Wong, Vincent Wai‐Sun

Background: Noninvasive tests are well validated in metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease, but evidence in metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-associated liver disease (MetALD) and alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) is limited. We evaluated noninvasive test–based clinical care pathways for fibrosis risk stratification in MetALD and ALD. Methods: This is a multinational, multicenter, cross-sectional study across 35 centers in 16 countries (2013–2025), including adults with MetALD or ALD. Fibrosis was assessed by liver biopsy and/or vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE). In biopsy-proven participants, we analyzed the sequential pathway (Fibrosis-4 [FIB-4] first, followed by VCTE for indeterminate FIB-4) to identify advanced fibrosis (≥F3). Diagnostic accuracy was assessed using the AUC. Results: Among 893 participants (41.3% MetALD and 58.7% ALD), the median age was 52 [43.0–61.0] years, and 79.4% were male. The estimated prevalence of advanced fibrosis was 45% (32.2% in MetALD and 54.0% in ALD). Participants with MetALD had a more dysmetabolic profile but lower fibrosis stages than ALD. Among biopsy-proven participants, FIB-4 AUC was 0.720, and VCTE AUC was 0.833. FIB-4 performed better in MetALD than ALD (AUC 0.773 vs. 0.540), while VCTE accuracy was similar across groups. In the sequential pathways, the false-negative rate for advanced fibrosis (misclassified as low risk) was 6.8% (4.9% MetALD and 11.3% ALD). Conclusions: In biopsy-proven patients, FIB-4 performance was acceptable in MetALD but substantially weaker in ALD. The standard 2-step pathway performed adequately in MetALD but missed a clinically meaningful proportion of advanced fibrosis in ALD.

Background: Noninvasive tests (NITs) are used to risk-stratify metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease. The aim was to survey global patterns of real-world use of NITs. Methods: A 38-item survey was designed by the Global NASH Council. Providers were asked about risks for advanced fibrosis, which NITs (cutoff values) they use to risk-stratify liver disease, monitor progression, and which professional guidelines they follow. Results: A total of 321 participants from 43 countries completed the survey (54% hepatologists, 28% gastroenterologists, and 18% other). Of the respondents, 85% would risk-stratify patients with type 2 diabetes, obesity (82%), or abnormal liver enzymes (73%). Among NITs to rule out significant or advanced fibrosis, transient elastography (TE) and fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) were most used, followed by NAFLD Fibrosis Score, Enhanced Liver Fibrosis, and magnetic resonance elastography. The cutoffs for ruling out significant fibrosis varied considerably between practices and from guidelines, with only 50% using TE <8 kPa, 65% using FIB-4 <1.30 for age <65, and 41% using FIB-4 <2.00 for age ≥65. Similar variability was found for ruling in advanced fibrosis, where thresholds of FIB-4 ≥2.67 and TE ≥10 kPa were used by 20% and 17%, respectively. To establish advanced fibrosis, 48% would use 2 NITs while 23% would consider 1 NIT, and 17% would confirm with liver biopsy. TE was used by >75% to monitor, and 66% would monitor (intermediate or high risk) annually. Finally, 65% follow professional guideline recommendations regarding NITs. Conclusions: In clinical practice, there is variability in NIT use and their thresholds. Additionally, there is suboptimal adherence to professional societies’ guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: The recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of resmetirom for treating metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis in patients necessitates patient selection for significant fibrosis or higher (≥F2). No existing vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) algorithm targets ≥F2. METHODS: The mAchine Learning ADvanceD fibrosis and rIsk metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis Novel predictor (ALADDIN) study addressed this gap by introducing a machine-learning-based web calculator that estimates the likelihood of significant fibrosis using routine laboratory parameters with and without VCTE. Our study included a training set of 827 patients, a testing set of 504 patients with biopsy-confirmed metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease from 6 centers, and an external validation set of 1,299 patients from 9 centers. Five algorithms were compared using area under the curve (AUC) in the test set: ElasticNet, random forest, gradient boosting machines, XGBoost, and neural networks. The top 3 (random forest, gradient boosting machines, and XGBoost) formed an ensemble model. RESULTS: In the external validation set, the ALADDIN-F2-VCTE model, using routine laboratory parameters with VCTE (AUC 0.791, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.764–0.819), outperformed VCTE alone (0.745, 95% CI 0.717–0.772, P < 0.0001), FibroScan-aspartate aminotransferase (0.710, 0.679–0.748, P < 0.0001), and Agile-3 model (0.740, 0.710–0.770, P < 0.0001) regarding the AUC, decision curve analysis, and calibration. The ALADDIN-F2-Lab model, using routine laboratory parameters without VCTE, achieved an AUC of 0.706 (95% CI: 0.668–0.749) and outperformed Fibrosis-4, steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator, and LiverRisk scores. DISCUSSION: Along with the steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator model developed to target significant fibrosis or higher, ALADDIN-F2-VCTE (https://aihepatology.shinyapps.io/ALADDIN1) uniquely supports a refined noninvasive approach to patient selection for resmetirom without the need for liver biopsy. In addition, ALADDIN-F2-Lab (https://aihepatology.shinyapps.io/ALADDIN2) offers an effective alternative when VCTE is unavailable.

ABSTRACT Background The continuum of metabolic syndrome encompasses a spectrum of dysfunctions impacting obesity‐linked insulin resistance, glucose homeostasis, lipid metabolism and pro‐inflammatory immune responses. The global prevalence of metabolic diseases, including diabetes, chronic liver disease, cardiometabolic disease and kidney disease, has surged in recent decades, contributing significantly to population mortality. Metabolic dysfunction‐associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), formerly known as non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease, is a leading cause of liver disease worldwide. MASLD poses a significant global health challenge with its rising prevalence, placing a substantial burden on healthcare systems, impacts patient well‐being and incurs significant economic costs. Addressing MASLD requires a comprehensive understanding of its interconnected factors, including its prevalence, healthcare burden and economic implications. Lack of awareness, imprecise non‐invasive diagnostic methods and ineffective preventive interventions are core components of the MASLD‐related problem. Aim The aim of this article was to summarise the global burden of MASLD from the payer's perspective. Methods We carried out a review of the global comprehensive burden of MASLD. These topics led to discussions and insights by an expert panel during the 7th Metabolic Continuum Roundtable meeting, which took place in November 2023. This meeting focused on the burden, patient‐reported outcomes and health economics, from payor and societal perspectives, and aimed to identify opportunities for improving patient care, optimise resource allocation and mitigate the overall impact on individuals and society related to MASLD. During the roundtable, an emphasis emerged on the need for greater awareness and strategic deployment of diagnostic, therapeutic and preventative measures to address MASLD effectively. Conclusion The global burden of MASLD is high and growing. Prioritising the prevention of metabolic dysregulation and timely therapeutic interventions can yield a holistic strategy to combat MASLD, its progression and potentially lower disease costs. Trial Registration: NCT06309992

Background: Following the adoption of new nomenclature for steatotic liver disease, we aimed to build consensus on the use of International Classification of Diseases codes and recommendations for future research and advocacy. Methods: Through a two-stage Delphi process, a core group (n = 20) reviewed draft statements and recommendations (n = 6), indicating levels of agreement. Following revisions, this process was repeated with a large expert panel (n = 243) from 73 countries. Results: Consensus ranged from 88.8% to 96.9% (mean = 92.3%). Conclusions: This global consensus statement provides guidance on harmonizing the International Classification of Diseases coding for steatotic liver disease and future directions to advance the field.

Background and Aims: Aldafermin, an engineered analog of the human hormone FGF19, improves liver histology in patients with noncirrhotic NASH; however, its efficacy and safety in compensated cirrhosis is unknown. No drug has yet to demonstrate benefit in the compensated NASH population. Approach and Results: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial, 160 patients with compensated NASH cirrhosis were randomized to aldafermin 0.3 mg (n = 7), 1 mg (n = 42), 3 mg (n = 55), or placebo (n = 56) for 48 weeks. The 0.3 mg group was discontinued to limit exposure to suboptimal doses. The primary end point was a change in Enhanced Liver Fibrosis from baseline to week 48. The analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat population. At week 48, the least-squares mean difference in the change in Enhanced Liver Fibrosis was −0.5 (95% CI, −0.7 to −0.2; p = 0.0003) between the 3 mg group and the placebo group. 15%, 21%, and 23% of patients in the placebo, 1 mg, and 3 mg group, respectively, achieved fibrosis improvement ≥ 1 stage; and 13%, 16%, and 20% achieved fibrosis improvement ≥ 1 stage without NASH worsening. Improvement in alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, neoepitope-specific N-terminal pro-peptide of type III collagen, and liver stiffness favored aldefermin groups over placebo. Diarrhea was the most frequent adverse event, occurring at 26% and 40% in the 1 mg and 3 mg groups, respectively, compared to 18% in the placebo group. Overall, 0%, 2%, and 9% of patients in the placebo, 1 mg, and 3 mg group, respectively, discontinued due to treatment-related adverse events. Conclusions: Aldafermin 3 mg resulted in a significant reduction in Enhanced Liver Fibrosis in patients with compensated NASH cirrhosis.

Background and Aims: Fatty liver disease is a major public health threat due to its very high prevalence and related morbidity and mortality. Focused and dedicated interventions are urgently needed to target disease prevention, treatment, and care. Approach and Results: We developed an aligned, prioritized action agenda for the global fatty liver disease community of practice. Following a Delphi methodology over 2 rounds, a large panel (R1 n = 344, R2 n = 288) reviewed the action priorities using Qualtrics XM, indicating agreement using a 4-point Likert-scale and providing written feedback. Priorities were revised between rounds, and in R2, panelists also ranked the priorities within 6 domains: epidemiology, treatment and care, models of care, education and awareness, patient and community perspectives, and leadership and public health policy. The consensus fatty liver disease action agenda encompasses 29 priorities. In R2, the mean percentage of “agree” responses was 82.4%, with all individual priorities having at least a super-majority of agreement (> 66.7% “agree”). The highest-ranked action priorities included collaboration between liver specialists and primary care doctors on early diagnosis, action to address the needs of people living with multiple morbidities, and the incorporation of fatty liver disease into relevant non-communicable disease strategies and guidance. Conclusions: This consensus-driven multidisciplinary fatty liver disease action agenda developed by care providers, clinical researchers, and public health and policy experts provides a path to reduce the prevalence of fatty liver disease and improve health outcomes. To implement this agenda, concerted efforts will be needed at the global, regional, and national levels.

The principal limitations of the terms NAFLD and NASH are the reliance on exclusionary confounder terms and the use of potentially stigmatising language. This study set out to determine if content experts and patient advocates were in favor of a change in nomenclature and/or definition. A modified Delphi process was led by three large pan-national liver associations. The consensus was defined a priori as a supermajority (67%) vote. An independent committee of experts external to the nomenclature process made the final recommendation on the acronym and its diagnostic criteria. A total of 236 panelists from 56 countries participated in 4 online surveys and 2 hybrid meetings. Response rates across the 4 survey rounds were 87%, 83%, 83%, and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents felt that the current nomenclature was sufficiently flawed to consider a name change. The terms “nonalcoholic” and “fatty” were felt to be stigmatising by 61% and 66% of respondents, respectively. Steatotic liver disease was chosen as an overarching term to encompass the various aetiologies of steatosis. The term steatohepatitis was felt to be an important pathophysiological concept that should be retained. The name chosen to replace NAFLD was metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease. There was consensus to change the definition to include the presence of at least 1 of 5 cardiometabolic risk factors. Those with no metabolic parameters and no known cause were deemed to have cryptogenic steatotic liver disease. A new category, outside pure metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease, termed metabolic and alcohol related/associated liver disease (MetALD), was selected to describe those with metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease, who consume greater amounts of alcohol per week (140–350 g/wk and 210–420 g/wk for females and males, respectively). The new nomenclature and diagnostic criteria are widely supported and nonstigmatising, and can improve awareness and patient identification.