There is a sharp East (APASL)-West (CLIF-SOFA) divide with respect to the definition of ACLF (Sarin et al Hepa- tol Int 2009;3:269-82; Moreau R et al Gastroenterology 2013;144:1426-37). Hence, we for the first time compared the CLIF-SOFA and APASL definitions in Asian-Indian patients with liver cirrhosis and AD with regards to the short-term mortality. Consecutive patients with liver cirrhosis and AD were prospectively included between July 2013 and April 2014. They were classified

into ACLF and no-ACLF groups as per CLIF-SOFA and APASL criteria. Patients were followed up for 3-mo from inclusion or mortality whichever 3-MA order was earlier. Mortality at 28-d and 90-d was compared between no-ACLF and ACLF groups and also between different grades of ACLF as per CLIF-SOFA criteria. Prognostic scores like CLIF-SOFA,

Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE)-II, Child-Pugh-Turcotte (CTP) and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores were evaluated for their ability to predict click here 28-d mortality using area under receiver operating curves (AUROC). Of 80 patients, 56(70%) had ACLF as per CLIF-SOFA criteria and 36(45%) as per APASL criteria. Males (n=66,82.5%) were predominant, alcoholic liver disease (n=53, 66.3%) was the most common etiology, sepsis (n=39,48.8%) was the most common cause of AD while infection (n=39,48.8%) was the most common precipitant of AD. The 28-d mortality in no ACLF and ACLF groups was 8.3% and 44.6% (P=0.002) as per CLIF-SOFA

and 36.4% and 30.6% (P=0.64) as per APASL criteria. The 28-d mortality in patients with no ACLF (n=24), ACLF grade 1 (n=18), ACLF grade 2 (n=22) and ACLF grade 3 (n=16) as per CLIF-SOFA criteria was 8.3%, 16.7%, 40.9% and 81.2% (x2 for PD-1 antibody inhibitor trend, P=0.002) and 90-d mortality was 20.8%, 38.9%, 72.7% and 100% (x2 for trend, P <0.0001) respectively. Patients with prior decompensation had similar 28-d (36.4% vs 30.6%, P=0.64) and 90-d (52.3% vs 58.3%, P=0.66) mortality as patients without prior decompensation. AUROCs for 28-d mortality for CLIF-SOFA, APACHE-II, Child-Pugh and MELD scores were 0.839, 0.800, 0.783 and 0.755 respectively. On multivariate analysis of these scores, CLIF-SOFA and APACHE-II were the only significant independent predictor of mortality with an odds ratio 1.561 (95% CI: 1.114-2.187) and 1.160 (1.021-1.318) respectively. Conclusion: CLIF-SOFA criteria are better than APASL criteria to classify patients into ACLF based on their prognosis. CLIF-SOFA and APACHE II are the best predictor of short-term mortality. Disclosures: The following people have nothing to disclose: Radha K. Dhiman, Tarana Gupta, Swastik Agrawal, Ajay K. Duseja, Yogesh K.