RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Atención a la Salud , Hepatopatías , HumanosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico , Masculino , Femenino , Humanos , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/diagnóstico , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/metabolismo , Técnica Delphi , Hepatomegalia , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND & AIMS: An estimated 38% of adults worldwide have non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). From individual impacts to widespread public health and economic consequences, the implications of this disease are profound. This study aimed to develop an aligned, prioritised fatty liver disease research agenda for the global health community. METHODS: Nine co-chairs drafted initial research priorities, subsequently reviewed by 40 core authors and debated during a three-day in-person meeting. Following a Delphi methodology, over two rounds, a large panel (R1 n = 344, R2 n = 288) reviewed the priorities, via Qualtrics XM, indicating agreement using a four-point Likert-scale and providing written feedback. The core group revised the draft priorities between rounds. In R2, panellists also ranked the priorities within six domains: epidemiology, models of care, treatment and care, education and awareness, patient and community perspectives, and leadership and public health policy. RESULTS: The consensus-built fatty liver disease research agenda encompasses 28 priorities. The mean percentage of 'agree' responses increased from 78.3 in R1 to 81.1 in R2. Five priorities received unanimous combined agreement ('agree' + 'somewhat agree'); the remaining 23 priorities had >90% combined agreement. While all but one of the priorities exhibited at least a super-majority of agreement (>66.7% 'agree'), 13 priorities had <80% 'agree', with greater reliance on 'somewhat agree' to achieve >90% combined agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Adopting this multidisciplinary consensus-built research priorities agenda can deliver a step-change in addressing fatty liver disease, mitigating against its individual and societal harms and proactively altering its natural history through prevention, identification, treatment, and care. This agenda should catalyse the global health community's efforts to advance and accelerate responses to this widespread and fast-growing public health threat. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: An estimated 38% of adults and 13% of children and adolescents worldwide have fatty liver disease, making it the most prevalent liver disease in history. Despite substantial scientific progress in the past three decades, the burden continues to grow, with an urgent need to advance understanding of how to prevent, manage, and treat the disease. Through a global consensus process, a multidisciplinary group agreed on 28 research priorities covering a broad range of themes, from disease burden, treatment, and health system responses to awareness and policy. The findings have relevance for clinical and non-clinical researchers as well as funders working on fatty liver disease and non-communicable diseases more broadly, setting out a prioritised, ranked research agenda for turning the tide on this fast-growing public health threat.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico , Niño , Humanos , Adolescente , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/epidemiología , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/prevención & control , Salud Pública , Investigación , Salud GlobalRESUMEN
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 favour 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 panellists 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 (MASLD). 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 non-stigmatising, and can improve awareness and patient identification.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico , Femenino , Masculino , Humanos , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/diagnóstico , Técnica Delphi , Etanol , Consenso , HepatomegaliaRESUMEN
To achieve WHO's goal of eliminating hepatitis C virus (HCV), innovative strategies must be designed to diagnose and treat more patients. Therefore, we aimed to describe an implementation strategy to identify patients with HCV who were lost to follow-up (LTFU) and offer them re-linkage to HCV care. We conducted an implementation study utilizing a strategy to contact patients with HCV who were not under regular follow-up in 13 countries from Latin America. Patients with HCV were identified by the international classification of diseases (ICD-9/10) or equivalent. Medical records were then reviewed to confirm the diagnosis of chronic HCV infection defined by anti-HCV+ and detectable HCV-RNA. Identified patients who were not under follow-up by a liver specialist were contacted by telephone or email, and offered a medical reevaluation. A total of 10,364 patients were classified to have HCV. After reviewing their medical charts, 1349 (13%) had undetectable HCV-RNA or were wrongly coded. Overall, 9015 (86.9%) individuals were identified with chronic HCV infection. A total of 5096 (56.5%) patients were under routine HCV care and 3919 (43.5%) had been LTFU. We were able to contact 1617 (41.3%) of the 3919 patients who were LTFU at the primary medical institution, of which 427 (26.4%) were cured at a different institutions or were dead. Of the remaining patients, 906 (76.1%) were candidates for retrieval. In our cohort, about one out of four patients with chronic HCV who were LTFU were candidates to receive treatment. This strategy has the potential to be effective, accessible and significantly impacts on the HCV care cascade.
Asunto(s)
Hepatitis C Crónica , Hepatitis C , Humanos , Hepatitis C Crónica/diagnóstico , Hepatitis C Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Hepatitis C Crónica/epidemiología , América Latina/epidemiología , Perdida de Seguimiento , Hepacivirus/genética , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
Currently, chronic liver diseases have conditioned morbidity and mortality, many of these with a metabolic, toxicologic, immunologic, viral, or other etiology. Thus, a transcription factor that has been of huge importance for biomedical research is NRF-2. The latter is considered a principal component of the antioxidant mechanism, and it has been acknowledged that it impairs the function of NRF-2 in many liver diseases and that it forms an essential part of the pathologic changes that occur in the liver to contain inflammation and damage. Within the investigations and experiments carried out, there are isolated drugs, many of them related to plants and natural extracts that possess antioxidant properties through the NRF-2 signaling pathway, or even involving the stimulation of the transcription target proteins of NRF-2. Notwithstanding all of these experimental findings, to date there is not sufficient clinical evidence to justify the use of NRF-2 in medical practice.