| Literature DB >> 33842623 |
Qiang Zhou1, Chenhao Zhou1,2, Yirui Yin1,3, Wanyong Chen4, Chunxiao Liu2, Manar Atyah1, Jialei Weng1, Yinghao Shen1, Yong Yi1, Ning Ren1,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Microvascular invasion (MVI) is a significant hazard factor that influences the recurrence and survival of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after undergoing hepatectomy. This study aimed to develop and validate a nomogram that combines hematological and imaging features of HCC patients to preoperatively predict MVI, and investigate the effect of wide resection margin (≥1 cm) on the prognosis of MVI-positive HCC patients.Entities:
Keywords: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); disease-free survival (DFS); microvascular invasion (MVI); nomogram; prediction
Year: 2021 PMID: 33842623 PMCID: PMC8033313 DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-4695
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Clinical characteristics of patients in the training and validation cohort
| Variables | Training cohort (n=496) | Validation cohort (n=213) |
|---|---|---|
| Age, mean (SD) | 56.20 (10.69) | 57.32 (11.09) |
| Gender | ||
| Female | 83/496 (16.73%) | 37/213 (17.37%) |
| Male | 413/496 (83.27%) | 176/213 (82.63%) |
| TB, μmol/L | ||
| ≤20.4 | 455/496 (91.73%) | 188/213 (88.26%) |
| >20.4 | 41/496 (8.27%) | 25/213 (11.74%) |
| DB, μmol/L | ||
| ≤6.8 | 389/496 (78.43%) | 163/213 (76.53%) |
| >6.8 | 107/496 (21.57%) | 50/213 (23.47%) |
| ALB, g/L | ||
| ≤35–55 | 23/496 (4.64%) | 9/213 (4.23%) |
| >35–55 | 473/496 (95.36%) | 204/213 (95.77%) |
| ALT, U/L | ||
| ≤50 | 420/496 (84.68%) | 179/213 (84.04%) |
| >50 | 76/496 (15.32%) | 34/213 (15.96%) |
| AST, U/L | ||
| ≤40 | 413/496 (83.27%) | 174/213 (81.69%) |
| >40 | 83/496 (16.73%) | 39/213 (18.31%) |
| ALP, U/L | ||
| ≤125 | 452/496 (91.13%) | 190/213 (89.20%) |
| >125 | 44/496 (8.87%) | 23/213 (10.80%) |
| GGT, U/L | ||
| ≤60 | 298/496 (60.08%) | 121/213 (56.81%) |
| >60 | 198/496 (39.92%) | 92/213 (43.19%) |
| TC, mmol/L | ||
| ≤5.2 | 432/496 (87.1%) | 185/213 (86.85%) |
| >5.2 | 64/496 (12.9%) | 28/213 (13.15%) |
| TG, U/L | ||
| ≤60 | 436/496 (87.9%) | 183/213 (85.92%) |
| >60 | 60/496 (12.1%) | 30/213 (14.08%) |
| ApoA1, g/L | ||
| ≤1.7 | 423/496 (85.28%) | 184/213 (86.38%) |
| >1.7 | 73/496 (14.72%) | 29/213 (13.62%) |
| ApoB1, g/L | ||
| ≤1.55 | 485/496 (97.78%) | 211/213 (99.06%) |
| >1.55 | 11/496 (2.22%) | 2/213 (0.94%) |
| ApoE, mg/L | ||
| ≤53 | 389/496 (78.43%) | 167/213 (78.40%) |
| >53 | 107/496 (21.57%) | 46/213 (21.60%) |
| Cr, μmol/L | ||
| ≤115 | 487/496 (98.19%) | 208/213 (97.65%) |
| >115 | 9/496 (1.81%) | 5/213 (2.35%) |
| Glu, mmol/L | ||
| ≤5.6 | 423/496 (85.28%) | 162/213 (76.06%) |
| >5.6 | 73/496 (14.72%) | 51/213 (23.94%) |
| AFP, ng/mL | ||
| ≤20 | 238/496 (47.98%) | 97/213 (45.54%) |
| 20–400 | 145/496 (29.23%) | 54/213 (25.35%) |
| ≥400 | 113/496 (22.78%) | 62/213 (29.11%) |
| CEA, ng/mL | ||
| ≤5 | 442/496 (89.11%) | 184/213 (86.38%) |
| >5 | 54/496 (10.89%) | 29/213 (13.62%) |
| CA199, U/mL | ||
| ≤34 | 409/496 (82.46%) | 171/213 (80.28%) |
| >34 | 87/496 (17.54%) | 42/213 (19.72%) |
| PLT,109/L | ||
| ≤125 | 181/496 (36.49%) | 76/213 (35.68%) |
| >125 | 315/496 (63.51%) | 137/213 (64.32%) |
| PT, seconds | ||
| ≤13 | 459/496 (92.54%) | 198/213 (92.96%) |
| >13 | 37/496 (7.46%) | 15/213 (7.04%) |
| PIVKA-II, mAU/mL | ||
| ≤40 | 243/496 (48.99%) | 116/213 (54.46%) |
| 40–400 | 163/496 (32.86%) | 59/213 (27.70%) |
| ≥400 | 90/496 (18.15%) | 38/213 (17.84%) |
| HBV DNA load, IU/mL | ||
| ≤104 | 314/496 (63.31%) | 138/213 (64.79%) |
| >104 | 182/496 (36.69%) | 75/213 (35.21%) |
| HCV | ||
| No | 495/496 (99.80%) | 212/213 (99.53%) |
| Yes | 1/496 (0.20%) | 1/213 (0.47%) |
| Child-Pugh class | ||
| A | 488/496 (98.4%) | 208/213 (97.65%) |
| B | 8/496 (1.6%) | 5/213 (2.35%) |
| No. of tumors | ||
| Solitary | 429/496 (86.49%) | 185/213 (86.85%) |
| Multiple | 67/496 (13.51%) | 28/213 (13.15%) |
| Pseudo-capsule | ||
| Well-defined | 282/496 (56.85%) | 115/213 (53.99%) |
| Ill-defined | 214/496 (43.15%) | 98/213 (46.01%) |
| Tumor diameter, mean (SD%), cm | 4.18 (2.49%) | 4.18 (2.37%) |
| Cirrhosis | ||
| No | 271/496 (54.64%) | 110/213 (51.64%) |
| Yes | 225/496 (45.36%) | 103/213 (48.36%) |
| Tumor boundary | ||
| Smooth | 338/496 (68.15%) | 146/213 (68.54%) |
| Non-smooth | 158/496 (31.85%) | 67/213 (31.46%) |
| Tumor growth pattern | ||
| Regular | 273/496 (55.04%) | 105/213 (49.30%) |
| Irregular | 223/496 (44.96%) | 108/213 (50.70%) |
| Intratumor inhomogeneous | ||
| Absent | 406/496 (81.85%) | 159/213 (74.65%) |
| Present | 90/496 (18.15%) | 54/213 (25.35%) |
| Arterial enhancement | ||
| Hyper- | 462/496 (93.15%) | 195/213 (91.55%) |
| Hypo-/mild | 34/496 (6.85%) | 18/213 (8.45%) |
| Washout | ||
| Absent | 460/496 (92.74%) | 194/213 (91.08%) |
| Present | 36/496 (7.26%) | 19/213 (8.92%) |
| MVI | ||
| Absent | 278/496 (56.05%) | 125/213 (58.69%) |
| Present | 218/496 (43.95%) | 88/213 (41.31%) |
TB, total bilirubin; DB, direct bilirubin; ALB, albumin; ALT, alanine transaminase; AST, aspartate transaminase; ALP, alkaline phosphatase; GGT, glutamyl transpeptidase; TC, total cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; APoA1, apolipoprotein A; APoB1, apolipoprotein B; ApoE, apolipoprotein e; Cr, Creatinine; Glu, fasting plasma glucose; AFP, alpha-fetoprotein; CEA, carcino-embryonic antigen; CA199, carbohydrate antigen; PLT, blood platelet; PT, prothrombin time; PIVKA-II, protein induced by vitamin K absence-II; HBV, hepatitis B virus; HCV, hepatitis C virus.
Figure 1Flowchart of the study population and processing. HCC patients were categorized into two different groups (training, validation cohorts), and the further downstream processing was based on data from training cohort. HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma.
Figure 2Feature selection using the LASSO binary logistic regression model. (A) Tuning parameter (λ) was selected by LASSO model using 10-fold cross-validation via minimum criteria. The vertical axis represents AUC which was plotted versus log(λ). The minimum criteria and the 1 standard error of the minimum criteria was chosen as the optimal values for dotted vertical lines drawn. A log(λ) value of −2.91 was chosen. (B) LASSO coefficient profiles of the 34 texture features produced based on log (λ) sequence. 10-fold cross-validation was used for optimal λ resulting in 8 nonzero coefficients and vertical line drawn.
Figure 3The representative images of three HCC patients with MVI (39-, 47- and 53-year-old respectively). Pseudo-capsule manifested as a ring-shaped abnormal signal around the tumor on arterial phase (A), portal venous phases (B), and delay phases (C). Hemorrhagic or necrotic cystic signs inside the tumor resulted in intratumor inhomogeneous on arterial phase (D), portal venous phases (E), and delay phases (F). Infiltrative border with irregular shape of tumor was observed in T1 phase (G), arterial phase (H), portal venous phases (I).
Multivariate logistic regression analysis of MVI presence in the training cohort
| Variable | β | OR (95% CI) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALP, >125 | 1.18 | 3.26 (1.72–6.17) | <0.001*** |
| AFP, ng/mL | |||
| 20–400 | 0.65 | 1.91 (1.27–2.88) | 0.002** |
| ≥400 | 1.27 | 3.55 (2.29–5.51) | <0.001*** |
| PIVKA-II, mAU/mL | |||
| 40–400 | 0.30 | 1.744 (0.9–2.01) | 0.03* |
| ≥400 | 1.13 | 3.08 (1.87–5.07) | <0.001*** |
| No. of tumors, solitary | 0.64 | 1.90 (1.146–3.157) | 0.013* |
| Pseudo-capsule | |||
| Ill-defined | 0.41 | 1.51 (1.06–2.15) | 0.024* |
| Tumor diameter, cm | 0.31 | 1.37 (1.1–1.71) | 0.04* |
| Tumor growth pattern | |||
| Irregular | 0.81 | 2.25 (1.58–3.2) | <0.001*** |
| Intratumor inhomogeneous | |||
| Present | 0.67 | 1.95 (1.27–2.30) | 0.002** |
*, P<0.05; **, P<0.01; ***, P<0.001. MVI, microvascular invasion; ALP, alkaline phosphatase; AFP, alpha-fetoprotein; PIVKA-II, protein induced by vitamin K absence-II.
Figure 4Nomogram for preoperative prediction of MVI. MVI, microvascular invasion.
Figure 5Diagnostic accuracy and Calibration curves of the nomogram for the estimation of MVI in HCC patients in the training and validation cohorts. In panel (A) and (C), a cut-off value of 0.4 of the Nom-score is used, ROC curves showed good diagnostic performance of the nomogram in the training and validation cohorts. In panel (B) and (D), Calibration curves of the nomogram in the training (B) and validation (D) cohorts are shown. Calibration curves depict the calibration of the model in terms of the agreement between the predicted probabilities of MVI presence and observed outcomes of MVI presence. The dotted black line represents an ideal prediction, and the dotted orange line represents the predictive ability of the nomogram, a closer fit to the diagonal dotted black line represents a better prediction. HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; MVI, microvascular invasion.
Performance of the prediction Nomo-score for estimating the risk of MVI
| Variable | Value (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Training cohort | Validation cohort | |
| Cutoff value | 0.42 | 0.42 |
| AUC | 0.82 (0.78–0.857) | 0.80 (0.77–0.837) |
| Sensitivity, % | 74.8 (68.5–80.4) | 79.1 (73.7–83.1) |
| Specificity, % | 76.6 (71.2–81.5) | 70.2 (65.5–74.6) |
| Positive predictive value, % | 71.5 (65.2–77.3) | 66.8 (61.6–71.6) |
| Negative predictive value, % | 79.5 (74.1–84.2) | 81.3 (76.8–85.3) |
| Positive likelihood ratio | 3.20 (2.55–4.01) | 3.17 (2.1–4.7) |
| Negative likelihood ratio | 0.32 (0.26–0.41) | 0.36 (0.26–0.49) |
| Accuracy | 75.8 | 74.04 |
MVI, microvascular invasion; AUC, area under curve.
Figure 6The ROC curve of the prognostic nomogram, hematological test model, imaging features model and combined model in the training (A) and validation cohorts (B). Decision curve analysis (DCA) of each model in predicting MVI for HCC patients. The vertical axis measures standardized net-benefit. The horizontal axis shows the corresponding risk threshold. The DCA shows that if the threshold probability is between 0 and 0.8, using the present nomogram derived from this study (red curve) to predict MVI presence provides a greater benefit than the hematological test model (green curve) and Imaging features alone (orange curve) in previous studies. Notes: The DCA curve for training cohort (C) and validation cohort (D) are also shown.
Evaluation of the models with respect to NRI and IDI
| Characteristic | Training cohort | Validation cohort | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Categorical, NRI (95% CI) | Continuous, NRI (95% CI) | IDI (95% CI) | Categorical, NRI (95% CI) | Continuous, NRI (95% CI) | IDI (95% CI) | ||
| The combined model, | |||||||
| Hematological test model | 0.177 (0.084–0.271) | 0.624 (0.455–0.792) | 0.110 (0.082–0.138) | 0.239 (0.086–0.392) | 0.491 (0.231–0.750) | 0.102 (0.051–0.153) | |
| Imaging features model | 0.233 (0.140–0.325) | 0.673 (0.506–0.840) | 0.112 (0.084–0.141) | 0.169 (0.023–0.316) | 0.581 (0.328–0.835) | 0.115 (0.064–0.166) | |
| P value | P<0.001*** (both) | P<0.001*** (both) | P<0.001*** (both) | P= 0.024*, P=0.002** | P<0.001*** (both) | P<0.001*** (both) | |
*, P<0.05; **, P<0.01; ***, P<0.001. NRI, net reclassification improvement; IDI, integrated discrimination improvement.
Figure 7Effect of wide resection margin on the prognosis of MVI-positive HCC patients. In MVI-positive HCC patients with tumor diameter less than 5 cm, it showed that resection with wide margin (≥1 cm) of HCC patients had a better DFS than those with narrow margin (0.5–1 cm) (A). In MVI-negative group, there are not statistically significant differences in DFS between the two group (B). The same conclusion was drawn from the other group with tumor diameter more than 5 cm (C,D).