Identification and external validation of the optimal FIB-4 and APRI thresholds for ruling in chronic hepatitis B related liver fibrosis in tertiary care settings

Background: With the initially defined thresholds, the most widely used serum biomarkers for staging liver fibrosis (ie, APRI and FIB-4 scores) proved to be ineffective among patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection (CHB). Whether optimizing the FIB-4 and APRI thresholds could improve their...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Cai, F. (Author), Huang, J. (Author), Liang, Z. (Author), Liu, K. (Author), Liu, S. (Author), Peng, P. (Author), Qin, M. (Author), Tao, K. (Author), Zhao, L. (Author), Zou, J. (Author)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: John Wiley and Sons Inc 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:View Fulltext in Publisher
LEADER 04383nam a2200841Ia 4500
001 10.1002-jcla.23640
008 220427s2021 CNT 000 0 und d
020 |a 08878013 (ISSN) 
245 1 0 |a Identification and external validation of the optimal FIB-4 and APRI thresholds for ruling in chronic hepatitis B related liver fibrosis in tertiary care settings 
260 0 |b John Wiley and Sons Inc  |c 2021 
856 |z View Fulltext in Publisher  |u https://doi.org/10.1002/jcla.23640 
520 3 |a Background: With the initially defined thresholds, the most widely used serum biomarkers for staging liver fibrosis (ie, APRI and FIB-4 scores) proved to be ineffective among patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection (CHB). Whether optimizing the FIB-4 and APRI thresholds could improve their diagnostic accuracy requires further research. Methods: Using data of treat-naïve CHB patients from three tertiary hospitals, we explored the optimal FIB-4 and APRI thresholds to rule in liver fibrosis accurately. Subsequently, we validated the applicability of the newly defined thresholds to the CHB patients from another two tertiary hospitals. Results: The fibrosis stages between discovery cohort (n = 433) and the external validation cohort (n = 568) were statistically different (P <.001). When ruling in significant fibrosis and advanced fibrosis by the newly defined FIB-4 thresholds (2.25 and 3.00, respectively), 24.0% and 14.3% of patients, respectively, could be classified with excellent accuracy (PPVs of 91.3% and 80.6%, respectively; misdiagnosis rates of 6.0% and 5.4%, respectively), supported by the internal and external validation tests. Regrettably, the more accurate and robust thresholds of APRI score for ruling in significant fibrosis and advanced fibrosis could not be found. Besides, the FIB-4 and APRI scores should not be recommended for ruling in cirrhosis because of poor clinical diagnostic performance. Conclusion: The newly defined FIB-4 thresholds for ruling in significant fibrosis and advanced fibrosis showed superior and reproducible clinical diagnostic accuracy. The well-validated threshold (≥2.25) of FIB-4 score could aid in antiviral treatment decisions for treat-naïve adult CHB patients by accurately ruling in significant fibrosis in tertiary care settings. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC 
650 0 4 |a adult 
650 0 4 |a Adult 
650 0 4 |a alanine aminotransferase 
650 0 4 |a Alanine Transaminase 
650 0 4 |a aminotransferase 
650 0 4 |a Article 
650 0 4 |a aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index 
650 0 4 |a biomarkers 
650 0 4 |a blood 
650 0 4 |a chronic hepatitis B 
650 0 4 |a chronic hepatitis B 
650 0 4 |a clinical decision rules 
650 0 4 |a cohort analysis 
650 0 4 |a complication 
650 0 4 |a controlled study 
650 0 4 |a diagnostic accuracy 
650 0 4 |a diagnostic error 
650 0 4 |a diagnostic errors 
650 0 4 |a diagnostic test accuracy study 
650 0 4 |a external validity 
650 0 4 |a female 
650 0 4 |a Female 
650 0 4 |a Fibrosis-4 Index 
650 0 4 |a hepatitis B 
650 0 4 |a Hepatitis B, Chronic 
650 0 4 |a human 
650 0 4 |a Humans 
650 0 4 |a internal validity 
650 0 4 |a liver cirrhosis 
650 0 4 |a liver cirrhosis 
650 0 4 |a Liver Cirrhosis 
650 0 4 |a liver fibrosis 
650 0 4 |a major clinical study 
650 0 4 |a male 
650 0 4 |a Male 
650 0 4 |a middle aged 
650 0 4 |a Middle Aged 
650 0 4 |a pathology 
650 0 4 |a platelet count 
650 0 4 |a Platelet Count 
650 0 4 |a predictive value 
650 0 4 |a receiver operating characteristic 
650 0 4 |a reproducibility 
650 0 4 |a Reproducibility of Results 
650 0 4 |a sensitivity and specificity 
650 0 4 |a staging 
650 0 4 |a tertiary care center 
650 0 4 |a tertiary health care 
650 0 4 |a Tertiary Healthcare 
650 0 4 |a Transaminases 
700 1 |a Cai, F.  |e author 
700 1 |a Huang, J.  |e author 
700 1 |a Liang, Z.  |e author 
700 1 |a Liu, K.  |e author 
700 1 |a Liu, S.  |e author 
700 1 |a Peng, P.  |e author 
700 1 |a Qin, M.  |e author 
700 1 |a Tao, K.  |e author 
700 1 |a Zhao, L.  |e author 
700 1 |a Zou, J.  |e author 
773 |t Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis