α-fetoprotein and ultrasonography screening for hepatocellular carcinoma

354Citations
Citations of this article
107Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Although there is no definitive evidence that hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening in high-risk groups improves survival, many physicians screen high-risk populations with various strategies. α-fetoprotein (AFP) and liver ultrasonography (US) are the most widely used tools. AFP sensitivity and specificity depend on the cut-off value chosen. In cirrhotic patients, using a cut-off level of 20 ng/mL, sensitivity is only around 60% and positive predictive value ranges from 9% to 50%, depending on HCC prevalence. Sensitivity and specificity are much higher (94.1% and 99.9%, respectively) in hepatitis B carriers, but positive predictive value is only 5%. The performance of US as a screening tool varies widely depending on the experience of the examiner and the technology used. Recent studies generally indicate a 60% sensitivity or higher, a specificity greater than 90%, and a positive predictive value of 70%. The cost effectiveness of screening strategies using AFP, US, or both have been estimated retrospectively or using decision models. In general, HCC screening using both AFP and US appears to be of borderline cost effectiveness or not cost effective at all. Based on the estimated HCC doubling time, the recommended screening interval is 6 months, although a 1-year interval seems as effective. Currently, HCC screening with AFP only is not recommended except when US is either not available or of poor quality. US seems more efficient as a screening tool. Pathology assessment of liver explants in living-donor transplantation programs will provide more precise and reliable information regarding the value of AFP and US as HCC screening tools.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Daniele, B., Bencivenga, A., Megna, A. S., & Tinessa, V. (2004). α-fetoprotein and ultrasonography screening for hepatocellular carcinoma. In Gastroenterology (Vol. 127). W.B. Saunders. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2004.09.023

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free