Reliability of histologic assessment for NAFLD and development of an expanded NAFLD activity score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The NASH Clinical Research Network histologic scoring system, the gold-standard NASH histology assessment for clinical trials, has demonstrated intrarater and interrater variability. An expert panel in a previous systematic Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) study determined that existing histologic scoring systems do not fully capture NASH disease activity and fibrosis, and standardized definitions of histologic features are needed. We evaluated the reliability of existing and alternate histologic measures and their correlations with a disease activity visual analog scale to propose optimal components for an expanded NAFLD activity score (NAS). APPROACH AND RESULTS: Four liver pathologists who were involved in the prior RAND/UCLA study underwent standardized training and multiple discussions with the goal of improving agreement. They were blinded to clinical information and scored histologic measures twice, ≥2 weeks apart, for 40 liver biopsies representing the full spectrum of NAFLD. Index intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates demonstrated intrarater (0.80-0.85) and interrater (0.60-0.72) reliability. Hepatocyte ballooning items had similar interrater ICCs (0.68-0.79), including those extending scores from 0-2 to 0-4. Steatosis measures (interrater ICCs, 0.72-0.80) correlated poorly with disease activity. Correlations with disease activity were largest for hepatocyte ballooning and Mallory-Denk bodies (MDBs), with both used to develop the expanded NAS (intrarater ICC, 0.90; interrater ICC, 0.80). Fibrosis measures had ICCs of 0.70-0.87. CONCLUSIONS: After extensive preparation among a group of experienced pathologists, we demonstrated improved reliability of multiple existing histologic NAFLD indices and fibrosis staging systems. Hepatocyte ballooning and MDBs most strongly correlated with disease activity and were used for the expanded NAS. Further validation including evaluation of responsiveness is required.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.060 | 0.096 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".