Mean time on WL was 13.9 ± 20.3 months for non-HCC pts compared to 9.1 ± 14.1 months for HCC pts; p<0.001. LT survival benefit in non-HCC pts increased with increasing MELD [= -14.35 + 1.22*MELD; p<0.001]. LT survival benefit in HCC pts increased with RXDX-106 price increasing MELD and decreasing AFP [= -11.83

+ 0.95*MELD – (0.83*logAFP); p<0.001]. Equating these 2 regressions we obtained an adjusted HCC-MELD score: 2.06 + (0.78*MELD) – (0.67*logAFP) that predicts an equal survival benefit following LT for HCC pts compared to non-HCC pts having the same biochemical MELD. Conclusion: We describe a scoring system that equilibrates the survival benefit among pts with and without HCC who are on a common LT list. Rather than arbitrary exemption points, this score uses objective evidence of liver dysfunction (MELD) Trametinib price and tumor aggressiveness (AFP) to prioritize the listing of HCC pts for LT. This has the potential to improve organ allocation. Disclosures: The following people have nothing to disclose: Mohannad Dugum, Nizar N. Zein,

Rocio Lopez, Carlos J. Romero-Marrero, Federico N. Aucejo, Bijan Eghte-sad, Bradley Confer, Ibrahim A. Hanouneh Background & Aims: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered a major one of curative treatment options for hepato-cellular carcinoma (HCC). Growing data have demonstrated that cryoablation represents a safe and effective alternative therapy for HCC, but no randomization controlled trial (RCT) has been reported to compare cryoablation with RFA in HCC treatment. The present study was a multicenter RCT aimed to compare the outcomes of percutaneous cryoablation with RFA for the treatment of HCC. Methods:

Three hundred and sixty patients with Child class Amoxicillin A or B cirrhosis and 1-2 HCC lesions ≤ 4 cm, treatment naïve, without metastasis were randomly assigned at 1:1 ratio to receive cryoablation (n=180) or RFA (n=180) treatment. The baseline characteristics, including age, gender,Child-Pugh class, α-fetoprotein, tumor size, HBV DNA load,platelet count,ECOG score, alanine aminotransferase, albumin, and bilirubin level, were comparable in both groups, except the number of patients with two tumors (cryoablation vs RFA group : 10.56% vs 5%, P = 0.049). The primary end-points were local tumor recurrence in 3 years after the treatment and safety. Results: The local tumor recurrent rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 3%, 7%, and 7% for cryoablation and 9%, 11%, and 11% for RFA, respectively (P = 0.043). For lesions >3 cm in diameter, there was a significantly lower local tumor recurrent rate in cryoablation group vs. RFA group (7.7% versus 18.2%, P = 0.041). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 97%, 67% and 40%, for cryoablation and 97%, 66%, and 38% for RFA, respectively (P = 0.747). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year tumor-free survival rates were 89%, 54%, and 35% in the cryoablation group and 84%, 50%, and 34% in the RFA group, respectively (P = 0.628).