Low alcohol consumption influences outcomes in individuals with alcohol-related compensated cirrhosis in a French multicenter cohort.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The harmful impact of heavy alcohol consumption and recurrence in patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis is long-established, although this is based on old studies. However, the drivers of long-term outcome still need to be clearly investigated. METHOD: All patients with biopsy-proven compensated alcohol-related cirrhosis included in the CIRRAL cohort (22 centers) were prospectively studied. Prognostic variables of survival and liver event-free survival were assessed using multivariable Cox models with stepwise selection. The prognostic impact of alcohol recurrence during follow-up (computed in glass-years in the same way as pack-years for tobacco) was assessed using a time-dependent covariable. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2016, 650 patients were included. The median age at baseline was 58.4 years, 67.4% were men and the median BMI was 27.8 kg/m2, 63.8% had a history of liver decompensation, and 70.2% had discontinued alcohol. At 5 years, recurrence occurred in 30.9% of abstinent patients and this risk was higher in patients with a history of drug abuse and in those with shorter alcohol discontinuation times. Median survival was 97 months. Age, alcohol consumption at baseline, platelet count and Child-Pugh score >5 were associated with overall and liver event-free survival on multivariate analysis. Alcohol consumption of more than 25 glass-years during follow-up was independently associated with lower survival and with a trend toward lower liver event-free survival, with the risk increasing from 1 glass-year, though not significantly. Simon & Makuch plots confirm the benefit of no alcohol consumption (<1 glass/week) on both outcomes and the dose-dependent impact of alcohol over time. CONCLUSION: This prospective study in patients with compensated alcohol-related cirrhosis identifies factors predictive of alcohol recurrence during follow-up and shows that moderate alcohol consumption during follow-up negatively impacts outcomes. Patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis should be advised to completely stop drinking alcohol. REGISTRATION: CIRRAL (NCT01213927) cohort was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov and the full protocol is available at the following link: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01213927. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: In patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis, data are lacking about the impact of the amount of alcohol consumed on both survival and liver-related events. The present study based on the CIRRAL cohort demonstrates that alcohol recurrence occurs in more than 30% of patients with compensated cirrhosis and that even a moderate recurrence strongly influences outcomes. Patients with compensated alcohol-related cirrhosis should be advised to completely discontinue alcohol consumption, even in small amounts, as the present study shows that no alcohol consumption can be regarded as safe when cirrhosis has developed.

Direct comparison of the specialised blood fibrosis tests FibroMeterV2G and Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease from tertiary care centres.

BACKGROUND: The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score (ELF) and the FibroMeterV2G are two specialized blood fibrosis tests which include direct markers of liver fibrosis. They have been shown to be more accurate than the simple blood fibrosis tests FIB4 and the non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) fibrosis score (NFS). AIMS: To directly compare the accuracies of ELF and FibroMeterV2G for the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis in NAFLD. METHODS: Four hundred and seventeen patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD were enrolled from two tertiary care centres. Four blood fibrosis tests were calculated: ELF, FibroMeterV2G , NFS, and FIB4. Advanced fibrosis F3/4 on liver biopsy (NASH CRN scoring) was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for advanced fibrosis were not significantly different between the direct markers of liver fibrosis (hyaluronate, PIIINP, TIMP-1, alpha2-macroglobulin) and the simple blood fibrosis tests NFS and FIB4. ELF (0.793 ± 0.022) and FibroMeterV2G (0.804 ± 0.021) had significantly higher AUROC than NFS (0.722 ± 0.025, P < .010) and FIB4 (0.739 ± 0.024, P < .020). AUROC for advanced fibrosis and Obuchowski index were not significantly different between ELF and FibroMeterV2G . Algorithms using first ELF or FibroMeterV2G and then liver biopsy in case of undetermined diagnosis provided high diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis: 90% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 93% negative predictive value, 85% positive predictive value, and 90% correct classification. In these algorithms, the rate of liver biopsy was 45.3% with ELF versus 39.3% with FibroMeterV2G (P = .065). CONCLUSIONS: ELF and FibroMeterV2G have equal accuracy and perform better than the simple FIB4 and NFS tests for the non-invasive diagnosis of advanced liver fibrosis in patients with NAFLD from tertiary care centres.

Liver Stiffness Measurement With FibroScan: Use the Right Probe in the Right Conditions!

INTRODUCTION: FibroScan's M and XL probes give significantly different results, which could lead to misevaluation of liver fibrosis if the correct probe is not chosen. According to the manufacturer, the M probe should be used when the skin-liver capsule distance (SCD) is <25 mm, and the XL probe should be used when SCD is ≥25 mm. We aimed at validating this recommendation and defining the conditions of use for FibroScan probes in clinical practice. METHODS: Four hundred thirty-nine patients with biopsy-proven chronic liver disease were included. Of them, 382 had successful examinations with both M and XL probes. Advanced fibrosis was defined as Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network (NASH CRN) F ≥3 or Metavir F ≥2. RESULTS: In a same patient, XL probe results were significantly lower than M probe results: 7.9 (5.6-11.7) vs 9.5 (6.7-14.6) kPa, respectively (P < 0.001). After matching for age, sex, liver fibrosis, and serum transaminases, M probe results in patients with SCD <25 mm and XL probe results in those with SCD ≥25 mm did not significantly differ: 8.8 (6.0-12.0) vs 9.1 (6.7-12.8) kPa, respectively (P = 0.175). Of note, 81.4% of patients with body mass index (BMI) <32 kg/m had SCD <25 mm, and 77.7% of patients with BMI ≥32 kg/m had SCD ≥25 mm. A practical algorithm using BMI first and then the FibroScan Automatic Probe Selection tool was proposed to help physicians accurately choose which probe to use in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference in results between M and XL probes when they are used in the right conditions. In clinical practice, the probe should be selected according to the BMI and the Automatic Probe Selection tool.

Criteria to Determine Reliability of Noninvasive Assessment of Liver Fibrosis With Virtual Touch Quantification.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Virtual Touch Quantification (VTQ) evaluates liver fibrosis in patients with chronic liver diseases by measuring shear wave speed in the liver. We aimed to determine the reliability criteria of VTQ examination. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 1094 patients with chronic liver disease from November 2009 through October 2016 at Angers University Hospital, and between April 2010 and May 2015 at Bordeaux University Hospital, in France. All patients underwent liver biopsy analysis (reference standard), and VTQ examination was made by experienced operators on the same day, or no more than 3 months before or afterward. Advanced liver fibrosis was defined as fibrosis stage F ≥ 3 according to the scoring system of the Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network, or fibrosis stage F ≥ 2 according to the Metavir scoring system. The diagnostic accuracy of VTQ in detection of advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) and the rate of correctly classified patients. Reliability criteria were defined from the intrinsic characteristics of VTQ examination, which were shown to influence the diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: VTQ identified patients with advanced fibrosis with an AUROC of 0.773 ± 0.014 and correctly classified 72.0% of patients using a diagnostic cut-off value of 1.37 m/s. VTQ identified patients with cirrhosis with an AUROC value of 0.839 ± 0.014 and correctly classified 78.4% of patients using a cut-off value of 1.87 m/s. The reliability of VTQ decreased with an increasing ratio of interquartile range/median (IQR/M) in patients with intermediate-high VTQ results. We defined 3 reliability categories for VTQ: unreliable (IQR/M ≥0.35 with VTQ result ≥1.37 m/s), reliable (IQR/M ≥0.35 with VTQ result <1.37 m/s or IQR/M 0.15-0.34), and very reliable (IQR/M <0.15). For advanced fibrosis, VTQ correctly classified 57.8% of patients in the unreliable group, 73.7% of patients in the reliable group, and 80.9% of patients in the very reliable group (P < .001); for cirrhosis, these values were 50.0%, 83.4%, and 92.6%, respectively (P < .001). Of the VTQ examinations made, 21.4% were unreliable, 55.0% were reliable, and 23.6% were very reliable. The skin-liver capsule distance was independently associated with an unreliable VTQ examination, which occurred in 52.7% of patients with a distance of 30 mm or more. CONCLUSIONS: In a study to determine the reliability of VTQ findings, compared with results from biopsy analysis, we assigned VTQ examinations to 3 categories (unreliable, reliable, and very reliable). VTQ examinations with IQR/M ≥0.35 and ≥1.37 m/s had very low diagnostic accuracy. Our reliability criteria for liver fibrosis assessment with VTQ will help physicians to accurately evaluate the severity of chronic liver diseases and monitor their progression.

Doppler ultrasonography devices, including elastography, allow for accurate diagnosis of severe liver fibrosis.

OBJECTIVES: Advanced chronic liver disease is frequent yet largely underdiagnosed. Doppler-US is a common examination and we recently identified three simple Doppler-US signs associated with severe liver fibrosis. Recent Doppler-US devices include elastography modules, allowing for liver stiffness measurement (LSM). Our aim was to assess whether the use of elastography following positive simple Doppler-US signs improves the detection of severe liver fibrosis in a single Doppler-US examination. METHODS: 514 patients with chronic liver disease who consecutively underwent percutaneous liver biopsy were included in the study. All patients had a Doppler-US examination and LSM with Virtual Touch Quantification (VTQ) on the same day as a liver biopsy. A subset of 326 patients also had LSM with 2D shear wave elastography (SSI). Severe fibrosis was defined as Metavir F ≥ 3 on liver biopsy. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis confirmed our three simple Doppler-US signs (liver surface irregularity, splenomegaly ≥110 mm, and demodulation of hepatic veins) as independently associated with severe fibrosis. The presence of at least one of these three signs showed 85.6% sensitivity and 36.1% specificity for the diagnosis of severe liver fibrosis. Using VTQ (≥1.59 m/s) where there was a positive Doppler-US sign increased the specificity to 80.8%, at the cost of a decrease in sensitivity (73.7%). Similar results were obtained with SSI (≥9.5 kPa), with 73.3% specificity and 81.5% sensitivity. CONCLUSION: Elastography improves the accuracy of Doppler-US in the detection of severe fibrosis. This two-step procedure will help radiologists to accurately identify patients who need to be referred to specialist hepatologists during routine Doppler-US examinations.

Fibrosis assessment using FibroMeter combined to first generation tests in hepatitis C.

AIM: To evaluate the performance of FibroMeterVirus3G combined to the first generation tests aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index (APRI) or Forns index to assess significant fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C (CHC). METHODS: First generation tests APRI or Forns were initially applied in a derivation population from Rio de Janeiro in Brazil considering cut-offs previously reported in the literature to evaluate significant fibrosis. FibroMeterVirus3G was sequentially applied to unclassified cases from APRI or Forns. Accuracy of non-invasive combination of tests, APRI plus FibroMeterVirus3G and Forns plus FibroMeterVirus3G was evaluated in the Brazilian derivation population. APRI plus FibroMeterVirus3G combination was validated in a population of CHC patients from Angers in France. All patients were submitted to liver biopsy staged according to METAVIR score by experienced hepatopathologists. Significant fibrosis was considered as METAVIR F ≥ 2. The fibrosis stage classification was used as the reference for accuracy evaluation of non-invasive combination of tests. Blood samples for the calculation of serum tests were collected on the same day of biopsy procedure or within a maximum 3 mo interval and stored at -70 °C. RESULTS: Seven hundred and sixty CHC patients were included (222 in the derivation population and 538 in the validation group). In the derivation population, the FibroMeterVirus3G AUROC was similar to APRI AUROC (0.855 vs 0.815, P = 0.06) but higher than Forns AUROC (0.769, P < 0.001). The best FibroMeterVirus3G cut-off to discriminate significant fibrosis was 0.61 (80% diagnostic accuracy; 75% in the validation population, P = 0.134). The sequential combination of APRI or Forns with FibroMeterVirus3G in derivation population presented similar performance compared to FibroMeterVirus3G used alone (79% vs 78% vs 80%, respectively, P = 0.791). Unclassified cases of significant fibrosis after applying APRI and Forns corresponded to 49% and 54%, respectively, of the total sample. However, the combination of APRI or Forns with FibroMeterVirus3G allowed 73% and 77%, respectively, of these unclassified cases to be correctly evaluated. Moreover, this combination resulted in a reduction of FibroMeterVirus3G requirement in approximately 50% of the entire sample. The stepwise combination of APRI and FibroMeterVirus3G applied to the validation population correctly identified 74% of patients with severe fibrosis (F ≥ 3). CONCLUSION: The stepwise combination of APRI or Forns with FibroMeterVirus3G may represent an accurate lower cost alternative when evaluating significant fibrosis, with no need for liver biopsy.

A stepwise algorithm using an at-a-glance first-line test for the non-invasive diagnosis of advanced liver fibrosis and cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Chronic liver diseases (CLD) are common, and are therefore mainly managed by non-hepatologists. These physicians lack access to the best non-invasive tests of liver fibrosis, and consequently cannot accurately determine the disease severity. Referral to a hepatologist is then needed. We aimed to implement an algorithm, comprising a new first-line test usable by all physicians, for the detection of advanced liver fibrosis in all CLD patients. METHODS: Diagnostic study: 3754 CLD patients with liver biopsy were 2:1 randomized into derivation and validation sets. Prognostic study: longitudinal follow-up of 1275 CLD patients with baseline fibrosis tests. RESULTS: Diagnostic study: the easy liver fibrosis test (eLIFT), an "at-a-glance" sum of points attributed to age, gender, gamma-glutamyl transferase, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), platelets and prothrombin time, was developed for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis. In the validation set, eLIFT and fibrosis-4 (FIB4) had the same sensitivity (78.0% vs. 76.6%, p=0.470) but eLIFT gave fewer false positive results, especially in patients ≥60years old (53.8% vs. 82.0%, p<0.001), and was thus more suitable as screening test. FibroMeter with vibration controlled transient elastography (VCTE) was the most accurate among the eight fibrosis tests evaluated. The sensitivity of the eLIFT-FMVCTE algorithm (first-line eLIFT, second-line FibroMeterVCTE) was 76.1% for advanced fibrosis and 92.1% for cirrhosis. Prognostic study: patients diagnosed as having "no/mild fibrosis" by the algorithm had excellent liver-related prognosis with thus no need for referral to a hepatologist. CONCLUSION: The eLIFT-FMVCTE algorithm extends the detection of advanced liver fibrosis to all CLD patients and reduces unnecessary referrals of patients without significant CLD to hepatologists. LAY SUMMARY: Blood fibrosis tests and transient elastography accurately diagnose advanced liver fibrosis in the large population of patients having chronic liver disease, but these non-invasive tests are only currently available in specialized centers. We have developed an algorithm including the easy liver fibrosis test (eLIFT), a new simple and widely available blood test. It is used as a first-line procedure that selects at-risk patients who need further evaluation with the FibroMeterVCTE, an accurate fibrosis test combining blood markers and transient elastography result. This new algorithm, called the eLIFT-FMVCTE, accurately identifies the patients with advanced chronic liver disease who need referral to a specialist, and those with no or mild liver lesions who can remain under the care of their usual physician. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: No registration (analysis of pooled data from previously published diagnostic studies).

Diagnostic accuracy and prognostic significance of blood fibrosis tests and liver stiffness measurement by FibroScan in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: NAFLD is highly prevalent but only a small subset of patients develop advanced liver fibrosis with impaired liver-related prognosis. We aimed to compare blood fibrosis tests and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by FibroScan for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis and the evaluation of prognosis in NAFLD. METHODS: Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated in a cross-sectional study including 452 NAFLD patients with liver biopsy (NASH-CRN fibrosis stage), LSM, and eight blood fibrosis tests (BARD, NAFLD fibrosis score, FibroMeter(NAFLD), aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index (APRI), FIB4, FibroTest, Hepascore, FibroMeter(V2G)). Prognostic accuracy was evaluated in a longitudinal study including 360 NAFLD patients. RESULTS: LSM and FibroMeter(V2G) were the two best-performing tests in the cross-sectional study: AUROCs for advanced fibrosis (F3/4) were, respectively, 0.831±0.019 and 0.817±0.020 (p⩽0.041 vs. other tests); rates of patients with ⩾90% negative/positive predictive values for F3/4 were 56.4% and 46.7% (p<0.001 vs. other tests); Obuchowski indexes were 0.834±0.014 and 0.798±0.016 (p⩽0.036 vs. other tests). Two fibrosis classifications were developed to precisely estimate the histological fibrosis stage from LSM or FibroMeter(V2G) results without liver biopsy (diagnostic accuracy, respectively: 80.8% vs. 77.4%, p=0.190). Kaplan-Meier curves in the longitudinal study showed that both classifications categorised NAFLD patients into subgroups with significantly different prognoses (p<0.001): the higher was the class of the fibrosis classification, the worse was the prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: LSM and FibroMeter(V2G) were the most accurate of nine evaluated tests for the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis in NAFLD. LSM and FibroMeter(V2G) fibrosis classifications help physicians estimate both fibrosis stage and patient prognosis in clinical practice. LAY SUMMARY: The amount of liver fibrosis is the main determinant of the liver-related prognosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We evaluated eight blood tests and FibroScan in a cross-sectional diagnostic study and found that FibroScan and the blood test FibroMeter(V2G) were the two most accurate tests for the non-invasive evaluation of liver fibrosis in NAFLD. A longitudinal prognostic study showed these two tests initially developed for the diagnosis are also prognostic markers as they allow for the stratification of NAFLD patients in several subgroups with significantly different prognosis.

Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: Mono or multipolar?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Thermo-ablation by radiofrequency is recognized as a curative treatment for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. However, local recurrence may occur because of incomplete peripheral tumor destruction. Multipolar radiofrequency has been developed to increase the size of the maximal ablation zone. We aimed to compare the efficacy of monopolar and multipolar radiofrequency for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma and determine factors predicting failure. METHODS: A total of 171 consecutive patients with 214 hepatocellular carcinomas were retrospectively included. One hundred fifty-eight tumors were treated with an expandable monopolar electrode and 56 with a multipolar technique using several linear bipolar electrodes. Imaging studies at 6 weeks after treatment, then every 3 months, assessed local effectiveness. Radiofrequency failure was defined as persistent residual tumor after two sessions (primary radiofrequency failure) or local tumor recurrence during follow-up. This study received institutional review board approval (number 2014/77). RESULTS: Imaging showed complete tumor ablation in 207 of 214 lesions after the first session of radiofrequency. After a second session, only two cases of residual viable tumor were observed. During follow-up, there were 46 local tumor recurrences. Thus, radiofrequency failure occurred in 48/214 (22.4%) cases. By multivariate analysis, technique (P < 0.001) and tumor size (P = 0.023) were independent predictors of radiofrequency failure. Failure rate was lower with the multipolar technique for tumors < 25 mm (P = 0.023) and for tumors between 25 and 45 mm (P = 0.082). There was no difference for tumors ≥ 45 mm (P = 0.552). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to monopolar radiofrequency, multipolar radiofrequency improves tumor ablation with a subsequent lower rate of local tumor recurrence.

Liver stiffness in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A comparison of supersonic shear imaging, FibroScan, and ARFI with liver biopsy.

UNLABELLED: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has become a major public health issue. The goal of this study was to assess the clinical use of liver stiffness measurement (LSM) evaluated by supersonic shear imaging (SSI), FibroScan, and acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) in a cohort of NAFLD patients who underwent liver biopsy. A total of 291 NAFLD patients were prospectively enrolled from November 2011 to February 2015 at 2 French university hospitals. LSM was assessed by SSI, FibroScan (M probe), and ARFI within two weeks prior to liver biopsy. Calculations of the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) were performed and compared for the staging of liver fibrosis. AUROC for SSI, FibroScan, and ARFI were 0.86, 0.82, and 0.77 for diagnoses of ≥F2; 0.89, 0.86, and 0.84 for ≥F3; and 0.88, 0.87, and 0.84 for F4, respectively. SSI had a higher accuracy than ARFI for diagnoses of significant fibrosis (≥F2) (P = 0.004). Clinical factors related to obesity such as body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m(2) , waist circumference ≥102 cm or increased parietal wall thickness were associated with LSM failures when using SSI or FibroScan and with unreliable results when using ARFI. In univariate analysis, FibroScan values were slightly correlated with NAFLD activity score and steatosis (R = 0.28 and 0.22, respectively), whereas SSI and ARFI were not; however, these components of NAFLD did not affect LSM results in multivariate analysis. The cutoff values for SSI and FibroScan for staging fibrosis with a sensitivity ≥90% were very close: 6.3/6.2 kPa for ≥F2, 8.3/8.2 kPa for ≥F3, and 10.5/9.5 kPa for F4. CONCLUSION: Although obesity is associated with an increase in LSM failure, the studied techniques and especially SSI provide high value for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis in NAFLD patients. (Hepatology 2016;63:1817-1827).

Precise evaluation of liver histology by computerized morphometry shows that steatosis influences liver stiffness measured by transient elastography in chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Liver stiffness evaluation (LSE) by Fibroscan is now widely used to assess liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Liver steatosis is a common lesion in chronic hepatitis C as in other chronic liver diseases, but its influence on LSE remains unclear. We aimed to precisely determine the influence of steatosis on LSE by using quantitative and precise morphometric measurements of liver histology. METHODS: 650 patients with chronic hepatitis C, liver biopsy, and LSE were included. Liver specimens were evaluated by optical analysis (Metavir F and A, steatosis grading) and by computerized morphometry to determine the area (%, reflecting quantity) and fractal dimension (FD, reflecting architecture) of liver fibrosis and steatosis. RESULTS: The relationships between LSE and liver histology were better described using morphometry. LSE median was independently linked to fibrosis (area or FD), steatosis (area or FD), activity (serum AST), and IQR/LSE median. Steatosis area ≥4.0 % induced a 50 % increase in LSE result in patients with fibrosis area <9 %. In patients with IQR/LSE median ≤0.30, the rate of F0/1 patients misclassified as F ≥ 2 by Fibroscan was, respectively for steatosis area <4.0 and ≥4.0 %: 12.6 vs 32.4 % (p = 0.003). Steatosis level did not influence LSE median when fibrosis area was ≥9 %, and consequently did not increase the rate of F ≤ 3 patients misclassified as cirrhotic. CONCLUSION: A precise evaluation of liver histology by computerized morphometry shows that liver stiffness measured by Fibroscan is linked to liver fibrosis, activity, and also steatosis. High level of steatosis induces misevaluation of liver fibrosis by Fibroscan.

Determination of reliability criteria for liver stiffness evaluation by transient elastography.

UNLABELLED: Liver stiffness evaluation (LSE) is usually considered as reliable when it fulfills all the following criteria: ≥10 valid measurements, ≥60% success rate, and interquartile range / median ratio (IQR/M) ≤0.30. However, such reliable LSE have never been shown to be more accurate than unreliable LSE. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the relevance of the usual definition for LSE reliability, and to improve reliability by using diagnostic accuracy as a primary outcome in a large population. 1,165 patients with chronic liver disease from 19 French centers were included. All patients had liver biopsy and LSE. 75.7% of LSE were reliable according to the usual definition. However, these reliable LSE were not significantly more accurate than unreliable LSE with, respectively: 85.8% versus 81.5% well-classified patients for the diagnosis of cirrhosis (P = 0.082). In multivariate analyses with different diagnostic targets, LSE median and IQR/M were independent predictors of fibrosis staging, with no significant influence of ≥10 valid measurements or LSE success rate. These two reliability criteria determined three LSE groups: "very reliable" (IQR/M ≤0.10), "reliable" (0.10< IQR/M ≤0.30, or IQR/M >0.30 with LSE median <7.1 kPa), and "poorly reliable" (IQR/M >0.30 with LSE median ≥7.1 kPa). The rates of well-classified patients for the diagnosis of cirrhosis were, respectively: 90.4%, 85.8%, and 69.5% (P < 10(-3) ). According to these new reliability criteria, 9.1% of LSE were poorly reliable (versus 24.3% unreliable LSE with the usual definition, P < 10(-3) ), 74.3% were reliable, and 16.6% were very reliable. CONCLUSION: The usual definition for LSE reliability is not relevant. LSE reliability depends on IQR/M according to liver stiffness median level, defining thus three reliability categories: very reliable, reliable, and poorly reliable LSE. (HEPATOLOGY 2013).

Comparison of nine blood tests and transient elastography for liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C: the ANRS HCEP-23 study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Blood tests and transient elastography (Fibroscan™) have been developed as alternatives to liver biopsy. This ANRS HCEP-23 study compared the diagnostic accuracy of nine blood tests and transient elastography (Fibroscan™) to assess liver fibrosis, vs. liver biopsy, in untreated patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC). METHODS: This was a multicentre prospective independent study in 19 French University hospitals of consecutive adult patients having simultaneous liver biopsy, biochemical blood tests (performed in a centralized laboratory) and Fibroscan™. Two experienced pathologists independently reviewed the liver biopsies (mean length=25±8.4 mm). Performance was assessed using ROC curves corrected by Obuchowski's method. RESULTS: Fibroscan™ was not interpretable in 113 (22%) patients. In the 382 patients having both blood tests and interpretable Fibroscan™, Fibroscan™ performed similarly to the best blood tests for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis and cirrhosis. Obuchowski's measure showed Fibrometer® (0.86), Fibrotest® (0.84), Hepascore® (0.84), and interpretable Fibroscan™ (0.84) to be the most accurate tests. The combination of Fibrotest®, Fibrometer®, or Hepascore® with Fibroscan™ or Apri increases the percentage of well classified patients from 70-73% to 80-83% for significant fibrosis, but for cirrhosis a combination offers no improvement. For the 436 patients having all the blood tests, AUROC's ranged from 0.82 (Fibrometer®) to 0.75 (Hyaluronate) for significant fibrosis, and from 0.89 (Fibrometer® and Hepascore®) to 0.83 (FIB-4) for cirrhosis. CONCLUSIONS: Contrarily to blood tests, performance of Fibroscan™ was reduced due to uninterpretable results. Fibrotest®, interpretable Fibroscan™, Fibrometer®, and Hepascore® perform best and similarly for diagnosis of significant fibrosis and cirrhosis.

Comparison of eight diagnostic algorithms for liver fibrosis in hepatitis C: new algorithms are more precise and entirely noninvasive.

UNLABELLED: The sequential algorithm for fibrosis evaluation (SAFE) and the Bordeaux algorithm (BA), which cross-check FibroTest with the aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index (APRI) or FibroScan, are very accurate but provide only a binary diagnosis of significant fibrosis (SAFE or BA for Metavir F ≥ 2) or cirrhosis (SAFE or BA for F4). Therefore, in clinical practice, physicians have to apply the algorithm for F ≥ 2, and then, when needed, the algorithm for F4 ("successive algorithms"). We aimed to evaluate successive SAFE, successive BA, and a new, noninvasive, detailed classification of fibrosis. The study included 1785 patients with chronic hepatitis C, liver biopsy, blood fibrosis tests, and FibroScan (the latter in 729 patients). The most accurate synchronous combination of FibroScan with a blood test (FibroMeter) provided a new detailed (six classes) classification (FM+FS). Successive SAFE had a significantly (P < 10(-3) ) lower diagnostic accuracy (87.3%) than individual SAFE for F ≥ 2 (94.6%) or SAFE for F4 (89.5%), and required significantly more biopsies (70.8% versus 64.0% or 6.4%, respectively, P < 10(-3) ). Similarly, successive BA had significantly (P ≤ 10(-3) ) lower diagnostic accuracy (84.7%) than individual BA for F ≥ 2 (88.3%) or BA for F4 (94.2%), and required significantly more biopsies (49.8% versus 34.6% or 24.6%, respectively, P < 10(-3) ). The diagnostic accuracy of the FM+FS classification (86.7%) was not significantly different from those of successive SAFE or BA. However, this new classification required no biopsy. CONCLUSION: SAFE and BA for significant fibrosis or cirrhosis are very accurate. However, their successive use induces a significant decrease in diagnostic accuracy and a significant increase in required liver biopsy. A new fibrosis classification that synchronously combines two fibrosis tests was as accurate as successive SAFE or BA, while providing an entirely noninvasive (0% liver biopsy) and more precise (six versus two or three fibrosis classes) fibrosis diagnosis.

Comparison of accuracy of fibrosis degree classifications by liver biopsy and non-invasive tests in chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive tests have been constructed and evaluated mainly for binary diagnoses such as significant fibrosis. Recently, detailed fibrosis classifications for several non-invasive tests have been developed, but their accuracy has not been thoroughly evaluated in comparison to liver biopsy, especially in clinical practice and for Fibroscan. Therefore, the main aim of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of detailed fibrosis classifications available for non-invasive tests and liver biopsy. The secondary aim was to validate these accuracies in independent populations. METHODS: Four HCV populations provided 2,068 patients with liver biopsy, four different pathologist skill-levels and non-invasive tests. Results were expressed as percentages of correctly classified patients. RESULTS: In population #1 including 205 patients and comparing liver biopsy (reference: consensus reading by two experts) and blood tests, Metavir fibrosis (FM) stage accuracy was 64.4% in local pathologists vs. 82.2% (p < 10-3) in single expert pathologist. Significant discrepancy (≥ 2FM vs reference histological result) rates were: Fibrotest: 17.2%, FibroMeter2G: 5.6%, local pathologists: 4.9%, FibroMeter3G: 0.5%, expert pathologist: 0% (p < 10-3). In population #2 including 1,056 patients and comparing blood tests, the discrepancy scores, taking into account the error magnitude, of detailed fibrosis classification were significantly different between FibroMeter2G (0.30 ± 0.55) and FibroMeter3G (0.14 ± 0.37, p < 10-3) or Fibrotest (0.84 ± 0.80, p < 10-3). In population #3 (and #4) including 458 (359) patients and comparing blood tests and Fibroscan, accuracies of detailed fibrosis classification were, respectively: Fibrotest: 42.5% (33.5%), Fibroscan: 64.9% (50.7%), FibroMeter2G: 68.7% (68.2%), FibroMeter3G: 77.1% (83.4%), p < 10-3 (p < 10-3). Significant discrepancy (≥ 2 FM) rates were, respectively: Fibrotest: 21.3% (22.2%), Fibroscan: 12.9% (12.3%), FibroMeter2G: 5.7% (6.0%), FibroMeter3G: 0.9% (0.9%), p < 10-3 (p < 10-3). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy in detailed fibrosis classification of the best-performing blood test outperforms liver biopsy read by a local pathologist, i.e., in clinical practice; however, the classification precision is apparently lesser. This detailed classification accuracy is much lower than that of significant fibrosis with Fibroscan and even Fibrotest but higher with FibroMeter3G. FibroMeter classification accuracy was significantly higher than those of other non-invasive tests. Finally, for hepatitis C evaluation in clinical practice, fibrosis degree can be evaluated using an accurate blood test.

A new combination of blood test and fibroscan for accurate non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis stages in chronic hepatitis C.

OBJECTIVES: Precise evaluation of the level of liver fibrosis is recommended in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC). Blood fibrosis tests and Fibroscan are now widely used for the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis. Detailed fibrosis stage classifications have been developed to provide an estimation of the liver fibrosis stage from the results of these non-invasive tests. Our aim was to develop a new and more accurate fibrosis stage classification by using new scores combining non-invasive fibrosis tests. METHODS: In all, 729 patients with CHC (exploratory set: 349; validation set: 380) had liver biopsy for Metavir fibrosis (F) staging, and 6 fibrosis tests: Fibroscan, Fibrotest, FibroMeter, Hepascore, FIB-4, APRI. RESULTS: Exploratory set: Fibroscan and FibroMeter were the independent predictors of different diagnostic targets of liver fibrosis. New fibrosis indexes combining FibroMeter and Fibroscan were thus developed for the diagnosis of clinically significant fibrosis (CSF-index) or severe fibrosis (SF-index). The association of CSF- and SF-indexes provided a new fibrosis stage classification (CSF/SF classification): F0/1, F1/2, F2 ± 1, F2/3, F3 ± 1, F4. Validation set: CSF/SF classification had a high diagnostic accuracy (85.8% well-classified patients), significantly higher than the diagnostic accuracies of FibroMeter (69.7%, P<0.001), Fibroscan (63.3%, P<0.001), or Fibrotest (43.9%, P<0.001) classifications. CONCLUSIONS: The association of new fibrosis indexes combining FibroMeter and Fibroscan provides a new fibrosis stage classification. This classification is significantly more accurate than Fibrotest, FibroMeter, or Fibroscan classifications, and improves the accuracy of the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis stages to 86% without any liver biopsy.

Evolutionary history of hepatitis C virus genotype 5a in France, a multicenter ANRS study.

The epidemic history of HCV genotype 5a is poorly documented in France, where its prevalence is very low, except in a small central area, where it accounts for 14.2% of chronic hepatitis C cases. A Bayesian coalescent phylogenetic investigation based on the E1 envelope gene and a non-structural genomic segment (NS3/4) was carried out to trace the origin of this epidemic using a large sample of genotype 5a isolates collected throughout France. The dates of documented transmissions by blood transfusion were used to calibrate five nodes in the phylogeny. The results of the E1 gene analysis showed that the best-fitting population dynamic model was the expansion growth model under a relaxed molecular clock. The rate of nucleotide substitutions and time to the most recent common ancestors (tMRCA) of genotype 5a isolates were estimated. The divergence of all the French HCV genotype 5a strains included in this study was dated to 1939 [95% HPD: 1921-1956], and the tMRCA of isolates from central France was dated to 1954 [1942-1967], which is in agreement with epidemiological data. NS3/4 analysis provided similar estimates with strongly overlapping HPD values. Phylodynamic analyses give a plausible reconstruction of the evolutionary history of HCV genotype 5a in France, suggesting the concomitant roles of transfusion, iatrogenic route and intra-familial transmission in viral diffusion.

Optimization and robustness of blood tests for liver fibrosis and cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVES: To optimize the performance and feasibility of fibrosis blood tests and evaluate their robustness. DESIGN AND METHODS: The derivation population included 1056 HCV patients with liver biopsy and blood markers. Validation populations included 984 patients with various viral hepatitis causes, and Fibroscan and/or liver biopsy and/or blood markers. RESULTS: The bootstrap method validated the markers of the original FibroMeter(2G), but not those of Fibrotest and Hepascore, and provided a hyaluronate-free FibroMeter(3G). AUROCs for significant fibrosis were: FibroMeter(2G): 0.853 vs. FibroMeter(3G): 0.851, p=0.489. Compared to FibroMeter(2G), FibroMeter(3G) had a significantly higher patient rate with predictive values ≥90% for significant fibrosis. Accuracy for fibrosis stage classification was: Fibrotest: 37.9%, FibroMeter(2G): 74.9%, and FibroMeter(3G): 86.9% (p<10(-3)). CONCLUSION: The bootstrap method validated FibroMeter(2G) and provided a cheaper and more feasible hyaluronate-free FibroMeter(3G) with comparable performance. Compared to binary diagnosis, fibrosis stage classification increased discrimination, with an increased accuracy to 87% for FibroMeter(3G).

Acoustic radiation force impulse: a new ultrasonographic technology for the widespread noninvasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: As a module of a standard ultrasound imaging device, acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) is a new technology for liver stiffness evaluation (LSE). We aimed to evaluate accuracy, feasibility, reproducibility, and training effect of ARFI for liver fibrosis evaluation. METHODS: One hundred and one patients with chronic liver disease had LSE by Fibroscan and ARFI. LSE by ARFI was performed in the two liver lobes by two operators: an expert and a novice. Correlation and agreement were evaluated by the Pearson (Rp) and intraclass (Ric) correlation coefficients. The independent reference for liver fibrosis was fibrosis blood tests. RESULTS: ARFI results, ranging from 0.7 to 4.6 m/s, were well correlated with Fibroscan results (Rp=0.76). Fibroscan had a significantly higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) than ARFI for the perprotocol diagnosis of significant fibrosis: 0.890+/-0.034 versus 0.795+/-0.047 (P=0.04). However, LSE failure occurred in zero patients using ARFI versus six patients using Fibroscan (P=0.03). Thus, on an intention-to-diagnose basis, Fibroscan and ARFI AUROCs for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis were not different: 0.791+/-0.049 versus 0.793+/-0.046 (P=0.98). Interobserver agreement was very good (Ric=0.84) and excellent for ARFI interquartile range (IQR)< or =0.30 (Ric=0.91). Indeed, agreement was independently predicted only by ARFI IQR, but not by LSE result as earlier observed for Fibroscan. ARFI AUROC was 0.876+/-0.057 in patients with ARFI IQR ratio< or =0.30, and Fibroscan AUROC was 0.912+/-0.034 in patients with Fibroscan IQR ratio less than 0.21 (P=0.59). Intersite ARFI agreement between the two liver lobes was fair (Ric=0.60). There was no training effect for LSE by ARFI. CONCLUSION: ARFI is highly feasible and reproducible, and provides diagnostic accuracy similar to Fibroscan. This new device seems noteworthy for the widespread noninvasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis.

Comparison of liver fibrosis blood tests developed for HCV with new specific tests in HIV/HCV co-infection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We compared 5 non-specific and 2 specific blood tests for liver fibrosis in HCV/HIV co-infection. METHODS: Four hundred and sixty-seven patients were included into derivation (n=183) or validation (n=284) populations. Within these populations, the diagnostic target, significant fibrosis (Metavir F > or = 2), was found in 66% and 72% of the patients, respectively. Two new fibrosis tests, FibroMeter HICV and HICV test, were constructed in the derivation population. RESULTS: Unadjusted AUROCs in the derivation population were: APRI: 0.716, Fib-4: 0.722, Fibrotest: 0.778, Hepascore: 0.779, FibroMeter: 0.783, HICV test: 0.822, FibroMeter HICV: 0.828. AUROCs adjusted on classification and distribution of fibrosis stages in a reference population showed similar values in both populations. FibroMeter, FibroMeter HICV and HICV test had the highest correct classification rates in F0/1 and F3/4 (which account for high predictive values): 77-79% vs. 70-72% in the other tests (p=0.002). Reliable individual diagnosis based on predictive values > or = 90% distinguished three test categories: poorly reliable: Fib-4 (2.4% of patients), APRI (8.9%); moderately reliable: Fibrotest (25.4%), FibroMeter (26.6%), Hepascore (30.2%); acceptably reliable: HICV test (40.2%), FibroMeter HICV (45.6%) (p<10(-3) between tests). FibroMeter HICV classified all patients into four reliable diagnosis intervals (< or =F1, F1+/-1, > or =F1, > or =F2) with an overall accuracy of 93% vs. 79% (p<10(-3)) for a binary diagnosis of significant fibrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Tests designed for HCV infections are less effective in HIV/HCV infections. A specific test, like FibroMeter HICV, was the most interesting test for diagnostic accuracy, correct classification profile, and a reliable diagnosis. With reliable diagnosis intervals, liver biopsy can therefore be avoided in all patients.