In response to: Steatotic liver disease-know your enemies

The principal limitations of the terms NAFLD and NASH are the reliance on exclusionary confounder terms and the use of potentially stigmatising language. This study set out to determine if content experts and patient advocates were in favour of a change in nomenclature and/or definition. A modified Delphi process was led by three large pan-national liver associations. The consensus was defined a priori as a supermajority (67%) vote. An independent committee of experts external to the nomenclature process made the final recommendation on the acronym and its diagnostic criteria. A total of 236 panellists from 56 countries participated in 4 online surveys and 2 hybrid meetings. Response rates across the 4 survey rounds were 87%, 83%, 83%, and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents felt that the current nomenclature was sufficiently flawed to consider a name change. The terms "nonalcoholic" and "fatty" were felt to be stigmatising by 61% and 66% of respondents, respectively. Steatotic liver disease was chosen as an overarching term to encompass the various aetiologies of steatosis. The term steatohepatitis was felt to be an important pathophysiological concept that should be retained. The name chosen to replace NAFLD was metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). There was consensus to change the definition to include the presence of at least 1 of 5 cardiometabolic risk factors. Those with no metabolic parameters and no known cause were deemed to have cryptogenic steatotic liver disease. A new category, outside pure metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, termed metabolic and alcohol related/associated liver disease (MetALD), was selected to describe those with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, who consume greater amounts of alcohol per week (140-350 g/wk and 210-420 g/wk for females and males, respectively). The new nomenclature and diagnostic criteria are widely supported and non-stigmatising, and can improve awareness and patient identification.

Given the increasing prevalence of diabetes and obesity worldwide, the deleterious effects of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are becoming a growing challenge for public health. NAFLD is the most common chronic liver disease in the Western world. NAFLD is closely associated with metabolic disorders, including central obesity, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, hyperglycaemia and persistent abnormalities of liver function tests. In general NAFLD is a common denominer for a broad spectrum of damage to the liver, which can be due to hepatocyte injury, inflammatory processes and fibrosis. This is normally seen on liver biopsy and can range from milder forms (steatosis) to the more severe forms (non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), advanced fibrosis, cirrhosis and liver failure). In these patients, advanced fibrosis is the major predictor of morbidity and liver-related mortality, and an accurate diagnosis of NASH and NAFLD is mandatory. Histologic evaluation with liver biopsy remains the gold standard to diagnose NAFLD. Diagnosis of NAFLD is defined as presence of hepatic steatosis, ballooning and lobular inflammation with or without fibrosis. Weight loss, dietary modification, and the treatment of underlying metabolic syndrome remain the mainstays of therapy once the diagnosis is established. Dietary recommendations and lifestyle interventions, weight loss, and the treatment of underlying metabolic syndrome remain the mainstays of therapy once the diagnosis is established with promising results but are difficult to maintain. Pioglitazone and vitamin E are recommended by guidelines in selected patients. This review gives an overview of NAFLD and its treatment options.

OBJECTIVE Human blood glucose levels have likely evolved toward their current point of stability over hundreds of thousands of years. The robust population stability of this trait is called canalization. It has been represented by a hyperbolic function of two variables: insulin sensitivity and insulin response. Environmental changes due to global migration may have pushed some human subpopulations to different points of stability. We hypothesized that there may be ethnic differences in the optimal states in the relationship between insulin sensitivity and insulin response. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We identified studies that measured the insulin sensitivity index (S I) and acute insulin response to glucose (AIRg) in three major ethnic groups: Africans, Caucasians, and East Asians. We identified 74 study cohorts comprising 3,813 individuals (19 African cohorts, 31 Caucasian, and 24 East Asian). We calculated the hyperbolic relationship using the mean values of S I and AIRg in the healthy cohorts with normal glucose tolerance. RESULTS We found that Caucasian subpopulations were located around the middle point of the hyperbola, while African and East Asian subpopulations are located around unstable extreme points, where a small change in one variable is associated with a large nonlinear change in the other variable. CONCLUSIONS Our findings suggest that the genetic background of Africans and East Asians makes them more and differentially susceptible to diabetes than Caucasians. This ethnic stratification could be implicated in the different natural courses of diabetes onset.