Linearity, Bias, and Precision of Hepatic Proton Density Fat Fraction Measurements by Using MR Imaging: A Meta-Analysis

From the Department of Radiology, Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Deptartment of Radiology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.D.S.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology and Liver Imaging Group, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, Calif (G.H., M.S.M., C.B.S.); Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, Calif (R.L.); Division of Epidemiology, Department of Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, Calif (R.L.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis (D.H., S.B.R.); Biomedical Engineering, Medicine and Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis (S.B.R.); Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children’s Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (H.H.H.); Institute of Clinical Radiology, Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany (H.H.); Institute of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Carl Gustav Carus University, Dresden, Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms Universität, Bonn, Germany (G.M.K.); Quantitative Health Sciences, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio (N.A.O.); Department of Radiology, Chonbuk National University Medical School and Hospital, Jeonju, Chonbuk, Korea (J.S.S.); Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada (A.T.); and Department of Radiology, Beijing Military General Hospital, Beijing, China (X.W.).
Address correspondence to T.Y. (e-mail: [email protected]).

Published Online:Sep 11 2017https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170550

Abstract

A meta-analysis of pooled data collected from 28 published studies demonstrated excellent linearity, negligible bias, and high precision of proton density fat fraction measurements by using MR imaging across different field strengths, imager manufacturers, and reconstruction methods.

Purpose

To determine the linearity, bias, and precision of hepatic proton density fat fraction (PDFF) measurements by using magnetic resonance (MR) imaging across different field strengths, imager manufacturers, and reconstruction methods.

Materials and Methods

This meta-analysis was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A systematic literature search identified studies that evaluated the linearity and/or bias of hepatic PDFF measurements by using MR imaging (hereafter, MR imaging–PDFF) against PDFF measurements by using colocalized MR spectroscopy (hereafter, MR spectroscopy-PDFF) or the precision of MR imaging–PDFF. The quality of each study was evaluated by using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy 2 tool. De-identified original data sets from the selected studies were pooled. Linearity was evaluated by using linear regression between MR imaging–PDFF and MR spectroscopy-PDFF measurements. Bias, defined as the mean difference between MR imaging–PDFF and MR spectroscopy-PDFF measurements, was evaluated by using Bland-Altman analysis. Precision, defined as the agreement between repeated MR imaging–PDFF measurements, was evaluated by using a linear mixed-effects model, with field strength, imager manufacturer, reconstruction method, and region of interest as random effects.

Results

Twenty-three studies (1679 participants) were selected for linearity and bias analyses and 11 studies (425 participants) were selected for precision analyses. MR imaging–PDFF was linear with MR spectroscopy-PDFF (R² = 0.96). Regression slope (0.97; P < .001) and mean Bland-Altman bias (−0.13%; 95% limits of agreement: −3.95%, 3.40%) indicated minimal underestimation by using MR imaging–PDFF. MR imaging–PDFF was precise at the region-of-interest level, with repeatability and reproducibility coefficients of 2.99% and 4.12%, respectively. Field strength, imager manufacturer, and reconstruction method each had minimal effects on reproducibility.

Conclusion

MR imaging–PDFF has excellent linearity, bias, and precision across different field strengths, imager manufacturers, and reconstruction methods.

^© RSNA, 2017

Online supplemental material is available for this article.

An earlier incorrect version of this article appeared online. This article was corrected on October 2, 2017.

References

1. Loomba R, Sanyal AJ. The global NAFLD epidemic. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;10(11):686–690. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
2. Wong RJ, Cheung R, Ahmed A. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is the most rapidly growing indication for liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the U.S. Hepatology 2014;59(6):2188–2195. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
3. Matteoni CA, Younossi ZM, Gramlich T, Boparai N, Liu YC, McCullough AJ. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a spectrum of clinical and pathological severity. Gastroenterology 1999;116(6):1413–1419. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
4. Ekstedt M, Franzén LE, Mathiesen UL, et al. Long-term follow-up of patients with NAFLD and elevated liver enzymes. Hepatology 2006;44(4):865–873. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
5. Rubinstein E, Lavine JE, Schwimmer JB. Hepatic, cardiovascular, and endocrine outcomes of the histological subphenotypes of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Semin Liver Dis 2008;28(4):380–385. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
6. Guzman G, Brunt EM, Petrovic LM, Chejfec G, Layden TJ, Cotler SJ. Does nonalcoholic fatty liver disease predispose patients to hepatocellular carcinoma in the absence of cirrhosis? Arch Pathol Lab Med 2008;132(11):1761–1766. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
7. Sanyal AJ, Banas C, Sargeant C, et al. Similarities and differences in outcomes of cirrhosis due to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and hepatitis C. Hepatology 2006;43(4):682–689. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
8. Adams LA, Lymp JF, St Sauver J, et al. The natural history of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a population-based cohort study. Gastroenterology 2005;129(1):113–121. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
9. Adams LA, Sanderson S, Lindor KD, Angulo P. The histological course of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a longitudinal study of 103 patients with sequential liver biopsies. J Hepatol 2005;42(1):132–138. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
10. Angulo P. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. N Engl J Med 2002;346(16):1221–1231. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
11. Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD; American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Liver biopsy. Hepatology 2009;49(3):1017–1044. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
12. Ratziu V, Charlotte F, Heurtier A, et al. Sampling variability of liver biopsy in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gastroenterology 2005;128(7):1898–1906. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
13. Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med 2001;344(7):495–500. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
14. Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE, et al. The diagnosis and management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: practice guideline by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, American College of Gastroenterology, and the American Gastroenterological Association. Hepatology 2012;55(6):2005–2023. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
15. Castera L, Vilgrain V, Angulo P. Noninvasive evaluation of NAFLD. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;10(11):666–675. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
16. Reeder SB, Hu HH, Sirlin CB. Proton density fat-fraction: a standardized MR-based biomarker of tissue fat concentration. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36(5):1011–1014. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
17. Hu HH, Börnert P, Hernando D, et al. ISMRM workshop on fat-water separation: insights, applications and progress in MRI. Magn Reson Med 2012;68(2):378–388. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
18. Wei JL, Leung JC, Loong TC, et al. Prevalence and severity of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in non-obese patients: a population study using proton-magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2015;110(9):1306–1314; quiz 1315. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
19. Szczepaniak LS, Nurenberg P, Leonard D, et al. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy to measure hepatic triglyceride content: prevalence of hepatic steatosis in the general population. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2005;288(2):E462–E468. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
20. Longo R, Pollesello P, Ricci C, et al. Proton MR spectroscopy in quantitative in vivo determination of fat content in human liver steatosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995;5(3):281–285. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
21. Rajeev SP, Sprung VS, Roberts C, et al. Compensatory changes in energy balance during dapagliflozin treatment in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial (ENERGIZE)-study protocol. BMJ Open 2017;7(1):e013539. Google Scholar
22. Smits MM, Tonneijck L, Muskiet MH, et al. Twelve week liraglutide or sitagliptin does not affect hepatic fat in type 2 diabetes: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Diabetologia 2016;59(12):2588–2593. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
23. Zhang HJ, He J, Pan LL, et al. Effects of moderate and vigorous exercise on nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176(8):1074–1082. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
24. Papamiltiadous ES, Roberts SK, Nicoll AJ, et al. A randomised controlled trial of a Mediterranean Dietary Intervention for Adults with Non Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (MEDINA): study protocol. BMC Gastroenterol 2016;16:14. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
25. Bhatia L, Scorletti E, Curzen N, Clough GF, Calder PC, Byrne CD. Improvement in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease severity is associated with a reduction in carotid intima-media thickness progression. Atherosclerosis 2016;246:13–20. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
26. Hallsworth K, Thoma C, Hollingsworth KG, et al. Modified high-intensity interval training reduces liver fat and improves cardiac function in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Sci (Lond) 2015;129(12):1097–1105. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
27. Scorletti E, Bhatia L, McCormick KG, et al. Effects of purified eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: results from the Welcome* study. Hepatology 2014;60(4):1211–1221. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
28. Koopman KE, Caan MW, Nederveen AJ, et al. Hypercaloric diets with increased meal frequency, but not meal size, increase intrahepatic triglycerides: a randomized controlled trial. Hepatology 2014;60(2):545–553. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
29. Wong VW, Wong GL, Yeung DK, et al. Fatty pancreas, insulin resistance, and β-cell function: a population study using fat-water magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Gastroenterol 2014;109(4):589–597. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
30. de Mutsert R, den Heijer M, Rabelink TJ, et al. The Netherlands Epidemiology of Obesity (NEO) study: study design and data collection. Eur J Epidemiol 2013;28(6):513–523. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
31. Sullivan S, Kirk EP, Mittendorfer B, Patterson BW, Klein S. Randomized trial of exercise effect on intrahepatic triglyceride content and lipid kinetics in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology 2012;55(6):1738–1745. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
32. Wong VW, Chu WC, Wong GL, et al. Prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and advanced fibrosis in Hong Kong Chinese: a population study using proton-magnetic resonance spectroscopy and transient elastography. Gut 2012;61(3):409–415. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
33. Sathyanarayana P, Jogi M, Muthupillai R, Krishnamurthy R, Samson SL, Bajaj M. Effects of combined exenatide and pioglitazone therapy on hepatic fat content in type 2 diabetes. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2011;19(12):2310–2315. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
34. Guerrero R, Vega GL, Grundy SM, Browning JD. Ethnic differences in hepatic steatosis: an insulin resistance paradox? Hepatology 2009;49(3):791–801. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
35. Raunig DL, McShane LM, Pennello G, et al. Quantitative imaging biomarkers: a review of statistical methods for technical performance assessment. Stat Methods Med Res 2015;24(1):27–67. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
36. Motosugi U, Hernando D, Wiens C, Bannas P, Reeder SB. High SNR acquisitions improve the repeatability of liver fat quantification using confounder-corrected chemical shift-encoded MR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 2017 Feb 13. [Epub ahead of print] Crossref, Google Scholar
37. Park CC, Hamilton G, Desai A, et al. Effect of intravenous gadoxetate disodium and flip angle on hepatic proton density fat fraction estimation with six-echo, gradient-recalled-echo, magnitude-based MR imaging at 3T. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017;42(4):1189–1198. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
38. Kramer H, Pickhardt PJ, Kliewer MA, et al. Accuracy of liver fat quantification with advanced CT, MRI, and ultrasound techniques: prospective comparison with MR spectroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017;208(1):92–100. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
39. Cui J, Philo L, Nguyen P, et al. Sitagliptin vs. placebo for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomized controlled trial. J Hepatol 2016;65(2):369–376. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
40. Vu KN, Gilbert G, Chalut M, Chagnon M, Chartrand G, Tang A. MRI-determined liver proton density fat fraction, with MRS validation: comparison of regions of interest sampling methods in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016;43(5):1090–1099. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
41. Tyagi A, Yeganeh O, Levin Y, et al. Intra- and inter-examination repeatability of magnetic resonance spectroscopy, magnitude-based MRI, and complex-based MRI for estimation of hepatic proton density fat fraction in overweight and obese children and adults. Abdom Imaging 2015;40(8):3070–3077. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
42. Hetterich H, Bayerl C, Peters A, et al. Feasibility of a three-step magnetic resonance imaging approach for the assessment of hepatic steatosis in an asymptomatic study population. Eur Radiol 2016;26(6):1895–1904. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
43. Kim KY, Song JS, Kannengiesser S, Han YM. Hepatic fat quantification using the proton density fat fraction (PDFF): utility of free-drawn-PDFF with a large coverage area. Radiol Med (Torino) 2015;120(12):1083–1093. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
44. Rehm JL, Wolfgram PM, Hernando D, Eickhoff JC, Allen DB, Reeder SB. Proton density fat-fraction is an accurate biomarker of hepatic steatosis in adolescent girls and young women. Eur Radiol 2015;25(10):2921–2930. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
45. Kukuk GM, Hittatiya K, Sprinkart AM, et al. Comparison between modified Dixon MRI techniques, MR spectroscopic relaxometry, and different histologic quantification methods in the assessment of hepatic steatosis. Eur Radiol 2015;25(10):2869–2879. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
46. Zand KA, Shah A, Heba E, et al. Accuracy of multiecho magnitude-based MRI (M-MRI) for estimation of hepatic proton density fat fraction (PDFF) in children. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;42(5):1223–1232. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
47. Motosugi U, Hernando D, Bannas P, et al. Quantification of liver fat with respiratory-gated quantitative chemical shift encoded MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;42(5):1241–1248. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
48. Artz NS, Haufe WM, Hooker CA, et al. Reproducibility of MR-based liver fat quantification across field strength: Same-day comparison between 1.5T and 3T in obese participants. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;42(3):811–817. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
49. Bashir MR, Zhong X, Nickel MD, et al. Quantification of hepatic steatosis with a multistep adaptive fitting MRI approach: prospective validation against MR spectroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015;204(2):297–306. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
50. Kühn JP, Jahn C, Hernando D, et al. T1 bias in chemical shift-encoded liver fat-fraction: role of the flip angle. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;40(4):875–883. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
51. Kühn JP, Hernando D, Mensel B, et al. Quantitative chemical shift-encoded MRI is an accurate method to quantify hepatic steatosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;39(6):1494–1501. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
52. Levin YS, Yokoo T, Wolfson T, et al. Effect of echo-sampling strategy on the accuracy of out-of-phase and in-phase multiecho gradient-echo MRI hepatic fat fraction estimation. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;39(3):567–575. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
53. Johnson BL, Schroeder ME, Wolfson T, et al. Effect of flip angle on the accuracy and repeatability of hepatic proton density fat fraction estimation by complex data-based, T1-independent, T2*-corrected, spectrum-modeled MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;39(2):440–447. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
54. Le TA, Chen J, Changchien C, et al. Effect of colesevelam on liver fat quantified by magnetic resonance in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: a randomized controlled trial. Hepatology 2012;56(3):922–932. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
55. Kang GH, Cruite I, Shiehmorteza M, et al. Reproducibility of MRI-determined proton density fat fraction across two different MR scanner platforms. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;34(4):928–934. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
56. Hines CD, Frydrychowicz A, Hamilton G, et al. T(1) independent, T(2) (*) corrected chemical shift based fat-water separation with multi-peak fat spectral modeling is an accurate and precise measure of hepatic steatosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;33(4):873–881. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
57. Meisamy S, Hines CD, Hamilton G, et al. Quantification of hepatic steatosis with T1-independent, T2-corrected MR imaging with spectral modeling of fat: blinded comparison with MR spectroscopy. Radiology 2011;258(3):767–775. Link, Google Scholar
58. Yokoo T, Shiehmorteza M, Hamilton G, et al. Estimation of hepatic proton-density fat fraction by using MR imaging at 3.0 T. Radiology 2011;258(3):749–759. Link, Google Scholar
59. Wu B, Han W, Li Z, et al. Reproducibility of intra- and inter-scanner measurements of liver fat using complex confounder-corrected chemical shift encoded MRI at 3.0 Tesla. Sci Rep 2016;6:19339. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
60. Sofue K, Mileto A, Dale BM, Zhong X, Bashir MR. Interexamination repeatability and spatial heterogeneity of liver iron and fat quantification using MRI-based multistep adaptive fitting algorithm. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;42(5):1281–1290. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
61. Negrete LM, Middleton MS, Clark L, et al. Inter-examination precision of magnitude-based MRI for estimation of segmental hepatic proton density fat fraction in obese participants. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;39(5):1265–1271. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
62. Serai SD, Dillman JR, Trout AT. Proton density fat fraction measurements at 1.5- and 3-T hepatic MR imaging: same-day agreement among readers and across two imager manufacturers. Radiology 2017;284(1):244–254. Link, Google Scholar
63. Mashhood A, Railkar R, Yokoo T, et al. Reproducibility of hepatic fat fraction measurement by magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013;37(6):1359–1370. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
64. Hamilton G, Yokoo T, Bydder M, et al. In vivo characterization of the liver fat ¹H MR spectrum. NMR Biomed 2011;24(7):784–790. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
65. Yu H, Shimakawa A, McKenzie CA, Brodsky E, Brittain JH, Reeder SB. Multiecho water-fat separation and simultaneous R2* estimation with multifrequency fat spectrum modeling. Magn Reson Med 2008;60(5):1122–1134. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
66. Reeder SB, Cruite I, Hamilton G, Sirlin CB. Quantitative assessment of liver fat with magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;34(4):729–749. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
67. Reeder SB, Sirlin CB. Quantification of liver fat with magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2010;18(3):337–357, ix. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
68. Ruschke S, Eggers H, Kooijman H, et al. Correction of phase errors in quantitative water-fat imaging using a monopolar time-interleaved multi-echo gradient echo sequence. Magn Reson Med 2016 Oct 31. [Epub ahead of print] Google Scholar
69. Colgan TJ, Hernando D, Sharma SD, Reeder SB. The effects of concomitant gradients on chemical shift encoded MRI. Magn Reson Med 2016 Sep 21. [Epub ahead of print] Medline, Google Scholar
70. Peterson P, Månsson S. Fat quantification using multiecho sequences with bipolar gradients: investigation of accuracy and noise performance. Magn Reson Med 2014;71(1):219–229. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
71. Hernando D, Hines CD, Yu H, Reeder SB. Addressing phase errors in fat-water imaging using a mixed magnitude/complex fitting method. Magn Reson Med 2012;67(3):638–644. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
72. Yu H, Shimakawa A, Hines CD, et al. Combination of complex-based and magnitude-based multiecho water-fat separation for accurate quantification of fat-fraction. Magn Reson Med 2011;66(1):199–206. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
73. Hamilton G, Middleton MS, Bydder M, et al. Effect of PRESS and STEAM sequences on magnetic resonance spectroscopic liver fat quantification. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;30(1):145–152. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
74. Knobloch K, Yoon U, Vogt PM. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement and publication bias. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2011;39(2):91–92. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
75. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 2010;8(5):336–341. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
76. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011;155(8):529–536. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
77. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:25. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
78. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315(7109):629–634. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
79. Kessler LG, Barnhart HX, Buckler AJ, et al. The emerging science of quantitative imaging biomarkers terminology and definitions for scientific studies and regulatory submissions. Stat Methods Med Res 2015;24(1):9–26. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
80. Di Martino M, Pacifico L, Bezzi M, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance spectroscopy, proton density fat fraction and histological analysis in the quantification of liver steatosis in children and adolescents. World J Gastroenterol 2016;22(39):8812–8819. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
81. Patel J, Bettencourt R, Cui J, et al. Association of noninvasive quantitative decline in liver fat content on MRI with histologic response in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2016;9(5):692–701. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
82. Vogt LJ, Steveling A, Meffert PJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of changes in abdominal compartments in obese diabetics during a low-calorie weight-loss program. PLoS One 2016;11(4):e0153595. Google Scholar
83. Arulanandan A, Ang B, Bettencourt R, et al. Association between quantity of liver fat and cardiovascular risk in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease independent of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;13(8):1513–1520.e1. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
84. Tang A, Chen J, Le TA, et al. Cross-sectional and longitudinal evaluation of liver volume and total liver fat burden in adults with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Abdom Imaging 2015;40(1):26–37. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
85. Bamberg F, Hetterich H, Rospleszcz S, et al. Subclinical disease burden as assessed by whole-body MRI in participants with prediabetes, participants with diabetes, and normal control participants from the general population: the KORA-MRI study. Diabetes 2017;66(1):158–169. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
86. Bamberg F, Kauczor HU, Weckbach S, et al. Whole-body MR imaging in the German National Cohort: rationale, design, and technical background. Radiology 2015;277(1):206–220. Link, Google Scholar
87. Völzke H, Alte D, Schmidt CO, et al. Cohort profile: the study of health in Pomerania. Int J Epidemiol 2011;40(2):294–307. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
88. Bedossa P, Dargère D, Paradis V. Sampling variability of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 2003;38(6):1449–1457. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar

Article History

Received March 9, 2017; revision requested April 21; revision received May 4; accepted June 5; final version accepted June 8.
Published online: Sept 11 2017
Published in print: Feb 2018

Vol. 286, No. 2

Supplemental Material

Funding/Support

Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance projects and activities have been funded in whole or in part with Federal funds from National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services (HHSN268201000050C, HHSN268201300071C, HHSN268201500021C). T.Y supported in part by research grant from Radiological Society of North America (RSCH1625). S.B.R. supported in part by research grants from National Institutes of Health (R01DK083380, R01DK088925, R01DK100651, K24DK102595). A.T. supported in part by Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé (Career Award #26993). C.B.S. supported in part by research grants from National Institutes of Health (R01DK106419, R01DK088925, R01DK110096, U01DK061734).

Abbreviations

Abbreviations:
CI	confidence interval
PDFF	proton density fat fraction
QIB	quantitative imaging biomarker
QIBA	Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance
ROI	region of interest

Metrics

Altmetric Score

PDF download