See Editorial on Page 1877
Steatohepatitis/Metabolic Liver Disease
Utility of magnetic resonance imaging versus histology for quantifying changes in liver fat in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease trials
Version of Record online: 17 OCT 2013
© 2013 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases
Volume 58, Issue 6, pages 1930–1940, December 2013
How to Cite
Noureddin, M., Lam, J., Peterson, M. R., Middleton, M., Hamilton, G., Le, T.-A., Bettencourt, R., Changchien, C., Brenner, D. A., Sirlin, C. and Loomba, R. (2013), Utility of magnetic resonance imaging versus histology for quantifying changes in liver fat in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease trials. Hepatology, 58: 1930–1940. doi: 10.1002/hep.26455
The funding agencies did not have any role in the design or conduct of the study; in the collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; or in the preparation, review, or approval of the article.
Potential conflict of interest: Dr. Sirlin consults for Bayer. Dr. Middleton received grants from Isis, Genzyme, Sanofi, Merck, GE, Siemens, Gilead, Pfizer, Synageva, Biomedical Systems, Bioclinica, Profil, and Takeda
- Issue online: 26 NOV 2013
- Version of Record online: 17 OCT 2013
- Accepted manuscript online: 20 MAY 2013 02:25PM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 9 APR 2013
- Manuscript Received: 19 DEC 2012
- Clinical and Translational Research Institute of the University of California San Diego
- American Gastroenterological Association Foundation/Sucampo/Association of Specialty Professors Designated Research Award in Geriatric Gastroenterology
- Atlantic Philanthropies, Inc., the John A. Hartford Foundation, the Association of Specialty Professors, the American Gastroenterological Association. Grant Number: K23-DK090303
Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online version of this article.
|hep26455-sup-0001-suppfig1.pptx||1008K||Supporting Figure 1: Regression plots (slope and intercept) between MRI-PDFF and MRS-PDFF at baseline and week 24: Scatterplots of MRI versus MRS. Redline represents the best fit through the data points and the great line represent the null hypotheses (intercept=0, slope =1) . The regression intercept and slope and their 95% confidence intervals are shown. * is significance from intercept 0 or slope 1 according to two tail t test α=0.05. At baseline MRI underestimated MRS by 3% with small bias in the slope. At week 24 MRI underestimated MRS by 1% with a small bias as well. The difference in the slope and intercept is relatively small 3% and 1% and likely clinically irrelevant|
Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.