Indan Journal of Medical Research Indan Journal of Medical Research Indan Journal of Medical Research
  Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login  
  Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Users Online: 17988       

   Table of Contents      
POLICY DOCUMENT
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 152  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 468-474

Indian Council of Medical Research consensus document on hepatocellular carcinoma


1 Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, India
2 Department of Gastrointestinal & Hepato-Pancreato-biliary Service, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
3 Department of Gastrointestinal & Hepato-Pancreato-biliary Service, Paras Hospital, Gurugram, Haryana &, India
4 Department of Medical Oncology, Army Hospital Research & Referral, New Delhi, India
5 Department of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
6 Department of Medical Oncology, Dr. B.R.A Institute-Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
7 Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Medical Centre, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
8 Department of Gastroenterology, Institute of Liver & Biliary Sciences, New Delhi, India
9 Department of Interventional Radiology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
10 Department of Radiodiagnosis, Dr. B.R.A Institute-Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
11 Division of Non-Communicable Diseases, Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, India
12 Department of Radiation Oncology, Dr. B.R.A Institute-Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Date of Submission18-Feb-2020
Date of Web Publication8-Mar-2021

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Bhawna Sirohi
Department of Medical Oncology, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai 600 028, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_404_20

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

This document aims to assist oncologists in making clinical decisions encountered while managing their patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), specific to Indian practice, based on consensus among experts. Most patients are staged by Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system which comprises patient performance status, Child-Pugh status, number and size of nodules, portal vein invasion and metastasis. Patients should receive multidisciplinary care. Surgical resection and transplant forms the mainstay of curative treatment. Ablative techniques are used for small tumours (<3 cm) in patients who are not candidates for surgical resection (Child B and C). Patients with advanced (HCC should be assessed on an individual basis to determine whether targeted therapy, interventional radiology procedures or best supportive care should be provided. In advanced HCC, immunotherapy, newer targeted therapies and modern radiation therapy have shown promising results. Patients should be offered regular surveillance after completion of curative resection or treatment of advanced disease.

Keywords: Guidelines - hepatocellular carcinoma - Indian Council of Medical Research - management


How to cite this article:
Sirohi B, Shrikhande SV, Gaikwad V, Patel A, Patkar S, Goel M, Bal M, Sharma A, Shrimali RK, Bhatia V, Kulkarni S, Srivastava DN, Kaur T, Dhaliwal R S, Rath GK, for the Indian Council of Medical Research Guidelines Working Group. Indian Council of Medical Research consensus document on hepatocellular carcinoma. Indian J Med Res 2020;152:468-74

How to cite this URL:
Sirohi B, Shrikhande SV, Gaikwad V, Patel A, Patkar S, Goel M, Bal M, Sharma A, Shrimali RK, Bhatia V, Kulkarni S, Srivastava DN, Kaur T, Dhaliwal R S, Rath GK, for the Indian Council of Medical Research Guidelines Working Group. Indian Council of Medical Research consensus document on hepatocellular carcinoma. Indian J Med Res [serial online] 2020 [cited 2021 May 15];152:468-74. Available from: https://www.ijmr.org.in/text.asp?2020/152/5/468/310891

There are several international guidelines pertaining to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)[1],[2], but none have been issued by the Indian Council of Medical Research specific for the Indian setting. The Indian population requires a unique understanding of the incidence and biology of the disease, with a different socio-economic spectrum and accessibility to healthcare resources. These guidelines are aimed to maximize healthcare resources, standardize diagnosis methodology and strengthen the multidisciplinary approach regarding the treatment of HCC in India.


   Incidence and risk factors Top


Globally, HCC is the fifth most common cancer (0.90 million new cases per year) and is the third leading cause of annual deaths due to cancer (0.83 million deaths per year)[1],[3]. There is a lack of nationally representative data, so we must depend on autopsy studies, national cancer registries and population-based surveillance data to estimate the frequency of HCC in India. A large-scale verbal autopsy study in 2010 reported liver cancer to be the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in men (14,000 deaths), with an age-standardized mortality rate (ASMR) of 6.8/100,000 population. In women, liver cancer was the eighth most common cause of cancer-related deaths (12,000 deaths), with an ASMR of 5.1/100,000 population[4]. The areas covered by Naharlagun population-based cancer registry (PBCR) reported the highest age-adjusted incidence rate (AAIR) of 38.0 in Papum Pare district in Arunachal Pradesh[5].

Risk factors corroborated in Indian studies are cirrhosis, hepatitis B infection, hepatitis C infection, alcohol consumption, aflatoxin exposure, smoking, diabetes, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and age[6],[7]. Among cancers as a whole, HCC is particularly amenable to prevention given a detailed understanding of risk factors. The most feasible and cost-effective strategy in the Indian scenario appears to be primary prevention. The most easily applicable modality is the hepatitis B vaccination, which is recommended in newborns and healthcare workers[8]. For patients with a high viral load in HBV cirrhosis, antiviral therapy assists in preventing HCC development and is, therefore, recommended[9]. Patients at risk of developing HCC are candidates for regular surveillance if they are eligible for HCC treatment. The recommended surveillance test is a six-monthly ultrasound abdomen by an experienced radiologist[10].


   Diagnosis and staging Top


Non-invasive diagnosis can be established by demonstration of the typical HCC radiological hallmark (hyperenhancement on arterial phase and wash out on porto-venous phase) by one of the imaging techniques in nodules >2 cm and by two coincidental techniques with nodules of 1-2 cm in diameter [dynamic computed tomography (CT) or dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)]. If a suspicious nodule measuring >1 cm fails to show typical enhancement pattern on both dynamic CT and dynamic MRI, image-guided sampling is indicated. The 2017 version of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is a useful comprehensive system which incorporates features such as arterial-phase hyperenhancement, observation size, wash out, enhancing capsule and threshold growth[11]. The CT/MRI LI-RADS requires a CT/MRI with extracellular agents or MRI with hepatobiliary agents.

Immunohistochemical markers useful for diagnosing HCC include glypican-3, glutamine synthase, arginase 1, HepPar1, alpha foetoprotein (AFP) and heat shock protein-70[12].

Small nodules (<1 cm) in cirrhotic livers should be subjected to a 3-6-monthly follow up using the same technique, which detected the nodule, for a period of two years. Evaluation by gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) - enhanced MRI scan, or a SonoVue contrast-enhanced ultrasound, is an alternative strategy. Gadobenate dimeglumine MRI is also available in India and is particularly useful for lesions not displaying the characteristic radiological features of HCC as well for detecting high-grade dysplastic nodules[13]. A PET (positron emission tomography) scan is not routinely recommended[14]. AFP estimation is no longer part of the diagnostic algorithm of HCC[15].

In India, the BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) staging system is commonly used and includes patient performance, Child-Pugh status, number and size of nodules, portal vein invasion and metastasis, and is most commonly used for prognostic information and treatment allocation[16]. Stage 0 is very early, stage A is early, stage B intermediate, stage C advanced and stage D is terminal stage HCC.


   Multidisciplinary treatment for early disease Top


All new cases should be discussed at the tumour board or in multidisciplinary team meetings, and the treatment strategy should be confirmed. Surgery (resection/transplant) forms the mainstay of definitive treatment. Surgical resection is advocated only in early-stage disease in patients with preserved liver function (Child-Pugh A) without evidence of portal hypertension or vascular invasion. Resection can be anatomical versus non-anatomical and open versus laparoscopic. In patients with decompensated liver disease or portal hypertension, liver transplant (from a living donor or cadaveric) is the treatment of choice as it not only treats the tumour but also the underlying predisposing liver pathology[17],[18].

Small tumours (<3 cm) in patients who are not candidates for surgical resection (Child B) can be offered ablative techniques. The percutaneous ablative therapies have role in the very early (BCLC-0) and early stage (BCLC-A), while the transarterial therapies are (generally) indicated in the intermediate stage (BCLC-B, C) of HCC. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is indicated when the lesion in not suitable for resection, the size of the lesion is up to 3 cm and number of lesions are three or less[19]. The BCLC guidelines also support the use of image-guided ablation in very early HCC, which conforms to the criteria and for patients on waiting list for transplant[20].

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is usually offered as palliative treatment; however, it also has a role as a bridge to transplant in the patients who are on the waiting list. This is a minimally invasive modality of treatment which has shown definitive survival benefits, especially in those who can be categorized as intermediate BCLC B patients[21]. In the presence of portal vein thrombosis, transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in usually preferred[22]. Various forms of radiation therapy have also been used with promising results in small tumours as well as a bridge to transplantation[23].


   Multidisciplinary treatment for advanced disease Top


Unfortunately, most patients present with advanced disease, not amenable to curative treatment. Several Phase II studies have shown benefit of image-guided radiotherapy in local control and overall survival (OS) for patients with locally advanced HCC unsuitable for standard locoregional therapies[24],[25]. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) make high-dose radiation to HCC possible with sparing of the surrounding non-tumour liver parenchyma. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in these various forms has also been shown to increase the chances of performing a TACE. EBRT has been reported to reduce tumour size, decrease pain and also improve survival in certain studies. It has also been used as an adjunctive therapy after resection or TACE with survival benefit[23],[26],[27].

In the absence of trials showing a distinct benefit, the use of systemic chemotherapy in the management of HCC is not recommended outside of clinical trials[7]. Systemic chemotherapy may be an option for patients who progress on sorafenib and are in good physical health (BCLC stage C).

In the recent past, the only drugs with proven survival benefit were sorafenib and regorafenib in the first- and second-line therapy, respectively[28],[29]. The landscape for the treatment of advanced HCC is rapidly changing with emerging newer therapies. Atezolizumab and bevacizumab combination resulted in better OS and PFS (progression-free survical) compared to sorafenib in first-line setting and has changed practice[30]. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) offer promise, and the stage seems set for CPIs to become the mainstay of treatment for advanced HCC and may be also in the adjuvant setting[31],[32],[33]. However, pembrolizumab Phase 3 trial in HCC in second-line setting did not meet its primary end point (OS and PFS)[32]. Sorafenib and lenvatinib have been demonstrated to be equally effective as a first-line therapy[28],[34]. Regorafenib, cabozantinib (for sorafenib-intolerant patients) and ramucirumab have shown an OS benefit in the second-line[33]. Supportive care involves providing support at all stages of a person's experience with cancer. Systemic therapies and their benefits are concisely shown in the [Table 1][28],[29],[30],[32],[34],[35],[36]. This includes treatment of any underlying hepatitis, pain management, nutrition build-up, management of ascites, bleeding control and psychological support. Treatment algorithm is shown in the [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Algorithm for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Local ablative therapies. RFA, radiofrequency ablation, TARE, transarterial radio embolization; TACE, transarterial chemoembolization; SBRT, stereotactic body radiotherapy. Local therapies are preferred as per institutional practices and expertise. Repeated local therapies are advocated in select cases.
*For Child-Pugh C - Best supportive care (BSC) is an option. **Future liver remnant (FLR) to be ascertained. #Transplant eligible - Milan criteria to be fulfilled18. Cost, donor availability and institutional experience are other factors to be taken into consideration. ##Systemic therapies and principles of it are depicted in the Table.


Click here to view
Table 1: Summary of approved and available systemic therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma

Click here to view


The follow up of patients is recommended every three months with monitoring of AFP levels and imaging to check whether there are signs/symptoms of progression.

The following are the brief indications for various modalities for the management of HCC (to be decided after multidisciplinary consensus):

  1. ( i) Liver resection: Non-cirrhotic/Child A with no or mild portal hypertension, resectable tumour with adequate FLR, BCLC A/B
  2. ( ii) Liver transplantation: Cirrhosis (any Child score) with or without portal hypertension, BCLC A/B, fitting into liver transplantation criteria
  3. ( iii) RFA: Up to 3 cm tumours, poor-risk surgical patients
  4. ( iv) TACE: No portal venous thrombosis, BCLC B, Child A/B, outside liver transplantation criteria[37]
  5. ( v) TARE: BCLC B, Child A/B, with portal venous thrombosis
  6. ( vi) Targeted therapy: BCLC C, Child A/B
  7. ( vii) Best supportive care: BCLC D (poor performance status, Child C)


Conflicts of Interest: None.

 
   References Top

1.
European Association for The Study of The Liver, European Organisation for Research And Treatment of Cancer. EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2012; 56 : 908-43.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Chen LT, Martinelli E, Cheng AL, Pentheroudakis G, Qin S, Bhattacharyya GS, et al. Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with intermediate and advanced/relapsed hepatocellular carcinoma: A TOS-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, ISMPO, JSMO, KSMO, MOS and SSO. Ann Oncol 2020; 31 : 334-51.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. Liver: Globocan 2020. Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/cancers/11-Liver-fact-sheet.pdf, accessed on November 5, 2020.   Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Dikshit R, Gupta PC, Ramasundarahettige C, Gajalaksmi V, Aleksandrowicz L, Badwe R, et al. Cancer mortality in India: A nationally representative survey. Lancet 2012; 379 : 1807-16.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
National Cancer Registry Programme, Indian Council of Medical Research. National Centre for Disease Informatics and Research, Bengaluru. Available from: http://ncrpindia.org, accessed on November 30, 2019.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Sarin SK, Thakur V, Guptan RC, Saigal S, Malhotra V, Thyagarajan SP, et al. Profile of hepatocellular carcinoma in India: An insight into the possible etiologic associations. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2001; 16 : 666-73.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Kumar A, Acharya SK, Singh SP, Saraswat VA, Arora A, Duseja A, et al. (The INASL Task-Force on Hepatocellular Carcinoma). The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) consensus on prevention, diagnosis and management of hepatocellular carcinoma in India: The Puri recommendations. J Clin Exp Hepatol 2014; 4 (Suppl 3): S3-26.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Paul SB, Sreenivas V, Gulati MS, Madan K, Gupta AK, Mukhopadhyay S, et al. Economic evaluation of a surveillance program of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in India. Hepatol Int 2008; 2 : 231-6.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Singal AK, Singh A, Jaganmohan S, Guturu P, Mummadi R, Kuo YF, et al. Antiviral therapy reduces risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010; 8 : 192-9.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
de Lope CR, Tremosini S, Forner A, Reig M, Bruix J. Management of HCC. J Hepatol 2012; 56 (Suppl 1) : S75-87.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
12.
Lagana SM, Salomao M, Bao F, Moreira RK, Lefkowitch JH, Remotti HE. Utility of an immunohistochemical panel consisting of glypican-3, heat-shock protein-70, and glutamine synthetase in the distinction of low-grade hepatocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular adenoma. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2013; 21 : 170-6.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL clinical practice guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2018; 69 : 182-236.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Talbot JN, Fartoux L, Balogova S, Nataf V, Kerrou K, Gutman F, et al. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma with PET/CT: A prospective comparison of 18F-fluorocholine and 18F-FDG in patients with cirrhosis or chronic liver disease. J Nucl Med 2010; 51 : 1699-706.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Trevisani F, D'Intino PE, Morselli-Labate AM, Mazzella G, Accogli E, Caraceni P, et al. Serum alpha-fetoprotein for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease: Influence of HbsAg and anti-HCV status. J Hepatol 2001; 34 : 570-5.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM, Beaugrand M, Lencioni R, Burroughs AK, et al. EASL Panel of Experts on HCC. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver. J Hepatol 2001; 35 : 421-30.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Llovet JM, Fuster J, Bruix J; Barcelona-Clínic Liver Cancer Group. The Barcelona approach: Diagnosis, staging, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Transpl 2004; 10 : S115-20.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Mazzaferro V, Bhoori S, Sposito C, Bongini M, Langer M, Miceli R, Mariani L. Milan criteria in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an evidence-based analysis of 15 years of experience. Liver Transpl 2011; 17 (Suppl 2) : S44-57.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Llovet JM, Bruix J. Novel advancements in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in 2008. J Hepatol 2008; 48 (Suppl 1): S20-37.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Forner A, Reig M, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet 2018; 391 : 1301-14.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Lo CM, Ngan H, Tso WK, Liu CL, Lam CM, Poon RT, et al. Randomized control trial of Transarterial Lipiodol chemoembolisation for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 2002; 35 : 1164-71.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Kulik L, Wang E, Riaz A, Ryu RK, et al. Radioembolization results in longer time-to-progression and reduced toxicity compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2011; 140 : 497-507.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Han B, Li C, Meng H, Gomes Romeiro F, Mancuso A, Zhou Z, et al. Efficacy and safety of external-beam radiation therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: An overview of current evidence according to the different target population. Biosci Trends 2019; 13 : 10-22.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Kawashima M, Furuse J, Nishio T, Konishi M, Ishii H, Kinoshita T, et al. Phase II study of radiotherapy employing proton beam for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 : 1839-46.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Zeng ZC, Fan J, Tang ZY, Zhou J, Qin LX, Wang JH, et al. A comparison of treatment combinations with and without radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein and/or inferior vena cava tumor thrombus. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61 : 432-43.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Shui Y, Yu W, Ren X, Guo Y, Xu J, Ma T, et al. Stereotactic body radiotherapy based treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma with extensive portal vein tumor thrombosis. Radiat Oncol 2018; 13 : 188.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Li X, Guo W, Guo L, Lau WY, Ge N, Wang K, et al. Should transarterial chemoembolization be given before or after intensity-modulated radiotherapy to treat patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus? a propensity score matching study. Oncotarget 2018; 9 : 24537-47.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V, Hilgard P, Gane E, Blanc JF, et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2008; 359 : 378-90.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Bruix J, Qin S, Merle P, Granito A, Huang Y, Bodoky G, et al. Regorafenib for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who progressed on sorafenib treatment (RESORCE): A randomised, double-bling, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2017; 389 : 56-66.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Finn RS, Qin S, Ikeda M, Galle PR, Ducreux M, Kim TY, Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2020; 382 : 1894-905.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Raoul JL, Kudo M, Finn RS, Edeline J, Reig M, Galle PR. Systemic therapy for intermediate and advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Sorafenib and beyond. Cancer Treat Rev 2018; 68 : 16-24.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Liu X, Qin S. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma: Opportunities and challenges. Oncologist 2019; 24 : S3-10.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Bakouny Z, Assi T, El Rassy E, Nasr F. Second-line treatments of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Gastroenterol 2019; 53 : 251-61.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Kudo M, Finn RS, Qin S, Han K-H, Ikeda K, Piscaglia F, et al. Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A randomized phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2018; 391 : 1163-73.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Cheng AL, Kang YK, Chen Z, Tsao CJ, Qin S, Kim JS, et al. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2009; 10 : 25-34.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Zhu AX, Park JO, Ryoo BY, Yen CJ, Poon R, Pastorelli D, et al. Ramucirumab versus placebo as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib (REACH): A randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2015; 16 : 859-70.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Yao FY, Ferrell L, Bass NM, Bacchetti P, Ascher NL, Roberts JP. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparison of the proposed UCSF criteria with the Milan criteria and the Pittsburgh modified TNM criteria. Liver Transpl 2002; 8 : 765-74.  Back to cited text no. 37
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
    Incidence and ri...
    Diagnosis and st...
    Multidisciplinar...
    Multidisciplinar...
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed432    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded103    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal