Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: & Aim, Metabolic dysfunction associated and alcohol associated liver disease (MetALD) is a poorly understood condition that bridges cardiometabolic and alcohol-related pathological characteristics. We aim to distinguish MetALD patients who share similar molecular signatures with alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) and those share signatures with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), and assess their prognostic risk for complications and mortality. METHODS: Our analysis involved 443,453 European participants from UK Biobank, including 34,147 with MetALD, 11,220 with ALD, and 124,034 with MASLD. We employed Elastic Net Regression to classify ALD and MASLD involving 249 plasma metabolites and/or 2,941 plasma proteins with various sensitivity analyses. We then used the selected concise model in MetALD patients to identify alcohol-predominant group (classified to ALD) and cardiometabolic-predominant group (classified to MASLD). Finally, we explored their 15-year risk of major outcomes (i.e., heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and mortality) using Cox regression. RESULTS: The metabolome alone discriminated ALD from MASLD with an Area under the Curve (AUC) of 0.86, while the proteome alone achieved an AUC of 0.96. Adding age, sex, BMI, liver enzymes, or metabolome information did not enhance the AUC of the proteome model. A ten-protein model differentiated ALD and MASLD with an AUC of 0.93. This model identified that alcohol-predominant MetALD patients had significantly higher risks of mortality, and cirrhosis, along with elevated fibrosis scores and higher fibrosis stages, compared to cardiometabolic-predominant patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study emphasizes the importance of subtyping differentiation using proteome data for personalized treatment and improved prognostic outcomes in MetALD patients.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.jhep.2025.05.026

Type

Journal article

Journal

J Hepatol

Publication Date

04/06/2025

Keywords

ALD, MASLD, MetALD, Steatotic liver disease, classification, metabolomics, proteomics