Abstract
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.