To compare the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) and Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) classification systems when applied to HCC patients from the largest tertiary-level centre in Singapore.METHODSOne thousand two hun...To compare the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) and Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) classification systems when applied to HCC patients from the largest tertiary-level centre in Singapore.METHODSOne thousand two hundred and seventy hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients prospectively enrolled in a tertiary-level centre registry in Singapore since 1988 were studied. Patients were grouped into their respective BCLC and HKLC stages. Data such as demography, aetiology of HCC and type of treatment were collected. Survival data was based on census with the National Registry of Births and Deaths on 31<sup>st</sup> October 2015. Statistical analyses were done using SPSS version 21 (Chicago, IL, United States). Survival analyses were done by the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences in survival rates were compared using the log-rank test.RESULTSThe median age at presentation was 63 years (range 13-94); male 82.4%; Chinese 89.4%, Malay 7.1%, Indian, 2.8%. Hepatitis B was the predominant aetiology (75.0%; Hepatitis C 7.2%, Hepatitis B and C co-infection 3.8%, non-viral 14.0%). Both BCLC and HKLC staging systems showed good separation with overall log rank test confirming significant survival differences between stages in our cohort (P < 0.001). 206 out of the 240 patients (85.8%) assigned for curative treatment by the BCLC treatment algorithm received curative therapy for HCC [Stage 0 93.2% (68/73); Stage A 82.6% (138/167)]. In contrast, only 341/558 (61.1%) patients received curative treatment despite being assigned for curative treatment by the HKLC treatment algorithm [Stage I 72.7% (264/363); Stage II 40.2% (66/164); Stage Va 35.5% (11/31)]. Patients who were assigned to curative treatment by HKLC but did not receive curative treatment had significantly poorer ECOG (P < 0.001), higher Child-Pugh status (P < 0.001) and were older (median age 66 vs 61, P < 0.001) than those who received curative therapy. Median overall survival in patients assigned to curative treatment groups by BCLC and HKLC were 6.1 and 2.6 years respectively (P < 0.001). When only patients receiving curative treatment were analyzed, BCLC still predicted overall median survival better than HKLC (7.1 years vs 5.5 years, P = 0.037).CONCLUSIONBCLC performs better than HKLC in our multiethnic Asian population in allocating patients to curative treatment in a real-life situation as well as in predicting survival.展开更多
文摘To compare the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) and Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) classification systems when applied to HCC patients from the largest tertiary-level centre in Singapore.METHODSOne thousand two hundred and seventy hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients prospectively enrolled in a tertiary-level centre registry in Singapore since 1988 were studied. Patients were grouped into their respective BCLC and HKLC stages. Data such as demography, aetiology of HCC and type of treatment were collected. Survival data was based on census with the National Registry of Births and Deaths on 31<sup>st</sup> October 2015. Statistical analyses were done using SPSS version 21 (Chicago, IL, United States). Survival analyses were done by the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences in survival rates were compared using the log-rank test.RESULTSThe median age at presentation was 63 years (range 13-94); male 82.4%; Chinese 89.4%, Malay 7.1%, Indian, 2.8%. Hepatitis B was the predominant aetiology (75.0%; Hepatitis C 7.2%, Hepatitis B and C co-infection 3.8%, non-viral 14.0%). Both BCLC and HKLC staging systems showed good separation with overall log rank test confirming significant survival differences between stages in our cohort (P < 0.001). 206 out of the 240 patients (85.8%) assigned for curative treatment by the BCLC treatment algorithm received curative therapy for HCC [Stage 0 93.2% (68/73); Stage A 82.6% (138/167)]. In contrast, only 341/558 (61.1%) patients received curative treatment despite being assigned for curative treatment by the HKLC treatment algorithm [Stage I 72.7% (264/363); Stage II 40.2% (66/164); Stage Va 35.5% (11/31)]. Patients who were assigned to curative treatment by HKLC but did not receive curative treatment had significantly poorer ECOG (P < 0.001), higher Child-Pugh status (P < 0.001) and were older (median age 66 vs 61, P < 0.001) than those who received curative therapy. Median overall survival in patients assigned to curative treatment groups by BCLC and HKLC were 6.1 and 2.6 years respectively (P < 0.001). When only patients receiving curative treatment were analyzed, BCLC still predicted overall median survival better than HKLC (7.1 years vs 5.5 years, P = 0.037).CONCLUSIONBCLC performs better than HKLC in our multiethnic Asian population in allocating patients to curative treatment in a real-life situation as well as in predicting survival.
