ArticleHepatology communications2026
Multi-threshold analysis of the ELF Test versus histology for prognostication of disease progression and regression in MASH.
Article in Hepatology communications, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) with advanced fibrosis are at risk for progression to cirrhosis and clinical outcomes, but can also experience fibrosis regression. The aim of this study was to compare risk stratification by the Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) Test to histological staging to assess patients at risk of disease progression and those likely to experience histological regression.
methodsUsing pooled data from 6 large placebo-controlled trials of 2710 patients with advanced fibrosis due to MASH, 4 analyses of ELF and fibrosis stage were performed to evaluate the association with the following events: (1) liver-related clinical outcomes; (2) progression from bridging fibrosis to cirrhosis; (3) regression from bridging fibrosis; (4) regression from cirrhosis. Significance was assessed by interval likelihood ratio (iLR), Cox proportional hazard ratio (HR), and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC).
resultsIn 2304 participants (17.8 mo mean follow-up), there was a progressive rise in liver-related outcome risk with increasing baseline ELF score [<9.00 (0%), ≥9.00 to <9.80 (2%), ≥9.80 to <11.30 (4%), ≥11.30 to <12.80 (13%), ≥12.80 (40%)]. In 1414 patients with bridging fibrosis, increasing baseline ELF scores were associated with a higher risk of progression to cirrhosis [<9.80 (9%), ≥9.80 to <11.30 (18%), ≥11.30 (45%)] and a lower likelihood of histological regression. In 1690 patients with cirrhosis, increasing baseline ELF scores were associated with a lower likelihood of histological regression [<9.80 (33%), ≥9.80 to <11.30 (16%), ≥11.30 (6%)]. In all analyses, the ELF Test provided more detailed information than histology.
conclusionsThe ELF Test adds risk strata that are significantly different from fibrosis staging for the prediction of clinical events and histological changes, thereby improving risk stratification.
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.