Selecting an optimal staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of 5 currently used prognostic models (Q39861863)

15 September 2017

Selecting an optimal staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of 5 currently used prognostic models (English)

1 reference

15 September 2017

hepatocellular carcinoma

1 reference

Chia-Yang Hsu

1

1 reference

15 September 2017

Cheng-Yuan Hsia

2

1 reference

15 September 2017

Yi-Hsiang Huang

3

1 reference

15 September 2017

Chien-Wei Su

4

1 reference

15 September 2017

Han-Chieh Lin

5

1 reference

15 September 2017

Pui-Ching Lee

6

1 reference

15 September 2017

Che-Chuan Loong

7

1 reference

15 September 2017

Jen-Huey Chiang

8

1 reference

15 September 2017

Teh-Ia Huo

9

1 reference

15 September 2017

Shou-Dong Lee

10

1 reference

15 September 2017

language of work or name

English

0 references

publication date

1 June 2010

1 reference

15 September 2017

1 reference

15 September 2017

116

1 reference

15 September 2017

12

1 reference

15 September 2017

3006-3014

1 reference

Clinical biostatistics. XVI. The process of prognostic stratification. 2.

15 September 2017

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

Survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: a comparison of BCLC, CLIP and GRETCH staging systems

21 January 2018

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

The continuing increase in the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States: an update

21 January 2018

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Hepatocellular carcinoma and liver tumors in South African children: a case for increased prevalence

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Proposal of a new prognostic model for hepatocellular carcinoma: an analysis of 403 patients

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of 7 staging systems in an American cohort

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Staging for hepatocellular carcinoma: look for a perfect classification system

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Prognostic factors for survival in patients with early-intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing non-surgical therapy: comparison of Okuda, CLIP, and BCLC staging systems in a single Italian centre.

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Comparison of seven staging systems in cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in a cohort of patients who underwent radiofrequency ablation with complete response.

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Discrimination value of the new western prognostic system (CLIP score) for hepatocellular carcinoma in 662 Japanese patients. Cancer of the Liver Italian Program

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Validation of a new prognostic staging system for hepatocellular carcinoma: The JIS score compared with the CLIP score

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Comparison of the usefulness of three staging systems for hepatocellular carcinoma (CLIP, BCLC, and JIS) in Japan

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Applicability of staging systems for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma is dependent on treatment method – Analysis of 2010 Taiwanese patients

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Evaluation of predictive value of CLIP, Okuda, TNM and JIS staging systems for hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing surgery

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Prognostic value and clinical relevance of the 6th Edition 2002 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system in patients with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Epidemiology of alcoholic liver disease

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Occurrence of cirrhosis-related complications is a time-dependent prognostic predictor independent of baseline model for end-stage liver disease score

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Nodules less than 20 mm and vascular invasion are predictors of survival in small hepatocellular carcinoma

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Liver transplantation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas in patients with cirrhosis

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Proposal of a modified Cancer of the Liver Italian Program staging system based on the model for end-stage liver disease for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing loco-regional therapy

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

The model for end-stage liver disease-based Japan Integrated Scoring system may have a better predictive ability for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing locoregional therapy

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

A comparison of goodness-of-fit tests for the logistic regression model

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Key Concepts in Model Selection: Performance and Generalizability.

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Selecting a short-term prognostic model for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), MELD-sodium, and five cancer staging systems

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma in Japan: consensus-based clinical practice manual proposed by the Japan Society of Hepatology

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

The model for end-stage liver disease based cancer staging systems are better prognostic models for hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective sequential survey

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Early and very early hepatocellular carcinoma: when and how much do staging and choice of treatment really matter? A multi-center study

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Percutaneous thermal ablation of medium and large hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term outcome and prognostic factors

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

A modified TNM-based Japan Integrated Score combined with AFP level may serve as a better staging system for early-stage predominant hepatocellular carcinoma patients

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Comparison of 7 staging systems for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing transarterial chemoembolization.

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: assessment of the Japanese TNM and AJCC/UICC TNM systems in a cohort of 13,772 patients in Japan.

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: similar long-term results despite geographic variations

1 reference

https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002%2FCNCR.25044

7 January 2021

Identifiers

DOI

10.1002/CNCR.25044

1 reference

15 September 2017

1 reference