- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Romero-Gómez, Manuel"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item A multisociety Delphi consensus statement on new fatty liver disease nomenclature(Wolters Kluwer, 2023) Rinella, Mary E.; Lazarus, Jeffrey V.; Ratziu, Vlad; Francque, Sven M.; Sanyal, Arun J.; Kanwal, Fasiha; Romero, Diana; Abdelmalek, Manal F.; Anstee, Quentin M.; Arab, Juan Pablo; Arrese, Marco; Bataller, Ramon; Beuers, Ulrich; Boursier, Jerome; Bugianesi, Elisabetta; Byrne, Christopher D.; Castro Narro, Graciela E.; Chowdhury, Abhijit; Cortez-Pinto, Helena; Cryer, Donna R.; Cusi, Kenneth; El-Kassas, Mohamed; Klein, Samuel; Eskridge, Wayne; Fan, Jiangao; Gawrieh, Samer; Guy, Cynthia D.; Harrison, Stephen A.; Kim, Seung Up; Koot, Bart G.; Korenjak, Marko; Kowdley, Kris V.; Lacaille, Florence; Loomba, Rohit; Mitchell-Thain, Robert; Morgan, Timothy R.; Powell, Elisabeth E.; Roden, Michael; Romero-Gómez, Manuel; Silva, Marcelo; Singh, Shivaram Prasad; Sookoian, Silvia C.; Spearman, C. Wendy; Tiniakos, Dina; Valenti, Luca; Vos, Miriam B.; Wong, Vincent Wai-Sun; Xanthakos, Stavra; Yilmaz, Yusuf; Younossi, Zobair; Hobbs, Ansley; Villota-Rivas, Marcela; Newsome, Philip N.; NAFLD Nomenclature consensus group; Medicine, School of MedicineThe 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.Item Best Practices in Liver Biopsy Histologic Assessment for Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Trials: Expert Opinion(Wiley, 2022) Filozof, Claudia M.; Lackner, Carolin; Romero-Gómez, Manuel; Imperial, Joanne C.; McGee, Robert; Dimick-Santos, Lara; Cummings, Oscar; Behling, Cynthia; Johnson, Troy; Sanyal, Arun; Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of MedicineBackground: In most clinical trials focusing on precirrhotic nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), a liver biopsy is required for confirmation of diagnosis, staging fibrosis, and grading steatohepatitis activity. Reliance on the biopsy, both as a requisite for study entry, as well as for a primary endpoint in clinical trials, poses several challenges that need to be overcome: patient reluctance to undergo the procedure; potential sampling error; concern regarding the handling, processing and shipping of the biopsy of the biopsy material to the central reader(s); and the degree of pathologists’ intra- and interobserver variability in biopsy interpretation. Aims: To provide recommendations for improving the liver biopsy process in order to maximize the accuracy of its histological interpretation in NASH clinical trials. Methods and Results: These recommendations were created by an expert panel of participants from the United States and European Union who met multiple times and reached alignment through review of available data and their individual clinical experiences. The recommendations include the methodology for biopsy procedure, central lab and pathology processing of the specimen, and recommendations to minimize the intra- and intersubject variability. Finally, we are discussing digital pathology technology and machine learning applications as important additions to enhance liver biopsy interpretation. Conclusions: Liver biopsy poses multiple challenges in clinical trials in NASH, and there is a need to standardize the processes to maximize accuracy and minimize variability. Many questions remained unanswered due to limited available data. New evolving modalities may help in the future, but generation of robust data is warranted.Item Development and Validation of Hepamet Fibrosis Scoring System A Simple, Noninvasive Test to Identify Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease With Advanced Fibrosis(Elsevier, 2019) Ampuero, Javier; Pais, Raluca; Aller, Rocío; Gallego-Durán, Rocío; Crespo, Javier; García-Monzón, Carmelo; Boursier, Jerome; Vilar, Eduardo; Petta, Salvatore; Ming-Hua, Zheng; Escudero, Desamparados; Calleja, Jose Luis; Aspichueta, Patricia; Diago, Moisés; Rosales, Jose Miguel; Caballería, Joan; Gómez-Camarero, Judith; Lo Iacono, Oreste; Benlloch, Salvador; Albillos, Agustín; Turnes, Juan; Banales, Jesus M.; Ratziu, Vlad; Romero-Gómez, Manuel; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground & Aims Fibrosis affects prognoses for patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Several non-invasive scoring systems have aimed to identify patients at risk for advanced fibrosis, but inconclusive results and variations in features of patients (diabetes, obesity and older age) reduce their diagnostic accuracy. We sought to develop a scoring system based on serum markers to identify patients with NAFLD at risk for advanced fibrosis. Methods We collected data from 2452 patients with NAFLD at medical centers in Italy, France, Cuba, and China. We developed the Hepamet fibrosis scoring system using demographic, anthropometric, and laboratory test data, collected at time of liver biopsy, from a training cohort of patients from Spain (n = 768) and validated the system using patients from Cuba (n = 344), Italy (n = 288), France (n = 830), and China (n = 232). Hepamet fibrosis score (HFS) were compared with those of previously developed fibrosis scoring systems (the NAFLD fibrosis score [NFS] and FIB-4). The diagnostic accuracy of the Hepamet fibrosis scoring system was assessed based on area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and positive and negative predictive values and likelihood ratios. Results Variables used to determine HFS were patient sex, age, homeostatic model assessment score, presence of diabetes, levels of aspartate aminotransferase, and albumin, and platelet counts; these were independently associated with advanced fibrosis. HFS discriminated between patients with and without advanced fibrosis with an AUROC curve value of 0.85 whereas NFS or FIB-4 did so with AUROC values of 0.80 (P = .0001). In the validation set, cut-off HFS of 0.12 and 0.47 identified patients with and without advanced fibrosis with 97.2% specificity, 74% sensitivity, a 92% negative predictive value, a 76.3% positive predictive value, a 13.22 positive likelihood ratio, and a 0.31 negative likelihood ratio. HFS were not affected by patient age, body mass index, hypertransaminasemia, or diabetes. The Hepamet fibrosis scoring system had the greatest net benefit in identifying patients who should undergo liver biopsy analysis and led to significant improvements in reclassification, reducing the number of patients with undetermined results to 20% from 30% for the FIB-4 and NFS systems (P < .05). Conclusions Using clinical and laboratory data from patients with NAFLD, we developed and validated the Hepamet fibrosis scoring system, which identified patients with advanced fibrosis with greater accuracy than the FIB-4 and NFS systems. the Hepamet system provides a greater net benefit for the decision-making process to identify patients who should undergo liver biopsy analysis.