PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Chen, Siyu AU - Lu, Linbin AU - Hu, Xinyu AU - Lin, Shan AU - Zhu, Lijun TI - Decision curve analysis to identify optimal candidates of liver resection for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma with hepatitis B cirrhosis : A cohort study AID - 10.1101/2020.10.07.20166769 DP - 2022 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.10.07.20166769 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/01/26/2020.10.07.20166769.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/01/26/2020.10.07.20166769.full AB - Background The selection criterion for liver resection (LR) in intermediate-stage (IM) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is still controversial. This study aims to compare LR and transarterial chemoembolization in the range of predicted death riskMethods The multivariable Cox regression model (MVR) was estimated to predict mortality at 5yr. The cut-off values were determined by a two-piece-wise linear regression model, decision curve analysis with MVR model, and hazard ratio curve for treatment plotted against the predicted mortality.Results 825 IM-HCC with hepatitis B cirrhosis were included for analysis (TACE, n=622; LR, n=203). The 5-yr overall survival rate of LR patients was higher than the TACE group (52.8% vs. 20.8%; P<0.0001). The line of LR and TACE were crossing with predicted death risk at 100% (P for interaction =0.008). The benefit of LR versus TACE decreased progressively as predicted death risk>0.55 (95%CI: 0.45,0.62). When predicted death risk over 0.7, decision curve analysis suggested that LR and TACE did not increase net benefit. Patients were then divided into four subgroups by the cut-off values (<0.45, 0.45≥ /<0.62, 0.62≥ /<0.7, ≥ 0.7). The stratified analysis of treatment in different subgroups, hazard ratios were 0.39 (95%CI: 0.27, 0.56), 0.36 (95%CI: 0.23, 0.56), 0.51 (95%CI: 0.27, 0.98), and 0.46 (95%CI: 0.27, 0.80), respectively.Conclusions LR reached the maximal relative utility in the interval of 0.45 to 0.62, and both LR and TACE did not increase net benefit at the 5-yr death risk over 0.7.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementnoneAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study protocol (2017-FXY-129) was approved by the Ethics Committee of SYSUCCI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe raw data were freely obtained from the Dryad Digital Repository database (www. Datadryad.org; https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.pd44k8r).BCLCBarcelona clinic liver cancerSYSUCCSun Yat-sen University Cancer CenterLRLiver resectionIM-HCCintermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinomaTACEtransarterial chemoembolizationOSoverall survivalHBVhepatitis B virus