Search

Background: Noninvasive assessment of dynamic changes in liver blood flow, perfusion, and oxygenation using MRI may allow detection of subtle hemodynamic alterations in cirrhosis.Purpose: To assess the feasibility of measuring dynamic liver blood flow, perfusion, and T2 * alterations in response to meal, hypercapnia, and hyperoxia challenges.Study Type: Prospective.Subjects: Ten healthy volunteers (HV) and 10 patients with compensated cirrhosis (CC).Field Strength/sequence: 3T; phase contrast, arterial spin labeling, and T2* mapping.Assessment: Dynamic changes in portal vein and hepatic artery blood flow (using phase contrast MRI), liver perfusion (using arterial spin labeling), and blood oxygenation ( T2* mapping) following a meal challenge (660 kcal), hyperoxia (target PET O2 of 500 mmHg), and hypercapnia (target increase PET CO2 of ∼6 mmHg).Statistical Tests: Tests between baseline and each challenge were performed using a paired two-tailed t-test (parametric) or Wilcoxon-signed-ranks test (nonparametric). Repeatability and reproducibility were determined by the coefficient of variation (CoV).Results: Portal vein velocity increased following the meal (70 ± 9%, P < 0.001) and hypercapnic (7 (5-11)%, P = 0.029) challenge, while hepatic artery flow decreased (-30 ± 18%, P = 0.005) following the meal challenge in HV. In CC patients, portal vein velocity increased (37 ± 13%, P = 0.012) without the decrease in hepatic artery flow following the meal. In both groups, the meal increased liver perfusion (HV: 82 ± 50%, P < 0.0001; CC: 27 (16-42)%, P = 0.011) with faster arrival time of blood (HV: -54 (-56-30)%, P = 0.074; CC: -42 ± 32%, P = 0.005). In HVs, T2* increased after the meal and in response to hyperoxia, with a decrease in hypercapnia (6 ± 8% P = 0.052; 3 ± 5%, P = 0.075; -5 ± 6%, P = 0.073, respectively), but no change in CC patients. Baseline between-session CoV <15% for blood flow and <10% for T2* measures.Data Conclusion: Dynamic changes in liver perfusion, blood flow, and oxygenation following a meal, hyperoxic, and hypercapnic challenges can be measured using noninvasive MRI and potentially be used to stratify patients with cirrhosis.Level Of Evidence: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:1577-1586. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Liver biopsy is the standard test for the assessment of fibrosis in liver tissue of patients with chronic liver disease. Recent studies have used a non-invasive measure of T1 relaxation time to estimate the degree of fibrosis in a single slice of the liver. Here, we extend this work to measure T1 of the whole liver and investigate the effects of additional histological factors such as steatosis, inflammation and iron accumulation on the relationship between liver T1 and fibrosis. We prospectively enrolled patients who had previously undergone liver biopsy to have MR scans. A non-breath-holding, fast scanning protocol was used to acquire MR relaxation time data ( T1 and T2*), and blood serum was used to determine the enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) score. Areas under the receiver operator curves (AUROCs) for T1 to detect advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis were derived in a training cohort and then validated in a second cohort. Combining the cohorts, the influence of various histology factors on liver T1 relaxation time was investigated. The AUROCs (95% confidence interval (CI)) for detecting advanced fibrosis ( F ≥ 3) and cirrhosis ( F = 4) for the training cohort were 0.81 (0.65-0.96) and 0.92 (0.81-1.0) respectively ( p < 0.01). Inflammation and iron accumulation were shown to significantly alter T1 in opposing directions in the absence of advanced fibrosis; inflammation increasing T1 and iron decreasing T1. A decision tree model was developed to allow the assessment of early liver disease based on relaxation times and ELF, and to screen for the need for biopsy. T1 relaxation time increases with advanced fibrosis in liver patients, but is also influenced by iron accumulation and inflammation. Together with ELF, relaxation time measures provide a marker to stratify patients with suspected liver disease for biopsy. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effect of metformin may be more pronounced in patients with early/mild portal hypertension (HVPG <12 mm Hg) where an increase in IHVR (as opposed to exuberant portal flow) is the predominant pathogenic mechanism. Simvastatin lowers portal pressure in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension: a randomized controlled trial. The development of portal hypertension is a major inflection point in the natural history of cirrhosis conferring risk of variceal bleeding, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and hepatorenal syndrome. [Extracted from the article]

Background. Alcoholic hepatitis (AH) is a distinct clinical entity in the spectrum of alcoholic liver disease with a high short-term mortality. Several scoring systems are being used to assess the severity of AH but the ability of these scores to predict long-term survival in these patients is largely unknown. Aims. We aim to assess the utility of five different scoring systems Child Pugh (CP), model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), Maddrey's discriminant function (mDF), Glasgow AH score (GAHS), and age-bilirubin- INR-creatinine (ABIC) score in predicting shot-termand long-term-survival in patients with AH. Methods. Patients with histological evidence of AH were identified from our database. The clinical and biochemical parameters were used to calculate the 5 different scores. The prognostic utility of these scores was determined by generating an ROC curve for survival at 30 days, 90 days, 6 months, and 1 year. Results and Conclusions. All 5 scores with the exception of CP score have a similar accuracy in predicting the short-term prognosis. However, they are uniformly poor in predicting longer-term survival with AUROC not exceeding 0.74. CP score is a very poor predictor of survival in both short and long term. Abstinence from alcohol was significantly (P < 0.05) associated with survival at 1 year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

LINKED CONTENT This article is linked to Moore et al and Allegretti et al papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15836 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15981 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Increasing rates of liver transplantation and improved outcomes have led to greater numbers of transplant recipients followed up in non-transplant centres. Our aim was to document long-term clinical outcomes of liver transplant recipients managed in this 'hub-and-spoke' healthcare model. Methods A retrospective analysis of all adult patients who underwent liver transplantation between 1987 and 2016, with posttransplant follow-up in two non-transplant centres in the UK (Nottingham) and Canada (Ottawa), was performed. Results The 1-, 5-, 10- and 20-year patient survival rates were 98%, 95%, 87% and 62%, and 100%, 96%, 88% and 62% in the Nottingham and Ottawa groups, respectively (p=0.87). There were no significant differences between the two centres in 1-, 5-, 10- and 20-year cumulative incidence of death-censored graft-survival (p=0.10), end-stage renal disease (p=0.29) or de novo cancer (p=0.22). Nottingham had a lower incidence of major cardiovascular events (p=0.008). Conclusion Adopting a new model of healthcare provides a means of delivering post-transplant patient care close to home without compromising patient survival and long-term clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Histologically assessed liver fibrosis stage has prognostic significance in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and is accepted as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials for non-cirrhotic NAFLD. Our aim was to compare the prognostic performance of non-invasive tests with liver histology in patients with NAFLD., Methods: This was an individual participant data meta-analysis of the prognostic performance of histologically assessed fibrosis stage (F0-4), liver stiffness measured by vibration-controlled transient elastography (LSM-VCTE), fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4), and NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS) in patients with NAFLD. The literature was searched for a previously published systematic review on the diagnostic accuracy of imaging and simple non-invasive tests and updated to Jan 12, 2022 for this study. Studies were identified through PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL, and authors were contacted for individual participant data, including outcome data, with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplantation, or cirrhosis complications (ie, ascites, variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, or progression to a MELD score ≥15). We calculated aggregated survival curves for trichotomised groups and compared them using stratified log-rank tests (histology: F0-2 vs F3 vs F4; LSM: <10 vs 10 to <20 vs ≥20 kPa; FIB-4: <1·3 vs 1·3 to ≤2·67 vs >2·67; NFS: <-1·455 vs -1·455 to ≤0·676 vs >0·676), calculated areas under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves (tAUC), and performed Cox proportional-hazards regression to adjust for confounding. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022312226., Findings: Of 65 eligible studies, we included data on 2518 patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD from 25 studies (1126 [44·7%] were female, median age was 54 years [IQR 44-63), and 1161 [46·1%] had type 2 diabetes). After a median follow-up of 57 months [IQR 33-91], the composite endpoint was observed in 145 (5·8%) patients. Stratified log-rank tests showed significant differences between the trichotomised patient groups (p<0·0001 for all comparisons). The tAUC at 5 years were 0·72 (95% CI 0·62-0·81) for histology, 0·76 (0·70-0·83) for LSM-VCTE, 0·74 (0·64-0·82) for FIB-4, and 0·70 (0·63-0·80) for NFS. All index tests were significant predictors of the primary outcome after adjustment for confounders in the Cox regression., Interpretation: Simple non-invasive tests performed as well as histologically assessed fibrosis in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with NAFLD and could be considered as alternatives to liver biopsy in some cases., Funding: Innovative Medicines Initiative 2., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests KS is an employee of Versantis AG. MT received speaker fees from BMS, Falk Foundation, Gilead, Intercept, Janssen, MSD, and Roche; advised for AbbVie, Albireo, BiomX, Boehringer Ingelheim, Falk Pharma, Genfit, Gilead, Hightide, Intercept, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Phenex, Pliant, Regulus, Siemens, and Shire; received travel grants from AbbVie, Falk, Gilead, Intercept, and Janssen; and received research grants from Albireo, Alnylam, Cymabay, Falk, Gilead, Intercept, MSD, Takeda, and UltraGenyx. MT is also co-inventor of patents on the medical use of norUDCA filed by the Medical Universities of Graz and Vienna. AGH reports consultancy for Julius Clinical, Novo Nordisk, Echosens, Inventiva, and has received research grants from Novo Nordisk and Gilead. EB has served as a consultant or advisory board member for Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead Sciences, Intercept, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, ProSciento, and as a speaker for Gilead Sciences, Intercept, Merck, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer. EB has also received a research grant from Gilead Sciences for fatty liver research. VW-SW has served as a consultant or advisory board member for 3V-BIO, AbbVie, Allergan, Boehringer Ingelheim, Center for Outcomes Research in Liver Diseases, Echosens, Gilead Sciences, Hanmi Pharmaceutical, Intercept, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Perspectum, Pfizer, ProSciento, Sagimet Biosciences, TARGET PharmaSolutions, and Terns; and as a speaker for AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Echosens, and Gilead Sciences. VW-SW has also received a research grant from Gilead Sciences for fatty liver research. TK and JW received unrestricted research grants from Echosens. TK has served as a speaker for Echosens. GPA has served as a consultant and an advisory board member for Pfizer, Inventiva Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, and KaNDy Therapeutics; has been a consultant to BerGenBio, Median Technologies, FRACTYL, Amryt Pharmaceuticals, and AstraZeneca; and has given presentations on behalf of Roche Diagnostics and Medscape all through the University of Nottingham contract. GS has acted as speaker for Merck, Gilead, AbbVie, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer; served as an advisory board member for Pfizer, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Gilead, and Intercept; and has received unrestricted research funding from Theratechnologies. ETs has served on the advisory boards for Boehringer, Pfizer, NovoNordisk, Orphalan, Univar, and Alexion; and has been a speaker for NovoNordisk and Dr Falk. MY received research support from Kowa Co. HH's institutions have received research grants from Astra Zeneca, EchoSens, Gilead, Intercept, MSD, and Pfizer. W-KC has served as a consultant or advisory board member for AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk; and as a speaker for Hisky Medical and Viatris. SM received honorarium fees from Echosens. MV has served as a consultant or a speaker for Gilead Sciences and Intercept Pharmaceuticals. VdL reports consultancy fees for AbbVie, BMS, Echosens, Gilead Sciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Myr-Pharma, Pfizer, Supersonic Imagine, and Tillotts. MN has been on the advisory board or has been a consultant for 89BIO, Altimmune, BI, Gilead, cohBar, Cytodyn, Pfizer, GSK, Novo Nordisk, EchoSens, Madrigal, NorthSea, Perspectum, Terns, Takeda, Sami-Sabina group, Siemens, and Roche diagnostic; has received research support from Allergan, Akero, BMS, Gilead, Galmed, Galectin, Genfit, Conatus, Corcept, Enanta, Madrigal, Novartis, Pfizer, Shire, TERNS, Viking, and Zydus; and is a shareholder or has stocks in Anaetos, Chrownwell, Cytodyn, Ciema, Rivus Pharma, and Viking. CF-P is employed by Echosens. AG has served as a speaker and consultant for AbbVie, Alexion, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, CSL Behring, Eisai, Falk, Gilead, Heel, Intercept, Ipsen, Merz, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Sequana; and received research funding from Intercept, Falk, and Novartis. MM is employed by Novartis. TT is employed by Pfizer. QMA is coordinator of the IMI2 LITMUS consortium; has received research grant funding from AbbVie, Allergan/Tobira, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Glympse Bio, Novartis Pharma AG, Pfizer, Vertex; has received consultancy fees on behalf of Newcastle University for Abbott Laboratories, Acuitas Medical, Allergan/Tobira, Blade, BNN Cardio, Cirius, CymaBay, EcoR1, E3Bio, Eli Lilly, Galmed, Genfit, Gilead, Grunthal, HistoIndex, Indalo, Imperial Innovations, Intercept Pharma Europe, Inventiva, IQVIA, Janssen, Kenes, Madrigal, MedImmune, Metacrine, NewGene, NGMBio, North Sea Therapeutics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Poxel, ProSciento, Raptor Pharma, Servier, Viking Therapeutics; and has received speaker fees from Abbott Laboratories, Allergan/Tobira, BMS, Clinical Care Options, Falk, Fishawack, Genfit, Gilead, Integritas Communications, MedScape. SAH has received research grants from Akero, Altimmune, Axcella-Cirius, CiVi Biopharma, Cymabay, Galectin, Genfit, Gilead Sciences, Hepion Pharmaceuticals, Hightide Therapeutics, Intercept, Madrigal, Metacrine, NGM Bio, Northsea Therapeutics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Poxel, Sagimet, and Viking; and has received consulting fees from Akero, Altimmune, Alentis, Arrowhead, Axcella, Echosens, Enyo, Foresite Labs, Galectin, Genfit, Gilead Sciences, Hepion, Hightide, HistoIndex, Intercept, Kowa, Madrigal, Metacrine, NeuroBo, NGM, Northsea, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Poxel, Perspectum, Sagimet, Terns, and Viking. MP is a shareholder of Perspectum. All other authors declared no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE), point shear wave elastography (pSWE), 2-dimensional shear wave elastography (2DSWE), magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have been proposed as non-invasive tests for patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). This study evaluated their diagnostic accuracy for liver fibrosis and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)., Methods: PubMED/MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies examining the diagnostic accuracy of these index tests, against histology as the reference standard, in adult patients with NAFLD. Two authors independently screened and assessed methodological quality of studies and extracted data. Summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (sAUC) were calculated for fibrosis stages and NASH, using a random effects bivariate logit-normal model., Results: We included 82 studies (14,609 patients). Meta-analysis for diagnosing fibrosis stages was possible in 53 VCTE, 11 MRE, 12 pSWE and 4 2DSWE studies, and for diagnosing NASH in 4 MRE studies. sAUC for diagnosis of significant fibrosis were: 0.83 for VCTE, 0.91 for MRE, 0.86 for pSWE and 0.75 for 2DSWE. sAUC for diagnosis of advanced fibrosis were: 0.85 for VCTE, 0.92 for MRE, 0.89 for pSWE and 0.72 for 2DSWE. sAUC for diagnosis of cirrhosis were: 0.89 for VCTE, 0.90 for MRE, 0.90 for pSWE and 0.88 for 2DSWE. MRE had sAUC of 0.83 for diagnosis of NASH. Three (4%) studies reported intention-to-diagnose analyses and 15 (18%) studies reported diagnostic accuracy against pre-specified cut-offs., Conclusions: When elastography index tests are acquired successfully, they have acceptable diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis. The potential clinical impact of these index tests cannot be assessed fully as intention-to-diagnose analyses and validation of pre-specified thresholds are lacking., Lay Summary: Non-invasive tests that measure liver stiffness or use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have been suggested as alternatives to liver biopsy for assessing the severity of liver scarring (fibrosis) and fatty inflammation (steatohepatitis) in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). In this study, we summarise the results of previously published studies on how accurately these non-invasive tests can diagnose liver fibrosis and inflammation, using liver biopsy as the reference. We found that some techniques that measure liver stiffness had a good performance for the diagnosis of severe liver scarring., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest EAS, FEM, MHZ, YV, JAL, CKL, LAJY, NP, CHL, GPA and PMB have nothing to declare. ANAJ, SN and MP are shareholders of Perspectum Ltd. MRG reports grant funding from Gilead Sciences and Intercept; consultancy from Allergan, Gilead Science, Intercept, Medimmune, Shionogi, ProSciento, Kaleido, Siemens, Abbvie, Novo Nordisk, Genfit and Zydus. MJB and TAT are shareholders and employees of Pfizer. QMA is coordinator of the IMI2 LITMUS consortium and he reports research grant funding from Abbvie, Allergan/Tobira, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Glympse Bio, Novartis Pharma AG, Pfizer Ltd., Vertex; consultancy on behalf of Newcastle University for Abbott Laboratories, Acuitas Medical, Allergan/Tobira, Blade, BNN Cardio, Cirius, CymaBay, EcoR1, E3Bio, Eli Lilly & Company Ltd., Galmed, Genfit SA, Gilead, Grunthal, HistoIndex, Indalo, Imperial Innovations, Intercept Pharma Europe Ltd., Inventiva, IQVIA, Janssen, Kenes, Madrigal, MedImmune, Metacrine, NewGene, NGMBio, North Sea Therapeutics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/S, Pfizer Ltd., Poxel, ProSciento, Raptor Pharma, Servier, Viking Therapeutics; and speaker fees from Abbott Laboratories, Allergan/Tobira, BMS, Clinical Care Options, Falk, Fishawack, Genfit SA, Gilead, Integritas Communications, MedScape. SAH has research grants from Akero, Axcella, Cirius, CiVi Biopharma, Cymabay, Galectin, Galmed, Genfit, Gilead Sciences, Hepion Pharmaceuticals, Hightide Therapeutics, Intercept, Madrigal, Metacrine, NGM Bio, Northsea Therapeutics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Poxel, Sagimet, Viking. He has received consulting fees from Akero, Altimmune, Alentis, Arrowhead, Axcella, Canfite, Cirius, CiVi, Cymabay, Echosens, Enyo, Fibronostics, Foresite Labs, Fortress Biotech, Galectin, Genfit, Gilead Sciences, Hepion, HIghtide, HistoIndex, Intercept, Kowa, Madrigal, Metacrine, NGM, Northsea, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Poxel, Prometic, Ridgeline, Sagimet, Terns, and Viking. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endoscopy within 24 h of admission (early endoscopy) is a quality standard in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB). We aimed to audit time to endoscopy outcomes and identify factors affecting delayed endoscopy (>24 h of admission)., Methods: This prospective multicentre audit enrolled patients admitted with AUGIB who underwent inpatient endoscopy between November and December 2017. Analyses were performed to identify factors associated with delayed endoscopy, and to compare patient outcomes, including length of stay and mortality rates, between early and delayed endoscopy groups., Results: Across 348 patients from 20 centres, the median time to endoscopy was 21.2 h (IQR 12.0-35.7), comprising median admission to referral and referral to endoscopy times of 8.1 h (IQR 3.7-18.1) and 6.7 h (IQR 3.0-23.1), respectively. Early endoscopy was achieved in 58.9%, although this varied by centre (range: 31.0-87.5%, p = 0.002). On multivariable analysis, lower Glasgow-Blatchford score, delayed referral, admissions between 7:00 and 19:00 hours or via the emergency department were independent predictors of delayed endoscopy. Early endoscopy was associated with reduced length of stay (median difference 1 d; p = 0.004), but not 30-d mortality (p = 0.344)., Conclusions: The majority of centres did not meet national standards for time to endoscopy. Strategic initiatives involving acute care services may be necessary to improve this outcome.

Background & Aims: Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement is currently the only validated technique to accurately evaluate changes in portal pressure. In this study, we evaluate the use of non-contrast quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a surrogate measure of portal pressure., Methods: Thirty patients undergoing HVPG measurement were prospectively recruited. MR parameters of longitudinal relaxation time (T 1 ), perfusion of the liver and spleen (by arterial spin labelling), and blood flow in the portal, splanchnic and collateral circulation (by phase contrast MRI) were assessed. We estimated the liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) score. The correlation of all non-invasive parameters with HVPG was evaluated., Results: The mean (range) HVPG of the patients was 9.8 (1-22) mmHg, and 14 patients (48%) had clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH, HVPG ⩾10mmHg). Liver T 1 relaxation time, splenic artery and superior mesenteric artery velocity correlated significantly with HVPG. Using multiple linear regression, liver T 1 and splenic artery velocity remained as the two parameters in the multivariate model significantly associated with HVPG (R=0.90, p<0.001). This correlation was maintained in patients with CSPH (R=0.85, p<0.001). A validation cohort (n=10) showed this linear model provided a good prediction of HVPG. LSM and ELF score correlated significantly with HVPG in the whole population but the correlation was absent in CSPH., Conclusions: MR parameters related to both hepatic architecture and splanchnic haemodynamics correlate significantly with HVPG. This proposed model, confirmed in a validation cohort, could replace the invasive HVPG measurement., Lay Summary: In patients with cirrhosis, the development and progression of portal hypertension is related to worse outcomes. However, the standard technique of assessing portal pressure is invasive and not widely used in clinical practice. Here, we have studied the use of non-invasive MRI in evaluating portal pressure. The MRI measures of liver architecture and blood flow in the splenic artery correlated well with portal pressure. Therefore, this non-invasive method can potentially be used to assess portal pressure in clinical trials and monitoring treatment in practice., (Copyright © 2016 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Liver biopsy is the standard test for the assessment of fibrosis in liver tissue of patients with chronic liver disease. Recent studies have used a non-invasive measure of T1 relaxation time to estimate the degree of fibrosis in a single slice of the liver. Here, we extend this work to measure T1 of the whole liver and investigate the effects of additional histological factors such as steatosis, inflammation and iron accumulation on the relationship between liver T1 and fibrosis. We prospectively enrolled patients who had previously undergone liver biopsy to have MR scans. A non-breath-holding, fast scanning protocol was used to acquire MR relaxation time data (T1 and T2*), and blood serum was used to determine the enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) score. Areas under the receiver operator curves (AUROCs) for T1 to detect advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis were derived in a training cohort and then validated in a second cohort. Combining the cohorts, the influence of various histology factors on liver T1 relaxation time was investigated. The AUROCs (95% confidence interval (CI)) for detecting advanced fibrosis (F ≥ 3) and cirrhosis (F = 4) for the training cohort were 0.81 (0.65-0.96) and 0.92 (0.81-1.0) respectively (p < 0.01). Inflammation and iron accumulation were shown to significantly alter T1 in opposing directions in the absence of advanced fibrosis; inflammation increasing T1 and iron decreasing T1. A decision tree model was developed to allow the assessment of early liver disease based on relaxation times and ELF, and to screen for the need for biopsy. T1 relaxation time increases with advanced fibrosis in liver patients, but is also influenced by iron accumulation and inflammation. Together with ELF, relaxation time measures provide a marker to stratify patients with suspected liver disease for biopsy., (Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)