Liver fibrosis assessments using FibroScan, virtual-touch tissue quantification, the FIB-4 index, and mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer levels compared with pathological findings of liver resection specimens in patients with hepatitis C infection

Background Evaluation of fibrosis stage is important to monitor progression of liver disease and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). While liver biopsy is the gold standard, the method is invasive and faces several limitations. The aim of this study was to determine correlations among METAVIR scores and FibroScan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification (VTQ), fibrosis index based on four factors (FIB-4 index), and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer (M2BPGi) level, and for examine differences in the reliability of non-invasive methods to evaluate fibrosis. Methods We used liver resection specimens from patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV), correlations were assessed between METAVIR scores and non-invasive method. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and cut off values of the methods. Results All Patients group: In F0–2 vs F3–4, the areas under the ROC curve (AUC) (0.85) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p = 0.002) and that (0.67) of M2BPGi (p = 0.001). The AUC (0.83) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p = 0.01) and that (0.67) of M2BPGi (p = 0.002). In F0–3 vs F4, the AUC (0.86) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.65) of FIB-4 index (p = 0.04). The AUC (0.89) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.65) of FIB-4 index (p = 0.002) and that (0.76) of M2BPGi (p = 0.02). Non-SVR group: In F0–2 vs F3–4, the AUC (0.85) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.84) of FIB-4 index (p = 0.02) and that (0.73) of M2BPGi (p = 0.003). The AUC (0.84) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.74) of FIB-4 index (p = 0.04). In F0–3 vs F4, the AUC (0.91) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p = 0.003) and that (0.78) of M2BPGi (p = 0.02). The AUC (0.88) of VTQ was significantly higher than that of FIB-4 index (0.67) and that of M2BPGi (0.78) (p = 0.04). Conclusions FibroScan and VTQ best reflected the results of hepatic fibrosis diagnosis using liver resection specimens among the four examination methods evaluated.

Liver fibrosis assessments using FibroScan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification, the FIB-4 index, and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer levels compared with pathological findings of liver resection specimens in patients with hepatitis C infection

BackgroundEvaluation of fibrosis stage is important to monitor progression of liver disease and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). While liver biopsy is the gold standard, the method is invasive and faces several limitations. The aim of this study was to determine correlations among METAVIR scores and FibroScan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification (VTQ), fibrosis index based on four factors (FIB-4 index), and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer (M2BPGi) level , and for examine differences in the reliability of non-invasive methods to evaluate fibrosis.MethodsWe used liver resection specimens from patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV), correlations were assessed between METAVIR scores and non-invasive method. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and cut off values of the methods.ResultsAll Patients group: In F0-2 vs F3-4, the areas under the ROC curve (AUC) (0.85) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p=0.002) and that (0.67) of M2BPGi (p=0.001). The AUC (0.83) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p=0.01) and that (0.67) of M2BPGi (p=0.002). In F0-3 vs F4, the AUC (0.86) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.65) of FIB-4 index (p=0.04). The AUC (0.89) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.65) of FIB-4 index (p=0.002) and that (0.76) of M2BPGi (p=0.02).Non-SVR group: In F0-2 vs F3-4, the AUC (0.85) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.84) of FIB-4 index (p=0.02) and that (0.73) of M2BPGi (p=0.003). The AUC (0.84) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.74) of FIB-4 index (p=0.04). In F0-3 vs F4, the AUC (0.91) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p=0.003) and that (0.78) of M2BPGi (p=0.02). The AUC (0.88) of VTQ was significantly higher than that of FIB-4 index (0.67) and that of M2BPGi (0.78) (p=0.04).ConclusionsFibroScan and VTQ best reflected the results of hepatic fibrosis diagnosis using liver resection specimens among the four examination methods evaluated.

Liver fibrosis assessments using FibroScan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification, the FIB-4 index, and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer levels compared with pathological findings of liver resection specimens in patients with hepatitis C infection

BackgroundEvaluation of fibrosis stage is important to monitor progression of liver disease and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). While liver biopsy is the gold standard, the method is invasive and faces several limitations. The aim of this study was to determine correlations among METAVIR scores and FibroScan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification (VTQ), fibrosis index based on four factors (FIB-4 index), and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer (M2BPGi) level , and for examine differences in the reliability of non-invasive methods to evaluate fibrosis.MethodsWe used liver resection specimens from patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV), correlations were assessed between METAVIR scores and non-invasive method. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and cut off values of the methods.ResultsAll Patients group: In F0-2 vs F3-4, the areas under the ROC curve (AUC) (0.85) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p=0.002) and that (0.67) of M2BPGi (p=0.001). The AUC (0.83) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p=0.01) and that (0.67) of M2BPGi (p=0.002). In F0-3 vs F4, the AUC (0.86) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.65) of FIB-4 index (p=0.04). The AUC (0.89) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.65) of FIB-4 index (p=0.002) and that (0.76) of M2BPGi (p=0.02).Non-SVR group: In F0-2 vs F3-4, the AUC (0.85) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.84) of FIB-4 index (p=0.02) and that (0.73) of M2BPGi (p=0.003). The AUC (0.84) of VTQ was significantly higher than that (0.74) of FIB-4 index (p=0.04). In F0-3 vs F4, the AUC (0.91) of FibroScan was significantly higher than that (0.67) of FIB-4 index (p=0.003) and that (0.78) of M2BPGi (p=0.02). The AUC (0.88) of VTQ was significantly higher than that of FIB-4 index (0.67) and that of M2BPGi (0.78) (p=0.04).ConclusionsFibroScan and VTQ best reflected the results of hepatic fibrosis diagnosis using liver resection specimens among the four examination methods evaluated.

Liver fibrosis assessments using FibroScan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification, the FIB-4 index, and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer levels compared with pathological findings of liver resection specimens in patients with hepatitis C infection

Background and purpose: Viral infection promotes fibrosis through repeated regeneration of hepatocytes. Evaluation of fibrosis stage is important to monitor progression of liver disease and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). While liver biopsy is the gold standard, the method is invasive and faces several limitations. The aim of this study was to determine correlations among METAVIR scores and FibroScan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification (VTQ), fibrosis index based on four factors (FIB-4 index), and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer (M2BPGi) level in order to examine differences in the reliability of non-invasive methods to evaluate fibrosis.Methods: We used liver resection specimens from patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Correlations were assessed between METAVIR scores and non-invasive method. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and cut off values of the methods.Results: Correlations between METAVIR scores and the results of each method were as follows: FibroScan r=0.61 p≤0.001; VTQ r=0.64, p≤0.001; FIB-4 index r=0.40, p≤0.001; and M2BPGi r=0.32, p=0.01. In comparing ROC curves, there were significant differences between FibroScan and FIB-4 index; FibroScan and M2BPGi in the F0-1vs F2-4 group; VTQ and FIB-4 index; FibroScan and FIB-4 index; FibroScan and M2BPGi in the F0-2 and F3-4 group; VTQ and FIB-4 index; FibroScan and FIB-4 index; FibroScan and M2BPGi; and VTQ and M2BPGi in the F0-3 vs F4 group. Results in the non-sustained viral response (SVR) group were as follows: FibroScan r=0.65, p≤0.001; VTQ r=0.70, p≤0.001; FIB-4 index r=0.44, p≤0.001; and M2BPGi r=0.31, p=0.01, with significant differences with respect to VTQ vs FIB-4 index, FibroScan vs FIB-4 index, FibroScan vs M2BPGi, VTQ vs M2BPGi in the F0-2 vs F3-4 group, VTQ vs FIB-4 index, FibroScan vs FIB-4 index, FibroScan vs M2BPGi, and VTQ vs M2BPGi in the F0-3 vs F4 group.The following correlations were found in the SVR group: FibroScan r=0.58, p≤0.001; VTQ r=0.65, p≤0.001; FIB-4 index r=0.59, p≤0.001; and M2BPGi r=0.54, p≤0.001, with significant differences with respect to FibroScan vs VTQ, FibroScan vs FIB-4 index, FibroScan vs M2BPGi in the F0-1 vs F2-4 group, and FibroScan vs FIB-4 index in the F0-3 vs F4 group.Conclusions: FibroScan and VTQ best reflected the results of hepatic fibrosis diagnosis using liver resection specimens among the four examination methods evaluated.

Liver fibrosis assessments using FibroScan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification, the FIB-4 index, and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer levels compared with pathological findings of liver resection specimens in patients with hepatitis C infection

Background and purpose: Viral infection promotes fibrosis through repeated regeneration of hepatocytes. Evaluation of fibrosis stage is important to monitor progression of liver disease and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). While liver biopsy is the gold standard, the method is invasive and faces several limitations. The aim of this study was to determine correlations among METAVIR scores and Fibroscan, Virtual-Touch tissue quantification (VTQ), fibrosis index based on four factors (FIB-4 index), and Mac-2 binding protein glycosylation isomer (M2BPGi) level to examine differences in reliability of non-invasive methods to evaluate fibrosis.Methods: We used liver resection specimens from patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Correlations were assessed between METAVIR scores and each test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and cut off values of the tests.Results: Among the four tests, VTQ had the best correlation with the METAVIR score, followed by FibroScan. In ROC curves, the area under the curve (AUC) for diagnosis of fibrosis grade ≥F2 were as follows: 0.94 for FibroScan, 0.89 for VTQ, 0.85 for the FIB-4 index, and 0.77 for M2BPGi level. The respective values for diagnosis of grade ≥F3 were 0.85, 0.84, 0.74, and 0.73, and those for a diagnosis of F4 were 0.91, 0.88, 0.67, and 0.78.Conclusions: FibroScan and VTQ best reflected the results of hepatic fibrosis diagnosis using liver resection specimens among the four examination methods evaluated.