Performance Of The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis Test To Estimate Advanced Fibrosis Among Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

IMPORTANCE The most important surrogate for increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes among patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the patient's stage of liver fibrosis. There is a significant barrier to risk-stratifying patients in clinical practice owing to the need for liver biopsy.OBJECTIVE To determine the performance of the enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test as a noninvasive test for assessment of liver fibrosis among patients with NAFLD.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted among patients recruited from a large, community-based hospital system's outpatient liver clinic from 2001 to 2020. Patients with NAFLD defined as steatosis greater than 5% without evidence of other liver disease or excessive alcohol use were included. Data were analyzed from August 2020 through February 2021.INTERVENTION Enhanced liver fibrosis score was calculated.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Advanced fibrosis was identified by liver biopsy or transient elastography.RESULTS Among 829 patients with NAFLD, the mean (SD) age was 53.1 (14.0) years, there were 363 (43.8%) men, 294 patients (35.5%) had type 2 diabetes, and the mean (SD) fibrosis-4 (fib-4) score was 1.34 (0.97). There were 463 patients with liver biopsy, among whom 113 individuals (24.4%) had bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis; among 462 patients with transient elastography data, 79 individuals (17.1%) had liver stiffness results of 9.6 kPa or more (ie, advanced fibrosis). Patients with advanced fibrosis had statistically significantly increased mean (SD) ELF scores compared with patients without advanced fibrosis as determined by biopsy (10.1 [1.3] vs 8.6 [1.0]; P < .001) or transient elastography (10.0 [1.1] vs 9.0 [0.8]; P < .001). Among all patients with NAFLD, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for ELF in identifying patients with advanced fibrosis was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.77-0.85) for patients diagnosed by biopsy and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.75-0.82) for those diagnosed by transient elastography. Performance of the ELF score was similar among patients with NAFLD who were aged 65 years or older (AUROC, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.87) or had type 2 diabetes (AUROC, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.71-0.84). The combination of an ELF score of 7.2 or greater with a fib-4 score of 0.74 or greater was associated with a negative predictive value of 95.1% (95% CI, 91.8%-98.4%) and a sensitivity of 92.5% (95% CI, 87.4%-97.5%), which can reliably rule out advanced fibrosis. An ELF score of 9.8 or greater with a fib-4 score of 2.9 or greater was associated with a positive predictive value of 95.0% (95% CI, 85.5%-100%) and a specificity of 99.7% (95% CI, 99.1%-100%), which can be used to rule in advanced fibrosis.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These findings suggest that the ELF test performs well in identifying patients with NAFLD who are at increased risk of advanced fibrosis and that this test combined with fib-4 score may be reliably used in clinical practice to assess the presence or absence of advanced fibrosis among patients with NAFLD.