MedElevator
Войти в исследования Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2023
Machine-learning model comprising five clinical indices and liver stiffness measurement can accurately identify MASLD-related liver fibrosis.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fan Rong, Yu Ning, Li Guanlin, Arshad Tamoore, Liu Wen-Yue, Wong Grace Lai-Hung, Liang Xieer, Chen Yongpeng, Jin Xiao-Zhi, Leung Howard Ho-Wai, Chen Jinjun, Wang Xiao-Dong, Yip Terry Cheuk-Fung, Sanyal Arun J, Sun Jian, Wong Vincent Wai-Sun, Zheng Ming-Hua, Hou Jinlin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND & AIMS: aMAP score, as a hepatocellular carcinoma risk score, is proven to be associated with the degree of chronic hepatitis B-related liver fibrosis. We aimed to evaluate the ability of aMAP score for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD; formerly NAFLD)-related fibrosis diagnosis and establish a machine-learning (ML) model to improve the diagnostic performance.
METHODS: A total of 946 biopsy-proved MASLD patients from China and the United States were included in the analysis. The aMAP score, demographic/clinical indices and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) were included in seven ML algorithms to build fibrosis diagnostic models in the training set (N = 703). The performance of ML models was evaluated in the external validation set (N = 125).
RESULTS: The AUROCs of aMAP versus fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) and aspartate aminotransferase-platelet ratio (APRI) in cirrhosis and advanced fibrosis were (0.850 vs. 0.857 [P = 0.734], 0.735 [P = 0.001]) and (0.759 vs. 0.795 [P = 0.027], 0.709 [P = 0.049]). When using dual cut-off values, aMAP had a smaller uncertainty area and higher accuracy (26.9%, 86.6%) than FIB-4 (37.3%, 85.0%) and APRI (59.0%, 77.3%) in cirrhosis diagnosis. The seven ML models performed satisfactorily in most cases. In the validation set, the ML model comprising LSM and 5 indices (including age, sex, platelets, albumin and total bilirubin used in aMAP calculator), built by logistic regression algorithm (called LSM-plus model), exhibited excellent performance. In cirrhosis and advanced fibrosis detection, the LSM-plus model had higher accuracy (96.8%, 91.2%) than LSM alone (86.4%, 67.2%) and Agile score (76.0%, 83.2%), respectively. Additionally, the LSM-plus model also displayed high specificity (cirrhosis: 98.3%; advanced fibrosis: 92.6%) with satisfactory AUROC (0.932, 0.875, respectively) and sensitivity (88.9%, 82.4%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The aMAP score is capable of diagnosing MASLD-related fibrosis. The LSM-plus model could accurately identify MASLD-related cirrhosis and advanced fibrosis.
METHODS: A total of 946 biopsy-proved MASLD patients from China and the United States were included in the analysis. The aMAP score, demographic/clinical indices and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) were included in seven ML algorithms to build fibrosis diagnostic models in the training set (N = 703). The performance of ML models was evaluated in the external validation set (N = 125).
RESULTS: The AUROCs of aMAP versus fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) and aspartate aminotransferase-platelet ratio (APRI) in cirrhosis and advanced fibrosis were (0.850 vs. 0.857 [P = 0.734], 0.735 [P = 0.001]) and (0.759 vs. 0.795 [P = 0.027], 0.709 [P = 0.049]). When using dual cut-off values, aMAP had a smaller uncertainty area and higher accuracy (26.9%, 86.6%) than FIB-4 (37.3%, 85.0%) and APRI (59.0%, 77.3%) in cirrhosis diagnosis. The seven ML models performed satisfactorily in most cases. In the validation set, the ML model comprising LSM and 5 indices (including age, sex, platelets, albumin and total bilirubin used in aMAP calculator), built by logistic regression algorithm (called LSM-plus model), exhibited excellent performance. In cirrhosis and advanced fibrosis detection, the LSM-plus model had higher accuracy (96.8%, 91.2%) than LSM alone (86.4%, 67.2%) and Agile score (76.0%, 83.2%), respectively. Additionally, the LSM-plus model also displayed high specificity (cirrhosis: 98.3%; advanced fibrosis: 92.6%) with satisfactory AUROC (0.932, 0.875, respectively) and sensitivity (88.9%, 82.4%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The aMAP score is capable of diagnosing MASLD-related fibrosis. The LSM-plus model could accurately identify MASLD-related cirrhosis and advanced fibrosis.