MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044553904 · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2020.07.025

aMAP risk score predicts hepatocellular carcinoma development in patients with chronic hepatitis

2020· article· en· W3044553904 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hepatology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
FundersCilagMedical Research CouncilGuangdong Provincial Pearl River Talents ProgramNorgineEisaiNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDuke Clinical Research InstituteNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchIpsenH. Lundbeck A/SCancer Research UKGilead SciencesGlaxoSmithKlineNational Major Science and Technology Projects of ChinaAlexion PharmaceuticalsPfizerVir BiotechnologyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsHepatocellular carcinomaChronic hepatitisMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyHepatitis a virusOncologyImmunologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the leading cause of death in patients with chronic hepatitis. In this international collaboration, we sought to develop a global universal HCC risk score to predict the HCC development for patients with chronic hepatitis. METHODS: A total of 17,374 patients, comprising 10,578 treated Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), 2,510 treated Caucasian patients with CHB, 3,566 treated patients with hepatitis C virus (including 2,489 patients with cirrhosis achieving a sustained virological response) and 720 patients with non-viral hepatitis (NVH) from 11 international prospective observational cohorts or randomised controlled trials, were divided into a training cohort (3,688 Asian patients with CHB) and 9 validation cohorts with different aetiologies and ethnicities (n = 13,686). RESULTS: We developed an HCC risk score, called the aMAP score (ranging from 0 to 100), that involves only age, male, albumin-bilirubin and platelets. This metric performed excellently in assessing HCC risk not only in patients with hepatitis of different aetiologies, but also in those with different ethnicities (C-index: 0.82-0.87). Cut-off values of 50 and 60 were best for discriminating HCC risk. The 3- or 5-year cumulative incidences of HCC were 0-0.8%, 1.5-4.8%, and 8.1-19.9% in the low- (n = 7,413, 43.6%), medium- (n = 6,529, 38.4%), and high-risk (n = 3,044, 17.9%) groups, respectively. The cut-off value of 50 was associated with a sensitivity of 85.7-100% and a negative predictive value of 99.3-100%. The cut-off value of 60 resulted in a specificity of 56.6-95.8% and a positive predictive value of 6.6-15.7%. CONCLUSIONS: This objective, simple, reliable risk score based on 5 common parameters accurately predicted HCC development, regardless of aetiology and ethnicity, which could help to establish a risk score-guided HCC surveillance strategy worldwide. LAY SUMMARY: In this international collaboration, we developed and externally validated a simple, objective and accurate prognostic tool (called the aMAP score), that involves only age, male, albumin-bilirubin and platelets. The aMAP score (ranged from 0 to 100) satisfactorily predicted the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development among over 17,000 patients with viral and non-viral hepatitis from 11 global prospective studies. Our findings show that the aMAP score had excellent discrimination and calibration in assessing the 5-year HCC risk among all the cohorts irrespective of aetiology and ethnicity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it