## 3 Results
### Reproducibility of Pathological Features and Patterns with eFuCM  
After reaching a consensus diagnosis in discordant cases, the results were compared with individual eFuCM evaluations (Table 3). Pathologist 1, the non-eFuCM-experienced operator, had slight-to-fair levels of agreement for the presence of lobular inflammation (\(\kappa\) = 0.247), the grade of lobular inflammation (\(\kappa\) = 0.158) and the grade of portal inflammation (\(\kappa\) = 0.233). The agreement for the remaining features was moderate-to-substantial. Pathologist 2, the eFuCM-experienced operator, had a moderate-to-almost-perfect agreement for all the histopathological features, with lower kappa values for inflammation and steatosis grading.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Part I** & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Pathologist 1, n**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Observed Agreement**} & **Kappa 1** & **Agreement** \\ \cline{2-6}
**Pathologist 2, n** & **Yes** & **No** & & & & \\ \hline Fibrotic septa & & & & 91.3\% & 0.777 & Substantial \\ Yes & 16 & 0 & & & & \\ No & 2 & 5 & & & & \\ \hline Cirrhosis & & & & 100.0\% & 1.000 & Perfect \\ Yes & 11 & 0 & & & & \\ No & 0 & 12 & & & & \\ \hline Septal inflammation & & & & 95.7\% & 0.893 & Almost perfect \\ Yes & 16 & 1 & & & & \\ No & 0 & 6 & & & & \\ \hline Lobular inflammation & & & & 82.6\% & 0.553 & Moderate \\ Yes & 4 & 3 & & & & \\ No & 1 & 15 & & & & \\ \hline Steatosis & & & & 95.7\% & 0.881 & Almost perfect \\ Yes & 5 & 0 & & & & \\ No & 1 & 17 & & & & \\ \hline Tumor & & & & 100.0\% & 1.000 & Perfect \\ Yes & 2 & 0 & & & & \\ No & 0 & 21 & & & & \\ \hline
**Part II** & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Pathologist 2, n**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Pathologist 1, n**} & **Observed Agreement**} & **Kappa 1** & **Agreement** \\ \hline Grade of portal inflammation & No & Mild & Moderate & Severe & 84.5\% & 0.669 & Substantial \\ No & 4 & 1 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Mild & 2 & 14 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Moderate & 0 & 2 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Severe & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ \hline Grade of lobular inflammation & No & Mild & Moderate & Severe & 73.9\% & 0.378 & Fair \\ No & 15 & 1 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Mild & 3 & 1 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Moderate & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Severe & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & & & \\ \hline Grade of steatosis & No & Mild & Moderate & Severe & 95.7\% & 0.881 & Almost perfect \\ No & 17 & 1 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Mild & 0 & 5 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Moderate & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ Severe & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Reproducibility of histopathologic features by conventional optical microscopy.  
A substantial agreement (\(\kappa\) = 0.650) was observed for the overall intra-observer agreement between eFuCM patterns diagnosis and conventional H&E for Pathologist 1 and an almost perfect agreement (\(\kappa\) = 0.88) for Pathologist 2. The overall inter-observer agreement for the eFuCM patterns diagnosis was moderate between Pathologist 1 and 2 (\(\kappa\) = 0.601). Table 4 shows intra-observer agreement for both pathologists 1 and 2 with the conventional microscopy consensus diagnosis for each diagnosis pattern. The inter-observer agreement (Kappa 4) for the eFuCM pattern evaluation was perfect (\(\kappa\) = 1) for chronic hepatitis and tumor, substantial for steatosis (\(\kappa\) = 0.746), and moderate for acute hepatitis patterns (\(\kappa\) = 0.556) or normal samples (\(\kappa\) = 0.468)