Contribution of the ELFG test in algorithms of non-invasive markers towards the diagnosis of significant fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C

Enhanced Liver Fibrosis Score: Is It Useful for Evaluation of Fibrosis Severity in Chronic Hepatitis C Infection?

Introduction: The assessment of liver fibrosis is important in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC). In recent years, non-invasive tests like enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) have been developed as an alternative to liver biopsy for estimating the severity of liver fibrosis. Therefore, we aimed to assess whether the ELF score can be used for fibrosis severity estimation using liver biopsy as the gold standard.

Materials and methods: Forty-nine patients with CHC were enrolled in this study. Liver biopsy, ELF assessment, and transient elastography (TE) were performed in all patients, and severity of fibrosis on histopathology was assessed by meta-analysis of histological data in viral hepatitis (METAVIR) score. In addition, the diagnostic performance of ELF was evaluated by receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) analyses, and liver biopsy histopathology was taken as the gold standard for the severity of liver fibrosis.

Results: The area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) for significant fibrosis of ELF score was 0.64 (95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.48-0.79) and of TE was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.73-0.96). The AUROC for advance fibrosis of ELF was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.57-0.97) and TE was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.94-1.0). The calculated cut-offs of ELF overestimated fibrosis in 53.06% (26/49) of patients and underestimated fibrosis in 6.12% (3/49) patients. AUROC of TE was significantly better than ELF for diagnosis of significant fibrosis (p=0.004) and advanced fibrosis (p=0.034).

Conclusion: The ELF score can be used for estimating the severity of fibrosis but it is inferior to TE in estimating liver fibrosis severity.

Direct comparison of the specialised blood fibrosis tests FibroMeterV2G and Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease from tertiary care centres

BACKGROUND

The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score (ELF) and the FibroMeter^V2G 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 FibroMeter^V2G 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, FibroMeter^V2G , 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 FibroMeter^V2G (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 FibroMeter^V2G . Algorithms using first ELF or FibroMeter^V2G 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 FibroMeter^V2G (P = .065).

CONCLUSIONS

ELF and FibroMeter^V2G 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.

Overestimate of Fibrosis by FIBROSpect® II in African Americans Complicates the Management of their Chronic Hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of advanced fibrosis in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is used to facilitate decisions on treatment strategy and to initiate additional screening measures. Unfortunately, most studies have predominately Caucasian (Cau) patients and may not be as relevant for African Americans (AA).

AIMS

This study specifically addresses the issue of defining minimal vs. significant fibrosis in African Americans (AA) with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) using noninvasive assays.

METHODS

All patients (n = 319) seen between 1 January 2008 and 30 June 2013 for whom a FibroSpect II® (FSII) assay was performed and had data for calculation of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) platelet ratio index (APRI) and Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) were identified using the medical records.

RESULTS

When liver biopsy score and FSII assay results for the AA patients with CHC were compared, 31% of AA had advanced FSII fibrosis scores (F2-F4) despite a biopsy score of F0-F1. In contrast, 10% of Cau over-scored. The AA false positive rate was 14% for APRI and 34% for FIB-4. Combining FSII with either APRI (7% false positive) or FIB-4 (10% false positive) improved the false positive rate in AA to 7% (FSII + APRI) and 10% (FSII + FIB-4) but reduced the sensitivity for significant fibrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The FSII assay overestimates fibrosis in AA and should be used with caution since these patients may not have significant fibrosis. If the APRI or FIB-4 assay is combined with the FSII assay, minimal fibrosis in AA can be defined without subjecting the patients to a subsequent biopsy.

Non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis: Between prediction/prevention of outcomes and cost-effectiveness

The assessment of the fibrotic evolution of chronic hepatitis has always been a challenge for the clinical hepatologist. Over the past decade, various non-invasive methods have been proposed to detect the presence of fibrosis, including the elastometric measure of stiffness, panels of clinical and biochemical parameters, and combinations of both methods. The aim of this review is to analyse the most recent data on non-invasive techniques for the evaluation of hepatic fibrosis with particular attention to cost-effectiveness. We searched for relevant studies published in English using the PubMed database from 2009 to the present. A large number of studies have suggested that elastography and serum markers are useful techniques for diagnosing severe fibrosis and cirrhosis and for excluding significant fibrosis in hepatitis C virus patients. In addition, hepatic stiffness may also help to prognosticate treatment response to antiviral therapy. It has also been shown that magnetic resonance elastography has a high accuracy for staging and differentiating liver fibrosis. Finally, studies have shown that non-invasive methods are becoming increasingly precise in either positively identifying or excluding liver fibrosis, thus reducing the need for liver biopsy. However, both serum markers and transient elastography still have “grey area” values of lower accuracy. In this case, liver biopsy is still required to properly assess liver fibrosis. Recently, the guidelines produced by the World Health Organization have suggested that the AST-to-platelet ratio index or FIB-4 test could be utilised for the evaluation of liver fibrosis rather than other, more expensive non-invasive tests, such as elastography or FibroTest.

Diagnostic usefulness of FibroMeter VCTE for hepatic fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease

BACKGROUND

Liver fibrosis is an important prognostic determinant in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The FibroMeter VCTE is a diagnostic tool comprising both biochemical markers and transient elastography (TE) originally developed for the diagnosis of fibrosis in patients with chronic viral hepatitis. In this pilot study, we investigated the diagnostic performance of the FibroMeter VCTE tool for determining fibrosis in patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD. Its diagnostic accuracy was also compared with those of the NAFLD fibrosis score (NFSA) and TE alone.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

FibroMeter VCTE, NFSA, and TE were determined in 52 patients with NAFLD. The results of liver biopsies were considered the gold standard. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were used to express the diagnostic accuracy of each test.

RESULTS

Significant (F≥2) and severe (F≥3) fibrosis were detected in 20 (38%) and 10 (19%) patients, respectively. The sensitivity of FibroMeter VCTE, NFSA, and TE for detecting significant fibrosis was 70, 65, and 75%, respectively, whereas specificity was 88, 81, and 78%. The sensitivity of FibroMeter VCTE, NFSA, and TE for diagnosing severe fibrosis was 90, 90, and 100%, respectively, whereas specificity was 93, 78, and 76%. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that FibroMeter VCTE had a significantly larger areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.968) compared with both NFSA (0.833, P<0.001) and TE (0.922, P<0.05) for the detection of severe fibrosis.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary findings indicate that FibroMeter VCTE is superior to both NFSA and TE for the diagnosis of severe fibrosis in patients with NAFLD.

Enhanced liver fibrosis panel as a predictor of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C patients

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of fibrosis is crucial in the assessment of chronic hepatitis C (CHC). The enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) is a serological panel including hyaluronic acid (HA), tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases-1 (TIMP-1), and amino-terminal propeptide of type III procollagen (PIIINP) that has shown good results in predicting liver fibrosis in distinct scenarios of chronic liver diseases.

AIMS

We aimed to assess the performance of ELF on the detection of fibrosis and cirrhosis in a CHC patient cohort and to compare the results of ELF and transient elastography (TE-Fibroscan) using liver biopsy as reference.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred twenty patients were prospectively evaluated by TE and ELF using an ADVIA Centaur automated system. The ELF score was calculated using the manufacturer's algorithm. Biopsies were classified according to the METAVIR score. Receiver operator characteristic curve analyses were performed to evaluate the accuracy of ELF and TE.

RESULTS

The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) of ELF for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis was 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.73-0.87], for advanced fibrosis was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.74-0.88), and for cirrhosis was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85). Using the proposed cutoffs, ELF overestimated fibrosis in 66% (81/120) of cases and underestimated in 3% (3/120). We found no statistically significant difference when comparing the AUROC of ELF and TE for diagnosing fibrosis or cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

ELF panel is a good noninvasive fibrosis marker and showed similar results to TE in CHC patients. However, new cutoff points need to be established to improve its performance on patients with CHC.

The performance of enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The enhanced liver fibrosis test (ELF) has been shown to accurately predict significant liver fibrosis in several liver diseases.

AIMS

To perform a meta-analysis to assess the performance of the ELF test for the assessment of liver fibrosis.

STUDY

Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify studies of the ELF test. After methodological quality assessment and data extraction, pooled estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristics (sROC) were assessed systematically. The extent of heterogeneity and reasons for it were assessed.

RESULTS

Nine studies were identified for analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, and DOR values of ELF test, for assessment of significant liver fibrosis, were 83% (95% CI=0.80-0.86), 73% (95% CI=0.69-0.77), 4.00 (95% CI=2.50-6.39), 0.24 (95% CI=0.17-0.34), and 16.10 (95% CI=8.27-31.34), respectively; and, for evaluation of severe liver fibrosis, were 78% (95% CI=0.74-0.81), 76% (95% CI=0.73-0.78), 4.39 (95% CI=2.76-6.97), 0.27 (95% CI=0.16-0.46), and 16.01 (95% CI: 7.15-35.82), respectively; and, for estimation of cirrhosis, were 80% (95% CI=0.75-0.85), 71% (95% CI=0.68-0.74), 3.13 (95% CI=2.01-4.87), 0.29 (95% CI=0.19-0.44), and 14.09 (95% CI: 5.43-36.59), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The ELF test shows good performance and considerable diagnostic value for the prediction of histological fibrosis stage.