SAFE biopsy: A validated method for large‐scale staging of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C

The staging of liver fibrosis is pivotal for defining the prognosis and indications for therapy in hepatitis C. Although liver biopsy remains the gold standard, several noninvasive methods are under evaluation for clinical use. The aim of this study was to validate the recently described sequential algorithm for fibrosis evaluation (SAFE) biopsy, which detects significant fibrosis (≥F2 by METAVIR) and cirrhosis (F4) by combining the AST‐to‐platelet ratio index and Fibrotest‐Fibrosure, thereby limiting liver biopsy to cases not adequately classifiable by noninvasive markers. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients (2035) were enrolled in nine locations in Europe and the United States. The diagnostic accuracy of SAFE biopsy versus histology, which is the gold standard, was investigated. The reduction in the need for liver biopsies achieved with SAFE biopsy was also assessed. SAFE biopsy identified significant fibrosis with 90.1% accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.87‐0.90) and reduced by 46.5% the number of liver biopsies needed. SAFE biopsy had 92.5% accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.89‐0.94) for the detection of cirrhosis, obviating 81.5% of liver biopsies. A third algorithm identified significant fibrosis and cirrhosis simultaneously with high accuracy and a 36% reduction in the need for liver biopsy. The patient's age and body mass index influenced the performance of SAFE biopsy, which was improved with adjusted Fibrotest‐Fibrosure cutoffs. Two hundred two cases (9.9%) had discordant results for significant fibrosis with SAFE biopsy versus histology, whereas 153 cases (7.5%) were discordant for cirrhosis detection; 71 of the former cases and 56 of the latter cases had a Fibroscan measurement within 2 months of histological evaluation. Fibroscan confirmed SAFE biopsy findings in 83.1% and 75%, respectively. Conclusion: SAFE biopsy is a rational and validated method for staging liver fibrosis in hepatitis C with a marked reduction in the need for liver biopsy. It is an attractive tool for large‐scale screening of HCV carriers. (HEPATOLOGY 2009.)

[1]  A. Alberti,et al.  Prevalence of Liver Disease in a Population of Asymptomatic Persons with Hepatitis C Virus Infection , 2002, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[2]  Edward A Belongia,et al.  National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: management of hepatitis B. , 2009, Annals of internal medicine.

[3]  J. Wong,et al.  Watchful Waiting with Periodic Liver Biopsy versus Immediate Empirical Therapy for Histologically Mild Chronic Hepatitis C: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , 2000, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[4]  F. Degos,et al.  Practices of Liver Biopsy in France: Results of a Prospective Nationwide Survey , 2000, Hepatology.

[5]  R. Myers,et al.  FibroTest and FibroScan for the Prediction of Hepatitis C-Related Fibrosis: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Test Accuracy , 2007, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[6]  A. Alberti,et al.  Non invasive fibrosis biomarkers reduce but not substitute the need for liver biopsy. , 2006, World journal of gastroenterology.

[7]  N. Afdhal,et al.  Evaluation of Liver Fibrosis: A Concise Review , 2004, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[8]  D. Schuppan,et al.  Serum markers detect the presence of liver fibrosis: a cohort study. , 2004, Gastroenterology.

[9]  L. Seeff,et al.  Natural history of hepatitis C , 1997, Hepatology.

[10]  P. Bedossa,et al.  Intraobserver and Interobserver Variations in Liver Biopsy Interpretation in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C , 1994 .

[11]  E. DeLong,et al.  Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. , 1988, Biometrics.

[12]  R. W. Mccollum The natural history of hepatitis. , 1969, Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine.

[13]  T. Poynard,et al.  Biochemical markers of liver fibrosis in patients with hepatitis C virus infection: a prospective study , 2001, The Lancet.

[14]  Mario Plebani,et al.  Stepwise combination algorithms of non-invasive markers to diagnose significant fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. , 2006, Journal of hepatology.

[15]  V. de Lédinghen,et al.  Prospective comparison of transient elastography, Fibrotest, APRI, and liver biopsy for the assessment of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. , 2005, Gastroenterology.

[16]  J. Dienstag,et al.  The role of liver biopsy in chronic hepatitis C , 2002, Hepatology.

[17]  G. Leandro,et al.  Impact of liver biopsy size on histological evaluation of chronic viral hepatitis: the smaller the sample, the milder the disease. , 2003, Journal of hepatology.

[18]  Jacques Baranger,et al.  [Medical practices and expectations of general practitioners in relation to hepatitis C virus infection in the Auvergne region]. , 2003, Gastroenterologie clinique et biologique.

[19]  NIH Consensus Statement on Management of Hepatitis C: 2002. , 2002, NIH consensus and state-of-the-science statements.

[20]  R. Myers,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of the aspartate aminotransferase‐to‐platelet ratio index for the prediction of hepatitis C–related fibrosis: A systematic review , 2007, Hepatology.

[21]  M. Rugge,et al.  Liver biopsy sampling in chronic viral hepatitis. , 2004, Seminars in liver disease.

[22]  W D Carey,et al.  The role of liver biopsy in chronic hepatitis C , 2001, Hepatology.

[23]  J. Kalbfleisch,et al.  A simple noninvasive index can predict both significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C , 2003, Hepatology.

[24]  Patrice Faure,et al.  Prospective comparison of six non-invasive scores for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. , 2007, Journal of hepatology.

[25]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.