| Literature DB >> 24282481 |
Da-Wu Zeng1, Yu-Rui Liu, Jie-Min Zhang, Yue-Yong Zhu, Su Lin, Jia You, You-Bing Li, Jing Chen, Qi Zheng, Jia-Ji Jiang, Jing Dong.
Abstract
AIMS: This study aimed to investigate associations between ceruloplasmin (CP) levels, inflammation grade and fibrosis stages in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and to establish a noninvasive model to predict cirrhosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24282481 PMCID: PMC3837017 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077942
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Demographic and clinical characteristics of subjects in the training and validation groups.
| Variable | All | Training group | Validation Group |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (N=198) | (N=109) | (N=89) | ||
| Age (yr) | 36.44 ± 10.59 | 36.6 ± 10.75 | 36.25 ± 10.45 | 0.818 |
| Gender | 0.977 | |||
| Male | 160 (80.8) | 88 (80.7) | 72 (80. 9) | |
| Female | 38 (19.2) | 21 (19.3) | 17 (19.1) | |
| Total bilirubin (mmol/L) | 14.1 ( 10.18 , 20.28 ) | 14.2 ( 10 , 21 ) | 13.8 ( 10.2 , 18.65 ) | 0.55 |
| Albumin (g/L) | 41.62 ± 4.04 | 41.81 ± 4.03 | 41.38 ± 4.07 | 0.458 |
| Globulin (g/L) | 29.1 ± 4.37 | 29.31 ± 4.18 | 28.84 ± 4.59 | 0.451 |
| ALT (IU/L) | 66.5 ( 40 , 215.75 ) | 66 ( 40 , 200.5 ) | 69 ( 39.5 , 222.5 ) | 0.868 |
| AST (IU/L) | 50 ( 31 , 113 ) | 47 ( 32 , 120.5 ) | 51 ( 31 , 111.5 ) | 0.81 |
| GGT(IU/L) | 47.5 ( 25 , 86.25 ) | 48 ( 25 , 97 ) | 46 ( 25 , 78.5 ) | 0.367 |
| TBA (mmol/L) | 10.1 ( 5.08 , 22.7 ) | 11.7 ( 5.05 , 24.25 ) | 9.4 ( 5.15 , 18.1 ) | 0.7 |
| CHE (IU/L) | 7437.5 ( 6014.25 , 9372.5 ) | 7667 ( 5853.5 , 9485.5 ) | 7364 ( 6279.5 , 9239 ) | 0.653 |
| PT (s) | 12.7 ( 12.2 , 13.5 ) | 12.7 ( 12.2 , 13.5 ) | 12.7 ( 12.1 , 13.4 ) | 0.282 |
| INR | 1.04 ( 0.98 , 1.1 ) | 1.04 ( 0.99 , 1.11 ) | 1.03 ( 0.96 , 1.1 ) | 0.251 |
| HBV DNA (logIU/ml) | 5.63 ( 4.49 , 6.96 ) | 5.56 ( 4.47 , 7.2 ) | 5.66 ( 4.6 , 6.86 ) | 0.625 |
| WBC (109/L) | 5.67 ( 4.78 , 6.57 ) | 5.62 ( 4.71 , 6.45 ) | 5.81 ( 4.88 , 6.83 ) | 0.501 |
| PLT (1011/L) | 189.39±53.23 | 185.09±52.40 | 194.66±54.06 | 0.209 |
| AFP (ng/ml) | 4.11 ( 2.55 , 12.89 ) | 4.45 ( 2.89 , 14.53 ) | 3.94 ( 2.43 , 8.85 ) | 0.186 |
| CP (mg/L) | 205.13±38.99 | 202.22±38.84 | 208.70±39.10 | 0.246 |
| Inflammation stage | 0.81 | |||
| G1 | 35 (17.7%) | 19 (17.4%) | 16 (18.0%) | |
| G2 | 55 (27.8%) | 28 (25.7%) | 27 (30.3%) | |
| G3 | 79 (39.9%) | 44 (40.4%) | 35 (39.3%) | |
| G4 | 29 (14.6%) | 18 (16.5%) | 11 (12.4%) | |
| Stage of fibrosis, n (%) | 0.15 | |||
| F1 | 50(25.3) | 26(23.8) | 24(27.0) | |
| F2 | 58(29.3) | 26(23.8) | 32(36.0) | |
| F3 | 52(26.3) | 32(29.4) | 20(22.4) | |
| F4 | 38(19.2) | 25(23.0) | 13(14.6) | |
| Cirrhosis | 0.139 | |||
| No | 160 (80.8) | 84 (77.1) | 76 (85.4) | |
| Yes | 38(19.2) | 25(23.0) | 13(14.6) |
Continuous data were summarized as mean±SD if data followed normal distribution and as median (IQR: Q1 to Q3) if data did not follow normal distribution; ccategorical data were summarized as n (%).
Differences in continuous data between the training and validation groups were compared using two-sample test if data followed normal distribution and Mann-Whitney U test if data didn’t follow normal distribution; Differences in categorical data were compared using Pearson Chi-square test for gender, and Mann-Whitney U test for the ordinal inflammation stage and fibrosisstage.
TBA, Total bile acid; PT, Prothrombin time; WBC, White cell count; PLT, Platelet count.
* P<0.05 indicates a significant difference between groups.
Correlation analysis of inflammation stages and fibrosis stages with subjects’ demographic and clinical characteristics.
| Inflammation stage | Fibrosis stage | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | r |
| r |
| |
| Age (yr) | -0.075 | 0.438 | 0.100 | 0.303 | |
| Gender | -0.049 | 0.578 | -0.089 | 0.313 | |
| Male | |||||
| Female | |||||
| Total bilirubin (mmol/L) | 0.264 | 0.006[ | 0.257 | 0.007[ | |
| Albumin (g/L) | -0.466 | <.001[ | -0.424 | <.001[ | |
| Globulin (g/L) | 0.271 | 0.004[ | 0.175 | 0.069 | |
| ALT (IU/L) | 0.375 | <.001[ | 0.118 | 0.223 | |
| AST (IU/L) | 0.442 | <.001[ | 0.194 | 0.043[ | |
| GGT(IU/L) | 0.511 | <.001[ | 0.348 | <.001[ | |
| TBA (mmol/L) | 0.439 | <.001[ | 0.261 | 0.006[ | |
| CHE (IU/L) | -0.545 | <.001[ | -0.454 | <.001[ | |
| PT (s) | 0.547 | <.001[ | 0.529 | <.001[ | |
| INR | 0.475 | <.001[ | 0.451 | <.001[ | |
| HBV DNA (Log10 IU/ml) | 0.199 | 0.041[ | -0.065 | 0.503 | |
| WBC (109/L) | -0.041 | 0.038[ | -0.062 | 0.523 | |
| PLT (1011/L) | -0.340 | <.001[ | -0.396 | <.001[ | |
| AFP (ng/mL) | 0.604 | <.001[ | 0.494 | <.001[ | |
| CP (mg/L) | -0.375 | <.001[ | -0.483 | <.001[ | |
Coefficients with respective p-values were derived through Spearman’s correlation analysis or Kendall’s tau correlation analysis.
P<0.05 indicates a significant correlation.
Association of CP value with corresponding subjects’ demographic and clinical characteristics (N=109).
| Total(n=109) | Males(n=88) | Females(n=21) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | CP value |
| n | CP value |
| n | CP value |
| |||
| Overall | 109 | 202.22 ± 38.84 | - | 88 | 196.81 ± 37.98 | - | 21 | 224.90 ± 34.69 | - | ||
| Gender | 0.003[ | ||||||||||
| Males | 88 | 196.81 ± 37.98 | |||||||||
| Females | 21 | 224.90 ± 34.69 | |||||||||
| Age, yrs | 0.378 | 0.920 | 0.523 | ||||||||
| <20 | 5 | 195.40 ± 43.49 | 5 | 195.40 ± 43.49 | 0 | ND | |||||
| 20≤age<30 | 24 | 203.29 ± 34.96 | 18 | 194.22 ± 26.93 | 6 | 213.86 ± 44.41 | |||||
| 30≤age<40 | 40 | 200.00 ± 35.80 | 33 | 197.06 ± 34.97 | 7 | 213.86 ± 39.21 | |||||
| 40≤age<50 | 28 | 196.82 ± 41.08 | 25 | 195.00 ± 42.43 | 3 | 212.00 ± 28.00 | |||||
| age≥50 | 12 | 222.92 ± 47.98 | 7 | 209.71 ± 60.40 | 5 | 241.40 ± 11.26 | |||||
| Inflammation stage | <.001[ | 0.001[ | 0.447 | ||||||||
| G1 | 19 | 211.37 ± 33.09 | 16 | 209.50 ± 34.44 | 3 | 221.33 ± 28.01 | |||||
| G2 | 28 | 222.32 ± 43.41 | 20 | 214.95 ± 47.15 | 8 | 240.75 ± 26.29 | |||||
| G3 | 44 | 196.59 ± 33.52 | 37 | 193.51 ± 30.15 | 7 | 212.86 ± 47.32 | |||||
| G4 | 18 | 175.06 ± 31.13abc | 15 | 167.20 ± 26.85ab | 3 | 214.33 ± 20.31 | |||||
| Fibrosis stage | <.001[ | <.001[ | 0.526 | ||||||||
| F1 | 26 | 227.62 ± 32.26 | 17 | 222.24 ± 35.18 | 9 | 237.78 ± 24.45 | |||||
| F2 | 26 | 208.73 ± 40.42 | 24 | 207.38 ± 40.70 | 2 | 225.00 ± 46.67 | |||||
| F3 | 32 | 195.31 ± 33.63d | 27 | 192.37 ± 31.37 | 5 | 211.20 ± 44.67 | |||||
| F4 | 25 | 177.88 ± 33.43d | 20 | 168.50 ± 24.91de | 5 | 215.40 ± 39.50 | |||||
| Cirrhosis | <.001[ | <.001[ | 0.497 | ||||||||
| No | 84 | 209.46 ± 37.53 | 68 | 205.13 ± 37.25 | 16 | 227.88 ± 33.89 | |||||
| Yes | 25 | 177.88 ± 33.43 | 20 | 168.50 ± 24.91 | 5 | 215.40 ± 39.50 | |||||
CP values are represented as mean±SD for a given subject’s demographic and clinical characteristics.
Association was evaluated using two-sample t-test, or one-way ANOVA test with a post-hoc Bonferroni pair-wise comparisons.
P<0.05, indicates a significant difference.
abcde, indicates a significant difference compared to inflammation stage 1a, stage 2b, stage 3c, fibrosis stage 1d, stage 2e. (P<0.01)
CP values distinguish different stages of inflammation and fibrosis as measured by AUC (N=109).
| Pathological stages | AUC (95% CI) | Youden index | Cut-off point | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G≥4 | 0.741 (0.674, 0.800) | 38.38 | ≤199 | 82.76% | 55.62% |
| F≥2 | 0.754 (0.688, 0.812) | 44.19 | ≤204 | 64.19% | 80.00% |
| F≥3 | 0.712 (0.644, 0.774) | 37.04 | ≤189 | 55.56% | 81.48% |
| F≥4 | 0.737 (0.670, 0.797) | 37.66 | ≤189 | 65.79% | 71.87% |
AUC, area under ROC curve; CI, confidence intervals.
Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine factors significantly associated with cirrhosis in training group (N=109).
| Univariate | Multivariate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| |
| Age (yr) | |||||
| <20 | Reference | ||||
| 20≤age<30 | 0.800 (0.070 , 9.180) | 0.858 | |||
| 30≤age<40 | 1.517 (0.152 , 15.112) | 0.722 | |||
| 40≤age<50 | 1.091 (0.102 , 11.669) | 0.943 | |||
| age≥50 | 1.333 (0.104 , 17.098) | 0.825 | |||
| Gender | |||||
| Male | 0.941 (0.307 , 2.888) | 0.916 | |||
| Female | Reference | ||||
| Total bilirubin (Log10 mmol/L) | 1.657 (0.348 , 7.899) | 0.526 | - | ||
| Albumin (g/L) | 0.792 (0.693 , 0.906) | 0.001* | - | ||
| Globulin (Log10 g/L) | 1.171 (1.046 , 1.309) | 0.006 [ | - | ||
| ALT (Log10 IU/L) | 0.892 (0.366 , 2.174) | 0.802 | - | ||
| AST (Log10 IU/L) | 1.133 (0.392 , 3.278) | 0.817 | - | ||
| GGT(Log10 IU/L) | 3.099 (0.915 , 10.500) | 0.069 | - | ||
| TBA (Log10 mmol/L) | 2.638 (0.958 , 7.269) | 0.061 | - | ||
| CHE (Log10 IU/L) | 0.010 (0 , 0.334) | 0.010 [ | - | ||
| PT (Log10 s) | 1.3×1012 (2.7×105 , 6.3×1018) | <.001* | 1.4×1013 (4.4×104 , 4.6×1021) | 0.002* | |
| INR (Log10) | 4.5×109 (9.5×103 , 2.2×1015) | 0.001 | - | ||
| HBV DNA (Log10 IU/ml) | 1.006 (0.764 , 1.323) | 0.969 | - | ||
| WBC (Log10 109/L) | 0.034 (0.001 , 2.011) | 0.104 | - | ||
| PLT (1011/L) | 0.983 (0.972 , 0.994) | 0.003 [ | 0.982 (0.969 , 0.996) | 0.011* | |
| AFP (Log10 ng/ml) | 3.940 (1.895 , 8.190) | <.001* | 3.180 (1.321 , 7.656) | 0.010* | |
| CP (mg/L) | 0.971 (0.955 , 0.988) | 0.001* | 0.977 (0.958 , 0.997) | 0.022* | |
significantly associated with cirrhosis. (P<0.05)
Summary of validity of APPCI model in the training and validation groups.
| Training group | Validation Group | |
|---|---|---|
| (N=109) | (N=89) | |
| AUC (95%CI) | 0.893 (0.820 , 0.944) | 0.904 (0.823 , 0.956) |
| Cut-off point | -1.034 | -1.127 |
| Accuracy rate | ||
| Sen. | 88% | 84.62% |
| Spec. | 88.10% | 88.16% |
| PPV | 68.70% | 55.00% |
| NPV | 96.10% | 97.10% |
Abbreviations: AUC, area under ROC curve; CI, confidence intervals; Sen., sensitivity; Spec., specificity; PPV, positive predictive value, and NPV, negative predictive value.
Figure 1ROC curve of APPCI model in training (A) and validation (B) groups, respectively.
Comparisons of different non-invasive models predictive of cirrhosis. (N=198)
| Model[ | AUC (95% CI) | Youden index | Cut-off point | Sen. (%) | Spec. (%) | PPV (%) | NPV(%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| APPCI | 0.898 (0.847, 0.936) | 73.71% | -1.1198 | 86.84% | 86.87% | 61.10% | 96.50% | - |
| FIB-4 | 0.706 (0.637, 0.768) | 43.91% | -31.6084 | 65.79% | 78.12% | 41.70% | 90.60% | 0.001[ |
| APRI | 0.610 (0.539, 0.679) | 30.20% | 2659.57 | 78.95% | 51.25% | 27.80% | 91.10% | <.001[ |
| GPI | 0.645 (0.574, 0.711) | 24.25% | 156.23 | 47.37% | 76.88% | 32.73% | 86.01% | <.001[ |
| APGA | 0.729 (0.661, 0.789) | 37.79% | -4.1207 | 68.42% | 69.37% | 34.70% | 90.20% | <.001[ |
aModels:
APPCI model: -28.89+1.157×(LogAFP)+30.284×Log(PT)-0.018×PLT-0.023×CP;
FIB-4 model: 8.0-0.01 × PLT (× 109/L)-ALB (g/dL);
APRI model: AST (IU/L) × 100/PLT (× 109/L);
GPI model: 1.7-0.01×100/PLT (× 109/L)+0.5×Globulin (g/dL);
APGA model: 1.44+0.1490×log(GGT)+0.3308×log (AST)-0.5846×log(PLT)+0.1148log(AFP+1).
Abbreviations: AUC, area under ROC curve; Sen., sensitivity; Spec., specificity; PPV, positive predictive value, and NPV, negative predictive value.
*indicates a significant difference compared with APPCI model.
Figure 2ROC curves of the APPCI, FI, APRI, GPI, and APGA noninvasive models in all study subjects.