Recommendation of mHAP and ABCR scoring systems for the decision-making of the first and subsequent TACE session in HCC patients

Background Due to the high heterogeneity among hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients receiving transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), the prognosis of patients varies significantly. Various predictive scoring systems have been developed to identify the patients who could benefit from TACE. However, there is no consensus on which is better. This study aims to validate and compare the predictive capabilities of scoring systems for first and subsequent TACE. Materials A total of 524 HCC patients were treated with TACE, and 222 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included. Log-rank test was used to verify the predictive value of six scoring systems for the first TACE and four TACE retreatment scoring systems. Harrell’s concordance (C)-index, likelihood ratio and integrated Brier score (IBS) were used to compare the predictive performance. Results For the scoring systems of TACE, the overall survival (OS) of candidates screened by Hepatoma Arterial-embolization Prognostic (HAP), modified HAP (mHAP), mHAP3, alpha-fetoprotein, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer, Child-Pugh and Response (ABCR), albumin-bilirubin grade (ALBI), tumor size, alpha-fetoprotein, first TACE response and pre-/post-TACE was significantly longer than that of the noncandidates (all P < 0.05), whereas the mHAP2 and assessment for retreatment with TACE did not distinguish the candidates from noncandidates (P = 0.206, 0.115, respectively). The predictive and calibration performances of mHAP and ABCR were the highest for the first TACE and TACE retreatment, respectively. Conclusion mHAP identifies the patients who could benefit from the first TACE, whereas ABCR distinguishes patients who could benefit from subsequent TACE sessions

[1]  [Standardization for diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (2022 edition)]. , 2022, Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology.

[2]  D. Sinn,et al.  A differential risk assessment and decision model for Transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma based on hepatic function , 2020, BMC Cancer.

[3]  M. Huang,et al.  Validation and evaluation of clinical prediction systems for first and repeated transarterial chemoembolization in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A Chinese multicenter retrospective study , 2020, World journal of gastroenterology.

[4]  M. García-Fiñana,et al.  Prediction of Survival Among Patients Receiving Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Response‐Based Approach , 2019, Hepatology.

[5]  P. Schirmacher,et al.  EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. , 2018, Journal of hepatology.

[6]  J. Bruix,et al.  Hepatocellular carcinoma , 2018, The Lancet.

[7]  M. Abecassis,et al.  AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma , 2018, Hepatology.

[8]  R. Lencioni,et al.  Lipiodol transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review of efficacy and safety data , 2016, Hepatology.

[9]  R. Golfieri,et al.  Refining prognosis after trans‐arterial chemo‐embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma , 2016, Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver.

[10]  P. Galle,et al.  Validation of Clinical Scoring Systems ART and ABCR after Transarterial Chemoembolization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. , 2016, Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR.

[11]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics in China, 2015 , 2016, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[12]  S. Ahn,et al.  Addition of tumor multiplicity improves the prognostic performance of the hepatoma arterial‐embolization prognostic score , 2016, Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver.

[13]  M. Kudo,et al.  Evaluation of ART Scores for Repeated Transarterial Chemoembolization in Japanese Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma , 2015, Oncology.

[14]  Chung-Pin Li,et al.  The Effectiveness of ART Score in Selecting Patients for Transarterial Chemoembolization Retreatment , 2015, Medicine.

[15]  M. Kudo,et al.  Validation of the hepatoma arterial embolization prognostic score in European and Asian populations and proposed modification. , 2015, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.

[16]  J. Raoul,et al.  Retreatment with TACE: the ABCR SCORE, an aid to the decision-making process. , 2015, Journal of hepatology.

[17]  C. Mathers,et al.  Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012 , 2015, International journal of cancer.

[18]  H. Heinzl,et al.  How to STATE suitability and START transarterial chemoembolization in patients with intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma. , 2014, Journal of hepatology.

[19]  B. Sangro,et al.  Transarterial Chemoembolization and Radioembolization , 2014, Seminars in Liver Disease.

[20]  L. Bolondi,et al.  The ART Score Is Not Effective to Select Patients for Transarterial Chemoembolization Retreatment in an Italian Series , 2014, Digestive Diseases.

[21]  M. Kudo,et al.  Assessment for retreatment (ART) score for repeated transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma , 2014, Hepatology.

[22]  A. Burroughs,et al.  A simple prognostic scoring system for patients receiving transarterial embolisation for hepatocellular cancer , 2013, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[23]  H. Heinzl,et al.  The ART of decision making: Retreatment with transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma , 2013, Hepatology.

[24]  S. Ahn,et al.  Prognostic value of α-fetoprotein and des-γ-carboxy prothrombin responses in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with transarterial chemoembolization , 2013, BMC Cancer.

[25]  L. Bolondi,et al.  Response rate and clinical outcome of HCC after first and repeated cTACE performed "on demand". , 2012, Journal of hepatology.

[26]  V. Mazzaferro,et al.  Heterogeneity of Patients with Intermediate (BCLC B) Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Proposal for a Subclassification to Facilitate Treatment Decisions , 2012, Seminars in Liver Disease.

[27]  M. Forsting,et al.  Selective and sequential transarterial chemoembolization: survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. , 2012, European journal of radiology.

[28]  J. Joo,et al.  Severity and timing of progression predict refractoriness to transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma , 2012, Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology.

[29]  A. Benson,et al.  Alpha-fetoprotein response correlates with EASL response and survival in solitary hepatocellular carcinoma treated with transarterial therapies: a subgroup analysis. , 2012, Journal of hepatology.

[30]  Y. Shin,et al.  Which response criteria best help predict survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma following chemoembolization? A validation study of old and new models. , 2012, Radiology.

[31]  Riccardo Lencioni,et al.  Modified RECIST (mRECIST) Assessment for Hepatocellular Carcinoma , 2010, Seminars in liver disease.

[32]  M. Dumont,et al.  European Association for the Study of the Liver , 1971 .

[33]  [Chinese Clinical Practice Guidelines for transarterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma]. , 2019, Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology.

[34]  V. Mazzaferro,et al.  EASL-EORTC Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma European Association for the Study of the Liver ⇑ , European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer , 2012 .

[35]  Riccardo Lencioni,et al.  EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. , 2012, Journal of hepatology.