[2026-07-23] A Simple Clinical Prediction Score for Significant Liver Fibrosis Using VCTE as the Reference Standard in Thai Patients With MASLD
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33165/rmj.2027.e277606Keywords:
MASLD, Hepatic fibrosis, Prediction score, Vibration-controlled transient elastography, Clinical prediction model, Risk stratification, Thai patientsAbstract
Background: Clinically significant liver fibrosis is the major determinant of adverse liver-related outcomes in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). Vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) with liver stiffness measurement (LSM) is the standard tool for noninvasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis; however, its high cost and limited availability restrict its widespread use in Thai hospitals. A simple, accessible clinical tool may improve early detection and risk stratification.
Objectives: To develop and evaluate a simple clinical prediction score for identifying significant hepatic fibrosis (LSM-defined F2-F4) among Thai patients with MASLD obtained by VCTE as the reference standard.
Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 189 Thai MASLD patients who underwent VCTE at Maharat Nakhon Ratchasima Hospital, Thailand, between April 2023 and March 2024. Clinically significant hepatic fibrosis was defined as LSM stage F2-F4, while F0-F1 was considered no or mild fibrosis. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory parameters were evaluated, and independent predictors of steatosis were identified using multivariable logistic regression. The b coefficients were converted into weighted scores to create the hepatic fibrosis prediction score. Model performance was assessed by discrimination, calibration, and internal validation using 1000 bootstrap resamples.
Results: The mean (SD) controlled attenuation parameter was 257.5 (48.7) dB/m, and 96 patients (50.8%) had clinically significant hepatic fibrosis (F2-F4). Significant predictors included older age, body mass index, diabetes, and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) higher than 40 U/L. The final score incorporated these variables and demonstrated acceptable discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.743; 95% CI, 0.674-0.811) and an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.719 (95% CI, 0.651-0.786). Calibration was satisfactory (Hosmer-Lemeshow χ² = 6.66, P = .465). Patients classified as high risk (> 4.0 points) had an 89.5% prevalence of clinically significant fibrosis and a positive likelihood ratio of 8.42.
Conclusions: The hepatic fibrosis score is a simple, inexpensive, and internally validated clinical prediction tool for identifying patients at high risk of clinically significant hepatic fibrosis in Thai patients with MASLD. Although it is not intended to replace VCTE, the score may facilitate initial risk stratification and help prioritize patients for further fibrosis assessment, particularly in primary care and resource-limited settings. External validation is warranted before routine clinical implementation.
References
European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL); European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD); European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO). EASL-EASD-EASO clinical practice guidelines on the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). Obes Facts. 2024;17(4):374-444. doi:10.1159/000539371
Younossi ZM, Paik JM, Stepanova M, Ong J, Alqahtani S, Henry L. Clinical profiles and mortality rates are similar for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. J Hepatol. 2024;80(5):694-701. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2024.01.014
Rinella ME, Lazarus JV, Ratziu V, et al. A multisociety Delphi consensus statement on new fatty liver disease nomenclature. Hepatology. 2023;78(6):1966-1986. doi:10.1097/HEP.0000000000000520
Paik JM, Golabi P, Younossi Y, Mishra A, Younossi ZM. Changes in the global burden of chronic liver diseases from 2012 to 2017: the growing impact of NAFLD. Hepatology. 2020;72(5):1605-1616. doi:10.1002/hep.31173
Estes C, Anstee QM, Arias-Loste MT, et al. Modeling NAFLD disease burden in China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, United Kingdom, and United States for the period 2016-2030. J Hepatol. 2018;69(4):896-904. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2018.05.036
Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, Fazel Y, Henry L, Wymer M. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-meta-analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology. 2016;64(1):73-84. doi:10.1002/hep.28431
Younossi ZM, Golabi P, Paik JM, Henry A, Van Dongen C, Henry L. The global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH): a systematic review. Hepatology. 2023;77(4):1335-1347. doi:10.1097/HEP.0000000000000004
Younossi Z, Anstee QM, Marietti M, et al. Global burden of NAFLD and NASH: trends, predictions, risk factors and prevention. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;15(1):11-20. doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2017.109
Lazarus JV, Mark HE, Anstee QM, et al. Advancing the global public health agenda for NAFLD: a consensus statement. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022;19(1):60-78. doi:10.1038/s41575-021-00523-4
Riazi K, Azhari H, Charette JH, et al. The prevalence and incidence of NAFLD worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022;7(9):851-861. doi:10.1016/S2468-1253(22)00165-0
Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE, et al. The diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: practice guidance from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology. 2018;67(1):328-357. doi:10.1002/hep.29367
Sono S, Kaewdech A, Wongsawanon C, et al. Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) in the adult population attending a health check-up program in Thailand: prevalence and fibrosis status. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):21429. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-06874-1
Sanyal AJ, Van Natta ML, Clark J, et al. Prospective study of outcomes in adults with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(17):1559-1569. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2029349
Rinella ME, Neuschwander-Tetri BA, Siddiqui MS, et al. AASLD practice guidance on the clinical assessment and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2023;77(5):1797-1835. doi:10.1097/HEP.0000000000000323
Hadefi A, Arvanitakis M, Trépo E, Zelber-Sagi S. Dietary strategies in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease patients: from evidence to daily clinical practice, a systematic review. United European Gastroenterol J. 2023;11(7):663-689. doi:10.1002/ueg2.12443
Friedman SL, Neuschwander-Tetri BA, Rinella M, Sanyal AJ. Mechanisms of NAFLD development and therapeutic strategies. Nat Med. 2018;24(7):908-922. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0104-9
Bozic D, Podrug K, Mikolasevic I, Grgurevic I. Ultrasound methods for the assessment of liver steatosis: a critical appraisal. Diagnostics. 2022;12(10):2287. doi:10.3390/diagnostics12102287
Ferraioli G, Berzigotti A, Barr RG, et al. Quantification of liver fat content with ultrasound: a WFUMB position paper. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2021;47(10):2803-2820. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.06.002
Sasso M, Miette V, Sandrin L, Beaugrand M. The controlled attenuation parameter (CAP): a novel tool for the non-invasive evaluation of steatosis using Fibroscan®. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2012;36(1):13-20. doi:10.1016/j.clinre.2011.08.001
Mikolasevic I, Orlic L, Franjic N, Hauser G, Stimac D, Milic S. Transient elastography (FibroScan®) with controlled attenuation parameter in the assessment of liver steatosis and fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease - Where do we stand? World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(32):7236-7251. doi:10.3748/wjg.v22.i32.7236
Eddowes PJ, Sasso M, Allison M, et al. Accuracy of FibroScan controlled attenuation parameter and liver stiffness measurement in assessing steatosis and fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gastroenterology. 2019;156(6):1717-1730. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2019.01.042
Petroff D, Blank V, Newsome PN, et al. Assessment of hepatic steatosis by controlled attenuation parameter using the M and XL probes: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;6(3):185-198. doi:10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30357-5
de Lédinghen V, Wong GL, Vergniol J, et al. Controlled attenuation parameter for the diagnosis of steatosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;31(4):848-855. doi:10.1111/jgh.13219
Vuppalanchi R, Siddiqui MS, Van Natta ML, et al. Performance characteristics of vibration-controlled transient elastography for evaluation of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2018;67(1):134-144. doi:10.1002/hep.29489
Siddiqui MS, Vuppalanchi R, Van Natta ML, et al. Vibration-controlled transient elastography to assess fibrosis and steatosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;17(1):156-163.e2. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2018.04.043
Geethakumari P, Kampa P, Parchuri R, et al. Accuracy of ultrasonography vs elastography in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review. Cureus. 2022;14(10):e29967. doi:10.7759/cureus.29967
de Lédinghen V, Vergniol J, Foucher J, Merrouche W, le Bail B. Non-invasive diagnosis of liver steatosis using controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) and transient elastography. Liver Int. 2012;32(6):911-918. doi:10.1111/j.1478-3231.2012.02820.x
Karlas T, Petroff D, Sasso M, et al. Individual patient data meta-analysis of controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) technology for assessing steatosis. J Hepatol. 2017;66(5):1022-1030. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2016.12.022
Sripongpun P, Kim WR, Mannalithara A, et al. The steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator (SAFE) score: a tool to detect low-risk NAFLD in primary care. Hepatology. 2023;77(1):256-267. doi:10.1002/hep.32545
Prasoppokakorn T, Chan WK, Wong VW, et al. Validation model of fibrosis-8 index score to predict significant fibrosis among patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2022;28(15):1563-1573. doi:10.3748/wjg.v28.i15.1563
Jacobson IM, Wong VW, Castera L, et al. Expert panel consensus on clinical assertion statements describing noninvasive tools for diagnosing nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2023;57(3):253-264. doi:10.1097/MCG.0000000000001780
Park H, Yoon EL, Kim M, et al. Reappraisal of fibrosis-4 index and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score for advanced fibrosis in average-risk population. Front Med. 2022;9:1024836. doi:10.3389/fmed.2022.1024836
Abdelhameed F, Kite C, Lagojda L, et al. Non-invasive scores and serum biomarkers for fatty liver in the era of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD): a comprehensive review from NAFLD to MAFLD and MASLD. Curr Obes Rep. 2024;13(3):510-531. doi:10.1007/s13679-024-00574-z
Saokaew S, Kanchanasuwan S, Apisarnthanarak P, et al. Clinical risk scoring for predicting non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in metabolic syndrome patients (NAFLD-MS score). Liver Int. 2017;37(10):1535-1543. doi:10.1111/liv.13413
Saokaew S, Kositamongkol C, Charatcharoenwitthaya P, et al. Comparison of noninvasive scoring systems for the prediction of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in metabolic syndrome patients. Medicine. 2020;99(50):e23619. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000023619
Mahachai N, Washirasaksiri C, Ariyakunaphan P, et al. Clinical predictive score for identifying metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease in individuals with prediabetes using transient elastography. J Clin Med. 2023;12(24):7617. doi:10.3390/jcm12247617
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 by the Author(s). Licensee RMJ.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.





