kumada T, Izumi N, Kadoya M, Kokudo N, et al. Validation and potential of albumin-bilirubin grade and prognostication in a nationwide survey of 46,681 hepatocellular carcinoma patients in Japan: the need for a more detailed evaluation of hepatic function. Liver Cancer 2017;6:325-336.
- 11. Yu ML, Chen PJ, Dai CY, Hu TH, Huang CF, Huang YH, et al. 2020 Taiwan consensus statement on the management of hepatitis C: part (II) special populations. J Formos Med Assoc 2020;119:1135-1157.
- 12. Tsai PC, Huang CF, Yu ML. Unexpected early tumor recurrence in patients with hepatitis C virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing interferon-free therapy: issue of the interval between HCC treatment and antiviral therapy. J Hepatol 2017;66:464.
- 13. Lee SW, Chen LS, Yang SS, Huang YH, Lee TY. Direct-acting antiviral therapy for hepatitis C virus in patients with BCLC stage B/C hepatocellular carcinoma. Viruses 2022;14:2316.
- 14. Lee TY, Hsu YC, Ho HJ, Lin JT, Chen YJ, Wu CY. Daily aspirin associated with a reduced risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a population-based cohort study. EClinicalMedicine 2023;61:102065.
- 15. Lee TY, Hsu YC, Tseng HC, Yu SH, Lin JT, Wu MS, et al. Association of daily aspirin therapy with risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B. JAMA Intern Med 2019;179:633-640.
- 16. Sankar K, Gong J, Osipov A, Miles SA, Kosari K, Nissen NN, et al. Recent advances in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Mol Hepatol 2024;30:1-15.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
