Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Hepatol. Nov 27, 2021; 13(11): 1727-1742
Published online Nov 27, 2021. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v13.i11.1727
Table 3 Examples of noninvasive monitoring of liver fibrosis in pediatric cystic fibrosis liver disease
Non-invasive marker
Ref.
Outcome measured
AUC
Sensitivity
Specificity
Comments
Indirect markers of liver fibrosis
APRILeung et al[37]CFLD diagnosis and severe CFLD0.8173%70%APRI score cut-off > 0.264; Predict CFLD and significant fibrosis in CFLD with a high degree of accuracy
FIB-4Leung et al[37]Portal hypertension0.9178%93%FIB-4 cutoff 0.358
Direct markers of liver fibrosis
TIMP-1Pereira et al[38]CFLD diagnosis0.7664%83%Significantly increased in CFLD vs no-CFLD
Prolyl hydroxylasePereira et al[38]CFLD 60%91%Negative correlation between serum TIMP-1 levels and the stage of histological fibrosis; Prolyl hydroxylase useful in distinguishing CFLD patients with early fibrogenesis vs extensive fibrosis; Not able to differentiate CFLD versus no-CFLD
diagnosis
TIMP-2Rath et al[38]CFLD diagnosis0.69--
m-RNA’sCook et al[39] CFLD diagnosis0.7847%94%Able to differentiate between CFLD versus no-CFLD but quantify not fibrosis stage; Pathological significance not yet certain, more studies needed
Imaging methods
Transient elastographyWitters et al[40]Liver stiffness0.8663%87%Less inter and intra-observer variability; Easy to learn and perform; Regular measurements for serial follow-up feasible
Rath et al[34]Liver stiffness0.68--Few centres have access to technology
MR elastographyPalermo et al[41]Liver stiffness-100%100%Small study, paucity of data; Shear stiffness significantly elevated in CF patients with cirrhosis; Costly with limited availability