Validation of serological models for staging and prognostication of HCC in patients from a Japanese nationwide survey (original) (raw)

Abstract

Background

Two serology-based scoring models for prognostication of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the BALAD and BALAD-2 models, were applied to a Japanese cohort of a nationwide follow-up survey of HCC. The ability of these models to predict the progression of HCC and the deterioration of liver function and to assess prognosis was evaluated.

Methods

BALAD and BALAD-2 scores were calculated in 24,029 patients from a cohort of Japanese nationwide survey based on the serum levels of five markers (bilirubin, albumin, lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive alpha-fetoprotein, alpha-fetoprotein, and des-gamma-carboxy prothrombin) measured at the time of HCC diagnosis. The associations of these scores with the progression of HCC and liver function and with survival rates were analyzed.

Results

There were good correlations between BALAD and BALAD-2 scores and the progression of HCC and Child–Pugh class. Both scores accurately categorized patients into risk groups with different survival rates. BALAD-2 showed superior discrimination of patient survival compared with the original BALAD.

Conclusions

Serology-based scoring models for prognostication, especially the BALAD-2 model, were useful for staging and prognostication of survival in a cohort of Japanese patients with HCC from a nationwide survey.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

1. Okuda K, Ohtsuki T, Obata H, et al. Natural history of hepatocellular carcinoma and prognosis in relation to treatment. Study of 850 patients. Cancer. 1985;56:918–28.
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
2. The Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) Investigators. A new prognostic system for hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study of 435 patients. Hepatology. 1998;28:751–5.
   Article Google Scholar
3. Chevret S, Trinchet J-C, Mathieu D, et al. A new prognostic classification for predicting survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 1999;31:133–41.
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
4. Llovet JM, Bru C, Bruix J. Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: the BCLC staging classification. Semin Liver Dis. 1999;19:329–38.
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
5. Leung TW, Tang AM, Zee B, et al. Construction of the Chinese University Prognostic Index for hepatocellular carcinoma and comparison with the TNM staging system, the Okuda staging system, and the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program staging system: a study based on 926 patients. Cancer. 2002;94:1760–9.
   Article PubMed Google Scholar
6. Kudo M, Chung H, Haji S, et al. Validation of a new prognostic staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma: the JIS score compared with the CLIP score. Hepatology. 2004;40:1396–405.
   Article PubMed Google Scholar
7. Toyoda H, Kumada T, Osaki Y, et al. Staging hepatocellular carcinoma by a novel scoring system (BALAD score) based on serum markers. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1528–36.
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
8. Fox R, Berhane S, Teng M, et al. Biomarker-based prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma: validation and extension of the BALAD model. Br J Cancer. 2014;110:2090–8.
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
9. Berhane S, Toyoda H, Tada T, et al. Role of the GALAD and BALAD-2 serologic models in diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and prediction of survival in patients. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:875–86.
   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
10. Makuuchi M, Kokudo N, Arii S, et al. Development of evidence-based clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in Japan. Hepatol Res. 2008;38:37–51.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
11. The Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan. The general rules for the clinical and pathological study of primary liver cancer (English Ed.). 5th ed. Tokyo: Kaneraha & Co. Ltd; 2009.
    Google Scholar
12. Tateishi R, Yoshida H, Shiina S, et al. Proposal of a new prognostic model for hepatocellular carcinoma: an analysis of 403 patients. Gut. 2005;54:419–25.
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
13. Akaike H. Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, editor. Second international symposium on information theory. 1973.
14. Taktak AFG, Eleuteri A, Lake SP, et al. (2007) Evaluation of prognostic models: discrimination and calibration performance. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computational Intelligence in Medicine and Healthcare
15. Pugh RNH, Murray-Lyon IM, Dawson JL, et al. Transection of the oesophagus for bleeding oesophageal varices. Br J Surg. 1973;60:646–9.
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
16. International Union Against Cancer (UICC). Liver. In: Sobin LH, Wittekind CH, editors. TNM classification of malignant tumours. 6th ed. New York: Wiley; 2002. p. 81–3.
    Google Scholar
17. Vauthey JN, Lauwers GY, Esnaola NF, et al. Simplified staging for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2002;127:603–8.
    Google Scholar
18. Kawata S, Murakami T, Kim T, et al. Multidetector CT: diagnostic impact of slice thickness on detection of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:61–6.
    Article Google Scholar
19. Ichikawa T, Erturk SM, Araki T. Multiphasic contrast-enhanced multidetector-row CT of liver: contrast-enhancement theory and practical scan protocol with a combination of fixed injection duration and patients’ body-weight-tailored dose of contrast material. Eur J Radiol. 2006;58:165–76.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
20. Kim HD, Lim YS, Han S, et al. Evaluation of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma by magnetic resonance imaging with gadoxetic acid detects additional lesions and increases overall survival. Gastroenterology. 2015;148:1371–82.
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
21. Toyoda H, Kumada T, Kiriyama S, et al. Impact of surveillance on survival of patients with initial hepatocellular carcinoma: a study from Japan. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1170–6.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
22. Toyoda H, Kumada T, Osaki Y, et al. Role of tumor markers in assessment of tumor progression and prediction of outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol Res. 2007;37:S166–71.
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
23. Nagaoka S, Yatsuhashi H, Hamada H, et al. The des-γ-carboxy prothrombin index is a new prognostic indicator for hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer. 2003;98:2671–7.
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
24. Nouso K, Kobayashi Y, Nakamura S, et al. Prognostic importance of fucosylated alpha-fetoprotein in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with low alpha-fetoprotein. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;26:1195–200.
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
25. Toyoda H, Kumada T, Kiriyama S, et al. Prognostic significance of simultaneous measurement of three tumor markers in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:111–7.
    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
26. Johnson PJ, Berhane S, Kagebayashi C, et al. Assessment of liver function in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a new evidence-based approach-the ALBI grade. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:550–8.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
27. Johnson PJ, Pirrie SJ, Cox TF, et al. The detection of hepatocellular carcinoma using a prospectively developed and validated model based on serological biomarkers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2014;23:144–53.
    Article CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Gastroenterology, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, 4-86 Minaminokawa, Ogaki, Gifu, 503-8502, Japan
   Hienori Toyoda, Toshifumi Tada & Takashi Kumada
2. Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
   Philip J. Johnson
3. Department of Gastroenterology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
   Namiki Izumi
4. Department of Radiology, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Matsumoto, Japan
   Masumi Kadoya
5. Department of Gastroenterology, Kanazawa University Hospital, Kanazawa, Japan
   Shuichi Kaneko
6. Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery Division, Artificial Organ and Transplantation Division, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
   Norihiro Kokudo
7. Division of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan
   Yonson Ku
8. Department of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
   Shoji Kubo
9. Department of Biostatics, School of Public Health, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
   Yutaka Matsuyama
10. Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Kurume University Hospital, Kurume, Japan
    Osamu Nakashima
11. Department of Pathology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
    Michiie Sakamoto
12. Department of Digestive Surgery, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
    Tadatoshi Takayama
13. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kinki University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
    Masatoshi Kudo

Authors

1. Hienori Toyoda
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
2. Toshifumi Tada
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
3. Philip J. Johnson
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
4. Namiki Izumi
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
5. Masumi Kadoya
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
6. Shuichi Kaneko
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
7. Norihiro Kokudo
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
8. Yonson Ku
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
9. Shoji Kubo
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
10. Takashi Kumada
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
11. Yutaka Matsuyama
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
12. Osamu Nakashima
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
13. Michiie Sakamoto
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
14. Tadatoshi Takayama
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
15. Masatoshi Kudo
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

The Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan

Corresponding author

Correspondence toHienori Toyoda.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 23 kb)

535_2017_1321_MOESM2_ESM.pptx

Supplementary material 2 (PPTX 221 kb) Supplementary figure S1. Selection flowchart of the study patients in a cohort of a Japanese nationwide survey of patients with HCC. Supplementary figure S2. Survival rates of patients with intermediate BALAD scores. A) Comparison of survival rates of patients with BALAD score 3 between patients with 1 elevated tumor marker (deteriorated liver function predominant) and patients with 3 elevated tumor markers (tumor progression predominant). No significant difference was found (p = 0.3873). B) Comparison of survival rates of patients with BALAD score 2 between patients with 0 elevated tumor marker (deteriorated liver function predominant) and patients with 2 elevated tumor markers (tumor progression predominant). No significant difference was found (P = 0.6990). Supplementary figure S3. Survival rates of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after diagnosis by original BALAD scores evaluated by serum levels of the following measured at the diagnosis of HCC: ALB, T-Bil, AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP. A) Patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection; B) Patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection; C) Patients without hepatitis virus infection (non-HBV/HCV). Supplementary figure S4. Survival rates of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who undergone A) curative, B) intermediate, and C) palliative or no treatment after diagnosis by original BALAD scores evaluated by serum levels of the following measured at the diagnosis of HCC: ALB, T-Bil, AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP. Supplementary figure S5. Survival rates of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after diagnosis based on Japan Integrated Staging scores evaluated at the diagnosis of HCC. Dotted lines, 95% confidence intervals (CIs)

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Toyoda, H., Tada, T., Johnson, P.J. et al. Validation of serological models for staging and prognostication of HCC in patients from a Japanese nationwide survey.J Gastroenterol 52, 1112–1121 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-017-1321-6

Download citation

• Received: 04 January 2017
• Accepted: 07 February 2017
• Published: 21 February 2017
• Issue Date: October 2017
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-017-1321-6

Keywords