Limits...
Comparison of ELF, FibroTest and FibroScan for the non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis.

Friedrich-Rust M, Rosenberg W, Parkes J, Herrmann E, Zeuzem S, Sarrazin C - BMC Gastroenterol (2010)

Bottom Line: While a systematic review has shown comparable results for both individual markers, there has been no direct comparison of both markers.FibroTest and ELF can be performed with comparable diagnostic accuracy for the non-invasive staging of liver fibrosis.Serum tests are informative in a higher proportion of patients than transient elastography.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Internal Medicine 1, JW Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.

ABSTRACT

Background: FibroTest (FT) is the most frequently used serum fibrosis marker and consists of an algorithm of five fibrosis markers (alfa2-macroglobulin, apolipoproteinA1, haptoglobin, GGT, bilirubin). The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) test consists of an algorithm of three fibrosis markers (hyaluronic acid, amino-terminal propeptide-of-type-III-collagen, tissue-inhibitor of matrix-metaloproteinase-1). While a systematic review has shown comparable results for both individual markers, there has been no direct comparison of both markers.

Methods: In the present study, the ELF-test was analyzed retrospectively in patients with chronic liver disease, who received a liver biopsy, transient elastography (TE) and the FibroTest using histology as the reference method. Histology was classified according to METAVIR and the Ludwig's classification (F0-F4) for patients with chronic hepatitis C and B virus (HCV, HBV) infection and primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC), respectively.

Results: Seventy-four patients were analysed: 36 with HCV, 10 with HBV, and 28 with PBC. The accuracy (AUROC) for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (F≥2) for ELF and FibroTest was 0.78 (95%CI:0.67-0.89) and 0.69 (95%-CI:0.57-0.82), respectively (difference not statistically significant, n.s.). The AUROC for the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was 0.92 (95%CI:0.83-1,00), and 0.91 (95%CI:0.83-0.99), respectively (n.s.). For 66 patients with reliable TE measurements the AUROC for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (cirrhosis) for TE, ELF and FT were 0.80 (0.94), 0.76 (0.92), and 0.67 (0.91), respectively (n.s.).

Conclusion: FibroTest and ELF can be performed with comparable diagnostic accuracy for the non-invasive staging of liver fibrosis. Serum tests are informative in a higher proportion of patients than transient elastography.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves for FibroTest and ELF for diagnosis of liver cirrhosis (F = 4)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2944336&req=5

Figure 2: Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves for FibroTest and ELF for diagnosis of liver cirrhosis (F = 4)

Mentions: The diagnostic accuracy (AUROC) for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (F≥2) for ELF and FibroTest was 0.78 (95%-CI: 0.67-0.89) and 0.69 (95%-CI: 0.57-0.82), respectively (s. figure 1). The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.20). The AUROC for the diagnosis of severe fibrosis (F≥3) was 0.79 (95%-CI: 0.67-0.91) and 0.72 (95%-CI: 0.60-0.84), respectively (p = 0.22). The AUROC for the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was 0.92 (95%-CI: 0.83-1.00) and 0.91 (95%-CI: 0.82-0.99), respectively (p = 0.91) (s. figure 2). Details are shown in table 2.


Comparison of ELF, FibroTest and FibroScan for the non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis.

Friedrich-Rust M, Rosenberg W, Parkes J, Herrmann E, Zeuzem S, Sarrazin C - BMC Gastroenterol (2010)

Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves for FibroTest and ELF for diagnosis of liver cirrhosis (F = 4)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2944336&req=5

Figure 2: Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves for FibroTest and ELF for diagnosis of liver cirrhosis (F = 4)
Mentions: The diagnostic accuracy (AUROC) for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (F≥2) for ELF and FibroTest was 0.78 (95%-CI: 0.67-0.89) and 0.69 (95%-CI: 0.57-0.82), respectively (s. figure 1). The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.20). The AUROC for the diagnosis of severe fibrosis (F≥3) was 0.79 (95%-CI: 0.67-0.91) and 0.72 (95%-CI: 0.60-0.84), respectively (p = 0.22). The AUROC for the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was 0.92 (95%-CI: 0.83-1.00) and 0.91 (95%-CI: 0.82-0.99), respectively (p = 0.91) (s. figure 2). Details are shown in table 2.

Bottom Line: While a systematic review has shown comparable results for both individual markers, there has been no direct comparison of both markers.FibroTest and ELF can be performed with comparable diagnostic accuracy for the non-invasive staging of liver fibrosis.Serum tests are informative in a higher proportion of patients than transient elastography.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Internal Medicine 1, JW Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.

ABSTRACT

Background: FibroTest (FT) is the most frequently used serum fibrosis marker and consists of an algorithm of five fibrosis markers (alfa2-macroglobulin, apolipoproteinA1, haptoglobin, GGT, bilirubin). The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) test consists of an algorithm of three fibrosis markers (hyaluronic acid, amino-terminal propeptide-of-type-III-collagen, tissue-inhibitor of matrix-metaloproteinase-1). While a systematic review has shown comparable results for both individual markers, there has been no direct comparison of both markers.

Methods: In the present study, the ELF-test was analyzed retrospectively in patients with chronic liver disease, who received a liver biopsy, transient elastography (TE) and the FibroTest using histology as the reference method. Histology was classified according to METAVIR and the Ludwig's classification (F0-F4) for patients with chronic hepatitis C and B virus (HCV, HBV) infection and primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC), respectively.

Results: Seventy-four patients were analysed: 36 with HCV, 10 with HBV, and 28 with PBC. The accuracy (AUROC) for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (F≥2) for ELF and FibroTest was 0.78 (95%CI:0.67-0.89) and 0.69 (95%-CI:0.57-0.82), respectively (difference not statistically significant, n.s.). The AUROC for the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was 0.92 (95%CI:0.83-1,00), and 0.91 (95%CI:0.83-0.99), respectively (n.s.). For 66 patients with reliable TE measurements the AUROC for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (cirrhosis) for TE, ELF and FT were 0.80 (0.94), 0.76 (0.92), and 0.67 (0.91), respectively (n.s.).

Conclusion: FibroTest and ELF can be performed with comparable diagnostic accuracy for the non-invasive staging of liver fibrosis. Serum tests are informative in a higher proportion of patients than transient elastography.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus