ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) C stage demonstrates considerable heterogeneity because it includes patients with either symptomatic tumors (performance status [PS], 1–2) or with an invasive tumoral pattern reflected by the presence of vascular invasion (VI) or extrahepatic spread (EHS). This study aimed to derive a more relevant staging system by modification of the BCLC system considering the prognostic implication of PS. METHODS: A total of 7,501 subjects who were registered in the Korean multicenter hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) registry database from 2008 to 2013 were analyzed. The relative goodness-of-fit between staging systems was compared using the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and integrated area under the curve (IAUC). Three modified BCLC (m-BCLC) systems (#1, #2, and #3) were devised by reducing the role of PS. RESULTS: As a result, the BCLC C stage, which includes patients with PS 1–2 without VI/EHS, was reassigned to stage 0, A, or B according to their tumor burden in the m-BCLC #2 model. This model was identified as the most explanatory and desirable model for HCC staging by demonstrating the smallest AIC (AIC=70,088.01) and the largest IAUC (IAUC=0.722), while the original BCLC showed the largest AIC (AIC=70,697.17) and the smallest IAUC (IAUC=0.705). The m-BCLC #2 stage C was further subclassified into C1, C2, C3, and C4 according to the Child-Pugh score, PS, presence of EHS, and tumor extent. The C1 to C4 subgroups showed significantly different overall survival distribution between groups (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An accurate and relevant staging system for patients with HCC was derived though modification of the BCLC system based on PS.
Subject(s)
Humans , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Liver , Population Characteristics , Tumor BurdenABSTRACT
Objective To compare the prognostic ability of Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging system with that of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system for Chinese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after receiving transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).Methods The clinical data of 180 Chinese patients with primary HCC,who were treated with TACE during the period from August 2008 to December 2015,were retrospectively analyzed.HCC staging of each patient was scored by two staging methods separately.Kaplan-Meier analysis was adopted to separately calculate the median survival time of each stage that was judged by the two staging methods.The likelihood ratio (LR) x2 values,the Akaike information criterion (AIC) value and Harrell's C value of the two staging methods were calculated.Results Statistically significant differences in the survival time of each period existed between the two staging systems.AIC value,LRx2 value and Harrell's C value of HKLC staging system were 1360,66.6,and 0.813 respectively,while those of BCLC staging system were 1365,61.8,and 0.772 respectively.Conclusion Compared with BCLC staging,HKLC staging is more suitable for predicting the survival time of Chinese patients with primary liver cancer treated with TACE.
ABSTRACT
Background & Aim: Many liver staging systems have been proposed for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however it is still controversial which staging system is best. The aim of this study was to compare the ability of 7 different staging systems in predicting survival in an Indian cohort of patients with HCC. Methods: In this prospective study, 101 HCC patients were diagnosed and stratified according to 7 different staging systems; along with analysis of independent predictors of survival and their correlation with it (Kaplan-Meier analysis). Results: CLIP, Tokyo score and BCLC staging system showed a significant difference in the probability of survival. All other staging systems failed to show a significant difference in survival. Age, portal vein thrombosis, serum bilirubin, MELD score showed a significant difference with survival in univariate analysis. However, serum bilirubin was the independent predictor of survival with a hazard ratio of 1.609 (95% CI 1.015-2.553, p= 0.043). Conclusion: The CLIP, Tokyo score and BCLC are the most useful staging systems in an Indian cohort.