Using FIB-4 score as a screening tool in the assessment of significant liver fibrosis (F2) in patients with transfusion dependent beta thalassaemia: a cross sectional study

Introduction

Liver disease is the third commonest cause of morbidity and mortality in transfusion-dependent thalassaemia (TDT) patients. Though infections and cardiac failure are the leading causes of death among these patients liver is yet another major target organ susceptible to damage ¹. Transfusional iron overload and transfusion-transmitted hepatitis infections are the leading causes of hepatic fibrogenesis triggering liver cell dysfunction in these patients ^2,3. Upon chronic exposure to excess iron, myofibroblasts activate and secrete extracellular matrix protein, predominantly collagen type I and III, assisting in scar tissue formation, causing liver fibrosis. ^4,5.

Assessing liver fibrosis utilizing liver biopsy is the gold standard method. Owing to its procedure related mortality (<1 in 10,000 cases) and its invasive nature, liver biopsy is not favoured by clinicians or patients ^6,7,8. Transient elastography (TE) (FibroScan^®) estimates liver fibrosis/stiffness non-invasively. This technology was first introduced by Sandrin et al. in 2003. It is a rapid bedside tool with remarkable reproducibility ⁹. TE is based on measuring the velocity of a mechanical shear wave generated by a transducer placed on the skin. The shear wave velocity is decided by the time the shear wave takes to travel through the liver tissue, and the velocity is then converted to liver stiffness measurement and is expressed in kilopascals (kPa). ^{10,7,11,12,13}. Despite being simple, safe, and efficient, routine use of TE is restricted by the cost of the device, primarily in resource-poor settings.

Consequently, the desire to develop clinical scores to detect liver fibrosis using inexpensive point of care tests have always been explored ⁸. Of the several unique biomarkers that have been developed, the FIB-4 score has been widely used. This was initially developed in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection to predict liver fibrosis and has been validated in HCV and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) patients. It is a simple model based on biochemical parameters of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and platelet count, along with the age of the patient ^14,15. Though its interpretation is cautious in splenectomised thalassaemia patients due to post splenectomised thrombocytosis, the FIB-4 score is a cost-effective bedside biomarker for liver fibrosis assessment in primary care. However, there is limited information available on the applicability of this score in patients with TDT ^16,17. Moreover, data regarding diagnostic performance of FIB-4 score and its comparability with TE in TDT patients is scarce.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of the FIB-4 score in assessing liver fibrosis compared to TE and assess if the FIB-4 score could be used as a screening tool to detect significant liver fibrosis (F2), among chronic transfusion-dependent beta-thalassemia patients, in a resource-poor setting.

Methodology

Results

Of the 45-transfusion dependent beta thalassaemia patients we studied, 22 (49%) were males. The mean age of the patients was 18.9 years (SD = 4.8). Thirty (67%) patients have not undergone splenectomy in our study group. Of the 15 (33%) patients who had undergone splenectomy seven (47%) patients had thrombocytosis (defined as >450,000) following post splenectomy. Demographic, biochemical characteristics, FIB-4 and TE scores of the entire group, the un-splenectomised group and the splenectomised group are summarized in table 1. There were no failures recorded in the TE assessment.

The FIB-4 score showed a significant linear correlation with TE scores in the entire study group (r = 0.52; p < 0.0003).

At the time of recruitment, there were 29 (64%) patients who had significant liver fibrosis as per the TE results. Conversely, the FIB-4 score detected only 1 out of 29 patients with significant liver fibrosis in the study group; hence sensitivity is 3.4% (table 2). In other words, when a pre-defined cut off value of 1.3 was set for FIB4 score, only 1 (1/29) patient was correctly classified as having significant liver fibrosis in our study cohort (true positives). Twenty-eight out of 29 patients (28/29) were misclassified as not having significant liver fibrosis (false negative). Similarly, at the time of recruitment, 16 patients did not have significant liver fibrosis as per the TE assessment (true negatives). Of that group, the FIB-4 score was able to classify 100% as not having significant liver fibrosis; hence specificity is 100%. Not a single patient without significant liver fibrosis was misclassified as having significant liver fibrosis (false positives). At this cut off point, it’s a very poor detector for fibrosis but will not erroneously diagnose fibrosis in those who don’t have it.

Table 3 shows the sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) for the FIB-4 score with a new cut off value to detect F2 fibrosis compared to the pre-defined cut off value of 1.3.

The best new cut off point to detect significant liver fibrosis in this study group is 0.32 (AUC = 66%) (figure 1). With the suggested new cut off value of 0.32, the FIB-4 score was able to detect 21 out of 29 patients (72%) with F2 fibrosis in the study cohort. Hence sensitivity improved from 3.4% to 72 %. Only 8 out of 29 patients (8/29) were misclassified as not having significant liver fibrosis (false negative). As per the new cut off value, nine patients were correctly classified as having F2 fibrosis (true negatives), whereas seven patients were misclassified as not having F2 fibrosis (false positives). Hence the new cut-off value is unable to rule out patients with significant liver fibrosis 100%.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1: ROC curve analysis of the total study participants (AUC = 66% with the best new cut-off for FIB-4 score = 0.32)

(ROC: Receiver operating characteristics, AUC: area under the curve)

Discussion

Hepatic transient elastography is one of the most useful imaging modalities for liver fibrosis assessment. Though this technology was first validated in patients with chronic viral hepatitis C infection, it has not been validated for use in the thalassaemia population ²¹. Nevertheless, TE has been recommended as a reliable tool in assessing liver fibrosis in patients with transfusion-dependent thalassaemia ^22,23,24,25 While the FIB-4 score was initially developed and validated in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection to predict liver fibrosis, this score has previously been tested only on a few occasions in patients with transfusion-dependent thalassaemia ^15,17. Yet as per the WHO recommendation, the FIB-4 score can be applied to assess hepatic fibrosis in resource-poor settings when TE is not feasible ²⁶.

Of the 15 patients who had undergone splenectomy in our study cohort, 7 (47%) patients had thrombocytosis following post-splenectomy. Post-operative thrombocytosis is a known complication in beta thalassaemia major patients following splenectomy. Approximately seventy-five per cent of splenectomised patients developing thrombocytosis even reaching values as high as 1,000,000 cells/mm³ is known ^23,27. In our study cohort, there is no statistically significant difference between the mean platelet count of the splenectomised and un-splenectomised patient groups (p=0.11). Therefore, in the FIB-4 calculator, though the platelet count is a key component, changes of which would unlikely to affect the final result of this study cohort.

With the ROC curve analysis, we propose a better cut off value of 0.32 with 72% sensitivity and 56% specificity (Table 3; Figure 1) for the FIB-4 score in patients with TDT. Yet the AUROC of 66% does not satisfactorily predict F2 fibrosis in this patient cohort. The findings of this study are consistent with the study done by Hamidieh et al. on paediatric patients with transfusion-dependent thalassaemia. The study has concluded that TE was superior to the FIB-4 index in fibrosis assessment, and the best cut off value of 0.699 shows AUROC of 61% in paediatric thalassaemia major patients ¹⁷. Besides a study done on 76 hepatitis C virus-infected patients with beta thalassaemia, Poustchi et al. (2013) disclosed a cut-off value of 0.25 with an AUROC of 51% to detect significant liver fibrosis ¹⁶.

The data from the present study suggests that when using TE as the standard (in the absence of liver biopsy) and using the FIB-4 score cut off value of 1.3, the FIB-4 score is improbable to lead to a false classification of thalassaemia patients to have significant fibrosis (F2). On the other hand, it had a very low diagnostic yield in missing almost all (except one) of those who had significant fibrosis. Using a much lowered cut off point for FIB-4 score at 0.32, we were able to improve the pick-up rate of F2 fibrosis using the FIB-4 score to 72%. Yet the new cut off point misclassified seven patients as not having significant liver fibrosis, hence unable to exclude patients with F2 100%.

Regardless of the FIB-4 cut-off point, it is clear that in clinical practice FIB-4 score cannot be used as a good screening tool to pick up significant liver fibrosis in patients with TDT, irrespective of their splenectomy status. On the contrary, at 1.3 cut off value though FIB-4 is a very poor detector of F2 fibrosis it will not erroneously diagnose F2 fibrosis in those who don’t have it.

We acknowledge that the small sample size of our study is one of the significant limitations. A similar study with a larger sample size would be required to justify the findings of this study. Even though the liver biopsy is the gold standard method of assessing liver fibrosis, TE was used as the reference standard in our study. Hence part of the variability of our study findings would have been accounted for this. Yet we believe that TE has been validated in various other clinical conditions. It has shown a very good correlation with the histological gradings of liver fibrosis ^28,29.

Declarations