Comparative effectiveness of different hepatocellular carcinoma screening intervals or modalities: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Yang Jichun12,Yang Zhirong34,Zeng Xueyang1,Yu Shuqing1,Gao Le15,Jiang Yu2,Sun Feng1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China

2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population Medicine and Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China

3. Primary Care Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridgeshire CB18RN, UK

4. Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, China

5. Centre for Safe Medication Practice and Research, Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China.

Abstract

Abstract Background: Current guidelines recommend hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening in high-risk populations. However, the ideal HCC screening interval and screening modality have not been determined. This study aimed to compare the screening efficacy among different modalities with various intervals. Methods: PubMed and other nine databases were searched through June 30, 2021. Binary outcomes were pooled using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Survival rates were also pooled using RR with 95% CIs because most eligible studies only provided the number of survival patients instead of hazard ratio. Results: In all, 13 studies were included. Two random controlled trials (RCTs) and six cohort studies compared screening intervals for ultrasonography (US) screening and found no significant differences between shorter (3- or 4-month) and longer (6- or 12-month) screening intervals in terms of early HCC proportion, HCC significant mortality, 1-year survival rate; screening at 6-month interval significantly increased the proportion of early HCC (RR = 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08–1.26) and prolonged the 5-year survival rate (RR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.07–1.82) relative to the 12-month interval results. Three other RCTs and two cohort studies compared different screening modalities in cirrhosis or chronic hepatitis B, which indicated no statistical differences in the proportion of early HCC (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.40–1.96) and HCC mortality (RR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.23–2.09) between the biannual US and annual computed tomography (CT screening). Biannual US screening showed a lower proportion of early HCC than biannual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.37–0.97) and biannual US combined with annual CT (RR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.13–1.51) screening. The proportion of early HCC in the contrast-enhanced US group was slightly higher than that in the B-mode US (RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.00–1.23) group. Conclusions: The evidence suggests that 6 months may be the best HCC screening interval for US screening. The effectiveness of CT and MRI is better than US during same screening intervals. However, MRI and CT are more expensive than US, and CT also can increase the risk of radiation exposure. The selection of CT or MRI instead of US should be carefully considered. Registration: No. CRD42020148258 at PROSPERO website (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/).

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

General Medicine,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3