Tripartite motif-containing 50 (TRIM50) belongs to the tripartite motif (TRIM) protein family, which has been implicated in the pathogenesis of multiple cancers. However, the role of TRIM50 in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains to be clarified. Here we showed that TRIM50 expression was significantly decreased in liver cancer tissues compared with corresponding non-cancerous liver tissues, and its decreased expression was significantly correlated with advanced disease progression. Gain-of-function assay by exogenous overexpression of TRIM50 in HCC cells showed that proliferation, colony formation, migration and invasion of HCC cells were significantly inhibited, whereas loss-of-function assay by TRIM50 knockdown showed that these malignant behaviors of HCC cells were significantly increased. Further investigation showed that TRIM50 could directly bind with SNAIL and induced K-48 linked poly-ubiquitous degradation of SNAIL protein, which further reversed SNAIL-mediated epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) process of HCC cells. In vivo assay by xenograft tumor model verified the antitumor effect of TRIM50 on HCC. Taken together, these results showed that TRIM50 acted as a tumor suppressor in HCC cells by directly targeting SNAIL and reversing EMT, which further indicated that positive modulation of TRIM50 might be a novel therapeutic strategy for SNAIL overexpressed HCC cells.

Background & aims: Liver resection (LR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are commonly used for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the optimal treatment modality remains unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of LR vs RFA for recurrent HCC. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary outcomes were major complications and hospital stay. Results: Eighteen studies with 1991 patients with recurrent HCC were included. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) for OS demonstrated that LR had significantly better OS than RFA in recurrent HCC (HR, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.95). Specifically, LR was associated with higher 2-, 3-and 4year OS rates compared with RFA. The pooled HR for DFS showed no significant difference between LR and RFA during the whole follow-up period (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76-1.07). However, LR was associated with significantly higher 2-to 5-year DFS rates compared to RFA. LR was also associated with more major complications (p < .001) and longer hospital stay (p < .001). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that LR and RFA had similar efficacy in patients with recurrent tumors less than 3 cm or patients presenting three or fewer recurrent nodules. Conclusion: LR could provide better long-term survival outcomes than RFA for recurrent HCC patients, while RFA has a higher safety profile. RFA can be a good alternative to LR for patients with small-sized recurrence or patients with a limited number of recurrent nodules. However, as tumor size increases, LR tends to be more efficacious.

No abstract