Is Liver Biopsy the Gold Standard? Mamta K. Jain, MD, MPH What are the indications for a liver biopsy? • Diagnosis of liver disease • Assess severity of liver disease • Assess response to treatment Hepatitis B • Initial trials used pre-treatment and post-treatment biopsy to assess response to nucleoside therapy • Knodell index grades histological activity from 0-22 – – – – Periportal bridging necrosis (0-10) Focal necrosis (0-4) Portal inflammation (0-4) Fibrosis (0-4) • Treatment response based on 2 point decrease in necroinflammatory activity – composed of the first three parameters – measured (0-18) Lai et al. New Engl J Med 1998;339:61-8 Hepatitis C • Clinical trials have used viral response as primary endpoint • Liver biopsies pre- and post- treatment were done for – Confirmation of chronic hepatitis, r/o other causes, identify cirrhosis (staging) – Change in histological activity • Knodell HAI • METAVIR McHutchison et al. New Engl J Med 1998;339:1485-92 Poynard et al. Lancet 1998;352:1426-32 Relationship Between Liver disease Stage and Fibrosis • Fibrosis– excess collagen – Collagen proportion of liver fibrosis correlates with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) – Increasing fibrosis has prognostic value – Histological assessment of fibrosis is by trichrome or reticulin stains but does not correlate with quantitative amount of hepatic collagen • Fibrosis is part of histologic staging of disease severity Germani et al. Histopathology 2010; 57:773-784 Relationship Between Liver Disease Stage and Fibrosis • Staging describes features that depend on architectural changes, not just degree of fibrosis • Histopathologic assignment of liver disease stage is a different process from measurement of liver fibrosis • Both measurements are complementary but are imperfectly correlated Germani et al. Histopathology 2010; 57:773-784 Size of Liver Biopsy • Smaller biopsy is associated with greater sampling error – Error reduced by increasing sample size and number of biopsies performed – Study found 25 mm biopsy had error rate of 25% – Optimal size 40 mm • But only 16% of samples are >20 mm Bedossa et al. Hepatology 2003;38:1449-1457 Sampling Error • Studies have shown 10-30% of cirrhosis was understaged by percutaneous liver biopsy • Study of biopsy of the left and right lobe of the liver found discrepancy in 50% of the samples – Inaccurate by 1 stage – Underestimation of inflammation Maharaj et al. Lancet 1986; 1:523-25 Poniachik et al. Gastrointest endosc 1996; 43:568-571 Regev et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97:2614-2618. Intra-observer Variability • Intra-observer variability seen in up to 10% of samples and was 1 stage or 1 grade. • Use of scoring system has made staging more consistent Regev et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97:2614-2618. Complications • HALT-C reported complications of liver biopsy in HCV patients with advanced liver disease – 1.1 % serious adverse events – 0.6% due to bleeding (most common) • More common if platelet <60,000 • INR>1.3 Seeff et al. Clin Gastroentrol Hepatol 2010; 8:877--83. Pro and Cons for Liver Biopsy Pros • Steatosis assessment and quantification • Fibrosis assessment and architectural distortion • Iron level measurement • Diagnose other pathology – Using special stains – other liver disease (viral hepatitis + NAFLD, EtOH, etc) Cons • Invasive • Risk of complications 1-5% – Mortality .01% to 0.1% • Limitations – Sampling error – Intra-observer variability What are the alternatives? • Radiology – CT – MRI – US – Hepatic elastography • Serum markers of fibrosis – Indirect – Direct Pros and Cons for Radiology Pros • Non-invasive • US with Doppler can be used to support diagnosis of cirrhosis Cons • Insufficient resolution to detect earlier stages of fibrosis • Accuracy 82-88% Aube et al. J Hepatol 1999; 30:472-478 Gaiani et al. J Hepatol 1997;27:979-985 Hepatic Elastography • Emerging technology to stage hepatic fibrosis • Elastography technique measures liver stiffness of hepatic tissue (FibroScan; Echosens, Paris, France) • Ultrasound wave that produces elastic shear – velocity of the shear wave is related to tissue stiffness – more rigid, the faster the wave travels • Increased rigidity is marker of progressive fibrosis Sandrin et al. Ultrasound Med Biol 2003;29:1705-1713. Liver Fibrosis Measurement of Stiffness in Patients with HCV • Pt distribution for METAVIR fibrosis stage, activity grade, and steatosis • AUROC curve 0.97-0.99 0.91-0.95 0.79-0.81 Ziol et al. Hepatology 2005; 41:48-54. Liver Stiffness and HVPG • HVPG– predictor of survival and decompensation in cirrhotic patients • Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) predicted severe portal hypertension in HCV patients • AUROC curves for prediction of HVPG – >10mmHg was 0.99 – >12mmHg was 0.92 – LSM Cut-off values 13.6kPa sensitivity 97% – LSM Cut-off values 17.6kPa sensitivity 94% Vizzutti et al. Hepatology 2007; 45:1290-97. Pro and Cons for FibroScan Pros • Non-invasive • Able to assess a much larger proportion of the liver • Serial measurements to evaluate fibrosis progression Cons • Poor performance in mild to moderate disease • Cannot be used in – Patients with ascites – Morbid obesity (BMI>40) • Cost • Cannot distinguish between stage 0-II or III-IV Serum Markers of Fibrosis • Ideal biomarker – Liver specific – Independent of metabolic alterations – Detect fibrosis regardless of cause – Sensitive enough to distinguish between fibrosis stages – Reflective of dynamic changes Friedman. J Hepatol. 2003; 38 (Suppl 1); S38-S53. Indirect Markers of Fibrosis • FibroTest/FibroSure – Alpha-2 globulin – Alpha-2 macroglobulin – Gamma globulin – Apoliprotein A1 – Gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) – Total bilirubin • ActiTest – Fibrotest +ALT • Forns index • APRI • Fib-4 • AST/ALT ratio • AST/ALT with plts Afdhal and Shiffman 2006 www.CCO hepatitis. FibroTest • Classifies fibrosis into 1 of 3 categories – Mild (METAVIR F0-F1) – Significant (METAVIR F2-F4) – Indeterminate • HCV – Detect F2 or higher stage • 75% sensitivity • 85% specificity • Accuracy 46% Imbert-Bismut Lancet. 2001;357:1069-1075. ActiTest • FibroTest + ALT – Reflects necro-inflammation and fibrosis – Better at identifying more advanced fibrosis associated with histological inflammation – Meta-analysis of HCV patients found both FibroTest and ActiTest reliable alternatives for liver biopsy. Poynard et al. Comp Hepatol 2004;3:8. Halfon et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:547-555 Forns Test • Uses 4 common clinical measurements – Patient age – Cholesterol level – Platelet count – Gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase • Studies HCV patients to – 96% NPV in mild fibrosis – 66% PPV in F2-F4 • Able to accurately exclude mild fibrosis • Inferior to FibroTest Forns et al. Hepatology. 2003; 34 (4 pt 1): 986-992. Thabut et al. Hepatology. 2003:37:1220-1221 APRI • Uses clinical variables – ALT and platelet count – NPV • Significant fibrosis 86% • Cirrhosis 98% – PPV • Significant fibrosis 88% • Cirrhosis 57% – Able to exclude cirrhosis Wai et al. Hepatology. 2003; 38: 518-526. Fib-4 Index • Uses clinical variables – – – – Platelets ALT AST Age • <1.45 NPV 94.7% to exclude severe fibrosis (F3-F4) with sensitivity 74.3% • >3.25 PPV significant fibrosis 82% with specificity of 98% • Fib-4 <1.45 or >3.25 (62% of all cases) was highly correlated to FibroTest in 92% and 76% Vallet-Pichard et al. Hepatology. 2007; 46: 32-36. Indirect Methods Pros • Non-invasive • Less expensive • Useful in HCV for determining significant fibrosis (METAVIR stage F2-F4) when HCV treatment is recommended • May be most useful in fibrosis that is unevenly distributed Cons • Not sensitive enough to distinguish between stages • Degree of fibrosis does not linearly correlate with biopsy stage • May be better to evaluate for inflammation (i.e., FibroTest) Direct Markers • • Measure qualitative and quantitative changes in extracellular matrix markers Markers matrix deposition – Procollagen type I carboxyterminal peptide – Procollagen type III aminoterminal peptide – Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase – Transforming growth factor-beta – Collagen type IV • • • Markers of matrix removal – Procollagen Type IV C peptide – Procollagen Type IV N peptide – Matrix metalloproteinase Other markers – Hyaluronic acid – YkL-40 Combination biomarker assay – FibroSpect – ELF – SHASTA None of these markers are liver specific and are influenced by metabolism Afdhal and Shiffman 2006 www.CCO hepatitis. Is Liver Biopsy a Gold Standard? • Perhaps it depends on why biopsy is being done • Yes, if it is : – To diagnose a disease (excluding viral hepatitis) – To exclude other concomitant disease – To measure iron stores – To quantify steatosis – To get special stains for diagnosis – To stage liver disease if fibrosis is evenly distributed Is Liver Biopsy a Gold Standard? • No, if it is: – To determine cirrhosis – To evaluate for significant fibrosis – To determine stage if fibrosis is unevenly distributed – To follow longitudinally Future • Hepatitis C – With new DAA with high SVR rates, perhaps a liver biopsy is not needed? Biopsy is not typically performed in genotype 2 and 3 if patient willing to be treated – If liver biopsy and elastography are not equivalent, then what impact does this have on patient characterization in clinical trials? Clinical trials are using FibroScan in Europe instead of liver biopsy – Non-invasive tests need to be validated as predictors of poor outcomes and not just on correlation to liver biopsy stage • Hepatitis B – Will we still need biopsy to determine disease activity to assess for treatment? May not need biopsy in HIV/HBV who were started on ART with Truvada (treatment based on viral load and not on biopsy) Conclusions • Liver biopsy still plays an important role in – Diagnosis of some types of liver disease – Quantification of steatosis – Measurement of iron stores – To distinguish between earlier stages of disease • Fibrosis can be determined by other means such as elastography or other non-invasive tests
© Copyright 2024