Evaluation of serum glycocholic acid as a biomarker for liver injury in liver diseases


Abstract

Aim: While alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and total bile acids (TBA) have been implicated for monitoring liver injury in liver diseases, the role of glycocholic acid (GCA) as a biomarker for liver injury is underexplored. This study aims to assess the potential value of CGA in liver diseases.

Methods: Serum levels of GCA, ALT, AST, and TBA were detected and analyzed in 240 patients with liver disease [80 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), 80 liver cirrhosis, and 80 Chronic Hepatitis B (CHB)] and in 80 healthy subjects. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to analyze. Further, the correlations of GCA with AST, ALT, and TBA were examined.

Results: The serum levels of GCA, ALT, AST, and TBA in patients with liver disease were higher than those in healthy subjects. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of the GCA in liver disease was 0.882 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.842 - 0.915], which was higher than that of ALT [0.645 (95%CI: 0.589 - 0.697)] (P < 0.0001), AST [0.745 (95%CI: 0.693 -0.792)] (P < 0.0001) and TBA [0.811 (95%CI: 0.764 - 0.853)] (P = 0.0044). When GCA was combined with the ALT, AST, and TBA for liver disease, the combined AUROCs increased, with values of 0.909 (95%CI: 0.872 - 0.938) (P = 0.0107). When healthy subjects served as controls, the AUROCs of the GCA in HCC patients, liver cirrhosis patients, and CHB patients were 0.889 [95% CI: 0.830 - 0.933], 0.959 [95% CI: 0.916 - 0.984], and 0.798 [95% CI: 0.727 - 0.857], respectively. When GCA was combined with the ALT, AST, and TBA for HCC, the AUROCs increased, with values of 0.967 (95%CI: 0.926 - 0.989) (P = 0.0014). Serum levels of GCA in HCC patients were significantly lower than those in liver cirrhosis patients (P =0.0014) and were higher than those in CHB patients (P < 0.0001). When CHB served as controls, the AUROC of GCA alone was 0.704 [95% CI: 0.627 - 0.774] for HCC and 0.813 [95% CI: 0.743 - 0.870] for liver cirrhosis. GCA was positively correlated with serum levels of ALT, AST, and TBA (Kendall's Tau = 0.155, P<0.0001; Kendall's Tau =0.304, P<0.0001; and Kendall's Tau = 0.453, P<0.0001, respectively).

Conclusions: GCA may be more useful than ALT, AST, and TBA for monitoring liver injury in liver diseases. It was positively correlated with serum levels of ALT, AST, and TBA. GCA monitoring can be applied in the differentiation of liver disease, in the selection of patients for liver biopsy, in the follow-up of liver diseases, and plays an adjunctive role with other liver tests.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].