Table 4.
Comparison of demographic, laboratory, immunohistochemical, and histological data across NASH subtypes
| Type 1 NASH (n=21) | Type 2 NASH (n=19) | Mixed NASH (n=5) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male/Female | 16/5 | 16/3 | 4/1 | |
| Age (yr) | 15.0 ± 1.8* | 11.5 ± 2.7 | 13.8 ± 2.4 | <0.001 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 35.3 ± 6.1 | 32.7 ± 4.8 | 38.4 ± 4.6 | 0.156 |
| Glycemic Measures | ||||
| Glucose (mg/dl) | 98.5 ± 20.4 | 92.8 ± 17.0 | 104.8 ± 23.6 | 0.442 |
| Insulin (mcU/ml) | 24.7 ± 16.8 | 26.4 ± 17.9 | 41.4 ± 19.0 | 0.204 |
| HOMA | 6.3 ± 5.8 | 6.4 ± 4.3 | 10.8 ± 5.4 | 0.147 |
| HbA1c (%) | 5.5 ± 0.4 | 5.2 ± 0.3 | 5.1 ± 0.3 | 0.126 |
| Lipids | ||||
| Total Cholesterol (mg/dl) | 165.6 ± 37.7 | 178.4 ± 36.5 | 185.4 ± 35.9 | 0.502 |
| LDL Cholesterol (mg/dl) | 65.0 ± 52.0 | 78.9 ± 51.1 | 79.0 ± 35.7 | 0.560 |
| HDL Cholesterol (mg/dl) | 72.6 ± 38.6 | 58.8 ± 39.1 | 76.0 ± 57.9 | 0.587 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dl) | 161.7 ± 88.9 | 207.4 ± 142.4 | 151.6 ± 57.1 | 0.587 |
| Liver Biochemistries | ||||
| ALT (U/L) | 106.4 ± 55.1 | 128.2 ± 118.6 | 182.6 ± 75.6 | 0.109 |
| AST (U/L) | 70.9 ± 36.6 | 70.2 ± 49.7 | 90.4 ± 38.5 | 0.427 |
| Albumin (GM/dl) | 4.1 ± 0.4 | 4.3 ± 0.4 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 0.286 |
| Immunohistochemistry | ||||
| Malondialdehyde (MDA) content (%) | 53.3 ± 19.5 | 44.3 ± 20.0 | 37.2 ± 8.2 | 0.066 |
| CYP2E1 protein content (%) | 59.4 ± 8.2 | 61.7 ± 8.9 | 60.4 ± 4.8 | 0.764 |
| Steatosis (%) | 10.1 ± 6.1 | 12.7 ± 6.6 | 7.9 ± 5.6 | 0.299 |
| Histological Scoring | ||||
| Steatosis grade | 1.7 ± 0.8 | 2.2 ± 0.9 | 1.4 ± 0.5 | 0.080 |
| Fibrosis stage | 1.9 ± 1.8# | 3.7 ± 0.9 | 2.8 ± 0.8 | 0.001 |
| Grade of lobular inflammation | 1.3 ± 0.6 | 1.0 ± 0.5 | 1.2 ± 0.8 | 0.274 |
| Grade of portal inflammation | 0.5 ± 0.5# | 1.1 ± 0.6 | 1.4 ± 0.5 | 0.004 |
| Hepatocyte ballooning | 1.4 ± 0.7* | 0.5 ± 0.7 | 0.8 ± 0.5 | 0.001 |
Values expressed are mean ± SD and immunohistochemical measures are as a percent of total liver biopsy area. Note that diagnoses were based on histological scoring criteria and statistical comparisons between groups should be interpreted accordingly.
NOTE: 4 NASH patients were not characterized by NASH type and were therefore not included in this analysis.
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; HOMA, Homeostatic Model Assessment Method; HbA1c, glycosylated hemoglobin; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase.
*
p<0.05 vs type 2 NASH;
#
p<0.05 vs all other groups.