ArticleInfectious medicine2025
Comparative analysis of non-invasive fibrosis markers: Insights from chronic HBV, HBV+HDV, and HCV infections.
Article in Infectious medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic viral hepatitis remains a significant global health burden, with accurate assessment of liver fibrosis being crucial for patient management. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive tests (NITs) for liver fibrosis assessment in patients with chronic hepatitis B (HBV), hepatitis B and D co-infection (HBV + HDV), and hepatitis C (HCV) infections. Methods: A prospective study was conducted on 78 patients with chronic viral hepatitis (22 HBV, 34 HBV + HDV, 22 HCV). Participants underwent magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), transient elastography (TE), and serum biomarker testing (APRI, FIB-4, PIIINP, COL4). MRE was used as the reference standard for liver fibrosis staging. Results: Transient elastography demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy for detecting advanced liver fibrosis across all etiologies (AUC 0.95, cutoff 10.2 kPa). The performance of serum biomarkers varied among different viral hepatitis etiologies. In chronic hepatitis B, APRI and FIB-4 showed moderate performance (AUC 0.64), while PIIINP and COL4 demonstrated poor diagnostic accuracy. In HBV + HDV co-infection, all markers showed moderate performance. In chronic hepatitis C, COL4 demonstrated excellent diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.93), while FIB-4 and APRI showed moderate performance. Conclusions: This study highlights the complex relationship between viral hepatitis etiologies and the performance of non-invasive fibrosis tests. While TE demonstrates high accuracy across all groups, the utility of serum biomarkers varies significantly. These findings underscore the importance of considering the specific viral etiology when selecting and interpreting NITs for liver fibrosis assessment in chronic viral hepatitis patients.
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.