Med (New York, N.Y.) · 2024
LiverRisk score: An accurate, cost-effective tool to predict fibrosis, liver-related, and diabetes-related mortality in the general population.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Liu Shanghao, Chen Xiaohan, Jiang Xuanwei, Yin Xiaochun, Fekadu Ginenus, Liu Chuan, He Yan, Chen Huihui, Ni Wenjing, Wang Ruiying, Zeng Qing-Lei, Chen Yuping, Yang Ling, Shi Ruihua, Ju Sheng-Hong, Shen Jie, Gao Jingli, Zhao Linhua, Ming Wai-Kit, Zhong Victor W, Teng Gao-Jun, Qi Xiaolong
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Noninvasive and early assessment of liver fibrosis is of great significance and is challenging. We aimed to evaluate the predictive performance and cost-effectiveness of the LiverRisk score for liver fibrosis and liver-related and diabetes-related mortality in the general population.
METHODS: The general population from the NHANES 2017-March 2020, NHANES 1999-2018, and UK Biobank 2006-2010 were included in the cross-sectional cohort (n = 3,770), along with the NHANES follow-up cohort (n = 25,317) and the UK Biobank follow-up cohort (n = 17,259). The cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using TreeAge Pro software. Liver stiffness measurements ≥10 kPa were defined as compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD).
FINDINGS: Compared to conventional scores, the LiverRisk score had significantly better accuracy and calibration in predicting liver fibrosis, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.76 (0.72-0.79) for cACLD. According to the updated thresholds of LiverRisk score (6 and 10), we reclassified the population into three groups: low, medium, and high risk. The AUCs of LiverRisk score for predicting liver-related and diabetes-related mortality at 5, 10, and 15 years were all above 0.8, with better performance than the Fibrosis-4 score. Furthermore, compared to the low-risk group, the medium-risk and high-risk groups in the two follow-up cohorts had a significantly higher risk of liver-related and diabetes-related mortality. Finally, the cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for LiverRisk score compared to FIB-4 was USD $18,170 per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY.
CONCLUSIONS: The LiverRisk score is an accurate, cost-effective tool to predict liver fibrosis and liver-related and diabetes-related mortality in the general population.
FUNDING: The National Natural Science Foundation of China (nos. 82330060, 92059202, and 92359304); the Key Research and Development Program of Jiangsu Province (BE2023767a); the Fundamental Research Fund of Southeast University (3290002303A2); Changjiang Scholars Talent Cultivation Project of Zhongda Hospital of Southeast University (2023YJXYYRCPY03); and the Research Personnel Cultivation Program of Zhongda Hospital Southeast University (CZXM-GSP-RC125).
METHODS: The general population from the NHANES 2017-March 2020, NHANES 1999-2018, and UK Biobank 2006-2010 were included in the cross-sectional cohort (n = 3,770), along with the NHANES follow-up cohort (n = 25,317) and the UK Biobank follow-up cohort (n = 17,259). The cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using TreeAge Pro software. Liver stiffness measurements ≥10 kPa were defined as compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD).
FINDINGS: Compared to conventional scores, the LiverRisk score had significantly better accuracy and calibration in predicting liver fibrosis, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.76 (0.72-0.79) for cACLD. According to the updated thresholds of LiverRisk score (6 and 10), we reclassified the population into three groups: low, medium, and high risk. The AUCs of LiverRisk score for predicting liver-related and diabetes-related mortality at 5, 10, and 15 years were all above 0.8, with better performance than the Fibrosis-4 score. Furthermore, compared to the low-risk group, the medium-risk and high-risk groups in the two follow-up cohorts had a significantly higher risk of liver-related and diabetes-related mortality. Finally, the cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for LiverRisk score compared to FIB-4 was USD $18,170 per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY.
CONCLUSIONS: The LiverRisk score is an accurate, cost-effective tool to predict liver fibrosis and liver-related and diabetes-related mortality in the general population.
FUNDING: The National Natural Science Foundation of China (nos. 82330060, 92059202, and 92359304); the Key Research and Development Program of Jiangsu Province (BE2023767a); the Fundamental Research Fund of Southeast University (3290002303A2); Changjiang Scholars Talent Cultivation Project of Zhongda Hospital of Southeast University (2023YJXYYRCPY03); and the Research Personnel Cultivation Program of Zhongda Hospital Southeast University (CZXM-GSP-RC125).
Предметные рубрики MeSH
RiskCost-Effectiveness AnalysisLiver CirrhosisDiabetes MellitusReproducibility of ResultsCross-Sectional StudiesUnited StatesUnited KingdomBiological Specimen BanksCalibrationQuality-Adjusted Life YearsArea Under CurveHumansMaleFemaleAdultMiddle AgedAgedRisk AdjustmentPredictive Value of TestsSeverity of Illness Index