APPROACH & RESULTS: NAFLD knowledge surveys containing 54 and 59 questions covering three domains (Epidemiology/Pathogenesis, Diagnostics, and Treatment) were completed electronically by hepatologists, gastroenterologists (GEs), endocrinologists (ENDOs) and primary care physicians (PCPs) from 40 countries comprising 5 Global Burden of Disease (GBD) super-regions. Over 24 months, 2202 surveys were completed (488 hepatologists, 758 GEs, 148 ENDOs, and 808 PCPs; 50% High-Income GBD super-region, 27% from North Africa and Middle East, 12% Southeast Asia, and 5% South Asian and Latin America). Hepatologists saw the greatest number of NAFLD patients annually: median (IQR) 150 (60-300) vs. 100 (35-200) for GEs, 100 (30-200) for ENDOs, and 10 (4-50) for PCPs (all p<0.0001). The primary sources of NAFLD knowledge acquisition for hepatologists were international conferences (33% vs. 8-26%) and practice guidelines for others (39-44%). Internet was the second most common source of NAFLD knowledge for PCPs (28%). NAFLD knowledge scores were higher for hepatologists than GEs: Epidemiology 62% vs. 53%, Diagnostics 80% vs. 73%, Treatment 61% vs. 58% (p<0.0001) and ENDOs scores were higher than PCPs: Epidemiology 70% vs. 60%, Diagnostics 71% vs. 64%, Treatment 79% vs. 68% (p<0.0001). Being a hepatologist or ENDO was associated with higher knowledge scores than GE or PCP, respectively (p<0.05). Higher NAFLD knowledge scores were independently associated with greater number of NAFLD patients seen (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Despite the growing burden of NAFLD, significant knowledge gap remains for identification, diagnosis and management of NAFLD.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a Delphi-based approach, a multidisciplinary panel of 50 international experts from 26 countries reached a consensus on some of the open research questions regarding the link between MAFLD and CKD.
CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi-based consensus statement provided guidance on the epidemiology, mechanisms, management and treatment of MAFLD and CKD, as well as the relationship between the severity of MAFLD and risk of CKD, which establish a framework for the early prevention and management of these two common and interconnected diseases.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A multidisciplinary panel of fifty-two international experts comprising Hepatologists, Endocrinologists, Diabetologists, Cardiologists and Family Physicians from six continents (Asia, Europe, North America, South America, Africa and Oceania) participated in a formal Delphi survey and developed consensus statements on the association between MAFLD and the risk of CVD. Statements were developed on different aspects of CVD risk, ranging from epidemiology to mechanisms, screening, and management.
CONCULSIONS: The expert panel identified important clinical associations between MAFLD and the risk of CVD that could serve to increase awareness of the adverse metabolic and cardiovascular outcomes of MAFLD. Finally, the expert panel also suggests potential areas for future research.
METHODS: Clinical, laboratory, and PRO data (Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire-nonalcoholic steatohepatitis [NASH], Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, and the Work Productivity and Activity Index) were collected from NAFLD patients seen in real-world practices and enrolled in the Global NAFLD/NASH Registry encompassing 18 countries in 6 global burden of disease super-regions.
RESULTS: Across the global burden of disease super-regions, NAFLD patients (n = 5691) were oldest in Latin America and Eastern Europe and youngest in South Asia. Most men were enrolled at the Southeast and South Asia sites. Latin America and South Asia had the highest employment rates (>60%). Rates of cirrhosis varied (12%-21%), and were highest in North Africa/Middle East and Eastern Europe. Rates of metabolic syndrome components varied: 20% to 25% in South Asia and 60% to 80% in Eastern Europe. Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire-NASH and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue PRO scores were lower in NAFLD patients than general population norms (all P < .001). Across the super-regions, the lowest PRO scores were seen in Eastern Europe and North Africa/Middle East. In multivariate analysis adjusted for enrollment region, independent predictors of lower PRO scores included younger age, women, and nonhepatic comorbidities including fatigue (P < .01). Patients whose fatigue scores improved over time experienced a substantial PRO improvement. Nearly 8% of Global NAFLD/NASH Registry patients had a lean body mass index, with fewer metabolic syndrome components, fewer comorbidities, less cirrhosis, and significantly better PRO scores (P < .01).
CONCLUSIONS: NAFLD patients seen in real-world practices in different countries experience a high comorbidity burden and impaired quality of life. Future research using global data will enable more precise management and treatment strategies for these patients.
METHODS: This was an individual participant data meta-analysis for the performance of NITs against liver biopsy for MASH+F2-4, MASH+F2-3 and MASH+F4. Index tests were the FibroScan-AST (FAST) score, liver stiffness measured using vibration-controlled transient elastography (LSM-VCTE), the fibrosis-4 score (FIB-4) and the NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS). Area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) and thresholds including those that achieved 34% SFR were reported.
RESULTS: We included 2281 unique cases. The prevalence of MASH+F2-4, MASH+F2-3 and MASH+F4 was 31%, 24% and 7%, respectively. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curves for MASH+F2-4 were .78, .75, .68 and .57 for FAST, LSM-VCTE, FIB-4 and NFS. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curves for MASH+F2-3 were .73, .67, .60, .58 for FAST, LSM-VCTE, FIB-4 and NFS. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curves for MASH+F4 were .79, .84, .81, .76 for FAST, LSM-VCTE, FIB-4 and NFS. The sequential combination of FIB-4 and LSM-VCTE for the detection of MASH+F2-3 with threshold of .7 and 3.48, and 5.9 and 20 kPa achieved SFR of 67% and sensitivity of 60%, detecting 15 true positive cases from a theoretical group of 100 participants at the prevalence of 24%.
CONCLUSIONS: Sequential combinations of NITs do not compromise diagnostic performance and may reduce resource utilisation through the need of fewer LSM-VCTE examinations.
METHODS: This international study included seven adult cohorts with suspected NAFLD who underwent liver biopsy, LSM and blood sampling during routine clinical practice or screening for trials. The population was randomly divided into a training set and an internal validation set, on which the best-fitting logistic regression model was built, and performance and goodness of fit were assessed, respectively. Furthermore, both scores were externally validated on two large cohorts. Cut-offs for high sensitivity and specificity were derived in the training set to rule-out and rule-in cirrhosis or AF and then tested in the validation set and compared to FIB-4 and LSM.
RESULTS: Each score combined LSM, AST/ALT ratio, platelets, sex and diabetes status, as well as age for Agile 3+. Calibration plots for Agile 4 and Agile 3+ indicated satisfactory to excellent goodness of fit. Agile 4 and Agile 3+ outperformed FIB-4 and LSM in terms of AUROC, percentage of patients with indeterminate results and positive predictive value to rule-in cirrhosis or AF.
CONCLUSIONS: The two novel non-invasive scores improve identification of cirrhosis or AF among individuals with NAFLD attending liver clinics and reduce the need for liver biopsy in this population.
IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Non-invasive tests currently used to identify patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis, such as fibrosis-4 index and liver stiffness measurement by vibration-controlled transient elastography, have high negative predictive values but high false positive rates, while results are indeterminate for a large number of cases. This study provides scores that will help the clinician diagnose advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis. These new easy-to-implement scores will help liver specialists to better identify (1) patients who need more intensive follow-up, (2) patients who should be referred for inclusion in therapeutic trials, and (3) which patients should be treated with pharmacological agents when effective therapies are approved.
METHODS: This prospective study included a derivation cohort before validation in multiple international cohorts. The derivation cohort was a cross-sectional, multicentre study of patients aged 18 years or older, scheduled to have a liver biopsy for suspicion of NAFLD at seven tertiary care liver centres in England. This was a prespecified secondary outcome of a study for which the primary endpoints have already been reported. Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by vibration-controlled transient elastography and controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) measured by FibroScan device were combined with aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), or AST:ALT ratio. To identify those patients with NASH, an elevated NAS, and significant fibrosis, the best fitting multivariable logistic regression model was identified and internally validated using boot-strapping. Score calibration and discrimination performance were determined in both the derivation dataset in England, and seven independent international (France, USA, China, Malaysia, Turkey) histologically confirmed cohorts of patients with NAFLD (external validation cohorts). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01985009.
FINDINGS: Between March 20, 2014, and Jan 17, 2017, 350 patients with suspected NAFLD attending liver clinics in England were prospectively enrolled in the derivation cohort. The most predictive model combined LSM, CAP, and AST, and was designated FAST (FibroScan-AST). Performance was satisfactory in the derivation dataset (C-statistic 0·80, 95% CI 0·76-0·85) and was well calibrated. In external validation cohorts, calibration of the score was satisfactory and discrimination was good across the full range of validation cohorts (C-statistic range 0·74-0·95, 0·85; 95% CI 0·83-0·87 in the pooled external validation patients' cohort; n=1026). Cutoff was 0·35 for sensitivity of 0·90 or greater and 0·67 for specificity of 0·90 or greater in the derivation cohort, leading to a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0·83 (84/101) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 0·85 (93/110). In the external validation cohorts, PPV ranged from 0·33 to 0·81 and NPV from 0·73 to 1·0.
INTERPRETATION: The FAST score provides an efficient way to non-invasively identify patients at risk of progressive NASH for clinical trials or treatments when they become available, and thereby reduce unnecessary liver biopsy in patients unlikely to have significant disease.
FUNDING: Echosens and UK National Institute for Health Research.
METHODS: Members of the Global NASH Council created two surveys about experiences/attitudes toward NAFLD and related diagnostic terms: a 68-item patient and a 41-item provider survey.
RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 1,976 patients with NAFLD across 23 countries (51% Middle East/North Africa [MENA], 19% Europe, 17% USA, 8% Southeast Asia, 5% South Asia) and 825 healthcare providers (67% gastroenterologists/hepatologists) across 25 countries (39% MENA, 28% Southeast Asia, 22% USA, 6% South Asia, 3% Europe). Of all patients, 48% ever disclosed having NAFLD/NASH to family/friends; the most commonly used term was "fatty liver" (88% at least sometimes); "metabolic disease" or "MAFLD" were rarely used (never by >84%). Regarding various perceptions of diagnostic terms by patients, there were no substantial differences between "NAFLD", "fatty liver disease (FLD)", "NASH", or "MAFLD". The most popular response was being neither comfortable nor uncomfortable with either term (56%-71%), with slightly greater discomfort with "FLD" among the US and South Asian patients (47-52% uncomfortable). Although 26% of patients reported stigma related to overweight/obesity, only 8% reported a history of stigmatization or discrimination due to NAFLD. Among providers, 38% believed that the term "fatty" was stigmatizing, while 34% believed that "nonalcoholic" was stigmatizing, more commonly in MENA (43%); 42% providers (gastroenterologists/hepatologists 45% vs. 37% other specialties, p = 0.03) believed that the name change to metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (or MASLD) might reduce stigma. Regarding the new nomenclature, the percentage of providers reporting "steatotic liver disease" as stigmatizing was low (14%).
CONCLUSIONS: The perception of NAFLD stigma varies among patients, providers, geographic locations and sub-specialties.
IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Over the past decades, efforts have been made to change the nomenclature of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to better align with its underlying pathogenetic pathways and remove any potential stigma associated with the name. Given the paucity of data related to stigma in NAFLD, we undertook this global comprehensive survey to assess stigma in NAFLD among patients and providers from around the world. We found there is a disconnect between physicians and patients related to stigma and related nomenclature. With this knowledge, educational programs can be developed to better target stigma in NAFLD among all stakeholders and to provide a better opportunity for the new nomenclature to address the issues of stigma.
METHODS: Individual data were collected from 14 registry centers on patients with biopsy-proven non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and in all patients, circulating CK-18 M30 levels were measured. Individuals with a NAFLD activity score (NAS) ≥5 with a score of ≥1 for each of steatosis, ballooning, and lobular inflammation were diagnosed as having definite NASH; individuals with a NAS ≤2 and no fibrosis were diagnosed as having non-alcoholic fatty liver (NAFL).
RESULTS: A total of 2571 participants were screened, and 1008 (153 with NAFL and 855 with NASH) were finally enrolled. Median CK-18 M30 levels were higher in patients with NASH than in those with NAFL (mean difference 177 U/L; standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.87 [0.69-1.04]). There was an interaction between CK-18 M30 levels and serum alanine aminotransferase, body mass index (BMI), and hypertension ( P