Non-invasive tests used to stage liver fibrosis in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis play a growing role in care and trial recruitment, but their performance in routine practice may differ from results seen in clinical studies.
Non-invasive tests used to stage liver fibrosis in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis play a growing role in care and trial recruitment, but their performance in routine practice may differ from results seen in clinical studies.
Trials report sensitivity and AUROC numbers, then the same tests get used on patients who look nothing like the trial cohort. Who actually got biopsied to validate these scores in the real clinic, and why does nobody ask how many of those biopsies were ever done on the people the tests now screen out? Selection bias everywhere, and the press release calls it “promising.” Give me the denominator before I believe the headline.