A new model for estimation of significant fibrosis in primary care. SAFE to use?

肝活检 人口 肝病 估计 医学 重症监护医学 危害 疾病 阶段(地层学) 医疗保健 采样(信号处理) 活检 内科学 环境卫生 计算机科学 古生物学 法学 管理 经济 政治学 滤波器(信号处理) 生物 经济增长 计算机视觉
作者
Hannes Hagström
出处
期刊:Hepatology [Lippincott Williams & Wilkins]
卷期号:77 (1): 18-19
标识
DOI:10.1002/hep.32549
摘要

While non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common liver disease globally, few patients develop clinically significant liver‐related events.1 Correct estimation of patients at risk for such outcomes is of high importance. It is now well established that fibrosis stage is the key determinant of liver‐related outcomes in NAFLD, and also predicts overall mortality.2,3 However, much research focus is made to step away from use of liver biopsy as a diagnostic and prognostic tool since biopsies are expensive, has the potential for harm, and results can be difficult to interpret due to sampling error and poor intra‐ and inter‐reader reproducibility, especially regarding the presence of ballooning.4 Therefore, developing non‐invasive alternatives to biopsy is a subject of high interest to patients and clinicians, as well as healthcare payers. Since most patients with NAFLD are found in primary care, a first step is to estimate the probability for presence (or absence) of clinically significant hepatic fibrosis. This is usually agreed as being stage 2–4 on the NASH CRN scale.5 Given the magnitude of the population at risk (possibly up to 25%), tools to use in a primary care setting needs to be simple, inexpensive and easy to interpret for primary care physicians. Developing such tools have been shown to be difficult. The commonly used FIB‐4 score for instance,6 was found to lack specificity and sensitivity when used in a primary care population.7 Efforts to improve first‐line diagnostics in this field are therefore highly warranted, especially since both FIB‐4 and other scores are mostly developed to identify stage 3–4 fibrosis, while inclusion in clinical trials normally requires presence of stage 2–3 fibrosis and patients with stage 2 fibrosis also have an increased risk for outcomes compared to those with minimal fibrosis.2 In this issue of Hepatology, Sripongpun and colleagues present a new diagnostic model for detection of stage 2–4 fibrosis in patients with NAFLD. The intention was to improve primary care decision‐making on when to retain the patient in primary care, and when to refer to other services in the healthcare system. The Steatosis‐Associated Fibrosis Estimator (SAFE) score was constructed using data from 676 patients recruited from the NASH CRN observational study, of which 45% had fibrosis stage 2–4.8 After considering a number of machine learning methods, the model was constructed using logistic regression. Data on age, body mass index, diabetes as a binary variable, AST, ALT, total globulin and platelets were included. The area under the ROC curve for this model to correctly define presence of significant fibrosis was 0.79 in the training data set, and 0.80 in an external validation data set, consisting of participants in the FLINT trial. Further validation was performed in a separate cohort of patients with MRE‐defined fibrosis. Finally, the authors investigated the prognostic performance of the SAFE score in the NHANES data set and found that higher levels of the score were associated with a higher overall mortality. Unfortunately, only overall mortality could be ascertained and not liver‐specific mortality or non‐fatal events. The authors compared the SAFE score to that of established diagnostic models (FIB‐4 and NAFLD fibrosis score9) where SAFE outperformed these in both the derivation and validation cohorts. Interestingly, many of the included parameters are strikingly similar to those included in the NAFLD fibrosis score. So, should we switch to recommending the SAFE score as a first‐line tool in primary care instead of FIB‐4 or other scores? Perhaps not so fast. The model was developed in a context where it is not intended to be used.10 Ideally, a diagnostic or prediction model should be developed in the cohorts where it would be applied, in this case in primary care. In secondary or tertiary care, other non‐invasive alternatives to biopsy such as vibration‐controlled transient elastography with higher diagnostic accuracy are often available as alternatives to blood‐based models. The problem can be visualized by the use of SAFE in the NHANES data set. In those with presumed NAFLD, only 58% were defined as at low risk using the suggested cut‐offs. 34% were defined as at indeterminate risk and 8% as high risk. By contrast, an analysis of the FIB‐4 score in a Swedish general population cohort found that 1.4% were classified as high risk.7 Thus, using the SAFE score in primary care could as of now lead to a high proportion of false‐positives and risk overwhelming hepatology services. Another drawback of the SAFE score is the use of more parameters compared with for instance FIB‐4, meaning that it could be more difficult to implement on a wider stage. The authors conclude that it is unknown how their score is best used in a primary care setting, to which one must fully agree. Recalibration of the SAFE score using a primary care cohort would be a natural next step, and such studies could be interesting to the community. Extensive validation of new clinical diagnostic or prediction models needs to be performed before use in clinical practice, and the community need to decide on which model is most proper to use in different settings.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
冷静如松完成签到 ,获得积分10
3秒前
5秒前
浮云完成签到 ,获得积分10
6秒前
屈岂愈完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
21秒前
Pupil完成签到,获得积分10
21秒前
偏偏意气用事完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
安安完成签到,获得积分10
26秒前
cttc完成签到,获得积分10
27秒前
Chnimike完成签到 ,获得积分10
27秒前
31秒前
红茸茸羊完成签到 ,获得积分10
31秒前
年轻千愁完成签到 ,获得积分10
33秒前
liu完成签到,获得积分10
34秒前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
34秒前
Wanyeweiyu完成签到,获得积分10
36秒前
Fury完成签到 ,获得积分10
41秒前
风中幻梦完成签到,获得积分10
43秒前
bigpluto完成签到,获得积分10
44秒前
46秒前
是谁还没睡完成签到 ,获得积分10
47秒前
盘尼西林发布了新的文献求助10
51秒前
zzz完成签到 ,获得积分10
53秒前
dktrrrr完成签到,获得积分10
55秒前
科研通AI2S应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
55秒前
丘比特应助科研通管家采纳,获得20
55秒前
55秒前
ccc完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
萧秋灵完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
缓慢冥幽完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
旺仔同学完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
吉以寒完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
科研老兵完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
1分钟前
fys131415完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
执着的忆雪完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
1分钟前
闵不悔完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
阳光火车完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
cc完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
高分求助中
【提示信息,请勿应助】关于scihub 10000
Les Mantodea de Guyane: Insecta, Polyneoptera [The Mantids of French Guiana] 3000
徐淮辽南地区新元古代叠层石及生物地层 3000
The Mother of All Tableaux: Order, Equivalence, and Geometry in the Large-scale Structure of Optimality Theory 3000
Handbook of Industrial Diamonds.Vol2 1100
Global Eyelash Assessment scale (GEA) 1000
Picture Books with Same-sex Parented Families: Unintentional Censorship 550
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 冶金 细胞生物学 免疫学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 4038066
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3575779
关于积分的说明 11373801
捐赠科研通 3305584
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1819239
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 892655
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 815022