1002/hep.25617. “
“Liver fibrosis resulting from chronic liver injury is the Ruxolitinib harbinger of cirrhosis, with its inherent potential complications and associated morbidity and increased mortality. Hepatic fibrogenesis is a dynamic process incorporating hepatocellular injury associated with chronic inflammation and continuous extracellular matrix (ECM) protein remodeling choreographed by hepatic stellate cells.1 Knowledge of the stage of fibrosis in chronic liver disease guides clinical decisions about the timing and approach

to interventions. Although this has traditionally relied on liver biopsy, a suite of non-invasive models for liver fibrosis relying on individual or various combinations of putative biomarkers has been developed. These have been principally assessed in chronic hepatitis C virus infection

(CHC), which is a dominant cause of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the ‘developed world’. CHC and chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection (CHB) have different natural histories and often affect different populations, so data from CHC cannot be directly extrapolated to represent CHB. Unfortunately, most blood-based models for liver fibrosis exhibit a significant level of incompetence at lower stages of liver fibrosis.2 Further, few have been validated for use in CHB, which remains a global public health problem with over 350 million people chronically infected worldwide.3 The burden of CHB is Selumetinib research buy most significant in the Asia-Pacific region and Sub-Saharan Africa and in migrants from these regions. Historically, liver biopsy has been considered the gold standard reference diagnostic and prognostic test for assessing liver disease. Following

initial reports of liver 上海皓元 biopsy dating as far back as 1883,4 liver biopsy techniques and indications have been further refined; however, the risk of significant bleeding or death related to liver biopsy5 remains relatively unchanged over more than 50 years. As increasing pharmaco-therapeutic options for chronic liver disorders, particularly CHB and CHC, have become available, the role of liver biopsy in guiding treatment decisions has been highlighted. However, liver biopsy for histology is an imperfect gold standard for assessing liver fibrosis alone, as demonstrated by an increasing body of evidence.6–8 It has been plagued with concerns about the invasive nature of the procedure, hence complication risk and limited patient acceptance, sampling error, inter- and intra-observer variability and cost. Complications of liver biopsy include pain (up to 84%), bleeding (in up to 0.04%) and death (up to 0.01%).5 Also, histologic staging of liver fibrosis presents thedynamic process of extracellular matrix deposition and remodeling as a categorical, non-linear result. Together with the invasive nature of liver biopsy, it is clear that serial assessment of liver histology is not practical at a population level.