Prediction of significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in hepatitis B e-antigen negative patients with chronic hepatitis B using routine parameters.

Yan Wang,Ming-Yi Xu,Rui-Dan Zheng,Jian-Chun Xian,Hong-Tao Xu,Jun-Ping Shi,Shi-Bo Li,Ying Qu,Yu-Wei Dong,Lun-Gen Lu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1872-034X.2012.01094.x
2013-01-01
Hepatology Research
Abstract:Aim As liver biopsy has considerable limitations in the assessment of liver fibrosis, non-invasive models have achieved great progress in the past. However, many tests consist of variables that are not readily available, and there are few data about patients with hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg) negative chronic hepatitis B (CHB). The aim of this study was to develop a model using routine data to predict liver fibrosis in HBeAg negative CHB patients. Methods We randomly divided 349 patients who underwent liver biopsy into training (n=200) and validation (n=149) sets. Multivariable logistic regression and receiveroperator curve (ROC) analyses were used to develop a model for predicting both significant fibrosis (stages 24) and cirrhosis (stage 4) in the training set. The model was validated in 149 patients in comparison to FIB-4, Forn's, S and aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index indices using ROC. Results Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the parameters of the model for predicting both significant fibrosis and cirrhosis included sex, age, prothrombin time, platelet count, cholesterol and -glutamyltransferase. In the training set, the areas under the ROC (AUC) for predicting significant fibrosis and cirrhosis were 0.856 and 0.956, respectively. In the validation group, the AUC for predicting significant fibrosis and cirrhosis were 0.889 and 0.937, respectively. Using the best cut-off values, significant fibrosis and cirrhosis can be accurately predicted in 40.9% and 91.3% of patients, respectively. Conclusion Our model can accurately predict both significant fibrosis and cirrhosis and may decrease the need of liver biopsy in a considerable proportion of patients with HBeAg negative CHB.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?