ArticleGastro hep advances2025
Modeling Reductions in Liver Fat: Comparing Noninvasive Tests to Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Proton Density Fat Fraction.
Article in Gastro hep advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic performance of ultrasound-derived fat fraction for detecting hepatic steatosis in patients with tumor-related liver disease.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- A dose-response study of the association between MRI-derived liver proton density fat fraction and prevalent T2DM in postmenopausal women with abnormal glucose metabolism.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) is an accurate, noninvasive tool for diagnosing metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, but its feasibility is limited in routine clinical practice. We aimed to assess the clinical utility of alternative, cost-efficient approaches for assessing liver fat changes and their relationship with MRI-PDFF changes. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a phase 2a study that included adults with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease who received clesacostat, a selective, reversible inhibitor of acetyl-CoA carboxylase. In this secondary analysis, responders were defined as those in whom a ≥30% decrease in liver fat by MRI-PDFF was observed with clesacostat or placebo. Other endpoints were evaluated for their ability to predict MRI-PDFF responder status, including controlled attenuation parameter (CAP), liver enzymes (alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and gamma-glutamyl transferase), metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis-related biomarkers (liver stiffness measurement by vibration-controlled transient elastography, cytokeratin 18-M30, and cytokeratin 18-M65), and markers of hepatic steatosis (hepatic steatosis index and fatty liver index). These relationships were investigated through correlation, univariate, and multivariable regression analyses. Results: Of 260 participants with a baseline and on-treatment measure at week 12 or week 16, 143 were responders. Based on correlation analyses, a significant but weak positive correlation between MRI-PDFF and CAP measurements of relative percentage change from baseline in liver fat was observed. By combining the selected 6 parameters (CAP, hepatic steatosis index, fatty liver index, alanine aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase, and cytokeratin 18-M65) through multivariable regression modeling, responders can be predicted with a high level of sensitivity and specificity (mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.831 from 10-fold cross-validation). Conclusion: Modeling multiple noninvasive assessments of liver fat closely aligned with MRI-PDFF measurements. These data support further assessment of its suitability in real-world clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.