METHODS: Patients had progressed after initial benefit with erlotinib or gefitinib, and/or had an EGFR or HER2 mutation, had no other treatment options, and were ineligible for afatinib trials. The recommended starting dose of afatinib was 50 mg/day. Dose modifications were allowed, and afatinib was continued as long as deemed beneficial. Response and survival information was provided voluntarily. Safety reporting was mandatory.

RESULTS: 2242 patients (26% aged ≥ 70 years, 96% with adenocarcinoma) received afatinib at centers in 10 Asian countries. Most were heavily pre-treated, including prior treatment with erlotinib or gefitinib. Of 1281 patients tested, 1240 had EGFR mutations (common: 1034/1101; uncommon: 117/1101). There were no new safety signals, the most common adverse events being rash and diarrhea. Objective response rate (ORR) was 24% overall (n = 431 with data available), 27% for patients with common EGFR mutations (n = 230) and 28% for those with uncommon mutations (n = 32); median time to treatment failure (TTF) in these groups was 7.6 months (n = 1550), 6.4 months (n = 692) and 8.4 months (n = 83), respectively. In patients with EGFR exon 20 insertions (n = 23) and HER2 mutations (n = 12), median TTF exceeded 12 months.

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.

DESIGN: Individual patient data meta-analysis of studies evaluating LSM-VCTE against liver histology was conducted. FIB-4 and NFS were computed where possible. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) were calculated. Biomarkers were assessed individually and in sequential combinations.

RESULTS: Data were included from 37 primary studies (n=5735; 45% women; median age: 54 years; median body mass index: 30 kg/m2; 33% had type 2 diabetes; 30% had advanced fibrosis). AUROCs of individual LSM-VCTE, FIB-4 and NFS for advanced fibrosis were 0.85, 0.76 and 0.73. Sequential combination of FIB-4 cut-offs (<1.3; ≥2.67) followed by LSM-VCTE cut-offs (<8.0; ≥10.0 kPa) to rule-in or rule-out advanced fibrosis had sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) of 66% (63-68) and 86% (84-87) with 33% needing a biopsy to establish a final diagnosis. FIB-4 cut-offs (<1.3; ≥3.48) followed by LSM cut-offs (<8.0; ≥20.0 kPa) to rule out advanced fibrosis or rule in cirrhosis had a sensitivity of 38% (37-39) and specificity of 90% (89-91) with 19% needing biopsy.