Display options
Cite
Aida Y, Abe H, Tomita Y, et al. Serum cytokeratin 18 fragment level as a noninvasive biomarker for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014;7(11):4191-8
Aida, Y., Abe, H., Tomita, Y., Nagano, T., Seki, N., Sugita, T., Itagaki, M., Ishiguro, H., Sutoh, S., & Aizawa, Y. (2014). Serum cytokeratin 18 fragment level as a noninvasive biomarker for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 7(11), 4191-8.
Aida, Yuta, et al. "Serum cytokeratin 18 fragment level as a noninvasive biomarker for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease." International journal of clinical and experimental medicine vol. 7,11 (2014): 4191-8.
Aida Y, Abe H, Tomita Y, Nagano T, Seki N, Sugita T, Itagaki M, Ishiguro H, Sutoh S, Aizawa Y. Serum cytokeratin 18 fragment level as a noninvasive biomarker for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014 Nov 15;7(11):4191-8. eCollection 2014. PMID: 25550930; PMCID: PMC4276188.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014 Nov 15;7(11):4191-8. eCollection 2014.

Serum cytokeratin 18 fragment level as a noninvasive biomarker for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

International journal of clinical and experimental medicine

Yuta Aida, Hiroshi Abe, Yoichi Tomita, Tomohisa Nagano, Nobuyoshi Seki, Tomonori Sugita, Munenori Itagaki, Haruya Ishiguro, Satoshi Sutoh, Yoshio Aizawa

Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Jikei University School of Medicine, Katsushika Medical Center 6-41-2 Aoto, Katsushika-ku, Tokyo 125-8506, Japan.

PMID: 25550930 PMCID: PMC4276188

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We evaluated the usefulness of serum cytokeratin 18 fragment (CK18-F) as a noninvasive biomarker in differentiating nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) from nonalcoholic fatty liver (NAFL) since the prognosis of the 2 diseases differ.

METHODS: 116 Japanese patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) proven by liver biopsy were studied. Histological findings were classified according to the NAFLD activity score (NAS) proposed by the Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network. The correlation between histological findings and serum CK18-F levels was investigated.

RESULTS: Serum CK18-F levels showed a positive correlation with histologic steatosis (ρ = 0.271, P = 0.0033), inflammation (ρ = 0.353, P = 0.0005), ballooning (ρ = 0.372, P = 0.0001), and the total NAS (ρ = 0.474, P = 2.68 × 10-7). The serum CK18-F level was significantly lower for NAFL (NAS ≤ 2) than for borderline NASH (NAS of 3-4) or definite NASH (NAS ≥ 5) (P = 0.0294, P = 1.163 × 10-5, respectively). The serum CK18-F level was significantly higher for definite NASH than for borderline NASH (P = 0.0002). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of serum CK18-F to predict the presence of NAFL and definite NASH was 0.762 and 0.757, respectively. The optimal cut-off point of serum CK18-F for NAFL and definite NASH was 230 and 270 U/L, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predict value, and negative predict value of serum CK18-F for NAFL were 0.89, 0.65, 0.34, and 0.97, and those for definite NASH were 0.64, 0.76, 0.72, and 0.67, respectively. Accuracies of diagnosis for both NAFL and definite NASH were 0.70.

CONCLUSIONS: Serum CK18-F could be a clinically useful biomarker to discriminate between NAFL and NASH.

Keywords: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD); definite nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH); nonalcoholic fatty liver (NAFL); nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity score (NAS); serum cytokeratin 18 fragment (CK18-F)

References

  1. Clin Chem. 1972 Jun;18(6):499-502 - PubMed
  2. Gut. 2008 Oct;57(10):1441-7 - PubMed
  3. Hepatol Res. 2007 Sep;37(9):722-30 - PubMed
  4. Hepatology. 2002 Oct;36(4 Pt 1):986-92 - PubMed
  5. Ann Epidemiol. 2007 Nov;17(11):863-9 - PubMed
  6. Hepatology. 2011 Mar;53(3):810-20 - PubMed
  7. Liver Int. 2006 Oct;26(8):956-63 - PubMed
  8. World J Gastroenterol. 2007 Feb 14;13(6):837-44 - PubMed
  9. Hepatology. 2007 Apr;45(4):846-54 - PubMed
  10. J Gastroenterol. 2003;38(10):954-61 - PubMed
  11. Dig Liver Dis. 2008 May;40(5):371-8 - PubMed
  12. Gastroenterology. 2001 Sep;121(3):710-23 - PubMed
  13. Hepatology. 2006 Jun;43(6):1317-25 - PubMed
  14. BMC Gastroenterol. 2006 Nov 02;6:33 - PubMed
  15. Hepatology. 2004 Nov;40(5):1078-87 - PubMed
  16. J Hepatol. 2013 Oct;59(4):859-71 - PubMed
  17. Cell Death Differ. 2007 Jul;14(7):1237-43 - PubMed
  18. Hepatology. 2003 Aug;38(2):518-26 - PubMed
  19. Gastroenterology. 2009 Sep;137(3):865-72 - PubMed
  20. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2010 Apr;44(4):e87-95 - PubMed
  21. Gastroenterology. 2003 Aug;125(2):437-43 - PubMed
  22. Gastroenterology. 1999 Jun;116(6):1413-9 - PubMed
  23. J Hepatol. 2002 Jul;37(1):154-60 - PubMed
  24. Hepatology. 2004 Dec;40(6):1387-95 - PubMed
  25. Hepatology. 2006 Jul;44(1):27-33 - PubMed
  26. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Apr;24(4):564-8 - PubMed
  27. Dig Dis Sci. 2013 Jan;58(1):265-74 - PubMed
  28. J Hepatol. 2014 Jan;60(1):167-74 - PubMed
  29. Lancet. 2004 Jan 10;363(9403):157-63 - PubMed
  30. Hepatol Res. 2014 Aug;44(8):827-8 - PubMed
  31. Diabetes Care. 2000 Jan;23(1):57-63 - PubMed
  32. J Gastroenterol. 2006 Aug;41(8):725-32 - PubMed
  33. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2010 Jul;44(6):440-7 - PubMed
  34. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2012 Dec;36(11-12):1057-66 - PubMed
  35. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Oct;10(10):1162-8; quiz e87 - PubMed
  36. Hepatology. 2012 Jun;55(6):2005-23 - PubMed

Publication Types