Evidence Hub

Staging liver fibrosis and cirrhosis using non-invasive tests in people with chronic hepatitis B to inform WHO 2024 guidelines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Antonio Liguori, Mirko Zoncapè, Giovanni Casazza, Philippa Easterbrook, E. Tsochatzis

The Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2025

1,000 participants · 58 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive tests (aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index [APRI] and transient elastography [FibroScan]) were recommended in the 2015 WHO guidelines to guide treatment decisions in people with chronic hepatitis B. We updated the systematic review and meta-analysis that informed the 2015 guidelines to inform new cutoffs for non-invasive tests for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis and cirrhosis for the 2024 WHO guidelines for chronic hepatitis B.

METHODS

We searched PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science) for studies published in any language between Jan 1, 2014, and Feb 15, 2023. We included all studies that reported cross-sectional data on the staging of fibrosis or cirrhosis with APRI, Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4), and FibroScan compared with liver biopsy as the reference standard in people with chronic hepatitis B. We excluded studies in which the maximum interval between liver biopsy and non-invasive fibrosis test was more than 6 months; that reported on fewer than ten patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis; that were done exclusively in children; and did not report diagnostic accuracy across our prespecified ranges of test cutoffs. The results of this updated search were collated with the meta-analysis that informed the 2015 guidelines. Outcomes of interest were the sensitivity and specificity of non-invasive tests using defined index test cutoffs for detecting significant fibrosis (≥F2), advanced fibrosis…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,000 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free