| Literature DB >> 27002630 |
Seiichi Tawara1, Tomohide Tatsumi1, Sadaharu Iio2, Ichizou Kobayashi3, Minoru Shigekawa1, Hayato Hikita1, Ryotaro Sakamori1, Naoki Hiramatsu1, Eiji Miyoshi4, Tetsuo Takehara1.
Abstract
Fucosylated haptoglobin (Fuc-Hpt) and Mac-2 binding protein (Mac-2 bp) are identified as cancer biomarkers, based on the results from a glyco-proteomic analysis. Recently, we reported that these glyco-biomarkers were associated with liver fibrosis and/or ballooning hepatocytes in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We evaluated the ability of these glycoproteins to estimate liver fibrosis in 317 patients with chronic hepatitis C. We measured the serum Fuc-Hpt and Mac-2 bp levels using a lectin-antibody ELISA and ELISA, respectively. The serum levels of both Fuc-Hpt and Mac-2 bp increased with the progression of liver fibrosis. The multivariate analysis revealed that Mac-2 bp was an independent factor associated with moderate liver fibrosis (F ≥ 2). In contrast, Fuc-Hpt was an independent factor associated with advanced liver fibrosis (F ≥ 3). In terms of evaluating liver fibrosis, the serum levels of these glycomarkers were correlated with well-known liver fibrosis indexes, such as the aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index (APRI) and Fibrosis-4 (FIB4) index. An assay that combined the APRI or FIB4 index and the Fuc-Hpt or Mac-2 bp levels increased the AUC value for diagnosing hepatic fibrosis. Interestingly, the cumulative incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was significantly higher in the patients with elevated serum levels of Fuc-Hpt and Mac-2 bp. In conclusion, both Fuc-Hpt and Mac-2 bp could be useful glyco-biomarkers of liver fibrosis and predictors of HCC in patients with chronic hepatitis C.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27002630 PMCID: PMC4803196 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151828
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Demographic, clinical, serological and virological characteristics of the 317 patients infected with HCV.
| Factor | Number or Median [Interquartile range] |
|---|---|
| Age, years | 57 [45–64] |
| Gender, male/female | 167/150 |
| Liver histology, | |
| F0/1/2/3/4 | 7/149/87/58/16 |
| A0/1/2/3 | 5/178/133/1 |
| HCV RNA, <4.9/≥5.0 LogIU/mL | 34/283 |
| Alcohol, none/drinking/unknown | 99/73/145 |
| HBsAg, +/- | 0/317 |
| Anti-nuclear antibody, <40/40≤/unknown | 246/35/36 |
| Hemoglobin, g/dL | 14.2 [13.3–15.4] |
| Platelet count, ×104/μL | 15.7 [12.1–20.5] |
| Prothrombin time, % | 92 [83–100] |
| Total bilirubin, mg/dL | 0.7 [0.5–0.9] |
| Aspartate aminotransferase, U/L | 52 [35–78] |
| Alanine aminotransferase, U/L | 64 [41–101] |
| Serum total protein, g/dL | 7.5 [7.2–7.9] |
| Serum albumin, g/dL | 4.1 [3.9–4.3] |
| Blood urea nitrogen, mg/dL | 13.8 [11.5–16.2] |
| Creatinine, mg/dL | 0.67 [0.57–0.77] |
| Hyaluronic acid, ng/mL (missing value, n = 74) | 65.7 [26.3–155.8] |
| Alpha fetoprotein, ng/mL | 5.6 [3.3–11] |
| Fucosylated haptoglobin, U/mL | 559 [304–1135] |
| Mac-2 binding protein, ng/mL | 1847 [1022–3021] |
Clinical course of the 317 patients after liver biposy.
| Factor | Number or Median [Interquartile range] |
|---|---|
| Follow-up period after liver biopsy, years | 2.4 [1.0–4.9] |
| Interferon therapy, none/completed/cessation | 13/272/32 |
| Viral response, SVR/non-SVR/unknown | 167/89/16 |
| HCC incidence after liver biopsy, yes/no | 19/298 |
| Prognosis, death/living | 11/306 |
SVR: sustained virological response.
Fig 1Box-and-whisker plot of the serum Fuc-Hpt (A) and Mac-2 bp (B) levels for each liver fibrosis stage.
The top and bottom of each box represent the first and third quartiles, respectively, with the height of the box representing the interquartile range, covering 50% of the values. The line across each box represents the median. The error bars show the minimum and maximum values. The statistical analysis was performed with the Wilcoxon rank sum test. * P < 0.05. ** P < 0.001.
Fig 2The diagnostic abilities of the serum Fuc-Hpt and Mac-2 bp levels for assessing the stage of liver fibrosis.
The ROC curves and AUROC values of serum Fuc-Hpt and Mac-2 bp in F ≥ 2, F ≥ 3 and F4 stage liver fibrosis were shown in the figure.
The diagnostic abilities of each liver fibrosis marker for assessing the stage of liver fibrosis.
| Fibrosis stage | Optimal cutoff | AUROC | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F ≥ 2 | 654 | 0.67702 | 59.0 | 72.4 | 68.8 | 63.1 | |
| F ≥ 3 | 730 | 0.73835 | 73.0 | 70.0 | 42.5 | 89.5 | |
| F4 | 966 | 0.81333 | 81.3 | 73.1 | 13.8 | 98.7 | |
| F ≥ 2 | 1595 | 0.74741 | 75.2 | 64.1 | 68.4 | 71.4 | |
| F ≥ 3 | 2352 | 0.73393 | 64.9 | 72.4 | 41.7 | 87.1 | |
| F4 | 3029 | 0.79651 | 75.0 | 77.7 | 15.2 | 98.3 | |
| F ≥ 2 | 15.0 | 0.72135 | 59.0 | 74.4 | 70.4 | 63.7 | |
| F ≥ 3 | 12.8 | 0.78893 | 66.2 | 79.4 | 49.5 | 88.5 | |
| F4 | 9.4 | 0.85237 | 62.5 | 92.0 | 29.4 | 97.9 | |
| F ≥ 2 | 75.6 | 0.77091 | 65.3 | 77.3 | 75.0 | 68.1 | |
| F ≥ 3 | 85.0 | 0.80925 | 78.6 | 69.5 | 42.7 | 91.5 | |
| F4 | 155.8 | 0.84591 | 78.6 | 78.2 | 18.0 | 98.4 | |
| F ≥ 2 | 0.65 | 0.76411 | 82.0 | 60.3 | 68.0 | 76.4 | |
| F ≥ 3 | 0.86 | 0.78192 | 85.1 | 62.5 | 40.9 | 93.3 | |
| F4 | 1.11 | 0.82828 | 87.5 | 66.4 | 12.2 | 99.0 | |
| F ≥ 2 | 2.71 | 0.76867 | 63.4 | 79.5 | 76.1 | 67.8 | |
| F ≥ 3 | 3.31 | 0.82710 | 70.3 | 82.3 | 54.7 | 90.1 | |
| F4 | 5.83 | 0.87645 | 62.5 | 94.0 | 32.3 | 97.9 |
*The hyaluronic acid analysis was performed in 243 cases as a reference because 74 values were missing values. PPV: Positive predictive value. NPV: Negative predictive value.
Factors associated with moderate liver fibrosis (F ≥ 2).
| Factor | Category | Fibrosis stage | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||||
| Fuc-Hpt, U/mL | ≤ 559 (median), > 559 | F0-1 vs. F2-4 | 3.26 | 2.06–5.16 | < 0.05 | 1.28 | 0.71–2.28 | 0.41 |
| Mac-2 bp, ng/mL | ≤ 1847 (median), > 1847 | F0-1 vs. F2-4 | 4.44 | 2.77–7.12 | < 0.05 | 2.23 | 1.27–3.92 | < 0.05 |
| Liver histology, activity | A0-1, A2-3 | F0-1 vs. F2-4 | 2.08 | 1.32–3.27 | < 0.05 | 1.38 | 0.80–2.36 | 0.25 |
| FIB4 index | < 2.67, ≥ 2.67 | F0-1 vs. F2-4 | 6.14 | 3.74–10.1 | < 0.05 | 3.19 | 1.81–5.68 | < 0.05 |
| PT, % | ≥ 80, < 80 | F0-1 vs. F2-4 | 2.89 | 1.54–5.42 | < 0.05 | 1.48 | 0.68–3.27 | 0.32 |
| Alb, g/dL | ≥ 4.0, < 4.0 | F0-1 vs. F2-4 | 2.43 | 1.52–3.91 | < 0.05 | 0.82 | 0.50–1.71 | 0.82 |
| AFP, ng/mL | < 10, ≥ 10 | F0-1 vs. F2-4 | 8.18 | 4.35–15.4 | < 0.05 | 3.13 | 1.52–6.67 | < 0.05 |
OR: odds ratio.
Factors associated with advanced liver fibrosis (F ≥ 3).
| Factor | Category | Fibrosis stage | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||||
| Fuc-Hpt, U/mL | ≤ 559 (median), > 559 | F0-2 vs. F3-4 | 5.01 | 2.53–9.22 | < 0.05 | 2.19 | 1.02–4.77 | < 0.05 |
| Mac-2 bp, ng/mL | ≤ 1847 (median), > 1847 | F0-2 vs. F3-4 | 3.87 | 2.17–6.91 | < 0.05 | 1.13 | 0.53–2.41 | 0.74 |
| Liver histology, activity | A0-1, A2-3 | F0-2 vs. F3-4 | 2.32 | 1.36–3.94 | < 0.05 | 1.33 | 0.71–2.41 | 0.38 |
| FIB4 index | < 2.67, ≥ 2.67 | F0-2 vs. F3-4 | 8.17 | 4.36–15.3 | < 0.05 | 3.47 | 1.70–7.28 | < 0.05 |
| PT, % | ≥ 80, < 80 | F0-2 vs. F3-4 | 2.87 | 1.55–5.30 | < 0.05 | 1.06 | 0.49–2.23 | 0.88 |
| Alb, g/dL | ≥ 4.0, < 4.0 | F0-2 vs. F3-4 | 4.29 | 2.48–7.42 | < 0.05 | 1.75 | 0.89–3.43 | 0.11 |
| AFP, ng/mL | < 10, ≥ 10 | F0-2 vs. F3-4 | 7.44 | 4.18–13.2 | < 0.05 | 2.50 | 1.21–5.17 | < 0.05 |
Factors associated with liver cirrhosis (F4).
| Factor | Category | Fibrosis stage | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||||
| Fuc-Hpt, U/mL | ≤ 559 (median), > 559 | F0-3 vs. F4 | – | – | < 0.05 | 2.43 < | 2.43 - | < 0.05 |
| Mac-2 bp, ng/mL | ≤ 1847 (median), > 1847 | F0-3 vs. F4 | 7.53 | 1.68–33.7 | < 0.05 | 0.96 | 0.17–7.56 | 0.97 |
| FIB4 index | < 2.67, ≥ 2.67 | F0-3 vs. F4 | 21.7 | 2.83–166 | < 0.05 | 4.24 | 0.58–89.5 | 0.17 |
| T-bil, mg/dL | ≤ 1, > 1 | F0-3 vs. F4 | 8.29 | 2.96–23.8 | < 0.05 | 2.89 | 0.80–10.4 | 0.10 |
| PT, % | ≥ 80, < 80 | F0-3 vs. F4 | 12.5 | 4.15–37.7 | < 0.05 | 5.08 | 1.34–21.7 | < 0.05 |
| Alb, g/dL | ≥ 4.0, < 4.0 | F0-3 vs. F4 | 4.27 | 1.44–12.6 | < 0.05 | 0.44 | 0.10–1.92 | 0.27 |
| AFP, ng/mL | < 10, ≥ 10 | F0-3 vs. F4 | 22.5 | 4.99–101 | < 0.05 | 4.19 | 0.82–33.9 | 0.09 |
The correlation coefficients between each of the liver fibrosis markers.
| Correlation coefficients | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| vs. | Mac-2 bp | Platelet count | Hyaluronic acid | APRI | FIB4 index |
| Fuc-Hpt | 0.4312 | - 0.2469 | 0.4701 | 0.2962 | 0.3153 |
| Mac-2 bp | - 0.2627 | 0.2524 | 0.2715 | 0.3103 | |
| Platelet count | - 0.4033 | - 0.5821 | - 0.7318 | ||
| Hyaluronic acid | 0.3711 | 0.5196 | |||
| APRI | 0.7777 | ||||
The diagnostic abilities of combinations with these glycoproteins.
| Fibrosis stage | AUROC | Logit (p) | P value; by the Likelihood ratio test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FIB4 | F ≥ 2 | 0.76867 | - 0.7205 + 0.6598×(FIB4) | |
| FIB4 + Mac-2 bp | F ≥ 2 | 0.80005 | - 1.198 + 0.5413×(FIB4) + 0.0003561×(Mac-2 bp) | FIB4; p < 0.0001, Mac-2 bp; p = 0.0003 |
| FIB4 | F ≥ 3 | 0.82710 | - 2.244 + 0.6166×(FIB4) | |
| FIB4 + Fuc-Hpt | F ≥ 3 | 0.84079 | - 2.327 + 0.5610×(FIB4) + 0.0001962×(Fuc-Hpt) | FIB4; p < 0.0001, Fuc-Hpt; p = 0.0305 |
Fig 3The cumulative hepatocellular carcinoma incidence rate.
The median follow-up period after liver biopsy was 2.4 years (Interquartile range; 1.0–4.9 years). HCC was detected in 19 patients during the follow-up period. The incidence rates at 1, 3 and 5 years in all patients were 1.8%, 4.3% and 9.2%, respectively, using the Kaplan-Meier method. (A) We divided these findings into two groups by the liver histology grade, F0-1 and F2-4, and the median (B) Fuc-Hpt (C) and Mac-2 bp (D) levels. These analysis were performed using the log-rank test.