Validation of a two-step approach combining serum biomarkers and liver stiffness measurement to predict advanced fibrosis - PubMed (original) (raw)
. 2021 Jun 10;5(7):801-808.
doi: 10.1002/jgh3.12590. eCollection 2021 Jul.
Affiliations
- PMID: 34263075
- PMCID: PMC8264241
- DOI: 10.1002/jgh3.12590
Validation of a two-step approach combining serum biomarkers and liver stiffness measurement to predict advanced fibrosis
Hideki Fujii et al. JGH Open. 2021.
Abstract
Background and aim: The Gut and Obesity in Asia Workgroup recently reported that a two-step approach using fibrosis scores followed by liver stiffness measurement (LSM) could accurately detect patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) having advanced fibrosis in low-risk fibrosis populations. This study aimed to validate the utility of this approach using a Japanese health checkup registry.
Methods: This cross-sectional study included subjects who underwent a health checkup from 2014 to 2019. Using estimated fibrosis stage measured by LSM as a standard, we calculated the percentage of misclassification from assessments made based on fibrosis scores (NAFLD fibrosis score [NFS] or Fibrosis-4 score [FIB-4]) and LSM, alone or in combination.
Results: Of 630 subjects with NAFLD, 4 (0.8%) had advanced fibrosis. In the first-step evaluation, only 21.4-38.0% of subjects needed further testing. This approach was associated with a high specificity of approximately 100% and a negative predictive value of 99.7%. The percentage of misclassification based on NFS or FIB-4 values followed by LSM in all subjects and using LSM after NFS or FIB-4 determination only in subjects with indeterminate/high NFS or FIB-4 values (two-step approach) was 0% and 0.3% and 0.16% and 0.3%, respectively. In addition, very few false negatives occurred for both NFS and FIB-4.
Conclusion: The two-step approach helps to identify the subjects with NAFLD who have advanced fibrosis during a routine health checkup and is associated with only a few false negatives.
Keywords: hepatic fibrosis; noninvasive fibrosis test; non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease; transient elastography.
© 2021 The Authors. JGH Open published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Figures
Figure 1
(a) The two‐step approach and (b) both tests for all subjects. LSM, liver stiffness measurement; NAFLD, nonalcoholic liver disease; NFS, NAFLD fibrosis score.
Figure 2
Flow diagram of the study subjects. Ab, antibody; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; HBsAg, hepatitis B surface antigen; HBV, hepatitis B virus; HCV, hepatitis C virus; LSM, liver stiffness measurement; SR, success rate; IQR/med, interquartile range/median.
Figure 3
Diagnostic performance of fatty liver based on CAP. AUROC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; Se, sensitivity; Sp, specificity.
Figure 4
Boxplots showing the NAFLD fibrosis score, FIB‐4 value, and liver stiffness measurement value of subjects with and without advanced fibrosis in the overall study population. FIB‐4, Fibrosis‐4; NAFLD, non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease.
References
- Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, Fazel Y, Henry L, Wymer M. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease‐meta‐analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology. 2016; 64: 73–84. - PubMed
- Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE et al. The diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: practice guidance from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology. 2018; 67: 328–57. - PubMed
- European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD); European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO) . EASL‐EASD‐EASO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease. J. Hepatol. 2016; 64: 1388–402. - PubMed
- Wong VW, Chan WK, Chitturi S et al. Asia‐Pacific Working Party on Non‐alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease guidelines 2017‐Part 1: Definition, risk factors and assessment. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2018; 33: 70–85. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources