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%.

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.

METHODS: This was an individual participant data meta-analysis of the prognostic performance of histologically assessed fibrosis stage (F0-4), liver stiffness measured by vibration-controlled transient elastography (LSM-VCTE), fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4), and NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS) in patients with NAFLD. The literature was searched for a previously published systematic review on the diagnostic accuracy of imaging and simple non-invasive tests and updated to Jan 12, 2022 for this study. Studies were identified through PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL, and authors were contacted for individual participant data, including outcome data, with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplantation, or cirrhosis complications (ie, ascites, variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, or progression to a MELD score ≥15). We calculated aggregated survival curves for trichotomised groups and compared them using stratified log-rank tests (histology: F0-2 vs F3 vs F4; LSM: <10 vs 10 to <20 vs ≥20 kPa; FIB-4: <1·3 vs 1·3 to ≤2·67 vs >2·67; NFS: 0·676), calculated areas under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves (tAUC), and performed Cox proportional-hazards regression to adjust for confounding. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022312226.

FINDINGS: Of 65 eligible studies, we included data on 2518 patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD from 25 studies (1126 [44·7%] were female, median age was 54 years [IQR 44-63), and 1161 [46·1%] had type 2 diabetes). After a median follow-up of 57 months [IQR 33-91], the composite endpoint was observed in 145 (5·8%) patients. Stratified log-rank tests showed significant differences between the trichotomised patient groups (p<0·0001 for all comparisons). The tAUC at 5 years were 0·72 (95% CI 0·62-0·81) for histology, 0·76 (0·70-0·83) for LSM-VCTE, 0·74 (0·64-0·82) for FIB-4, and 0·70 (0·63-0·80) for NFS. All index tests were significant predictors of the primary outcome after adjustment for confounders in the Cox regression.

INTERPRETATION: Simple non-invasive tests performed as well as histologically assessed fibrosis in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with NAFLD and could be considered as alternatives to liver biopsy in some cases.

METHODS: We analyzed data from 3004 individuals with biopsy-proven metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) across 29 Chinese and 9 international cohorts to validate the acMASH index and develop the acFibroMASH index. Additionally, we utilized the independent external data from a multi-national cohort of 9034 patients with MASLD to examine associations between the acFibroMASH index and the risk of LREs.

RESULTS: In the pooled global cohort, the acMASH index identified MASH with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.802 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.786-0.818). The acFibroMASH index (including the acMASH index plus liver stiffness measurement) accurately identified fibrotic MASH with an AUROC of 0.808 in the derivation cohort and 0.800 in the validation cohort. Notably, the AUROC for the acFibroMASH index was 0.835 (95% CI, 0.786-0.882), superior to that of the FAST score at 0.750 (95% CI, 0.693-0.800; P < .01) in predicting the 5-year risk of LREs. Patients with acFibroMASH >0.39 had a higher risk of LREs than those with acFibroMASH <0.15 (adjusted hazard ratio, 11.23; 95% CI, 3.98-31.66).