The “Six-and-Twelve” Score for Recurrent HCC Patients Receiving TACE: Does it Still Work?

Background A new prognostic model, the “six-and-twelve” (SAT) score, was suggested to be effective in selecting ideal transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) candidates from treatment naïve hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. However, whether the SAT score could also be applied in recurrent HCC patients with prior curative-intent treatments remains unknown. We aimed to validate and compare SAT focussing on these patients. Methods From January 2014 to May 2019, 121 unresectable HCC patients with recurrence in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) A/B receiving TACE were enrolled. Survival distribution was evaluated by the Kaplan–Meier method compared by the log-rank test. Discriminatory ability was compared with the concordance index (C-index) to rank six prognostic systems (SAT, Four-and-seven, HAP, mHAP, mHAP2, mHAP3). The area under the curve (AUC) was performed to assess the mortality prediction at 1, 2, and 3 years. Results In recurrent HCC patients receiving TACE, SAT had better performances in survival distribution. Due to the highest C-index, SAT was deemed the first ranking prognostic score. In terms of mortality prediction at 1, 2 and 3 years, SAT had the best mortality prediction at 2 and 3 years and mHAP3 had the best mortality prediction at 1 year. Conclusions Among the six prognostic systems analysed in ideal TACE patients with recurrences after curative-intent treatments, SAT was proven to be superior to other systems, suggesting that it could also be used in these patients.