4.6 Article

Serum Biomarkers and Transient Elastography as Predictors of Advanced Liver Fibrosis in a United States Cohort: The Boston Children's Hospital Experience

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
Volume 163, Issue 4, Pages 1058-+

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.04.044

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Echosens

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To evaluate and compare the ability of serum hyaluronic acid (HA) and human cartilage glycoprotein-39 (YKL-40) values, as well as transient elastography (TE) findings, to predict advanced hepatic fibrosis in a cohort from a single pediatric center. Study design Subjects who underwent liver biopsy analysis within 12 months before enrollment were eligible for this prospective study. HA and YKL-40 measurements were obtained within 1 month of TE. A METAVIR score of F3 or F4 was considered to indicate advanced fibrosis. Results A total of 128 patients (51% males) aged 1.4 months to 27.6 years (22% aged <2 years) were enrolled. Thirty-one subjects had data on only HA and YKL-40 measurements, and 97 subjects had data on both blood tests and TE. For the prediction of advanced fibrosis, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values were 0.83 for TE, 0.72 for HA, and 0.52 for YKL-40. The AUC of 0.83 for TE was statistically significantly greater than the AUCs for HA (P = .03) and YKL-40 (P < .0001). Optimal cutpoints for predicting F3-F4 fibrosis were 8.6 kPa for TE (P < .0001), 43 ng/mL for HA (P < .0001), and 26.2 ng/mL for YKL-40 (P = .85). The combination of TE and HA was not better than TE alone for predicting advanced fibrosis (P = .15). Conclusion In this study, which evaluated TE, HA, and YKL-40 to predict liver fibrosis in children in the US, YKL-40 had no predictive value and TE was superior to HA, but the addition of HA did not improve the performance of TE. Our data suggest that TE and HA may be useful noninvasive tools for assessing liver fibrosis in children.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available