METHODS: We did an individual patient data meta-analysis, in which we searched PubMed and Web of Science for studies published from database inception until April 30, 2019. Studies reporting original biopsy-controlled data of CAP for non-invasive grading of steatosis were eligible. Probe recommendation was based on automated selection, manual assessment of skin-to-liver-capsule distance, and a body-mass index (BMI) criterion. Receiver operating characteristic methods and mixed models were used to assess diagnostic properties and covariates. Patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) were analysed separately because they are the predominant patient group when using the XL probe. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018099284.

FINDINGS: 16 studies reported histology-controlled CAP including the XL probe, and individual data from 13 papers and 2346 patients were included. Patients with a mean age of 46·5 years (SD 14·5) were recruited from 20 centres in nine countries. 2283 patients had data for BMI; 673 (29%) were normal weight (BMI <25 kg/m2), 530 (23%) were overweight (BMI ≥25 to <30 kg/m2), and 1080 (47%) were obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2). 1277 (54%) patients had NAFLD, 474 (20%) had viral hepatitis, 285 (12%) had alcohol-associated liver disease, and 310 (13%) had other liver disease aetiologies. The XL probe was recommended in 1050 patients, 930 (89%) of whom had NAFLD; among the patients with NAFLD, the areas under the curve were 0·819 (95% CI 0·769-0·869) for S0 versus S1 to S3 and 0·754 (0·720-0·787) for S0 to S1 versus S2 to S3. CAP values were independently affected by aetiology, diabetes, BMI, aspartate aminotransferase, and sex. Optimal cutoffs differed substantially across aetiologies. Risk of bias according to QUADAS-2 was low.

INTERPRETATION: CAP cutoffs varied according to cause, and can effectively recognise significant steatosis in patients with viral hepatitis. CAP cannot grade steatosis in patients with NAFLD adequately, but its value in a NAFLD screening setting needs to be studied, ideally with methods beyond the traditional histological reference standard.

METHODS: The extract of D. linearis leaves (CEDL; 50, 250 and 500 mg/kg) was orally administered to rats for 7 consecutive days followed by the oral administration of 3 g/kg PCM to induce liver injury. Blood was collected for liver function analysis while the liver was obtained for histopathological examination and endogenous antioxidant activity determination. The extract was also subjected to antioxidant evaluation and phytochemicals determination via phytochemical screening, HPLC and UPLC-HRMS analyses.

RESULTS: CEDL exerted significant (p liver endogenous antioxidant (catalase and superoxide dismutase) level. CEDL possessed a high antioxidant capacity when measured using the ORAC assay, but a low total phenolic content value and radical scavenging activity as confirmed via several radical scavenging assays, which might be attributed particularly to the presence of triterpenes. Phytochemicals screening demonstrated the presence of triterpenes and flavonoids, while UPLC-HRMS analysis showed the presence of polyphenols belonging to the hydroxybenzoic acids, hydroxycinammates and flavonoid groups.

METHODS: 1812 biopsy-proven NAFLD patients across nine countries in Asia assessed between 2006 and 2019 were pooled into a curated clinical registry. Demographic, metabolic and histological differences between non-obese and obese NAFLD patients were evaluated. The performance of Fibrosis-4 index for liver fibrosis (FIB-4) and NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS) to identify advanced liver disease across the varying obesity subgroups was compared. A random forest analysis was performed to identify novel predictors of fibrosis and steatohepatitis in non-obese patients.

FINDINGS: One-fifth (21.6%) of NAFLD patients were non-obese. Non-obese NAFLD patients had lower proportions of NASH (50.5% vs 56.5%, p = 0.033) and advanced fibrosis (14.0% vs 18.7%, p = 0.033). Metabolic syndrome in non-obese individuals was associated with NASH (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.01-2.54, p = 0.047) and advanced fibrosis (OR 1.88, 95% CI 0.99-3.54, p = 0.051). FIB-4 performed better than the NFS score (AUROC 81.5% vs 73.7%, p liver disease.