4.8 Article

α-Fetoprotein, Des-γ Carboxyprothrombin, and Lectin-Bound α-Fetoprotein in Early Hepatocellular Carcinoma

期刊

GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 137, 期 1, 页码 110-118

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.04.005

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA-084986, U01 CA084986] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK064909, R03 DK077707-02, K23 DK064909-05, K23 DK064909] Funding Source: Medline
  3. ICREA Funding Source: Custom

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND & AIMS: alpha-Fetoprotein (AFP) is widely used as a surveillance test for hepatoceitular carcinoma (HCC) among patients with cirrhosis. Des-gamma carboxy-prothrombin (DCP) and lectin-bound AFP (AFP-L3%) are potential surveillance tests for HCC. The alms of this study were to determine performance of DCP and AFP-L3% for the diagnosis of early HCC; whether they complement AFP; and what factors affect DCP, AFP-L3%, or AFP levels. METHODS: We conducted a large phase 2 biomarker case-control study in 7 academic medical centers in the United States. Controls were patients with compensated cirrhosis and cases were patients with HCC. AFP, DCP, and AFP-L3% levels were measured blinded to clinical data in a central reference laboratory. RESULTS: A total of 836 patients were enrolled: 417 (50%) were cirrhosis controls and 419 (50%) were HCC cases, of which 208 (49.6%) had early stage HCC (n = 77 very early, n = 131 early). AFP had the best area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-0.84), followed by DCP (0.72, 95% CI: 0.68-0.77) and AFP-L3% (0.66, 95% CI: 0.62-0.70) for early stage HCC. The optimal AFP Cutoff value was 10.9 ng/mL leading to a sensitivity of 66%. When only those with very early HCC were evaluated, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for AFP was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.72-0.85) leading to a sensitivity of 65% at the same cutoff. CONCLUSIONS: AFP was more sensitive than DCP and AFP-L3% for the diagnosis of early and very early stage HCC at a new cutoff of 10.9 ng/mL.

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

4.8
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