Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. May 15, 2025; 17(5): 105148
Published online May 15, 2025. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v17.i5.105148
Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis
Ref.
Country
Study type
Cut-off value
Method of measurement
Average age (years)
No. of patients (female/male)
Follow-up time (years)
Tseng et al[26], 2022ChinaCohortHBcrAg > 4.0 LogU/mLNA42.4 ± 10.1990 (351/639)Mean = 15.88
Hosaka et al[16], 2022JapanCohortiTACT-HBcrAg > 2.9 LogU/mLiTACT51.0 ± 9.9180Median = 11.0
Hsieh et al[18], 2023ChinaCase-controlHBcrAg ≥ 3.0 LogU/mLCLEIA55.0 (49.0-60.0)649 (245/404)1991-2014
Kaneko et al[19], 2021JapanCohortHBcrAg > 4.1 LogU/mLCLEIA54.0 (20.0-85.0)139Median = 5.3
Suzuki et al[23], 2021JapanCase-controliTACT-HBcrAg > 2.7 LogU/mLiTACT80.3 (44.0-70.0)17 (5/12)Not available
Liang et al[22], 2020ChinaCohortHBeAg-positive cohort: HBcrAg > 4.9 LogU/mLCLEIA53.5 ± 11.81400 (387/1013)Mean = 3.75
To et al[25], 2019ChinaCohortHBcrAg > 5.12 LogU/mLCLEIA40.0 (34.0-45.0)207 (89/118)Median = 13.1
Tseng et al[27], 2019ChinaCohortHBcrAg ≥ 4.0 LogU/mLCLEIA411211 (1050/161)Mean = 15.95
Suzuki et al[24], 2019JapanCross-sectionalHBcrAg ≥ 3.0 LogU/mLCLEIA54.8449 (296/153)Not available
Hosaka et al[17], 2019JapanCohortHBeAg-negative cohort: HBcrAg > 4.30 LogU/mLCLEIA44.0 (34.0-57.0)1268 (339/929)Median = 8.9
Ando et al[12], 2018JapanCohortHBcrAg > 3.4 LogU/mLCLEIA51.0 (20.0-79.0)133 (54/79)Median = 4.8
Chen et al[13], 2018ChinaCohortHBcrAg > 5.2 LogU/mLCLEIA52.5 (30.0-87.0)56Median = 5.0
Cheung et al[14], 2017ChinaCase-controlHBcrAg ≥ 3.89 LogU/mLCLEIAHCC: 61.3 (54.8-66.8)228 (39/189)Not available
Tada et al[28], 2016JapanCohortHBcrAg > 2.9 LogU/mLCLEIA49.0 (35.0-59.5)1031 (473/558)Median = 10
Honda et al[15], 2016JapanCohortHBcrAg > 3.0 LogU/mLCLEIA52.0 (30.0-79.0)109 (33/76)Mean = 6.5
Kumada et al[20], 2013JapanCohortHBcrAg > 2.9 LogU/mLCLEIA52.0 (21.0-77.0)234 (89/145)Median = 13.0
Kusakabe et al[21], 2011JapanCohortNot mentionedCLEIA55.2 ± 8.5479 (259/220)Mean = 12.7
HBcrAg: Hepatitis B core-related antigen; HBeAg: Hepatitis B e antigen; CLEIA: Chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay; iTACT: Immunoassay for hepatitis B core-related antigen using a new technology.
Table 2 The quality assessment according to Newcastle-Ottawa Scale of each cohort study
Ref.
Representativeness of the exposed cohort
Selection of the non-exposed cohort
Ascertainment of exposure
Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study
Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis
Assessment of outcome
Was follow-up long enough
Adequacy of follow up of cohorts
Total score
Tseng et al[26]★★★★★★★7
Hosaka et al[16]★★★★★★★7
Hsieh et al[18]★★★★★★★★★9
Kaneko et al[19]★★★★★★★7
Suzuki et al[23]★★★★★★★7
Liang et al[22]★★★★★★★★8
To et al[25]★★★★★★★★★9
Tseng et al[27]★★★★★★★★8
Suzuki et al[24]★★★★★★★★8
Hosaka et al[17]★★★★★★★★★9
Ando et al[12]★★★★★★★★★9
Chen et al[13]★★★★★★★★8
Cheung et al[14]★★★★★★★★★9
Tada et al[28]★★★★★★★★8
Honda et al[15]★★★★★★★★★9
Kumada et al[20]★★★★★★★★★9
Kusakabe et al[21]★★★★★★★★★9
Table 3 Subgroup analysis of hepatitis B core-related antigen and primary hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence
Subgroup factor
Divided standard
Pooled HR (95%CI)
Heterogeneity (I²)
Effects model
Sample size≥ 5004.18 (1.68-6.53)65.90%Random-effect
< 5003.26 (1.39-5.66)76.20%Random-effect
Follow-up time≥ 10 years2.89 (1.38-5.31)82.30%Random-effect
< 10 years3.27 (1.98-6.79)51.10%Random-effect
HBcrAg cut-off value≥ 4.0 LogU/mL5.29 (2.17-8.56)55.80%Random-effect
< 4.0 LogU/mL1.78 (1.25-4.42)51.68%Random-effect
TreatmentWith NAs1.98 (1.38-4.98)71.56%Random-effect
Without NAs3.87 (1.96-8.53)38.94%Fixed-effect
Baseline HBeAgNegative3.15 (1.88-5.16)67.75%Random-effect
Positive2.52 (1.21-7.18)0.00%Fixed-effect
HBcrAg: Hepatitis B core-related antigen; HBeAg: Hepatitis B e antigen; NA: Nucleos(t)ide analog.