4.4 Article

Statin Use is Protective Against Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease A Case-control Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 54, 期 8, 页码 733-740

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001260

关键词

nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD); nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH); visceral fat; hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); statins

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Goal: The incidence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is rising. We aimed to characterize risk factors for NAFLD-HCC development. Methods: We performed a retrospective case-control study of HCC cases from a cohort of NAFLD patients who underwent at least 2 computed tomography scans. NAFLD-HCC cases confirmed on contrast imaging and/or biopsy were included. Controls were NAFLD patients without HCC matched by sex and age. Clinical variables were assessed. Visceral adipose tissue and subcutaneous adipose tissue were measured by computed tomography at 2 timepoints: before HCC diagnosis and at diagnosis. Results: We identified 102 subjects [34 HCC cases, 68 controls, 65% (n=66) males, mean age: 69 y] from 2002 to 2016. Cirrhosis was present in 91%. In multivariate analysis, statin use was protective against HCC [odds ratio (OR)=0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.07-0.60,P=0.004], while hypertension was a risk factor for HCC (OR=5.80, 95% CI: 2.01-16.75,P=0.001). In multivariate analysis, visceral adipose tissue in males was higher before HCC diagnosis and declined by HCC diagnosis in 86%, which was a significant difference compared with controls (OR=2.78, 95% CI: 1.10-7.44,P=0.04). Conclusions: In a cohort of NAFLD-HCC patients, statin use was protective against HCC, while hypertension conferred an increased risk. Visceral adiposity at baseline was not a risk factor, but was higher in male patients before HCC development, declining in the majority by HCC diagnosis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据