Review Article: Fibrosis‐4 Index in Steatotic Liver Disease—Past, Present and Future

ABSTRACT Background Steatotic liver disease (SLD) is highly prevalent, and fibrosis stage is the strongest determinant of liver‐related outcomes, hepatocellular carcinoma and mortality. Liver biopsy remains the reference standard for staging, but it is invasive, subject to sampling and observer variability. These limitations have accelerated the use of noninvasive tests (NITs) across various settings. Aims This review summarizes the past, present and future of the Fibrosis‐4 (FIB‐4) index in SLD. Methods We reviewed the development of serum‐based fibrosis assessment, validation of FIB‐4 across SLD subtypes, its incorporation into clinical pathways, real‐world performance and potential role in precision therapy and longitudinal risk assessment. Results Initially derived in patients with HIV/hepatitis C coinfection using age, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and platelet count, FIB‐4 has since been validated across SLD populations. FIB‐4 generally provides moderate discrimination for advanced fibrosis and high negative predictive value (NPV) when used with dual thresholds and age‐adjusted cutoffs. Modern care pathways operationalize FIB‐4 as the first‐line triage test, followed by transient elastography or another second line test for indeterminate or elevated results, with specialty referral and selective biopsy reserved for diagnostic uncertainty or discordant testing. Conclusions In the precision therapy era, FIB‐4 remains a scalable front‐door test but should not serve as a stand‐alone selector for drug eligibility; confirmatory staging is required to identify F2–F3 disease and exclude cirrhosis. Future directions include trajectory‐based monitoring, integration with elastography and multi‐analyte biomarkers, and selective layering of genetic risk to refine prognosis in intermediate and high‐risk strata.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Published
2026-10-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.71037
Primary Topic
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Review Article: Fibrosis‐4 Index in Steatotic Liver Disease—Past, Present and Future

Vinay Jahagirdar, Luis Antonio Díaz, Juan Pablo Arab, Richard K. Sterling et al.
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Review Article: Fibrosis‐4 Index in Steatotic Liver Disease—Past, Present and Future

Vinay Jahagirdar, Luis Antonio Díaz, Juan Pablo Arab, Richard K. Sterling, Kriti Soni, Omar Albhaisi, Hanna Blaney
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Steatotic liver disease (SLD) is highly prevalent, and fibrosis stage is the strongest determinant of liver‐related outcomes, hepatocellular carcinoma and mortality. Liver biopsy remains the reference standard for staging, but it is invasive, subject to sampling and observer variability. These limitations have accelerated the use of noninvasive tests (NITs) across various settings. Aims This review summarizes the past, present and future of the Fibrosis‐4 (FIB‐4) index in SLD. Methods We reviewed the development of serum‐based fibrosis assessment, validation of FIB‐4 across SLD subtypes, its incorporation into clinical pathways, real‐world performance and potential role in precision therapy and longitudinal risk assessment. Results Initially derived in patients with HIV/hepatitis C coinfection using age, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and platelet count, FIB‐4 has since been validated across SLD populations. FIB‐4 generally provides moderate discrimination for advanced fibrosis and high negative predictive value (NPV) when used with dual thresholds and age‐adjusted cutoffs. Modern care pathways operationalize FIB‐4 as the first‐line triage test, followed by transient elastography or another second line test for indeterminate or elevated results, with specialty referral and selective biopsy reserved for diagnostic uncertainty or discordant testing. Conclusions In the precision therapy era, FIB‐4 remains a scalable front‐door test but should not serve as a stand‐alone selector for drug eligibility; confirmatory staging is required to identify F2–F3 disease and exclude cirrhosis. Future directions include trajectory‐based monitoring, integration with elastography and multi‐analyte biomarkers, and selective layering of genetic risk to refine prognosis in intermediate and high‐risk strata.

Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (CL), Virginia Commonwealth University (US), University of California San Diego (US), University of California San Diego Medical Center (US), Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.