Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2008
Is the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program system an adequate weighting for survival of hepatocellular carcinoma? Evaluation of intrascore prognostic value among 36 subgroups.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lin Chih-Yun, Kee Kwong-Ming, Wang Jing-Houng, Lee Chuan-Mo, Chen Chao-Long, Changchien Chi-Sin, Hu Tsung-Hui, Cheng Yu-Fan, Hsu Hsuan-Chih, Wang Chih-Chi, Chen Tai-Yi, Lu Sheng-Nan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was subdivided into 36 subgroups. We aimed to validate the prognostic value of CLIP scoring.
METHODS: This study included 3868 HCC cases treated between 1986 and 2002. Survival and prognostic impact of all subgroups were analysed.
RESULTS: In primary CLIP, comparisons of each score showed a significant difference (P<0.001) and exhibited a linear trend (P<0.001). A CLIP score of 0 was used as control group. Portal vein thrombosis, Child-Pugh B, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) > or =400 ng/ml and multinodular with tumour extension < or =50% of the four subgroups with a CLIP score of 1 exhibited decreasing univariate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals, with values of 2.99 (2.05-4.37), 2.39 (2.00-2.86), 1.66 (1.40-1.96) and 1.39 (1.18-1.63) respectively. Homogeneity in the same score was evaluated by comparing subgroup survival curves. For scores 1-5, 83.3% (5/6), 57.1% (16/28), 24.4% (11/45), 3.6% (1/28) and 16.7% (1/6) pairs of survival curves significantly differed, respectively, with decreasing linear trend (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Different prognostic weighting of four predictive factors caused intrascore heterogeneity. Lower CLIP scores were associated with increased differences in intrascore. In conclusion, the CLIP staging scoring system is a reasonable ordinal scale, but the clinician must be aware of the heterogeneity of mortality risk within a given score.
METHODS: This study included 3868 HCC cases treated between 1986 and 2002. Survival and prognostic impact of all subgroups were analysed.
RESULTS: In primary CLIP, comparisons of each score showed a significant difference (P<0.001) and exhibited a linear trend (P<0.001). A CLIP score of 0 was used as control group. Portal vein thrombosis, Child-Pugh B, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) > or =400 ng/ml and multinodular with tumour extension < or =50% of the four subgroups with a CLIP score of 1 exhibited decreasing univariate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals, with values of 2.99 (2.05-4.37), 2.39 (2.00-2.86), 1.66 (1.40-1.96) and 1.39 (1.18-1.63) respectively. Homogeneity in the same score was evaluated by comparing subgroup survival curves. For scores 1-5, 83.3% (5/6), 57.1% (16/28), 24.4% (11/45), 3.6% (1/28) and 16.7% (1/6) pairs of survival curves significantly differed, respectively, with decreasing linear trend (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Different prognostic weighting of four predictive factors caused intrascore heterogeneity. Lower CLIP scores were associated with increased differences in intrascore. In conclusion, the CLIP staging scoring system is a reasonable ordinal scale, but the clinician must be aware of the heterogeneity of mortality risk within a given score.