Abstract
Objective
To evaluate the usefulness of longitudinal observation of liver stiffness measured using magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) to stratify the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic liver disease.
Materials and methods
We retrospectively reviewed data for 161 patients with chronic liver disease using the following inclusion criteria: two MRE examinations separated by at least a 12-month interval, no history of HCC, no development of HCC between the two examinations and availability of laboratory results. Liver stiffness was classified as low (< 3 kPa), moderate (3–4.7 kPa) or high (> 4.7 kPa). The patients were divided into three groups according to sequential changes in liver stiffness as follows: high on the first MRE (group A, n = 60), low on both MRE examinations (group C, n = 36) and other combinations (group B, n = 65). Cox analyses and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to determine the risk of developing HCC.
Results
Forty-seven patients (29.2%) developed HCC during follow-up (46.7% [28/60] in group A, 26.2% [17/65] in group B, and 5.6% [2/36] in group C). There was a significant difference in the rate of development of HCC between groups A (45.1%), B (26.1%) and C (12.4%) at 3 years (p = 0.0002). The independent risk factors for development of HCC were group A classification, age and a high alanine aminotransferase level (risk ratio 1.018–6.030; p = 0.0028–0.0268).
Conclusion
Longitudinal observation of liver stiffness using MRE can stratify the risk of HCC during follow-up of chronic liver disease.
Key Points
• The results of MRE can stratify the risk for development of HCC during follow-up in patients with chronic liver disease.
• Patients with chronic liver disease and high liver stiffness (> 4.7 kPa) on a previous MRE examination are at high risk for developing HCC, regardless of current liver stiffness.
• Management of patients with chronic liver disease becomes more appropriate using longitudinally acquired two-point MRE data.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Assessment of risk for development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is essential in the management of patients with chronic liver disease. Cirrhosis has been reported to be the most important risk factor [1]. Therefore, it is important to be able to detect advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis in patients with chronic liver disease to stratify the risk for development of HCC. These patients should be followed up closely so that HCC can be detected at an early stage because curative treatment can prolong survival in patients with HCC [2]. Historically, staging of liver fibrosis required a liver biopsy followed by histopathological assessment. Biopsy can have complications, including severe pain, bleeding and biliary injury [3], so it is difficult to perform these repeatedly during follow-up. Moreover, it is difficult to assess intermediate stage of fibrosis by biopsy even though a skilled hepatopathologist evaluates a good quality biopsy specimen [4]. Routinely, many patients are diagnosed and monitored with a combination non-invasive tests, the most important being elastography. Elastography is a non-invasive method for measurement of liver stiffness using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or ultrasound (US) and is used for diagnosis of liver fibrosis/cirrhosis. Many types of US-based elastographic techniques have been used to evaluate liver fibrosis [5, 6]. Moreover, there are several studies that have addressed the ability of transient elastography to predict the development of HCC [7, 8]. Even if US-based methods are most frequently used, recent studies indicate that magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) is a highly reproducible and accurate method for staging of hepatic fibrosis [9, 10]. There is a good correlation between liver stiffness measured via MRE or US elastography and the stage of liver fibrosis [10, 11]. Little has been reported on the ability of MRE to predict the development of HCC [12]. Given that development of HCC subsequent to fibrosis is an event that occurs over a long period of time, data from more than one time point, i.e. chronological changes in liver stiffness, can be more useful than simple one-time observations of current status.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of longitudinal measurement of liver stiffness via MRE to stratify the risk for development of HCC in patients with chronic liver disease.
Materials and methods
Patients
This retrospective study was performed in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by our institutional review board. The requirement for written informed consent was waived in view of the retrospective design. Between January 2010 and April 2014, 1,512 consecutive patients with chronic liver disease underwent MRE. They were required to satisfy the following inclusion criteria: two MRE examinations separated by an interval of at least 12 months; no prior history of HCC; no development of HCC between the two MRE examinations; and availability of laboratory results within 2 weeks before or after the second MRE examination. The primary endpoint of the study was development of hypervascular HCC, which was diagnosed based on pathological evidence or fulfilment of the criteria for HCC proposed by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases [13] and European Association for the Study of the Liver [14], i.e. arterial hypervascularity and washout in the venous or delayed phase on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) images.
Magnetic resonance elastography
MRE was performed using either a 1.5-T magnetic resonance (MR) system with a superconducting magnet (Signa Excite HD MR 1.5 T; GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, WI, USA) and an 8-channel phased-array coil or a 3.0-T MR system (Discovery 750; GE Medical Systems) with a 32-channel phased-array coil. The patient was placed in the supine position, and a cylindrical passive driver was attached to the right chest wall using a rubber belt. Pneumatic vibration was delivered through a plastic cylinder to a passive driver from a vibrator placed outside the imaging room. The passive driver then transferred the vibration to the liver via the chest wall [15]. The scanning position extended from above the gallbladder to below the subphrenic space in the liver. Patients were instructed to breath-hold after expiration to maintain a consistent position during image acquisition at each phase offset [16]. The following parameters were used: frequency of vibration, 60 Hz; axis of motion-sensitising gradient pulse, z-axis (perpendicular to the imaging plane); MR sequence for data acquisition, two-dimensional gradient echo; and acquisition time, 13–17 s. Table 1 summarises the MR sequence parameters. The MR scanners automatically generated liver stiffness maps by processing the acquired propagating shear-wave images according to a two-dimensional inversion algorithm [17], and shear stiffness of the tissue was translated to a pixel value (kPa) [18]. Based on the stiffness maps, one radiologist (S.I.) with 10 years’ experience in abdominal radiology and blinded to the histopathological data placed a region of interest (ROI) in the right lobe of the liver of each patient. ROIs of at least 1.5 cm2 were placed to exclude large blood vessels seen on a magnitude MRE image, to exclude the edge of the liver and to include a parallel waveform without interference on the phase images.
Statistical analysis
Liver stiffness was classified as low (< 3 kPa), moderate (3–4.7 kPa) or high (> 4.7 kPa) according to the previously reported cut-off values [9]. The cumulative incidence rate for development of HCC was compared between these three groups based only on the second MRE examination (method A, standard) using the Kaplan-Meier method and a Cox proportional hazards model. The cumulative incidence rate for development of HCC was also assessed on the basis of the first MRE examination (method B) and both MRE examinations to take into account the chronological change in liver stiffness between the first and second examinations (method C). For classification using method C, Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed for all combinations of the two MRE results (see Electronic Supplementary Material, 1). After a visual assessment of these curves, stiffness was classified using method C as follows: high stiffness on the first MRE examination (group A); low stiffness on both MRE examinations (group C), and other combinations (group B). The reference date for the Kaplan-Meier curves was set as the date of the second MRE examination for all classifications.
The results were compared between patients with and without occurrence of hypervascular HCC during follow-up using a Cox proportional hazards model to identify factors that were independently associated with development of HCC. The following variables were analysed: age, sex, body weight, aetiology of hepatitis, chronological change in liver stiffness, the interval between the first and second MRE examination, platelet count, aspartate aminotransferase level, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level, albumin level, total bilirubin level, lactate dehydrogenase level, alkaline phosphatase level, gamma-glutamyl transferase level, prothrombin activity, alpha-fetoprotein level, PIVKA-II (protein induced by vitamin K absence or antagonists-II) level, Child-Pugh classification and achievement of SVR. All statistical analyses were performed using JMP version 10.0.2 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results
Patients
Finally, 161 patients (102 male; 59 female; mean age 65.3 [range, 60–88] years) were included in the study (see Electronic Supplementary Material, 2). The aetiologies of chronic liver disease were hepatitis C (n = 100), hepatitis B (n = 36), alcoholic steatohepatitis (n = 10), primary biliary cholangitis (n = 6), non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (n = 1), autoimmune hepatitis (n = 1) and uncertain liver disease with elevated liver enzyme levels (n = 7). The mean interval between the two MRE examinations was 17.9 (range 12–46.8) months. All patients were followed up at our institution. The median duration of follow-up after the second MRE examination was 32.7 (range 3.8–52.7) months. During follow-up, 44 (32.4%) of 136 patients who had hepatitis C or B were treated with antiviral therapy, 25 of whom achieved a sustained virological response (SVR).
Occurrence of HCC
Forty-seven (29.2%) of the 161 patients developed HCC during the follow-up period. Hypervascular HCC was diagnosed based on pathological evidence in 13 cases (biopsy, n = 7; resection, n = 6) and on CT images in 34 cases. According to method A, 49 (30.4%), 63 (39.1%) and 49 (30.4%) patients had low, moderate and high liver stiffness. Among them, 6 (12.2%), 20 (31.7%) and 21 (42.9%) developed HCC (p = 0.0033). The incidence rates for development of HCC at 3 years in the high, moderate and low liver stiffness groups were 17.7%, 29.0% and 44.9%, respectively (p = 0.0033; Fig. 1a). According to method B, 44 (27.3%), 57 (35.4%) and 60 (37.5%) patients had low, moderate and high liver stiffness. Among them, 4 (9.09%), 16 (28.1%) and 27 (45.0%) developed HCC (p = 0.0004). The incidence rates for development of HCC at 3 years in the high, moderate and low liver stiffness groups were 15.4%, 27.8% and 42.7%, respectively (p = 0.0009; Fig. 1b). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed similar results between methods A and B; however, method B showed slightly better separation between the three groups than method A. Using classification method B, there was a significant difference in the incidence rate for development of HCC between the three groups (p = 0.0444–0.0001, Table 2). However, using method A, there was a significant difference in incidence rate between patients with high liver stiffness and those with low liver stiffness and between patients with moderate liver stiffness and those with low liver stiffness (p = 0.0026 and p = 0.0354, respectively; Table 2), but not between patients with high liver stiffness and those with moderate liver stiffness (p = 0.2458).
According to method C, 60 (37.3%), 36 (22.5%) and 65 (40.4%) patients had high stiffness on the first MRE examination (group A), low stiffness on both MRE examinations (group C) and other combinations (group B) (Fig. 2). Among them, 28 (46.7%), 17 (26.2%) and two (5.6%) patients in groups A, B and C developed HCC (p < 0.0001; Fig. 3). The incidence rates for development of HCC at 3 years in groups A, B and C were 45.1%, 26.1% and 12.4%, respectively (p = 0.0002; Fig. 4). Using method C, there were significant differences in the incidence rates for development of HCC between the three groups (p = 0.0335 to p < 0.0001; Table 2). Figures 5 and 6 provide clinical details for specific clinical cases.
Factors associated with the development of HCC
Univariate analyses revealed that age, liver stiffness on first and second MRE, chronological change in liver stiffness between the two MRE examinations, platelet count and ALT level were associated with development of HCC (hazard ratio (HR) 0.994–7.080; p < 0.0001–0.0335; Tables 2 and 3). Aetiology of hepatitis did not show a significant difference (p = 0.1613–0.4047).
Multivariate analyses were performed three times (one for each method (method A, B or C)) of these factors. In multivariate analysis in included method A, age (HR, 1.043; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.007–1.080; p = 0.0145) and ALT level (HR, 1.018; 95% CI, 1.005–1.032; p = 0.0143) were identified as independent risk factors for development of HCC. Classification of liver stiffness did not show a significant difference (p = 0.1174–0.6248). In multivariate analysis in included method B, age (HR, 1.046; 95% CI, 1.010–1.083; p = 0.0087), high liver stiffness (HR, 4.379; 95% CI, 1.523–14.59; p = 0.0053 compared with low liver stiffness) and ALT level (HR, 1.017; 95% CI, 1.004–1.032; p = 0.0195) were identified as independent risk factors for development of HCC. There was no significant difference between high and moderate liver stiffness (p = 0.1012). In multivariate analysis in included method C, age (HR, 1.043; 95% CI, 1.008–1.081; p = 0.0154), group A classification (HR, 6.030; 95% CI, 1.780–27.84; p = 0.0028 and HR, 2.164; 95% CI, 1.092–4.354; p = 0.0268 compared with group C and B, respectively) and ALT level (HR, 1.018; 95% CI, 1.003–1.032; p = 0.0196) were identified as independent risk factors for development of HCC (Table 4). Hazard ratios of MRE results in multivariate analysis that included method C were the highest among the three methods.
Discussion
In our study, the more recent liver stiffness values recorded on the second MRE examination were associated with development of HCC. However, our results also suggested that the results of the first MRE examination, i.e. the earlier liver stiffness value, are also important, especially if liver stiffness had been found to be high more than a year earlier. It was also useful to take account of the chronological change in liver stiffness for estimation of the risk for development of HCC. A previous study focused on chronological change in liver stiffness measured by transient elastography, in which the authors indicated that patients with baseline and serial high liver stiffness had a higher risk of portal hypertension progression [19]. Our results were consistent with their results.
A persistently high liver stiffness value could be a greater risk factor for hepatocarcinogenesis than a single point measurement of current moderate-to-high liver stiffness. Formation of new abnormal vessels (angiogenesis) is a key mechanism in the pathogenesis of chronic liver disease, and angiogenesis increases with the progression of fibrosis and hepatocarcinogenesis. Liver hypoxia is a major trigger for angiogenesis. There are many causes of liver hypoxia associated with cirrhosis, including compression of the portal tract by abnormal scarring with fibrous tissue, intrahepatic arterioportal shunts that decrease arterial oxygenation and impairment of oxygen exchange by capillarisation of hepatic sinusoids [20, 21]. Therefore, persistently high liver stiffness could be a greater risk factor for HCC than elevation of liver stiffness, given that a sustained state of cirrhosis is important for hepatocarcinogenesis. Calculations using a hidden Markov model showed that it can take 24.99–178.92 months for chronic liver disease to progress to liver cirrhosis, depending on the cause, and 15.63–48.91 months for cirrhosis to progress to HCC [22].
Interestingly, in our study, the Kaplan-Meier curve for the patients who had moderate liver stiffness on the first MRE and high liver stiffness on the second MRE (Fig. 1) showed that the incidence rate for development of HCC was the same as that in group A approximately 48 months later. Although the observation period in our study may not have been long enough, the risk for development of HCC may increase several years after liver stiffness increases to a cirrhotic level.
Recently, MRE has emerged as a superior modality for evaluation of liver fibrosis. MRE is a very applicable method for liver imaging not only for evaluation of liver fibrosis, but also for the assessment of degree of portal hypertension [23, 24], risk of hepatic decompensation or progression of cirrhosis [25, 26], characterisation of hepatic lesions [27, 28] and assessment of post-treatment state [29,30,31]. In general, it is well validated that liver stiffness by MRE is highly correlated with liver fibrosis stage. Liver cirrhosis is pathologically defined as a diffuse replacement of the normal lobule by abnormal nodules and fibrous septa [32]. Although cirrhosis is considered to be an end-stage liver disease, clinical severity and prognosis can vary [33]. Since most type C hepatitis, a major cause of cirrhosis, can be cured by antiviral treatments, the liver fibrosis can change or resolve over time [34]. That means that a simple point assessment of pathology-based fibrosis staging is not able to accurately stratify the risk of HCC development. Laennec’s staging system can be used to assess the degree of cirrhosis, liver function and the risk of liver-related event occurrence among patients with cirrhosis [35, 36]. There are several reports using this staging system and ultrasound elastography [37, 38]; however, there is no report using this staging system and MRE.
The major limitation of our study was its retrospective design. The most appropriate method for assessment of risk factors for HCC would be a prospective study with longitudinal observation of a sufficient number of patients, in which the endpoint is the incidence of HCC. The incidence rate of HCC in this study was higher than that in previous studies [39, 40], suggesting that the population in our study may be skewed towards very high-risk patients probably due to the retrospective study design that included patients who were referred to MRI. Another potential limitation is that we did not assess the activity of hepatitis. Previous research has suggested that the activity of hepatitis may be a confounder of liver stiffness measurement during staging of fibrosis using MRE [41,42,43]. Finally, the observation period may have been too short, given that direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents became available in the course of the study. These new agents are highly effective in the treatment of HCV infection and can be used safely in treatment-naïve patients with HCV and in patients who have been treated unsuccessfully, so HCV cure rates have increased dramatically [44, 45]. There are several reports suggesting that DAA therapy might reduce the risk of HCC [46, 47]. Achievement of an SVR was not associated with development of HCC in this study, but such an association might have been found had the observation period been longer.
In conclusion, longitudinal observation of liver stiffness via MRE examination can be useful to stratify the risk for development of HCC.
Abbreviations
- ALT:
-
Alanine aminotransferase
- DAA:
-
Direct-acting antiviral
- MRE:
-
Magnetic resonance elastography
- PIVKA-II:
-
Protein induced by vitamin K absence or antagonists-II
- SVR:
-
Sustained virological response
References
Wong VW, Janssen HL (2015) Can we use HCC risk scores to individualize surveillance in chronic hepatitis B infection? J Hepatol 63:722–732
Sugino Y, Yamakado K, Yamanaka T et al (2017) Role of curative treatment in patients with intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Jpn J Radiol 35:254–261
Takyar V, Etzion O, Heller T et al (2017) Complications of percutaneous liver biopsy with Klatskin needles: a 36-year single-centre experience. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 45:744–753
Chindamo MC, Nunes-Pannain VL, Araújo-Neto JM et al (2015) Intermediate fibrosis staging in hepatitis C: a problem not overcome by optimal samples or pathologists' expertise. Ann Hepatol 14:652–657
Huang Z, Zheng W, Zhang YJ et al (2017) Assessing hepatic fibrosis using 2-D shear wave elastography in patients with liver tumors: a prospective single-center study. Ultrasound Med Biol 43:2522–2529
Wang T, Shao C, Zhang G, Xu Y (2017) Real-time elastography (RTE): a valuable sonography-based non-invasive method for the assessment of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B. Abdom Radiol (NY) 42:2632–2638
Masuzaki R, Tateishi R, Yoshida H et al (2008) Risk assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis C patients by transient elastography. J Clin Gastroenterol 42:839–843
Park MS, Han KH, Kim SU (2014) Non-invasive prediction of development of hepatocellular carcinoma using transient elastography in patients with chronic liver disease. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 8:501–511
Ichikawa S, Motosugi U, Enomoto N, Matsuda M, Onishi H (2017) Noninvasive hepatic fibrosis staging using MR elastography: the usefulness of the bayesian prediction method. J Magn Reson Imaging 46:375–382
Yin M, Glaser KJ, Talwalkar JA, Chen J, Manduca A, Ehman RL (2016) Hepatic MR elastography: clinical performance in a series of 1377 consecutive examinations. Radiology 278:114–124
Kim SU, Kim BK, Park JY et al (2016) Transient elastography is superior to FIB-4 in assessing the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Medicine (Baltimore) 95:e3434
Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Koshiishi T et al (2013) Liver stiffness measured by magnetic resonance elastography as a risk factor for hepatocellular carcinoma: a preliminary case-control study. Eur Radiol 23:156–162
Heimbach JK, Kulik LM, Finn RS et al (2018) AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 67:358–380
European Association for the Study of the Liver (2018) EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2018.03.019
Rouviere O, Yin M, Dresner MA et al (2006) MR elastography of the liver: preliminary results. Radiology 240:440–448
Yin M, Talwalkar JA, Glaser KJ et al (2007) Assessment of hepatic fibrosis with magnetic resonance elastography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:1207–1213.e2
Manduca A, Oliphant TE, Dresner MA et al (2001) Magnetic resonance elastography: non-invasive mapping of tissue elasticity. Med Image Anal 5:237–254
Talwalkar JA, Yin M, Venkatesh S et al (2009) Feasibility of in vivo MR elastographic splenic stiffness measurements in the assessment of portal hypertension. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:122–127
Wang JH, Chuah SK, Lu SN et al (2014) Baseline and serial liver stiffness measurement in prediction of portal hypertension progression for patients with compensated cirrhosis. Liver Int 34:1340–1348
Coulon S, Heindryckx F, Geerts A, Van Steenkiste C, Colle I, Van Vlierberghe H (2011) Angiogenesis in chronic liver disease and its complications. Liver Int 31:146–162
Machado MV, Cortez-Pinto H (2015) Proangiogenic factors in the development of HCC in alcoholic cirrhosis. Clin Res Gastroenterol Hepatol 39(Suppl 1):S104–S108
Bartolomeo N, Trerotoli P, Serio G (2011) Progression of liver cirrhosis to HCC: an application of hidden Markov model. BMC Med Res Methodol 11:38
Guo J, Büning C, Schott E et al (2015) In vivo abdominal magnetic resonance elastography for the assessment of portal hypertension before and after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt implantation. Invest Radiol 50:347–351
Morisaka H, Motosugi U, Ichikawa S et al (2015) Association of splenic MR elastographic findings with gastroesophageal varices in patients with chronic liver disease. J Magn Reson Imaging 41:117–124
Asrani SK, Talwalkar JA, Kamath PS et al (2014) Role of magnetic resonance elastography in compensated and decompensated liver disease. J Hepatol 60:934–939
Takamura T, Motosugi U, Ichikawa S et al (2016) Usefulness of MR elastography for detecting clinical progression of cirrhosis from child-pugh class A to B in patients with type C viral hepatitis. J Magn Reson Imaging 44:715–722
Thompson SM, Wang J, Chandan VS et al (2017) MR elastography of hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation of tumor stiffness with histopathology features—preliminary findings. Magn Reson Imaging 37:41–45
Hennedige TP, Hallinan JT, Leung FP et al (2016) Comparison of magnetic resonance elastography and diffusion-weighted imaging for differentiating benign and malignant liver lesions. Eur Radiol 26:398–406
Gordic S, Ayache JB, Kennedy P et al (2017) Value of tumor stiffness measured with MR elastography for assessment of response of hepatocellular carcinoma to locoregional therapy. Abdom Radiol (NY) 42:1685–1694
Lee DH, Lee JM, Yi NJ et al (2017) Hepatic stiffness measurement by using MR elastography: prognostic values after hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur Radiol 27:1713–1721
Crespo G, Castro-Narro G, García-Juárez I et al (2016) Usefulness of liver stiffness measurement during acute cellular rejection in liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 22:298–304
Anthony PP, Ishak KG, Nayak NC et al (1978) The morphology of cirrhosis. Recommendations on definition, nomenclature, and classification by a working group sponsored by the World Health Organization. J Clin Pathol 31:395–414
D'Amico G, Garcia-Tsao G, Pagliaro L (2006) Natural history and prognostic indicators of survival in cirrhosis: a systematic review of 118 studies. J Hepatol 44:217–231
Shiratori Y, Imazeki F, Moriyama M et al (2000) Histologic improvement of fibrosis in patients with hepatitis C who have sustained response to interferon therapy. Ann Intern Med 132:517–524
Kim SU, Oh HJ, Wanless IR et al (2012) The Laennec staging system for histological sub-classification of cirrhosis is useful for stratification of prognosis in patients with liver cirrhosis. J Hepatol 57:556–563
Wang W, Li J, Pan R et al (2015) Association of the Laennec staging system with degree of cirrhosis, clinical stage and liver function. Hepatol Int 9:621–626
Kim SU, Kim JK, Park YN et al (2012) Discordance between liver biopsy and Fibroscan® in assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis b: risk factors and influence of necroinflammation. PLoS One 7:e32233
Krawczyk M, Ligocka J, Ligocki M et al (2017) Does transient elastography correlate with liver fibrosis in patients with PSC? Laennec score-based analysis of explanted livers. Scand J Gastroenterol 52:1407–1412
Yoshida H, Shiratori Y, Moriyama M et al (1999) Interferon therapy reduces the risk for hepatocellular carcinoma: national surveillance program of cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients with chronic hepatitis C in Japan. IHIT Study Group. Inhibition of Hepatocarcinogenesis by Interferon Therapy. Ann Intern Med 131:174–181
Tran SA, Le A, Zhao C et al (2008) Rate of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance remains low for a large, real-life cohort of patients with hepatitis C cirrhosis. BMJ Open Gastroenterol 5:e000192
Ichikawa S, Motosugi U, Nakazawa T et al (2015) Hepatitis activity should be considered a confounder of liver stiffness measured with MR elastography. J Magn Reson Imaging 41:1203–1208
Yoshimitsu K, Mitsufuji T, Shinagawa Y et al (2016) MR elastography of the liver at 3.0 T in diagnosing liver fibrosis grades; preliminary clinical experience. Eur Radiol 26:656–663
Shi Y, Guo Q, Xia F et al (2014) MR elastography for the assessment of hepatic fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B infection: does histologic necroinflammation influence the measurement of hepatic stiffness? Radiology 273:88–98
Chhatwal J, Wang X, Ayer T et al (2016) Hepatitis C disease burden in the United States in the era of oral direct-acting antivirals. Hepatology 64:1442–1450
Alexopoulou A, Karayiannis P (2015) Interferon-based combination treatment for chronic hepatitis C in the era of direct acting antivirals. Ann Gastroenterol 28:55–65
Kanwal F, Kramer J, Asch SM, Chayanupatkul M, Cao Y, El-Serag HB (2017) Risk of hepatocellular cancer in HCV patients treated with direct acting antiviral agents. Gastroenterology 153:996–1005.e1
Ogata F, Kobayashi M, Akuta N et al (2017) Outcome of all-oral direct-acting antiviral regimens on the rate of development of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 1-related chronic liver disease. Oncology 93:92–98
Funding
The authors state that this work has not received any funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Guarantor
The scientific guarantor of this publication is Hiroshi Onishi.
Conflict of interest
The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.
Statistics and biometry
No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.
Informed consent
Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.
Ethical approval
Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.
Study subjects or cohorts overlap
Some study subjects or cohorts have been previously reported in an earlier report (Ichikawa S, et al. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017;46(2):375-382.). Data of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) for 42 patients in this study were included in the paper; however, the results for two MRE examinations for these patients have not been reported previously.
Methodology
• Retrospective
• Observational
• Performed at one institution
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOCX 5467 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ichikawa, S., Motosugi, U., Enomoto, N. et al. Magnetic resonance elastography can predict development of hepatocellular carcinoma with longitudinally acquired two-point data. Eur Radiol 29, 1013–1021 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5640-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5640-7