| Literature DB >> 34064988 |
Minah Kim1, Yeonju Lee2, Jun Sik Yoon3, Minjong Lee4, So Shin Kye1, Sun Woong Kim2, Yuri Cho5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The FIB-4 index, a noninvasive tool (FIB-4 index = age × aspartate transaminase (AST)/(platelet count × √alanine aminotransferase (ALT)), is a useful assessment for liver fibrosis. Patients with a high FIB-4 index were reported to have a high risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study analyzed the clinical association of the FIB-4 index with HCC development in patients with coexisting nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and chronic hepatitis B (NAFLD-CHB).Entities:
Keywords: FIB-4; chronic hepatitis B; hepatocellular carcinoma; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; predictor
Year: 2021 PMID: 34064988 PMCID: PMC8151791 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13102301
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Figure 1CONSORT diagram. Of the 547 eligible patients, 310 were excluded from the study in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, 237 patients were included: 147 in the low FIB-4 group (<1.77) and 90 patients in the high FIB-4 group (≥1.77).
Baseline characteristics of the NAFLD–CHB patients with a low FIB-4 index (<1.77) and NALFD-CHB patients with a high FIB-4 index (≥1.77).
| Variables | Before Propensity Score Matching | After Propensity Score Matching * | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Population ( | Low FIB-4 Index | High FIB-4 Index | Low FIB-4 Index | High FIB-4 Index | |||
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ||||
| Male (vs. female) | 214 (90.3%) | 137 (93.2%) | 77 (85.6%) | 0.09 | 83 (92.2%) | 77 (85.6%) | 0.24 |
| Diabetes mellitus (yes vs. no) | 55 (23.2%) | 36 (24.5%) | 19 (21.1%) | 0.66 | 27 (30.0%) | 19 (21.1%) | 0.13 |
| Hypertension (yes vs. no) | 52(21.9%) | 28 (19.0%) | 24 (26.7%) | 0.22 | 23 (25.6%) | 24 (26.7%) | 1.00 |
| USG-LC (yes vs. no) | 37 (15.6%) | 18 (12.2%) | 19 (21.1%) | 0.1 | 16 (17.8%) | 19 (21.1%) | 0.85 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 25.0 (25.0–26.8) | 25.0 (25.0–26.6) | 25.0 (25.0–27.2) | 0.56 | 25.0 (24.7–26.3) | 25.0 (25.0–27.2) | 0.37 |
| Antiviral treatment at baseline (yes vs. no) | 84 (35.4%) | 42 (28.6%) | 42 (46.7%) | 0.007 | 33 (36.7%) | 42 (46.7%) | 0.23 |
| Antiviral treatment after baseline (yes vs. no) | 132 (55.7%) | 74 (50.3%) | 58 (64.4%) | 0.047 | 51 (56.7%) | 58 (64.4%) | 0.29 |
| Aspirin use (yes vs. no) | 42 (17.7%) | 25 (32.9%) | 17 (18.9%) | 0.85 | 20 (22.2%) | 17 (18.9%) | 0.71 |
| Statin use (yes vs. no) | 49 (20.7%) | 32 (21.8%) | 17 (18.9%)) | 0.71 | 20 (22.2%) | 17 (18.9%)) | 0.47 |
| HBeAg positivity (yes vs. no) | 121 (51.1%) | 74 (50.3%) | 47 (52.2%) | 0.88 | 45 (50.0%) | 47 (52.2%) | 1 |
| HBV DNA > 2000 IU/mL (yes vs. no) | 96 (40.5%) | 61 (41.5%) | 140 (22.2%) | <0.001 | 38 (42.2%) | 35 (38.9%) | 0.65 |
| Total bilirubin (IU/L) | 0.8 (0.6–1.0) | 0.8 (0.6–1.0) | 0.8 (0.6–1.1) | 0.26 | 0.8 (0.6–1.1) | 0.8 (0.6–1.1) | 0.23 |
| Cholesterol (mg/dL) | 171.0 (151.0–194.5) | 172.0 (150.0–194.5) | 168.0 (151.0–193.0) | 0.77 | 168.0 (150.0–193.0) | 168.0 (151.0–193.0) | 0.82 |
| FIB-4 index | 1.6 (1.2–2.0) | 1.3 (1.1–1.5) | 2.2 (1.9–2.6) | <0.001 | 1.4 (1.2–1.6) | 2.2 (1.9–2.6) | <0.001 |
| Age (years) | 46.0 (39.0–52.0) | 43.0 (36.5–49.0) | 51.5 (47.0–55.0) | <0.001 | 46.5 (42.0–52.0) | 51.5 (47.0–55.0) | <0.001 |
| AST (IU/L) | 30.0 (23.0–46.0) | 25.0 (20.5–31.0) | 49.0 (36.0–67.0) | <0.001 | 24.0 (20.0–30.0) | 49.0 (36.0–67.0) | <0.001 |
| ALT (IU/L) | 41.0 (28.0–70.0) | 35.0 (26.0–51.0) | 63.5 (35.0–94.0) | <0.001 | 34.5 (25.0–48.0) | 63.5 (35.0–94.0) | <0.001 |
| Platelet (109/L) | 182.0 (150.0–220.0) | 197.0 (161.5–231.5) | 156.5 (121.0–197.0) | <0.001 | 193.0 (155.0–224.0) | 156.5 (121.0–197.0) | 0.001 |
NOTE. Data are expressed as n (%) or median (interquartile range). USG-LC, ultrasonographic liver cirrhosis; HBV, hepatitis B virus; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase. * Adjusted for sex, age, diabetes mellitus, ultrasonographic liver cirrhosis, BMI, history of drug use (i.e., antiviral agents at baseline, antiviral agents after baseline, aspirin, and statin), and HBV DNA levels.
Figure 2Receiver operating characteristic curve of FIB-4 index for predicting HCC development in entire cohort.
Risk factors of HCC development in the propensity score matched cohort.
| Variables | Univariable Analysis | Multivariable Analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | aHR (95% CI) | |||
| Male (vs. female) | 1.32 (0.17–9.99) | 0.78 | – | – |
| Age (years) | 1.00 (0.95–1.07) | 0.88 | – | – |
| Diabetes mellitus (yes vs. no) | 1.65 (0.62–4.41) | 0.31 | – | – |
| USG-LC (yes vs. no) | 7.59 (2.94–19.59) | <0.001 | 7.84 (3.03–20.28) | <0.001 |
| Body mass index ≥25 (vs. <25) | 1.55 (0.61–3.93) | 0.35 | – | – |
| Antiviral treatment at baseline (yes vs. no) | 0.65 (0.24–1.73) | 0.39 | – | – |
| Antiviral treatment after baseline (yes vs. no) | 2.02 (0.67–6.15) | 0.21 | – | – |
| Aspirin use (yes vs. no) | 0.21 (0.03–1.57) | 0.13 | – | – |
| Statin use (yes vs. no) | 0.20 (0.02–1.54) | 0.12 | – | – |
| HBeAg positivity (yes vs. no) | 0.93 (0.37–2.33) | 0.87 | – | – |
| HBV DNA >2000 IU/mL (yes vs. no) | 0.63 (0.24–1.67) | 0.35 | – | – |
| High FIB-4 index (≥1.77) (vs. <1.77) | 4.16 (1.37–12.65) | 0.01 | 4.35 (1.42–13.24) | 0.009 |
HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; aHR, adjusted hazards ratio; USG-LC, ultrasonographic liver cirrhosis; HBV, hepatitis B virus.
Figure 3Propensity score-matched Kaplan–Meier estimates of HCC incidence in (1) NAFLD–CHB patients with a low FIB-4 index (<1.77) and (2) NAFLD–CHB patients with a high FIB-4 index (≥1.77).
Figure 4Unadjusted Kaplan–Meier estimates of HCC incidence in (1) NAFLD–CHB patients with FIB-4 index < 1.3, (2) NAFLD–CHB patients with 1.3 ≤ FIB-4 index ≤ 2.67, and (3) NAFLD–CHB patients with FIB-4 index > 2.67.
Figure 5Propensity score-matched Kaplan–Meier estimates of HCC incidence in (1) NAFLD–CHB patients with a low FIB-4 index (<1.77) and (2) NAFLD–CHB patients with a high FIB-4 index (≥1.77) among ultrasonographic NAFLD patients.