Hong Kong Liver Cancer Research Articles

Prognostic performance of Hong Kong Liver Cancer with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging systems in hepatocellular carcinoma

BackgroundAccurate staging is necessary for predicting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis and guiding patient management. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system has limitations due to heterogeneity observed among patients in BCLC stages B and C. In contrast, the Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging system offers more aggressive treatment strategies.AimTo compare the prognostic performance of HKLC and BCLC staging systems in Egyptian patients with HCC.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study at the National Liver Institute, Menoufia University, Egypt, on 1015 HCC patients. Data was collected from patients’ medical records over 10 years (from 2008 to 2018). The BCLC and HKLC stages were identified, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to compare patients’ overall survival rates within each staging system. Additionally, we evaluated the comparative prognostic performance of the two staging systems.ResultsHepatitis C was identified as the underlying etiology in 799 patients (78.7%), hepatitis B in 12 patients (1.2%), and non-viral causes in 204 patients (20.1%). The survival analysis demonstrated significant differences across the various stages within both the BCLC and HKLC systems. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves indicated a marginally superior performance of the HKLC system in predicting survival at 1, 2, and 3 years compared to the BCLC system. Furthermore, the HKLC staging provided a slightly enhanced prognostic capability, particularly for patients classified under BCLC stages B and C, suggesting a potential survival benefit.ConclusionHKLC classification had a slightly better prognostic performance than BCLC staging system and may offer a survival advantage for certain patients with HCC in BCLC stage B and C HCC cases.

Pre-operative Trans-arterial treatment in Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) stage IIB hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity matched and intention to treat analysis

Pre-operative Trans-arterial treatment in Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) stage IIB hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity matched and intention to treat analysis

Ideal patients for liver resection in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer or Hong Kong Liver clinic systems for hepatocellular carcinoma: Conservative or aggressive?

BackgroundBoth the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging and the Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging have their own definitions of ideal patients for liver resection (IPLR) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to compare the prognosis of IPLRs between the BCLC and HKLC staging systems, and to identify patients who may benefit from liver resection (LR) in the HKLC staging but beyond the BCLC staging.MethodsThis retrospective study evaluated 1,296 consecutive patients with HCC who underwent LR between August 2013 and April 2021 (457 patients and 1,046 patients were IPLR according to the BCLC and HKLC staging systems, respectively). Overall survival (OS) was compared between the two groups. To assess potential benefit of LR for IPLR in the HKLC staging but beyond the BCLC staging, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to determine prognostic factors of OS, and prognostic stratification was performed based on the selected prognostic factors. The IPLRs in the HKLC staging but beyond the BCLC staging were divided into subgroups according to the prognostic stratification and separately compared with the IPLRs in the BCLC staging.ResultsOS was different between the two staging systems (P = 0.011). All the 457 IPLRs in the BCLC staging were also the IPLRs in the HKLC staging. Diameter of the largest tumor5 cm (HR = 1.58; 95% CI: 1.18–2.10; P = 0.002) and liver cirrhosis (HR = 1.61; 95% CI: 1.19–2.20; P = 0.002) were risk factors for poor OS in IPLRs in the HKLC staging but beyond the BCLC staging; hence, patients were divided into the low-risk (n = 104), intermediate-risk (n = 369), and high-risk groups (n = 116) accordingly. There was no difference in OS between patients in the BCLC staging and patients in low-risk group (P = 0.996). However, OS was significantly different between patients in the BCLC staging and those in intermediate-risk (P = 0.003) and high-risk groups (P < 0.001).ConclusionIPLRs in the BCLC staging system have better prognosis. However, IPLRs in the HKLC staging system but beyond the BCLC staging may have equivalent prognosis to IPLRs in the BCLC staging if the tumor size is ≤ 5 cm and liver cirrhosis is absent.

Prognostic Value of Microvascular Invasion in Eight Existing Staging Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Bi-Centeric Retrospective Cohort Study.

BackgroundMicrovascular invasion (MVI) is a significant risk factor affecting survival outcomes of patients after R0 liver resection (LR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, whether the existing staging systems of hepatocellular carcinoma can distinguish the prognosis of patients with MVI and the prognostic value of MVI in different subtypes of hepatocellular carcinoma remains to be clarified.MethodsA dual-center retrospective data set of 1,198 HCC patients who underwent R0 LR was included in the study between 2014 and 2016. Baseline characteristics and staging information were collected. Homogeneity and modified Akaike information criterion (AICc) were compared between each system. And the prognostic significance of MVI for overall survival (OS) was studied in each subgroup.ResultsIn the entire cohort, there were no significant survival differences between Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) score 2 and 3 (p = 0.441), and between Taipei Integrated Scoring System (TIS) score 3 and 4 (p = 0.135). In the MVI cohort, there were no significant survival differences between Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stages B and C (p=0.161), CLIP scores 2 and 3 (p = 0.083), TIS scores 0 and 1 (p = 0.227), TIS scores 2 and 3 (p =0.794), Tokyo scores 3 and 4 (p=0.353), and American Joint Committee on Cancer Tumor-Node-Metastasis 7th stage I and II (p=0.151). Among the eight commonly used HCC staging systems, the Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging system showed the highest homogeneity and the lowest AICc value in both the entire cohort and MVI cohort. In each subgroup of the staging systems, MVI generally exhibited poor survival outcomes.ConclusionsThe HKLC staging system was the most accurate model for discriminating the prognosis of MVI patients, among the eight staging systems. Meanwhile, our findings suggest that MVI may be needed to be incorporated into the current HCC staging systems as one of the grading criteria.

Selecting an Optimal Staging System for Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Comparison of 9 Currently Used Prognostic Models.

PurposeIt remains unknown which staging system is best in predicting the survival of patients with intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to investigate the performance of nine currently used HCC staging systems.Patients and MethodsBetween 2005 and 2014, a large cohort of 880 consecutive patients with intermediate stage HCC and sufficient data for utilization in all staging systems were enrolled. The prognostic performance of each staging system was compared. Independent prognostic variables were also identified.ResultsMultivariate analysis revealed that alkaline phosphatase (ALP), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), etiology, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), Child-Pugh stage, tumor size, and tumor number were independent prognostic factors for survival. In the entire cohort, the Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging system was associated with the highest Harrell’s c-index and lowest Akaike information criterion value in comparison with other systems. In subgroup analysis according to treatment strategy, the HKLC staging system remained the best prognostic model in patients undergoing hepatic resection (n=222) or transarterial chemoembolization (n=658). Additional prognostic factors of AST, ALP, etiology, and AFP improved the discriminatory ability of HKLC.ConclusionThe HKLC staging system is stable and consistently the best prognostic model in all patients with intermediate-stage HCC and in patients subjected to different treatment strategies. Selecting an optimal staging system is helpful in improving the design of future clinical trials in intermediate stage HCC.

Real-World Data on Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Liver Cancer: A Prospective Validation of the National Cancer Centre Singapore Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Introduction: Real-world management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is crucially challenging in the current rapidly evolving clinical environment which includes the need for respecting patient preferences and autonomy. In this context, regional/national treatment guidelines nuanced to local demographics have increasing importance in guiding disease management. We report here real-world data on clinical outcomes in HCC from a validation of the Consensus Guidelines for HCC at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS). Method: We evaluated the NCCS guidelines using prospectively collected real-world data, comparing the efficacy of treatment received using overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Treatment outcomes were also independently evaluated against 2 external sets of guidelines, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) and Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC). Results: Overall treatment compliance to the NCCS guidelines was 79.2%. Superior median OS was observed in patients receiving treatment compliant with NCCS guidelines for early (nonestimable vs. 23.5 months p < 0.0001), locally advanced (28.1 vs. 22.2 months p = 0.0216) and locally advanced with macrovascular invasion (10.3 vs. 3.3 months p = 0.0013) but not for metastatic HCC (8.1 vs. 6.8 months p = 0.6300), but PFS was similar. Better clinical outcomes were seen in BCLC C patients who received treatment compliant with NCCS guidelines than in patients with treatment only allowed by BCLC guidelines (median OS 14.2 vs. 7.4 months p = 0.0002; median PFS 6.1 vs. 4.0 months p = 0.0286). Clinical outcomes were, however, similar for patients across all HKLC stages receiving NCCS-recommended treatment regardless of whether their treatment was allowed by HKLC. Conclusion: The high overall compliance rate and satisfactory clinical outcomes of patients managed according to the NCCS guidelines confirm its validity. This validation using real-world data considers patient and treating clinician preferences, thus providing a realistic analysis of the usefulness of the NCCS guidelines when applied in the clinics.

An overview in management of hepatocellular carcinoma in Hong Kong using the Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging system.

In Hong Kong, liver cancer is the fifth most common cancer and the third most common cause of cancer deaths. The prevalence of hepatitis B is high in Hong Kong because of the high rate of hepatitis B virus infection, and chronic hepatitis B has remained the leading cause of hepatocellular carcinoma in the city, accounting for 80% of all cases in the period from 1992 to 2016. In view of the different etiologies of hepatocellular carcinoma around the world, a group of liver experts in Hong Kong developed the Hong Kong Liver Cancer staging system in order to provide more aggressive treatment guidance (predominantly a wider use of surgical resection) for Asian patients of hepatocellular carcinoma. In this article focussing on the Hong Kong Liver Cancer staging system, we briefly reviewed the screening criteria adopted in Hong Kong for liver resection, local ablation, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, transcatheter arterial radioembolization, stereotactic body radiation therapy, and systemic therapy.

"Six-and-twelve" score for outcome prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma following transarterial chemoembolization. In-depth analysis from a multicenter French cohort.

The “six-and-twelve” (6&12) score is a new hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognostic index designed for recommended transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) candidates. Quick and easy to use by the sum of tumor size (cm) and number, this model identifies three groups with different survival time (the sum is ≤ 6; or > 6 but ≤ 12; or > 12); a survival benefit with TACE can be expected for HCC patients with a score not exceeding twelve. Recently, Wang ZW et al showed that the “6&12” model was the best system correlated with radiological response after the first TACE. Thus, we wanted to assess its survival prediction ability as well as its prognostic value and compared it to other systems (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer, Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging, Albumin-Bilirubin grade, tumor nodularity, infiltrative nature of the tumor, alpha-fetoprotein, Child-Pugh class, and Performance Status score, Cancer of the Liver Italian Program, Model to Estimate Survival for HCC scores, up-to-seven criteria) different from Wang ZW et al study in a multicenter French cohort of HCC including only recommended TACE candidates retrospectively enrolled. As previously demonstrated, we show that the "6&12” score can classify survival within this French cohort, with a prognostic value comparable to that of other systems, except HKLC staging. More importantly, the “6&12” score simplicity and ability in patients’ stratification outperform other systems for a routine clinical practice.

Role of the E3 Ubiquitin Ligase TRIM4 in Predicting the Prognosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

The E3 ubiquitin ligase TRIM4 has been reported to regulate the assembly of the antiviral signalling complex, induce mitochondrial aggregation and sensitize cells to H2O2-induced death. However, the relationship between TRIM4 and human malignancies, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is unclear. In this study, we detected the expression of TRIM4 in 134 pairs of HCC tissues and peritumoural tissues and investigated the association of TRIM4 expression with the prognosis of HCC. We found that the TRIM4 expression was much lower in HCC tissues than in peritumoural tissues and was significantly associated with vascular invasion, tumour capsule and Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) stage. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that the TRIM4 expression was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in our HCC cohort. Patients with higher TRIM4 expression had a lower incidence of intrahepatic recurrence and a higher OS rate (p<0.001 and p<0.01, respectively). These results were further validated in another independent cohort of 200 HCC patients. In conclusion, the TRIM4 level in HCC tissues is an independent prognostic factor for HCC patients. Close clinical monitoring is recommended for patients with low TRIM4 expression.

Hepatocellular carcinoma staging systems: Hong Kong liver cancer vs Barcelona clinic liver cancer in a Western population.

BACKGROUNDDespite being the world’s most widely used system for staging and therapeutic guidance in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment, the Barcelona clinic liver cancer (BCLC) system has limitations, especially regarding intermediate-grade (BCLC-B) tumors. The recently proposed Hong Kong liver cancer (HKLC) staging system appears useful but requires validation in Western populations.AIMTo evaluate the agreement between BCLC and HKLC staging on the management of HCC in a Western population, estimating the overall patient survival.METHODSThis was a retrospective study of HCC patients treated at a university hospital in southern Brazil between 2011 and 2016. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected. HCC staging was carried out according to the HKLC and BCLC systems to assess treatment agreement. Overall survival was estimated based on the treatment proposed in each system.RESULTSA total of 519 HCC patients were assessed. Of these, 178 (34.3%) were HKLC-I; 95 (18.3%) HKLC-IIA; 47 (9.1%) HKLC-IIB; 29 (5.6%) HKLC-IIIA; 30 (5.8%) HKLC-IIIB; 75 (14.4%) HKLC-IV; and 65 (12.5%) HKLC-V. According to the BCLC, 25 (4.9%) were BCLC-0; 246 (47.4%) BCLC-A; 107 (20.6%) BCLC-B; 76 (14.6%) BCLC-C; and 65 (12.5%) BCLC-D. The general agreement between the two systems was 80.0% - BCLC-0 and HKLC-I (100%); BCLC-A and HKLC-I/HKLC-II (96.7%); BCLC-B and HKLC-III (46.7%); BCLC-C and HKLC-IV (98.7%); BCLC-D and HKLC-V (41.5%). When sub-classifying BCLC-A, HKLC-IIB, HKLC-IIIA and HKLC-IIIB stages according to the up-to-7 in/out criterion, 13.4, 66.0, 100 and 36.7%, respectively, of the cases were classified as up-to-7 out.CONCLUSIONIn a Western population, the general agreement between the two systems was 80.0%, although in BCLC-B cases the agreement was low, suggesting that some individuals could be candidates for the curative treatment recommended by the HKLC. The authors suggest that the BCLC system should be routinely employed, although for BCLC-B cases it should be associated with the HKLC system.

BCLC-B Subclassification and the Hong Kong Liver Cancer System in Intermediate Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Identifying Candidates for Curative Therapy.

The intermediate stage of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification includes a heterogenous population of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and palliative treatment with transarterial chemoembolization is recommended for all of them. In this regard, 2 other classifications could be useful, the subclassification BCLC-B (SUB) and the classification Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC). To determine the indication of curative or palliative treatment between SUB and HKLC in BCLC-B patients. A retrospective study in HCC patients seen between 2011 and 2016 in southern Brazil. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected. HCC staging was performed with BCLC, SUB, and HKLC. A total of 570 patients with HCC were assessed, of whom 95 were classified as BCLC-B: 25 (26.0%) B1, 48 (50.5%) B2, 9 (9.5%) B3, and 13 (13.7%) B4. Overall median survival was 21.1 (95% confidence interval, 14.2-28.0) months. Median survival was higher for BCLC-B1 patients than in subgroups B3 (P=0.046) and B4 (P=0.001), and this was also seen for B2 versus B4 (P=0.044). Regarding the HKLC classification, a significantly higher median survival was observed for HKLC-I and HKLC-IIB in relation to the categories HKLC-IIIA (P<0.001 and 0.004, respectively) and HKLC-IIIB (P<0.001 and 0.006, respectively). When HKLC was applied, the following were identified as candidates for curative treatment: BCLC-B1, 24 (96.0%); BCLC-B2, 26 (54.2%); BCLC-B3, 0 (0%); and BCLC-B4, 3 (23.1%). In intermediate HCC, SUB was able to identify a subset of patients with a higher overall survival. According to HKLC, 55.8% of BCLC-B patients could receive curative treatment.

Abstract No. 514 A comparison of Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging for overall survival in patients undergoing TACE for hepatocellular carcinoma

Abstract No. 514 A comparison of Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging for overall survival in patients undergoing TACE for hepatocellular carcinoma

Staging systems of hepatocellular carcinoma: A review.

Staging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is necessary for guiding prognostication, management, and research purposes that further aid in the improvement of existing clinical and epidemiological health services. Though there are some new staging systems for HCC developed in different parts of the world, there is no globally accepted staging system that allows for comparison of current management protocols among heterogeneous populations. In this review, we discuss the evolution and applicability in clinical practice of different clinical staging systems of HCC-Okuda, CLIP (Cancer of the Liver Italian Program) score, MESIAH (Model to Estimate Survival In Ambulatory HCC patients) score, ITA.LI.CA (Italian Liver Cancer) score, BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) staging, HKLC (Hong Kong Liver Cancer) staging, and the Alberta algorithm. This review aims to highlight the main criteria for assessing the prognosis of HCC that these different staging systems take into account, their strengths and limitations for use in modern clinical practice. Despite the limitations of the BCLC staging system, it remains the most validated and reliable system for prognostication. However, there is a need to update the BCLC staging system to include recent data on locoregional and systemic therapies for HCC, expanded criteria for transplantation, and systemic therapy for hepatitis C infection.

Evaluation of Hong Kong liver cancer (HKLC) classification for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing surgical resection at tertiary care cancer centre in India

Evaluation of Hong Kong liver cancer (HKLC) classification for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing surgical resection at tertiary care cancer centre in India

Multicentric Assessment of the Hong Kong Liver Cancer Staging System in Chinese Patients Following Transarterial Chemoembolization.

We aimed to validate the performance of the hepatitis B-based Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging system compared with the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system in Chinese hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with conventional transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) as the initial treatment. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards at all participating centers. This retrospective study included 715 patients with HCC who underwent TACE as the initial treatment between January 2008 and December 2016 at three Chinese institutions. All of the patients calculated HCC stage using 5-substage HKLC (HKLC-5), 9-substage HKLC (HKLC-9), and the BCLC system. Based on overall survival (OS), these three staging systems' performance on treatment outcome prediction were compared using C statistic, Akaike information criterion (AIC), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), linear trend Chi-square, likelihood ratio Chi-square, and calibration plots, respectively. The median OS was 10.1months. Compared with the BCLC system, the HKLC system, especially HKLC-9, showed better performance on survival prediction (HKLC-9: C = 0.689, AIC = 6646.162; HKLC-5: C = 0.683, AIC = 6662.663; BCLC: C = 0.680, AIC = 6654.146), homogeneity (likelihood ratio Chi-square: HKLC-9 = 232.38, HKLC-5 = 215.87, and BCLC = 224.39, P < 0.001), and calibration (R2: HKLC-9 = 0.923, HKLC-5 = 0.916, and BCLC = 0.914). HKLC-9 outperformed on AUC at 6-, 12-, and 24-month survival prediction than HKLC-5 and BCLC. BCLC showed better performance on monotonicity (linear trend Chi-square: HKLC-9 = 121.641, HKLC-5 = 117.389, and BCLC = 125.752; P < 0.001). Combining survival prediction, discrimination, and calibration, the HKLC, especially HKLC-9 system, performed better for Chinese patients treated with TACE than the BCLC system.

Tumor stage and primary treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma at a large tertiary hospital in China: A real-world study.

The current clinical reality of tumor stages and primary treatments of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is poorly understood. This study reviewed the distribution of tumor stages and primary treatment modalities among a large population of patients with primary HCC. Medical records of patients treated between January 2003 and October 2013 for primary HCC at our tertiary hospital in China were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 6241 patients were analyzed. The distribution of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages was as follows: stage 0/A, 28.9%; stage B, 16.2%; stage C, 53.6%; stage D, 1.3%. The distribution of Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) stages was as follows: stage I, 8.4%; stage IIa, 1.5%; stage IIb, 29.0%; stage IIIa, 10.0%; stage IIIb, 33.6%; stage IVa, 3.4%; stage IVb, 2.5%; stage Va, 0.2%; stage Vb, 11.4%. The most frequent therapy was hepatic resection for patients with BCLC-0/A/B disease, and transarterial chemoembolization for patients with BCLC-C disease. Both these treatments were the most frequent for patients with HKLC I to IIIb disease, while systemic chemotherapy was the most frequent first-line therapy for patients with HKLC IVa or IVb disease. The most frequent treatment for patients with HKLC Va/Vb disease was traditional Chinese medicine. In conclusion, Prevalences of BCLC-B and -C disease, and of HKLC I to IIIb disease, were relatively high in our patient population. Hepatic resection and transarterial chemoembolization were frequent first-line therapies.

Validation of The Hong Kong Liver Cancer Staging System in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Curative Intent Treatment

Backgrounds:Recently Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging system has been proposed for staging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and has been shown to provide better prognostic ability than the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) system. However, the HKLC system lacks external validation, and its applicability remains uncertain. The present study was aimed to evaluate the prognostic performance of HKLC in HCC patients treated with curative intent.Methods:Medical records of HCC patients treated with either resection or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) from 2011 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. The overall survival and the prognostic ability of the HKLC and BCLC system were evaluated.Results:79 HCC patients were included, of which 64.56% had Child A cirrhosis. Chronic viral hepatitis B infection was the leading cause of HCC, followed by chronic viral hepatitis C infection, alcohol and alcohol with HBV or HCV infection. According to the BCLC system, 82.28% were in stage 0-A, and according to the HKLC system, 93.67% were in stage I-IIb. RFA and liver resection were the primary treatment in 56.96% and 43.04%, respectively. The 5-year survival rate of patients in HKLC stage I, IIa and IIb were 81.64%, 61.66%, and 54.42%, respectively (P<0.001). Whereas, the 5-year survival rate of patients in BCLC stage 0, A and B were 60.00%, 75.90%, and 26.65%, respectively (P=0.053). The AUROC curve of the HKLC and BCLC for the entire cohort was 0.77 and 0.64, respectively (P=0.15). Subgroup analysis showed the AUROC curve of the HKLC and BCLC for the patients with viral-associated HCC was 0.79 and 0.68, respectively (P=0.02).Conclusions:Applying the HKLC staging system provides a good discriminative ability for survival prediction in HCC patients treated with curative intent. Comparing with the BCLC system, the HKLC system tends to yield better prognostic accuracy, particularly in viral-associated HCC.

Proposal and validation of a new model to estimate survival for hepatocellular carcinoma patients

Background and aimsThe survival of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients is heterogeneous. We aim to develop and validate a simple prognostic model to estimate survival for HCC patients (MESH score). MethodsA total of 3182 patients were randomised into derivation and validation cohort. Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent predictors of survival in the derivation cohort. The validation cohort was employed to examine the prognostic capabilities. ResultsThe MESH score allocated 1 point for each of the following parameters: large tumour (beyond Milan criteria), presence of vascular invasion or metastasis, Child-Turcotte-Pugh score ≥6, performance status ≥2, serum alpha-fetoprotein level ≥20 ng/ml, and serum alkaline phosphatase ≥200 IU/L, with a maximal of 6 points. In the validation cohort, significant survival differences were found across all MESH scores from 0 to 6 (all p < 0.01). The MESH system was associated with the highest homogeneity and lowest corrected Akaike information criterion compared with Barcelona Clínic Liver Cancer, Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC), Cancer of the Liver Italian Program, Taipei Integrated Scoring and model to estimate survival in ambulatory HCC Patients systems. The prognostic accuracy of the MESH scores remained constant in patients with hepatitis B- or hepatitis C-related HCC. The MESH score can also discriminate survival for patients from early to advanced stages of HCC. ConclusionsThis newly proposed simple and accurate survival model provides enhanced prognostic accuracy for HCC. The MESH system is a useful supplement to the BCLC and HKLC classification schemes in refining treatment strategies.

Validity of the Barcelona clinic liver cancer (BCLC) and Hong Kong liver cancer (HKLC) staging system in determining treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Singapore

Various staging systems have been introduced to stage and guide the therapeutic approach in patients diagnosed with HCC. The goal of our study is to compare paradigms in the HCC staging system, specifically, the BCLC and HKLC system, and to ultimately determine which framework Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH), Singapore, employs more often. Generally, the HKLC algorithm provides a more refined staging and offers more aggressive treatments than the BCLC algorithm. A retrospective analysis was done, in which patients diagnosed with HCC at TTSH between 2010 and 2015 were identified and staged according to both the BCLC and HKLC staging system. The offered treatment was recorded and compared against the recommended treatment algorithm corresponding to each staging framework. Through this comparison, we determined which algorithm was followed by the hospital, if any at all. 779 patients were identified and in 475 (60.8%) cases, either the BCLC or HKLC was followed. 155 (19.9%) patients exclusively used the treatment algorithm recommended by HKLC while 78 (10.0%) patients exclusively followed the treatment algorithm recommended by BCLC. In the cases that exclusively followed the HKLC system, more aggressive treatments were offered than if the BCLC algorithm had been followed instead. In 242 (31.1%) cases, both algorithms recommend the same treatment modality and hence, these patients followed both staging systems. Finally, the treatment offered to 304 (39.0%) patients did not correspond to either of the staging systems. In general, the HKLC staging system was adopted by the hospital in a higher percentage of cases.

Assessment of the Hong Kong Liver Cancer Staging System in Europe

European and American guidelines have endorsed the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the recently developed Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) classification as a staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Europe. We used a pooled set of 1693 HCC patients combining three prospective European cohorts. Discrimination ability between the nine substages and five stages of the HKLC classification system was assessed. To evaluate the predictive power of the HKLC and BCLC staging systems on overall survival, Nagelkerke pseudo R2, Bayesian Information Criterion and Harrell's concordance index were calculated. The number of patients who would benefit from a curative therapy was assessed for both staging systems. The HKLC classification in nine substages shows suboptimal discrimination between the staging groups. The classification in five stages shows better discrimination between groups. However, the BCLC classification performs better than the HKLC classification in the ability to predict overall survival (OS). The HKLC treatment algorithm tags significantly more patients to curative therapy than the BCLC. The BCLC staging system performs better for European patients than the HKLC staging system in predicting OS. Twice more patients are eligible for a curative therapy with the HKLC algorithm; whether this translates in survival benefit remains to be investigated.