| Literature DB >> 35116708 |
Zhidong Xuan1, Na Wu1, Chao Li1, Yongrong Liu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To explore the clinical application value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the pathological grading and prognosis prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Entities:
Keywords: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS); hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); pathological grade; prognosis prediction
Year: 2021 PMID: 35116708 PMCID: PMC8799228 DOI: 10.21037/tcr-21-1264
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Cancer Res ISSN: 2218-676X Impact factor: 1.241
Comparison of basic characteristics of patients with different levels of tissue differentiation
| Variables | Highly-differentiated (n=23) | Moderately-differentiated (n=63) | Poorly-differentiated (n=42) | F/χ2 | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years old) | 35.83±11.86 | 36.71±12.32 | 39.14±11.89 | 0.730 | 0.484 |
| Gender, n (%) | 0.338 | 0.845 | |||
| Male | 14 (60.9) | 34 (54.0) | 23 (54.8) | ||
| Female | 9 (39.1) | 29 (46.0) | 19 (45.0) | ||
| HBsAg, n (%) | 2.718 | 0.257 | |||
| Negative | 13 (56.5) | 29 (46.0) | 15 (35.7) | ||
| Positive | 10 (43.5) | 34 (54.0) | 27 (64.3) | ||
| AFP, n (%) | 1.648 | 0.439 | |||
| ≤10 | 3 (13.0) | 4 (6.3) | 2 (4.8) | ||
| >10 | 20 (87.0) | 59 (93.7) | 40 (95.2) | ||
| Child-Pugh grade, n (%) | 6.49 | 0.165 | |||
| A | 13 (56.5) | 48 (76.2) | 23 (54.8) | ||
| B | 8 (34.8) | 13 (20.6) | 15 (35.7) | ||
| C | 2 (8.7) | 2 (3.2) | 4 (9.5) | ||
| Number of tumors, n (%) | 2.339 | 0.311 | |||
| Single | 18 (78.3) | 46 (73.0) | 26 (61.9) | ||
| Multiple | 5 (21.7) | 17 (27.0) | 16 (38.1) | ||
| Tumor location, n (%) | 8.733 | 0.189 | |||
| Left lobe | 7 (30.4) | 17 (27.4) | 9 (21.4) | ||
| Right lobe | 8 (34.8) | 35 (56.5) | 23 (54.8) | ||
| Caudal lobe | 7 (30.4) | 7 (11.3) | 5 (11.9) | ||
| Whole liver | 1 (4.3) | 3 (4.8) | 5 (11.9) | ||
| Tumor diameter (cm), n (%) | 26.511 | <0.001* | |||
| <2 | 17 (73.9) | 38 (60.3) | 7 (16.7) | ||
| ≥2 | 6 (26.1) | 25 (39.7) | 35 (83.3) | ||
| MVI, n (%) | 11.442 | 0.003* | |||
| Negative | 19 (82.6) | 49 (77.8) | 21 (50.0) | ||
| Positive | 4 (17.4) | 14 (22.2) | 21 (50.0) |
*, P<0.05. AFP, alpha-fetoprotein; MVI, microvascular invasion.
Comparison of basic characteristics between recurrence and non-recurrence patients
| Variables | Non-recurrence (n=97) | Recurrence (n=31) | t/χ2 | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years old) | 36.45±12.27 | 40.16±11.17 | −1.496 | 0.137 |
| Gender, n (%) | 0.007 | 0.935 | ||
| Male | 54 (55.7) | 17 (54.8) | ||
| Female | 43 (44.3) | 14 (45.2) | ||
| HBsAg, n (%) | 0.561 | 0.454 | ||
| Negative | 45 (46.4) | 12 (38.7) | ||
| Positive | 52 (53.6) | 19 (61.3) | ||
| AFP, n (%) | 0.906 | 0.341 | ||
| ≤10 | 8 (8.2) | 1 (3.2) | ||
| >10 | 89 (91.8) | 30 (96.8) | ||
| Child-Pugh grade, n (%) | 4.001 | 0.135 | ||
| A | 68 (70.1) | 16 (51.6) | ||
| B | 23 (23.7) | 13 (41.9) | ||
| C | 6 (6.2) | 2 (6.5) | ||
| Number of tumors, n (%) | 1.595 | 0.207 | ||
| Single | 71 (73.2) | 19 (61.3) | ||
| Multiple | 26 (26.8) | 12 (38.7) | ||
| Tumor location, n (%) | 1.404 | 0.705 | ||
| Left lobe | 27 (27.8) | 6 (19.4) | ||
| Right lobe | 48 (49.5) | 19 (61.3) | ||
| Caudal lobe | 15 (15.5) | 4 (12.9) | ||
| Whole liver | 7 (7.2) | 2 (6.5) | ||
| Tumor diameter (cm), n (%) | 13.853 | <0.001* | ||
| <2 | 56 (57.7) | 6 (19.4) | ||
| ≥2 | 41 (42.3) | 25 (80.6) | ||
| MVI, n (%) | 6.200 | 0.013* | ||
| Negative | 73 (75.3) | 16 (51.6) | ||
| Positive | 24 (24.7) | 15 (48.4) |
*, P<0.05. AFP, alpha-fetoprotein; MVI, microvascular invasion.
Comparison of CEUS indicators in patients with different levels of tissue differentiation
| Variables | Highly-differentiated (n=23) | Moderately-differentiated (n=63) | Poorly-differentiated (n=42) | F | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RT | 11.09±1.87b | 9.86±2.38a | 6.39±1.09ab | 56.753 | <0.001* |
| TTP | 12.18±3.03b | 9.19±2.75a | 7.56±2.35ab | 22.108 | <0.001* |
| Enhancement rate | 0.63±0.16 | 0.76±0.15 | 0.80±0.14ab | 15.000 | <0.001* |
| mTT | 89.33±21.76 | 95.08±34.01 | 97.47±25.26 | 0.573 | 0.565 |
| Imax | 123.03±39.10 | 112.73±40.46 | 109.82±8.53 | 0.859 | 0.426 |
Compared with the highly-differentiated group, aP<0.05; compared with the moderately-differentiated group, bP<0.05. *, P<0.05. CEUS, contrast-enhanced ultrasound; RT, rise time; TTP, time to peak; mTT, mean transit time; Imax, intensity maximum.
Figure 1CEUS images and quantitative analysis curves of HCC patients. (A) Highly-differentiated patients; (B) moderately-differentiated patients; (C) poorly-differentiated patients. CEUS, contrast-enhanced ultrasound; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma.
Comparison of CEUS indicators between the recurrence and non-recurrence group
| Variables | Non-recurrence (n=97) | Recurrence (n=31) | t/χ2 | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RT | 9.66±2.52 | 6.70±1.74 | 6.064 | <0.001* |
| TTP | 9.68±3.04 | 7.42±2.78 | 3.841 | <0.001* |
| Enhancement rate | 0.73±0.16 | 0.82±0.15 | −2.609 | 0.010* |
| mTT | 95.29±30.54 | 93.41±25.62 | 0.309 | 0.758 |
| Imax | 118.66±38.66 | 97.89±38.77 | 2.602 | 0.010* |
*, P<0.05. CEUS, contrast-enhanced ultrasound; RT, rise time; TTP, time to peak; mTT, mean transit time; Imax, intensity maximum.
The relationships between RT, TTP, enhancement rate, and HCC pathological grade
| Variables | HCC pathological grade | |
|---|---|---|
| rs | P | |
| RT | 0.6720 | <0.001* |
| TTP | 0.5140 | <0.001* |
| Enhancement rate | −0.324 | <0.001* |
*, P<0.05. RT, rise time; TTP, time to peak; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma.
Figure 2The relationships between RT, TTP, enhancement rate, and HCC pathological grade. RT, rise time; TTP, time to peak; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma.
The diagnostic value of CEUS indicators in the pathological grading of HCC
| Variables | AUC | P | Sensitivity | Specificity | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RT | 0.802 | <0.001* | 100 | 50.48 | 0.5048 |
| TTP | 0.773 | <0.001* | 78.26 | 86.67 | 0.6493 |
| Enhancement rate | 0.775 | <0.001* | 73.91 | 88.57 | 0.6248 |
*, P<0.05. CEUS, contrast-enhanced ultrasound; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; AUC, area under the curve; RT, rise time; TTP, time to peak.
Multivariate analysis of the relationships between CEUS indicators, tumor diameter, MVI, differentiation degree, and HCC recurrence
| Variables | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | P | OR | 95% CI | P | ||
| Differentiation degree | |||||||
| Highly-differentiated | 1.000 | – | – | 1.000 | – | – | |
| Moderately-differentiated | 1.527 | 0.300–7.787 | 0.610 | 0.231 | 0.029–1.841 | 0.167 | |
| Poorly-differentiated | 10.5 | 2.181–50.544 | 0.003* | 0.202 | 0.017–2.446 | 0.209 | |
| Tumor diameter | |||||||
| <2 | 1.000 | – | – | 1.000 | – | – | |
| ≥2 | 5.691 | 2.141–15.131 | <0.001* | 0.469 | 0.124–1.777 | 0.265 | |
| MVI | |||||||
| Negative | 1.000 | – | – | 1.000 | – | – | |
| Positive | 2.852 | 1.229–6.618 | 0.015* | 5.569 | 1.256–24.696 | 0.024* | |
| RT | 0.581 | 0.462–0.730 | <0.001* | 0.619 | 1.256–24.696 | 0.005* | |
| TTP | 0.722 | 0.589–0.884 | 0.722 | 0.786 | 0.445–0.862 | 0.034* | |
| Enhancement rate | 33.157 | 2.137–514.508 | 0.012* | 3.806 | 0.630–0.981 | 0.494 | |
| Imax | 0.986 | 0.974–0.997 | 0.013* | 0.980 | 0.083–175.298 | 0.023* | |
*, P<0.05. CEUS, contrast-enhanced ultrasound; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; MVI, microvascular invasion; RT, rise time; TTP, time to peak; Imax, intensity maximum.