Dataset Information

Effect of ultrasonography surveillance in patients with liver cancer: a population-based longitudinal study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Liver cancer is a growing global public health problem. Ultrasonography is an imaging tool widely used for the early diagnosis of liver cancer. However, the effect of ultrasonography surveillance (US) on the survival of patients with liver cancer is unknown. Therefore, this study examined the association between survival and US frequency during the 2 years preceding patients' liver cancer diagnosis.

Methods

This population-based longitudinal study was conducted in Taiwan, a region with high liver cancer incidence, by using the National Health Insurance Research Database. We compared survival between patients who received US three times or more (?3?group) and less than three times (<3?group) during the 2 years preceding their liver cancer diagnosis, and identified the predictors for the ?3?group.

Results

This study enrolled 4621 patients with liver cancer who had died between 1997 and 2010. The median survival rate was higher in the ?3?group (1.42 years) than in the <3?group (0.51 years). Five-year survival probability was also significantly higher in the ?3?group (14.4%) than in the <3?group (7.7%). The multivariate logistic regression results showed that the three most common positive predictors for receiving three or more US sessions were indications of viral hepatitis, gallbladder diseases and kidney-urinary-bladder diseases; the most common negative predictors for receiving three or more US sessions were male sex and indications of abdominal pain.

Conclusion

Patients with liver cancer who received US three times or more during the 2 years preceding their liver cancer diagnosis exhibited a higher 5-year survival probability.

SUBMITTER: Chiang JK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5541579 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of ultrasonography surveillance in patients with liver cancer: a population-based longitudinal study.

Chiang Jui-Kun JK Chih-Wen Lin L Kao Yee-Hsin YH

BMJ open 20170623 6

<h4>Objective</h4>Liver cancer is a growing global public health problem. Ultrasonography is an imaging tool widely used for the early diagnosis of liver cancer. However, the effect of ultrasonography surveillance (US) on the survival of patients with liver cancer is unknown. Therefore, this study examined the association between survival and US frequency during the 2 years preceding patients' liver cancer diagnosis.<h4>Methods</h4>This population-based longitudinal study was conducted in Taiwan ...[more]

PMID: 28645973

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceScreening for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing can lead to problems of underdiagnosis and overdiagnosis. Short, noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or transrectal ultrasonography might overcome these limitations.ObjectiveTo compare the performance of PSA testing, MRI, and ultrasonography as screening tests for prostate cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective, population-based, blinded cohort study was conducted at 7 primary care practices and 2 imaging centers in the United Kingdom. Men 50 to 69 years of age were invited for prostate cancer screening from October 10, 2018, to May 15, 2019.InterventionsAll participants underwent screening with a PSA test, MRI (T2 weighted and diffusion), and ultrasonography (B-mode and shear wave elastography). The tests were independently interpreted without knowledge of other results. Both imaging tests were reported on a validated 5-point scale of suspicion. If any test result was positive, a systematic 12-core biopsy was performed. Additional image fusion-targeted biopsies were performed if the MRI or ultrasonography results were positive.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was the proportion of men with positive MRI or ultrasonography (defined as a score of 3-5 or 4-5) or PSA test (defined as PSA ≥3 μg/L) results. Key secondary outcomes were the number of clinically significant and clinically insignificant cancers detected if each test was used exclusively. Clinically significant cancer was defined as any Gleason score of 3+4 or higher.ResultsA total of 2034 men were invited to participate; of 411 who attended screening, 408 consented to receive all screening tests. The proportion with positive MRI results (score, 3-5) was higher than the proportion with positive PSA test results (72 [17.7%; 95% CI, 14.3%-21.8%] vs 40 [9.9%; 95% CI, 7.3%-13.2%]; P < .001). The proportion with positive ultrasonography results (score, 3-5) was also higher than the proportion of those with positive PSA test results (96 [23.7%; 95% CI, 19.8%-28.1%]; P < .001). For an imaging threshold of score 4 to 5, the proportion with positive MRI results was similar to the proportion with positive PSA test results (43 [10.6%; 95% CI, 7.9%-14.0%]; P = .71), as was the proportion with positive ultrasonography results (52 [12.8%; 95% CI, 9.9%-16.5%]; P = .15). The PSA test (≥3 ng/mL) detected 7 clinically significant cancers, an MRI score of 3 to 5 detected 14 cancers, an MRI score of 4 to 5 detected 11 cancers, an ultrasonography score of 3 to 5 detected 9 cancer, and an ultrasonography score of 4 to 5 detected 4 cancers. Clinically insignificant cancers were diagnosed by PSA testing in 6 cases, by an MRI score of 3 to 5 in 7 cases, an MRI score of 4 to 5 in 5 cases, an ultrasonography score of 3 to 5 in 13 cases, and an ultrasonography score of 4 to 5 in 7 cases.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, when screening the general population for prostate cancer, MRI using a score of 4 or 5 to define a positive test result compared with PSA alone at 3 ng/mL or higher was associated with more men diagnosed with clinically significant cancer, without an increase in the number of men advised to undergo biopsy or overdiagnosed with clinically insignificant cancer. There was no evidence that ultrasonography would have better performance compared with PSA testing alone.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have shown that leprosy multi-drug therapy (MDT) does not stop the progression of nerve function impairment. There are no prospective studies investigating the evolution of nerve anatomic abnormalities after treatment. We examined leprosy patients aiming to investigate the evolution of nerve ultrasonography (US) abnormalities and the risk factors for poor outcomes after MDT.Methodology/principal findingsWe performed bilateral US of the ulnar (U), median (M) and common fibular (CF) nerves in 9 paucibacillary (PB) and 64 multibacillary (MB) patients before and after MDT. Forty-two patients had leprosy reactions (type 1, type 2, acute neuritis) during the study. We analyzed nerve maximum cross-sectional areas (CSA), echogenicity and Doppler signal. Poor outcomes included a post-treatment CSA above normal limits with a reduction of less than 30% (U, M) or 40% (CF) from the baseline, echogenicity abnormalities or intraneural Doppler in the post-treatment study. We found that PB and patients without reactions showed significant increases in CSA at CF, whereas MB and patients with reactions had CSA reduction in some nerves after treatment (p<0.05). Despite this reduction, we observed a greater frequency of poor CSA outcomes in the MB compared to the PB (77.8% and 40.6%; p>0.05) and in the patients with reactions compared to those without (66.7% and 38.7%; p<0.05). There was significantly higher odds ratio (7.75; 95%CI: 1.56-38.45) for poor CSA outcomes only for M nerve in patients with reactions. Poor echogenicity outcomes were more frequent in MB (59.4%) compared to PB (22.2%) (p<0.05). There was significant association between poor Doppler outcomes and neuritis. Gender, disease duration, and leprosy classification were not significant risk factors for poor outcomes in CSA, echogenicity or Doppler.Conclusions/significanceUS nerve abnormalities can worsen after treatment despite the leprosy classification or the presence of reactions.

Project description:BackgroundUltrasonography (US) is recommended as a standard surveillance tool for patients with a high risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the low sensitivity of US for small HCC can lead to surveillance failure, resulting in advanced stage tumor presentations. For the early detection of HCC in high-risk patients and to improve survival and prognosis, a new efficient imaging tool with a high sensitivity for HCC detection is needed. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the feasibility and efficacy of non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with US as a surveillance tool for HCC in patients with liver cirrhosis.MethodsMAGNUS-HCC is a prospective, multicenter clinical trial with a crossover design for a single arm of patients. This study was approved by six Institutional Review Boards, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. All patients will undergo liver US every 6 months and non-contrast liver MRI every 12 months during a follow-up period of 3 years. If a focal liver lesion suspected of harboring HCC is detected, dynamic liver computed tomography (CT) will be performed to confirm the diagnosis. After the last surveillance round, patients without suspicion of HCC or who are not diagnosed with HCC will be evaluated with a dynamic liver CT to exclude false-negative findings. The primary endpoint is to compare the rate of detection of HCC by US examinations performed at 6-month intervals with that of yearly non-contrast liver MRI studies during a 3-year follow-up. The secondary endpoint is the survival of the patients who developed HCC within the 3-year follow-up period.DiscussionMAGNUS-HCC is the first study to compare the feasibility of non-contrast MRI with US as a surveillance tool for the detection of HCC in high-risk patients. We anticipate that the evidence presented in this study will establish the efficacy of non-contrast MRI as a surveillance tool for HCC in high-risk patients.Trial registrationThe date of trial registration ( NCT02551250 ) in this study was September 15, 2015, and follow-up is still ongoing.

Dataset Information

Effect of ultrasonography surveillance in patients with liver cancer: a population-based longitudinal study.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Effect of ultrasonography surveillance in patients with liver cancer: a population-based longitudinal study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets