4.8 Article Proceedings Paper

Development of a simple noninvasive index to predict significant fibrosis in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection

期刊

HEPATOLOGY
卷 43, 期 6, 页码 1317-1325

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hep.21178

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [R01DA16078] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [K23 DK064578] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Liver biopsy remains the gold standard in the assessment of severity of liver disease. Noninvasive tests have gained popularity to predict histology in view of die associated risks of biopsy. However, many models include tests not readily available, and there are limited data from patients with HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection. We aimed to develop a model using routine tests to predict liver fibrosis in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection. A retrospective analysis of liver histology was performed in 832 patients. Liver fibrosis was assessed via Ishak score; patients were categorized as 0-1, 2-3, or 4-6 and were randomly assigned to training (n = 555) or validation (n = 277) sets. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that platelet count (PLT), age, AST, and M were significantly associated with fibrosis. Additional analysis revealed PLT, age, AST, and ALT as an alternative model. Based on this, a simple index (FIB-4) was developed: age ([yr] x AST [U/L])/((PLT [10(9)/L]) X (ALT [U/L])(1/2)). The AUROC of the index was 0.765 for differentiation between Ishak stage 0-3 and 4-6. At a cutoff of < 1.45 in the validation set, the negative predictive value to exclude advanced fibrosis (stage 4-6) was 90% with a sensitivity of 70%. A cutoff of > 3.25 had a positive predictive value of 65% and a specificity of 97%. Using these cutoffs, 87% of the 198 patients with FIB-4 values outside 1.45-3.25 would be correctly classified, and liver biopsy could be avoided in 71% of the validation group. In conclusion noninvasive tests can accurately predict hepatic fibrosis and may reduce the need for liver biopsy in the majority of HIV/HCV-coinfected patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据