Retrospective Cohort Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 14, 2017; 23(14): 2545-2555
Published online Apr 14, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i14.2545
Table 1 Patients’ characteristics at diagnosis (n = 1102) and first hepatocellular carcinoma recorded treatment n (%)
All patients (n = 1102)
Age - Median (Q1-Q3), yr68 (60-74)
Gender
Male/Female943 (86)/159 (14)
Liver disease
Alcoholism/HCV/HBV/MS/ Other452 (41)/297 (27)/66 (6)/99 (9)/188 (17)
Cirrhosis895 (81)
Child - Pugh grade
A/B653 (73)/242 (27)
Tumor Size (Q1-Q3) mm43 (20-75)
Multifocal654 (59)
Nodules
< 3/≥ 3633 (57)/469 (43)
Portal vein thrombosis452 (41)
Infiltrative HCC469 (43)
AFP - Median [Q1-Q3], ng/mL53 (7-1300)
ECOG (PS)
0/1-2/3-4553 (50)/506 (46)/43 (4)
BCLC stage
A/B/C/D187 (17)/177 (16)/658 (60)/80 (7)
Treatment allocation
Resection/RFA ± TACE259 (23.5)
TACE260 (23.5)
Sorafenib342 (31)
Other palliative treatments56 (5)
Supportive care185 (17)
Table 2 Comparison of predictive accuracy for overall survival between the nomogram and the conventional staging and scoring systems (Barcelona clinic liver cancer, HKLC, CLIP, NIACE)
ScoreDiscriminatory ability linear trend test
Homogeneity likelihood ratio test
Akaike information criterionC-index
LT (χ²)P valueLR (χ²)P value
BCLC Nomogram93.2169< 0.0001500.7218< 0.000110679.5130.719
NIACE91.6906< 0.0001532.0369< 0.000110648.1980.718
BCLC79.0342< 0.0001380.4100< 0.000110805.8250.674
HKLC71.8861< 0.0001455.3169< 0.000110740.9180.698
CLIP87.2785< 0.0001430.3872< 0.000110749.8480.716
Nomogram according to BCLC last version86.1320< 0.0001417.4356< 0.000110762.7990.698