Top

Published in:

01-11-2019 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Magnetic Resonance

Prediction of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) activity score (NAS) with multiparametric hepatic magnetic resonance imaging and elastography

Authors: Ziying Yin, Matthew C. Murphy, Jiahui Li, Kevin J. Glaser, Amy S. Mauer, Taofic Mounajjed, Terry M. Therneau, Heshan Liu, Harmeet Malhi, Armando Manduca, Richard L. Ehman, Meng Yin

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 11/2019

Abstract

Objectives

To investigate the use of MR elastography (MRE)–derived mechanical properties (shear stiffness (|G*|) and loss modulus (G″)) and MRI-derived fat fraction (FF) to predict the nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) activity score (NAS) in a NAFLD mouse model.

Methods

Eighty-nine male mice were studied, including 64 training and 25 independent testing animals. An MRI/MRE exam and histologic evaluation were performed. Pairwise, nonparametric comparisons and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the relationships between the three imaging parameters (FF, |G*|, and G″) and histologic features. A virtual NAS score (vNAS) was generated by combining three imaging parameters with an ordinal logistic model (OLM) and a generalized linear model (GLM). The prediction accuracy was evaluated by ROC analyses.

Results

The combination of FF, |G*|, and G″ predicted NAS > 1 with excellent accuracy in both training and testing sets (AUROC > 0.84). OLM and GLM predictive models misclassified 3/54 and 6/54 mice in the training, and 1/25 and 1/25 in the testing cohort respectively, in distinguishing between “not-NASH” and “definite-NASH.” “Borderline-NASH” prediction was poorer in the training set, and no borderline-NASH mice were available in the testing set.

Conclusion

This preliminary study shows that multiparametric MRI/MRE can be used to accurately predict the NAS score in a NAFLD animal model, representing a promising alternative to liver biopsy for assessing NASH severity and treatment response.

Key Points

• MRE-derived liver stiffness and loss modulus and MRI-assessed fat fraction can be used to predict NAFLD activity score (NAS) in our preclinical mouse model (AUROC > 0.84 for all NAS levels greater than 1).

• The overall agreement between the histological-determined NASH diagnosis and the imaging-predicted NASH diagnosis is 80–92%.

• The multiparametric hepatic MRI/MRE has great potential for noninvasively assessing liver disease severity and treatment efficacy.

Available only for authorised users

Browning JD, Szczepaniak LS, Dobbins R et al (2004) Prevalence of hepatic steatosis in an urban population in the United States: impact of ethnicity. Hepatology 40:1387–1395CrossRef

Younossi ZM, Blissett D, Blissett R et al (2016) The economic and clinical burden of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in the United States and Europe. Hepatology 64:1577–1586CrossRef

Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, Fazel Y, Henry L, Wymer M (2016) Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-meta-analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology 64:73–84CrossRef

Ehman RL (2009) Science to practice: can MR elastography be used to detect early steatohepatitis in fatty liver disease? Radiology 253:1–3CrossRef

Charlton M (2004) Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a review of current understanding and future impact. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2:1048–1058CrossRef

Adams LA, Lindor KD, Angulo P (2004) The prevalence of autoantibodies and autoimmune hepatitis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Am J Gastroenterol 99:1316–1320CrossRef

Schwenzer NF, Springer F, Schraml C, Stefan N, Machann J, Schick F (2009) Non-invasive assessment and quantification of liver steatosis by ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance. J Hepatol 51:433–445CrossRef

Cassidy FH, Yokoo T, Aganovic L et al (2009) Fatty liver disease: MR imaging techniques for the detection and quantification of liver steatosis. Radiographics 29:231–260CrossRef

Reeder SB, Sirlin CB (2010) Quantification of liver fat with magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 18:337–357 ixCrossRef

10.

Kramer H, Pickhardt PJ, Kliewer MA et al (2017) Accuracy of liver fat quantification with advanced CT, MRI, and ultrasound techniques: prospective comparison with MR spectroscopy. Am J Roentgenol 208:92–100CrossRef

11.

Tang A, Desai A, Hamilton G et al (2015) Accuracy of MR imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction for classification of dichotomized histologic steatosis grades in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Radiology 274:416–425CrossRef

12.

Imajo K, Kessoku T, Honda Y et al (2016) Magnetic resonance imaging more accurately classifies steatosis and fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease than transient elastography. Gastroenterology 150(626–637):e627

13.

Paige JS, Bernstein GS, Heba E et al (2017) A pilot comparative study of quantitative ultrasound, conventional ultrasound, and MRI for predicting histology-determined steatosis grade in adult nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:W168–W177CrossRef

14.

Chen J, Yin M, Talwalkar JA et al (2017) Diagnostic performance of MR elastography and vibration-controlled transient elastography in the detection of hepatic fibrosis in patients with severe to morbid obesity. Radiology 283:418–428CrossRef

15.

Yin M, Glaser KJ, Talwalkar JA, Chen J, Manduca A, Ehman RL (2016) Hepatic MR elastography: clinical performance in a series of 1377 consecutive examinations. Radiology 278:114–124CrossRef

16.

Song P, Mellema DC, Sheedy SP et al (2016) Performance of 2-dimensional ultrasound shear wave elastography in liver fibrosis detection using magnetic resonance elastography as the reference standard: a pilot study. J Ultrasound Med 35:401–412CrossRef

17.

Rausch V, Peccerella T, Lackner C et al (2016) Primary liver injury and delayed resolution of liver stiffness after alcohol detoxification in heavy drinkers with the PNPLA3 variant I148M. World J Hepatol 8:1547–1556CrossRef

18.

Ogawa S, Moriyasu F, Yoshida K et al (2016) Relationship between liver tissue stiffness and histopathological findings analyzed by shear wave elastography and compression testing in rats with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. J Med Ultrason 43:355–360CrossRef

19.

El Bokl MA-EH, Mabrouk SH, El Karmoty KZ, Bakir ASM, El Aleem AMA (2012) Fibroscan as a noninvasive tool in the assessment of the degree of hepatic steatosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Egypt Liver J 2:83–87CrossRef

20.

Yin M, Glaser KJ, Manduca A et al (2017) Distinguishing between hepatic inflammation and fibrosis with MR elastography. Radiology 284:694–705CrossRef

21.

Kleiner DE, Brunt EM, Van Natta M et al (2005) Design and validation of a histological scoring system for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology 41:1313–1321CrossRef

22.

Yin M, Woollard J, Wang X et al (2007) Quantitative assessment of hepatic fibrosis in an animal model with magnetic resonance elastography. Magn Reson Med 58:346–353CrossRef

23.

Hayashi T, Saitoh S, Takahashi J et al (2017) Hepatic fat quantification using the two-point Dixon method and fat color maps based on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease activity score. Hepatol Res 47:455–464CrossRef

24.

Fischer AH, Jacobson KA, Rose J, Zeller R (2008) Hematoxylin and eosin staining of tissue and cell sections. CSH Protoc 2008:pdb prot4986PubMed

25.

Junqueira LC, Bignolas G, Brentani RR (1979) Picrosirius staining plus polarization microscopy, a specific method for collagen detection in tissue sections. Histochem J 11:447–455CrossRef

26.

Bedossa P, Poitou C, Veyrie N et al (2012) Histopathological algorithm and scoring system for evaluation of liver lesions in morbidly obese patients. Hepatology 56:1751–1759CrossRef

27.

Juluri R, Vuppalanchi R, Olson J et al (2011) Generalizability of the nonalcoholic steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network histologic scoring system for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. J Clin Gastroenterol 45:55–58CrossRef

28.

Pournik O, Alavian SM, Ghalichi L et al (2014) Inter-observer and intra-observer agreement in pathological evaluation of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease suspected liver biopsies. Hepat Mon 14:e15167CrossRef

29.

Sumida Y, Nakajima A, Itoh Y (2014) Limitations of liver biopsy and non-invasive diagnostic tests for the diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease/nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. World J Gastroenterol 20:475–485CrossRef

30.

Brunt EM, Kleiner DE, Wilson LA, Belt P, Neuschwander-Tetri BA (2011) Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) activity score and the histopathologic diagnosis in NAFLD: distinct clinicopathologic meanings. Hepatology 53:810–820CrossRef

31.

Tiniakos DG, Vos MB, Brunt EM (2010) Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: pathology and pathogenesis. Annu Rev Pathol 5:145–171CrossRef

32.

Kang GH, Cruite I, Shiehmorteza M et al (2011) Reproducibility of MRI-determined proton density fat fraction across two different MR scanner platforms. J Magn Reson Imaging 34:928–934CrossRef

33.

Middleton MS, Haufe W, Hooker J et al (2017) Quantifying abdominal adipose tissue and thigh muscle volume and hepatic proton density fat fraction: repeatability and accuracy of an MR imaging-based, semiautomated analysis method. Radiology 283:438–449CrossRef

34.

Lee Y, Lee JM, Lee JE et al (2014) MR elastography for noninvasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis: reproducibility of the examination and reproducibility and repeatability of the liver stiffness value measurement. J Magn Reson Imaging 39:326–331CrossRef

35.

Yasar TK, Wagner M, Bane O et al (2016) Interplatform reproducibility of liver and spleen stiffness measured with MR elastography. J Magn Reson Imaging 43:1064–1072CrossRef

36.

Shire NJ, Yin M, Chen J et al (2011) Test-retest repeatability of MR elastography for noninvasive liver fibrosis assessment in hepatitis C. J Magn Reson Imaging 34:947–955CrossRef

37.

Serai SD, Obuchowski NA, Ventakesh SK et al (2017) Repeatability of MR elastography of liver: a meta-analysis. Radiology 285:92–100CrossRef

Title: Prediction of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) activity score (NAS) with multiparametric hepatic magnetic resonance imaging and elastography
Authors: Ziying Yin
Matthew C. Murphy
Jiahui Li
Kevin J. Glaser
Amy S. Mauer
Taofic Mounajjed
Terry M. Therneau
Heshan Liu
Harmeet Malhi
Armando Manduca
Richard L. Ehman
Meng Yin
Publication date: 01-11-2019
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Fatty Liver
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 11/2019
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06076-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Prediction of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) activity score (NAS) with multiparametric hepatic magnetic resonance imaging and elastography

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2019

Radial MP2RAGE sequence for rapid 3D T1 mapping of mouse abdomen: application to hepatic metastases

Tumour necrosis as assessed with 18F-FDG PET is a potential prognostic marker in diffuse large B cell lymphoma independent of MYC rearrangements

Non-contrast MR lymphography of the lymphatic system of the liver

Non-branched microcysts of the pancreas on MR imaging of patients with pancreatic tumors who had pancreatectomy may predict the presence of pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN): a preliminary study

Can IVIM help predict HCC recurrence after hepatectomy?

Combination of intratumoural micellar paclitaxel with radiofrequency ablation: efficacy and toxicity in rodents