APRI test and hyaluronic acid as non-invasive diagnostic tools for post HCV liver fibrosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) accounts for a sizable proportion of chronic liver disease cases and represents the most common indication for liver transplantation. Precise diagnosis of hepatic fibrosis stage is considered a funnel-neck in proper management and follow-up of HCV-infected patients. Given the possible complications of liver biopsy, a non-invasive method for assessing hepatic fibrosis is needed. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of APRI and hyaluronic acid as non-invasive diagnostic assessment tools for post HCV liver fibrosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Systematic literature searching identified studies performed on Egyptian territory to evaluate APRI and hyaluronic acid as non-invasive tests of fibrosis and using liver biopsy as the reference standard. Meta-analysis was performed for areas with an adequate number of publications. Validation of meta- analysis on APRI was done on a subset of 150 treatment-naïve post-hepatitis C patients.

RESULTS

Both APRI and hyaluronic acid have superior predictive power for hepatic cirrhosis (F4) than for significant fibrosis (F2-F3). The pooled estimate for sensitivities and specificities of APRI and hyaluronic acid to diagnose F4 were (84% and 82%) and (83% and 89%) respectively. In the subgroup of treatment naïve post-hepatitis C patients, APRI had higher diagnostic performance to diagnose liver cirrhosis with 93.8% sensitivity and 72.4% specificity (AUC; 0.908, 95%CI; 0.851-0.965, p-value; <0.001) compared to its accuracy to diagnose significant hepatic fibrosis with 65.1% sensitivity and 77.8% (AUC; 0.685, 95% CI; 0.59-0.78, p-value; 0.001).

CONCLUSION

APRI score and hyaluronic acid levels are simple and reliable non-invasive markers to detect advanced fibrosis among post-hepatitis C patients.

[Biomarkers for liver fibrosis: advances, advantages and disadvantages]

Liver cirrhosis in Mexico is one of the most important causes of death in persons between the ages of 25 and 50 years. One of the reasons for therapeutic failure is the lack of knowledge about the molecular mechanisms that cause liver disorder and make it irreversible. One of its prevalent anatomical characteristics is an excessive deposition of fibrous tissue that takes different forms depending on etiology and disease stage. Liver biopsy, traditionally regarded as the gold standard of fibrosis staging, has been brought into question over the past decade, resulting in the proposal for developing non-invasive technologies based on different, but complementary, approaches: a biological one that takes the serum levels of products arising from the fibrosis into account, and a more physical one that evaluates scarring of the liver by methods such as ultrasound and magnetic resonance elastography; some of the methods were originally studied and validated in patients with hepatitis C. There is great interest in determining non-invasive markers for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis, since at present there is no panel or parameter efficient and reliable enough for diagnostic use. In this paper, we describe the biomarkers that are currently being used for studying liver fibrosis in humans, their advantages and disadvantages, as well as the implementation of new-generation technologies and the evaluation of their possible use in the diagnosis of fibrosis.

Prognostic value of liver fibrosis biomarkers: a meta-analysis

AIMS AND METHODS

Several serum biomarkers such as FibroTest, aspartate transaminase-platelet ratio index (APRI), FIB-4, and liver stiffness measurement by FibroScan have been validated as alternatives to biopsy for the diagnosis of fibrosis in patients with chronic liver disease. This paper aims to assess the 5-year prognostic values of these biomarkers. A meta-analysis combined all published prognostic studies. Baseline biopsy and APRI data were used as references.

RESULTS

Only 3 biomarkers had several prognostic validations: FibroTest (4 studies; 2,396 patients), APRI (5 studies; 2,422 patients), and FIB-4 (3 studies; 1,184 patients). For the prediction of survival without liver-related death, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) were 0.86 for biopsy (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.95), 0.88 for FibroTest (95% CI, 0.79-0.98), 0.73 for FIB-4 (95% CI, 0.62-0.85), and 0.66 for APRI (95% CI, 0.57-0.75). APRI had a significantly lower prognostic value versus biopsy, with a mean difference between AUROCs of -0.21 (95% CI, -0.33 to -0.10; P<.001); FIB-4 had a significantly lower prognostic value versus biopsy, with a mean difference between AUROCs of -0.21 (95% CI, -0.20 to -0.02; P=.02). Only FibroTest did not show a significant difference in prognostic value versus biopsy, with a mean difference in AUROCs of +0.02 (95% CI, -0.05 to +0.09; P=.85).

CONCLUSION

FibroTest is a validated biomarker for the prognosis of patients with chronic liver disease.