Use of non-invasive diagnostic tools for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis: A qualitative exploration of challenges and barriers.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Non-invasive tests (NITs) are underutilized for diagnosis and risk stratification in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), despite good accuracy. This study aimed to identify challenges and barriers to the use of NITs in clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative exploratory study in Germany, Italy, United Kingdom and United States. Phase 1 participants (primary care physicians, hepatologists, diabetologists, researchers, healthcare administrators, payers and patient advocates; n = 29) were interviewed. Phase 2 participants (experts in MASLD; n = 8) took part in a group discussion to validate and expand on Phase 1 findings. Finally, we triangulated perspectives in a hybrid deductive/inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Four themes hindering the use of NITs emerged: (1) limited knowledge and awareness; (2) unclear referral pathways for patients affected by liver conditions; (3) uncertainty over the value of NITs in monitoring and managing liver diseases; and (4) challenges justifying system-level reimbursement. Through these themes, participants perceived a stigma associated with liver diseases, and primary care physicians generally lacked awareness, adequate knowledge and skills to use recommended NITs. We identified uncertainties over the results of NITs, specifically to guide lifestyle intervention or to identify patients that should be referred to a specialist. Participants indicated an ongoing need for research and development to improve the prognostic value of NITs and communicating their cost-effectiveness to payers. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study suggests that use of NITs for MASLD is limited due to several individual and system-level barriers. Multi-level interventions are likely required to address these barriers.

Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: Update and impact of new nomenclature on the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases practice guidance on nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

This commentary discusses how clinicians and various stakeholders can utilize the recently published American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (AASLD NAFLD) Practice Guidance in light of the change in the nomenclature to steatotic liver disease and its subcategories. The new terminologies explained in this commentary make it easier for the readers to interchangeably use metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) in place of NAFLD and metabolic-dysfunction associated steatohepatitis (MASH) instead of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), respectively, as they read the NAFLD Practice Guidance. The guidance document is relevant and can be utilized for the diagnosis, risk stratification, and management of patients with MASLD. This commentary serves as an accompanying article to the NAFLD Practice Guidance and helps it clinical application in the light of the new nomenclature.

The future of International Classification of Diseases coding in steatotic liver disease: An expert panel Delphi consensus statement.

BACKGROUND: Following the adoption of new nomenclature for steatotic liver disease, we aimed to build consensus on the use of International Classification of Diseases codes and recommendations for future research and advocacy. METHODS: Through a two-stage Delphi process, a core group (n = 20) reviewed draft statements and recommendations (n = 6), indicating levels of agreement. Following revisions, this process was repeated with a large expert panel (n = 243) from 73 countries. RESULTS: Consensus ranged from 88.8% to 96.9% (mean = 92.3%). CONCLUSIONS: This global consensus statement provides guidance on harmonizing the International Classification of Diseases coding for steatotic liver disease and future directions to advance the field.

A Phase 3, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Resmetirom in NASH with Liver Fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is a progressive liver disease with no approved treatment. Resmetirom is an oral, liver-directed, thyroid hormone receptor beta-selective agonist in development for the treatment of NASH with liver fibrosis. METHODS: We are conducting an ongoing phase 3 trial involving adults with biopsy-confirmed NASH and a fibrosis stage of F1B, F2, or F3 (stages range from F0 [no fibrosis] to F4 [cirrhosis]). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive once-daily resmetirom at a dose of 80 mg or 100 mg or placebo. The two primary end points at week 52 were NASH resolution (including a reduction in the nonalcoholic fatty liver disease [NAFLD] activity score by ≥2 points; scores range from 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating more severe disease) with no worsening of fibrosis, and an improvement (reduction) in fibrosis by at least one stage with no worsening of the NAFLD activity score. RESULTS: Overall, 966 patients formed the primary analysis population (322 in the 80-mg resmetirom group, 323 in the 100-mg resmetirom group, and 321 in the placebo group). NASH resolution with no worsening of fibrosis was achieved in 25.9% of the patients in the 80-mg resmetirom group and 29.9% of those in the 100-mg resmetirom group, as compared with 9.7% of those in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both comparisons with placebo). Fibrosis improvement by at least one stage with no worsening of the NAFLD activity score was achieved in 24.2% of the patients in the 80-mg resmetirom group and 25.9% of those in the 100-mg resmetirom group, as compared with 14.2% of those in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both comparisons with placebo). The change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels from baseline to week 24 was -13.6% in the 80-mg resmetirom group and -16.3% in the 100-mg resmetirom group, as compared with 0.1% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both comparisons with placebo). Diarrhea and nausea were more frequent with resmetirom than with placebo. The incidence of serious adverse events was similar across trial groups: 10.9% in the 80-mg resmetirom group, 12.7% in the 100-mg resmetirom group, and 11.5% in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Both the 80-mg dose and the 100-mg dose of resmetirom were superior to placebo with respect to NASH resolution and improvement in liver fibrosis by at least one stage. (Funded by Madrigal Pharmaceuticals; MAESTRO-NASH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03900429.).

Validation of the new nomenclature of steatotic liver disease in patients with a history of excessive alcohol intake: an analysis of data from a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Steatotic liver disease is a new overarching term that includes metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related steatotic liver disease (MetALD), and alcohol-related liver disease (ALD). We aimed to validate the prognostic importance of MASLD, MetALD, and ALD as steatotic liver disease subclasses. METHODS: Between April 18, 2013, and Sept 17, 2018, we prospectively recruited patients aged 18-75 years with current or previous excessive alcohol intake (>24 g/day for women and >36 g/day for men) for at least a year and no previous hepatic decompensation from the Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology at Odense University Hospital (Odense, Denmark). Participants were followed up until Sept 15, 2022. Here, we characterise these patients according to steatotic liver disease subclasses. We classified patients as having MASLD, MetALD, or ALD in accordance with the nomenclature definitions, on the basis of metabolic comorbidity and self-reported average alcohol intake in the 3 months leading up to inclusion. Histological scoring was done by a pathologist who was masked to the clinical data. We compared prognoses between classes using Cox regression analyses on hepatic decompensation and overall mortality as the two outcome measures. Patients not meeting the criteria for steatotic liver disease were classified as no steatotic liver disease and served as a reference group. FINDINGS: We enrolled 446 patients with a history of excessive alcohol intake were included in this analysis (334 [75%] were male and 112 [25%] were female; median age 56 years [SD 10]). Cirrhosis was present in 58 (13%), and 435 (98%) had at least one cardiometabolic risk factor. 321 (72%) met steatotic liver disease criteria and 125 (28%) did not have steatotic liver disease, meaning no evident liver steatosis and no significant fibrosis (≥F2). Of the 321 patients with steatotic liver disease, six (2%) were identified as having ALD due to the absence of cardiometabolic risk factors. The remaining 315 (98%) patients presented with at least one cardiometabolic risk factor. Of these patients, 153 (49%) had MASLD, 76 (24%) had MetALD, and 86 (27%) had ALD. During follow-up, 67 (15%) of 446 patients decompensated and 97 (22%) died (median follow-up 70 months [IQR 53-94]). Patients with steatotic liver disease had a significantly higher risk of hepatic decompensation and overall mortality than those without steatotic liver disease, independent of age, sex, and liver stiffness. The risk of decompensation increased in a stepwise manner from MASLD (hazard ratio 4·73 [95% CI 1·03-21·6]), through MetALD (7·69 [1·66-35·6]), to ALD (10·2 [2·24-46·4]). Similarly, overall mortality increased from MASLD (HR 2·30 [95% CI 1·08-4·90]), through MetALD (2·94 [1·31-6·58]), to ALD (3·57 [1·64-7·80]), independent of age, sex, and liver stiffness. INTERPRETATION: Steatotic liver disease and its subclasses portend distinct prognoses. There is a need to specify how historical alcohol intake should be integrated into the nomenclature and risk stratification of steatotic liver disease. FUNDING: EU Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program.

A global action agenda for turning the tide on fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Fatty liver disease is a major public health threat due to its very high prevalence and related morbidity and mortality. Focused and dedicated interventions are urgently needed to target disease prevention, treatment, and care. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We developed an aligned, prioritized action agenda for the global fatty liver disease community of practice. Following a Delphi methodology over 2 rounds, a large panel (R1 n = 344, R2 n = 288) reviewed the action priorities using Qualtrics XM, indicating agreement using a 4-point Likert-scale and providing written feedback. Priorities were revised between rounds, and in R2, panelists also ranked the priorities within 6 domains: epidemiology, treatment and care, models of care, education and awareness, patient and community perspectives, and leadership and public health policy. The consensus fatty liver disease action agenda encompasses 29 priorities. In R2, the mean percentage of "agree" responses was 82.4%, with all individual priorities having at least a super-majority of agreement (> 66.7% "agree"). The highest-ranked action priorities included collaboration between liver specialists and primary care doctors on early diagnosis, action to address the needs of people living with multiple morbidities, and the incorporation of fatty liver disease into relevant non-communicable disease strategies and guidance. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus-driven multidisciplinary fatty liver disease action agenda developed by care providers, clinical researchers, and public health and policy experts provides a path to reduce the prevalence of fatty liver disease and improve health outcomes. To implement this agenda, concerted efforts will be needed at the global, regional, and national levels.

A multisociety Delphi consensus statement on new fatty liver disease nomenclature.

The principal limitations of the terms NAFLD and NASH are the reliance on exclusionary confounder terms and the use of potentially stigmatising language. This study set out to determine if content experts and patient advocates were in favor of a change in nomenclature and/or definition. A modified Delphi process was led by three large pan-national liver associations. The consensus was defined a priori as a supermajority (67%) vote. An independent committee of experts external to the nomenclature process made the final recommendation on the acronym and its diagnostic criteria. A total of 236 panelists from 56 countries participated in 4 online surveys and 2 hybrid meetings. Response rates across the 4 survey rounds were 87%, 83%, 83%, and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents felt that the current nomenclature was sufficiently flawed to consider a name change. The terms "nonalcoholic" and "fatty" were felt to be stigmatising by 61% and 66% of respondents, respectively. Steatotic liver disease was chosen as an overarching term to encompass the various aetiologies of steatosis. The term steatohepatitis was felt to be an important pathophysiological concept that should be retained. The name chosen to replace NAFLD was metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. There was consensus to change the definition to include the presence of at least 1 of 5 cardiometabolic risk factors. Those with no metabolic parameters and no known cause were deemed to have cryptogenic steatotic liver disease. A new category, outside pure metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, termed metabolic and alcohol related/associated liver disease (MetALD), was selected to describe those with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, who consume greater amounts of alcohol per week (140-350 g/wk and 210-420 g/wk for females and males, respectively). The new nomenclature and diagnostic criteria are widely supported and nonstigmatising, and can improve awareness and patient identification.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of aldafermin in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Aldafermin, an engineered analog of the human hormone FGF19, improves liver histology in patients with noncirrhotic NASH; however, its efficacy and safety in compensated cirrhosis is unknown. No drug has yet to demonstrate benefit in the compensated NASH population. APPROACH AND RESULTS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial, 160 patients with compensated NASH cirrhosis were randomized to aldafermin 0.3 mg (n = 7), 1 mg (n = 42), 3 mg (n = 55), or placebo (n = 56) for 48 weeks. The 0.3 mg group was discontinued to limit exposure to suboptimal doses. The primary end point was a change in Enhanced Liver Fibrosis from baseline to week 48. The analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat population. At week 48, the least-squares mean difference in the change in Enhanced Liver Fibrosis was -0.5 (95% CI, -0.7 to -0.2; p = 0.0003) between the 3 mg group and the placebo group. 15%, 21%, and 23% of patients in the placebo, 1 mg, and 3 mg group, respectively, achieved fibrosis improvement ≥ 1 stage; and 13%, 16%, and 20% achieved fibrosis improvement ≥ 1 stage without NASH worsening. Improvement in alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, neoepitope-specific N-terminal pro-peptide of type III collagen, and liver stiffness favored aldefermin groups over placebo. Diarrhea was the most frequent adverse event, occurring at 26% and 40% in the 1 mg and 3 mg groups, respectively, compared to 18% in the placebo group. Overall, 0%, 2%, and 9% of patients in the placebo, 1 mg, and 3 mg group, respectively, discontinued due to treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Aldafermin 3 mg resulted in a significant reduction in Enhanced Liver Fibrosis in patients with compensated NASH cirrhosis.

Global survey of stigma among physicians and patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with fatty liver disease may experience stigma from the disease or comorbidities. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to understand stigma among patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and healthcare providers. METHODS: Members of the Global NASH Council created two surveys about experiences/attitudes toward NAFLD and related diagnostic terms: a 68-item patient and a 41-item provider survey. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 1,976 patients with NAFLD across 23 countries (51% Middle East/North Africa [MENA], 19% Europe, 17% USA, 8% Southeast Asia, 5% South Asia) and 825 healthcare providers (67% gastroenterologists/hepatologists) across 25 countries (39% MENA, 28% Southeast Asia, 22% USA, 6% South Asia, 3% Europe). Of all patients, 48% ever disclosed having NAFLD/NASH to family/friends; the most commonly used term was "fatty liver" (88% at least sometimes); "metabolic disease" or "MAFLD" were rarely used (never by >84%). Regarding various perceptions of diagnostic terms by patients, there were no substantial differences between "NAFLD", "fatty liver disease (FLD)", "NASH", or "MAFLD". The most popular response was being neither comfortable nor uncomfortable with either term (56%-71%), with slightly greater discomfort with "FLD" among the US and South Asian patients (47-52% uncomfortable). Although 26% of patients reported stigma related to overweight/obesity, only 8% reported a history of stigmatization or discrimination due to NAFLD. Among providers, 38% believed that the term "fatty" was stigmatizing, while 34% believed that "nonalcoholic" was stigmatizing, more commonly in MENA (43%); 42% providers (gastroenterologists/hepatologists 45% vs. 37% other specialties, p = 0.03) believed that the name change to metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (or MASLD) might reduce stigma. Regarding the new nomenclature, the percentage of providers reporting "steatotic liver disease" as stigmatizing was low (14%). CONCLUSIONS: The perception of NAFLD stigma varies among patients, providers, geographic locations and sub-specialties. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Over the past decades, efforts have been made to change the nomenclature of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to better align with its underlying pathogenetic pathways and remove any potential stigma associated with the name. Given the paucity of data related to stigma in NAFLD, we undertook this global comprehensive survey to assess stigma in NAFLD among patients and providers from around the world. We found there is a disconnect between physicians and patients related to stigma and related nomenclature. With this knowledge, educational programs can be developed to better target stigma in NAFLD among all stakeholders and to provide a better opportunity for the new nomenclature to address the issues of stigma.

Utility of pathologist panels for achieving consensus in NASH histologic scoring in clinical trials: Data from a phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Liver histopathologic assessment is the accepted surrogate endpoint in NASH trials; however, the scoring of NASH Clinical Research Network (CRN) histologic parameters is limited by intraobserver and interobserver variability. We designed a consensus panel approach to minimize variability when using this scoring system. We assessed agreement between readers, estimated linear weighted kappas between 2 panels, compared them with published pairwise kappa estimates, and addressed how agreement or disagreement might impact the precision and validity of the surrogate efficacy endpoint in NASH trials. METHODS: Two panels, each comprising 3 liver fellowship-trained pathologists who underwent NASH histology training, independently evaluated scanned whole slide images, scoring fibrosis, inflammation, hepatocyte ballooning, and steatosis from baseline and month 18 biopsies for 100 patients from the precirrhotic NASH study REGENERATE. The consensus score for each parameter was defined as agreement by ≥2 pathologists. If consensus was not reached, all 3 pathologists read the slide jointly to achieve a consensus score. RESULTS: Between the 2 panels, the consensus was 97%-99% for steatosis, 91%-93% for fibrosis, 88%-92% for hepatocyte ballooning, and 84%-91% for inflammation. Linear weighted kappa scores between panels were similar to published NASH CRN values. CONCLUSIONS: A panel of 3 trained pathologists independently scoring 4 NASH CRN histology parameters produced high consensus rates. Interpanel kappa values were comparable to NASH CRN metrics, supporting the accuracy and reproducibility of this method. The high concordance for fibrosis scoring was reassuring, as fibrosis is predictive of liver-specific outcomes and all-cause mortality.