Copyright
©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Hepatol. Jun 18, 2016; 8(17): 703-715
Published online Jun 18, 2016. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v8.i17.703
Published online Jun 18, 2016. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v8.i17.703
HAP (0 to 4 points) | NIACE (0 to 7 points) | STATE | ||
Before the first TACE | ||||
Albumin < 36 g/dL | 1 point | ≥ 3 nodules | 1 point | Albumin (g/L) |
Bilirubin > 17 mcmol/L | 1 point | infiltrative HCC vs nodular HCC | 1.5 points | -12 (tumour load exceeding the up-to-7 criteria) |
0 | ||||
AFP > 400 ng/mL | 1 point | AFP ≥ 200 ng/mL | 1.5 points | |
Child-Pugh A vs Child-Pugh B | 0 | |||
1.5 points | ||||
Size of dominant tumour > 70 mm | 1 point | ECOG PS ≥ 1 | 1.5 points | -12 (if CRP ≥ 1 mg/dL) |
No chemoembolization | ||||
≥ 2 points | > 3 points | < 18 points |
- Citation: Adhoute X, Penaranda G, Raoul JL, Le Treut P, Bollon E, Hardwigsen J, Castellani P, Perrier H, Bourlière M. Usefulness of staging systems and prognostic scores for hepatocellular carcinoma treatments. World J Hepatol 2016; 8(17): 703-715
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5182/full/v8/i17/703.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v8.i17.703