No abstract

Two‐dimensional shear wave elastography (2D‐SWE) has proven to be efficient for the evaluation of liver fibrosis in small to moderate‐sized clinical trials. We aimed at running a larger‐scale meta‐analysis of individual data. Centers which have worked with Aixplorer ultrasound equipment were contacted to share their data. Retrospective statistical analysis used direct and paired receiver operating characteristic and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analyses, accounting for random effects. Data on both 2D‐SWE and liver biopsy were available for 1,134 patients from 13 sites, as well as on successful transient elastography in 665 patients. Most patients had chronic hepatitis C (n = 379), hepatitis B (n = 400), or nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (n = 156). AUROCs of 2D‐SWE in patients with hepatitis C, hepatitis B, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease were 86.3%, 90.6%, and 85.5% for diagnosing significant fibrosis and 92.9%, 95.5%, and 91.7% for diagnosing cirrhosis, respectively. The AUROC of 2D‐SWE was 0.022‐0.084 (95% confidence interval) larger than the AUROC of transient elastography for diagnosing significant fibrosis (P = 0.001) and 0.003‐0.034 for diagnosing cirrhosis (P = 0.022) in all patients. This difference was strongest in hepatitis B patients. Conclusion: 2D‐SWE has good to excellent performance for the noninvasive staging of liver fibrosis in patients with hepatitis B; further prospective studies are needed for head‐to‐head comparison between 2D‐SWE and other imaging modalities to establish disease‐specific appropriate cutoff points for assessment of fibrosis stage. (Hepatology 2018;67:260‐272).

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) constitutes a major health concern with the increasing incidence of obesity and diabetes in many Western countries, reaching a prevalence of up to 30% in the general population. Animal models have played a vital role in elucidating the pathophysiological mechanisms of NAFLD and continue to do so. A myriad of different models exists, each with its advantages and disadvantages. This review presents a brief overview of these models with a particular focus on the basic mechanisms and physical, biochemical and histological phenotype. Both nutritional and chemically induced, as well as genetic models are examined, including models combining different approaches.

BACKGROUNDManagement of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is an unmet clinical need. Lanifibranor is a pan-PPAR (peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor) agonist that modulates key metabolic, inflammatory, and fibrogenic pathways in the pathogenesis of NASH. METHODSIn this phase 2b, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, patients with noncirrhotic, highly active NASH were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 1200 mg or 800 mg of lanifibranor or placebo once daily for 24 weeks. The primary end point was a decrease of at least 2 points in the SAF-A score (the activity part of the Steatosis, Activity, Fibrosis [SAF] scoring system that incorporates scores for ballooning and inflammation) without worsening of fibrosis; SAF-A scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating more-severe disease activity. Secondary end points included resolution of NASH and regression of fibrosis. RESULTSA total of 247 patients underwent randomization, of whom 103 (42%) had type 2 diabetes mellitus and 188 (76%) had significant (moderate) or advanced fibrosis. The percentage of patients who had a decrease of at least 2 points in the SAF-A score without worsening of fibrosis was significantly higher among those who received the 1200-mg dose, but not among those who received the 800-mg dose, of lanifibranor than among those who received placebo (1200-mg dose vs. placebo, 55% vs. 33%, P = 0.007; 800-mg dose vs. placebo, 48% vs. 33%, P = 0.07). The results favored both the 1200-mg and 800-mg doses of lanifibranor over placebo for resolution of NASH without worsening of fibrosis (49% and 39%, respectively, vs. 22%), improvement in fibrosis stage of at least 1 without worsening of NASH (48% and 34%, respectively, vs. 29%), and resolution of NASH plus improvement in fibrosis stage of at least 1 (35% and 25%, respectively, vs. 9%). Liver enzyme levels decreased and the levels of the majority of lipid, inflammatory, and fibrosis biomarkers improved in the lanifibranor groups. The dropout rate for adverse events was less than 5% and was similar across the trial groups. Diarrhea, nausea, peripheral edema, anemia, and weight gain occurred more frequently with lanifibranor than with placebo. CONCLUSIONSIn this phase 2b trial involving patients with active NASH, the percentage of patients who had a decrease of at least 2 points in the SAF-A score without worsening of fibrosis was significantly higher with the 1200-mg dose of lanifibranor than with placebo. These findings support further assessment of lanifibranor in phase 3 trials. (Funded by Inventiva Pharma; NATIVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03008070.