Background and Aim
Histological score systems may not fully capture the essential nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) features, which is one of the leading causes of screening failure in clinical trials. We assessed the NASH distribution and its components across the fibrosis stages and their impact on the prognosis and their relationship with the concept of metabolic‐associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD).
Methods
Spanish multicenter study including 1893 biopsy‐proven nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) patients from HEPAmet registry. NASH was diagnosed by NAS score ≥4 (including steatosis, ballooning and lobular inflammation) and fibrosis by Kleiner score. The presence of MAFLD was determined. Progression to cirrhosis, first episode of decompensated cirrhosis and death were collected during the follow‐up (4.7 ± 3.8 years).
Results
Fibrosis was F0 34.3% (649/1893), F1 27% (511/1893), F2 16.5% (312/1893), F3 15% (284/1893) and F4 7.2% (137/1893). NASH diagnosis 51.9% (982/1893), and its individual components (severe steatosis, ballooning and lobular inflammation), increased from F0 (33.6%) to F2 (68.6%), and decreased significantly in F4 patients (51.8%) (P = .0001). More than 70% of non‐NASH patients showed some inflammatory activity (ballooning or lobular inflammation), showing a similar MAFLD rate than NASH (96.2% [945/982] vs. 95.2% [535/562]) and significantly higher than nonalcoholic fatty liver (NAFL) subjects (89.1% [311/349]) (P < .0001). Progression to cirrhosis was similar between NASH (9.5% [51/539]) and indeterminate NASH (7.9% [25/316]), and higher than steatosis (5% [14/263]) (logRank 8.417; P = .015). Death and decompensated cirrhosis were similar between these.
Conclusions
The prevalence of steatohepatitis decreased in advanced liver disease. However, most of these patients showed some inflammatory activity histologically and had metabolic disturbances. These findings should be considered in clinical trials whose main aim is to prevent cirrhosis progression and complications, liver transplant and death.
BackgroundGastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are the most common primary mesenchymal neoplasia in the gastrointestinal tract, although they represent only a small fraction of total gastrointestinal malignancies in adults (<2%). GISTs can be located at any level of the gastrointestinal tract; the stomach is the most common location (60-70%), in contrast to the rectum, which is most rare (4%). When a GIST invades into the adjacent prostate tissue, it can simulate prostate cancer. In this study, we report on a case comprising the unexpected collision between a rectal GIST tumour and a prostatic adenocarcinoma.FindingsWe describe the complexity of the clinical, endoscopic and radiological diagnosis, of the differential diagnosis based on tumour biopsy, and of the role of neoadjuvant therapy using imatinib prior to surgical treatment.ConclusionsAlthough isolated cases of coexisting GISTs and prostatic adenocarcinomas have previously been described, this is the first reported case in the medical literature of a collision tumour involving a rectal GIST and prostatic adenocarcinoma components.Virtual slidesThe virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1238437468776331.
The aetiology is uncertain. There is controversy relating to increased susceptibility of synchronous neoplasms to pelvic endometriosis and inherited genetic syndromes. Its diagnosis needs to differentiate them from metastatic disease. Additionally, they are problematical from a clinical, diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic point of view. The presentation of more cases of triple synchronous cancers is necessary for a complete adjuvant and surgical treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.