Mikael F Forsgren1,2, Patrik Nasr3, Markus Karlsson1,2, Nils Dahlström2,4, Bengt Norén2,4, Simone Ignatova5, Ralph Sinkus6, Gunnar Cedersund7,8, Olof Dahlqvist Leinhard1,2, Mattias Ekstedt3, Stergios Kechagias3, Peter Lundberg1,2. 1. Department of Radiation Physics, Department of and Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 2. Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 3. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 4. Department of Radiology, Department of and Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 5. Department of Clinical Pathology and Clinical Genetics, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 6. Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, King's College London, London, United Kingdom. 7. Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 8. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Accurate biomarkers for quantifying liver fibrosis are important for clinical practice and trial end-points. We compared the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including gadoxetate-enhanced MRI and 31P-MR spectroscopy, with fibrosis stage and serum fibrosis algorithms in a clinical setting. Also, in a subset of patients, MR- and transient elastography (MRE and TE) was evaluated when available. METHODS: Patients were recruited prospectively if they were scheduled to undergo liver biopsy on a clinical indication due to elevated liver enzyme levels without decompensated cirrhosis. Within a month of the clinical work-up, an MR-examination and liver needle biopsy were performed on the same day. Based on late-phase gadoxetate-enhanced MRI, a mathematical model calculated hepatobiliary function (relating to OATP1 and MRP2). The hepatocyte gadoxetate uptake rate (KHep) and the normalised liver-to-spleen contrast ratio (LSC_N10) were also calculated. Nine serum fibrosis algorithms were investigated (GUCI, King's Score, APRI, FIB-4, Lok-Index, NIKEI, NASH-CRN regression score, Forns' score, and NAFLD-fibrosis score). RESULTS: The diagnostic performance (AUROC) for identification of significant fibrosis (F2-4) was 0.78, 0.80, 0.69, and 0.78 for MRE, TE, LSC_N10, and GUCI, respectively. For the identification of advanced fibrosis (F3-4), the AUROCs were 0.93, 0.84, 0.81, and 0.82 respectively. CONCLUSION: MRE and TE were superior for non-invasive identification of significant fibrosis. Serum fibrosis algorithms developed for specific liver diseases are applicable in this cohort of diverse liver diseases aetiologies. Gadoxetate-MRI was sufficiently sensitive to detect the low function losses associated with fibrosis. None was able to efficiently distinguish between stages within the low fibrosis stages.Lay summaryExcessive accumulation of scar tissue, fibrosis, in the liver is an important aspect in chronic liver disease. To replace the invasive needle biopsy, we have explored non-invasive methods to assess liver fibrosis. In our study we found that elastographic methods, which assess the mechanical properties of the liver, are superior in assessing fibrosis in a clinical setting. Of interest from a clinical trial point-of-view, none of the tested methods was sufficiently accurate to distinguish between adjacent moderate fibrosis stages.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Accurate biomarkers for quantifying liver fibrosis are important for clinical practice and trial end-points. We compared the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including gadoxetate-enhanced MRI and 31P-MR spectroscopy, with fibrosis stage and serum fibrosis algorithms in a clinical setting. Also, in a subset of patients, MR- and transient elastography (MRE and TE) was evaluated when available. METHODS:Patients were recruited prospectively if they were scheduled to undergo liver biopsy on a clinical indication due to elevated liver enzyme levels without decompensated cirrhosis. Within a month of the clinical work-up, an MR-examination and liver needle biopsy were performed on the same day. Based on late-phase gadoxetate-enhanced MRI, a mathematical model calculated hepatobiliary function (relating to OATP1 and MRP2). The hepatocyte gadoxetate uptake rate (KHep) and the normalised liver-to-spleen contrast ratio (LSC_N10) were also calculated. Nine serum fibrosis algorithms were investigated (GUCI, King's Score, APRI, FIB-4, Lok-Index, NIKEI, NASH-CRN regression score, Forns' score, and NAFLD-fibrosis score). RESULTS: The diagnostic performance (AUROC) for identification of significant fibrosis (F2-4) was 0.78, 0.80, 0.69, and 0.78 for MRE, TE, LSC_N10, and GUCI, respectively. For the identification of advanced fibrosis (F3-4), the AUROCs were 0.93, 0.84, 0.81, and 0.82 respectively. CONCLUSION: MRE and TE were superior for non-invasive identification of significant fibrosis. Serum fibrosis algorithms developed for specific liver diseases are applicable in this cohort of diverse liver diseases aetiologies. Gadoxetate-MRI was sufficiently sensitive to detect the low function losses associated with fibrosis. None was able to efficiently distinguish between stages within the low fibrosis stages.Lay summaryExcessive accumulation of scar tissue, fibrosis, in the liver is an important aspect in chronic liver disease. To replace the invasive needle biopsy, we have explored non-invasive methods to assess liver fibrosis. In our study we found that elastographic methods, which assess the mechanical properties of the liver, are superior in assessing fibrosis in a clinical setting. Of interest from a clinical trial point-of-view, none of the tested methods was sufficiently accurate to distinguish between adjacent moderate fibrosis stages.