| Literature DB >> 20735842 |
Danan Wang1, Qinghui Wang, Fengping Shan, Beixing Liu, Changlong Lu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Liver fibrosis progression is commonly found in patients with CHB. Liver biopsy is a gold standard for identifying the extent of liver fibrosis, but has many draw-backs. It is essential to construct a noninvasive model to predict the levels of risk for liver fibrosis. It would provide very useful information to help reduce the number of liver biopsies of CHB patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20735842 PMCID: PMC2939639 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-10-251
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Comparing characteristics of patients with and without significant fibrosis
| Variables | Patients without significant fibrosis (F0-1), n = 329 | Patients with significant fibrosis (F2-4), n = 126 | χ2 value | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 29(16-60) | 40(17-75) | 52.21 | < 0.0001 |
| Gender(M/F) | 215/114 | 74/52 | 1.723 | 0.189 |
| WBC(109/L) | 5.3(2.3-12.2) | 4.5(1.3-18.1) | 14.51 | < 0.0001 |
| RBC(1012/L) | 4.8(3.5-4.0) | 4.5(2.6-5.7) | 9.47 | 0.002 |
| Hb(g/L) | 145(87-173) | 141(85-167) | 1.79 | 0.174 |
| Platelet(109/L) | 184(46-350) | 136(13-246) | 80.24 | < 0.0001 |
| ALT(U/L) | 72.0(6-471) | 174.1(11-536) | 11.37 | < 0.001 |
| AST(U/L) | 15.2(11-341) | 63.4(11-413) | 28.43 | < 0.0001 |
| GGT(u/L) | 24.9(6-473) | 66.5(8-327) | 62.14 | < 0.0001 |
| ALP(u/L) | 106(7-219) | 117(19-307) | 2.78 | 0.099 |
| ChE(u/L) | 8054(70-20427) | 6617(50-12648) | 41.28 | < 0.0001 |
| TP(g/L) | 72.3(49-88.4) | 72.1(40-88.3) | 0.442 | 0.501 |
| Alb(g/L) | 45.4(11.6-47.0) | 43.2(10.9-52.6) | 18.14 | < 0.0001 |
| TBIL(μmol/L) | 13.4(3-138) | 15.3(5.5-216) | 11.03 | < 0.0001 |
| Length of liver biopsy(mm) | 14(10-21) | 12(11-19) | 1.290 | 0.256 |
| Number of liver biopsy | 2.0(1.0-4.0) | 2.5(1.0-5.0) | 1.621 | 0.197 |
Comparing input and output variables in three sets
| Variables | Patients in the training set, n = 226 | Patients in the validation set, n = 113 | Patients in the testing set, n = 116 | χ2( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age(years) | 30(16-62) | 35(16-75) | 32(16-74) | 1.741(0.419) |
| WBC(109/L) | 5.4(1.3-18.1) | 5.5(2.5-16.8) | 5.4(3.0-11) | 0.231(0.891) |
| RBC(1012/L) | 4.7(2.6-4.0) | 4.7(3.6-5.7) | 4.6(3.7-5.6) | 0.310(0.856) |
| Platelet(109/L) | 165(53-246) | 170(13-350) | 185(46-345) | 4.965(0.083) |
| ALT(U/L) | 87(16-471) | 80(11-536) | 72(6-507) | 2.475(0.290) |
| AST(U/L) | 48(11-413) | 42.5(15-375) | 39(11-361) | 1.264(0.531) |
| GGT(U/L) | 29(6-421) | 33(6-288) | 34(10-473) | 3.247(0.197) |
| ChE(U/L) | 8402(50-20427) | 7674(145-11374) | 7258(360-12648) | 3.051(0.217) |
| Alb(g/L) | 44.8(10.9-47.0) | 44.2(11.8-50.7) | 44.1(31.3-52.6) | 0.412(0.814) |
| TBIL(μmol/L) | 14.1(3.6-216) | 15.3(3-196) | 13.2(3- 134) | 3.650(0.161) |
| Fibrosis | 166/60 | 83/30 | 80/36 | 0.657(0.720) |
Figure 1Sensitivity analysis of input variables. The horizontal axis is the input variables; the vertical axis is the percent change on the output variable. The value shown for each input variable is a measure of its relative importance, with 0 representing a variable that has no effect on the prediction and 1 representing a variable that completely dominates the prediction.
Figure 2ROC curve of the neural network output in three sets. (a) In the training set(Cutoff = 0.415, AUROC = 0.883); (b) In the validation set(Cutoff = 0.421, AUROC = 0.884); (c) In the testing set(Cutoff = 0.418, AUROC = 0.920)
ROC analysis of artificial neural network output at different cutoff points in the testing set
| Cutoff point | Sensitivity% | Specificity% | PPV% | NPV% | Youden Index% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.33 | 100.0 | 68.7 | 59.0 | 100.0 | 68.7 |
| 0.35 | 94.4 | 75.0 | 63.0 | 96.8 | 69.4 |
| 0.40 | 91.7 | 80.0 | 65.3 | 94.0 | 71.7 |
| 0.45 | 83.3 | 85.0 | 71.4 | 91.9 | 68.3 |
| 0.50 | 66.7 | 88.7 | 72.7 | 85.5 | 47.1 |
| 0.55 | 55.5 | 92.5 | 76.9 | 82.2 | 44.2 |
| 0.60 | 44.4 | 96.2 | 83.3 | 78.6 | 42.3 |
| 0.70 | 36.1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 77.7 | 36.1 |