Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Hepatol. May 28, 2017; 9(15): 711-714
Published online May 28, 2017. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v9.i15.711
Published online May 28, 2017. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v9.i15.711
Table 1 Baseline characteristics in European hepatocellular carcinoma cohort (n = 581) n (%)
| Patients characteristics | Cohort (n = 581) |
| Age, yr, mean ± SD | 67.4 ± 11.7 |
| Male | 475 (82) |
| Etiology - HCV/HBV/Alcohol/MS/others | 209 (36)/41 (7)/215 (37)/87 (15)/29 (5) |
| Cirrhosis | 505 (87) |
| Child - Pugh stage1 A/B | 323 (64)/182 (36) |
| Maximal tumor diameter, mean ± SD | 60.9 ± 39.1 |
| Tumor nodularities (1/2/≥ 3), n (%) | 227 (39%)/76 (13%)/278 (48) |
| Infiltrative tumor | 235 (40) |
| Extrahepatic metastasis | 59 (10) |
| Vascular invasion | 213 (37) |
| Performance status 0/1/2-4 | 276 (48)/136 (23)/169 (29) |
| Laboratory values (mean ± SD) | |
| Alkaline phosphatase (IU/L) > 200 | 112 (19) |
| PT (%), mean ± SD | 78.0 ± 15.8 |
| Albumin (g/L), mean ± SD | 34.7 ± 6.1 |
| Aspartate transaminase (IU/L), mean ± SD | 68.7 ± 60.7 |
| Alpha-fetoprotein (ng/mL), mean ± SD | 5680 ± 31332 |
| Tumor stages | |
| BCLC (A/B/C/D), n (%) | 181 (31)/92 (16)/241 (41)/67 (12) |
| Treatment allocation | |
| Resection or RFA, n (%) | 131 (23) |
| TACE, n (%) | 175 (30) |
| Sorafenib, n (%) | 152 (26) |
| Supportive care, n (%) | 123 (21) |
| Follow-up Time, mo, mean ± SD | 18.3 ± 20.3 |
| Deaths, n (%) | 413 (71) |
| Overall Survival, mo, mean ± SD | 26.0 ± 1.3 |
Table 2 Comparison of performances of each scoring systems in the entire cohort
| Score | Discriminatory ability linear trend test | Homogeneity likelihood ratio test | Akaike Information Criterion | C-index (95%CI) | ||
| LT (χ²) | P value | LR (χ²) | P value | |||
| MESH | 145.125 | < 0.0001 | 372.4846 | < 0.0001 | 4145.284 | 0.830 |
| BCLC | 137.845 | < 0.0001 | 327.5024 | < 0.0001 | 4194.266 | 0.806 |
| HKLC | 104.966 | < 0.0001 | 387.2755 | < 0.0001 | 4146.493 | 0.811 |
| CLIP | 108.423 | < 0.0001 | 341.3485 | < 0.0001 | 4101.288 | 0.816 |
| NIACE | 144.998 | < 0.0001 | 425.6698 | < 0.0001 | 4092.099 | 0.853 |
Table 3 Comparison of performances of each scoring systems in patients treated by surgery/radiofrequency ablation
| Score | Discriminatory ability linear trend test | Homogeneity likelihood ratio test | Akaike Information Criterion | C-index (95%CI) | ||
| LT (χ²) | P value | LR (χ²) | P value | |||
| MESH | 21.5588 | < 0.0001 | 23.3342 | < 0.0001 | 346.508 | 0.719 |
| BCLC | 15.5560 | < 0.0001 | 12.4538 | 0.0020 | 359.388 | 0.644 |
| HKLC | 5.9647 | 0.0146 | 18.9510 | 0.0020 | 358.891 | 0.629 |
| CLIP | 9.9391 | 0.0016 | 13.1460 | 0.0003 | 356.696 | 0.642 |
| NIACE | 19.1701 | < 0.0001 | 23.1937 | < 0.0001 | 346.648 | 0.672 |
- Citation: Adhoute X, Pénaranda G, Raoul JL, Bourlière M. Usefulness of the MESH score in a European hepatocellular carcinoma cohort. World J Hepatol 2017; 9(15): 711-714
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5182/full/v9/i15/711.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v9.i15.711
