RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is recommended by national and international guidelines. However, there are no trial data on whether surveillance improves clinical outcomes in a UK cirrhosis population of mixed aetiology. Our aim was to determine the impact of, and adherence to, surveillance on overall survival. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on consecutive patients diagnosed with HCC between January 2009 and December 2015 at two large UK centres. We assessed outcomes depending on whether they had been entered into an HCC surveillance programme, and if they had adhered to that. RESULTS: Out of 985 patients diagnosed with HCC in this study, 40.0% had been enrolled in a surveillance programme. Of these, 76.6% were adherent with surveillance and 24.4% were not. Adherence to surveillance was significantly associated with improved overall survival, even when accounting for lead-time bias using different approaches (HR for 270 days lead-time adjustment 0.64, 0.53 to 0.76, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: When adjusted for lead-time bias, HCC surveillance is associated with improved overall survival; however, the beneficial effect of surveillance on survival was lower than reported in studies that did not account fully for lead-time bias.
RESUMO
UNLABELLED: Our objective was to address two shortfalls in the hepatitis C virus (HCV) literature: (1) Few data exist comparing post-treatment liver-related mortality/morbidity in HCV-sustained virologic response (SVR) patients to non-SVR patients and (2) no data exist examining liver-related morbidity among treatment response subgroups,particularly among noncirrhotic SVR patients, a group who in the main are discharged from care without further follow-up. A retrospective cohort of 1,215 previously naïve HCV interferon patients (treated 1996-2007)was derived using HCV clinical databases from nine Scottish clinics. Patients were followed up post-treatment for a mean of 5.3 years. (1) By Cox-regression, liver-related hospital episodes (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR]:0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.15-0.34) and liver-related mortality [corrected] (AHR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.09-0.58)were significantly lower in SVR patients, compared to non-SVR patients. (2) Rates of liver-related hospitalization were elevated among all treatment subgroups compared to the general population: Among noncirrhotic SVR patients, adjusted standardized morbidity ratio (SMBR) up to 5.9 (95% CI: 4.5-8.0); among all SVR patients,SMBR up to 10.5 (95% CI: 8.7-12.9); and among non-SVR patients, SMBR up to 53.2 (95% CI: 49.4-57.2).Considerable elevation was also noted among patients who have spontaneously resolved their HCV infection(a control group used to gauge the extent to which lifestyle factors, and not chronic HCV, can contribute toliver-related morbidity), SMBR up to 26.8 (95% CI: 25.3-28.3). CONCLUSIONS: (1) Patients achieving an SVR were more than four times less likely to be hospitalized, or die for a liver-related reason, than non-SVR patients and (2) although discharged, noncirrhotic SVR patients harbor a disproportionate burden of liver-related morbidity; up to six times that of the general population. Further, alarming levels of liver-related morbidity in spontaneous resolvers is an important finding warranting further study..
