Assessing strategies to target screening for advanced liver fibrosis among overweight and obese patients.

Metabolism and target organ damage Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-07-18 DOI:10.20517/mtod.2022.08
Fernando Bril, Eddison Godinez Leiva, Romina Lomonaco, Sulav Shrestha, Srilaxmi Kalavalapalli, Meagan Gray, Kenneth Cusi
{"title":"Assessing strategies to target screening for advanced liver fibrosis among overweight and obese patients.","authors":"Fernando Bril,&nbsp;Eddison Godinez Leiva,&nbsp;Romina Lomonaco,&nbsp;Sulav Shrestha,&nbsp;Srilaxmi Kalavalapalli,&nbsp;Meagan Gray,&nbsp;Kenneth Cusi","doi":"10.20517/mtod.2022.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The optimal screening strategy for advanced liver fibrosis in overweight and obese patients is unknown. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of different strategies to select patients at high risk of advanced liver fibrosis for screening using non-invasive tools.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients underwent: liver <sup>1</sup>H-MRS and percutaneous liver biopsy (in those with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease [NAFLD]). Unique selection strategies were compared to determine the best screening algorithm: (A) A \"metabolic approach\": selecting patients based on HOMA-IR ≥ 3; (B) A \"diabetes approach\": selecting only patients with type 2 diabetes; (C) An \"imaging approach\": selecting patients with hepatic steatosis based on <sup>1</sup>H-MRS; (D) A \"liver biochemistry approach\": selecting patients with elevated ALT (i.e., ≥ 30 IU/L for males and ≥ 19 IU/L for females); and (E) Universal screening of overweight and obese patients. FIB-4 index, NAFLD fibrosis score, and APRI were applied as screening strategies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 275 patients were included in the study. Patients with advanced fibrosis (<i>n</i> = 29) were matched for age, gender, ethnicity, and BMI. Selecting patients by ALT elevation provided the most effective strategy, limiting the false positive rate while maintaining the sensitivity compared to universal screening. Selecting patients by any other strategy did not contribute to increasing the sensitivity of the approach and resulted in more false positive results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Universal screening of overweight/obese patients for advanced fibrosis with non-invasive tools is unwarranted, as selection strategies based on elevated ALT levels lead to the same sensitivity with a lower false positive rate (i.e., fewer patients that would require a liver biopsy or referral to hepatology).</p>","PeriodicalId":91001,"journal":{"name":"Metabolism and target organ damage","volume":"2 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9400455/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metabolism and target organ damage","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20517/mtod.2022.08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Aim: The optimal screening strategy for advanced liver fibrosis in overweight and obese patients is unknown. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of different strategies to select patients at high risk of advanced liver fibrosis for screening using non-invasive tools.

Methods: All patients underwent: liver 1H-MRS and percutaneous liver biopsy (in those with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease [NAFLD]). Unique selection strategies were compared to determine the best screening algorithm: (A) A "metabolic approach": selecting patients based on HOMA-IR ≥ 3; (B) A "diabetes approach": selecting only patients with type 2 diabetes; (C) An "imaging approach": selecting patients with hepatic steatosis based on 1H-MRS; (D) A "liver biochemistry approach": selecting patients with elevated ALT (i.e., ≥ 30 IU/L for males and ≥ 19 IU/L for females); and (E) Universal screening of overweight and obese patients. FIB-4 index, NAFLD fibrosis score, and APRI were applied as screening strategies.

Results: A total of 275 patients were included in the study. Patients with advanced fibrosis (n = 29) were matched for age, gender, ethnicity, and BMI. Selecting patients by ALT elevation provided the most effective strategy, limiting the false positive rate while maintaining the sensitivity compared to universal screening. Selecting patients by any other strategy did not contribute to increasing the sensitivity of the approach and resulted in more false positive results.

Conclusion: Universal screening of overweight/obese patients for advanced fibrosis with non-invasive tools is unwarranted, as selection strategies based on elevated ALT levels lead to the same sensitivity with a lower false positive rate (i.e., fewer patients that would require a liver biopsy or referral to hepatology).

超重和肥胖患者晚期肝纤维化筛查的评估策略
目的:超重和肥胖患者晚期肝纤维化的最佳筛查策略尚不清楚。本研究的目的是比较使用非侵入性工具筛选晚期肝纤维化高风险患者的不同策略的性能。方法:所有患者接受肝脏1H-MRS和经皮肝活检(非酒精性脂肪性肝病[NAFLD])。比较不同的选择策略以确定最佳筛选算法:(A)“代谢法”:根据HOMA-IR≥3选择患者;(B)“糖尿病法”:只选择2型糖尿病患者;(C)“影像学方法”:基于1H-MRS筛选肝脂肪变性患者;(D)“肝脏生化法”:选择ALT升高的患者(即男性≥30 IU/L,女性≥19 IU/L);(E)超重和肥胖患者的普遍筛查。FIB-4指数、NAFLD纤维化评分、APRI作为筛查策略。结果:共纳入275例患者。晚期纤维化患者(n = 29)根据年龄、性别、种族和BMI进行匹配。通过ALT升高选择患者提供了最有效的策略,与普遍筛查相比,在保持敏感性的同时限制了假阳性率。通过任何其他策略选择患者都不能提高该方法的敏感性,并导致更多的假阳性结果。结论:使用非侵入性工具对超重/肥胖患者进行晚期纤维化的普遍筛查是不合理的,因为基于ALT水平升高的选择策略具有相同的敏感性,但假阳性率较低(即需要肝活检或转诊到肝病学的患者较少)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信