IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0105728.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Diagnostic Value of the FIB-4 Index for Staging Hepatitis B-Related Fibrosis: A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yuanyuan Li
  • Yu Chen
  • Ying Zhao

Abstract

Background: Liver fibrosis stage is an important factor in determining prognosis and need for treatment in patients infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV). Liver biopsies are typically used to assess liver fibrosis; however, noninvasive alternatives such as the FIB-4 index have also been developed. Aims: To quantify the accuracy of the FIB-4 index in the diagnosis of HBV related fibrosis and cirrhosis. Methods: A meta-analysis of studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of the FIB-4 index vs. liver biopsy in HBV-infected patients was performed using studies retrieved from the following databases: PubMed, Ovid, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure and the Chinese Biology Medicine disc. A hierarchical summary receiver operating curves model and bivariate model were used to produce summary receiver operating characteristic curves and pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. The heterogeneity was explored with meta-regression analysis. Publication bias was detected using Egger’s test and the trim and fill method. Results: 12 studies (N = 1,908) and 10 studies (N = 2,105) were included in the meta-analysis for significant fibrosis and cirrhosis, respectively. For significant fibrosis, the area under the hierarchical summary receiver operating curve (AUHSROC) was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.74–0.81). The recommended cutoff value was between 1.45 and 1.62, and the AUHSROC, summary sensitivity and specificity were 0.78 (95% CI = 0.74–0.81), 0.65 (95% CI = 0.56–0.73) and 0.77 (95% CI = 0.7–0.83), respectively. For cirrhosis, the AUHSROC was 0.89 (95% CI = 0.85–0.91). The recommended cutoff value was between 2.9 and 3.6, and the AUHSROC, summary sensitivity and specificity were 0.96 (95% CI = 0.92–1.00), 0.42 (95% CI = 0.36–0.48) and 0.96 (95% CI = 0.95–0.97), respectively. No publication bias was detected. Conclusions: The FIB-4 index is valuable for detecting significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in HBV-infected patients, but has suboptimal accuracy in excluding fibrosis and cirrhosis.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuanyuan Li & Yu Chen & Ying Zhao, 2014. "The Diagnostic Value of the FIB-4 Index for Staging Hepatitis B-Related Fibrosis: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-13, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0105728
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105728
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105728
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105728&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0105728?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0105728. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.