Dataset Information

Progression of Liver Fibrosis in HIV/HCV Co-Infection: A Comparison between Non-Invasive Assessment Methods and Liver Biopsy.

ABSTRACT: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of seven non-invasive tests (NITs) of liver fibrosis and to assess fibrosis progression over time in HIV/HCV co-infected patients.Transient elastography (TE) and six blood tests were compared to histopathological fibrosis stage (METAVIR). Participants were followed over three years with NITs at yearly intervals.Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for significant fibrosis (> = F2) in 105 participants was highest for TE (0.85), followed by FIB-4 (0.77), ELF-Test (0.77), APRI (0.76), Fibrotest (0.75), hyaluronic acid (0.70), and Hepascore (0.68). AUROC for cirrhosis (F4) was 0.97 for TE followed by FIB-4 (0.91), APRI (0.89), Fibrotest (0.84), Hepascore (0.82), ELF-Test (0.82), and hyaluronic acid (0.79). A three year follow-up was completed by 87 participants, all on antiretroviral therapy and in 20 patients who completed HCV treatment (9 with sustained virologic response). TE, APRI and Fibrotest did not significantly change during follow-up. There was weak evidence for an increase of FIB-4 (mean increase: 0.22, p = 0.07). 42 participants had a second liver biopsy: Among 38 participants with F0-F3 at baseline, 10 were progessors (1-stage increase in fibrosis, 8 participants; 2-stage, 1; 3-stage, 1). Among progressors, mean increase in TE was 3.35 kPa, in APRI 0.36, and in FIB-4 0.75. Fibrotest results did not change over 3 years.TE was the best NIT for liver fibrosis staging in HIV/HCV co-infected patients. APRI-Score, FIB-4 Index, Fibrotest, and ELF-Test were less reliable. Routinely available APRI and FIB-4 performed as good as more expensive tests. NITs did not change significantly during a follow-up of three years, suggesting slow liver disease progression in a majority of HIV/HCV co-infected persons on antiretroviral therapy.

SUBMITTER: Schmid P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4587859 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Progression of Liver Fibrosis in HIV/HCV Co-Infection: A Comparison between Non-Invasive Assessment Methods and Liver Biopsy.

Schmid Patrick P Bregenzer Andrea A Huber Milo M Rauch Andri A Jochum Wolfram W Müllhaupt Beat B Vernazza Pietro P Opravil Milos M Weber Rainer R

PloS one 20150929 9

<h4>Objectives</h4>To evaluate the diagnostic performance of seven non-invasive tests (NITs) of liver fibrosis and to assess fibrosis progression over time in HIV/HCV co-infected patients.<h4>Methods</h4>Transient elastography (TE) and six blood tests were compared to histopathological fibrosis stage (METAVIR). Participants were followed over three years with NITs at yearly intervals.<h4>Results</h4>Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for significant fibrosis (> = F2) ...[more]

PMID: 26418061

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background & aimsFibrosis progression might be accelerated in patients who are coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and HCV (HIV/HCV). However, no studies have directly compared fibrosis progression by paired liver biopsy between patients infected with HIV and HCV versus those infected with only HCV.MethodsLiver biopsy samples were collected from patients with HIV/HCV (n = 306) and those with HCV; biopsies from 59 without a sustained virologic response (SVR) or cirrhosis were matched with those from patients with only HCV (controls) for initial fibrosis stage, demographics, and HCV treatment. For HIV/HCV patients, categorical variables at baseline and the area under the curve of continuous variables per unit time were analyzed for associations with fibrosis progression.ResultsLiver biopsies from HIV/HCV patients had more piecemeal necrosis than controls (P = .001) and increased lobular inflammation (P = .002); HIV/HCV patients also had shorter intervals between liver biopsies (4.7 vs 5.9 years, P < .0001). Between the first and second biopsies, fibrosis remained unchanged or progressed 1 or 2 units in 55%, 18%, and 18% of HIV/HCV patients, respectively, compared with 45%, 30%, and 9% of controls. The fibrosis progression rate was similar between HIV/HCV and control patients (0.12 ± 0.40 vs 0.091 ± 0.29 units/y; P = .72). In paired biopsies from 66 patients, including those with SVR, there were no associations between fibrosis progression and demographics; numbers of CD4+ T cells; levels of aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase; use of highly active antiretroviral therapy; response to HCV therapy (no treatment, SVR, or non-response); baseline levels of FIB-4; or histologic features including inflammation, fibrosis, or steatosis.ConclusionsOn the basis of analysis of liver biopsy samples, fibrosis progression was similar between HIV/HCV-infected and HCV-infected patients; no clinical or laboratory parameters predicted disease progression.

Project description:BackgroundNon-invasive tests have been constructed and evaluated mainly for binary diagnoses such as significant fibrosis. Recently, detailed fibrosis classifications for several non-invasive tests have been developed, but their accuracy has not been thoroughly evaluated in comparison to liver biopsy, especially in clinical practice and for Fibroscan. Therefore, the main aim of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of detailed fibrosis classifications available for non-invasive tests and liver biopsy. The secondary aim was to validate these accuracies in independent populations.MethodsFour HCV populations provided 2,068 patients with liver biopsy, four different pathologist skill-levels and non-invasive tests. Results were expressed as percentages of correctly classified patients.ResultsIn population #1 including 205 patients and comparing liver biopsy (reference: consensus reading by two experts) and blood tests, Metavir fibrosis (FM) stage accuracy was 64.4% in local pathologists vs. 82.2% (p < 10-3) in single expert pathologist. Significant discrepancy (? 2FM vs reference histological result) rates were: Fibrotest: 17.2%, FibroMeter2G: 5.6%, local pathologists: 4.9%, FibroMeter3G: 0.5%, expert pathologist: 0% (p < 10-3). In population #2 including 1,056 patients and comparing blood tests, the discrepancy scores, taking into account the error magnitude, of detailed fibrosis classification were significantly different between FibroMeter2G (0.30 ± 0.55) and FibroMeter3G (0.14 ± 0.37, p < 10-3) or Fibrotest (0.84 ± 0.80, p < 10-3). In population #3 (and #4) including 458 (359) patients and comparing blood tests and Fibroscan, accuracies of detailed fibrosis classification were, respectively: Fibrotest: 42.5% (33.5%), Fibroscan: 64.9% (50.7%), FibroMeter2G: 68.7% (68.2%), FibroMeter3G: 77.1% (83.4%), p < 10-3 (p < 10-3). Significant discrepancy (? 2 FM) rates were, respectively: Fibrotest: 21.3% (22.2%), Fibroscan: 12.9% (12.3%), FibroMeter2G: 5.7% (6.0%), FibroMeter3G: 0.9% (0.9%), p < 10-3 (p < 10-3).ConclusionsThe accuracy in detailed fibrosis classification of the best-performing blood test outperforms liver biopsy read by a local pathologist, i.e., in clinical practice; however, the classification precision is apparently lesser. This detailed classification accuracy is much lower than that of significant fibrosis with Fibroscan and even Fibrotest but higher with FibroMeter3G. FibroMeter classification accuracy was significantly higher than those of other non-invasive tests. Finally, for hepatitis C evaluation in clinical practice, fibrosis degree can be evaluated using an accurate blood test.

Dataset Information

Progression of Liver Fibrosis in HIV/HCV Co-Infection: A Comparison between Non-Invasive Assessment Methods and Liver Biopsy.

Publications

Progression of Liver Fibrosis in HIV/HCV Co-Infection: A Comparison between Non-Invasive Assessment Methods and Liver Biopsy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets