Wenjie Miao1, Pei Nie2, Guangjie Yang3, Yangyang Wang1, Lei Yan1, Yujun Zhao1, Ting Yu4, Mingming Yu1, Fengyu Wu1, Wei Rao5,6, Zhenguang Wang7. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. 2. Department of Radiology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. ygj_2815@qq.com. 4. Department of Gastrointestinal Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. 5. Division of Hepatology, Liver Disease Center, Organ Transplantation Center, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. qdfy_raowei@126.com. 6. Institute of Transplantation Science, Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. qdfy_raowei@126.com. 7. Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China. doctorwzg2002@hotmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To construct an FDG PET/CT metabolic parameter-based model to predict early recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplantation (LT). METHODS: A total of 62 patients with HCC after LT were enrolled with a follow-up period of 1 year. Basic clinical, pathology, and laboratory data, CT features (CPLC), and PET metabolic parameters (CPLCP) were collected for model construction. A CPLC nomogram without metabolic parameters and a CPLCP nomogram with metabolic parameters were established. The net reclassification index (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) of the two models were calculated. The constructed model was compared with Milan criteria and University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria. The time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (time-AUC) was used to compare the efficiency of the models, and the bootstrap method was used to for verification. Harrell's concordance index (C-index) was used to evaluate the performance of these models. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to evaluate the clinical practicability of each model. RESULTS: Thirty out of 62 patients experienced a recurrence during the 1-year follow-up. BCLC stage (P = 0.009), MVI (P = 0.032), AFP (P = 0.004), CTdmax (P = 0.033), and MTV (P = 0.039) were the independent predictors. The CPLC nomogram and the CPLCP nomogram were established. Compared with the CPLC nomogram, the NRI of the CPLCP nomogram increased by 38.98% (95% CI = -18.77-60.43%) and the IDI increased by 4.40% (95% CI = -1.00-16.62%). The AUC value of the CPLCP nomogram was higher than those of Milan criteria and UCSF criteria in the time-AUC curve. Moreover, the CPLCP nomogram had a higher C-index (0.774) than other models. Finally, the DCA curve showed that clinical practicability of the CPLCP nomogram outperformed the Milan criteria and UCSF criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The CPLCP nomogram combining basic clinical data, pathology data, laboratory data, CT features, and PET metabolic parameters showed good efficacy and high clinical practicability in predicting the early recurrence of HCC after LT.
PURPOSE: To construct an FDG PET/CT metabolic parameter-based model to predict early recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplantation (LT). METHODS: A total of 62 patients with HCC after LT were enrolled with a follow-up period of 1 year. Basic clinical, pathology, and laboratory data, CT features (CPLC), and PET metabolic parameters (CPLCP) were collected for model construction. A CPLC nomogram without metabolic parameters and a CPLCP nomogram with metabolic parameters were established. The net reclassification index (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) of the two models were calculated. The constructed model was compared with Milan criteria and University of California San Francisco (UCSF) criteria. The time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (time-AUC) was used to compare the efficiency of the models, and the bootstrap method was used to for verification. Harrell's concordance index (C-index) was used to evaluate the performance of these models. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to evaluate the clinical practicability of each model. RESULTS: Thirty out of 62 patients experienced a recurrence during the 1-year follow-up. BCLC stage (P = 0.009), MVI (P = 0.032), AFP (P = 0.004), CTdmax (P = 0.033), and MTV (P = 0.039) were the independent predictors. The CPLC nomogram and the CPLCP nomogram were established. Compared with the CPLC nomogram, the NRI of the CPLCP nomogram increased by 38.98% (95% CI = -18.77-60.43%) and the IDI increased by 4.40% (95% CI = -1.00-16.62%). The AUC value of the CPLCP nomogram was higher than those of Milan criteria and UCSF criteria in the time-AUC curve. Moreover, the CPLCP nomogram had a higher C-index (0.774) than other models. Finally, the DCA curve showed that clinical practicability of the CPLCP nomogram outperformed the Milan criteria and UCSF criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The CPLCP nomogram combining basic clinical data, pathology data, laboratory data, CT features, and PET metabolic parameters showed good efficacy and high clinical practicability in predicting the early recurrence of HCC after LT.
Authors: Adam S Bodzin; Keri E Lunsford; Daniela Markovic; Michael P Harlander-Locke; Ronald W Busuttil; Vatche G Agopian Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Elena Fernandez-Sevilla; Marc-Antoine Allard; Jasmijn Selten; Nicolas Golse; Eric Vibert; Antonio Sa Cunha; Daniel Cherqui; Denis Castaing; René Adam Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: Nicolas Goldaracena; Andre Gorgen; Adam Doyle; Bettina E Hansen; Koji Tomiyama; Wei Zhang; Anand Ghanekar; Les Lilly; Mark Cattral; Zita Galvin; Markus Selzner; Mamatha Bhat; Nazia Selzner; Ian McGilvray; Paul D Greig; David R Grant; Gonzalo Sapisochin Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: G Sapisochin; N Goldaracena; S Astete; J M Laurence; D Davidson; E Rafael; L Castells; C Sandroussi; I Bilbao; C Dopazo; D R Grant; J L Lázaro; M Caralt; A Ghanekar; I D McGilvray; L Lilly; M S Cattral; M Selzner; R Charco; P D Greig Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-12-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Elizabeth C Verna; Yuval A Patel; Avin Aggarwal; Archita P Desai; Catherine Frenette; Anjana A Pillai; Reena Salgia; Anil Seetharam; Pratima Sharma; Courtney Sherman; Georgios Tsoulfas; Francis Y Yao Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: A Kwong; W R Kim; J R Lake; J M Smith; D P Schladt; M A Skeans; S M Noreen; J Foutz; E Miller; J J Snyder; A K Israni; B L Kasiske Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Freddie Bray; Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rebecca L Siegel; Lindsey A Torre; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 508.702