Identifying and Linking Patients At Risk for MASLD with Advanced Fibrosis to Care in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Severity of fibrosis is the driver of liver-related outcomes in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), and non-invasive testing such as fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score is utilized for risk stratification. We aimed to determine if primary care patients at risk for MASLD and advanced fibrosis were evaluated with subsequent testing. A secondary aim was to determine if at-risk patients with normal aminotransferases had advanced fibrosis. METHODS: Primary care patients at increased risk for MASLD with advanced fibrosis (n = 91,914) were identified using previously established criteria. Patients with known alternative/concomitant etiology of liver disease or cirrhosis were excluded. The study cohort included patients with calculated FIB-4 score in 2020 (n = 52,006), and stratified into low, indeterminate, and high likelihood of advanced fibrosis. Among those at indeterminate/high risk, rates of subsequent testing were measured. RESULTS: Risk stratification with FIB-4 characterized 77% (n = 40,026) as low risk, 17% (n = 8847) as indeterminate, and 6% (n = 3133) as high risk. Among indeterminate/high-risk patients (n = 11,980), 78.7% (n = 9433) had aminotransferases within normal limits, 0.95% (n = 114) had elastography, and 8.2% (n = 984) were referred for subspecialty evaluation. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of primary care patients at risk for MASLD with fibrosis, the FIB-4 score identified a substantial proportion of indeterminate/high-risk patients, the majority of which had normal aminotransferase levels. Low rates of subsequent testing were observed. These data suggest that a majority of patients at increased risk for liver-related outcomes remain unrecognized and highlight opportunities to facilitate their identification.

Multidisciplinary Endocrine Tumor Board: Assessment of the Patient Experience.

Research surrounding tumor boards has focused on patient outcomes and care coordination. Little is known about the patient experience with tumor boards. This survey examined aspects of the patient experience for patients presented at our multidisciplinary endocrine tumor board (ETB). A 15-item survey was distributed via the online patient portal to patients over the age of 18 whose case had been discussed at our ETB over an 18-month period. Descriptive statistics were reported, and a Fisher's exact test was used to examine relationships between variables. A total of 47 patients completed the survey (46%). A majority (72%) report their provider explained what the ETB is, and 77% report being informed their case would be discussed. Most patients were satisfied their case was being discussed (72%). A number of patients did report moderate or severe anxiety knowing their case was being discussed (15%). Sixty-four percent of patients report the ETB recommendations were clearly explained; however, satisfaction with the recommendations was slightly lower (53%). Despite the somewhat low satisfaction with the recommendations, 75% of patients felt more confident in their treatment plan knowing their case was discussed. Finally, if given the chance, 66% responded that they would have been interested in participating in their own ETB discussion. This study provides some insight into the patient experience surrounding tumor board discussions. Overall, patients are satisfied when their case is discussed at ETB. Patients can also experience anxiety about these discussions, and many patients desire to be present for their own discussions.