MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154594411 · doi:10.1016/j.jhepr.2021.100290

Predictive performance of newer Asian hepatocellular carcinoma risk scores in treated Caucasians with chronic hepatitis B

2021· article· en· W3154594411 on OpenAlexaff
George Papatheodoridis, George Ν. Dalekos, Ramazan Idılman, Vana Sypsa, Florian van Bömmel, Marı́a Buti, José Luís Calleja, John Goulis, Spilios Manolakopoulos, Alessandro Loglio, Μargarita Papatheodoridi, Nikolaos Gatselis, Rhea Veelken, Marta López-Gómez, Bettina E. Hansen, Savvoula Savvidou, Anastasia Κourikou, Kostas Galanis, Cihan Yurdaydın, Rafael Esteban, Harry L.A. Janssen, Thomas Berg, Pietro Lampertico

Bibliographic record

VenueJHEP Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis B Virus Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
FundersMerck Sharp and DohmeJanssen PharmaceuticalsGilead SciencesRocheIpsenNovartisAbbVieMerckGlaxoSmithKlineBayerSiemensBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsHepatocellular carcinomaMedicineInternal medicineCirrhosisEntecavirGastroenterologyChronic hepatitisPredictabilityHepatitis BHepatitis B virusImmunologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

•In treated Caucasian patients with chronic hepatitis B, newer Asian hepatocellular carcinoma risk scores offer good 5- and 10-year predictability, similar to that of PAGE-B.•PAGE-B and mPAGE-B scores are simpler in clinical practice, as they do not require an accurate diagnosis of cirrhosis.•The addition of albumin in mPAGE-B does not seem to offer an advantage in patients with well-compensated liver disease. Background & AimsRecently, several risk scores for prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were developed in cohorts of treated Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), but they have not been assessed in non-Asian patients. We evaluated the predictability and comparative utility of our PAGE-B and recent Asian HCC risk scores in nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA)-treated adult Caucasian patients with CHB, with or without well-documented compensated cirrhosis but not previous diagnosis of HCC.MethodsWe included 1,951 patients treated with entecavir/tenofovir and followed up for a median of 7.6 years. The c-statistic was used to estimate the predictability of PAGE-B, HCC-Rescue, CAMD, mPAGE-B, and AASL score for HCC development within 5 or 10 years. The low- and high-risk group cut-offs were used for estimation of negative (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV), respectively.ResultsHCC developed in 103/1,951 (5.3%) patients during the first 5 years and in another 39/1,428 (2.7%) patients between years 5 and 10. The 3-, 5-, and 10-year cumulative HCC rates were 3.3%, 5.9%, and 9.6%, respectively. All scores offered good 5- and 10-year HCC prediction (c-statistic: 0.78–0.82). NPVs were always >99% (99.3–100%), whereas PPV ranged between 13% and 24%.ConclusionsIn NA-treated Caucasian patients with CHB including compensated cirrhosis, HCC risk scores developed in NA-treated Asian patients offer good 5- and 10-year HCC predictability, similar to that of PAGE-B. PAGE-B and mPAGE-B scores are simpler in clinical practice, as they do not require an accurate diagnosis of cirrhosis, but the addition of albumin in mPAGE-B score does not seem to offer an advantage in patients with well compensated liver disease.Lay summarySeveral risk scores for prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were recently developed in cohorts of treated Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). In Caucasian patients with CHB treated with oral antivirals, newer Asian HCC risk scores offer good 5- and 10-year HCC predictability, similar to that of PAGE-B. For clinical practice, PAGE-B and mPAGE-B scores are simpler, as they do not require an accurate diagnosis of cirrhosis. Recently, several risk scores for prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were developed in cohorts of treated Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), but they have not been assessed in non-Asian patients. We evaluated the predictability and comparative utility of our PAGE-B and recent Asian HCC risk scores in nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA)-treated adult Caucasian patients with CHB, with or without well-documented compensated cirrhosis but not previous diagnosis of HCC. We included 1,951 patients treated with entecavir/tenofovir and followed up for a median of 7.6 years. The c-statistic was used to estimate the predictability of PAGE-B, HCC-Rescue, CAMD, mPAGE-B, and AASL score for HCC development within 5 or 10 years. The low- and high-risk group cut-offs were used for estimation of negative (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV), respectively. HCC developed in 103/1,951 (5.3%) patients during the first 5 years and in another 39/1,428 (2.7%) patients between years 5 and 10. The 3-, 5-, and 10-year cumulative HCC rates were 3.3%, 5.9%, and 9.6%, respectively. All scores offered good 5- and 10-year HCC prediction (c-statistic: 0.78–0.82). NPVs were always >99% (99.3–100%), whereas PPV ranged between 13% and 24%. In NA-treated Caucasian patients with CHB including compensated cirrhosis, HCC risk scores developed in NA-treated Asian patients offer good 5- and 10-year HCC predictability, similar to that of PAGE-B. PAGE-B and mPAGE-B scores are simpler in clinical practice, as they do not require an accurate diagnosis of cirrhosis, but the addition of albumin in mPAGE-B score does not seem to offer an advantage in patients with well compensated liver disease.

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 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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJHEP ReportsSame topicHepatitis B Virus StudiesFrench-language works237,207