Home
JournalsCollections
For Authors For Reviewers For Editorial Board Members
Article Processing Charges Open Access
Ethics Advertising Policy
Editorial Policy Resource Center
Company Information Contact Us
OPEN ACCESS

Evaluation of GALAD Score in Diagnosis and Follow-up of Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Local Ablative Therapy

  • Rasha Eletreby1,
  • Marwa Elsharkawy2,
  • Alaa Awad Taha3,
  • Mohamed Hassany4,
  • Amr Abdelazeem5,
  • Mohamed El-Kassas5,*  and
  • Ahmed Soliman1
Journal of Clinical and Translational Hepatology   2023;11(2):334-340

doi: 10.14218/JCTH.2022.00013

Received:

Revised:

Accepted:

Published online:

 Author information

Citation: Eletreby R, Elsharkawy M, Taha AA, Hassany M, Abdelazeem A, El-Kassas M, et al. Evaluation of GALAD Score in Diagnosis and Follow-up of Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Local Ablative Therapy. J Clin Transl Hepatol. 2023;11(2):334-340. doi: 10.14218/JCTH.2022.00013.

Abstract

Background and Aims

Strategies for detection of early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are still limited. The GALAD score is a serum biomarker-based model designed to predict the probability of having HCC. We aimed to assess the ability of GALAD score to diagnose early HCC and its validity to follow patients after local ablation therapy.

Methods

This multicenter prospective study included 108 patients in two groups, 58 HCC patients (67 focal lesions) with local ablative therapy (study group), and a control group of 50 patients with liver cirrhosis. The GALAD scores of the study and control groups, and of the HCC patients before and after ablative therapy were compared.

Results

Most patients were men (74.1% in study group and 76% in controls) with hepatitis C virus infection (98.30% in the study group, and 94% in controls). GALAD scores were significantly higher in HCC patients than in those with benign cirrhosis (2.65 vs. −0.37, p=0.001). Ablative therapy was successful in 94.4% of focal lesions <2 cm, and in 86.10% of 2–5 cm lesions. The GALAD score was also significantly lower at 1 month after ablation in patients with well-ablated tumors (2.19 vs. 0.98, p=0.001). The best cutoff values of GALAD score for diagnosis of early HCC, and for prediction of well ablation of HCC were 0.74 and ≤3.31 (areas under the curve of 0.92 and 0.75, sensitivities of 84.48% and 76.19%, specificities of 89.13% and 83.33%, positive predictive values of 90.74% and 94.1%, and negative predictive values of 82% and 35.7% respectively).

Conclusion

The GALAD score was effective for the diagnosis of early HCC and for follow-up after ablative therapy.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

GALAD score, HCC, Ablative therapy, Liver cirrhosis, Egypt

Introduction

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most prevalent cancer worldwide and the second most frequent cause of cancer-related death. The incidence of liver cancer per 100,000 person-years is estimated as 9.3% and the mortality as 8.5%.1 Egypt has a high incidence of HCC, which occurs in approximately 21% of patients with liver cirrhosis.2 HCC was, until recently, diagnosed by histologic examination of tumor tissue. Now, it can be confirmed with high specificity from characteristic radiological features in tumors larger than 1 cm in diameter.3 This approach avoids both the risk of bleeding and tumor seeding along the biopsy tract.4,5 Surveillance is well accepted as key to effective delivery of potentially curative treatment. It involves ultrasound examination6 followed by confirmatory tests to see if focal lesions are detectable. A 4-phase multidetector computed tomography (CT) scan or dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are used with or without biopsy. The limitations of the radiological diagnosis of HCC are becoming increasingly recognized in the screening setting.7

The sensitivity of ultrasound for screening is usually between 65% and 80%, and is lower in early disease, in which appearances are not specific and the performance characteristics for surveillance in nodular cirrhotic livers are not well defined. It is also subjective, dependent on operator experience, and the available equipment.8 Assay of serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) has also been used for diagnosis, with grossly elevated levels being highly specific for HCC,9 but sensitivity is limited to 45% or less in smaller tumors.6,10 Other diagnostic serological tests include des-gamma-carboxy-prothrombin (DCP), an abnormal prothrombin molecule derived from an acquired defect in the posttranslational carboxylation of the prothrombin precursor11 and AFP-L3 (an isoform of AFP characterized by the presence of an alpha 1,6-linked residue on the AFP carbohydrate side chain.12,13 However, none have alone proved to be a sufficient screening test.14

GALAD is a serum-based tool for the detection of HCC that was developed at a UK center using a statistical model that determined the risk of HCC in individual patients with chronic liver diseases. It is based on the objective measures of gender, age, and three serologic biomarkers, AFP, L3-AFP, and DCP.15 All assays are commercially available on a single standard platform.16 The model has potential use for surveillance and may mitigate some of the limitations of ultrasound scanning, including reduced sensitivity in obese patients and patients with advanced cirrhosis. That is important for screening because the earlier the disease is detected, the better the chance of curative treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the ability of the GALAD score for early diagnosis of HCC and its ability to predict tumor course in HCC patients after ablative therapy.

Methods

This prospective cohort study was conducted from July 2017 to April 2019 in the gastroenterology and hepatology department of the Theodor Bilharz Research Institute, the hepatology and infectious disease department of the National Hepatology and Tropical Medicine Research Institute, and the hepatology unit of the Arab Contractors Medical Center. The study included 108 patients who were divided into two groups, 58 in the study group and 50 in the control group.

Inclusion criteria

The study group (58 patients) included adult Egyptian patients with HCC on top of liver cirrhosis (Child A or B) with a single focal lesion less than 5 cm in diameter or three lesions, each less than 3 cm in diameter, and no distant metastasis or vascular invasion. The diagnosis of HCC was established by triphasic CT contrast imaging and/or dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. HCC was diagnosed if the lesion showed arterial enhancement and rapid wash-out in the portal and delayed phases.17 The control group (50 patients) included patients with known liver cirrhosis with an absence of focal lesions on ultrasound screening. Patients with hepatic focal lesions other than HCC or late stages that would not benefit from curative therapies according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) criteria were excluded.

Included patients were subjected to a full medical history, clinical examination, laboratory investigations including a complete blood count, liver biochemical profile (bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, GGT, prothrombine time, INR, and serum albumin) and tumor markers including serum AFP, AFP L3, and DCP levels, and viral hepatitis markers (HCV Ab, HBsAg). Dynamic imaging modality, including triphasic CT, or dynamic MRI, was utilized to confirm the diagnosis of HCC if there is a focal lesion on abdominal ultrasound (US).

Calculation of the GALAD score

For all patient groups, the GALAD score was calculated as Z = −10.08 + 0.09 × age + 1.67 × sex + 2.34 × log (AFP) + 0.04 × AFP-L3 + 1.33 × log (DCP), where sex equals 1 for males and 0 for females.15 The probability of HCC individual patients (ranging from 0 to 1) was estimated as Pr (HCC) = exp (Z)/(1 + exp (Z).15 A follow-up GALAD score was calculated for patients who underwent ablative therapy after at least 1 month with a negative triphasic CT for tumor recurrence or acquisition of new focal lesions. Values of the GALAD score were compared between patients with HCC (study group) and the control group (patients with chronic liver disease and advanced fibrosis without HCC by imaging). In addition, values of the GALAD score were compared between patients with HCC before and 1 month after ablation.

Statistical analysis

Continuous values were reported as means ± standard deviation, or in the case of non-normally distributed data, as the median and interquartile range. Continuous data were analyzed using independent-sample t-tests or Mann–Whitney U tests in the case of skewed data. Chi-squared tests was used to compare the frequency of occurrence between different groups of patients. Paired samples were analyzed using a paired t-test or the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, according to normality. Pearson’s or Spearman’s correlation analysis was performed between the tumor characteristics (the number of lesions and the size of the tumor), patient characteristics, such as age, sex, performance status, or liver condition, and the GALAD score. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to identify the best cutoff value of the GALAD score, with maximum sensitivity and specificity for differentiation of cirrhotic patients with HCC from those without HCC.

Results

The study included 108 patients with chronic HCV divided into two groups (58 in the study group and 50 in the control group) in the period from July 2017 to April 2019. The study group (58) included patients with HCC on top of liver cirrhosis (Child A or B) with a single focal lesion of less than 5 cm in diameter or three lesions, each less than 3 cm in diameter, and no distant metastasis or vascular invasion. The control group (50 patients) included patients with known liver cirrhosis with an absence of focal lesions on US screening. No significant differences were found between both groups with regard to demographic features. Most patients in each group were men, 43 (74.10%) in the study group and 38 (76%) in the control group. Most resided in urban areas (65.50% and 72%) and were infected with HCV (98.30% and 94 %). Comparison of baseline laboratory data between both groups revealed significantly higher AFP, AFP-L3, hemoglobin, platelets, and albumin levels in patients with HCC, and significantly lower bilirubin level and INR values compared with the control group (Table 1). Comparison of the GALAD score between the two groups revealed significantly higher scores in patients with HCC compared with the control group (Table 1). Most patients (73.10%) had a single focal lesion that most often occurred in the right lobe (85.10%) and ranged from 2–5 cm (68.70%). No significant difference was found in the GALAD score between lesions less than or more than 2 cm. The median GALAD scores were 2.36 for lesions >2 cm in size and 2.64 for those <2 cm in size, p=0.813).

Table 1

Baseline laboratory data and GALAD scores of both groups

BaselinePatient group (n=58)Control group (n=50)p-value
Hemoglobin, gm/dLMean1310.20.001
Total leucocyte count, /mm3Mean5.5050.207
Platelet count, /mm3Median125800.001
Albumin, gm/dLMean3.602.400.001
Total bilirubin, mg/dLMean12.30.001
INRMean1.101.500.001
AST, IU/LMedian36420.707
ALT, IU/LMedian31220.001
Alkaline phosphatase, IU/LMean1051080.618
Creatinine, mg/dLMean0.901.200.001
AFP, ng/mLMedian27.503.300.001
AFP-L3, %Median8.205.800.021
DCP, ng/mLMedian14.7140.213
GALAD scoreMedian2.56−0.370.001

Most patients with HCC were Child A (49/58), most underwent radiofrequency ablation (44 patients (75.90%), and a microwave procedure was done for 14 (24.10%). Follow-up laboratory and imaging data for HCC cases at 1 month after ablation included 48/58 patients with 54 focal lesions, owing to the absence of the follow-up data of 10 patients who failed to appear in the follow-up period and because of technical problems and invalid samples. Most focal lesions were well ablated on follow-up CT at 1 month after ablation (88.80%). Lesions less than 2 cm in diameter had a higher ablation rate than lesions larger than 2 cm (94.40% vs 86.10%). ROC curves were performed to determine the best cutoff value of the GALAD score for the diagnosis of early HCC, which was 0.74 with an AUC of 0.92, sensitivity of 84.48%, specificity of 89.13%, positive predictive value of 90.74%, and negative predictive value of 82% (Fig. 1. and Table 2). We reviewed different GALAD score cutoffs and their corresponding sensitivities and specificities in previously published studies and tested the cutoffs in our cohort in a trial to reach the best possible cutoff that could be applied in different patient populations. The results of GALAD score cutoffs in previous studies and their corresponding sensitivities and specificities, together with results of these cutoffs on our cohort from sensitivity and specificity points of view are shown in (Table 3).15,18–21

Receiver operating characteristic curve of GALAD score as a predictor of hepatocellular carcinoma.
Fig. 1  Receiver operating characteristic curve of GALAD score as a predictor of hepatocellular carcinoma.
Table 2

Predictivity of GALAD score for Early HCC

ParameterAUCCutoff pointSensitivity (%)Specificity (%)PPVNPV
GALAD score0.922>0.7484.5089.1090.7082
Table 3

GALAD score cutoffs, corresponding sensitivities, and specificities in previously published studies and the resultant sensitivity and specificity of testing each cutoff in our cohort

StudyNumber of HCC patientsNumber of Non-HCC patientsMean GALAD score cutoffSensitivity (%)Specificity (%)Early HCC cases, nSensitivity (%)Specificity (%)Applying the studied cutoffs on our cohort
Sensitivity (%)Specificity (%)
Johnson et al., 201415331339−36.098617598.2857
−63.198618598.2810.8
0.8886615679.395.4
Best et al., 201620285402−36.085.693.36168.398.2857
Best et al., 202018125231−33.191.290.92586.290.998.2810.8
Best et al., 202018−36.084.495.2256895.298.2857
Yang et al., 201919 (single center cohort)111180−67.0918560927998.2850
−81.1898198.2816
−36.0898660828698.2857
Yang et al., 201919 (multicenter cohort) Early Detection Research Network phase II233412−71.0768696.5571.7
−36.0797998.2857
Schotten et al., 202121Total19637770
HBV52130−36.076.995.41898.2857
HCV84139−36.089.795.74298.2857
Other etiology60108−36.089.395.71098.2857

GALAD scores were significantly lower at 1 month after ablation compared with the baseline value (1.32 vs. 2.37). The same applied to AFP and DCP. Albumin was significantly lower after ablation. Total bilirubin and INR were significantly higher than the baseline value. HB, leucocytes, and platelet counts were significantly lower after ablation. No significant differences in baseline demographic and virologic data and Child scores were found between patients with well-ablated versus partially ablated tumors (Tables 4, 5). The median GALAD score was significantly lower at 1 month after ablation in patients with well-ablated tumors compared with baseline (0.98 vs. 2.19, p=0.001). Similarly, GALAD scores and AFP values 1 month after ablation were significantly lower in patients with well-ablated lesions compared with those with partially ablated lesions. The median GALAD score was 0.98 in patients with well-ablated lesions, 3.90 in those with partially ablated lesions (p=0.001), and median AFP values were significantly lower for well-ablated lesions (13 ng/mL) compared with partially ablated lesions (151.50 ng/mL), p=0.02). Median GALAD scores were higher at 1 month after ablation than at baseline in patients with partially ablated tumors, but the difference was not significant (2.60 vs. 3.90, p=0.514). The ROC curve was measured to determine the cutoff value of GALAD score for the prediction of well-ablated HCC, and was found to be ≤3.31 with an AUC of 0.75, a sensitivity of 76.19%, a specificity of 83.33%, a positive predictive value of 94.10%, and a negative predictive value of 35.70% (Fig. 2).

Table 4

Comparison of laboratory data and GALAD score before and after ablation in the patient groups (n=48)

LaboratoryBaselineFollow-upp-value
HB (gm/dL)Mean13.1012.600.001
TLC (/mm3)Mean5.604.800.001
PLT (/mm3)Median1281150.001
Albumin (gm/dL)Mean3.703.500.003
Total bilirubin (mg/dL)Mean11.200.029
INRMean1.11.200.001
AST (IU/L)Median36350.052
ALT (IU/L)Median30320.068
ALP (IU/L)Mean106103.600.473
Creatinine (mg/dL)Mean0.870.920.312
AFP (ng/mL)Median25.50170.001
AFP-L3 (%)Median7.407.200.792
DCP (ng/mL)Median13.70100.023
GALAD scoreMedian2.371.320.001
Table 5

Comparison of baseline laboratory data and GALAD score between patients with well-ablated and partially ablated tumors

BaselineWell ablated, n=42Partially ablated, n=6p-value
HB (gm/dL)Mean13.1013.100.690
TLC (/mm3)Mean5.704.600.476
PLT (/mm3)Median131.50124.500.842
Albumin (gm/dL)Mean3.703.600.486
Total bilirubin (mg/dL)Mean10.950.574
INRMean1.201.100.795
AST (IU/L)Median3638.500.883
ALT (IU/L)Median3038.500.440
ALP (IU/L)Mean105.6099.100.467
Creatinine (mg/dL)Mean0.900.860.420
AFP (ng/mL)Median22.80135.100.098
AFP-L3 (%)Median7.108.700.659
DCP (ng/mL)Median146.700.131
GALAD scoreMedian2.192.600.541
Receiver operating characteristic curve curve of GALAD score as predictor of response in patients with well-ablated tumors.
Fig. 2  Receiver operating characteristic curve curve of GALAD score as predictor of response in patients with well-ablated tumors.

Discussion

The study aim was to assess the effectiveness of the GALAD score for the diagnosis of early HCC and the follow-up of HCC cases after ablative therapy. Our study results revealed that the GALAD score was significantly higher in cases with HCC than in those without HCC (2.56 vs. 0.37). This is consistent with Best et al.18 who conducted a multicenter study of early HCC in an international cohort of patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. They found significantly higher GALAD scores in patients with HCC than in those with benign cirrhotic livers (2.93 vs. −3.96) in German centers. However, the median GALAD score in the Japanese center in the same study was lower in patients with HCC vs. benign cirrhotic liver (−0.30 vs, −3.24), which may have been caused by low values of tumor markers integrated into the GALAD score, especially DCP, in those patients. In addition, Yang et al.,19 who evaluated the GALAD score for HCC detection compared with liver US and the GALADUS score, reported that the median GALAD score in patients with HCC (3.80) was significantly higher than in patients without HCC (−2.60).

In this study, the best cutoff of the GALAD score for the detection of early HCC was 0.74, with a sensitivity of 84.40%, a specificity of 89.10%, an NPV of 82%, and a PPV of 90.74%. We reviewed different GALAD score cutoffs and their corresponding sensitivities and specificities in previously published studies15,18–21 and tested the cutoffs in our cohort in a trial to reach the best possible cutoff that could be used in different patient populations. However, despite showing very high sensitivity when applying the different cutoffs (most more than 98%), the specificity results were unacceptable (most less than 60%) and carry the risk of high false positive results if used as a screening test. Despite having a high specificity (98.4%) when applying the cutoff proposed by Johnson et al.,15 (0.88), the sensitivity was still less than that of our proposed cutoff (79.3 vs. 84.4%). The difference in the cutoffs between the studies and the higher cutoff in our study can be attributed to several factors related to the structure of the score itself which included age, sex, levels of AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP as core components. In our study, most cases were men (74%). Ahn et al.,22 in a study of the association of serum tumor biomarkers with integrated genomic and clinical characteristics of HCC, found that serum biomarker levels differed with genetic variants and gene expression profiles in HCC, not only the clinical characteristics and tumor stage, may also have been related to the underlying etiology of liver disease. In our study, most patients had post-HCV CLD (98%). The findings highlight the importance of studying the GALAD score in different ethnic groups and among different etiologies of chronic liver disease to reach a standard reference for HCC disease among the spectrum of presentations. With regard to baseline tumor markers, our HCC patients showed highly significant AFP and AFP-L3 values compared with the control group, with no significant difference in the DCP values between groups. The results matched those of Best et al.,18 in a Japanese study. In contrast, Yang et al.,19 and Johnson et al.,15 reported significant differences in AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP between the two groups.

To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to assess the ability of the GALAD score to predict the course and response to therapy in HCC cases after ablative therapy. Our results revealed that the follow-up GALAD scores 1 month after ablation in patients who had well-ablated tumors were significantly lower than the baseline values, 2.19 before ablation vs. 0.98 after, a more than two-fold decrease. The best cutoff for the prediction of good ablation was ≤3.31, with an AUC of 0.75, a sensitivity of 76.10%, and a specificity of 83.33%. In contrast, the GALAD scores in patients with a partial response or tumor progression 1 month after ablation were higher but not significantly different.

In our study, most the patients underwent radiofrequency ablation (75.90%) and the rest (24.10%) underwent microwave ablation following with the BCLC guidelines for the management of HCC.23 With regard to the efficacy of ablation for focal lesions, most lesions showed a complete response (94.40% in lesions <2 cm and 86.10% for lesions from 2–5 cm). That agrees with Abdelaziz et al.,24 who studied efficacy and survival of achieved with percutaneous radiofrequency compared with microwave ablation in HCC. They reported that most focal lesions had a complete response (96.50% in lesions <3 cm in diameter and 92.68% in lesions 3–5 cm) by either technique. The difference was not significant. In our study, most patients had a single focal lesion, mainly in the right lobe of the liver. That is in line with the findings of Amoros et al.,25 and Kamal et al.26 With regard to the socio-demographic characteristics of the study patients, most were men (74% in the HCC group and 76% in the cirrhosis group), and the patients with HCC were older than those in the cirrhotic group, but the difference was not significant. The finding was in accordance with studies conducted by Choi et al.22 and Amoros et al.27

Regarding baseline laboratory data and Child–Pugh classification, the patients with HCC had increased albumin and normal bilirubin levels, nearly normal prothrombin time, and were more likely to be Child–Pugh class A compared with the control group. The better liver biochemical profile might be explained by the selection bias of well-compensated HCC cases to allow for therapeutic intervention, and consistent with the findings of Johnson et al.,15 Soliman et al.,18 and Best et al.28

Our study has several strengths. The most important is the study of cases with early-stage tumors, where 31.30% of the included focal lesions were less than 2 cm in diameter with curative potential. The main value of surveillance is to detect potentially curative disease. The median GALAD score in patients with focal lesions less than 2 cm was 2.64, which was significant for the diagnosis of early HCC, and as mentioned above, a cutoff score of 0.74 had excellent sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV for the prediction of HCC. It was thus, a good tool for screening HCC, overcame the low sensitivity of US and AFP alone, and avoided radiation exposure, invasiveness, and the cost of other radiological modalities.

The data will help us to use the GALAD score for follow-up after ablative procedures. Further studies in larger numbers of patients will validate the best cutoff value to achieve cure and reduce the need for radiological modalities such as triphasic CT and dynamic MRI, which would decrease multiple radiation exposures, renal contrast insult, and patient cost.

Based on the study results, we can conclude that the GALAD score was clinically useful, rapid, and accurate for the diagnosis of early HCC and was a good prognostic tool, especially in patients with well-ablated focal lesions.

Abbreviations

AFP: 

alpha-fetoprotein

BCLC: 

Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer

CT: 

computed tomography

DCP: 

des-gamma-carboxy-prothrombin

HCC: 

Hepatocellular carcinoma

MRI: 

magnetic resonance imaging

Declarations

Ethical statement

This work was conducted following the ethical principles of declaration of Helsinki. All patients gave their written an informed consent before enrollment. The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of Kasr Al-Aini School of Medicine in 2017 (Serial number: I-200316).

Data sharing statement

Data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Funding

None to declare.

Conflict of interest

ME has been an editorial board member of Journal of Clinical and Translational Hepatology since 2021. The other authors have no conflict of interests related to this publication.

Authors’ contributions

Contributed to this paper with conception and design of the work (AS, RE, ME), collected patient data and attended clinical sessions (AA, MH), performed the literature review drafted the manuscript (RE, AS, ME), All authors participated in revising, editing, approving the final version of the manuscript.

References

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68(6):394-424 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  2. Abdel-Atti EA. HCC burden in Egypt. Gastroenterol Hepatol Open Access 2015;2(3):00045 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  3. Lee JM, Yoon JH, Joo I, Woo HS. Recent Advances in CT and MR Imaging for Evaluation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Liver Cancer 2012;1(1):22-40 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  4. Silva MA, Hegab B, Hyde C, Guo B, Buckels JA, Mirza DF. Needle track seeding following biopsy of liver lesions in the diagnosis of hepatocellular cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut 2008;57(11):1592-1596 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  5. Stigliano R, Marelli L, Yu D, Davies N, Patch D, Burroughs AK. Seeding following percutaneous diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma. What is the risk and the outcome? Seeding risk for percutaneous approach of HCC. Cancer Treat Rev 2007;33(5):437-447 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  6. Bruix J, Sherman M, American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 2011;53(3):1020-1022 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  7. Tang A, Cruite I, Sirlin CB. Toward a standardized system for hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis using computed tomography and MRI. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;7(3):269-279 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  8. Yu NC, Chaudhari V, Raman SS, Lassman C, Tong MJ, Busuttil RW, et al. CT and MRI improve detection of hepatocellular carcinoma, compared with ultrasound alone, in patients with cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011;9(2):161-167 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  9. Johnson PJ. The role of serum alpha-fetoprotein estimation in the diagnosis and management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Liver Dis 2001;5(1):145-159 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  10. Marrero JA, El-Serag HB. Alpha-fetoprotein should be included in the hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance guidelines of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology 2011;53(3):1060-1061 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  11. Ikoma J, Kaito M, Ishihara T, Nakagawa N, Kamei A, Fujita N, et al. Early diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using a sensitive assay for serum des-gamma-carboxy prothrombin: a prospective study. Hepatogastroenterology 2002;49(43):235-238 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  12. Oda K, Ido A, Tamai T, Matsushita M, Kumagai K, Mawatari S, et al. Highly sensitive lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive α-fetoprotein is useful for early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease. Oncol Rep 2011;26(5):1227-1233 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  13. Toyoda H, Kumada T, Tada T. Highly sensitive Lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive α-fetoprotein: a new tool for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Oncology 2011;81(Suppl 1):61-65 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  14. Choi J, Kim GA, Han S, Lee W, Chun S, Lim YS. Longitudinal Assessment of Three Serum Biomarkers to Detect Very Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Hepatology 2019;69(5):1983-1994 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  15. Johnson PJ, Pirrie SJ, Cox TF, Berhane S, Teng M, Palmer D, et al. The detection of hepatocellular carcinoma using a prospectively developed and validated model based on serological biomarkers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014;23(1):144-153 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  16. Kagebayashi C, Yamaguchi I, Akinaga A, Kitano H, Yokoyama K, Satomura M, et al. Automated immunoassay system for AFP-L3% using on-chip electrokinetic reaction and separation by affinity electrophoresis. Anal Biochem 2009;388(2):306-311 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  17. Bruix J, Sherman M, Practice Guidelines Committee, American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 2005;42(5):1208-1236 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  18. Best J, Bechmann LP, Sowa JP, Sydor S, Dechêne A, Pflanz K, et al. GALAD Score Detects Early Hepatocellular Carcinoma in an International Cohort of Patients With Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020;18(3):728-735.e4 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  19. Yang JD, Addissie BD, Mara KC, Harmsen WS, Dai J, Zhang N, et al. GALAD Score for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Detection in Comparison with Liver Ultrasound and Proposal of GALADUS Score. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2019;28(3):531-538 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  20. Best J, Bilgi H, Heider D, Schotten C, Manka P, Bedreli S, et al. The GALAD scoring algorithm based on AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP significantly improves detection of BCLC early stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Z Gastroenterol 2016;54(12):1296-1305 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  21. Schotten C, Ostertag B, Sowa JP, Manka P, Bechmann LP, Hilgard G, et al. GALAD Score Detects Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma in a European Cohort of Chronic Hepatitis B and C Patients. Pharmaceuticals (Basel) 2021;14(8):735 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  22. Ahn KS, O’Brien DR, Kim YH, Kim TS, Yamada H, Park JW, et al. Associations of Serum Tumor Biomarkers with Integrated Genomic and Clinical Characteristics of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Liver Cancer 2021;10(6):593-605 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  23. European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2018;69(1):182-236 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  24. Abdelaziz A, Elbaz T, Shousha HI, Mahmoud S, Ibrahim M, Abdelmaksoud A, et al. Efficacy and survival analysis of percutaneous radiofrequency versus microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: an Egyptian multidisciplinary clinic experience. Surg Endosc 2014;28(12):3429-3434 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  25. Amoros R, King R, Toyoda H, Kumada T, Johnson PJ, Bird TG. A continuous-time hidden Markov model for cancer surveillance using serum biomarkers with application to hepatocellular carcinoma. Metron 2019;77(2):67-86 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  26. Kamal A, Elmoety AAA, Rostom YAM, Shater MS, Lashen SA. Percutaneous radiofrequency versus microwave ablation for management of hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized controlled trial. J Gastrointest Oncol 2019;10(3):562-571 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  27. Choi JY, Jung SW, Kim HY, Kim M, Kim Y, Kim DG, et al. Diagnostic value of AFP-L3 and PIVKA-II in hepatocellular carcinoma according to total-AFP. World J Gastroenterol 2013;19(3):339-346 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  28. Soliman AF, Abouelkhair MM, Hasab Allah MS, El-Kady NM, Ezzat WM, Gabr HA, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Microwave Ablation (MWA) for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) in Difficult Anatomical Sites in Egyptian Patients with Liver Cirrhosis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2019;20(1):295-301 View Article PubMed/NCBI