Abstract
BACKGROUND: The value of hepatocellular carcinoma screening is defined by the balance of benefits from early tumor detection vs harms because of false-positive results. We evaluated the value of a mailed outreach strategy for hepatocellular carcinoma screening in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter pragmatic randomized clinical trial comparing mailed outreach for hepatocellular carcinoma screening (n = 1436) and usual care with visit-based screening (n = 1436) among patients with cirrhosis at 3 health systems from March 2018 to September 2021. Outcomes of interest were early stage hepatocellular carcinoma detection (ie, screening benefit) and diagnostic evaluation for false-positive or indeterminate results (ie, screening harm). Screening harm was categorized as mild, moderate, and severe based on number and type of diagnostic exams. All patients were included in intention-to-screen analyses. RESULTS: Of 125 patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (67 outreach and 58 usual care), 71.2% were found at an early stage per the Milan criteria. Early tumor detection did not statistically significantly differ between the outreach and usual care arms (64.2% vs 79.3%; P = .06). The proportion of patients with physical harms also did not differ between the outreach and usual care arms (10.8% vs 10.7%; P = .95) with 5.9% in both arms having mild harms; 4.0% and 3.8%, respectively, with moderate harms; and 0.9% and 1.0%, respectively, with severe harms. CONCLUSION: Most patients enrolled in hepatocellular carcinoma screening were detected at an early stage, and a minority experienced physical harms. A mailed outreach strategy did not increase early hepatocellular carcinoma detection or physical harms compared with usual care. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT02582918 and NCT03756051.