Radiomics signature: A potential biomarker for β-arrestin1 phosphorylation prediction in hepatocellular carcinoma

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the patients in the training and validation cohorts

Variables	Training cohort (n = 69)	Validation cohort (n = 30)	P value
Age, mean ± SD, yr	51.00 ± 13.019	52.73 ± 11.776	0.269
Gender			0.751
Male	61 (88.4)	26 (86.7)
ALT (IU/L)			0.375
< 40	44 (63.8)	16 (53.5)
AST (IU/L)			0.829
< 35	32 (46.4)	13 (43.4)
ALB (g/L)			0.612
< 40	15 (21.7)	8 (26.7)
GGT (μ/L)			0.817
< 45	24 (34.8)	9 (30.0)
TBIL (μmol/L)			0.828
< 17.1	39 (56.5)	16 (53.3)
PLT (× 109/L)			0.791
< 100	14 (20.3)	7 (23.3)
PT(s)			0.596
< 9.6 or > 12.8	16 (23.2)	5 (16.7)
AFP (ng/mL)			0.279
< 400	34 (49.3)	11 (36.7)
CEA (ng/mL)			0.798
< 3.4	53 (76.8)	24 (80.0)
HBsAg			0.270
Positive	61 (88.4)	29 (96.7)
MVI			0.827
Absent	36 (52.2)	17 (56.7)
Present	33 (47.8)	13 (43.3)
Differentiation			0.661
Highly	37 (53.6)	18 (60.0)
Middle-Low	32 (46.4)	12 (40.0)
BCLC			0.254
0-A	9 (13.0)	8 (26.7)
B	28 (40.6)	10 (33.3)
C	32 (46.4)	12 (40.0)
Child-Pugh Score			0.770
< 3	57 (82.6)	26 (86.7)
Morphologic CT features
Tumour size			0.499
< 5 cm	24 (34.8)	13 (43.3)
Multifocality			0.351
1	49 (71.0)	18 (60.0)
≥ 2	20 (29.0)	12 (40.0)
Tumour margin			0.661
Smooth	32 (46.4)	12 (40.0)
Non-smooth	37 (53.6)	18 (60.0)
Pseudo–capsule			0.824
Well-defined	27 (39.1)	13 (43.3)
Ill-defined	42 (60.9)	17 (56.7)
AP hyperenhancement			0.448
No	5 (7.2)	4 (13.3)
Yes	64 (92.8)	26 (86.7)
PVP hypoenhancement			0.430
No	4 (5.8)	3 (10.0)
Yes	65 (94.2)	27 (90.0)
Radiologic evidence of necrosis			0.822
Absent	25 (36.2)	12 (40.0)
Present	44 (63.8)	18 (60.0)
Radiologic evidence of cirrhosis			0.654
Absent	45 (65.2)	18 (60.0)
Present	24 (34.8)	12 (40.0)
Portal vein tumor thrombosis invasion			0.186
Absent	43 (62.3)	14 (46.7)
Present	26 (37.7)	16 (53.3)

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, data are the number of patients, and data in parentheses are percentages. AFP: Alpha-fetoprotein; CEA: Carcinoembryonic antigen; HBsAg: Hepatitis B surface antigen; ALT: Alanine aminotransferase; AST: Aspartate aminotransferase; TBIL: Total bilirubin; ALB: Albumin; PT: Prothrombin time; PLT: Platelet count; GGT: γ-glutamyl transpeptidase; MVI: Microvascular invasion; BCLC: Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; SD: Standard deviation; AP: Arterial phase; PVP: Portal venous phase.

Table 2 Univariate and multivariate regression analyses of the p-β-arrestin1-positive and p-β-arrestin1-negative groups in the training cohort

Variables	Univariable analysis		Multivariable analysis
	OR (95%CI)	P value	OR (95%CI)	P value
ALT	0.237 (0.043-1.292)	0.096a	0.159 (0.038-0.673)	0.012a
AST	0.497 (0.100-2.471)	0.393	-	-
Tumor size	0.245 (0.059-1.019)	0.053a	0.243 (0.059-1.003)	0.050a
Tumor margin	0.180 (0.046-0.706)	0.014a	0.170 (0.044-0.664)	0.011a
Radiomics	3.473 (1.574-7.663)	0.002a	3.412 (1.562-7.453)	0.002a

^aP value < 0.1.

ALT: Alanine aminotransferase; AST: Aspartate aminotransferase; CI: Confidence interval; OR: Odds ratio.

Table 3 Diagnostic performance of the three models for predicting β-arrestin1 phosphorylation-positive hepatocellular carcinoma

	Training group				Validation cohort
	AUC (95%CI)	SPE	SEN	P value	AUC (95%CI)	SPE	SEN	P value
RS	0.754 (0.640-0.868)	53.8	86.7	0.0071	0.704 (0.454-0.953)	47.6	77.8	0.7911
CR	0.794 (0.686-0.901)	87.2	66.7	0.6312	0.646 (0.411-0.880)	81.0	33.3	0.7132
CRR	0.898 (0.820-0.977)	87.2	86.7	0.0113	0.735 (0.505-0.966)	71.4	66.7	0.1473

¹AUCs of the radiomics score and clinico-radiological-radiomics model were compared.

²AUCs of the radiomics score and clinico-radiological model were compared.

³AUCs of the clinico-radiological model and clinico-radiological-radiomics model were compared.

RS: Radiomics score; CR: Clinico-radiological; CRR: Clinico-radiological-radiomics; SEN: Sensitivity; SPE: Specificity; AUC: Area under the curve; CI: Confidence interval.