Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer and the third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. The etiology of HCC has now dramatically changed from viral hepatitis to metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). The main pathogenesis of MASLD-related HCC is the hepatic lipid accumulation of hepatocytes, which causes chronic inflammation and the subsequent progression of hepatic fibrosis. Chronic hepatic inflammation generates oxidative stress and DNA damage in hepatocytes, which contribute to genomic instability, resulting in the development of HCC. Several metabolic and molecular pathways are also linked to chronic inflammation and HCC in MASLD. In particular, the MAPK and PI3K-Akt-mTOR pathways are upregulated in MASLD, promoting the survival and proliferation of HCC cells. In addition, MASLD has been reported to enhance the development of HCC in patients with chronic viral hepatitis infection. Although there is no approved medication for MASLD besides resmetirom in the USA, there are some preventive strategies for the onset and progression of HCC. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, a class of medications, has been reported to exert anti-tumor effects on HCC by regulating metabolic reprogramming. Moreover, CD34-positive cell transplantation improves hepatic fibrosis by promoting intrahepatic angiogenesis and supplying various growth factors. Furthermore, exercise improves MASLD through an increase in energy consumption as well as changes in chemokines and myokines. In this review, we summarize the recent progress made in the pathogenic mechanisms of MASLD-associated HCC. Furthermore, we introduced new therapeutic strategies for preventing the development of HCC based on the pathogenesis of MASLD.

In patients with steatotic liver disease (SLD), significant hepatic fibrosis is a prognostic factor with various etiologies, including inflammation and metabolic dysfunction. This study aimed to investigate independent factors and profiles associated with significant hepatic fibrosis, including alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels >30 U/L and metabolic dysfunction-associated SLD (MASLD), in health check-up examinees.

This single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study enrolled 1378 consecutive health checkup examinees from April 2018 to September 2022. Shear wave elastography (SWE) was performed during a routine ultrasound examination, and patients with liver stiffness ≥6.60 kPa were defined as having significant hepatic fibrosis. Patients were classified into nonsignificant hepatic fibrosis (n = 1220) or a significant hepatic fibrosis (n = 158) group according to this definition.

In multivariate analysis, the independent factor for significant hepatic fibrosis was aging (≥65 years; OR 9.637, 95% CI 6.704-13.852, p < 0.0001). According to decision tree analysis, the initial classifier was aging (≥65 years). After aging, an ALT level >30 U/L was the second relevant factor for significant hepatic fibrosis, regardless of age. An undirected graphical model showed that an ALT level of >30 U/L was directly associated with significant hepatic fibrosis. In patients aged ≥65 years with an ALT level >30 U/L, significant hepatic fibrosis was observed in 52% of the patients. Meanwhile, in patients aged ≥65 years with an ALT level ≤30 U/L, MASLD was the third classifier, with significant hepatic fibrosis observed in 38% of patients.

ALT levels >30 U/L and MASLD may be involved in the pathogenesis of significant hepatic fibrosis in patients aged ≥65 years.

To provide clarity for research studies and clinical care, a set of positive criteria for adults and children with metabolic (dysfunction) associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) was recently published and has subsequently been widely endorsed. The development and subsequent validation of the criteria for MAFLD has created a positive momentum for change. During the course of the ongoing discussion on the redefinition, some concerns have surfaced that we thought needs clarification. In this review, we provide a perspective on MAFLD and bringing clarity to some of the key aspects that have been recently raised.

An international panel recently proposed an update to the terminology and diagnostic criteria for fatty liver disease. The experts proposed a change in the nomenclature from non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to metabolic (dysfunction)-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). This single-letter change, we believe, heralds the dawn of a new era in clinical practice and in clinical and basic research as well. The new nomenclature with the easily applicable approach has stimulated the enthusiasm of the researchers worldwide, resulting in a large number of publications over the past two years. Several recent studies have provided tremendous evidence of the superiority of the MAFLD criteria over the NAFLD criteria. Many studies in different geographic areas of the world including the United States, Europe, and Asia on a large number of patients proved that the utility of MAFLD criteria was higher than that of the NAFLD criteria in different aspects of fatty liver diseases. Consequently, many societies, physician and nurse groups, health stakeholders, representatives of regulatory sciences, and others endorsed the new nomenclature. Here we highlight the endorsement of the new name by different societies and groups and the outcome of different studies on the new nomenclature in addition to a short discussion of the debate by some experts.

With the gradual adoption of new metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) definitions in clinical practice, the relationship between MAFLD and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk remains unclear. Similarly, clinical differences between MAFLD and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and the relationship between MAFLD and CVD risk are unclear.

We conducted a retrospective study using the 1988-1994 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES III) database, including 11,673 individuals. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to test relationships between MAFLD and the 10-year CVD risk.

MAFLD was more significant than NAFLD in medium/high 10-year CVD risk (according to Framingham risk score) (1064 (29.92%) vs. 1022 (26.37%), P < 0.005). MAFLD patients were stratified according to NAFLD fibrosis scores (NFS's). In univariate regression analysis, when compared with non-MAFLD patients, unadjusted-OR values for MAFLD with different liver fibrosis stages, which were tiered by NFS (NFS < -1.455,-1.455 ≤ NFS < 0.676, and NFS ≥ 0.676) in the medium 10-year CVD risk (according to Framingham scores) were 1.175 (95% CI 1.030-1.341), 3.961 (3.449-4.549), and 5.477 (4.100-7.315), and the unadjusted or values of different MAFLD groups in the high 10-year CVD risk were 1.407 (95% CI 1.080-1.833), 5.725 (4.500-7.284), and 5.330 (3.132-9.068). Then, after adjusting for age, sex, race, alcohol consumption, and smoking, or adjusting for age, race, alcohol consumption, smoking, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and other confounding factors, the incidence of medium and high 10-year CVD risk was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

We showed that patients with MAFLD had a higher 10-year CVD risk when compared with patients with NAFLD. Increased MAFLD hepatic fibrosis scores were associated with a 10-year CVD risk.