Clinical Utility of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Biomarkers for Identifying Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Patients at High Risk of Progression: A Multicenter Pooled Data and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background & AimsNonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is increasing in prevalence worldwide. NAFLD is associated with excess risk of all-cause mortality, and its progression to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and fibrosis accounts for a growing proportion of cirrhosis and hepatocellular cancer and thus is a leading cause of liver transplant worldwide. Noninvasive precise methods to identify patients with NASH and NASH with significant disease activity and fibrosis are crucial when the disease is still modifiable. The aim of this study was to examine the clinical utility of corrected T1 (cT1) vs magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) liver fat for identification of NASH participants with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity score ≥4 and fibrosis stage (F) ≥2 (high-risk NASH).MethodsData from five clinical studies (n = 543) with participants suspected of NAFLD were pooled or used for individual participant data meta-analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of the MRI biomarkers to stratify NASH patients was determined using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).ResultsA stepwise increase in cT1 and MRI liver fat with increased NAFLD severity was shown, and cT1 was significantly higher in participants with high-risk NASH. The diagnostic accuracy (AUROC) of cT1 to identify patients with NASH was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.74–0.82), for liver fat was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.73–0.82), and when combined with MRI liver fat was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.78–0.85). The diagnostic accuracy of cT1 to identify patients with high-risk NASH was good (AUROC = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.74–0.82), was superior to MRI liver fat (AUROC = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64–0.74), and was not substantially improved by combining it with MRI liver fat (AUROC = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.75–0.83). The meta-analysis showed similar performance to the pooled analysis for these biomarkers.ConclusionsThis study shows that quantitative MRI-derived biomarkers cT1 and liver fat are suitable for identifying patients with NASH, and cT1 is a better noninvasive technology than liver fat to identify NASH patients at greatest risk of disease progression. Therefore, MRI cT1 and liver fat have important clinical utility to help guide the appropriate use of interventions in NAFLD and NASH clinical care pathways. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is increasing in prevalence worldwide. NAFLD is associated with excess risk of all-cause mortality, and its progression to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and fibrosis accounts for a growing proportion of cirrhosis and hepatocellular cancer and thus is a leading cause of liver transplant worldwide. Noninvasive precise methods to identify patients with NASH and NASH with significant disease activity and fibrosis are crucial when the disease is still modifiable. The aim of this study was to examine the clinical utility of corrected T1 (cT1) vs magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) liver fat for identification of NASH participants with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity score ≥4 and fibrosis stage (F) ≥2 (high-risk NASH). Data from five clinical studies (n = 543) with participants suspected of NAFLD were pooled or used for individual participant data meta-analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of the MRI biomarkers to stratify NASH patients was determined using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). A stepwise increase in cT1 and MRI liver fat with increased NAFLD severity was shown, and cT1 was significantly higher in participants with high-risk NASH. The diagnostic accuracy (AUROC) of cT1 to identify patients with NASH was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.74–0.82), for liver fat was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.73–0.82), and when combined with MRI liver fat was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.78–0.85). The diagnostic accuracy of cT1 to identify patients with high-risk NASH was good (AUROC = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.74–0.82), was superior to MRI liver fat (AUROC = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64–0.74), and was not substantially improved by combining it with MRI liver fat (AUROC = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.75–0.83). The meta-analysis showed similar performance to the pooled analysis for these biomarkers. This study shows that quantitative MRI-derived biomarkers cT1 and liver fat are suitable for identifying patients with NASH, and cT1 is a better noninvasive technology than liver fat to identify NASH patients at greatest risk of disease progression. Therefore, MRI cT1 and liver fat have important clinical utility to help guide the appropriate use of interventions in NAFLD and NASH clinical care pathways.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".