Citations

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.

SummaryBackground and AimsMachine learning (ML) can identify the hidden patterns without hypothesis in heterogeneous diseases like acute‐on‐chronic live failure (ACLF). We employed ML to describe and predict yet unknown clusters in ACLF.MethodsClinical data of 1568 patients with ACLF from a tertiary care centre (2015–2023) were subjected to distance‐, density‐ and model‐based clustering algorithms. Final model was selected on best cluster separation, viz. Silhouette width and Dunn's index (for distance‐ or density‐based algorithms) and minimum BIC (for model‐based algorithms). Cluster assignments, patient trajectories and survival were analysed through inferential statistics. Supervised ML models were trained in 70% data that predicted clusters in remaining 30% data followed by an temporal validation.ResultsThe cohort was male‐predominant (87%), aged 44.3 years, with alcohol‐associated hepatitis (62.9%) and survival of 50.5%. Due to poor performance of distance‐ and density‐based algorithms and better explainability, the latent class model (LCM) was selected for exploration. LCM revealed four clusters with distinct trajectories, reversibility and survival (independent of MELD, CLIF‐C ACLF and AARC scores). Cluster1 had patients with none/one organ failure and highest reversibility. Cluster2 had females with viral hepatitis and two organ failures. More‐than‐one acute precipitant, severity, infections, organ failures and irreversibility escalated from clusters 1 to 4. Circulatory and renal failures critically influenced cluster assignments. Incorporating clusters to CLIF‐C ACLF, infection and ACLF definition improved the discriminative accuracy of CLIF‐C‐ACLF by 11%. Extreme gradient boost and decision trees could predict clusters with AUCs of 0.989 (0.979–0.995) and 0.875 (0.865–0.890). MELD, CLIF‐C‐OF, haemoglobin, lactate, CLIF‐C‐ACLF and ALT were critical variables for cluster prediction. Clusters with distinct survival were documented in a temporal validation cohort.ConclusionsML for the first time could identify clusters with distinct phenotypes, trajectories and outcomes in ACLF. Stratification into clusters can address heterogeneity, guide prognosis, recruitment in trials, resource allocation and liver transplant discussions in ACLF.

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: 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.