ArticleJournal of hepatocellular carcinoma2026
Diagnostic Performance Comparison of AFP, PIVKA-II, GALAD Model, and ASAP Model Across Two Chemiluminescence Immunoassay Platforms for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Article in Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of individual serum biomarkers [alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), protein induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist-II (PIVKA-II)] and composite models (GALAD, ASAP) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) across two immunoassay platforms. Methods: From 2011 to 2021, 518 serum samples were selected from a liver-related disease biobank at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (Beijing, China), including 102 HCC patients, 117 with benign liver disease, 38 with cholangiocarcinoma, 96 with colorectal cancer, 65 with metastatic hepatic carcinoma, and 100 healthy controls. AFP and PIVKA-II levels were measured on both the Hotgen and Abbott ARCHITECT platforms. The GALAD and ASAP scores were calculated based on the data from each platform. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and the corresponding areas under the curves (AUCs) were used to evaluate and compare the diagnostic value of the individual biomarkers and the two composite models. Results: For HCC diagnosis, AFP exhibited comparable efficacy between Hotgen (AUC: 0.821) and Abbott (AUC: 0.846), whereas PIVKA-II performed better on Abbott (AUC: 0.863) than Hotgen (AUC: 0.787). GALAD and ASAP models exhibited significantly better diagnostic performance than individual serum biomarkers on both platforms (P < 0.05): on Hotgen, both models achieved an AUC of 0.872, while on Abbott, ASAP (AUC: 0.913) was marginally superior to GALAD (AUC: 0.901, P = 0.0569). Notably, both models performed better on Abbott than Hotgen (GALAD: 0.901 vs 0.872, P = 0.0001; ASAP: 0.913 vs 0.872, P = 0.0003). Spearman correlation analysis showed moderate inter-platform correlations for AFP (r = 0.573) and PIVKA-II (r = 0.460). Bland-Altman analysis indicated poor inter-platform consistency, with mean biases of 44.32% (AFP) and -92.02% (PIVKA-II). Conclusion: GALAD and ASAP models demonstrate superior diagnostic efficacy for HCC compared to individual biomarkers, and their performance is significantly influenced by the immunoassay platform employed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.