Skip to main content
. 2014 Jun 6;9(6):e99115. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099115

Table 7. Comparison of the prognostic ability among 4 BCLC-, 4 CLIP- and 4 TIS-based staging systems.

N = 2654 Distribution ofpatients (%) Homogeneity(Likelihood ratio χ2) Akaikeinformation criterion
BCLC models (0/A/B/C/D)
Original 9/22/14/42/14 492.449 13695.982
Modified A 2/25/13/46/14 500.669 13687.762
Modified B 2/25/17/42/14 518.292 13670.139
Modified C 2/28/14/42/14 502.622 13685.809
CLIP models [0/1/2/3/4/5/6(/7)]
Original 27/26/16/12/12/6/2 710.818 13477.613
Modified A 8/24/24/15/12/11/6/2 762.847 13425.584
Modified B 8/24/25/15/11/11/7 714.275 13474.156
Modified C 8/28/25/14/13/12/2 622.205 13566.226
TIS models [0/1/2/3/4/5/6(/7)]
Original 35/22/12/12/11/6/1 685.371 13503.060
Modified A 9/30/20/12/12/10/6/1 745.476 13442.955
Modified B 9/30/21/11/12/11/7 691.347 13497.084
Modified C 9/36/19/10/13/12/1 595.013 13593.418

Abbreviations: BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; CLIP, Cancer of the Liver Italian Program; TIS, Taipei Integrated Scoring.