BackgroundHCC is diagnosed in approximately half a million people per year, worldwide. Staging is a more complex issue than in most other cancer entities and, mainly due to unique geographic characteristics of the disease, no universally accepted staging system exists to date. Focusing on survival rates we analyzed demographic, etiological, clinical, laboratory and tumor characteristics of HCC-patients in our institution and applied the common staging systems. Furthermore we aimed at identifying the most suitable of the current staging systems for predicting survival.Methodology/Principal FindingsOverall, 405 patients with HCC were identified from an electronic medical record database. The following seven staging systems were applied and ranked according to their ability to predict survival by using the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and the concordance-index (c-index): BCLC, CLIP, GETCH, JIS, Okuda, TNM and Child-Pugh. Separately, every single variable of each staging system was tested for prognostic meaning in uni- and multivariate analysis. Alcoholic cirrhosis (44.4%) was the leading etiological factor followed by viral hepatitis C (18.8%). Median survival was 18.1 months (95%-CI: 15.2–22.2). Ascites, bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, AFP, number of tumor nodes and the BCLC tumor extension remained independent prognostic factors in multivariate analysis. Overall, all of the tested staging systems showed a reasonable discriminatory ability. CLIP (closely followed by JIS) was the top-ranked score in terms of prognostic capability with the best values of the AIC and c-index (AIC 2286, c-index 0.71), surpassing other established staging systems like BCLC (AIC 2343, c-index 0.66). The unidimensional scores TNM (AIC 2342, c-index 0.64) and Child-Pugh (AIC 2369, c-index 0.63) performed in an inferior fashion.Conclusions/SignificanceCompared with six other staging systems, the CLIP-score was identified as the most suitable staging system for predicting prognosis in a large German cohort of predominantly non-surgical HCC-patients.
We identified independent risk factors for patients treated with TACE. The newly constructed M-TACE score is superior to established staging systems and might prove helpful to identify patients who are most suitable for TACE.
<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) is a local treatment option for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Its exact role next to other HCC therapies has yet to be defined. In order to identify patients most suitable for SIRT, a SIRT-specific prognostic score should be developed. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A cohort of 72 SIRT patients treated at the University Hospital of Munich was retrospectively analyzed. The prognostic performance of 12 HCC staging systems and prognostic scores was assessed. Cox-regression analysis was used to identify independent prognostic factors, which formed the basis of the Munich-SIRT score (M-SIRT). All scores were ranked by calculating the c-Index and Akaike information criterion (AIC). External validation was performed in a cohort of 128 SIRT patients treated at the University Hospital of Pamplona, Spain. <b><i>Results:</i></b> median overall survival was 13 months (95% confidence interval 9.9–21.9). AFP (<i>p</i> = 0.005; hazard ratio [HR] 2.38), albumin (<i>p</i> < 0.001; HR 5.87), and alkaline phosphatase (<i>p</i> < 0.001; HR 8.38) were identified as independent prognostic factors. M-SIRT comprises 3 prognostic groups with a median survival of 38.9, 14.6, and 7.7 months, respectively (I vs. II: <i>p</i> = 0.003, II vs. III: <i>p</i> < 0.001). AIC (318) and concordance index (0.711) ranked M-SIRT superior to the established HCC staging systems, and the score successfully passed external validation in an independent SIRT cohort (I vs. II: <i>p</i> = 0.03; II vs. III: <i>p</i> = 0.007). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Therapy-specific prognostic scores can facilitate treatment decisions and prognostication for HCC patients. Considering its performance in 200 SIRT patients, M-SIRT is a promising prognostic tool for HCC patients evaluated for SIRT.
Background/Aims: The recently proposed Munich-transarterial chemoembolisation-score (M-TACE) was tailored to suit hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) patients evaluated for TACE. M-TACE outperformed the established HCC-staging-systems and successfully passed external validation. Modifications of staging-systems through the rearrangement of stages or by adding prognostic factors are methods of improving prognostic power. M-TACEs performance compared to scores modified this way should be tested. Methods: Seven well-known HCC staging-systems (including Cancer of the Liver Italian Program-score [CLIP] and Barcelona Clinic liver cancer [BCLC]) and 2 TACE-specific scores (Selection for Transarterial Chemoembolisation Treatment [STATE] and Hepatoma Arterial embolisation Prognostic [HAP]) were rearranged in a cohort of 186 TACE-patients through score-point-analysis and subsequent linking of non-significant adjacent score-points. Additionally, a new score was constructed by combining the top established staging-system in TACE patients (CLIP-TACE) and the prognostic parameter with the highest hazard ratio for death in the TACE-cohort [C-reactive protein (CRP)]. Additionally, the TACE-tailored-scores were applied to an external TACE-cohort (n = 71). Results: Rearrangement resulted in optimal stratification and monotonicity. CLIP-TACE demonstrated the best prognostic capability of all rearranged scores (c-index 0.668, AIC 1294) and the addition of CRP yielded further prognostic improvement (c-index 0.680, AIC 1289). However, superiority over M-TACE could not be achieved by any of the new scores in the internal and external cohort. Conclusion: M-TACE outperforms TACE-tailored modifications of all relevant HCC-staging-systems. Prospective validation of M-TACE to promote its role as the preferred staging-system for TACE-patients is therefore justified.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.