BACKGROUND: Validated diagnostic tools that are accurate, cost effective and acceptable to patients are required for disease stratification and monitoring in NAFLD. AIMS: To investigate the performance and cost of multiparametric MRI alongside existing biomarkers in the assessment of NAFLD. METHODS:Adult patients undergoing standard of care liver biopsy for NAFLD were prospectively recruited at two UK liver centres and underwentmultiparametric MRI, blood sampling and transient elastography withing 2 weeks of liver biopsy. Non-invasive markers were compared to histology as the gold standard. RESULTS: Data were obtained in 50 patients and 6 healthy volunteers. Corrected T1 (cT1) correlated with NAFLD activity score (ρ = 0.514, P < .001). cT1, enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test and liver stiffness differentiated patients with simple steatosis and NASH with AUROC (95% CI) of 0.69 (0.50-0.88), 0.87 (0.77-0.79) and 0.82 (0.70-0.94) respectively and healthy volunteers from patients with AUROC (95% CI) of 0.93 (0.86-1.00), 0.81 (0.69-0.92) and 0.89 (0.77-1.00) respectively. For the risk stratification of NAFLD, multiparametric MRI could save £150,218 per 1000 patients compared to biopsy. Multiparametric MRI did not discriminate between individual histological fibrosis stages in this population (P = .068). CONCLUSIONS: Multiparametric MRI accurately identified patients with steatosis, stratifies those with NASH or simple steatosis and reliably excludes clinically significant liver disease with superior negative predictive value (83.3%) to liver stiffness (42.9%) and ELF (57.1%). For the risk stratification of NAFLD, multiparametric MRI was cost effective and, combined with transient elastography, had the lowest cost per correct diagnosis.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Validated diagnostic tools that are accurate, cost effective and acceptable to patients are required for disease stratification and monitoring in NAFLD. AIMS: To investigate the performance and cost of multiparametric MRI alongside existing biomarkers in the assessment of NAFLD. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing standard of care liver biopsy for NAFLD were prospectively recruited at two UK liver centres and underwent multiparametric MRI, blood sampling and transient elastography withing 2 weeks of liver biopsy. Non-invasive markers were compared to histology as the gold standard. RESULTS: Data were obtained in 50 patients and 6 healthy volunteers. Corrected T1 (cT1) correlated with NAFLD activity score (ρ = 0.514, P < .001). cT1, enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test and liver stiffness differentiated patients with simple steatosis and NASH with AUROC (95% CI) of 0.69 (0.50-0.88), 0.87 (0.77-0.79) and 0.82 (0.70-0.94) respectively and healthy volunteers from patients with AUROC (95% CI) of 0.93 (0.86-1.00), 0.81 (0.69-0.92) and 0.89 (0.77-1.00) respectively. For the risk stratification of NAFLD, multiparametric MRI could save £150,218 per 1000 patients compared to biopsy. Multiparametric MRI did not discriminate between individual histological fibrosis stages in this population (P = .068). CONCLUSIONS: Multiparametric MRI accurately identified patients with steatosis, stratifies those with NASH or simple steatosis and reliably excludes clinically significant liver disease with superior negative predictive value (83.3%) to liver stiffness (42.9%) and ELF (57.1%). For the risk stratification of NAFLD, multiparametric MRI was cost effective and, combined with transient elastography, had the lowest cost per correct diagnosis.
Authors: Iris Y Zhou; Veronica Clavijo Jordan; Nicholas J Rotile; Eman Akam; Smitha Krishnan; Gunisha Arora; Hema Krishnan; Hannah Slattery; Noah Warner; Nathaniel Mercaldo; Christian T Farrar; Jeremy Wellen; Robert Martinez; Franklin Schlerman; Kenneth K Tanabe; Bryan C Fuchs; Peter Caravan Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kamil Janowski; Elizabeth Shumbayawonda; Matt Kelly; Carlos Ferreira; Maciej Pronicki; Wieslawa Grajkowska; Magdalena Naorniakowska; Piotr Pawliszak; Sylwia Chełstowska; Elżbieta Jurkiewicz; Rajarshi Banerjee; Piotr Socha Journal: Children (Basel) Date: 2022-04-25
Authors: Ashvin Bashyam; Chris J Frangieh; Siavash Raigani; Jeremy Sogo; Roderick T Bronson; Korkut Uygun; Heidi Yeh; Dennis A Ausiello; Michael J Cima Journal: Nat Biomed Eng Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 25.671
Authors: Samer Gawrieh; Laura A Wilson; Katherine P Yates; Oscar W Cummings; Eduardo Vilar-Gomez; Veeral Ajmera; Kris V Kowdley; William M Rosenberg; James Tonascia; Naga Chalasani Journal: Hepatol Commun Date: 2021-02-05
Authors: Velicia Bachtiar; Matthew D Kelly; Henry R Wilman; Jaco Jacobs; Rexford Newbould; Catherine J Kelly; Michael L Gyngell; Katherine E Groves; Andy McKay; Amy H Herlihy; Carolina C Fernandes; Mark Halberstadt; Marion Maguire; Naomi Jayaratne; Sophia Linden; Stefan Neubauer; Rajarshi Banerjee Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Katherine Arndtz; Elizabeth Shumbayawonda; James Hodson; Peter J Eddowes; Andrea Dennis; Helena Thomaides-Brears; Sofia Mouchti; Matt D Kelly; Rajarshi Banerjee; Stefan Neubauer; Gideon M Hirschfield Journal: Hepatol Commun Date: 2021-02-23
Authors: Young-Sun Lee; Yang Jae Yoo; Young Kul Jung; Ji Hoon Kim; Yeon Seok Seo; Hyung Joon Yim; In Hee Kim; Soo Yeon Lee; Baek-Hui Kim; Jeong Woo Kim; Chang Hee Lee; Jong Eun Yeon; So Young Kwon; Soon Ho Um; Kwan Soo Byun Journal: Clin Transl Gastroenterol Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 4.396
Authors: Natasha McDonald; Peter J Eddowes; James Hodson; Scott I K Semple; Nigel P Davies; Catherine J Kelly; Stella Kin; Miranda Phillips; Amy H Herlihy; Timothy J Kendall; Rachel M Brown; Desley A H Neil; Stefan G Hübscher; Gideon M Hirschfield; Jonathan A Fallowfield Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-06-15 Impact factor: 4.379