Agreement Between 2-Dimensional Shear Wave and Transient Elastography Values for Diagnosis of Advanced Chronic Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Inter-platform variation in liver stiffness evaluation (LSE) could hinder dissemination and clinical implementation of new ultrasound methods. We aimed to determine whether measurements of liver stiffness by bi-dimensional shear wave elastography (2D-SWE) with a Supersonic Imagine apparatus are comparable to those made by vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE). METHODS: We collected data from 1219 consecutive patients with chronic liver disease who underwent LSE by VCTE and 2D-SWE (performed by blinded operators), on the same day, at a single center in France from September 2011 through June 2019. We assessed the ability of liver stiffness value distributions and 2D-SWE performances to identify patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD) according to the Baveno VI criteria, based on VCTE cut-off values. RESULTS: VCTE and 2D-SWE values correlated (Pearson's correlation coefficient, 0.882; P < .0001; Lin concordance coefficient, 0.846; P < .0001). The median stiffness values were 6.7 kPa with VCTE (interquartile range, 4.8-11.6 kPa) and 7.1 kPa with 2D-SWE (interquartile range, 5.4-11.1 kPa) (P = .736). 2D-SWE values were slightly higher in the low percentiles and lower in the high percentiles; the best match with VCTE values were at approximately 7-9 kPa. The area under the curve of 2D-SWE for identifying of VCTE values below 10 was 0.964 (95% CI, 0.952-0.976) and for VCTE values above 15 kPa was 0.976 (95% CI, 0.963-0.988), with Youden index-associated cut-off values of 9.5 and 13kPa and best accuracy cut-off values of 10 kPa and 14 kPa, respectively. A 2D-SWE cut-off value of 10 kPa detected VCTE values below 10k Pa with 92% sensitivity, 87% specificity, and 91% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of liver stiffness by VCTE or 2D-SWE produces comparable results. 2D-SWE accurately identifies patients with cACLD according to the Baveno VI criteria based on VCTE cut-off values. A 10 kPa 2D-SWE cut-off value can be used to rule out cACLD.

Performance of Simple Fibrosis Scores in Nonobese Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Because only a minority of patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) have advanced fibrosis and would eventually develop liver-related complications, current guidelines recommend initial assessment with noninvasive tests of fibrosis.1-3 Most previous studies focused on overweight and obese patients. Despite a strong association between obesity and NAFLD, 3%-30% of people with relatively normal body mass index (BMI) may still have NAFLD.4,5 Hence, this study aims to evaluate the performance of the common noninvasive tests in non-obese (BMI <25 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥25 kg/m2) NAFLD patients.

Liver stiffness measurement predicts long-term survival and complications in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), fibrosis is the strongest prognostic factor and can be assessed by non-invasive methods. We evaluated the ability of liver stiffness measurement (LSM) to predict overall survival and liver, cardiovascular and oncologic complications. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on 2251 consecutive NAFLD patients (mean age 59 years, male 53%, mean body mass index 28 kg/m2 ) in two centres. At inclusion, all patients had LSM, clinical and biological evaluation. During follow-up, we recorded cardiovascular events, cancers, liver complications, liver transplantation and death. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Survival curves according to LSM were first performed using Kaplan-Meier method for the primary endpoint, and Aalen-Johansen method for secondary outcomes to take into account competitive risks. In a second step, a Cox proportional hazard model analysis was done to identify independent predictors of overall survival. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 27 months [IQR: 25-38]. Fifty-five patients died and three patients had liver transplantation. Overall survival significantly decreased as baseline LSM increased. Twenty-one patients (0.9%) had a liver event, 142 (6.3%) developed cancer (excluding HCC) and 151 (6.7%) had a cardiovascular event during follow-up. By multivariable analysis, independent predictors of overall survival were as follows: baseline LSM (adjusted HR (aHR) = 2.85 [1.65-4.92], P = .0002), age (aHR = 1.11 [1.08-1.13], P < .0001) and male sex (aHR = 2.05 [1.17-3.57], P = .012). Patients with elevated LSM were also more likely to develop cardiovascular, and liver events but not other cancers. CONCLUSION: LSM can be used to predict survival, cardiovascular and liver complications in NAFLD patients.

Unified interpretation of liver stiffness measurement by M and XL probes in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

OBJECTIVE: The latest model of vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) automatically selects M or XL probe according to patients' body built. We aim to test the application of a unified interpretation of VCTE results with probes appropriate for the body mass index (BMI) and hypothesise that this approach is not affected by hepatic steatosis. DESIGN: We prospectively recruited 496 patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease who underwent VCTE by both M and XL probes within 1 week before liver biopsy. RESULTS: 391 (78.8%) and 433 (87.3%) patients had reliable liver stiffness measurement (LSM) (10 successful acquisitions and IQR:median ratio ≤0.30) by M and XL probes, respectively (p<0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves was similar between the two probes (0.75-0.88 for F2-4, 0.83-0.91 for F4). When used in the same patient, LSM by XL probe was lower than that by M probe (mean difference 2.3 kPa). In contrast, patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 had higher LSM regardless of the probe used. When M and XL probes were used in patients with BMI <30 and ≥30 kg/m2, respectively, they yielded nearly identical median LSM at each fibrosis stage and similar diagnostic performance. Severe steatosis did not increase LSM or the rate of false-positive diagnosis by XL probe. CONCLUSION: High BMI but not severe steatosis increases LSM. The same LSM cut-offs can be used without further adjustment for steatosis when M and XL probes are used according to the appropriate BMI.

New sequential combinations of non-invasive fibrosis tests provide an accurate diagnosis of advanced fibrosis in NAFLD.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Advanced liver fibrosis is an important diagnostic target in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) as it defines the subgroup of patients with impaired prognosis. The non-invasive diagnosis of advanced fibrosis is currently limited by the suboptimal positive predictive value and the grey zone (representing indeterminate diagnosis) of fibrosis tests. Here, we aimed to determine the best combination of non-invasive tests for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis in NAFLD. METHODS: A total of 938 patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD were randomized 2:1 into derivation and validation sets. All patients underwent liver stiffness measurement with vibration controlled transient elastography (VCTE) and blood fibrosis tests (NAFLD fibrosis score, Fibrosis-4 [FIB4], Fibrotest, Hepascore, FibroMeter). FibroMeterVCTE, which combines VCTE results and FibroMeter markers in a single test, was also calculated in all patients. RESULTS: For the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis, VCTE was significantly more accurate than the blood tests (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC]: 0.840 ±â€¯0.013, p ≤0.005). FibroMeter was the most accurate blood test (AUROC: 0.793 ±â€¯0.015, p ≤0.017). The combinatory test FibroMeterVCTE outperformed VCTE and blood tests (AUROC: 0.866 ±â€¯0.012, p ≤0.005). The sequential combination of FIB4 then FibroMeterVCTE (FIB4-FMVCTE algorithm) or VCTE then FibroMeterVCTE (VCTE-FMVCTE algorithm) provided an excellent diagnostic accuracy of 90% for advanced fibrosis, with liver biopsy only required to confirm the diagnosis in 20% of cases. The FIB4-FMVCTE and VCTE-FMVCTE algorithms were significantly more accurate than the pragmatic algorithms currently proposed. CONCLUSION: The sequential combination of fibrosis tests in the FIB4-FMVCTE and VCTE-FMVCTE algorithms provides a highly accurate solution for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis in NAFLD. These algorithms should now be validated for the diagnosis of advanced liver fibrosis in diabetology or primary care settings. LAY SUMMARY: The evaluation of liver fibrosis is mandatory in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), as advanced fibrosis identifies the subgroup of patients with impaired prognosis. FibroMeterVCTE is a new fibrosis test combining blood markers and the result of vibration controlled transient elastography (VCTE) into a single diagnostic test. Our results show that FibroMeterVCTE outperforms other blood fibrosis tests and VCTE alone for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis in a large multi-centric cohort of 938 patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD. Sequential algorithms using a simple blood test or VCTE as a first-line procedure, then FibroMeterVCTE as a second-line test accurately classified 90% of patients.

Impact of Obesity and Alanine Aminotransferase Levels on the Diagnostic Accuracy for Advanced Liver Fibrosis of Noninvasive Tools in Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Some evidence suggests an interference of obesity and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels on the diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis of noninvasive tools such as liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by FibroScan, Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4), and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score (NFS). We assessed whether the diagnostic accuracy of LSM, Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4), and NFS and strategies based on the combination of these tools is affected by obesity and/or ALT levels. METHODS: We analyzed data from 968 patients with a histological diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. FIB-4, NFS, and LSM by FibroScan were measured. RESULTS: LSM was better than both FIB-4 and NFS for staging F3-F4 fibrosis area under the receiver operating characteristic curve test (AUC) 0.863, 0.777, and 0.765, respectively; P < 0.001 for both), showing higher accuracy and higher negative predictive value (NPV), but lower positive predictive value (PPV). LSM worked less well in high ALT (>100 IU) (AUC 0.811 vs 0.877, P = 0.04; PPV 57.5% vs 62.4%; NPV 90.7% vs 94%) or obese patients (AUC 0.786 vs 0.902, P < 0.001; PPV 58.7% vs 64.8%; NPV 88.3% vs 95.2%), the latter not being affected by the M or XL probe. Consistently, LSM worked better in terms of AUC and accuracy compared with both FIB-4 and NFS only in nonobese or high ALT patients, even with always keeping a slightly lower PPV. A serial combination of FIB-4 or NFS with LSM as the second test in patients in the gray area of the first test retained-in most scenarios-similar PPV and NPV compared with LSM alone. These strategies also increased the diagnostic accuracy of about 20% in all groups of patients, even if with a lower overall accuracy in obese patients (71.3% and 67.1% for FIB-4 and NFS as the first test, respectively) compared to nonobese patients (81.9% and 82.4% for FIB-4 and NFS as the first test, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: All tested noninvasive tools have overall better NPV than PPV. LSM has a better diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis than both FIB-4 and NFS only in nonobese and/or low ALT patients. Serial combination strategies are better than a single tool strategy, regardless of obesity and ALT levels, although the accuracy is lower in obese patients.

Improved noninvasive prediction of liver fibrosis by liver stiffness measurement in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease accounting for controlled attenuation parameter values.

Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) frequently overestimates the severity of liver fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) is a new parameter provided by the same machine used for LSM and associated with both steatosis and body mass index, the two factors mostly affecting LSM performance in NAFLD. We aimed to determine whether prediction of liver fibrosis by LSM in NAFLD patients is affected by CAP values. Patients (n = 324) were assessed by clinical and histological (Kleiner score) features. LSM and CAP were performed using the M probe. CAP values were grouped by tertiles (lower 132-298, middle 299-338, higher 339-400 dB/m). Among patients with F0-F2 fibrosis, mean LSM values, expressed in kilopascals, increased according to CAP tertiles (6.8 versus 8.6 versus 9.4, P = 0.001), and along this line the area under the curve of LSM for the diagnosis of F3-F4 fibrosis was progressively reduced from lower to middle and further to higher CAP tertiles (0.915, 0.848-0.982; 0.830, 0.753-0.908; 0.806, 0.723-0.890). As a consequence, in subjects with F0-F2 fibrosis, the rates of false-positive LSM results for F3-F4 fibrosis increased according to CAP tertiles (7.2% in lower versus 16.6% in middle versus 18.1% in higher). Consistent with this, a decisional flowchart for predicting fibrosis was suggested by combining both LSM and CAP values. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NAFLD, CAP values should always be taken into account in order to avoid overestimations of liver fibrosis assessed by transient elastography. (Hepatology 2017;65:1145-1155).

Validity criteria for the diagnosis of fatty liver by M probe-based controlled attenuation parameter.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) can be performed together with liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by transient elastography (TE) and is often used to diagnose fatty liver. We aimed to define the validity criteria of CAP. METHODS: CAP was measured by the M probe prior to liver biopsy in 754 consecutive patients with different liver diseases at three centers in Europe and Hong Kong (derivation cohort, n=340; validation cohort, n=414; 101 chronic hepatitis B, 154 chronic hepatitis C, 349 non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, 37 autoimmune hepatitis, 49 cholestatic liver disease, 64 others; 277 F3-4; age 52±14; body mass index 27.2±5.3kg/m2). The primary outcome was the diagnosis of fatty liver, defined as steatosis involving ≥5% of hepatocytes. RESULTS: The area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUROC) for CAP diagnosis of fatty liver was 0.85 (95% CI 0.82-0.88). The interquartile range (IQR) of CAP had a negative correlation with CAP (r=-0.32, p<0.001), suggesting the IQR-to-median ratio of CAP would be an inappropriate validity parameter. In the derivation cohort, the IQR of CAP was associated with the accuracy of CAP (AUROC 0.86, 0.89 and 0.76 in patients with IQR of CAP <20 [15% of patients], 20-39 [51%], and ≥40dB/m [33%], respectively). Likewise, the AUROC of CAP in the validation cohort was 0.90 and 0.77 in patients with IQR of CAP <40 and ≥40dB/m, respectively (p=0.004). The accuracy of CAP in detecting grade 2 and 3 steatosis was lower among patients with body mass index ≥30kg/m2 and F3-4 fibrosis. CONCLUSIONS: The validity of CAP for the diagnosis of fatty liver is lower if the IQR of CAP is ≥40dB/m. Lay summary: Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) is measured by transient elastography (TE) for the detection of fatty liver. In this large study, using liver biopsy as a reference, we show that the variability of CAP measurements based on its interquartile range can reflect the accuracy of fatty liver diagnosis. In contrast, other clinical factors such as adiposity and liver enzyme levels do not affect the performance of CAP.

Controlled Attenuation Parameter (CAP) with the XL Probe of the Fibroscan®: A Comparative Study with the M Probe and Liver Biopsy.

INTRODUCTION: Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) is a new method for the diagnosis of steatosis. Until now, CAP was available only with the M probe of the Fibroscan. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CAP with the XL probe versus CAP with the M probe, using liver biopsy (LB) as gold standard. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 236 patients with chronic liver disease undergoing LB had CAP measurement with M and XL probes the same day. All LB were analyzed independently by two experienced pathologists. RESULTS: Median CAP was 240.5 and 239.5 dB/m with the M and XL probes, respectively. For the detection of steatosis grade with the M and XL probes, AUROCs were 0.82/0.83 for S ≥ 1, 0.89/0.88 for S ≥ 2, and 0.92/0.93 for S3, respectively. Cutoffs were (M and XL probes) 246/242 for S ≥ 1, 269/267 for S ≥ 2, and 285/286 dB/m for S3, respectively. The factor significantly associated with CAP with the M and XL probes was steatosis grade. In multivariate analysis, a low CAP value with XL probe was negatively associated with waist circumference, triglycerides, albumin, and the alcohol consumption, and positively with alkaline phosphatases. In multivariate analysis, a high CAP value with the XL probe was positively associated with waist circumference and triglycerides. CONCLUSION: CAP with the XL probe is a new tool for the diagnosis of steatosis. This parameter could be useful for the diagnosis and the follow-up of obese patients.

Controlled attenuation parameter for the diagnosis of steatosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) evaluated with transient elastography (FibroScan) is a recent method for non-invasive assessment of steatosis. Its usefulness in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is unknown. We prospectively investigated the performance of CAP for the diagnosis of steatosis in NAFLD, factors associated with discordances between CAP and steatosis grades, and relationships between CAP and clinical or biological parameters. METHODS: All CAP examinations performed in NAFLD patients with a liver biopsy performed within 1 week of CAP measurement were included. Liver biopsies were assessed for activity and fibrosis stage, NAFLD activity score, and steatosis graded as follows: S0, steatosis < 5%; S1, 5-33%; S2, 34-66%; S3, >66%. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-one patients (59% male, age 56 years) from two ethnic groups were included. No patient had steatosis < 5%. The area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve of CAP for steatosis ≥S2 and S3 was 0.80 and 0.66, respectively. At a cut-off value of 310 dB/m, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for ≥S2 steatosis were 79%, 71%, 86%, and 71%, respectively. Discordance of at least one grade between CAP and steatosis was observed in 81 patients. By multivariate analysis, only steatosis S2S3 was associated with no discordance. By multivariate analysis, only BMI ≥ 30 kg/m(2) was significantly associated with CAP > 310 dB/m. CONCLUSION: The association of CAP with steatosis, especially in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, and with elevated BMI could be useful for the diagnosis and follow-up of NAFLD patients.

Evolution of noninvasive tests of liver fibrosis is associated with prognosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C.

UNLABELLED: No data are available about the prediction of long-term survival using repeated noninvasive tests of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C (CHC). We aimed to assess the prognostic value of 3-year liver stiffness measurement (LSM), aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index (APRI), and fibrosis 4 (FIB-4) evolution in CHC. CHC patients with two LSM (1,000-1,500 days interval) were prospectively included. Blood fibrosis tests APRI and FIB-4 were calculated the day of baseline (bLSM) and follow-up (fLSM) LSM. Evolution of fibrosis tests was expressed as delta: (follow-up-baseline results)/duration. Date and cause of death were recorded during follow-up that started the day of fLSM. In all, 1,025 patients were included. Median follow-up after fLSM was 38.0 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 27.7-46.1) during which 35 patients died (14 liver-related death) and seven had liver transplantation. Prognostic accuracy (Harrell C-index) of multivariate models including baseline and delta results was not significantly different between LSM and FIB-4 (P ≥ 0.24), whereas FIB-4 provided more accurate prognostic models than APRI (P = 0.03). By multivariate analysis including LSM variables, overall survival was independently predicted by bLSM, delta (dLSM), and sustained virological response (SVR). Prognosis was excellent in patients having bLSM <7 kPa, SVR, or no increase (<1 kPa/year) in 7-14 kPa bLSM. Prognosis was significantly impaired in patients with an increase (≥ 1 kPa/year) in 7-14 kPa bLSM, or decrease (≤ 0 kPa/year) in ≥ 14 kPa bLSM (P = 0.949 between these two groups). Patients with an increase (>0 kPa/year) in ≥ 14 kPa bLSM had the worst prognosis. Baseline and delta FIB-4 also identified patient subgroups with significantly different prognosis. CONCLUSION: Three-year evolution of noninvasive tests of liver fibrosis has a strong prognostic value in CHC patients. These tests should be repeated to monitor patients and predict their outcome.

Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) for the diagnosis of steatosis: a prospective study of 5323 examinations.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) evaluated with transient elastography (FibroScan®) is a recent method for non-invasive assessment of steatosis. Its usefulness in clinical practice is unknown. We prospectively investigated the determinants of CAP failure and the relationships between CAP and clinical or biological parameters in a large cohort of consecutive patients. METHODS: All CAP examinations performed in adult patients with suspected chronic liver disease were included. CAP failure was defined as zero valid shot. The following factors were analyzed for their influence on CAP value and the relationships between CAP and clinico-biological parameters: age, gender, body mass index, waist circumference, hypertension, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, alcohol use, liver stiffness measurement, indication, and different biological parameters. RESULTS: CAP failure occurred in 7.7% of 5323 examinations. By multivariate analysis, factors independently associated with CAP measurement failure were female gender, BMI, and metabolic syndrome. By multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with elevated CAP were BMI [25-30]kg/m(2), BMI >30kg/m(2), metabolic syndrome, alcohol >14 drink/week and liver stiffness >6kPa. CAP increased with the number of parameters of metabolic syndrome, BMI, waist circumference, the presence of diabetes or hypertension, and the cause of the disease. In the 440 patients with liver biopsy, for the diagnosis of steatosis >10%, steatosis >33%, and steatosis >66%, AUROCs of CAP were 0.79 (95% CI 0.74-0.84, p<0.001), 0.84 (95% CI 0.80-0.88, p<0.001), 0.84 (95% CI 0.80-0.88, p<0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CAP provides an immediate assessment of steatosis simultaneously with liver stiffness measurement. The strong association of CAP with the metabolic syndrome and alcohol use could be of interest for the follow-up of NAFLD or alcoholic patients.

Staging chronic hepatitis C in seven categories using fibrosis biomarker (FibroTest™) and transient elastography (FibroScan®).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: FibroTest™ (FT) and Transient Elastography (TE) have been validated as non-invasive markers of METAVIR fibrosis stages from F0 to F4 using biopsy, and as prognostic markers of liver related mortality in patients with chronic hepatitis C. The aim was to extend the validation of FT and TE as markers of critical steps defined by occurrence of cirrhosis without complications (F4.1), esophageal varices (F4.2), and severe complications (F4.3): primary liver cancer, variceal bleeding, or decompensation (ascites, encephalopathy, or jaundice). METHODS: The updated individual data of 3927 patients (1046 cirrhotics) without complications at baseline were pooled from three prospective cohorts called "EPIC", "Paris", and "Bordeaux" cohorts. RESULTS: At 5 years, among 501 patients without varices at baseline (F4.1) varices occurred in 19 patients [F4.2 incidence of 4.0% (95% CI 2.2-5.8)]. The predictive performance (AUROC) of FT was 0.77 (0.66-0.84; p<0.001). At 10 years severe complications occurred in 203 patients, [F4.3 incidence of 13.4% (9.6-17.1)], including primary liver cancer in 84 patients [6.4% (3.5-9.3)]. FT was predictive (Cox adjusted on treatment) of severe complications [AUROC 0.79 (76-82); p<0.0001], including primary liver cancer [AUROC 0.84 (80-87); p<0.0001]. Similarly TE was predictive of severe complications [AUROC 0.77 (72-81); p<0.0001], including primary liver cancer [AUROC 0.86 (81-90); p<0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: FibroTest™ and TE increase were associated with the occurrence of all severe complications including hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatic insufficiency, and variceal bleeding. FibroTest™ increase was also associated with the occurrence of esophageal varices.

Staging chronic hepatitis B into seven categories, defining inactive carriers and assessing treatment impact using a fibrosis biomarker (FibroTest®) and elastography (FibroScan®).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The first aim was to extend the validation of FibroTest® (FT) and transient elastography (TE) as markers of occurrence of cirrhosis without complications (F4.1), oesophageal varices (F4.2), and severe complications (F4.3) in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). The second aim was to validate a previous definition of an inactive carrier based on normal FT and ActiTest® (normal-FT-AT). The third aim was to assess the long-term dynamics of fibrosis in patients with sustained virological response. METHODS: The 10-year updated individual data of 1434 patients were pooled from two prospective cohorts. RESULTS: Of the 1312 patients without a history of complications, varices had occurred after 10 years in 14 patients (F4.2, incidence of 1.7%, 95% CI [0.6-2.8]), and severe complications in 25 (F4.3 3.7% [1.8-5.7]), including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 21 (3.7% [1.5-5.8]). Using Cox-multivariate analysis adjusted for treatment, viral load, HBeAg status and ALT, FT, and TE were predictive of liver complications (n=37; AUROC=0.83 [0.71-0.90]; p<0.0001) and (n=8/844; AUROC=0.82 [0.72-0.89]; p<0.0001) respectively. Normal FT-AT better identified patients with lower fibrosis progression than the ALT-based standard: 3/163 (1.8%) vs. 16/181 (8.8%; p=0.004) in the Paris cohort, and 5/195 (2.6%) vs. 15/228 (6.6%; p=0.05) in the Bordeaux cohort. Of the 582 responders, 23 had complications (incidence 6.2% [3.2-9.1]) including 19 HCC (5.8% [2.6-9.0]) and 10 with varices (2.6% [0.8-4.4]). Of the 138 responders with advanced fibrosis, only 31% (15-47%) had fibrosis regression. CONCLUSIONS: FibroTest® and TE identified three categories of cirrhosis with increasing morbidity. Normal FibroTest® and ActiTest® were better able to identify inactive hepatitis B carriers than the standard definition. Despite virological response, the overall incidence of cirrhosis increased, with a remaining 5.8% risk of HCC.

Non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis with transient elastography (FibroScan®): applying the cut-offs of M probe to XL probe.

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY: Limited studies have aimed to define the cut-offs of XL probe (XL cut-offs) for different stages of liver fibrosis, whereas those of M probe (M cut-offs) may not be applicable to XL probe. We aimed to derive appropriate XL cut-offs in overweight patients. Patients with liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by both probes were recruited. XL cut-offs probe for corresponding M cut-offs were derived from an exploratory cohort, and subsequently validated in a subgroup patients also underwent liver biopsy. The diagnostic accuracy of XL cut-offs to diagnose advanced fibrosis was evaluated. RESULTS: Total 517 patients (63% male, mean age 58) who had reliable LSM by both probes were included in the exploratory cohort. There was a strong correlation between the LSM by M probe (LSM-M) and LSM by XL probe (LSM-XL) (r² = 0.89, p < 0.001). A decision tree using LSM-XL was learnt to predict the 3 categories of LSM-M (< 6.0kPa, 6.0-11.9kPa and ≥ 12.0kPa), and XL cut-offs at 4.8kPa and 10.7kPa were identified. These cut-offs were subsequently validated in a cohort of 147 patients who underwent liver biopsy. The overall accuracy was 89% among 62 patients whose LSM-XL < 4.8kPa or ≥ 10.7kPa. These cut-offs would have avoided under-staging of fibrosis among patients with body mass index (BMI) > 25-30 kg/m2 but not > 30 kg/m2. CONCLUSIONS: XL cut-offs at 4.8kPa and 10.7kPa were the best estimates of 6.0kPa and 12.0kPa of M probe for patients with BMI > 25-30 kg/m2. Patients with BMI > 30 kg/m² might use M probe cut-offs for XL probe.

Diagnosis of liver fibrosis and cirrhosis using liver stiffness measurement: comparison between M and XL probe of FibroScan®.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Unreliable results of liver stiffness measurement are obtained in 16% of cases and are independently associated with body mass index (BMI) greater than 30 kg/m(2). A new FibroScan® probe (XL probe) was designed specifically for obese patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of liver stiffness measurement using M and XL probes of Fibroscan® for the diagnosis of fibrosis and cirrhosis in a large cohort of patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing liver biopsies for chronic liver disease were prospectively recruited. Liver stiffness measurement was performed within 1 week before liver biopsy using both M and XL probes of FibroScan®. RESULTS: A total of 286 patients were evaluated. A reliable liver stiffness measurement using M probe was obtained in 79.7% of cases. In the other 21.3%, liver stiffness measurement using XL probe was obtained in 56.9% of patients. A strong correlation was found between M and XL values, regardless of BMI. In all groups, median liver stiffness measurement using the XL probe was significantly lower than liver stiffness measurement using the M probe. By multivariate analysis, unsuccessful liver stiffness examination with M probe was independently associated with age >50 years and BMI >30 kg/m(2). By univariate analysis, only BMI >30 kg/m(2) was associated with unsuccessful liver stiffness measurement with XL probe. No significant difference was observed between the M and XL probes for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Liver stiffness measurement with either M or XL probe is possible in 91.2% of patients with comparable diagnostic accuracy. In clinical practice, the M probe could be used as first step for liver stiffness measurement. In case of no valid shot or unreliable measurement, the XL probe could be used. This result could be useful for the assessment of liver fibrosis in NAFLD and/or obese patients.

Noninvasive tests for fibrosis and liver stiffness predict 5-year outcomes of patients with chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Liver stiffness can be measured noninvasively to assess liver fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C. In patients with chronic liver diseases, level of fibrosis predicts liver-related complications and survival. We evaluated the abilities of liver stiffness, results from noninvasive tests for fibrosis, and liver biopsy analyses to predict overall survival or survival without liver-related death with a 5-year period. METHODS: In a consecutive cohort of 1457 patients with chronic hepatitis C, we assessed fibrosis and, on the same day, liver stiffness, performed noninvasive tests of fibrosis (FibroTest, the aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index, FIB-4), and analyzed liver biopsy samples. We analyzed data on death, liver-related death, and liver transplantation collected during a 5-year follow-up period. RESULTS: At 5 years, 77 patients had died (39 liver-related deaths) and 16 patients had undergone liver transplantation. Overall survival was 91.7% and survival without liver-related death was 94.4%. Survival was significantly decreased among patients diagnosed with severe fibrosis, regardless of the noninvasive method of analysis. All methods were able to predict shorter survival times in this large population; liver stiffness and results of FibroTest had higher predictive values. Patient outcomes worsened as liver stiffness and FibroTest values increased. Prognostic values of stiffness (P<.0001) and FibroTest results (P<.0001) remained after they were adjusted for treatment response, patient age, and estimates of necroinflammatory grade. CONCLUSIONS: Noninvasive tests for liver fibrosis (measurement of liver stiffness or FibroTest) can predict 5-year survival of patients with chronic hepatitis C. These tools might help physicians determine prognosis at earlier stages and discuss specific treatments, such as liver transplantation.

Liver stiffness measurement using XL probe in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

OBJECTIVES: Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by transient elastography is a noninvasive test of liver fibrosis, but cannot be performed in a significant proportion of obese patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the new XL probe in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). METHODS: Liver biopsy and paired LSM by both the original M probe and XL probe were performed on 193 consecutive NAFLD patients in France and Hong Kong. RESULTS: Compared with M probe, XL probe was more likely to achieve 10 valid measurements (95% vs. 81%; P<0.001) and a success rate of over 60% (90% vs. 74%; P<0.001). The areas under receiver operating characteristics curves of XL probe for F2, F3, and F4 disease were 0.80, 0.85, and 0.91, respectively. XL probe tended to generate lower LSM than M probe in the same patient. At a cutoff of 7.2 kPa, the sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values for F3 or greater disease were 78%, 78%, 60%, and 89%, respectively. Discordance of at least two stages between XL probe and histology was observed in 16 (9%) patients. Body mass index (BMI) over 35 kg/m(2) was independently associated with discordance (adjusted odds ratio 9.09; 95% confidence interval 1.10-75.43). Reliable measurements by XL probe were obtained in 75% of the overall population and 65% of patients with BMI over 30 kg/m(2). CONCLUSIONS: LSM by XL probe can be performed successfully in most NAFLD patients, but obesity is associated with less accurate and reliable measurements.

Non-invasive diagnosis of liver steatosis using controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) and transient elastography.

INTRODUCTION: Recently, a study showed that Controlled Attenuation Parameter (CAP), evaluated with transient elastography, could efficiently separate steatosis grades. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the performance of CAP for the diagnosis of steatosis in patients with chronic liver disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with chronic liver disease had steatosis diagnosis using CAP, blood sample and liver biopsy. Steatosis was graded as the percentage of hepatocytes with fat: S0 ≤ 10%, S1: 11 ~ 33%, S2: 34 ~ 66%, S3 ≥ 67%. RESULTS: Characteristics of the 112 patients included were as follows: age 54 years, BMI 26 kg m(-) ², HCV 36%, NAFLD 25%. Steatosis repartition was: S0 52%, S1 19%, S2 14%, S3 15%. CAP was significantly correlated with SteatoTest, Fatty Liver Index (FLI), percentage of steatosis on liver biopsy, steatosis grade and slightly with liver stiffness, but not with fibrosis and activity grade on liver biopsy. Using CAP vs SteatoTest vs FLI score, Area Under the Receiver-Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves (AUROC)s were 0.84 vs 0.72 vs 0.72 for the diagnosis of steatosis ≥ S1, 0.86 vs 0.73 vs 0.71 for the diagnosis of steatosis ≥ S2, and 0.93 vs 0.73 vs 0.75 for the diagnosis of steatosis S3 respectively. For a sensitivity ≥ 90%, cut-offs of CAP were 215 dB m(-1) for S ≥ 1, 252 dB m(-1) for S ≥ 2, and 296 dB m(-1) for S3. CONCLUSION: CAP is very efficient to detect even low grade steatosis. CAP being implemented on FibroScan(®) (Echosens, Paris, France), both steatosis and fibrosis can be evaluated simultaneously, enlarging the spectrum of non-invasive techniques for the management of chronic liver diseases.

Pitfalls of liver stiffness measurement: a 5-year prospective study of 13,369 examinations.

UNLABELLED: Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) based on transient elastography (TE, FibroScan) is gaining in popularity for noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis. However, LSM has limitations, which have not yet been thoroughly evaluated. We prospectively investigated the frequency and determinants of LSM failure and unreliable results over a 5-year period, based on 13,369 examinations (134,239 shots). LSM failure was defined as zero valid shots, and unreliable examinations were defined as fewer than 10 valid shots, an interquartile range (IQR)/LSM greater than 30%, or a success rate less than 60%. LSM failure occurred in 3.1% of all examinations (4% at first examination [n = 7261]) and was independently associated at first examination with body mass index (BMI) greater than 30 kg/m(2) (odds ratio [OR], 7.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6-10.2; P = 0.0001), operator experience fewer than 500 examinations (OR 2.5 [1.6-4.0]; P = 0.0001); age greater than 52 years (OR 2.3 [1.6-3.2]; P = 0.0001), and type 2 diabetes (OR 1.6 [1.1-2.2]; P = 0.009). Unreliable results were obtained in a further 15.8% of cases (17% at first examination) and were independently associated at first examination with BMI greater than 30 kg/m(2) (OR 3.3 [2.8-4.0]; P = 0.0001), operator experience fewer than 500 examinations (OR 3.1 [2.4-3.9]; P = 0.0001), age greater than 52 years (OR 1.8 [1.6-2.1]; P = 0.0001), female sex (OR 1.4 [1.2-1.6], P = 0.0001), hypertension (OR 1.3 [1.1-1.5]; P = 0.003), and type 2 diabetes (OR 1.2 [1.0-1.5]; P = 0.05). When metabolic syndrome and waist circumference were taken into account in a subgroup of 2835 patients, waist circumference was the most important determinant of LSM failure and unreliable results. CONCLUSION: In our experience, liver stiffness measurements are uninterpretable in nearly one in five cases. The principal reasons are obesity, particularly increased waist circumference, and limited operator experience. These results emphasize the need for adequate operator training and for technological improvements in specific patient subpopulations.