1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. References

Watch the interview with the authors

Watch the video presentation of this article

Current guidelines emphasize the importance of liver biopsy in the management of patients with hepatitis C because liver histology provides patients and their physicians with important prognostic information and helps to guide therapy decisions and treatment regimens.1,2 Recent improvements in antiviral therapy along with the development of alternate modes of evaluating fibrosis have led to a global reassessment of the risks and benefits and the overall wisdom of performing liver biopsy in these patients.

The presence of advanced or worsening fibrosis has traditionally served as an unequivocal indication for therapy,3 and clinicians still use the degree of fibrosis as a means for justifying therapy sooner rather than later. The availability of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents, which bring the promise of rapid viral negativity with therapy, intuitively appears to lessen the need for biopsy in therapeutic decision making; this is analogous to previously held perceptions about genotype 2/3 patients, who had higher sustained virological response (SVR) rates. Because of the increased efficacy of the newer regimens and even better regimens around the corner, clinicians and patients may choose to forgo biopsy with the compelling argument that the benefits of such effective therapy justify its use, even in those with minimal disease.

On the basis of the results of pivotal registration trials, the US Food and Drug Administration has suggested that therapy with DAA agents mandates an assessment of the degree of fibrosis because of the vastly different therapeutic regimens for patients with more advanced fibrosis. The recommended treatment with peginterferon/ribavirin and either telaprevir or boceprevir must be longer (48 weeks) because of the consistently lower efficacy of the therapy in patients with cirrhosis2 (Figs. 1–3). Accordingly, an assessment of the degree of fibrosis is crucial before the initiation of therapy. Treatment with interferon and ribavirin has led to higher rates of adverse events, including anemia, in the face of cirrhosis,8,9 and this information must be discussed with patients with cirrhosis before the initiation of current DAA-based therapies that include peginterferon and ribavirin.

thumbnail image

Figure 1. SVR rates by the degree of fibrosis in the ADVANCE and ILLUMINATE studies. Abbreviations: ITT, intention to treat; PR48, peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks; T12PR, telaprevir for 12 weeks and peginterferon/ribavirin. Adapted with permission from New England Journal of Medicine.4, 5

Download figure to PowerPoint

thumbnail image

Figure 2. SVR rates for patients with bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis in the Serine Protease Inhibitor Therapy 2 trial. Abbreviations: BOC44, boceprevir for 44 weeks; BOC RGT, boceprevir and response-guided therapy; PR48, peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks. Adapted with permission from Journal of Hepatology.6

Download figure to PowerPoint

thumbnail image

Figure 3. SVR rates by the degree of fibrosis in the REALIZE trial. Abbreviations: Pbo, placebo; PR48, peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks; T12/PR48, telaprevir for 12 weeks and peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks. Adapted with permission from the European Association for the Study of the Liver.7

Download figure to PowerPoint

In comparison with peginterferon/ribavirin dual therapy, the telaprevir- and boceprevir-based regimens have superior efficacy,4,10-14 but the field is moving forward quite rapidly, and we are currently learning about (1) far more potent DAA agents with better pharmacokinetic profiles, (2) interferon-sparing regiments, and (3) SVR rates approaching 100%. Thus, there is the likelihood that superior regimens will become available over the next few years. As physicians and patients with hepatitis C virus ponder their options, information obtained from liver biopsy samples may greatly assist in the decision to wait yet longer for future regimens with improved efficacy, shorter durations, and lower side-effect profiles.

The establishment of the fibrosis stage remains a key parameter that guides the management of patients with chronic hepatitis C. The presence of advanced fibrosis requires future lifelong screening for the development of varices and hepatocellular carcinoma, regardless of future responses to antiviral therapy. Unfortunately, an all-too-common scenario in clinical practice is the patient with known or unknown hepatitis C who learns of his cirrhosis only after the discovery of liver cancer or a large variceal bleed. Advanced fibrosis may exist in patients with normal liver enzyme levels and synthetic parameters.15 The identification of fibrosis at biopsy can be used as a realistic justification for encouraging reduced alcohol intake and weight reduction, which are factors that would otherwise accelerate the progression to cirrhosis.16-21

For the post–liver transplant patient with chronic hepatitis C, liver biopsy information is essential not only for assessing patients for fibrosis but also for differentiating between recurrent hepatitis C–induced inflammation and acute cellular rejection. Accelerated fibrosis progression in the posttransplant patient with chronic hepatitis C leads to graft loss in up to 30% of infected patients.22-24 Preemptive antiviral therapy without the guidance of biopsy information is often precluded by cytopenias, renal insufficiency, increased side effects, and the possibility of rejection.25,26 Current guidelines suggest the initiation of therapy only after the demonstration of significant cholestasis or fibrosis on liver biopsy.1,27 Accordingly, the information gained from liver biopsy, including the demonstration of either fibrosis progression or a lack of rejection, before the institution of antiviral therapy is vital to the posttransplant care of the hepatitis C patient.

The risks of liver biopsy include severe pain, organ perforation, and bleeding.28,29 This potential for complications has generated an increasing acceptance of alternative assessments of hepatic fibrosis, especially in patients with hepatitis C (Table 1). Unfortunately, for many such panels, availability, third-party payment, or widespread clinical consensus is lacking. Fibrosis related to chronic hepatitis C progresses slowly (on average 0.15 stages per year30), and a feasible alternative to liver biopsy must be able to measure this progression over time. Evaluations using standard laboratory tests, including the aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio, the cirrhosis discriminant score, the age-platelet index, the Pohl score, the aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index, and platelet counts, lack either the sensitivity or the specificity needed to be useful in clinical practice.31,34,35 In addition, these noninvasive fibrosis markers may have reduced performance in hepatitis C patients with normal alanine aminotransferase levels.36 Larger test panels, including Hepascore, Liverscore, and FibroTest, have high potential for false-positive results and are not readily available in clinical practice.32,37-39 These laboratory tests and panels have not reliably detected intermediate stages of fibrosis or the progression of fibrosis, and this is valuable information for clinical decision making.30,40 Transient elastography produces suboptimal results in obese patients and in tracking changes in fibrosis.41-43 The reproducibility of transient elastography is significantly reduced (P < 0.05) in patients with steatosis, an increased body mass index, or lower degrees of hepatic fibrosis.

Table 1. Noninvasive Markers for Liver Histological Assessments (Including Tests for Fibrosis, Necroinflammation, and Steatosis)
TestComponentsSensitivity/Specificity for Advanced Fibrosis (%/%)
  1. The data for this table were taken from Rockey and Bissell,30 Lackner et al.,31 Adams et al.,32 Sanai and Keeffe,33 and Sebastiani et al.36

  2. Abbreviations: A2M, alpha-2-macroglobulin; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase; HA, hyaluronic acid; INR, international normalized ratio; PIIINP, amino-terminal propeptide of type III collagen; TIMP1, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1.

FibroTest-ActiTestAge, sex, A2M, GGT, haptoglobin, total bilirubin, apolipoprotein A1, ALT87/59
FIBROSpect IIHA, TIMP1, A2M83/66
European Liver Fibrosis Group algorithmAge, PIIINP, HA, TIMP190/41
FibroMeterAge, sex, A2M, HA, platelet count, AST, prothrombin82/−
HepascoreAge, sex, HA, A2M, GGT67/92
AST-to-platelet ratio indexAST, platelet count41/95
AST/ALT ratioAST, ALT53/100
Forns indexAge, platelet count, GGT, cholesterol94/51
Pohl scoreAST, ALT, platelets18/98
Age-platelet indexAge, platelet count68/55
Cirrhosis discriminant scoreAST, ALT, platelet count, INR10/100
Fibrosis prediction indexAge, AST, cholesterol, past alcohol use, insulin resistance85/48
FibroScanHepatic transient elastography64/87
FIB-4Age, AST, ALT, platelet count71/65

Percutaneous liver biopsy is considered the gold standard for histology assessment, yet it has a widely recognized sampling error rate as high as 20% for the detection of encircling fibrotic nodules with the evaluation of just 1/50,000 of the total organ.44 Such samples can be useful only if there are an adequate number of complete portal tracts, and with a length of 2 cm and a width of 1.4 mm, this goal is often not achieved in clinical practice. Moreover, the discordance between biopsy samples taken from right and left lobes further demonstrates the inherent limitations of this time-honored diagnostic test.44,47 Despite these challenges, a liver biopsy sample from a patient with hepatitis C in the new antiviral era remains a source of invaluable information. This information can be combined with available clinical and laboratory evidence (often surrogate markers with their own inherent limitations) to best serve the patient. A physician's or patient's reluctance to undertake the risks of biopsy should not represent a contraindication to antiviral therapy but rather should serve as the basis for a discussion of our limitations in assessing liver function and disease severity.


  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. References
  • 1
    Ghany MG, Strader DB, Thomas DL, Seeff LB. Diagnosis, management, and treatment of hepatitis C: an update. Hepatology 2009; 49: 1335-1374.
  • 2
    Ghany MG, Nelson DR, Strader DB, Thomas DL, Seeff LB. An update on treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C virus infection: 2011 practice guidelines by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology 2011; 54: 1433-1444.
  • 3
    National Institutes of Health. National Institutes of Health consensus development conference statement: management of hepatitis C: 2002—June 10-12, 2002. Hepatology 2002; 36( suppl 1): S3-S20.
  • 4
    Jacobson IM, McHutchison JG, Dusheiko G, Di Bisceglie AM, Reddy KR, Bzowej NH, et al.; for ADVANCE Study Team. Telaprevir for previously untreated chronic hepatitis C virus infection. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 2405-2416.
  • 5
    Sherman KE, Flamm SL, Afdhal NH, Nelson DR, Sulkowski MS, Everson GT, et al.; for ILLUMINATE Study Team. Response-guided telaprevir combination treatment for hepatitis C virus infection. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1014-1024.
  • 6
    Bruno S, Vierling JM, Esteban R, Nyberg LM, et al. Boceprevir in addition to standard of care enhanced SVR in hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype-1 with advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis: subgroup analysis of SPRINT-2 and RESPOND-2 studies. J Hepatol 2011; 54: S4.
  • 7
    Zeuzem S, Andreone P, Pol S, Lawitz EJ, Diago M, Roberts S, et al. REALIZE trial final results: telaprevir-based regimen for genotype 1 hepatitis C virus infection in patients with prior null response, partial response or relapse to peginterferon/ribavirin. Paper presented at: EASL 46th Annual Meeting; March 30-April 3, 2011; Berlin, Germany.
  • 8
    Heathcote EJ, Shiffman ML, Cooksley WG, Dusheiko GM, Lee SS, Balart L, et al. Peginterferon alfa-2a in patients with chronic hepatitis C and cirrhosis. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1673-1680.
  • 9
    Helbling B, Jochum W, Stamenic I, Knopfli M, Cerny A, Borovicka J, et al. HCV-related advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis: randomized controlled trial of pegylated interferon alpha-2a and ribavirin. J Viral Hepatol 2006; 13: 762-769.
  • 10
    Kwo PY, Lawitz EJ, McCone J, Schiff ER, Vierling JM, Pound D, et al. Efficacy of boceprevir, an NS3 protease inhibitor, in combination with peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin in treatment-naive patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C infection (SPRINT-1): an open-label, randomised, multicentre phase 2 trial. Lancet 2010; 376: 705-716.
  • 11
    Poordad F, McCone J, Bacon BR, Bruno S, Manns MP, Sulkowski MS, et al. Boceprevir for untreated chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 1195-1206.
  • 12
    Bacon BR, Gordon SC, Lawitz E, Marcellin P, Vierling JM, Zeuzem S, et al. Boceprevir for previously treated chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 1207-1217.
  • 13
    McHutchison JG, Everson GT, Gordon SC, Jacobson IM, Sulkowski M, Kauffman R, et al. Telaprevir with peginterferon and ribavirin for chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1827-1838.
  • 14
    Hézode C, Forestier N, Dusheiko G, Ferenci P, Pol S, Goeser T, et al. Telaprevir and peginterferon with or without ribavirin for chronic HCV infection. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1839-1850.
  • 15
    Shiffman ML, Diago M, Tran A, Pockros P, Reindollar R, Prati D, et al. Chronic hepatitis C in patients with persistently normal alanine transaminase levels. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 4: 645-652.
  • 16
    Powell EE, Jonsson JR, Clouston AD. Steatosis: co-factor in other liver diseases. Hepatology 2005; 42: 5-13.
  • 17
    Hourigan LF, Macdonald GA, Purdie D, Whitehall VH, Shorthouse C, Clouston A, et al. Fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C correlates significantly with body mass index and steatosis. Hepatology 1999; 29: 1215-1219.
  • 18
    Adinolfi LE, Gambardella M, Andreana A, Tripodi MF, Utili R, Ruggiero G. Steatosis accelerates the progression of liver damage of chronic hepatitis C patients and correlates with specific HCV genotype and visceral obesity. Hepatology 2001; 33: 1358-1364.
  • 19
    Westin J, Nordlinder H, Lagging M, Norkrans G, Wejstal R. Steatosis accelerates fibrosis development over time in hepatitis C virus genotype 3 infected patients. J Hepatol 2002; 37: 837-842.
  • 20
    Younossi ZM, McCullough AJ, Ong JP, Barnes DS, Post A, Tavill A, et al. Obesity and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in chronic hepatitis C. J Clin Gastroenterol 2004; 38: 705-709.
  • 21
    Everhart JE, Lok AS, Kim HY, Morgan TR, Lindsay KL, Chung RT, et al.; for HALT-C Trial Group. Weight-related effects on disease progression in the hepatitis C antiviral long-term treatment against cirrhosis trial. Gastroenterology 2009; 137: 549-557.
  • 22
    Ghobrial RM, Steadman R, Gornbein J, Lassman C, Holt CD, Chen P, et al. A 10-year experience of liver transplantation for hepatitis C: analysis of factors determining outcome in over 500 patients. Ann Surg 2001; 234: 384-393.
  • 23
    Neumann UP, Berg T, Bahra M, Puhl G, Guckelberger O, Langrehr JM, et al. Long-term outcome of liver transplants for chronic hepatitis C: a 10-year follow-up. Transplantation 2004; 77: 226-231.
  • 24
    Neumann UP, Berg T, Bahra M, Seehofer D, Langrehr JM, Neuhaus R, et al. Fibrosis progression after liver transplantation in patients with recurrent hepatitis C. J Hepatol 2004; 41: 830-836.
  • 25
    Yilmaz N, Shiffman ML, Stravitz RT, Sterling RK, Luketic VA, Sanyal AJ, et al. A prospective evaluation of fibrosis progression in patients with recurrent hepatitis C virus following liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2007; 13: 975-983.
  • 26
    Mazzaferro V, Tagger A, Schiavo M, Regalia E, Pulvirenti A, Ribero ML, et al. Prevention of recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation with early interferon and ribavirin treatment. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 1355-1357.
  • 27
    Sugawara Y, Makuuchi M, Matsui Y, Kishi Y, Akamatsu N, Kaneko J, et al. Preemptive therapy for hepatitis C virus after living-donor liver transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 78: 1308-1311.
  • 28
    Piccinino F, Sagnelli E, Pasquale G, Giusti G. Complications following percutaneous liver biopsy. A multicentre retrospective study on 68,276 biopsies. J Hepatol 1986; 2: 165-173.
  • 29
    Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD. Liver biopsy. Hepatology 2009; 49: 1017-1044.
  • 30
    Rockey DC, Bissell MD. Noninvasive measures of liver fibrosis. Hepatology 2006; 43: S113-S120.
  • 31
    Lackner C, Struber G, Liegl B, Leibl S, Ofner P, Bankuti C, et al. Comparison and validation of simple noninvasive tests for prediction of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 2005; 41: 1376-1382.
  • 32
    Adams LA, Bulsara M, Rossi E, DeBoer B, Speers D, George J, et al. Hepascore: an accurate validated predictor of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C infection. Clin Chem 2005; 51: 1867-1873.
  • 33
    Sanai FM, Keeffe EB. Liver biopsy for histological assessment—the case against. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 124-132.
  • 34
    Forns X, Ampurdanes S, Llovet JM, Aponte J, Quinto L, Martinez-Bauer E, et al. Identification of chronic hepatitis C patients without hepatic fibrosis by a simple predictive model. Hepatology 2002; 36: 986-992.
  • 35
    Sud A, Hui JM, Farrell GC, Bandara P, Kench JG, Fung C, et al. Improved prediction of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C using measures of insulin resistance in a probability index. Hepatology 2004; 39: 1239-1247.
  • 36
    Sebastiani G, Castera L, Halfon P, Pol S, Mangia A, Di Marco V, et al. The impact of liver disease aetiology and the stages of hepatic fibrosis on the performance of non-invasive fibrosis biomarkers: an international study of 2411 cases. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2011; 34: 1202-1216.
  • 37
    Imbert-Bismut F, Ratziu V, Pieroni L, Charlotte F, Benhamou Y, Poynard T. Biochemical markers of liver fibrosis in patients with hepatitis C virus infection: a prospective study. Lancet 2001; 357: 1069-1075.
  • 38
    Arain SA, Jamal Q, Omair A. “Liverscore” is predictive of both liver fibrosis and activity in chronic hepatitis C. World J Gastroenterol 2011; 17: 4607-4613.
  • 39
    Shaheen AA, Wan AF, Myers RP. FibroTest and FibroScan for the prediction of hepatitis C-related fibrosis: a systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 2589-2600.
    Direct Link:
  • 40
    Poynard T, McHutchison J, Manns M, Myers RP, Albrecht J. Biochemical surrogate markers of liver fibrosis and activity in a randomized trial of peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin. Hepatology 2003; 38: 481-492.
  • 41
    Ziol M, Handra-Luca A, Kettaneh A, Christidis C, Mal F, Kazemi F, et al. Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis by measurement of stiffness in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 2005; 41: 48-54.
  • 42
    Castera L, Vergniol J, Foucher J, Le Bail B, Chanteloup E, Haaser M, et al. Prospective comparison of transient elastography, FibroTest, APRI, and liver biopsy for the assessment of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Gastroenterology 2005; 128: 343-350.
  • 43
    Fraquelli M, Rigamonti C, Casazza G, Conte D, Donato MF, Ronchi G, et al. Reproducibility of transient elastography in the evaluation of liver fibrosis in patients with chronic liver disease. Gut 2007; 56: 968-973.
  • 44
    Regev A, Berho M, Jeffers LJ, Milikowski C, Molina EG, Pyrsopoulos NT, et al. Sampling error and intraobserver variation in liver biopsy in patients with chronic HCV infection. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 2614-2618.
    Direct Link:
  • 45
    Schlichting P, Hølund B, Poulsen H. Liver biopsy in chronic aggressive hepatitis. Diagnostic reproducibility in relation to size of specimen. Scand J Gastroenterol 1983; 18: 27-32.
  • 46
    Colloredo G, Guido M, Sonzogni A, Leandro G. Impact of liver biopsy size on histological evaluation of chronic viral hepatitis: the smaller the sample, the milder the disease. J Hepatol 2003; 39: 239-244.
  • 47
    Siddique I, El-Naga HA, Madda JP, Memon A, Hasan F. Sampling variability on percutaneous liver biopsy in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection. Scand J Gastroenterol 2003; 38: 427-432.