Premium
Tumor markers are more useful in patients undergoing surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma with unreliable results by ultrasonography
Author(s) -
Mikami Shintaro,
Tateishi Ryosuke,
Hagiwara Shu,
Sato Masaya,
Minami Tatsuya,
Uchino Koji,
Enooku Kenichiro,
Sato Takahisa,
Nakagawa Hayato,
Masuzaki Ryota,
Asaoka Yoshinari,
Kondo Yuji,
Shiina Shuichiro,
Ikeda Hitoshi,
Omata Masao,
Yoshida Haruhiko,
Koike Kazuhiko
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
hepatology research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.123
H-Index - 75
eISSN - 1872-034X
pISSN - 1386-6346
DOI - 10.1111/hepr.12365
Subject(s) - medicine , interquartile range , ultrasonography , hepatocellular carcinoma , gastroenterology , radiology
Aim The objectives of this study was to evaluate the utility of tumor markers in hepatocellular carcinoma ( HCC ) surveillance based on the reliability of ultrasonography. Methods We analyzed 313 patients with HCC detected through a surveillance program using ultrasonography combined with three tumor markers from F ebruary 2000 to D ecember 2010. The patients were categorized into two groups based on the triggering event: the US group ( n = 281) in which a tumor was first detected using ultrasonography and the TM group ( n = 32) in which elevated tumor markers led to the diagnosis of a tumor that was undetected using ultrasonography. The reliability of ultrasonography was scored on a 4‐point scale based on three items (coarseness of liver parenchyma, patient obesity and liver atrophy). Additionally, patient survival was assessed using the K aplan– M eier method and log–rank test.Results The median tumor size was 20 mm (interquartile range, 15–24). The reliability of ultrasonography was evaluated as good in 208 (66.5%), satisfactory in 80 (8.0%), poor in 21 (6.7%) and unsatisfactory in four (1.2%) patients. The proportion of patients in the TM group increased significantly according to the score, from 7.2% to 25.0% ( P = 0.01). The survival rates of patients at 3 and 5 years were 83.7% and 57.2% in the US group, and 79.3% and 59.4% in the TM group, respectively ( P = 0.98). Conclusion Tumor markers may play a diagnostic role in patients with unreliable ultrasonography results. The survival of patients diagnosed by elevated tumor markers was not significantly different from those diagnosed by ultrasonography.