Study type Study Sample size Main findings Refs. Serum CysC Prospective Wan et al. (2015) 72 ACLF CysC plus total bilirubin can predict the short-term outcomes in HBV-ACLF patients. [14 ] Retrospective Wu et al. (2019) 75 DeCi High CysC can be considered a simple marker of 3-month mortality in HBV-DeCi patients. [15 ] Serum Hcy Retrospective Zhu et al. (2018) 52 ACLF, 52 CHB, and 65 HCs Serum Hcy can be an effective predictor of a worse prognosis in HBV-ACLF patients. [23 ] Serum CRP Retrospective Zhu et al. (2017) 140 DeCi Elevated CRP was associated with short-term mortality in HBV-DeCi patients. [32 ] CAR Retrospective Huang et al. (2017) 329 DeCi CAR was associated with the prognosis of HBV-DeCi and is superior to the MELD and CP scores in HBV-DeCi mortality prediction. [39 ] Retrospective Wang et al. (2019) 113 DeCi High CAR was associated with 1-month mortality in HBV-DeCi patients. [40 ] ALBI score Retrospective Chen et al. (2017) 806 LC ALBI is a simple predictor of long-term mortality in LC patients compared with the CP and MELD scores. [44 ] Retrospective Chen et al. (2017) 84 AoCLF, 56 CHB, and 48 HCs A high ALBI score may be used as a predictor for the 3-month mortality in HBV-ACLF patients. [45 ] Retrospective Lei et al. (2018) 138 ACLF, 130 LC, and 127 HCC ALBI showed parallel tendencies to the CP and MELD scores in HBV-ACLF, HBV-LC, and HBV-HCC patients. [46 ] Retrospective Qi et al. (2018) 81 DeCi ALBI is an accurate index to predict 1-month outcomes in HBV-DeCi patients. [47 ] Retrospective Wang et al. (2019) 398 LC The ALBI score accurately predicts the severity and prognosis of HBV-LC patients, and its prognostic performance was superior to the MELD score. [48 ] Retrospective Fujita et al. (2019) 91 CHB The ALBI score can be used for liver fibrosis staging in CHB, and a lower ALBI score predicts better HCC-free survival. [49 ] Prospective Zou et al. (2018) 229 HCC The ALBI score was a superior predictive value of postoperative outcomes over the CP score. [50 ] Retrospective Mai et al. (2019) 1,055 HCC The ALBI-APRI score is an accurate predictive model of posthepatectomy liver failure for HCC patients. [51 ] GPR Retrospective Lemoine et al. (2016) 135 treatment-naïve CHB GPR is a more accurate index than that of APRI and FIB-4 to stage liver fibrosis in CHB patients. [52 ] Retrospective Li et al. (2016) 1521 CHB GPR shows advantages in assessing hepatic fibrosis in patients with [53 ] Retrospective Ren et al. (2017) 160 treatment-naïve CHB GPR is a simple laboratory marker to stage liver fibrosis in CHB patients. [54 ] Retrospective Liu et al. (2018) 2016 CHB GPR had the best performance in predicting different stages of fibrosis compared with APRI and FIB-4. [55 ] Retrospective Lee et al. (2018) 278 CHB FIB-4 and GPR are a simple model for evaluating the severity of liver fibrosis in CHB patients. [56 ] Meta-analysis Lian et al. (2019) 10 studies GPR has moderate diagnostic accuracy for predicting HBV-related significant fibrosis, severe fibrosis, and cirrhosis. [57 ] Prospective Wang et al. (2016) 312 CHB GPR was a more reliable laboratory marker than APRI and FIB-4 for predicting the stage of liver fibrosis in Chinese CHB patients. [58 ] Retrospective Zhang et al. (2018) 1168 CHB GPR is considered a simple index for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis and the dynamic assessment of treatment responses in Chinese CHB patients. [59 ] Retrospective Li et al. (2016) 372 CHB GPR does not display advantages compared to APRI and FIB-4 for identifying significant fibrosis, severe fibrosis, and cirrhosis in CHB patients. [60 ] Retrospective Huang et al. (2017) 256 CHB GPR does not show advantages compared to APRI and FIB-4 in assessing liver fibrosis, advanced fibrosis, or cirrhosis in Chinese CHB patients. [61 ] Retrospective Lu et al. (2018) 397 treatment-naïve CHB GPR does not appear to represent a significant step forward compared with FIB-4 and APRI. [62 ] Retrospective Hu et al. (2017) 390 treatment-naïve CHB GPR can improve the sensitivity and specificity of hepatic fibrosis diagnosis in CHB when combined with FIB-4 or APRI. [63 ] Retrospective Desalegn et al. (2017) 582 treatment-naïve CHB APRI, FIB-4, and GPR had good diagnostic properties in CHB patients, though the sensitivities of the tests were low. [64 ] Retrospective Hamidi et al. (2019) 202 CHB GPR and FIB-4 may be useful for predicting advanced fibrosis in CHB. [65 ] Retrospective Wang et al. (2019) 496 CHB Age may influence the diagnostic thresholds and performance of APRI, FIB-4, and GPR for significant fibrosis in CHB patients. [66 ] Retrospective Wang et al. (2016) 357 HCC GPR served as an independent predictive factor for HBV-HCC overall survival. [67 ] Retrospective Pang et al. (2016) 182 HCC GPR is a simple predictor of outcomes in HBV-HCC. [68 ] Retrospective Park et al. (2017) 1109 CHB GPR can serve as a noninvasive index to assess the risk of HCC development in CHB patients. [69 ] Retrospective+prospective Liu et al. (2018) 355 ACLF Incorporating GPR into MELD may provide more accurate survival prediction in HBV-ACLF patients. [70 ] Retrospective Wang et al. (2018) 519 CHB GPR can be an effective model for predicting liver inflammation in CHB. [71 ] Retrospective Yu et al. (2019) 160 treatment-naïve CHB GPR is an effective model to assess liver fibrosis and inflammation activity. [72 ] APRI Retrospective Wai et al. (2006) 218 treatment-naïve CHB APRI was not able to accurately predict cirrhosis in CHB patients. [75 ] Retrospective Shin et al. (2008) 264 CHB APRI may be an effective index for predicting significant fibrosis in CHB. [76 ] Retrospective Lin et al. (2008) 48 CHB, 40 CHC, and 9 HCs. APRI could be used to decrease the number of liver biopsies. [77 ] Retrospective Zhang et al. (2008) 137 CHB APRI combined with hyaluronic acid could achieve a better diagnostic accuracy of liver fibrosis. [78 ] Retrospective Hung et al. (2010) 76 HCC APRI can be an effective model for assessing liver fibrosis and predicting survival in HBV-HCC patients. [79 ] Cross-sectional study Liu et al. (2011) 623 CHB APRI may have better accuracy for CHB patients, especially [80 ] Cross-sectional study Lesmana et al. (2011) 117 CHB APRI is a simple index to screen liver fibrosis in the primary care setting. [81 ] Retrospective Wang et al. (2013) 239 CHB Both FIB-4 and APRI are useful for the identification of those without significant fibrosis. However, they have a poor positive predictive value. [82 ] Prospective Gumusay et al. (2013) 58 CHB and 30 HCs Combination of the enhanced liver fibrosis panel and APRI has a better diagnostic value in predicting [83 ] Retrospective Ucar et al. (2013) 73 CHB APRI, FIB-4, and Forn’s index have a better diagnostic value in patients with significant fibrosis than the diagnostic value in those with no/minimal fibrosis. [84 ] Cross-sectional study Shrivastava et al. (2013) 52 CHB and 25HCs APRI and FIB-4 can be utilized in combination as screening tools to monitor CHB patients. [85 ] Retrospective+prospective Xiao et al. (2016) 2176 LC accompanied with HCC APRI and FIB-4 correlate with liver fibrosis, but they have low accuracy for predicting HBV-LC in HCC patients. [86 ] Systematic review+meta-analysis Houot et al. (2016) 71 studies APRI had lower performance than that of FIB-4, TE, and FibroTest in CHC and CHB. [87 ] Retrospective Huang et al. (2019) 91 CHB Real-time ultrasound elastography is reliable for the assessment of liver fibrosis in CHB patients and has better discrimination power than that of APRI and FIB-4. [88 ] Meta-analysis Jin et al. (2012) 9 studies APRI displayed limited value in identifying HBV-related fibrosis and cirrhosis. [89 ] Systematic review+meta-analysis Xiao et al. (2015) 39 articles APRI and FIB-4 can identify HBV-related fibrosis with a moderate sensitivity and accuracy. [90 ] Retrospective Mao et al. (2016) 193 CHB and 88 HCs APRI can be a simple predictor of adverse outcomes in HBV-DeCi patients. [91 ] FIB-4 Retrospective Mallet et al. (2009) 138 CHB FIB-4 is a cheap index to screen liver fibrosis in CHB. [93 ] Cross-sectional study Kim et al. (2010) 668 CHB FIB-4 may reduce the need for liver biopsy in the majority of CHB patients. [94 ] Retrospective Erdogan et al. (2013) 221 CHB FIB-4 may be useful in estimating the extent of fibrosis in CHB patients. [95 ] Retrospective Ma et al. (2013) 1168 CHB FIB-4 and Lok’s model are the most effective models for distinguishing significant and extensive fibrosis. [96 ] Retrospective Koksal et al. (2016) 228 CHB FIB-4, RPR, and platelet count were better for demonstrating advanced fibrosis. [97 ] Retrospective Kim et al. (2016) 542 CHB APRI and FIB-4 were effective predictors of HCC development and CHB patient prognosis. [98 ] Retrospective Kim et al. (2019) 444 CHB FIB-4 is useful for the noninvasive prediction of HCC development, while APRI and GPR were less useful. [99 ] Retrospective Li et al. (2014) 284 CHB FIB-4 and APRI predicted the liver fibrosis stage with a high degree of accuracy in both CHB and CHC patients. [100 ] Prospectively Zhu et al. (2011) 175 CHB APRI and FIB-4 were not superior to FibroScan for the diagnosis of significant liver fibrosis and cirrhosis in Western Chinese CHB patients. [101 ] Retrospective Kim et al. (2016) 575 CHB FIB-4 is not reliable for detecting the regression of fibrosis following antiviral treatment. [102 ] Meta-analysis Li et al. (2014) 22 studies FIB-4 is valuable for detecting significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in HBV-infected patients but has suboptimal accuracy when excluding fibrosis and cirrhosis. [103 ] Meta-analysis Yin et al. (2017) 26 studies FIB-4 has a high diagnostic value for detecting liver fibrosis in CHB patients when the diagnostic threshold value is greater than 2.0. [104 ] GAR Retrospective Li et al. (2017) 822 CHB GAR shows obvious advantages when predicting significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in Chinese CHB patients compared with APRI and FIB-4. [105 ]
