Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Hepatol. Jul 8, 2017; 9(19): 850-856
Published online Jul 8, 2017. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v9.i19.850
Published online Jul 8, 2017. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v9.i19.850
Table 1 Patient characteristics and outcomes
Characteristic | All patients | Patients with first Hepascore > 0.75 | All patients | Patients with first Hepascore > 0.75 | ||||
Number | Percent | Number | Percent | mean | Range | mean | Range | |
Number | 346 | - | 100 | - | - | - | - | - |
Gender (male) | 220 | 63.6 | 76 | 76 | - | - | - | - |
SVR | 38 | 11.0 | 16 | 16 | - | - | - | - |
Composite endpoint | 28 | 8.1 | 21 | 21 | - | - | - | - |
LRD | 8 | 2.3 | 8 | 8 | - | - | - | - |
LD | 16 | 4.6 | 12 | 12 | - | - | - | - |
HCC | 15 | 4.3 | 12 | 12 | - | - | - | - |
Result | - | - | - | - | ||||
Bilirubin (μmol/L)1 | - | - | - | - | 9.0 | 1.0-200 | 12 | 2.3-200 |
GGT (U/L)1 | - | - | - | - | 55.0 | 8.0-1005 | 93.5 | 17-713 |
HA (μg/L)1 | - | - | - | - | 30.3 | 1.0-1211 | 124.5 | 16-1211 |
A2M (μg/mL)1 | - | - | - | - | 2.5 | 0.6-6 | 3.6 | 1.5-6.0 |
Age (yr) | - | - | - | - | 53.6 | 30-80 | 58.3 | 36-80 |
Baseline Hepascore | - | - | - | - | 0.48 | 0.02-1.0 | 0.93 | 0.77-1.0 |
Second Hepascore | - | - | - | - | 0.57 | 0.04-1.0 | 0.87 | 0.13-1.0 |
Delta Hepascore | - | - | - | - | 0.09 | -0.80-0.94 | -0.06 | -0.8-0.23 |
Time between baseline and second Hepascore (yr) | - | - | - | - | 3.3 | 0.03-12.5 | 2.8 | 0.03-10.3 |
Follow-up after second Hepascore (yr) | - | - | - | - | 2.2 | 0.01-7.3 | 1.9 | 0.01-5.7 |
Table 2 Predictors of composite clinical endpoint (liver related death, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver decompensation) using Multivariate Cox Regression
Variable | Follow-up from the baseline Hepascore | Follow-up from the second Hepascore | ||
P | Hazard ratio (95%CI) | P | Hazard ratio (95%CI) | |
Baseline Hepascore | < 0.001 | 5.85 (2.25-15.18) | 0.020 | 12.86 (1.49-111.17) |
Second Hepascore | - | - | 0.891 | 3288.82 (0.0-4.6E + 53) |
Delta Hepascore | - | - | 0.013 | 4.77 (1.35-16.45) |
Table 3 Predictors of survival using Kaplan-Meier survival curves
Test | End point | P value (log rank) | Cohort size |
Baseline Hepascore alone | Composite Endpoint | < 0.001 | 346 |
LRD | < 0.001 | 352 | |
LD | < 0.001 | 348 | |
HCC | < 0.001 | 350 | |
Delta Hepascore | Composite Endpoint | 0.004 | 96 |
LRD | 0.048 | 105 | |
LD | 0.001 | 101 | |
HCC | 0.178 | 100 |
Table 4 Predictors of survival Using Area under Receiver Operating Characteristic
Test | End point | AUROC |
Baseline Hepascore alone | Composite endpoint | 0.80 |
LRD | 0.89 | |
LD | 0.75 | |
HCC | 0.87 | |
Baseline Hepascore > 0.75 and Delta Hepascore | Composite endpoint | 0.84 |
LRD | 0.95 | |
LD | 0.77 | |
HCC | 0.93 |
- Citation: Jeffrey AW, Huang Y, de Boer WB, Adams LA, MacQuillan G, Speers D, Joseph J, Jeffrey GP. Improved Hepascore in hepatitis C predicts reversal in risk of adverse outcome. World J Hepatol 2017; 9(19): 850-856
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5182/full/v9/i19/850.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v9.i19.850