Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz UKM, Jalan Yaacob Latif, Bandar Tun Razak, Cheras, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia
  • 2 Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz UKM, Jalan Yaacob Latif, Bandar Tun Razak, Cheras, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia
Medicina (Kaunas), 2022 Jul 28;58(8).
PMID: 36013482 DOI: 10.3390/medicina58081015

Abstract

Background and Objectives: We aim to compare the diagnostic performance of Protein induced by vitamin K absence-II (PIVKA-II), a biomarker for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) in differentiating HCC and non-malignant high-risk (NMHR) groups and to determine their cut-off values. Materials and Methods: A total of 163 patients, including 40 with HCC and 123 with NMHR (100 with liver cirrhosis and 23 with non-cirrhotic high-risk patients) were prospectively enrolled. The levels of AFP and PIVKA-II were measured, and their cut-off values were determined. We calculated and compared the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves of PIVKA-II, AFP, and their combination. Results: The levels of PIVKA-II and AFP were found to be significantly higher in the HCC compared to NMHR patients (p < 0.0001). For the differentiation of HCC from NMHR, the optimal cutoff values for PIVKA-II and AFP were 36.7 mAU/mL (90% sensitivity; 82.1% specificity) and 14.2 ng/mL (75% sensitivity; 93.5% specificity), respectively. The AUROC of PIVKA-II (0.905, p < 0.0001) was higher compared to AFP (0.869, p < 0.0001), but the combination of PIVKA−II and AFP gave the highest AUROC value (0.911, p < 0.0001). However, their differences were not statistically significant (AFP vs. PIVKA; p = 0.4775, AFP vs. Combination; p = 0.3808, PIVKA vs. Combination; p = 0.2268). Conclusions: PIVKA-II and AFP showed equal performance in detecting HCC in high-risk patients. AFP as a screening marker for HCC may be adequate, and replacing or adding the PIVKA-II test in current clinical practice may be of little value.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.