Table 4.
Differences in the tumor characteristics between NASH-HCC and ASH-HCC groups
| Variable | Etiology |
P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| NASH-HCC (n=54) | ASH-HCC (n=45) | ||
| Number of lesions | 0.99 | ||
| Single | 31 (57.4) | 26 (57.8) | |
| Multiple | 20 (37.0) | 17 (37.8) | |
| Diffuse | 2 (3.7) | 2 (4.4) | |
| Unknown | 1 (1.8) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Portal vein involvement | 0.81 | ||
| No | 35 (64.8) | 28 (62.2) | |
| Yes | 18 (33.3) | 16 (35.6) | |
| Unknown | 1 (1.9) | 1 (2.2) | |
| Lymph node involvement | |||
| No | 50 (92.6) | 34 (75.6) | 0.03 |
| Yes | 4 (7.4) | 10 (22.2) | |
| Unknown | 0 (0.0) | 1 (2.2) | |
| BCLC stage | 0.26 | ||
| 0 | 1 (6.2) | 0 (0.0) | |
| A | 5 (31.3) | 3 (42.9) | |
| B | 2 (12.5) | 1 (14.2) | |
| C | 2 (12.5) | 3 (42.9) | |
| D | 6 (37.5) | 0 (0.0) | |
| TNM staging (AJCC 7ed) | 0.37 | ||
| I | 9 (56.3) | 2 (28.6) | |
| II | 2 (12.5) | 1 (14.3) | |
| IIIA | 2 (12.5) | 2 (28.6) | |
| IIIB | 2 (12.5) | 0 (0.0) | |
| IIIC | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
| IVA | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
| IVB | 1 (6.3) | 2 (28.6) | |
| Treatment type | 0.41 | ||
| Curative | 14 (25.9) | 9 (20.0) | |
| Loco-regional therapy | 11 (20.3) | 10 (22.2) | |
| Systemic chemotherapy | 1 (1.9) | 2 (4.4) | |
| Best supportive care | 28 (51.8) | 24 (53.3) | |
Values are presented as number (%). There were missing data in the registry regarding the BCLC and TNM staging. Staging data was available for 23 patients, which is presented in the table.
HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; NASH, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; ASH, alcoholic steatohepatitis; BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; TNM, Tumor lymph Node Metastasis; A JCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer.