| Literature DB >> 31293654 |
Wenjie Zhang1,2,3, Guangyan Zhangyuan2, Fei Wang2,3, Haitian Zhang1,3, Decai Yu1, Jincheng Wang2,3, Kangpeng Jin1,3, Weiwei Yu1,2, Yang Liu1,3, Beicheng Sun2,3.
Abstract
Background: Serum globulin (GLB), albumin (ALB) and albumin/globulin ratio (AGR) have been reported as prognosis related factors for certain malignancies; however, the prognostic value of globulin (GLB) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has rarely been studied. This study was performed to evaluate whether GLB analysis could be applied for the prediction of the prognosis of patients received liver resection.Entities:
Keywords: HCC; albumin; globulin; survival
Year: 2019 PMID: 31293654 PMCID: PMC6603401 DOI: 10.7150/jca.29499
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cancer ISSN: 1837-9664 Impact factor: 4.207
Clinical features of patients with HCC in the training cohort
| n=210 | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 55(47-75) | |
| Sex | ||
| male | 173 | 82.4% |
| female | 37 | 17.6% |
| HbsAg | ||
| negative | 26 | 12.4% |
| positive | 184 | 87.6% |
| ALT (U/L) | ||
| ≤45 | 159 | 75.7% |
| >45 | 51 | 24.3% |
| AFP (ng/ml) | ||
| ≤13.6 | 79 | 37.6% |
| >13.6 | 131 | 62.4% |
| Cirrhosis | ||
| absent | 50 | 23.8% |
| present | 160 | 76.2% |
| Vascular invasion | ||
| absent | 52 | 24.8% |
| present | 158 | 75.2% |
| Tumor multiplicity | ||
| solitary | 157 | 74.8% |
| multiple | 53 | 25.2% |
| Tumor size (cm) | ||
| ≤5 | 125 | 59.5% |
| >5 | 85 | 40.5% |
| Edmondson grade | ||
| I-II | 118 | 56.2% |
| III-IV | 92 | 43.8% |
Association among GLB, ALB and the clinical features in HCC patients.
| Variable | GLB level(g/L) | P | ALB level(g/L) | P | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| high | high | |||||
| Sex | 0.617 | 0.100 | ||||
| Male | 124 | 49 | 118 | 55 | ||
| Female | 25 | 12 | 20 | 17 | ||
| Age | 0.812 | 0.614 | ||||
| ≤60 | 110 | 46 | 101 | 55 | ||
| >60 | 39 | 15 | 37 | 17 | ||
| HbsAg | 0.799 | 0.000 | ||||
| negative | 19 | 7 | 2 | 24 | ||
| positive | 130 | 54 | 136 | 48 | ||
| ALT (U/L) | 0.948 | 0.028 | ||||
| ≤45 | 113 | 46 | 98 | 61 | ||
| >45 | 36 | 15 | 40 | 11 | ||
| AFP (ng/ml) | 0.001 | 0.000 | ||||
| ≤13.6 | 67 | 12 | 36 | 43 | ||
| >13.6 | 82 | 49 | 102 | 29 | ||
| Cirrhosis | 0.049 | 0.007 | ||||
| absent | 41 | 9 | 25 | 25 | ||
| present | 108 | 52 | 113 | 47 | ||
| Vascular invasion | 0.148 | 0.954 | ||||
| absent | 41 | 11 | 34 | 18 | ||
| present | 108 | 50 | 104 | 54 | ||
| Tumor multiplicity | 0.107 | 0.782 | ||||
| solitary | 116 | 41 | 104 | 53 | ||
| multiple | 33 | 20 | 34 | 19 | ||
| Tumor size (mm) | 0.000 | 0.526 | ||||
| ≤5 | 104 | 45 | 80 | 45 | ||
| >5 | 21 | 40 | 58 | 27 | ||
| Edmondson grade | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| I-II | 109 | 9 | 62 | 56 | ||
| III-IV | 31 | 61 | 76 | 16 | ||
Univariate and multivariate survival analyses evaluating GLB, ALB, and AGR influencing CSS in HCC of the training cohort.
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | 5-year CCS | Log rank χ2 test | P | HR(95%CI) | P |
| Sex | 0.463 | 0.496 | NI | ||
| Male | 26.5% | ||||
| Female | 29.1% | ||||
| Age | 0.059 | 0.808 | NI | ||
| ≤60 | 26.6% | ||||
| >60 | 27.4% | ||||
| HbsAg | 0.027 | 0.870 | NI | ||
| negative | 28.8% | ||||
| positive | 28.0% | ||||
| ALT (U/L) | 0.873 | 0.350 | NI | ||
| ≤45 | 28.2% | ||||
| >45 | 22.1% | ||||
| AFP (ng/ml) | 7.727 | 0.005 | 0.288 | ||
| ≤13.6 | 36.5% | Reference | |||
| >13.6 | 20.7% | 1.221 (0.845-1.764) | |||
| Cirrhosis | 3.400 | 0.065 | NI | ||
| absent | 30.5% | ||||
| present | 25.9% | ||||
| Vascular invasion | 6.255 | 0.012 | 0.004 | ||
| absent | 27.6% | Reference | |||
| present | 25.1% | 1.847 (1.221-2.795) | |||
| Tumor multiplicity | 11.811 | 0.001 | 0.000 | ||
| solitary | 18.2% | Reference | |||
| multiple | 46.2% | 0.361 (0.230-0.567) | |||
| Tumor size (mm) | 34.515 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| ≤ 5 | 34.7% | Reference | |||
| > 5 | 14.5% | 2.308 (1.588-3.354) | |||
| Edmondson grade | 27.857 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| I-II | 36.6% | Reference | |||
| III-IV | 11.4% | 2.784 (1.694-4.573) | |||
| GLB (g/L) | 10.625 | 0.001 | 0.023 | ||
| ≤ 32.7 | 31.3% | Reference | |||
| > 32.7 | 14.2% | 1.865 (1.089-3.194) | |||
| ALB (g/L) | 10.038 | 0.002 | 0.046 | ||
| ≤ 40.6 | 20.1% | Reference | |||
| > 40.6 | 37.7% | 0.658 (0.436-0.993) | |||
| AGR | 13.172 | 0.000 | 0.358 | ||
| ≤ 1.4 | 20.7% | Reference | |||
| > 1.4 | 39.4% | 0.811 (0.519-1.267) | |||
NI: not included in multivariate survival analysis. HR: hazard ratio, CI: confidence interval, GLB: globulin, ALB: albumin, AGR: albumin/globulin ratio.
Figure 1X-tile analysis of survival data of HCC patients. X-tile analysis was done on patient data from our center, equally divided into training and validation sets. X-tile plots of the training sets are shown in the left panels, with plots of matched validation sets shown in the smaller inset. The optimal cut-point highlighted by the black circle in the left panels is shown on a histogram of the entire cohort (middle panels), and a Kaplan-Meier plot (right panels). P values were determined using the cutoff point defined in the training set and applying it to the validation set. A: Shows the optimal cutoff point for the GLB (32.70, χ2 = 10.625, P = 0.001). B: Shows the optimal cutoff point for the ALB (40.60, χ2 = 10.038, P = 0.002). C: Shows the optimal cutoff point for the AGR (1.40, χ2 = 13.172, P < 0.001).
Figure 2Kaplan-Meier analysis of CSS for ALB, GLB and AGR in the validation cohort. A: ALB B: GLB C: AGR.