ÿþ<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <title>EASL 2009 - Poster Presentations</title> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style.css"> </head> <body> <table width="750" align="center" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="MainTable"> <tr> <td><img src="http://www2.kenes.com/liver-congress/PublishingImages/top760.jpg" width="760" height="181" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="content"><h1>Poster Presentations</h1> <P><b>Session Title:</b> VIRAL HEPATITIS - f) HEPATITIS C  CLINICAL (EXCEPT THERAPY)<br><b>Presentation Date:</b> Apr 23, 2009</P><h2 align='left'><b>PAIRED BIOPSY COMPARISON OF TWO LIVER FIBROSIS MARKER PANELS (HCV FIBROTEST, HEPASCORE) IN FOLLOWING HISTOLOGICAL RESPONSE TO ANTIVIRAL THERAPY FOR CHRONIC HEPATITIS C (CHC) </b></h2> <p align='left'><b>A. Thompson</b>, L. Elliott, H. Tillmann, J. McHutchison, K. Patel<br> <em>Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA</em></p><br> <p align='justify'><b><b>Background: </b> </b>Non-invasive methods that follow changes in liver fibrosis after antiviral or antifibrotic therapy could provide an alternative to liver biopsy for the assessment of histological endpoints for CHC patients.<br><b><b>Aim: </b></b> To independently evaluate the performance characteristics of FibroTest (FT) and HepaScore (HS) panels in following changes in liver fibrosis in pre- and post-treatment biopsies in a single center patient cohort. <br><b><b>Methods: </b> </b>FT and HS were independently and blindly evaluated in serum obtained from 134 CHC patients, matched to biopsies pre- and 6 months post- IFN-based therapy. METAVIR stage was scored by expert histopathologists at our center. <br><b><b>Results: </b> </b>Baseline fibrosis prevalence was: F0 (13%), F1 (52%), F2 (11%), F3 (13%) and F4 (11%). All biopsies included > 6 portal tracts (median length 13 mm, IQR 11-15). For detecting F2-4, FT and HS had sensitivity 0.62 v. 0.71, specificity 0.60 v. 0.62, and AUROC 0.65 v. 0.74, respectively (<i>p=</i>NS). METAVIR scores post-treatment were unchanged in 61%, decreased by 1F stage in 14% and increased by 1F stage in 13%. Agreement between the change in METAVIR score and change in either FT or HS was poor (Kappa=0.003 and 0.07) (Figure 1). A significant correlation between change in FT and change in ALT was observed (r=0.41, <i>p</i>< 0.001). This relationship was weaker for HS and ALT (r=0.17, <i>p</i>=0.05). For FT, SVR (n=43), but not non-response (n = 91), led to a significant decrease in index score (SVR: mean decrease in FT=0.06±0.10; p< 0.001). Virological response was not associated with a significant change in HS.<br><b><b>Conclusion: </b> </b>In this cohort, the performance characteristics of both FT and HS were relatively poor for selection of F2-4 at baseline, and for detecting changes in fibrosis stage after therapy. Changes in marker index scores following antiviral therapy correlated with inflammation (ALT) and treatment outcome (SVR), especially for FT.<br><br><img hspace=5 vspace=5 src=pictures/p000143.jpg ><br><i>[Figure 1]</i><br></p> <img src='pictures/p000143.jpg'> <br><a href='Session-Category 5f.htm'>Back</a><br> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p></td> </tr> </table> </body> </html>