BACKGROUND & AIMS: Liver fibrosis is a significant concern for patients with hepatitis C virus/human immunodeficiency virus co-infection. Fibrosis staging by biopsy is accurate, but costly and invasive. Several fibrosis prediction models using noninvasive biomarkers have been developed but are suboptimal in co-infected patients. We compared results from different staging models and ordinal regression with biopsy data. METHODS: Data from the Adult Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome Clinical Trials Group protocol A5178 were used to evaluate 5 models of fibrosis staging; areas under receiver-operator characteristic curves (AUROC) were assessed. Individual covariates were assessed with univariable regression and then entered into an ordinal logistic regression model from which a stage-wise index was developed. RESULTS: Data from 173 patients were evaluated; 85% were on antiretroviral therapy, 31.2% had severe fibrosis (F3/F4), and 14% had cirrhosis (F4). Differences in CD4+ cell and platelets counts and international normalized ratio values were observed between those with and without F3/F4. Among existing models, the FIB-4 index ([age x AST])/[platelet count x (ALT)(1/2)]) performed best, with 88% specificity for F4 and greater than 86% negative predictive values for F3/F4, although AUROC values were low (0.56 +/- 0.03 for F3/F4). By using patients' demographic, clinical, and laboratory data, the ordinal regression model outperformed others, with an AUROC of 0.85 (standard error, 0.03) for predicting stage F3/F4 and 0.89 (standard error, 0.05) for stage 3 alone. CONCLUSIONS: Current noninvasive methods of fibrosis assessment have poor discriminatory capacity in hepatitis C virus/human immunodeficiency virus co-infected patients. Ordinal regression analysis outperformed other noninvasive fibrosis prediction models. Longitudinal studies with paired biopsies will assist in refining the Ordinal Regression Index.
BACKGROUND & AIMS:Liver fibrosis is a significant concern for patients with hepatitis C virus/human immunodeficiency virus co-infection. Fibrosis staging by biopsy is accurate, but costly and invasive. Several fibrosis prediction models using noninvasive biomarkers have been developed but are suboptimal in co-infectedpatients. We compared results from different staging models and ordinal regression with biopsy data. METHODS: Data from the Adult Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome Clinical Trials Group protocol A5178 were used to evaluate 5 models of fibrosis staging; areas under receiver-operator characteristic curves (AUROC) were assessed. Individual covariates were assessed with univariable regression and then entered into an ordinal logistic regression model from which a stage-wise index was developed. RESULTS: Data from 173 patients were evaluated; 85% were on antiretroviral therapy, 31.2% had severe fibrosis (F3/F4), and 14% had cirrhosis (F4). Differences in CD4+ cell and platelets counts and international normalized ratio values were observed between those with and without F3/F4. Among existing models, the FIB-4 index ([age x AST])/[platelet count x (ALT)(1/2)]) performed best, with 88% specificity for F4 and greater than 86% negative predictive values for F3/F4, although AUROC values were low (0.56 +/- 0.03 for F3/F4). By using patients' demographic, clinical, and laboratory data, the ordinal regression model outperformed others, with an AUROC of 0.85 (standard error, 0.03) for predicting stage F3/F4 and 0.89 (standard error, 0.05) for stage 3 alone. CONCLUSIONS: Current noninvasive methods of fibrosis assessment have poor discriminatory capacity in hepatitis C virus/human immunodeficiency virus co-infectedpatients. Ordinal regression analysis outperformed other noninvasive fibrosis prediction models. Longitudinal studies with paired biopsies will assist in refining the Ordinal Regression Index.
Authors: Xavier Forns; Sergi Ampurdanès; Josep M Llovet; John Aponte; Llorenç Quintó; Eva Martínez-Bauer; Miquel Bruguera; Jose Maria Sánchez-Tapias; Juan Rodés Journal: Hepatology Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Leon A Adams; Max Bulsara; Enrico Rossi; Bastiaan DeBoer; David Speers; Jacob George; James Kench; Geoffrey Farrell; Geoffrey W McCaughan; Gary P Jeffrey Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2005-07-28 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Robert J Fontana; David E Kleiner; Richard Bilonick; Norah Terrault; Nezam Afdhal; Steven H Belle; Lennox J Jeffers; Darmendra Ramcharran; Marc G Ghany; Jay H Hoofnagle Journal: Hepatology Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Thomas B Kelleher; Shruti H Mehta; Ramakrishnan Bhaskar; Mark Sulkowski; Jacquie Astemborski; David L Thomas; Richard E Moore; Nezam H Afdhal Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2005-04-25 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: Kenneth E Sherman; Enass A Abdel-Hameed; Richard L Ehman; Susan D Rouster; Adriana Campa; Sabrina Sales Martinez; Yongjun Huang; Gustavo G Zarini; Jacqueline Hernandez; Colby Teeman; Javier Tamargo; Qingyun Liu; Raul Mandler; Marianna K Baum Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2019-08-29 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Jason T Blackard; Jeffrey A Welge; Lynn E Taylor; Kenneth H Mayer; Robert S Klein; David D Celentano; Denise J Jamieson; Lytt Gardner; Kenneth E Sherman Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2011-01-19 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Shari S Rogal; Peng Yan; David Rimland; Vincent Lo Re; Hind Al-Rowais; Linda Fried; Adeel A Butt Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2015-11-02 Impact factor: 3.199