JGH Open (Jan 2022)

A validation study of after direct‐acting antivirals recommendation for surveillance score for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with hepatitis C virus infection who had received direct‐acting antiviral therapy and achieved sustained virological response

  • Toshifumi Tada,
  • Masayuki Kurosaki,
  • Nobuharu Tamaki,
  • Yutaka Yasui,
  • Nami Mori,
  • Keiji Tsuji,
  • Chitomi Hasebe,
  • Koji Joko,
  • Takehiro Akahane,
  • Koichiro Furuta,
  • Haruhiko Kobashi,
  • Hiroyuki Kimura,
  • Hitoshi Yagisawa,
  • Hiroyuki Marusawa,
  • Masahiko Kondo,
  • Yuji Kojima,
  • Hideo Yoshida,
  • Yasushi Uchida,
  • Shinichiro Nakamura,
  • Namiki Izumi

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.12690
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 6, no. 1
pp. 20 – 28

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background and Aim The pathogenic process underlying the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is not yet clear in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) who have received direct‐acting antiviral (DAA) therapy and achieved sustained virological response (SVR). This study validated a composite predictive model for HCC in these patients. Methods This study included 3058 patients in whom HCV was eradicated with DAA therapy. After DAAs recommendation for surveillance (ADRES) score, which is based on sex, FIB‐4 index, and α‐fetoprotein, was used as a composite predictive model for HCC development. Results The 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year cumulative incidence rates of HCC were 0.9, 4.5, and 15.2%, respectively. Multivariate analysis with Cox proportional hazards models showed that male sex (hazard ratio [HR], 2.646; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.790–3.911), FIB‐4 index >3.25 (HR, 2.891; 95% CI, 1.947–4.293), and α‐fetoprotein >5 ng/mL (HR, 2.835; 95% CI, 1.914–4.200) are independently associated with HCC development. The incidence of HCC differed significantly by ADRES score (P < 0.001). Cox proportional hazards models showed that compared to the ADRES score 0 group, the HR for HCC development was 2.947 (95% CI, 1.367–6.354) in the ADRES score 1 group, 9.171 (95% CI, 4.339–19.380) in the ADRES score 2 group, and 20.630 (95% CI, 8.641–49.230) in the ADRES score 3 group. ADRES score had superior predictive power for HCC development compared with the FIB‐4 index and α‐fetoprotein according to time‐dependent receiver operating characteristic analysis. Conclusion The ADRES score is useful for predicting HCC development after SVR.

Keywords