Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Proposal of a New Preoperative Prognostic Model for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma Incorporating 18F-FDG-PET Imaging with the ALBI Grade

  • Hepatobiliary Tumors
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Existing prognostic systems were not developed using only objective variables available preoperatively, and therefore do not provide ideal prognostication for patients undergoing hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to develop a preoperative prognostic model using objective variables involving two parameters: 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) and the albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade.

Methods

This study included 207 consecutive patients with solitary HCC who underwent 18F-FDG-PET prior to hepatectomy. The tumor to non-tumor maximum standardized uptake value ratio (TNR) was used as an 18F-FDG PET imaging parameter.

Results

The 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 58.6% and 28.8%, respectively. Multivariate analysis of OS identified TNR ≥ 2 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.743, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.114–2.648, p = 0.016) and ALBI grade 2 (HR 1.966, 95% CI 1.349–2.884, p < 0.001) as the only significant prognostic factors; tumor diameter and tumor markers were not significant. Patients were divided into low- (TNR < 2 and ALBI grade 1), intermediate- (TNR < 2 and ALBI grade 2, or TNR ≥ 2 and ALBI grade 1), and high-risk (TNR ≥ 2 and ALBI grade 2) groups, which differed significantly in terms of survival (5-year OS: 75.7, 49.6, and 27.3%, respectively, p < 0.001; 5-year DFS: 37.0, 24.9, and 13.6%, respectively, p < 0.001). Compared with other staging systems, our model had the best discriminatory ability (corrected Akaike information criteria 1054.8, p < 0.001) and homogeneity (likelihood ratio Chi square value 27.6, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

A preoperative prognostic model incorporating 18F-FDG-PET imaging with the ALBI grade may be useful for estimating the prognosis of selected patients with solitary HCC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Capuano G, Daniele B, Gaeta GB, Gallo C, Perrone F. A new prognostic system for hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study of 435 patients: the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) investigators. Hepatology. 1998;28:751–55.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bruix J, Sherman M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology. 2011;53:1020–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. European Association for the Study of the Liver, European Organisation For Research and Treatment of Cancer. EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2012;56:908–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dhir M, Melin AA, Douaiher J, et al. A review and update of treatment options and controversies in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg. 2016;263:1112–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Barone C, Koeberle D, Metselaar H, et al. Multidisciplinary approach for HCC patients: hepatology for the oncologists. Ann Oncol. 2013;24 Suppl 2:ii15–23.

  6. Allard MA, Sebagh M, Ruiz A, et al. Does pathological response after transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients with cirrhosis predict outcome. J Hepatol. 2015;63:83–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kim BK, Kim SU, Kim KA, et al. Complete response at first chemoembolization is still the most robust predictor for favorable outcome in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2015;62:1304–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kinoshita A, Onoda H, Fushiya N, et al. Staging systems for hepatocellular carcinoma: current status and future perspectives. World J Hepatol. 2015;7:406–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Kudo M, Chung H, Haji S, et al. Validation of a new prognostic staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma: the JIS score compared with the CLIP score. Hepatology. 2004;40:1396–05.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hsu CY, Hsia CY, Huang YH, et al. Selecting an optimal staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of 5 currently used prognostic models. Cancer. 2010;116:3006–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnson PJ, Berhane S, Kagebayashi C, et al. Assessment of liver function in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a new evidence-based approach—the ALBI grade. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:550–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wang YY, Zhong JH, Su ZY, et al. Albumin–bilirubin versus Child–Pugh score as a predictor of outcome after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2016;103:725–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kitamura K, Hatano E, Higashi T, et al. Proliferative activity in hepatocellular carcinoma is closely correlated with glucose metabolism but not angiogenesis. J Hepatol. 2011;55:846–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Seo S, Hatano E, Higashi T, et al. Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts tumor differentiation, P-glycoprotein expression, and outcome after resection in hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:427–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kawai T, Yasuchika K, Seo S, et al. Identification of keratin19-positive cancer stem cells associating human hepatocellular carcinoma using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:1450–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kojima H, Hatano E, Taura K, et al. Hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with tumor thrombus in the major portal vein. Dig Surg. 2015;32:413–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nishio T, Taura K, Koyama Y, et al. Prediction of posthepatectomy liver failure based on liver stiffness measurement in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Surgery. 2016;159:399–408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kitamura K, Hatano E, Higashi T, et al. Preoperative FDG-PET predicts recurrence patterns in hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:156–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Toyoda H, Lai PB, O’Beirne J, et al. Long-term impact of liver function on curative therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: application of the ALBI grade. Br J Cancer. 2016;114:744–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Kudo M, Matsui O, Izumi N, et al. JSH Consensus-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2014 Update by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan. Liver Cancer. 2014;3:458–68.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;40:205–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22.  Rahbari NN, Garden OJ, Padbury R, et al. Posthepatectomy liver failure: a definition and grading by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS). Surgery. 2011;149:713–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yamashita Y, Tsuijita E, Takeishi K, et al. Predictors for microinvasion of small hepatocellular carcinoma ≤ 2 cm. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:2027–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hong G, Suh KS, Suh SW, et al. Alpha-fetoprotein and 18F-FDG positron emission tomography predict tumor recurrence better than Milan criteria in living donor liver transplantation. J Hepatol. 2016;64:852–922.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bruix J, Sherman M: Practice Guidelines Committee, American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2005;42:1208–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Strasberg SM. Nomenclature of hepatic anatomy and resections: a review of the Brisbane 2000 system. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2005;12:351–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Taketomi A, Toshima T, Kitagawa D et al. Predictors of extrahepatic recurrence after curative hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:2740–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Yang Y, Nagano H, Ota H, Morimoto O, Nakamura M, Wada H, et al. Patterns and clinicopathologic features of extrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection. Surgery. 2007;141:196–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ochiai T, Ikoma H, Okamoto K, et al. Clinicopathologic features and risk factors for extrahepatic recurrences of hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection. World J Surg. 2012;36:136–143.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Uchino K, Tateishi R, Shiina S, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma with extrahepatic metastasis: clinical features and prognostic factors. Cancer. 2011;117:4475–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Tomoaki Yoh, Satoru Seo, Satoshi Ogiso, Takayuki Kawai, Yukihiro Okuda, Takamichi Ishii, Kojiro Taura, Tatsuya Higashi, Yuji Nakamoto, Etsuro Hatano, Toshimi Kaido, and Shinji Uemoto have no conflicts of interest to declare in relation to this article.

Funding

No financial support was received for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

    Tomoaki Yoh MD, Satoru Seo MD, PhD, Satoshi Ogiso MD, PhD, Takayuki Kawai MD, PhD, Yukihiro Okuda MD, PhD, Takamichi Ishii MD, PhD, Kojiro Taura MD, PhD, Toshimi Kaido MD, PhD & Shinji Uemoto MD, PhD

  2. National Institute of Radiological Sciences, National Institutes of Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan

    Tatsuya Higashi MD, PhD

  3. Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

    Yuji Nakamoto MD, PhD

  4. Department of Surgery, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Japan

    Etsuro Hatano MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Tomoaki Yoh MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Satoru Seo MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Satoshi Ogiso MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Takayuki Kawai MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yukihiro Okuda MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Takamichi Ishii MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kojiro Taura MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Tatsuya Higashi MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Yuji Nakamoto MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Etsuro Hatano MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Toshimi Kaido MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Shinji Uemoto MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Satoru Seo MD, PhD.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 270 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yoh, T., Seo, S., Ogiso, S. et al. Proposal of a New Preoperative Prognostic Model for Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma Incorporating 18F-FDG-PET Imaging with the ALBI Grade. Ann Surg Oncol 25, 542–549 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6262-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6262-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation