Citations

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.

Background and Aims Patients with cirrhosis on the liver transplant (LT) waiting list may die or be removed because of complications of portal hypertension (PH) or infections. von Willebrand factor antigen (vWF‐Ag) and C‐reactive protein (CRP) are simple, broadly available markers of these processes. Approach and Results We determined whether addition of vWF‐Ag and CRP to the Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease‐Sodium (MELD‐Na) score improves risk stratification of patients awaiting LT. CRP and vWF‐Ag at LT listing were assessed in two independent cohorts (Medical University of Vienna [exploration cohort] and Mayo Clinic Rochester [validation cohort]). Clinical characteristics, MELD‐Na, and mortality on the waiting list were recorded. Prediction of 3‐month waiting list mortality was assessed by receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC‐AUC). In order to explore potential mechanisms underlying the prognostic utility of vWF‐Ag and CRP in this setting, we evaluated their association with PH, bacterial translocation, systemic inflammation, and circulatory dysfunction. In the exploration cohort (n = 269) vWF‐Ag and CRP both improved the predictive value of MELD‐Na for 3‐month waitlist mortality and showed the highest predictive value when combined (AUC: MELD‐Na, 0.764; MELD‐Na + CRP, 0.790; MELD‐Na + vWF, 0.803; MELD‐Na + CRP + vWF‐Ag, 0.824). Results were confirmed in an independent validation cohort (n = 129; AUC: MELD‐Na, 0.677; MELD‐Na + CRP + vWF‐Ag, 0.882). vWF‐Ag was independently associated with PH and inflammatory biomarkers, whereas CRP closely, and MELD independently, correlated with biomarkers of bacterial translocation/inflammation. Conclusions The addition of vWF‐Ag and CRP—reflecting central pathophysiological mechanisms of PH, bacterial translocation, and inflammation, that are all drivers of mortality on the waiting list for LT—to the MELD‐Na score improves prediction of waitlist mortality. Using the vWFAg‐CRP‐MELD‐Na model for prioritizing organ allocation may improve prediction of waitlist mortality and decrease waitlist mortality.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a burgeoning health problem worldwide and an important risk factor for both hepatic and cardiometabolic mortality. The rapidly increasing prevalence of this disease and of its aggressive form nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) will require novel therapeutic approaches based on a profound understanding of its pathogenesis to halt disease progression to advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis and cancer. The pathogenesis of NAFLD involves a complex interaction among environmental factors (i.e., Western diet), obesity, changes in microbiota, and predisposing genetic variants resulting in a disturbed lipid homeostasis and an excessive accumulation of triglycerides and other lipid species in hepatocytes. Insulin resistance is a central mechanism that leads to lipotoxicity, endoplasmic reticulum stress, disturbed autophagy, and, ultimately, hepatocyte injury and death that triggers hepatic inflammation, hepatic stellate cell activation, and progressive fibrogenesis, thus driving disease progression. In the present review, we summarize the currently available data on the pathogenesis of NAFLD, emphasizing the most recent advances. A better understanding of NAFLD/NASH pathogenesis is crucial for the design of new and efficient therapeutic interventions.

Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a rare, but serious, cholestatic disease for which, to date, no effective therapy exists to halt disease progression toward end‐stage liver disease. Clinical trial design to study drugs that improve prognosis is hampered by the relatively low event rate of clinically relevant endpoints. To overcome this shortcoming, there is an urgent need to identify appropriate surrogate endpoints. At present, there are no established surrogate endpoints. This article provides a critical review and describes the results of a consensus process initiated by the International PSC Study Group to delineate appropriate candidate surrogate endpoints at present for clinical trials in this frequently dismal disease. The consensus process resulted in a shortlist of five candidates as surrogate endpoints for measuring disease progression: alkaline phosphatase (ALP); transient elastography (TE); histology; combination of ALP+histology; and bilirubin. Of these, histology, ALP, and TE came out as the most promising. However, the expert panel concluded that no biomarker currently exceeds level 3 validation. Combining multiple endpoints is advisable. Conclusion: At present, there are insufficient data to support level 2 validation for any surrogate endpoint in PSC. Concerted efforts by all stakeholders are highly needed. Novel, promising noninvasive biomarkers are under study and should be incorporated as exploratory endpoints in clinical trials. (Hepatology 2016;63:1357–1367)