Explore the vast range of titles available.

Liver transplantation (LT) provides the best long-term survival outcomes for patients with liver cancer. As a result, the field of transplant oncology has grown greatly over the past few decades, and many centers have expanded their criteria to allow increased access to LT for liver malignancies. Center-level guidelines and practices in transplant oncology significantly vary across the world, leading to debate regarding the best course of treatment for this patient population. An international consensus conference was convened by the International Liver Transplantation Society and the International Liver Cancer Association on February 1–2, 2024, in Valencia, Spain, to establish a more universal consensus regarding LT for oncologic indications. The conference followed the Delphi process, followed by external expert review. Consensus statements were accepted regarding patient assessment and waitlisting criteria, pretransplant treatment (including immunotherapy) and downstaging, living donor LT, post-LT patient management, and patient- and caregiver-related outcomes. The multidisciplinary participants in the consensus conference provided up-to-date recommendations regarding the selection and management of patients with liver cancer being considered for LT. Although participants deferred to center protocols in many cases, there was great interest in safely expanding access to LT for patients with larger tumor burden and biologically amenable lesions.

Confronted with rapid and complex changes in the digital era, both the Indonesian and Dutch Supreme Court have been granted the powers of providing legal solutions at an early stage of the legal process. The Dutch Parliament introduced the Law on Prejudicial Questions whereas the Indonesian Supreme Court reinstated the chamber system. Each year, pressing legal issues are discussed by the Supreme Court judges in the chambers and the legal solutions published in a circular ( Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung , SEMA) as guidelines to be followed by lower courts. In this paper we compare both ‘legal shortcuts’ and argue that, while the goal of legal unity is an urgent issue in Indonesia, to be able to properly function as legal guidelines for judges and lawyers SEMA require a more detailed description of the legal issue and legal reasoning behind the offered legal solutions.