Performance of the GALAD Model in an Asian Cohort Undergoing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: A Prospective Cohort Study
- PMID: 40346978
- DOI: 10.1111/jgh.16997
Performance of the GALAD Model in an Asian Cohort Undergoing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: A Prospective Cohort Study
Abstract
Background and aim: Current hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance strategy has its limitations, consequently delaying early detection. The GALAD model has been validated in retrospective studies, with two published cut-off values yielding different sensitivities for HCCs of different etiologies. We evaluated the performance of GALAD model in HCC surveillance and determined the ideal cut-off value for our cohort.
Methods: Patients undergoing 6-monthly HCC surveillance in Singapore General Hospital were recruited between December 2017-October 2018. Study serum specimens were prospectively collected and retrospectively tested using the μTASWako alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), AFP-L3, and protein induced by vitamin K antagonism-II (PIVKA-II) kits. GALAD score was calculated and compared with individual biomarkers using area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Published GALAD cut-offs of -0.63 and -1.95 were compared for their performance in HCC detection.
Results: There were 207 patients (median age 59 years, 55.1% males). Hepatitis B was the commonest etiology (72.9%). By February 2023, with a median follow-up of 48.9 months, 20 patients had developed HCC. Eight patients developed HCC within 1 year from specimen collection. For HCC developing within 1 year, GALAD model detected HCC with an AUC of 0.84, greater than AFP (AUC 0.77), AFP-L3 (AUC 0.60), and PIVKA-II (AUC 0.67). GALAD at cut-off -1.95 achieved sensitivity and specificity of 75% and 92.5% for HCCs detected within 1 year, superior to cut-off -0.63 (sensitivity 12.5%, specificity 100%).
Conclusion: In this prospective study of HCC surveillance, the GALAD model performed better than individual biomarkers. The cut-off of -1.95 was more useful in our predominantly chronic hepatitis B cohort.
Keywords: GALAD; chronic hepatitis B; hepatocellular carcinoma; hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance; tumor biomarkers.
© 2025 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Analysis of the optimal patterns of serum alpha fetoprotein (AFP), AFP-L3% and protein induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist-II (PIVKA-II) detection in the diagnosis of liver cancers.PeerJ. 2025 Jul 21;13:e19712. doi: 10.7717/peerj.19712. eCollection 2025. PeerJ. 2025. PMID: 40708828 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison between models for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver diseases of various etiologies: ASAP score versus GALAD score.Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2025 Aug;24(4):412-422. doi: 10.1016/j.hbpd.2023.12.004. Epub 2023 Dec 30. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2025. PMID: 38199909
-
The role of GALAD score in the surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma.Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 1;15(1):22279. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-07765-1. Sci Rep. 2025. PMID: 40594677 Free PMC article.
-
Performance of GALAD score and serum biomarkers for detecting NAFLD-related HCC: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 Jul-Dec;17(11):1159-1167. doi: 10.1080/17474124.2023.2279175. Epub 2023 Nov 23. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023. PMID: 37929312
-
Surveillance of cirrhosis for hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review and economic analysis.Health Technol Assess. 2007 Sep;11(34):1-206. doi: 10.3310/hta11340. Health Technol Assess. 2007. PMID: 17767898
Cited by
-
Enhancing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: Comparative Evaluation of AFP, AFP-L3, DCP and Composite Models in a Biobank-Based Case-Control Study.Cancers (Basel). 2025 Jul 18;17(14):2390. doi: 10.3390/cancers17142390. Cancers (Basel). 2025. PMID: 40723271 Free PMC article.
References
-
- H. Sung, J. Ferlay, R. L. Siegel, et al., “Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries,” CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 71, no. 3 (2021): 209–249, https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660.
-
- A. G. Singal, S. Mittal, O. A. Yerokun, et al., “Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening Associated With Early Tumor Detection and Improved Survival Among Patients With Cirrhosis in the US,” American Journal of Medicine 130, no. 9 (2017): 1099–1106.e1, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.01.021.
-
- European Association for the Study of the Liver, “Electronic Address: easloffice@easloffice.eu; European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma,” Journal of Hepatology 69, no. 1 (2018): 182–236, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2018.03.019 Erratum in: J Hepatol. 2019 Apr;70(4):817. PMID: 29628281.
-
- A. G. Singal, J. M. Llovet, M. Yarchoan, et al., “AASLD Practice Guidance on Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma [Published Correction Appears in Hepatology]. 2023 Dec 1;78(6):E105,” Hepatology 78, no. 6 (2023): 1922–1965 PMID: 37199193; PMCID: PMC10663390.
-
- M. Omata, A. L. Cheng, N. Kokudo, et al., “Asia‐Pacific Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A 2017 Update,” Hepatology International 11, no. 4 (2017): 317–370, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12072‐017‐9799‐9 PMID: 28620797; PMCID: PMC5491694.
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical