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: A review of the literature identified studies containing histology verified CAP data (M probe, vibration controlled transient elastography with FibroScan®) for grading of steatosis (S0-S3). Receiver operating characteristic analysis after correcting for center effects was used as well as mixed models to test the impact of covariates on CAP. The primary outcome was establishing CAP cut-offs for distinguishing steatosis grades.

RESULTS: Data from 19/21 eligible papers were provided, comprising 3830/3968 (97%) of patients. Considering data overlap and exclusion criteria, 2735 patients were included in the final analysis (37% hepatitis B, 36% hepatitis C, 20% NAFLD/NASH, 7% other). Steatosis distribution was 51%/27%/16%/6% for S0/S1/S2/S3. CAP values in dB/m (95% CI) were influenced by several covariates with an estimated shift of 10 (4.5-17) for NAFLD/NASH patients, 10 (3.5-16) for diabetics and 4.4 (3.8-5.0) per BMI unit. Areas under the curves were 0.823 (0.809-0.837) and 0.865 (0.850-0.880) respectively. Optimal cut-offs were 248 (237-261) and 268 (257-284) for those above S0 and S1 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: CAP provides a standardized non-invasive measure of hepatic steatosis. Prevalence, etiology, diabetes, and BMI deserve consideration when interpreting CAP. Longitudinal data are needed to demonstrate how CAP relates to clinical outcomes.

AIM: To determine how to use CAP in interpreting liver stiffness measurements.

METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of data from an individual patient data meta-analysis on CAP. The main exclusion criteria for the current analysis were unknown aetiology, unreliable elastography measurement and data already used for the same research question. Aetiology-specific liver stiffness measurement cut-offs were determined and used to estimate positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) with logistic regression as functions of CAP.

RESULTS: Two thousand and fifty eight patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria (37% women, 18% NAFLD/NASH, 42% HBV, 40% HCV, 51% significant fibrosis ≥ F2). Youden optimised cut-offs were only sufficient for ruling out cirrhosis (NPV of 98%). With sensitivity and specificity-optimised cut-offs, NPV for ruling out significant fibrosis was moderate (70%) and could be improved slightly through consideration of CAP. PPV for significant fibrosis and cirrhosis were 68% and 55% respectively, despite specificity-optimised cut-offs for cirrhosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS: This was an individual patient data meta-analysis of 1780 patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD and T2D. The index tests of interest were FIB-4, NAFLD Fibrosis Score (NFS), aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index, liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by vibration-controlled transient elastography, and AGILE 3+. The target conditions were advanced fibrosis, NASH, and fibrotic NASH(NASH plus F2-F4 fibrosis). The diagnostic performance of noninvasive tests. individually or in sequential combination, was assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and by decision curve analysis. Comparison with 2278 NAFLD patients without T2D was also made. In NAFLD with T2D LSM and AGILE 3+ outperformed, both NFS and FIB-4 for advanced fibrosis (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve:LSM 0.82, AGILE 3+ 0.82, NFS 0.72, FIB-4 0.75, aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index 0.68; p < 0.001 of LSM-based versus simple serum tests), with an uncertainty area of 12%-20%. The combination of serum-based with LSM-based tests for advanced fibrosis led to a reduction of 40%-60% in necessary LSM tests. Decision curve analysis showed that all scores had a modest net benefit for ruling out advanced fibrosis at the risk threshold of 5%-10% of missing advanced fibrosis. LSM and AGILE 3+ outperformed both NFS and FIB-4 for fibrotic NASH (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve:LSM 0.79, AGILE 3+ 0.77, NFS 0.71, FIB-4 0.71; p < 0.001 of LSM-based versus simple serum tests). All noninvasive scores were suboptimal for diagnosing NASH.

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.