paige_pharma said:

Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.

Second this. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.

Worth separating that from liver and MASH, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

Whether normalised enzymes tell you anything about fibrosis, and what the right follow-up measurement is?

jason_paloalto said:

One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here.