Maeva Guillaume1,2, Valerie Moal3,4, Cyrielle Delabaudiere1, Floraine Zuberbuhler4,5, Marie-Angèle Robic1, Adrien Lannes4,5, Sophie Metivier1, Frederic Oberti4,5, Pierre Gourdy2,6, Isabelle Fouchard-Hubert4,5, Janick Selves7, Sophie Michalak4,8, Jean-Marie Peron1, Paul Cales4,5, Christophe Bureau1, Jerome Boursier4,5. 1. Hepato-Gastroenterology Department, Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France. 2. Institut CARDIOMET, Fédération Hospitalo-Universitaire IMPACT, Institut des Maladies Métaboliques et Cardiovasculaires (I2MC), UMR1048, INSERM/UPS, Toulouse University, Toulouse, France. 3. Biochemistry Department, Angers University Hospital, Angers, France. 4. HIFIH Laboratory, UPRES 3859, SFR 4208, Angers University, Angers, France. 5. Hepato-Gastroenterology Department, Angers University Hospital, Angers, France. 6. Diabetology Department, Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France. 7. Pathology Department, Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France. 8. Pathology Department, Angers University Hospital, Angers, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score (ELF) and the FibroMeterV2G are two specialized blood fibrosis tests which include direct markers of liver fibrosis. They have been shown to be more accurate than the simple blood fibrosis tests FIB4 and the non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) fibrosis score (NFS). AIMS: To directly compare the accuracies of ELF and FibroMeterV2G for the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis in NAFLD. METHODS: Four hundred and seventeen patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD were enrolled from two tertiary care centres. Four blood fibrosis tests were calculated: ELF, FibroMeterV2G , NFS, and FIB4. Advanced fibrosis F3/4 on liver biopsy (NASH CRN scoring) was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for advanced fibrosis were not significantly different between the direct markers of liver fibrosis (hyaluronate, PIIINP, TIMP-1, alpha2-macroglobulin) and the simple blood fibrosis tests NFS and FIB4. ELF (0.793 ± 0.022) and FibroMeterV2G (0.804 ± 0.021) had significantly higher AUROC than NFS (0.722 ± 0.025, P < .010) and FIB4 (0.739 ± 0.024, P < .020). AUROC for advanced fibrosis and Obuchowski index were not significantly different between ELF and FibroMeterV2G . Algorithms using first ELF or FibroMeterV2G and then liver biopsy in case of undetermined diagnosis provided high diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis: 90% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 93% negative predictive value, 85% positive predictive value, and 90% correct classification. In these algorithms, the rate of liver biopsy was 45.3% with ELF versus 39.3% with FibroMeterV2G (P = .065). CONCLUSIONS: ELF and FibroMeterV2G have equal accuracy and perform better than the simple FIB4 and NFS tests for the non-invasive diagnosis of advanced liver fibrosis in patients with NAFLD from tertiary care centres.
BACKGROUND: The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score (ELF) and the FibroMeterV2G are two specialized blood fibrosis tests which include direct markers of liver fibrosis. They have been shown to be more accurate than the simple blood fibrosis tests FIB4 and the non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) fibrosis score (NFS). AIMS: To directly compare the accuracies of ELF and FibroMeterV2G for the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis in NAFLD. METHODS: Four hundred and seventeen patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD were enrolled from two tertiary care centres. Four blood fibrosis tests were calculated: ELF, FibroMeterV2G , NFS, and FIB4. Advanced fibrosis F3/4 on liver biopsy (NASH CRN scoring) was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for advanced fibrosis were not significantly different between the direct markers of liver fibrosis (hyaluronate, PIIINP, TIMP-1, alpha2-macroglobulin) and the simple blood fibrosis tests NFS and FIB4. ELF (0.793 ± 0.022) and FibroMeterV2G (0.804 ± 0.021) had significantly higher AUROC than NFS (0.722 ± 0.025, P < .010) and FIB4 (0.739 ± 0.024, P < .020). AUROC for advanced fibrosis and Obuchowski index were not significantly different between ELF and FibroMeterV2G . Algorithms using first ELF or FibroMeterV2G and then liver biopsy in case of undetermined diagnosis provided high diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis: 90% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 93% negative predictive value, 85% positive predictive value, and 90% correct classification. In these algorithms, the rate of liver biopsy was 45.3% with ELF versus 39.3% with FibroMeterV2G (P = .065). CONCLUSIONS: ELF and FibroMeterV2G have equal accuracy and perform better than the simple FIB4 and NFS tests for the non-invasive diagnosis of advanced liver fibrosis in patients with NAFLD from tertiary care centres.
Authors: Thierry Thévenot; Sophie Vendeville; Delphine Weil; Linda Akkouche; Paul Calame; Clémence M Canivet; Claire Vanlemmens; Carine Richou; Jean-Paul Cervoni; Marie-France Seronde; Vincent Di Martino; Jérôme Boursier Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-05-26 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Daniel Bradshaw; Yvonne Gilleece; Sumita Verma; Iga Abramowicz; Stephen Bremner; Nicky Perry Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Ivica Grgurevic; Kristian Podrug; Ivana Mikolasevic; Michal Kukla; Anita Madir; Emmanuel A Tsochatzis Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2020-01-21
Authors: Nancy de Los Ángeles Segura-Azuara; Carlos Daniel Varela-Chinchilla; Plinio A Trinidad-Calderón Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-01-13