The biopsy results should be conveyed to you in the form of "Stage" of
fibrosis, and "Grade" of inflammation. To produce those values, one of two
scoring systems will be used.

The "Metavir" scoring system is the one most often used for HCV patients. In
this system, staging is between 0 (no fibrosis) through 4 (cirrhosis). Grading
is also between 0 (no inflammation) and 4 (severe activity).

Some doctors use the Knodell scoring system. This is a somewhat more complex
algorithm that uses three biopsy result components to produce an inflammation
score, and a fourth component to produce a grading score. Three of these
markers are combined to produce the inflammation grade:

0 = no inflammation
1-4 = minimal inflammation
5-8 = mild inflammation
9-12 = moderate inflammation
13-18 = marked inflammation

The fourth component indicates the amount of scarring in the liver and ranges
from 0 (no scarring) through 4 (cirrhosis).

So, at the very least, you should be told which system was used and what your
scores are.

Biopsies are typically used to help make treatment decisions. The wisdom of
this is often debatable: if you have a low score, you may feel (or even be
told by the doctor) that you don't need to attempt treatment yet. But there is
overwhelming treatment data that shows treatment success is inversely related
to biopsy scores. Also, because HCV frequently causes manifestations beyond
liver damage, focusing on liver condition alone can be problematic for overall
patient health.

imho, a biopsy is best used to simply get the patient off the fence and into
treatment - pretty much regardless of the actual score. It makes no sense to
me to wait, if all other conditions are favorable to treatment (insurance
coverage, physician availability, support system availability, overall
physical and mental health, etc).

Cheers

/greyhackles