Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Mar 6;18(3):e0282539. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282539

Hepatocellular carcinoma presentation and prognosis among Nigerian adults with and without HIV

Pantong M Davwar 1, Edith Okeke 1, Mary Duguru 1, David Nyam 1, Kristen Bell 2, Emuobor A Odeghe 3, Ganiat Oyeleke 3, Olufunmilayo A Lesi 3, Revika Singh 2, Kwang-Youn Kim 2, Godwin Imade 1, Alani S Akanmu 3, Atiene S Sagay 1, Folasade T Ogunsola 3, Marion G Peters 2, Lewis R Roberts 4, Lifang Hou 2, Robert L Murphy 2, Claudia A Hawkins 2,*
Editor: Matias A Avila5
PMCID: PMC9987777  PMID: 36877687

Abstract

Introduction

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an increasing cause of mortality in Nigeria among persons with HIV (PLH), as access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) improves. In this study we describe clinical, radiological, and laboratory characteristics in Nigerian adults with HCC, with and without HIV, and examine how HIV impacts survival.

Methods

This prospective observational study was conducted between August 2018 and November 2021 at two Nigerian hospitals [Jos University Teaching Hospital (JUTH) and Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH)]. Subjects ≥18 years with HCC diagnosed according to American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) criteria were included. Baseline characteristics were compared, and Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to estimate survival.

Results

213 subjects [177 (83%) without HIV and 36 (17%) with HIV (PLH)] were enrolled. Median age was 52 years (IQR 42,60) and most subjects were male (71%). 83% PLH were on antiretroviral therapy (ART). Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positivity was similar between the two groups [91/177 (51%) without HIV vs. 18/36 (50%) with HIV; p = 0.86]. 46/213 (22%) subjects had active hepatitis C (anti-HCV+/HCV RNA>10 IU/mL). Cirrhosis was more common in PLH but there were no other significant differences in clinical and tumor characteristics between the groups. Overall, 99% subjects were symptomatic and 78% in late-stage HCC. Median overall survival was significantly shorter in PLH vs. without HIV (0.98 months vs 3.02 months, HR = 1.55, 95%CI 1.02, 2.37, p = 0.04). This association was not significant after adjusting for known risk factors including gender, current alcohol use, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), albumin, and total bilirubin (HR = 1.38, 95%CI 0.84, 2.29, p = 0.21).

Conclusion

HCC presented late with an extremely poor overall prognosis, highlighting the urgent need for more intensive surveillance in Nigeria to diagnose HCC at earlier stages. Early diagnosis and management of viral hepatitis, and access to HCC therapies, could prevent early mortality among persons with HCC, especially among PLH.

Introduction

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most-common cancer and the third most-common cause of cancer-related mortality in the world [1]. HCC is a major public health problem in West Africa. In Nigeria, HCC incidence is 8.4/100,000 persons and has a nearly identical mortality rate because most people present with late-stage disease due to a lack of adequate surveillance [1, 2].

HCC is emerging as an increasing cause of mortality in persons with HIV (PLH) with increased access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) [3, 4]. In the US, PLH have been shown to have a 3–7 times higher incidence of HCC compared to those without HIV [5]. HCC incidence in PLH in West Africa has not been well characterized, despite this region having some of the highest HCC and HIV rates in the world. In Nigeria, approximately 1.9 million persons are living with HIV [6]. PLH in Nigeria also have a high prevalence of co-infection with HBV (7.0–10.0%) and HCV (1.6–6.5%), both well-known risk factors for HCC [7–10]. HBV has been found to be present in 50% of persons with HCC [11]. High rates of HCV antibody seropositivity among Nigerians with HCC have also been reported, although rates of chronic HCV infection (detectable HCV viral load) are unknown [12]. Locally, many other factors exist that substantially increase the risk of HCC including exposure to aflatoxin, use of herbal medication, dietary iron overload, excess alcohol consumption and fatty liver disease, some of which are also more prevalent in PLH [13].

In addition to the increased burden of HCC, several studies have also reported faster progression of HCC and high mortality rates in PLH, particularly those with viral hepatitis co-infection [14]. In Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) where a high burden of HIV, viral co-infections and HCC exists, there is a need to further elucidate the impact of HIV and other viral co-infections on HCC progression and survival and consider whether more aggressive surveillance strategies are needed in PLH. In this study, we describe the clinical, radiological, and laboratory features of HCC in Nigerian adults with and without HIV, and compare median survival in HCC between the two groups. Understanding these differences could better help inform treatment and surveillance strategies that could improve morbidity and mortality from HCC in this high-risk population.

Methods

This prospective study included a cohort of adults with newly diagnosed HCC with and without HIV enrolled in an NCI-funded study examining epigenomic biomarkers associated with HIV-associated HCC (Award number U54CA221205). Subjects with HCC were recruited between August 2018 and November 2021 from the Hepatology clinics and inpatients wards of both the Jos University Teaching Hospital (JUTH) and Lagos University Teaching Hospitals (LUTH), and their affiliated sites in Nigeria.

Inclusion criteria were: a) ≥18yrs; b) confirmed to have HCC diagnosed by ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) scan. Exclusion criteria were: a) other known primary or secondary malignancy either currently or within the past 5 years. HCC was diagnosed based on radiologic criteria using triple phase CT according to the AASLD 2018 guidelines [15], which was offered to all patients who had a ≥1cm nodule on ultrasound and/or risk factors for HCC (i.e. HIV, HBV, HCV infection or cirrhosis of any etiology), and/or other symptoms and signs suggestive of HCC. CT findings of arterial phase hyperenhancement and washout during the portal venous phase were considered diagnostic. A liver biopsy was not required for diagnosis, and was not performed in any of the study subjects.

All study subjects confirmed with HCC by CT were provided with information about the study and asked to sign an informed consent. At their enrollment visit, participants underwent a physical exam by the study physician and laboratory testing for HIV (ELISA and Western Blot); complete blood count (CBC), comprehensive chemistry panel including albumin, total bilirubin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), viral serology including hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and antibody (anti-HBs) and HCV antibody (anti-HCV) using Lumi Quick diagnostics rapid test kits, and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). Plasma samples were also collected for methylomic analysis. Patients who were confirmed HIV seropositive, also had CD4+ T cell count (flow cytometry (Partec GmbH, Munster, Germany), and HIV RNA Roche Ampliprep TaqMan (Roche Diagnostics Germany; lower limit of detection (LLD) of 20 cp/ml) testing performed and were referred immediately to the HIV care and treatment clinic at their respective institutions for further treatment and care. Confirmatory HBV and HCV viral load testing on stored specimens was performed on all HBsAg and anti-HCV positive participants using the Cepheid GeneXpert® system. Participants received the usual care and treatment for HCC, HIV, viral hepatitis and other health conditions, according to Nigerian national and international guidelines [16, 17]. Sorafenib is offered to eligible patients with advanced disease and Child Pugh Turcotte (CPT) A where available. However, none of the study participants in the study received sorafenib or any other interventional therapies due to lack of access and/or high cost of the medication.

Data collection

An interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect the following demographic, clinical, and tumor data including: age, sex, date of study visit; (ii) BMI, WHO stage (persons with HIV only); (iii) symptoms associated with HCC and/or advanced liver disease i.e. jaundice, abdominal swelling, hematemesis, leg swelling, slow mentation, or confusion; (iv) other medical history; (v) quantification of alcohol intake and history of herbal medicine use; (vi) family history of HCC; (vii) HBV, HCV and HIV treatment history if HBV, HCV and/or HIV positive; (viii) HCC tumor characteristics (from CT) including size of tumor, number of tumors, vascular invasion, presence or absence of ascites, portal vein thrombosis; (xi) antiviral therapies for HBV and HCV, type and duration; (xii) ART therapy and duration (HIV-infected patients on ART); CPT score and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging were calculated based on available lab, radiologic, and clinical data by a physician.

Follow up

All study subjects were followed for 1 year. Subjects’ survival was collected monthly via phone calls to participants or participants next of kin or in person if they attended a clinical visit. Date of death was recorded to the nearest possible date if the exact date was unknown. Cause of death was obtained from next of kin or clinical record if they died while hospitalized.

Ethical approval

We obtained written informed consent from each participant in this study. The study was approved by the Jos University and Lagos University Teaching Hospitals Ethics Committees and the Northwestern University Institutional Review Board.

Statistical analysis

Baseline characteristics were summarized using descriptive statistics including median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous variables, and frequencies and counts for categorical variables. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare continuous variables and Fisher’s exact tests were used to compare categorical variables. Overall survival (OS) (primary outcome) was defined as time from study enrollment to death with patients censored at date of last available follow-up. To illustrate differences in OS between HIV status groups, Kaplan-Meier curves were presented and differences between groups were compared using the log-rank test. Association between HIV status and OS was assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model before and after adjusting for baseline predictors of interest including gender, current alcohol use, AFP, albumin, and total bilirubin. Results were presented using hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Statistical analyses and corresponding figures were generated using R statistical environment (v 4.0.2) along with extension packages survival (v 3.2–13) and survminer (v 0.4.9) [18, 19].

Results

Entry characteristics of the study population

213 participants [177 (83%) without HIV, 36 (17%) with HIV; median age (years)52 (IQR = 42, 60); 71% male] were included in this analysis. 109 (52%) were HBsAg positive; 8/109 (7%) were HBeAg positive. HBsAg seropositivity was similar between those with and without HIV. Among HBsAg positives, median HBV DNA was significantly higher in subjects without HIV [36,100 (336–606,750) IU/ml] vs. subjects with HIV [47 (0, 461) IU/ml]; p<0.01. Among subjects with HIV, 30 (83%) were on ART with a median duration of treatment of 8 years (IQR 2,12). ART therapy typically included the anti-HBV active drug tenofovir. 75/213 (36.4%) participants were anti-HCV positive; 46/213 had chronic HCV infection defined as anti-HCV positive with HCV VL >10 IU/L. The proportion with chronic HCV did not differ by HIV status. In participants with HIV, the median CD4+ T cell count at enrollment was 284 (IQR 137, 356) cells/mm3 and 15/28 (54%) with a HIV viral load measurement were HIV virologically suppressed (HIV VL <20 IU/L). Among all participants the prevalence of co-morbidities was low (20%). Almost all (99%) participants presented with ≥1 clinical symptom related to their liver cancer (ie. jaundice, anorexia, weakness, abdominal swelling, abdominal pain, leg swelling, weight loss). 78% presented with a CPT ≥B and 89% with at least one clinical finding consistent with advanced liver disease (ie. ascites, encephalopathy). 78% of participants were classified as BCLC Stage C or D. Staging and clinical symptoms did not differ significantly between persons with and without HIV. The median number of lesions on CT imaging was 6 (IQR 3,11); largest liver mass diameter(cm) was 7.60 (4.7, 11.5) and tumor burden was >50% in 65% of HCC patients. The proportion with cirrhosis detected on CT was significantly higher among subjects without HIV [108 (71%)] vs. those with HIV [13 (46%)]; p = 0.02. Median AFP was also higher in subjects without HIV [1000 (IQR 83, 1000)] vs. those with HIV [505 (IQR 6,1000)]; p = 0.06 [Table 1].

Table 1. Characteristics of HCC study participants by HIV status at study entry.

Parameter Overall HIV negative HIV positive P value
Total Participants (%) 213 177 (83) 36 (17)
Demographics
Age,(yrs) median (IQR) 52 (42, 60) 52 (40, 60) 51 (43, 56) 0.74
Males (n, %) 150 (71) 131 (74) 19 (53) 0.02
BMI, median (kg/m2)(IQR) 22 (20, 24) 22 (20, 24) 22 (20, 25) 0.80
Highest level of education (n, %) 0.79
No formal education 28 (13) 25 (14) 3 (8)
Primary 44 (21) 36 (21) 8 (22) `
Secondary 51 (24) 43 (25) 8 (22)
Tertiary (college and above) 88 (42) 71 (41) 17 (47)
Occupation, employed (n, %) 202 (95) 169 (96) 33 (92) 0.40
Marital status (n, %) <0.001
 Single 17 (8%) 15 (9) 2 (6)
 Married 181 (85) 157 (89) 24 (67)
 Divorced 1 (0.5) 1 (0.6) 0 (0)
 Widowed 9 (4) 3 (2) 6 (17)
 Separated 4 (2) 0 (0) 4 (11)
Clinical
Family history HCC (n, %) 16 (8) 15 (9) 1 (3) 0.62
Current alcohol use (n, %) 45 (21) 36 (20) 9 (25) 0.25
Clinical symptoms ≥1 (n, %) 177 (99%) 147 (99%) 30 (100) 1.0
Advanced liver disease > = 1 symptom‡ (n, %) 162 (89%) 137 (91%) 25 (81%) 0.12
Child Pugh Turcotte Score (CPT) (n, %) 0.62
 A = 5–6 45 (22) 35 (21) 10 (29)
 B = 7–9 75 (37) 63 (38) 12 (34)
 C = 10–15 82 (41) 69 (41) 13 (37)
BCLC stage n (%) 0.23
 Stage 0 1 (1) 1 (1) 0 (0)
 Stage A 6 (4) 6 (3) 3 (10) `
 Stage B 38 (19) 33 (20) 5 (17)
 Stage C 59 (30) 51 (30) 8 (28)
 Stage D 94 (48) 81 (48) 13 (45)
Laboratory
HBsAg positive (n, %) 109 (52) 91 (53) 18 (50) 0.86
HBeAg (n,%) † 8 (7) 8 (9) 0 (0) 0.36
Anti-HBe (n, %)† 60 (55) 52 (57) 8 (44) 0.31
HBV DNA IU/mL median (IQR) 12,850 (84–388,921) 36,100 (336–606,750) 47 (0, 461) <0.001
HBV DNA<10 IU/mL (n, %)† 8 (7) 3 (3) 5 (28) 0.005
HBV active antivirals† 47 (43%) 38 (42%) 9/18 (50%)
Anti-HCV positive (n, %) 75 (36) 67 (39) 8 (23) 0.08
HCV RNA IU/mL median (IQR) 54,150 (0–470,750) 21,800 (0–339,000) 5,488,000 (179,015–1,032,500) 0.17
HCV RNA≥10 IU/mL (n, %) 46 (61) 40 (60) 6 (75) 0.66
ALT (iu/l)(median, IQR) 46 (25,75) 45 (24, 75) 50 (30, 77) 0.46
AST (iu/l)(median, IQR) 159 (81, 324) 162 (83, 321) 129 (77, 462) 0.95
Albumin(g/l) (median, IQR) 31 (26, 36) 31 (26, 37) 30 (27, 35) 0.84
Total bilirubin (mmol/l)(median, IQR) 20 (7, 83) 20 (8, 74) 22 (6, 175) 0.60
INR (median, IQR) 2 (1,3) 2 (1,3) 1 (1,2) 0.19
Creatinineu(umol/l) (median, IQR) 70 (55, 91) 69 (54, 89) 71 (58, 118) 0.33
Platelets(x103/ul) (median, IQR) 227 (167, 320) 219 (160, 308) 260 (191, 340) 0.08
AFP(ng)≥1000 vs.<1000 106 (54) 91 (55) 15 (48) 0.56
HIV patients only
On ART - - 30 (83)
ART treatment duration (median yrs, IQR) - - 8 (2,12) -
CD4 count cells/mm3 (median, IQR) - - 284 (137, 356) -
HIV VL <20 IU/L - 15 (54) -
Radiologic
Cirrhosis (n, %) 121 (67) 108 (71) 13 (46) 0.02
Ascites (n, %) 104 (58) 91 (60) 13 (45) 0.29
Varices (n, %) 5 (3) 4 (3) 1 (4) 0.16
Number of lesions, (median, IQR) 6 (3,11) 7.0 (4,11) 4 (1,11) 0.16
Liver mass(cm) diameter, (median, IQR) 8 (5,12) 8 (5,12) 7 (6,13) 0.89
Tumor burden >50% 88 (65) 77 (66) 11 (58) 0.61
Portal vein invasion, n (%) 40 (23) 37 (25) 3 (11) 0.16
Portal vein thrombosis, n (%) 34 (19) 30 (20) 4 (15) 0.41
Open in a new tab

Abbreviations: na = not applicable; IQR = interquartile range; BCLC = Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; ART antiretroviral therapy; BMI body mass index; HCC hepatocellular carcinoma; AFP alpha fetoprotein

† denominator = all HBsAg positive patients

‡ Symptoms of advanced liver disease ≥ 1: patient had at least one of the following symptoms marked yes i) Jaundice ii) abdominal swelling iii) irrational talk iv) Hematemesis v)Leg swelling vi) slow mentation vii) confusion

Overall survival outcomes

By the end of follow up, survival information was available for 191 subjects. Of those, 27/33 (82%) subjects with HIV and 119/158 (75%) subjects without HIV had died [HR = 1.55, 95%CI 1.02, 2.37, p = 0.04]. Median overall survival (OS) was 2.73 (95%CI 1.91, 3.94) months and was significantly shorter among subjects with HIV [HR = 0.99, 95%CI 0.59, 2.96] than those without HIV [HR = 3.02, 95%CI 2.1, 5.45]; p = 0.04 (Fig 1). Median survival declined with increasing BCLC stage (Fig 2). Among those in whom death data was available, the most common cause of death was related to tumor progression or complications (98%). 8% died from variceal bleeding.

Fig 1. Overall survival by HIV status.

Fig 1

Open in a new tab

Fig 2. Overall survival by BCLC.

Fig 2

Open in a new tab

Predictors of overall survival

Using the Cox proportional hazards model, HIV was found to be significantly associated with overall survival at the univariate level [HR = 1.55, 95%CI 1.02, 2.37, p = 0.04]. However, after adjusting for other well-known risk factors associated with mortality in persons with HCC (gender, current alcohol use, AFP, albumin, and total bilirubin), the association between HIV and survival was no longer significant [HR = 1.36, 95%CI 0.82, 2.24, p = 0.24]. Albumin [HR = 0.96, 95%CI 0.94, 0.99; p = 0.003] and AFP level ≥1000ng/mL [HR = 1.63, 95%CI 1.81,2.3; p = <0.01] were the only significant predictors of survival, holding all other variables constant. HCV was not associated with overall survival [Table 2].

Table 2. Predictors associated with overall survival.

Predictor Univariate P value Multivariate P value
HR (CI) HR (CI)
Age 1.01 (0.998, 1.02) 0.10 - -
Sex (Male vs. Female) 1.23 (0.84, 1.79) 0.28 1.43 (0.94, 2.15) 0.10
Current alcohol use (Yes vs. No) 1.03 (0.7, 1.51) 0.89 0.66 (0.43, 1.03) 0.07
HBsAg status (Positive vs. Negative) 0.82 (0.59, 1.13) 0.23 - -
HCV RNA 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) 0.46 - -
AFP(ng) ≥1000 vs. <1000 1.66 (1.81, 2.33) <0.01 1.63 (1.15, 2.3) <0.01
Child Pugh Turcotte Score
 B vs A 1.10 (0.68, 1.71) 0.75 - -
 C vs A 1.49 (0.95, 2.33) 0.08 - -
Albumin 0.97 (0.95, 0.99) 0.01 0.96 (0.94,0.99) <0.01
Total bilirubin 1.00 (1, 1.00) 0.02 1.00 (1.00,1.00) 0.16
HIV (Positive vs. Negative 1.55 (1.02, 2.37) 0.04 1.38 (0.84, 2.29) 0.24
Total tumor burden >50% vs. <50% 1.41 (0.92, 2.18) 0.12 - -
Open in a new tab

Note: Univariable analyses and multivariable analyses (including Gender, Alcohol Use, AFP, Albumin, Total Bilirubin, HIV status) were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Unadjusted p-values were calculated using Cox’s regression. Hazard ratio (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) are presented.

Discussion

In this study, comparing host and tumor characteristics and prognosis in Nigerian adults with HCC with and without HIV, we found most individuals presented with symptomatic late-stage disease. Despite few clinical, or radiologic differences at presentation between the two groups, persons with HIV had a significantly shorter median survival compared to those without HIV, although this was not significant after adjusting for other HCC mortality risk factors. Other independent predictors of mortality included high AFP and low albumin levels, which have been reported previously in association with advanced HCC and HCC-related death [20, 21].

Our data adds to a growing number of studies reporting an adverse effect of HIV on HCC outcomes, several of which have reported similarly reduced survival among PLH and an independent effect of HIV on mortality [14, 20–33]. The mechanisms underlying the effects of HIV on HCC are not clear. Some have suggested the poor prognosis observed in those with HIV may be due to the long-term effects of HIV and its associated immune dysregulation on tumor biology, causing tumors to be more aggressive [10]. Indeed, a few studies have reported a higher prevalence of more aggressive features in PLH such as infiltrative tumors and portal invasion, however, most of these have been in persons co-infected with HCV [23]. In our study, we did not distinguish between infiltrative vs. other tumor types. However, tumor burden >50% and portal vein invasion was similar in subjects with and without HIV.

Others have suggested that more limited access to cancer therapies and treatment ineligibility may account for the poorer prognosis among those with HIV and HCC [20]. Interestingly, improved access to therapies among PLH did not translate into better prognostic outcomes in two large studies where a higher mortality was observed in PLH [22, 24]. Treatment intent also did not differ between persons with and without HIV in a large VA study where PLH had 37% higher risk of death [25]. In our study, none of the participants received any HCC specific treatments, thus access to treatment could not have accounted for the observed mortality differences.

Whether stage of HIV disease and HIV viremia at the time of diagnosis contributes to the earlier mortality observed in PLH remains debated. In one of the larger HCC outcome studies where a difference in mortality (higher in PLH) was observed, there was no independent association between CD4+ T cell count and death in PLH. However, median survival was longer in those with undetectable HIV RNA levels compared to those with viremia [22]. In another study where no differences in median survival between persons with HCC with and without HIV were observed, the proportion of patients with HIV virologic suppression and CD4>200 was 87%, suggesting that virologic suppression could have improved outcomes in PLH [27]. Although over 80% of PLH in our study were on ART treatment, not all were virologically suppressed. Unfortunately, due to small numbers, we were unable to determine the effect of virologic non-suppression on death in this cohort.

In both cohorts, regardless of HIV status, the prognosis was extremely poor and well over two-thirds (69%) died within the year. Overall survival was much shorter compared to other cohorts in Europe and North Africa [22, 23], likely because most participants presented with late-stage disease and no treatments, even supportive, were available. The WHO, AASLD and several other professional societies, currently recommend surveillance using semiannual abdominal ultrasonography in high-risk patients which includes patients with cirrhosis and other select groups, including Africans with chronic HBV infection at any age [15]. Ultrasound screening for HCC has been shown to improve early tumor detection, receipt of curative treatment, and overall survival in at-risk patients [10]. However, screening for HCC is rarely practiced as ultrasound is seldom available outside of academic settings and provider knowledge about HCC surveillance practices is poor [34].

In addition to the observed effects of HIV on HCC mortality in this study, another notable finding in both those with and without HIV, was the high prevalence (22%) of chronic HCV co-infection (defined as anti-HCV positive with HCV VL>10 IU/mL). Our study is one of the first to confirm active HCV infection with molecular testing in West Africa in persons with HCC. The prevalence of HCV among persons in this study far exceeds the national prevalence in the general population (1.73%) [3], suggesting HCV is an important risk factor for HCC in this region. In Europe and North America, HCV contributes to 30–60% cases of HCC countries [35–37] and is a leading indication for liver transplant in persons with HIV [38]. Until now, HCV has not been recognized as a major risk factor in West Africa primarily because of a lack of available confirmatory testing for HCV and limited knowledge of HCV among healthcare providers and patients. Our results highlight the urgent need for scale up of HCV screening in persons with and without HIV in Nigeria and HCC surveillance in these high-risk individuals, as well as improved access to HCV curative therapies.

HBV was also highly prevalent in this cohort (52%), a finding not unexpected since Nigeria is a region that is considered hyperendemic for HBV, with high rates of infection in those with and without HIV (9.9%-13.2%) [39]. Previous studies have found HBV in over 60% of persons with HCC in Nigeria, similar to our data [11]. In studies from Asia, both high HBV serum DNA levels and HBeAg seropositivity have been shown to correlate with more advanced HCC disease (portal vein tumor thrombosis and extrahepatic metastases) as well as a higher mortality [40]. Our cohort had very low prevalence of HBeAg seropositivity and low median HBV viral loads, most likely due to the high prevalence of circulating HBV genotype E strains, which we and others have previously reported [41–43]. Of note, only 42% of persons with HBV were on antivirals at the time of diagnosis and 76 (70%) did not meet criteria for antiviral initiation according to AASLD guidelines [44], at the time of HCC diagnosis. Cirrhosis was absent in a third of all patients, as seen in other cohorts [45], and less common in those with HIV. The relatively high prevalence of HCC occurring in non-cirrhotic livers and young age of onset, provides more evidence of hepatocarcinogensis at earlier stages of liver disease and the need for earlier and more intensive surveillance in this setting. The high proportion of persons with HBV mono-infection and HCC who were not eligible for treatment according to guidelines, also suggests antiviral therapy should also be considered sooner in these patients or given universally to all positive HBV patients. Whether antivirals are protective against HCC arising in non-cirrhotic livers and persons with less active HBV infection, however, is still to be determined.

Limitations

There are some limitations to this study. One is the relatively small number of HIV cases (although still larger than in other African cohorts), that limits interpretation of findings. One possible explanation for the lower numbers is the shorter survival of persons with HIV, especially those not yet on ART, which would prevent late complications such as HCC from being detected before their demise. Our cohort overall, presented in late-stage HCC and had few participants with early-stage disease reflecting the lack of surveillance for HCC. Due to a lack of resources and high costs of testing, most participants with HCC could not complete a full staging work up including a chest and abdominopelvic CT to evaluate for extrahepatic metastases or bone scan to evaluate for bone metastases. As a result, BCLC staging could have been underestimated. The strengths of the study include the use of CT imaging to confirm the diagnosis of HCC, which is recommended by AASLD, and data on several other host, infection, and prognostic markers.

Conclusion

In conclusion, in one of the largest longitudinal cohort studies of HCC from West Africa to date, we showed that HIV was associated with shorter time to death and increased risk of mortality, although this was not significant after adjusting for other known risk factors including albumin and AFP. More aggressive HCC surveillance, diagnosis and treatment are desperately needed in Nigeria to improve the prognosis of this devastating disease, particularly in those infected with HIV, HBV and HCV. Special attention should be paid to improving access to treatment for HCV and HBV which account for a substantial burden of HCC in this region.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the staff and clients that participated in this study. The authors acknowledge the following study team members for their contributions: Patience Omaiye, Atta Okute; Makupu Jire; Mark Henry; Edwin Adoga.

This study was previously presented in part at the 9th Annual Symposium on Global Cancer Research March 10–11, 2021. The abstract was also selected for publication in AACR’s Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers, & Prevention special edition.

Data Availability

Data cannot be shared publicly because it contains potential identifiers on individual participants. Deidentified data are available from the Institutional Review Board at Northwestern University and the University of Jos for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data. Contact details for the NU IRB are Name: Braden Van Buskirk, Address:Arthur Rubloff Building, 7th Floor 750 N. Lake Shore Dr. Chicago, IL 60611 312-503-9338.

Funding Statement

Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute. Grant Number: NIH/NCI U54CA221205 (PI Robert Murphy, Lifting Hou) The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2018. Nov;68(6):394–424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2021. May;71(3):209–49. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Aliyu GG, Aliyu SH, Ehoche A, Dongarwar D, Yusuf RA, Aliyu MH, et al. The burden of HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C by armed conflict setting: the Nigeria aids indicator and impact survey, 2018. Annals of Global Health. 2021;87(1). doi: 10.5334/aogh.3226 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Kronfli N, Bhatnagar SR, Hull MW, Moodie EE, Cox J, Walmsley S, et al. Trends in cause-specific mortality in HIV–hepatitis C coinfection following hepatitis C treatment scale-up. AIDS (London, England). 2019. May 1;33(6):1013. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002156 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Pinato DJ, Dalla Pria A, Sharma R, Bower M. Hepatocellular carcinoma: an evolving challenge in viral hepatitis and HIV coinfection. Aids. 2017. Mar 13;31(5):603–11. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001422 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). AIDSinfo: global data on HIV epidemiology and response. 2020.
  • 7.Ajuwon BI, Yujuico I, Roper K, Richardson A, Sheel M, Lidbury BA. Hepatitis B virus infection in Nigeria: a systematic review and meta-analysis of data published between 2010 and 2019. BMC infectious diseases. 2021. Dec;21(1):1–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sonderup MW, Afihene M, Ally R, Apica B, Awuku Y, Cunha L, et al. Hepatitis C in sub-Saharan Africa: the current status and recommendations for achieving elimination by 2030. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2017. Dec 1;2(12):910–9. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(17)30249-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Janevska D, Chaloska-Ivanova V, Janevski V. Hepatocellular carcinoma: risk factors, diagnosis and treatment. Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences. 2015. Dec 15;3(4):732. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2015.111 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Frenette CT, Isaacson AJ, Bargellini I, Saab S, Singal AG. A practical guideline for hepatocellular carcinoma screening in patients at risk. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovations, Quality & Outcomes. 2019. Sep 1;3(3):302–10. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2019.04.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Okeke E, Mark Davwar P, Mullen B, Duguru M, Agbaji O, Sagay A, et al. The impact of HIV on hepatocellular cancer survival in Nigeria. Tropical Medicine & International Health. 2021. Mar;26(3):335–42. doi: 10.1111/tmi.13532 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Adesegun OA, Olaniran OH, Bamidele E, Inyang JN, Adegbe M, Binuyo TO, et al. HIV-hepatitis co-infection in a rural community in Northern Nigeria. Pan African Medical Journal. 2020. Aug 27;36(1). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Tognarelli J, Ladep NG, Crossey MM, Okeke E, Duguru M, Banwat E, et al. Reasons why West Africa continues to be a hotbed for hepatocellular carcinoma. Nigerian medical journal: journal of the Nigeria Medical Association. 2015. Jul;56(4):231. doi: 10.4103/0300-1652.165032 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Negri F, Missale G, Degli Antoni A, Porta C. Hepatocellular cancer therapy in patients with HIV infection: Disparities in cancer care, trials enrolment, and cancer-related research. Translational Oncology. 2021. Sep 1;14(9):101153. doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2021.101153 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Marrero JA, Kulik LM, Sirlin CB, Zhu AX, Finn RS, Abecassis MM, et al. Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 2018 Practice Guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology. 2018. Aug;68(2):723–50. doi: 10.1002/hep.29913 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ndububa D, Ojo O, Lesi O, Samaila A, Ngim O. Management of Hepatocellular carcinoma. Nigerian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2015;7(2):77–92. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Research EO, Cancer TO, European Association For The Study Of The Liver. EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Journal of hepatology. 2012. Apr;56(4):908–43. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2011.12.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Therneau T (2021). _A Package for Survival Analysis in R_. R package version 3.2–13, <URL:https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survival>.
  • 19.Alboukadel Kassambara, Marcin Kosinski and Przemyslaw Biecek (2021). survminer: Drawing Survival Curves using ’ggplot2’. R package version 0.4.9. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survminer
  • 20.Pinato DJ, Allara E, Chen TY, Trevisani F, Minguez B, Zoli M, et al. The influence of HIV infection on the natural history of hepatocellular carcinoma: results from a global multi-cohort study. American Society of Clinical Oncology. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bräu N, Fox RK, Xiao P, Marks K, Naqvi Z, Taylor LE, et al. Presentation and outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma in HIV-infected patients: a US–Canadian multicenter study. Journal of hepatology. 2007. Oct 1;47(4):527–37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Berretta M, Garlassi E, Cacopardo B, Cappellani A, Guaraldi G, Cocchi S, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in HIV‐infected patients: Check early, treat hard. The oncologist. 2011. Sep;16(9):1258–69. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2010-0400 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lewin M, Gelu-Simeon M, Ostos M, Boufassa F, Sobesky R, Teicher E, et al. Imaging features and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis who are coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus. Radiology. 2015. Nov;277(2):443–53. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2015141500 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Puoti M, Bruno R, Soriano V, Donato F, Gaeta GB, Quinzan GP, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in HIV-infected patients: epidemiological features, clinical presentation and outcome. Aids. 2004. Nov 19;18(17):2285–93. doi: 10.1097/00002030-200411190-00009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Torgersen J, Taddei TH, Park LS, Carbonari DM, Kallan MJ, Mitchell Richards K, et al. Differences in pathology, staging, and treatment between HIV+ and uninfected patients with microscopically confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. 2020. Jan;29(1):71–8. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-0503 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Maponga TG, Glashoff RH, Vermeulen H, Robertson B, Burmeister S, Bernon M, et al. Hepatitis B virus-associated hepatocellular carcinoma in South Africa in the era of HIV. BMC gastroenterology. 2020. Dec;20(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/s12876-020-01372-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Lim C, Goutte N, Gervais A, Vullierme MP, Valla DC, Degos F, et al. Standardized care management ensures similar survival rates in HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes. 2012. Dec 15;61(5):581–7. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e31826ebdc7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Zhao H, Li J, Li S, Wang Y, Zhou J, Liu L, et al. Comparative Analysis of Presentation and Outcome After Liver Resection of Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma With and Without HIV. JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes. 2021. Mar 1;86(3):361–8. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002561 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Saud LR, Chagas AL, Maccali C, Pinto PV, Horvat N, Alencar RS, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in patients coinfected with hepatitis B or C and HIV: more aggressive tumor behavior?. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2021. Apr 1;33(4):583–8. doi: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000002057 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Gelu-Simeon M, Lewin M, Ostos M, Bayan T, Beso Delgado M, Teicher E, et al. Prognostic factors of survival in HIV/HCV co-infected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: The CARCINOVIC Cohort. Liver International. 2019. Jan;39(1):136–46. doi: 10.1111/liv.13921 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Merchante N, Rodríguez-Fernández M, Figueruela B, Rodríguez-Arrondo F, Revollo B, Ibarra S, et al. Impact of HIV on the survival of hepatocellular carcinoma in hepatitis C virus-infected patients. AIDS. 2020. Aug 1;34(10):1497–507. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002578 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Di Benedetto F, Tarantino G, Ercolani G, Baccarani U, Montalti R, De Ruvo N, et al. Multicenter italian experience in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in HIV-infected patients. The oncologist. 2013. May;18(5):592–9. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0255 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Salmon-Ceron D, Nahon P, Layese R, Bourcier V, Sogni P, Bani-Sadr F, et al. Human immunodeficiency virus/hepatitis C Virus (HCV) co-infected patients with cirrhosis are no longer at higher risk for hepatocellular carcinoma or end-stage liver disease as compared to HCV mono-infected patients. Hepatology. 2019. Sep;70(3):939–54. doi: 10.1002/hep.30400 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Davwar PM, Ewelike ID, Owoseni O, Musa Y, Manko M, Eboikpomwen JO, et al. The practice of hepatocellular cancer surveillance in Nigeria. Jos Journal of Medicine. 2019;13(2):36–42. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Ioannou GN, Bryson CL, Weiss NS, Miller R, Scott JD, Boyko EJ. The prevalence of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Hepatology. 2013. Jan;57(1):249–57. doi: 10.1002/hep.25800 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Rosenthal E, Roussillon C, Salmon-Céron D, Georget A, Hénard S, Huleux T, et al. Liver-related deaths in HIV-infected patients between 1995 and 2010 in F rance: the M ortavic 2010 study in collaboration with the A gence N ationale de R echerche sur le SIDA (ANRS) EN 20 M ortalité 2010 survey. HIV medicine. 2015. Apr;16(4):230–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.El-Serag HB, Kanwal F. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States: where are we? Where do we go?. Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.). 2014. Nov;60(5):1767. doi: 10.1002/hep.27222 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Sahasrabuddhe VV, Shiels MS, McGlynn KA, Engels EA. The risk of hepatocellular carcinoma among individuals with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome in the United States. Cancer. 2012. Dec 15;118(24):6226–33. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27694 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Dakurah OB, Tamandjou CR, Zunza M, Preiser W, Maponga TG. Viral hepatitis associated hepatocellular carcinoma on the African continent, the past, present, and future: a systematic review. BMC cancer. 2021. Dec;21(1):1–3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Chen J, Shi X, Luo T, Zhao Y, Ye J, Bai T, et al. The correlations between hepatitis B virus infection and hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus or extrahepatic metastasis. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2020. Mar 1;32(3):373–7. doi: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000001514 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Ahmad AE, Bakari AG, Musa BO, Mustapha SK, Jamoh BY, Abdullahi IN, et al. Pattern of prevalent hepatitis B virus genotypes in Zaria, Nigeria. The Nigerian postgraduate medical journal. 2019. Apr;26(2):80. doi: 10.4103/npmj.npmj_59_19 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Grant J, Agbaji O, Kramvis A, Yousif M, Auwal MA, Penugonda S, et al. Hepatitis B virus sequencing and liver fibrosis evaluation in HIV/HBV co-infected Nigerians. Tropical Medicine & International Health. 2017. Jun;22(6):744–54. doi: 10.1111/tmi.12873 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Wongjarupong N, Yonli AT, Nagalo BM, Djigma FW, Somda SK, Hassan MA, et al. Characteristics of patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection with genotype E predominance in Burkina Faso. Hepatology communications. 2020. Dec;4(12):1781–92. doi: 10.1002/hep4.1595 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Terrault NA, Lok AS, McMahon BJ, Chang KM, Hwang JP, Jonas MM, et al. Update on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic hepatitis B: AASLD 2018 hepatitis B guidance. Hepatology. 2018. Apr;67(4):1560–99. doi: 10.1002/hep.29800 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Chayanupatkul M, Omino R, Mittal S, Kramer JR, Richardson P, Thrift AP, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in the absence of cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection. Journal of hepatology. 2017. Feb 1;66(2):355–62. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2016.09.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Matias A Avila

16 Nov 2022

PONE-D-22-28133Hepatocellular carcinoma presentation and prognosis among Nigerian adults with and without HIV.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hawkins,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that fully addresses the points raised by the reviewers.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 31 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Matias A Avila, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. 

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: 

"Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award number U54CA221205. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. 

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: 

"Grant Number: NIH/NCI U54CA221205 (PI Robert Murphy, Lifting Hou)

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. 

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

5. Please amend the manuscript submission data (via Edit Submission) to include author "Atiene Sagay".

6. Please amend your list of authors on the manuscript to ensure that each author is linked to an affiliation. Authors’ affiliations should reflect the institution where the work was done (if authors moved subsequently, you can also list the new affiliation stating “current affiliation:….” as necessary).

7. We note that you have included the phrase “data not shown” in your manuscript. Unfortunately, this does not meet our data sharing requirements. PLOS does not permit references to inaccessible data. We require that authors provide all relevant data within the paper, Supporting Information files, or in an acceptable, public repository. Please add a citation to support this phrase or upload the data that corresponds with these findings to a stable repository (such as Figshare or Dryad) and provide and URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers that may be used to access these data. Or, if the data are not a core part of the research being presented in your study, we ask that you remove the phrase that refers to these data.

8. Please include a separate caption for each figure in your manuscript.

9. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 2 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear colleagues,

This study compares patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with or without concomitant Human Immunodeficiency Virus. 213 patients were prospectively enrolled, and clinical characteristics and survival is reported. The first aim is to compare the survival between groups. Other aims are to compare different clinical characteristics.

Main comments:

1. The multivariate survival analysis shows us the main endpoint, and it should be the main conclusion. BCLC should be included, as you show in figure 2 as related with survival. AFP cut at 1000 seems to be confusing, as it is the highest value reported. We don’t know the cut value of albumin. Altogether could change the results. Consider pointing out in the methods and abstract that this is the primary endpoint.

2. Demographics about late-stage diagnosis, poor access to curative treatments, coinfection with HCV and HBV, as well as other comorbidities are very important information that must be reported. It seems that HIV+ or HIV- HCC could have different behavior or may have different relationship with healthcare. For instance: HIV- are diagnosed more frequently with ChildPugh score C, and HIV+ are more frequently diagnosed in BCLC A stage and less cirrhotic.

Minor comments:

1. Line 17: cirrhosis is more frequent in HIV-. Following the same idea, it seems that there is more child-pugh C. Please note that BCLC-D include child-pugh C score patients, so consider reviewing only 24 HIV negative patients are BCLC-D when 34 HIV negative patients are child pugh score C.

2. Line 64: exlcusion criteria include other malignancies and they are usually related to HIV, so it may create a confuse factor.

3. Line 81-82: For me it’s not clear if patients enrolled are considered for sorafenib or not, and the reason. I think the access to systemic treatment is a key point in this report.

4. Line 121: please report the data and reference tables and figures.

I think this is a very interesting report. It is pointing out the situation of HCC in Nigeria, which is too different of US or European Countries. I think it is extremely important to publish this data in a good journal, so it is a well conducted prospective cohort study. May be it can improve the statistical analysis, but it would be very interesting for all of the people treating HCC to know the behavior in Nigeria.

Reviewer #2: In this study, authors present a descriptive analysis of HCC in Nigerian population. Describes demographics, tumor characteristics, Virus B or C infection, liver function, and HIV infection, and compares characteristics and overall survival between HIV positive and HIV negative patients. The main result of this study is that the majority of patients (70%) are diagnosed at intermediate or advance stage, any patient could received treatment for the HCC and the survival was very dissapointing.

Major issues: HCC diagnosis is based on AASLD guidelines, that states the diagnosis of HCC based on radiological enhancement characteristics. However, this radiological diagnosis " cannot be made by imaging in patients without cirrhosis, even if enhancement and washout are present, and biopsy is required in these cases". In the present study, in one third of the patients, cirrhosis was absent, but no biopsy was performed. This could provide a misdiagnosis in some cases, and liver nodules included as HCC could correspond to othere lesions, such as intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma or others. This remains an important issue when analysing survival.

Minor issues. Even though Sorafenib was offered to eligible patitns with advanced disease when available, none patients received sorafenib. Which was the reason?

Units for variables are missing along the text and in the tables. Above all, it remains necessary in tumor diameter, lesions are sized in cm or in mm?

In the figures, legends are referred as Arm 1 HCC+patients, suggesting as if there were and Arm 2. It seems like coming from other analysis....

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Carles Fabregat-Franco

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Mar 6;18(3):e0282539. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282539.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0

14 Feb 2023

Reviewer 1 Main Comments

1. The multivariate survival analysis shows us the main endpoint, and it should be the main conclusion. BCLC should be included, as you show in figure 2 as related with survival.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this important point. We revised the conclusions to state the main findings of the multivariate analysis more clearly. BCLC was not included in the multivariate analysis because the proportional hazards assumption was not met with this variable. This was also true with the updated BCLC data.

2. AFP cut at 1000 seems to be confusing, as it is the highest value reported. We don’t know the cut value of albumin. Altogether could change the results. Consider pointing out in the methods and abstract that this is the primary endpoint.

Response: Thank you for this comment. The table reports AFP as median and IQR, therefore 1000 is not the highest value reported. We revised table 1 to report AFP as a categorical rather than continuous value (>1000 vs. 1000) to avoid any confusion. 54% of the total cohort had AFP levels >1000. AFP was not the primary outcome of this study. OS was the primary outcome of this study which we have better clarified at line 113.

3. Demographics about late-stage diagnosis, poor access to curative treatments, coinfection with HCV and HBV, as well as other comorbidities are very important information that must be reported. It seems that HIV+ or HIV- HCC could have different behavior or may have different relationship with healthcare. For instance: HIV- are diagnosed more frequently with ChildPugh score C, and HIV+ are more frequently diagnosed in BCLC A stage and less cirrhotic.

Response: We agree with these comments. We were able to collect comprehensive data on clinical and radiologic characteristics that could be used to determine stage of disease as well as other co-morbidities that are known to be associated with liver cancer such as family history and viral hepatitis B and C co-infection. None of our study participants had access to oral chemotherapies (sorafenib) or interventional (surgical or non-surgical) procedures. The proportions in each CPT class/BCLC stage did not differ significantly between those with and without HIV. (Table 1). Thus, even a different relationship with healthcare, which was not measured but presumed to be better among persons with HIV, was unlikely to have improved the likelihood of getting an intervention or being diagnosed earlier.

Reviewer 1 Minor Comments

1. Line 17: cirrhosis is more frequent in HIV-. Following the same idea, it seems that there is more child-pugh C. Please note that BCLC-D include child-pugh C score patients, so consider reviewing only 24 HIV negative patients are BCLC-D when 34 HIV negative patients are child pugh score C.

Response: We appreciate the reviewer bringing this discrepancy to our attention. We went back and reviewed all of our CPT and BCLC data and found that some of the BCLC and CPT scores had been incorrectly calculated. These have now been corrected. Additional scores could also be calculated for persons who had missing data at the time of the previous analysis. (Table 1.)

2. Line 64: exlcusion criteria include other malignancies and they are usually related to HIV, so it may create a confuse factor.

Response: Exclusion criteria for this study included any current or past malignancy whether related to HIV or not. We further clarified this at line 64. We are not sure what was meant by ‘create a confuse factor’ but would be happy to respond to this once clarified.

3. Line 81-82: For me it’s not clear if patients enrolled are considered for sorafenib or not, and the reason. I think the access to systemic treatment is a key point in this report.

Response: Thank you for this comment. Unfortunately, none of the participants were able to access sorafenib in this study due to unavailability or high costs of the medication. We further clarified this in lines 83-84.

4. Line 121: please report the data and reference tables and figures.

Response:Table 1 is referenced at line 138 at the end of the first paragraph which summarizes all the data in this table. Figures 1 and 2 are referenced at lines 142 and 144 respectively.

Reviewer 2 Main Comments

1. HCC diagnosis is based on AASLD guidelines, that states the diagnosis of HCC based on radiological enhancement characteristics. However, this radiological diagnosis " cannot be made by imaging in patients without cirrhosis, even if enhancement and washout are present, and biopsy is required in these cases". In the present study, in one third of the patients, cirrhosis was absent, but no biopsy was performed. This could provide a misdiagnosis in some cases, and liver nodules included as HCC could correspond to othere lesions, such as intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma or others. This remains an important issue when analysing survival.

Response: Thank you for this comment and we acknowledge this is an area where there is some disagreement among experts. AASLD guidelines that were used for this study are considered equivalent to those used in LI-RADS 5. LI-RADs is designed for use in livers at risk for developing HCC including cirrhosis and viral infections like HBV without cirrhosis. Liver biopsies are not required for confirmation of diagnosis in LI-RADs 5. Our study population was one that was very high risk with >50% HBsAg seropositive and 22% with active HCV infection, therefore we believe that the risk of misdiagnosis when applying this criterion was extremely low.

Reviewer 2 Minor Comments

1. Even though Sorafenib was offered to eligible patitns with advanced disease when available, none patients received sorafenib. Which was the reason?

Response: Unfortunately, none of the participants were able to access sorafenib in this study due to unavailability or high costs of the medication. We further clarified this in lines 83-84.

2. Units for variables are missing along the text and in the tables. Above all, it remains necessary in tumor diameter, lesions are sized in cm or in mm?

Response: Thank you for this comment. We have added units and measurements to Tables 1 and 2.

3. In the figures, legends are referred as Arm 1 HCC+patients, suggesting as if there were and Arm 2. It seems like coming from other analysis....

Response: The reviewers are correct, HCC patients in this analysis were participants enrolled in a larger study of persons with HIV with (Arm 1) and without (Arms 2, 3) HCC. We have revised the legend to make this less confusing.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewer Comments & Response 2.4.docx

Click here for additional data file. (17.5KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Matias A Avila

17 Feb 2023

Hepatocellular carcinoma presentation and prognosis among Nigerian adults with and without HIV.

PONE-D-22-28133R1

Dear Dr. Hawkins,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Matias A Avila, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Matias A Avila

24 Feb 2023

PONE-D-22-28133R1

Hepatocellular carcinoma presentation and prognosis among Nigerian adults with and without HIV.

Dear Dr. Hawkins:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr Matias A Avila

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewer Comments & Response 2.4.docx

    Click here for additional data file. (17.5KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    Data cannot be shared publicly because it contains potential identifiers on individual participants. Deidentified data are available from the Institutional Review Board at Northwestern University and the University of Jos for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data. Contact details for the NU IRB are Name: Braden Van Buskirk, Address:Arthur Rubloff Building, 7th Floor 750 N. Lake Shore Dr. Chicago, IL 60611 312-503-9338.

    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES