Epidemiology of HCC in Brazil: Incidence and risk factors in a ten-year cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The lack of information about hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Brazil weakens health policy in preventing deaths from the illness. The aim of this study was to establish the cumulative incidence and the risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma development in patients under a surveillance program. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 884 patients with compensated cirrhosis were prospectively followed up for at least five years, from August 1998 until August 2008, with at least one annual ultrasonography liver examination and serum alpha fetoprotein (AFP) measurement. RESULTS: Among 884 patients, 72 (8.1%) developed a tumor with a median follow up of 21.4 months. In the hepatocellular carcinoma group, hepatitis C virus infection was the major etiological factor (65.3%), 56.9% (41/72) were male and the mean average age was 57 ± 10 years. The annual incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma was 2.9%. 79.2% (57/72) of HCCs were detected within Milan Criteria, and the mean survival time was 52.3 months, significantly higher than for those outside Milan, with a mean time of 40.6 months (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: The annual incidence of HCC among this large series of Brazilian cirrhotic patients was around 2.9% with a detection rate of 8.1%, or a cumulative incidence rate over five years of 14.3%. The three variables related to HCC risk were low serum albumin [HR: 0.518 (0.46-0.78)], high AFP > 20 ng/mL [HR: 3.16 (1.86-5.38)], and ethnicity (Brazilian-East Asian descendants vs. other mixed Brazilian ethnicities) [HR: 2.86 (1.48-5.53)].
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".