Liver Health Awareness Centre — Pilot Program

Community FibroScan Pilot: Results Summary

A descriptive overview of the first 210 participants screened for liver fibrosis and steatosis via transient elastography, Jan 31 – Apr 20, 2026.

210Participants
70.5%Flagged: elevated fibrosis or steatosis
17.6%Elevated liver stiffness (≥7 kPa)
68.1%Elevated steatosis (CAP ≥248 dB/m)
01

Who was screened

128 women and 82 men, ages 21–80 (mean 52.6), were screened across the Greater Toronto Area, primarily in Toronto proper.

Sexn%
Female12861.0%
Male8239.0%
Age range 21–80 Mean age 52.6 yrs
Toronto
113
North York
13
Mississauga
13
Etobicoke
9
Scarborough
8
Brampton
7
White
135
Asian
33
Other
15
Hispanic/Latino
11
Black / African American
11
Multi-racial
4
02

FibroScan results

Liver stiffness (kPa) estimates fibrosis; controlled attenuation parameter, "fat decay" (dB/m), estimates steatosis (fatty infiltration). Staging bands below follow commonly used VCTE cutoffs and are illustrative, not diagnostic thresholds set by a clinician.

5.65 kPa
Mean liver stiffness
median 4.75 kPa
263 dB/m
Mean fat decay (CAP)
range 160–380 dB/m
29.3
Mean BMI (kg/m²)
n=205 with height & weight recorded

Fibrosis staging (liver stiffness)

173F0–F182.4% · <7 kPa
21F210.0% · 7–9 kPa
10F34.8% · 9–12 kPa
6F42.9% · ≥12 kPa

Steatosis staging (fat decay / CAP)

67S031.9% · <248 dB/m
39S118.6% · 248–268
27S212.9% · 268–280
77S336.7% · ≥280 dB/m
148 of 210 participants (70.5%) showed at least one elevated result — either liver stiffness ≥7 kPa or CAP ≥248 dB/m. 32 participants (15.2%) were elevated on both measures, the group at highest apparent combined risk of fibrosis with steatosis.
03

Body weight profile

Nearly 3 in 4 participants with recorded height and weight fell in the overweight or obese BMI range.

Normal
43 (21%)
Overweight
80 (39%)
Obese
69 (34%)
Severely obese
13 (6%)
04

Reported health history

Self-reported comorbidities and prior liver testing, collected at intake.

Conditionn%
High cholesterol9143.3%
High blood pressure5124.3%
Type 2 diabetes2913.8%
Thyroid condition3315.7%
Cancer (any)104.8%
Cirrhosis41.9%
Hepatitis C31.4%
Hepatitis B21.0%
Type 1 diabetes21.0%
HIV10.5%
Congestive heart failure10.5%
Prior liver scan?n
No165
Yes24
Unsure21
Ever had abnormal/high liver test?n
No140
Yes70
104 participants (49.5%) already reported a diagnosed liver condition at intake (mostly Fatty Liver/MASLD), meaning roughly half of those flagged by the scan were previously undiagnosed or unaware — the population this kind of community screening is designed to reach.
05

Risk patterns

Average scan results were consistently worse among participants with type 2 diabetes, a known driver of fatty liver disease.

Liver stiffnessFat decay (CAP)
Without Type 2 diabetes (n=181)5.50 kPa261.1 dB/m
With Type 2 diabetes (n=29)6.58 kPa276.4 dB/m
Mean BMI
Liver stiffness <7 kPa28.6
Liver stiffness ≥7 kPa32.5
06

How people found the program

Online / social media
138 (66%)
Friend or family
51 (24%)
Other
13 (6%)
Community group
5 (2%)
Doctor / provider
3 (1%)
Two-thirds of participants self-referred through the website or social media, and clinician referral was the smallest channel (1%) — worth noting if a goal of the next pilot phase is deeper integration with primary care.
07

Data quality notes

A few things worth knowing before drawing conclusions from this pilot data: