Clinical and Experimental Medicine

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 45–50 | Cite as

Enhanced liver fibrosis test using ELISA assay accurately discriminates advanced stage of liver fibrosis as determined by transient elastography fibroscan in treatment naïve chronic HCV patients

  • Dalia Omran
  • Ayman Yosry
  • Samar K. Darweesh
  • Mohammed M. Nabeel
  • Mohammed El-Beshlawey
  • Sameh Saif
  • Azza Fared
  • Mohamed Hassany
  • Rania A. Zayed
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 222 Downloads

Abstract

Evaluation of liver fibrosis stage is crucial in the assessment of chronic HCV patients, regarding decision to start treatment and during follow-up. Our aim was to assess the validity of the enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) score in discrimination of advanced stage of liver fibrosis in naïve chronic HCV patients. We prospectively evaluated liver fibrosis stage in one hundred eighty-one naïve chronic HCV Egyptian patients by transient elastography (TE)-FibroScan. Patients were categorized into mild to moderate fibrosis (≤F2) group and advanced fibrosis (≥F3) group. The ELF score components, hyaluronic acid (HA), amino-terminal propeptide of type-III-procollagen (PIIINP) and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase type-1 (TIMP-1), were done using ELISA test. The mean values of ELF and its individual components significantly correlated with the hepatic fibrosis stage as measured by TE-FibroScan (P value 0.001). ELF cutoff value of 9.8 generated a sensitivity of 77.8%, specificity of 67.1%, area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.76 with 95% confidence interval [CI] (0.68–0.83) for detecting advanced fibrosis (F ≥ 3). ELF panel is a good, reliable noninvasive test and showed comparable results to TE-FibroScan in detecting liver fibrosis stage in treatment naïve chronic HCV patients.

Keywords

Liver fibrosis HCV ELF TE-FibroScan HA PIIINP TIMP-1 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Science and Technology Development Fund (STDF), Egypt. Grant No. 5380, Basic and applied research.

Funding

This study was funded by the Science and Technology Development Fund (STDF), Egypt. Grant No. 5380, Basic and applied research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

was obtained from each participant before recruitment in the study.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in the study were in accordance with the ethical standards of Cairo University research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. 1.
    Bedossa P, Dargère D, Paradis V. Sampling variability of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology. 2003;38:1449–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lawson A, Hagan S, Rye K, et al. The natural history of hepatitis C with severe hepatic fibrosis. J Hepatol. 2007;47:37–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ghany MG, Strader DB, Thomas DL, Seeff LB. Diagnosis, management, and treatment of hepatitis C: an update. Hepatology. 2009;49:1335–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Everhart JE, Wright EC, Goodman ZD, et al. Prognostic value of Ishak fibrosis stage: findings from the hepatitis C antiviral long-term treatment against cirrhosis trial. Hepatology. 2010;51:585–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maharaj B, Maharaj RJ, Leary WP, et al. Sampling variability and its influence on the diagnostic yield of percutaneous needle biopsy of the liver. Lancet. 1986;1:523–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:495–500.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Regev A, Berho M, Jeffers LJ, et al. Sampling error and intraobserver variation in liver biopsy in patients with chronic HCV infection. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:2614–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rousselet MC, Michalak S, Dupré F, et al. Sources of variability in histological scoring of chronic viral hepatitis. Hepatology. 2005;41:257–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Poynard T, Munteanu M, Imbert-Bismut F. Prospective analysis of discordant results between biochemical markers and biopsy in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Clin Chem. 2004;50:1344–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mehta SH, Lau B, Afdhal NH, Thomas DL. Exceeding the limits of liver histology markers. J Hepatol. 2009;50:36–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Anna S, Brian J. Chronic hepatitis B: update 2009. Hepatology. 2009;50:661–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD. American association for the study of liver diseases. Liver biopsy. Hepatol. 2009;49(3):1017–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castera L, Bedossa P. How to assess liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C: serum markers or transient elastography vs. liver biopsy? Liver Int. 2011;31(Suppl 1):13–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ledinghen V, Vergniol J. Transient elastography (FibroScan). Gastroenterol Clin Bio. 2008;32:58–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carrion JA, Puigvehi M, Coll S, et al. Applicability and accuracy improvement of transient elastography using the M and XL probes by experienced operators. J Viral Hepat. 2015;22:297–306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Castéra L, Vergniol J, Foucher J, et al. Prospective comparison of transient elastography, Fibrotest, APRI, and liver biopsy for the assessment of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Gastroenterology. 2005;128:343–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ziol M, Handra-Luca A, Kettaneh A, et al. Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis by measurement of stiffness in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology. 2005;41:48–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Arena U, Vizzutti F, Abraldes JG, et al. Reliability of transient elastography for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Gut. 2008;57:1288–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vergniol J, Foucher J, Mamou K, et al. Non-invasive evaluation of liver fibrosis using FibroScan in long-term sustained-virological responder patients after HCV treatment. Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 2008;32:1061–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ogawa E, Furusyo N, Toyoda K, et al. The longitudinal quantitative assessment by transient elastography of chronic hepatitis C patients treated with pegylated interferon alpha-2b and ribavirin. Antiviral Res. 2009;83:127–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vergniol J, Foucher J, Castera L, et al. Changes of non-invasive markers and FibroScan values during HCV treatment. J Viral Hepatitis. 2009;16:132–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Foucher J, Chanteloup E, Vergniol J, et al. Diagnosis of cirrhosis by transient elastography (FibroScan): a prospective study. Gut. 2006;55:403–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rosenberg WM, Voelker M, Thiel R, et al. Serum markers detect the presence of liver fibrosis: a cohort study. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:1704–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lichtinghagen R, Pietsch D, Bantel H, Manns MP, Brand K, Bahr MJ. The enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) score: normal values, influence factors and proposed cut-off values. J Hepatol. 2013;59:236–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fontaine H, Petitprez K, Roudot-Thoraval F, Trinchet JC. Guidelines for the diagnosis of uncomplicated cirrhosis. Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 2007;31:504–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nitta Y, Kawabe N, Hashimoto S, et al. Liver stiffness measured by transient elastography correlates with fibrosis area in liver biopsy in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology Research. 2009;39:675–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Parkes J, Guha IN, Roderick P, Rosenberg W. Performance of serum marker panels for liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. J Hepatol. 2006;44:462–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Friedrich-Rust M, Rosenberg W, Parkes J, Herrmann E, Zeuzem S, Sarrazin C. Comparison of ELF, FibroTest and FibroScan for the non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis. BMC Gastroenterol. 2010;10:103–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fraquelli M, Rigamonti C, Casazza G, et al. Reproducibility of transient elastography in the evaluation of liver fibrosis in patients with chronic liver disease. Gut. 2007;56:968–73.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Boursier J, Konate A, Gorea G, et al. Reproducibility of liver stiffness measurement by ultrasonographic elastometry. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6:1263–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Castera L, Foucher J, Bernard PH, et al. Pitfalls of liver stiffness measurement: a 5-year prospective study of 13,369 examinations. Hepatology. 2010;51:828–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wong GL, Wong VW, Chim AM, et al. Factors associated with unreliable liver stiffness measurement and its failure with transient elastography in the Chinese population. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;26:300–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    García-Jurado L, Oyagüez I, Casado MÁ, et al. Evaluation of the costs of transient elastography (FibroScan(®)) in the diagnosis of liver fibrosis in HIV patients with hepatitis C virus. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2012;30:294–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Canavan C, Eisenburg J, Meng L, Corey K, Hur C. Ultrasound elastography for fibrosis surveillance is cost effective in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus in the UK. Dig Dis Sci. 2013;58:2691–704.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Whitty JA, Tallis C, Nguyen KH, et al. Cost and time savings from a rapid access model of care using transient elastography to screen and triage patients with chronic Hepatitis C infection. J Med Econ. 2014;17:159–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Friedrich-Rust M, Ong MF, Martens S, et al. Performance of transient elastography for the staging of liver fibrosis: a metaanalysis. Gastroenterology. 2008;134:960–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Guéchot J, Trocmé C, Renversez JC, Sturm N, Zarski JP. ANRS HC EP 23 Fibrostar Study Group. Independent validation of the Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) score in the ANRS HC EP 23 Fibrostar cohort of patients with chronic hepatitis C. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2012;50(4):693–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Fernandes FF, Ferraz ML, Andrade LE, et al. Enhanced liver fibrosis panel as a predictor of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C patients. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2015;49(3):235–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wahl K, Rosenberg W, Vaske B, et al. Biopsy-controlled liver fibrosis staging using the enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) score compared to transient elastography. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(12):e51906.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gaballah AM, Elsaid HH, Shaheen NE. Enhanced Liver Fibrosis test can replace liver biopsy in detection of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C patients Int. J Adv Res. 2015;3(4):145–50.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dolman GE, Zaitoun A, IrvingWL Guha NI. PTH-081 enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test performs better than histological parameters in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with advanced fibrosis due to chronic hepatitis C infection. Gut. 2014;63(1):A245.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mayo MJ, Parkes J, Adams-Huet B, et al. Prediction of clinical outcomes in primary biliary cirrhosis by serum enhanced liver fibrosis assay. Hepatology. 2008;48(5):1549–57.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Puigvehí M, Hernández J, Broquetas T, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of the Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF®) score using HCV-infected serum samples cryopreserved for up to 25 years. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(12):e0164883.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Schuppan D, Afdhal NH. Liver cirrhosis. Lancet. 2008;371:838–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Popov Y, Schuppan D. Targeting liver fibrosis: strategies for development and validation of antifibrotic therapies. Hepatology. 2009;50:1294–306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Naveau S, Gaudé G, Asnacios A, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic values of noninvasive biomarkers of fibrosis in patients with alcoholic liver disease. Hepatology. 2009;49:97–105.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dalia Omran
    • 1
  • Ayman Yosry
    • 1
  • Samar K. Darweesh
    • 1
  • Mohammed M. Nabeel
    • 1
  • Mohammed El-Beshlawey
    • 1
  • Sameh Saif
    • 2
  • Azza Fared
    • 2
  • Mohamed Hassany
    • 2
  • Rania A. Zayed
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Endemic Medicine and Hepato-gastroenterology, Faculty of MedicineCairo UniversityCairoEgypt
  2. 2.National Hepatology and Tropical Medicine Research InstituteCairo UniversityCairoEgypt
  3. 3.Department of Clinical and Chemical Pathology, Faculty of MedicineCairo UniversityCairoEgypt

Personalised recommendations