Association between the non-treatment threshold or upper limit of normal of alanine aminotransferase and liver pathological injury in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection and a persistently low level of alanine aminotransferase
- VernacularTitle:ALT持续低水平慢性HBV感染者中ALT不治疗阈值或正常值上限与肝脏病理损伤的关系
- Author:
Ming SHU
1
;
Suwen JIANG
1
;
Airong HU
1
;
Qin CHEN
1
;
Jialan WANG
2
;
Menghan JIN
3
;
Haojin ZHANG
4
;
Shiqi YANG
2
;
Shiyang FAN
4
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords: Hepatitis B， Chronic; Alanine Transaminase; Threshold Limit Values
- From: Journal of Clinical Hepatology 2025;41(10):2044-2053
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
- Abstract: ObjectiveTo investigate the significance of different non-treatment thresholds or upper limits of normal （ULN） of alanine aminotransferase （ALT） in evaluating significant liver pathological injury in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus （HBV） infection， and to provide guidance for clinical diagnosis and treatment. MethodsThis study was conducted among 733 patients with chronic HBV infection who were hospitalized in Ningbo No. 2 Hospital from January 2015 to December 2023 and underwent liver biopsy and histopathological examination， and all patients had a persistent ALT level of ≤40 U/L and positive HBV DNA （>30 IU/mL）. According to the treatment threshold or ULN of ALT， the patients were divided into group 1 with 575 patients （≤35 U/L for male patients， ≤25 U/L for female patients）， group 2 with 430 patients （≤30 U/L for male patients， ≤19 U/L for female patients）， group 3 with 443 patients （≤27 U/L for male patients， ≤24 U/L for female patients）， group 4 with 446 patients （≤25 U/L）， group 5 with 158 patients （>35 U/L for male patients， >25 U/L for female patients）， and group 6 with 145 patients （>30 — ≤35 U/L for male patients， >19 — ≤25 U/L for female patients）. Groups 2， 5， and 6 were compared to analyze the severity of liver pathological injury in patients with different ALT levels and the constituent ratio of patients with significant liver pathological injury， and groups 1， 2， 3， and 4 were compared to investigate the value of different ULN or non-treatment thresholds of ALT in determining liver inflammation grade （G）， liver fibrosis stage （S）， and the treatment indication based on liver pathology. The independent-samples t test was used for comparison of normally distributed continuous data between two groups； a one-way analysis of variance was used for comparison between multiple groups， and the least significant difference t-test or the Tambane’s test was used for further comparison between two groups； the Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparison of non-normally distributed continuous data between two groups， and the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used for comparison between multiple groups and further comparison between two groups； the chi-square test or the Fisher’s exact test was used for comparison of categorical data between groups； a Ridit analysis was used for comparison of ranked data. A multivariate Logistic regression analysis （forward stepwise） was performed with whether liver pathology met the treatment indication （≥G2 and/or ≥S2） as the dependent variable and related factors with a significant impact on the dependent variable （P <0.05） as the independent variable. The receiver operating characteristic （ROC） curve was plotted， and the area under the ROC curve （AUC）， as well as sensitivity， specificity， positive predictive value， negative predictive value， positive likelihood ratio， and negative likelihood ratio， was used to assess the diagnostic value of different non-treatment thresholds of ALT. ResultsAmong the 733 patients， 259 （35.33%） had ≥G2 liver inflammation， 211 （28.79%） had ≥S2 liver fibrosis， and 306 （41.75%） had treatment indication （≥G2 and/or ≥S2）. There was a significant difference in liver inflammation grade （G0 — G4） between groups 2， 5， and 6 （χ2=22.869， P <0.001）， and there were also significant differences in the constituent ratios of patients with ≥G2 or ≥G3 liver inflammation between the three groups （χ2=21.742 and 14.921， P<0.001 and P=0.001）. There was a significant difference in liver fibrosis stage （S0 — S4） between groups 2， 5， and 6 （χ2=16.565， P<0.001）， and there were also significant differences in the constituent ratios of patients with ≥S2， ≥S3 or S4 liver fibrosis between the three groups （χ2=13.264， 13.050， and 6.260， P=0.001， 0.001， and 0.044）. There were significant differences between groups 2， 5， and 6 in the constituent ratios of patients with or without treatment indication based on liver pathology （χ2=20.728， P<0.001）. There were significant differences between groups 2， 5， and 6 in the constituent ratio of male patients （χ2=24.836， P<0.05）， age （F=5.710， P<0.05）， ALT （F=473.193， P<0.05）， aspartate aminotransferase （AST） （F=107.774， P<0.05）， ALT/AST ratio （F=40.167， P<0.05）， γ-glutamyl transpeptidase （GGT） （H=15.463， P<0.05）， aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index （APRI） （H=63.024， P<0.05）， and LIF-5 （5 indicators for liver inflammation and fibrosis） （H=46.397， P<0.05）. In groups 1 — 4， compared with the patients without treatment indication， the patients with treatment indication had a significantly lower constituent ratio of patients with positive HBeAg， significantly lower levels of platelet count （PLT） and HBV DNA， and significantly higher age， ALT， AST， GGT， APRI， FIB-4， and LIF-5 （all P<0.05）. The Logistic regression analysis showed that age （odds ratio ［OR］=1.044， 95% confidence interval ［CI］： 1.025 — 1.063， P<0.001）， GGT （OR=1.022， 95%CI： 1.007 — 1.038， P=0.003）， and HBV DNA （OR=0.839， 95%CI： 0.765 — 0.919， P<0.001） were influencing factors for treatment indication based on liver pathology in group 1； HBeAg （OR=1.978， 95%CI： 1.269 — 3.082， P=0.003）， age （OR=1.048， 95%CI： 1.025 — 1.071， P<0.001）， GGT （OR=1.016， 95%CI： 1.001 — 1.031， P=0.041）， and PLT （OR=0.995， 95%CI： 0.991 — 1.000， P=0.049） were influencing factors in group 2； age （OR=1.040， 95%CI： 1.014 — 1.066， P=0.002）， ALT （OR=1.047， 95%CI： 1.005 — 1.092， P=0.029）， HBV DNA （OR=0.817， 95%CI： 0.736 — 0.907， P<0.001）， and LIF-5 （OR=7.382， 95%CI： 1.151 — 47.330， P=0.035） were influencing factors in group 3； age （OR=1.054， 95%CI： 1.031 — 1.077， P<0.001）， ALT （OR=1.061， 95%CI： 1.016 — 1.107， P=0.008）， and HBV DNA （OR=0.825， 95%CI： 0.743 — 0.917， P<0.001） were influencing factors in group 4. The diagnostic performance for identifying ≥G2 liver inflammation， ≥S2 liver fibrosis， and treatment indication in groups 1 — 4 had an AUC of >0.7； group 1 showed the lowest sensitivity （28.76%） and the highest specificity， positive predictive value， positive likelihood ratio， and negative likelihood ratio in judging treatment indication； group 2 had the highest sensitivity and negative predictive value and the lowest negative likelihood ratio； groups 3 and 4 had similar diagnostic indicators. ConclusionIn patients with chronic HBV infection and a persistently low ALT level， the severity of liver histopathological injury and the constituent ratio of significant liver histopathological injury decrease with the reduction in ALT level. A higher non-treatment threshold or ULN of ALT can help to identify the patients requiring treatment （with a higher specificity）， while a lower non-treatment threshold or ULN of ALT can help to identify the patients who do not require treatment （with a higher sensitivity）.
