Evaluation of the increase in model for end-stage liver disease (ΔMELD) score over time as a prognostic predictor in patients with advanced cirrhosis: risk factor analysis and comparison with initial MELD and Child–Turcotte–Pugh score
Abstract
Background/aims The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) has been used to prioritize cirrhotic patients awaiting liver transplantation. The change in MELD score over time (DeltaMELD) may have additional prognostic value. We investigated the ability of DeltaMELD to predict the outcome of advanced cirrhosis and prospectively assessed the factors associated with increasing DeltaMELD. Methods Risk factors were determined in 58 prospectively followed-up patients. The predictive power of DeltaMELD, initial MELD and Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score was compared by using c-statistic in 351 patients. Results Ascites (P=0.020) and hepatic encephalopathy (P=0.023) were significantly associated with increasing MELD score at 3 months. The area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for DeltaMELD/month was 0.779 compared with 0.718 for MELD (P=0.130) and 0.528 for CTP score (P<0.001) at 6 months; the area was 0.822, 0.744 and 0.528, respectively (P=0.018 and <0.001, respectively) at 12 months. DeltaMELD/month >2.5 was the only significant prognostic predictor at 6 (odds ratio: 9.8, P<0.001) and 12 months (odds ratio: 16.3, P<0.001) in multivariate logistic analysis. Conclusions Increasing MELD score is associated with the onset of ascites and encephalopathy. DeltaMELD is superior to initial MELD and CTP scores to predict intermediate term outcome in patients with advanced cirrhosis.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The field has recognised that the MELD score is not the most optimal endpoint for evaluating therapeutic efficacy in trials targeting fibrosis progression and resolution.
“Since the trial was designed and initiated, the field has recognised that the MELD score is not the most optimal endpoint for evaluating therapeutic efficacy in trials targeting fibrosis progression and resolution (177, 178)”
From Targeting macrophages in liver fibrosis (2026) · cites this paper as [177]
The use of the MELD score as the primary endpoint is an important design limitation of the MATCH study.
“An important design limitation of the MATCH study concerns the use of the MELD score as the primary endpoint (177).”
From Targeting macrophages in liver fibrosis (2026) · cites this paper as [177]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Safety profile of autologous macrophage therapy for liver cirrhosis
Moroni, F., Dwyer, B. J., Graham, C., Pass, C., Bailey, L., Ritchie, L., Mitchell, D., Glover, A., Laurie, A., Doig, S., et al. (2019) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0599-8 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
Autologous macrophage therapy for liver cirrhosis: a phase 2 open-label randomized controlled trial
Brennan, P. N., MacMillan, M., Manship, T., Moroni, F., Glover, A., Troland, D., MacPherson, I., Graham, C., Aird, R., Semple, S. I. K., et al. (2025) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-024-03406-8 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Targeting macrophages in liver fibrosis
González del Barrio, L., Ipsen, D. H., Pfister, D. R., Hancz, D., & Scott, C. L. (2026) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1835489 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Huo, T.-I., Wu, J.-C., Lin, H.-C., Lee, F.-Y., Hou, M.-C., Lee, P.-C., Chang, F.-Y., & Lee, S.-D.
- Affiliations
- Taipei Veterans General Hospital (TW)
- Corresponding author
- Huo, Teh-Ia
- Venue
- Journal of Hepatology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-06
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 826-832
- ISSN
- 0168-8278 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2054857478
- Cited by
- 143
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 6.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Hepatology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Council
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver Disease and Transplantation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
- Keywords
- Model for End-Stage Liver Disease, advanced cirrhosis, outcome prediction, Child-Pugh score, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, liver transplantation, risk factors
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Female, Humans, Liver Cirrhosis, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Severity of Illness Index, Proportional Hazards Models, Liver Failure
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review