Peginterferon alfa-2a for hepatitis C after liver transplantation: two randomized, controlled trials

A systematic review with meta-analysis: Is ribavirin necessary in sofosbuvir-based direct-acting antiviral therapies for patients with HCV recurrence after liver transplantation?

OBJECTIVES

With the appearance of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs), sofosbuvir (SOF)-based DAAs are recommended for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). Whether ribavirin (RBV) is needed by patients after LT in combination with SOF-based DAAs remains to be determined. This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the necessity of RBV with SOF-based DAAs for post-LT patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases were systematically searched for eligible studies from the databases' inceptions until November 2018. We accepted the studies that included HCV recurrence in post-LT patients who were treated with SOF-based DAAs ± RBV, and evaluated the rate of sustained virological response 12 weeks (SVR12) after the end of treatment.

RESULTS

Twelve studies, comprising a total of 1466 LT recipients, were included in this study. The pooled SVR12 of these patients was 91% (95% CI: 84% to 95%). There was no statistical difference of SVR12 in the patients treated with SOF-based DAAs + RBV versus -RBV group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.03; P = 0.35) by different therapy duration (P = 0.26), with different targets of DAAs (P = 0.13) and in different regions (P = 0.34) but a tendency for a higher incidence of anemia in the +RBV group than in the -RBV group (RR = 5.18; 95% CI: 3.41 to 7.86; p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

The addition of RBV may not contribute to a higher SVR rate and could increase the incidence of anemia, so RBV is not necessary in SOF-based DAAs for patients with HCV recurrence after LT.

Improved Graft Survival After Liver Transplantation for Recipients With Hepatitis C Virus in the Direct-Acting Antiviral Era

Highly effective direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy has transformed outcomes of liver transplantation in hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients. We examined longer-term outcomes in HCV-positive recipients in the DAA era and analyzed the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients for primary adult, single-organ, nonfulminant liver transplant recipients in the United States from January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2018. Graft loss was compared among HCV-positive liver transplant recipients who received either an HCV-negative or HCV-positive donor (donor [D]-/recipient [R]+; D+/R+) and HCV-negative liver transplant recipients who received a HCV-negative donor (D-/R-). The groups were further divided between the pre-DAA and DAA eras. There were 52,526 patients included: 31,193 were D-/R- patients; 18,746 were D-/R+ patients; and 2587 were D+/R+ patients. The number of D-/R+ transplants decreased from 2010 in 2008 to 1334 in 2017, with this decline particularly noticeable since 2015. D-/R+ patients in the DAA era (n = 7107) were older, had higher rates of hepatocellular carcinoma, and lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores than those in the pre-DAA era. Graft survival improved for all recipients in the DAA era but improved most dramatically in HCV-positive recipients: D-/R+ 1-year survival was 92.4% versus 88.7% and 3-year survival was 83.7% versus 77.7% (DAA versus pre-DAA era, respectively) compared with D-/R- 1-year survival of 92.7% versus 91.0% and 3-year survival of 85.7% versus 84.0% (DAA versus pre-DAA era, respectively). The magnitude of improvement in 3-year graft survival was almost 4-fold greater for D-/R+ patients. The 3-year survival for D+/R+ patients was similar to HCV-negative patients. In conclusion, the number of liver transplants for HCV has decreased by more than one-third over the past decade. Graft survival among HCV-positive recipients has increased disproportionately in the DAA era with HCV-positive recipients now achieving similar outcomes to non-HCV recipients.

Successful treatment of donor-derived hepatitis C viral infection in three transplant recipients from a donor at increased risk for bloodborne pathogens

We report here the successful treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) transmitted from a nucleic acid testing (NAT)-negative donor to three HCV-negative recipients-two renal transplants and one liver. Both renal recipients underwent standard deceased-donor renal transplantation with immediate graft function. The liver recipient underwent standard orthotopic liver transplantation and recovered uneventfully. The donor was a 39-year-old woman with a terminal serum creatinine of 0.7 mg/dL. She was high risk for bloodborne pathogens, based upon a history of sexual contact with an HCV-infected male partner. Recipient 1 was a 45-year-old man with a history of end-stage renal disease from systemic lupus erythematosus. Recipient 2 was a 62-year-old woman with a history of end-stage renal disease caused by hypertension and insulin-dependent diabetes. Recipient 3 was a 42-year-old man with acute liver failure from acetaminophen ingestion. All recipients became HCV polymerase chain reaction positive on post-transplant follow-up. Both kidney recipients were treated with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir combination therapy for 12 weeks without side effects or rejection episodes. Recipient 3 was treated with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in combination with ribavirin for 12 weeks without side effects. All patients achieved a sustained viral response at 12 weeks and are considered cured of HCV. The kidney recipients maintained good allograft function with a serum creatinine of 1.4 mg/dL and 1.0 mg/dL, respectively. Both renal recipients maintained normal liver function post treatment and did not develop any evidence of fibrosis. The liver recipient's liver function tests returned to normal without further incident. This case report provides evidence for the successful treatment of donor-derived HCV in transplant recipients.

Developing therapies to treat hepatitis C infection in post-liver transplant recipients

INTRODUCTION

Currently, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains the most common indication for liver transplant in the United States (US) with almost universal HCV recurrence in the post-liver transplant setting. Previous interferon (IFN)-related efficacy and tolerability concerns about worsening liver function have limited treatment options for many patients with HCV-associated decompensated liver disease and post-liver transplant recipients. However, the last decade has seen a seen a radical shift in the management of HCV with multiple direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatments that provide more effective, all-oral, IFN-free alternatives. Areas covered: This review will serve to highlight the various pharmacotherapies available to clinicians for patients with HCV recurrence post-liver transplant. A brief history of prior regimens is provided with evidence for newer treatments presented. Also detailed are updated guidelines from societal organizations. Finally, timing of HCV treatment is discussed as the decision to treat patients in a pre or post-liver transplant setting remains challenging. Expert opinion: While there are many potential available therapies for HCV recurrence in the post-liver transplant setting, daclatasvir/sofosbuvir and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir have been the most extensively studied. Newer, pangenotypic generation drugs require more evidence before routine utilization in post-liver transplant recipients.

Optimal timing for hepatitis C therapy in US patients eligible for liver transplantation: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Recurrence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) following liver transplantation (LT) is universal for those with ongoing viraemia and is associated with higher rates of allograft failure and death. However, the optimal timing of HCV treatment for patients awaiting transplant remains unclear.

AIM

To evaluate the comparative cost-effectiveness of treating HCV pre-LT vs. post-LT (pre-emptive or after HCV recurrence).

METHODS

A Markov state-transition model was created to simulate the progression of a cohort of HCV-genotype 1 or 4 cirrhotic patients from the time of transplant listing until death. We then used this model to study the cost-effectiveness of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) with ribavirin for 12 weeks, administered for three separate treatment strategies: (i) pre-LT; (ii) post-LT preemptively prior to HCV recurrence; or (iii) post-LT after HCV recurrence.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis using a median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score <25 at the time of transplant, we found that pre-LT treatment of HCV led to more QALYs for fewer dollars compared to other strategies. Analysis limited to living donor LT recipients revealed that pre-LT treatment was also the most cost-effective strategy. When the analysis was repeated for MELD ≥25, decompensated disease (Child-Pugh class B or C), and hepatocellular carcinoma cases, preemptive post-LT strategy was more cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of HCV prior to liver transplantation appears to be the most cost-effective strategy for patients with a MELD score <25. For patients with a MELD ≥25 or decompensated cirrhosis, preemptive post-liver transplantation treatment before HCV recurrence is the most cost-effective strategy.

Treatment of Hepatitis C in Patients Undergoing Immunosuppressive Drug Therapy

With 185 million people chronically infected globally, hepatitis C is a leading bloodborne infection. All-oral regimens of direct acting agents have superior efficacy compared to the historical interferon-based regimens and are significantly more tolerable. However, trials of both types of regimens have often excluded patients on immunosuppressive medications for reasons other than organ transplantation. Yet, these patients-most often suffering from malignancy or autoimmune diseases-could stand to benefit from these treatments. In this study, we systematically review the literature on the treatment of hepatitis C in these neglected populations. Research on patients with organ transplants is more robust and this literature is reviewed here non-systematically. Our systematic review produced 2273 unique works, of which 56 met our inclusion criteria and were used in our review. The quality of data was low; only 3 of the 56 studies were randomized controlled trials. Sustained virologic response was reported sporadically. Interferon-containing regimens achieved this end-point at rates comparable to that in immunocompetent individuals. Severe adverse effects and death were rare. Data on all-oral regimens were sparse, but in the most robust study, rates of sustained virologic response were again comparable to immunocompetent individuals (40/41). Efficacy and safety of interferon-containing regimens and all-oral regimens were similar to rates in immunocompetent individuals; however, there were few interventional trials. The large number of case reports and case series makes conclusions vulnerable to publication bias. While firm conclusions are challenging, given the dearth of high-quality studies, our results demonstrate that antiviral therapy can be safe and effective. The advent of all-oral regimens offers patients and clinicians greatly increased chances of cure and fewer side effects. Preliminary data reveal that these regimens may confer such benefits in immunosuppressed individuals as well. More prospective interventional trials would greatly benefit the many patients with chronic hepatitis C on immunosuppressive therapies.

Successful Anti-HCV Therapy of a Former Intravenous Drug User with Sofosbuvir and Daclatasvir in a Peritranspant Setting: A Case Report

BACKGROUND Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) represent a new hallmark in antiviral therapy of hepatitis C virus (HCV). DAAs have been shown to be safe and effective after liver transplantation (LT), but there is little information about their use in peritransplant settings. Former intravenous drug users represent an increasing group seeking HCV treatment. This case report demonstrates the successful peritransplant antiviral treatment of a former intravenous drug user who had been treated in a methadone maintenance program. CASE REPORT The patient was diagnosed with Child B cirrhosis for the first time in 2009. He had a Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of 21 and started antiviral therapy with sofosbuvir (SOF) and daclatasvir (DCV) in March 2014. Due to hepatic decompensation, he received a LT in April 2014. Immunosuppression was performed with tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate-mofetil (MMF), and boosted with prednisolone in the initial stage. Four weeks after his LT, the patient presented with an acute renal injury. The patient was discharged one week later after sufficient hydration, discontinuation of non-steroidal anti-phlogistics therapy, and adjustments to his immunosuppressive regimen. At the beginning of his therapy, the number of RNA copies was 13,000 IU/mL. He received 24 weeks of anti-HCV treatment with SOF and DCV; the antiviral treatment was successful and his LT was well tolerated.  CONCLUSIONS Treatment of HCV is feasible in a peritransplant setting. The antiviral regimen we used did not seem to have any relevant interactions with the patient's immunosuppressive regimens. Still, the peritransplant setting is a very demanding environment for anti-HCV therapy, and further studies are needed.

Fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis C in post-transplant adult recipients of liver transplantation

Hepatitis C recurrence continues to present a major challenge in liver transplantation (LT). Approximately 10% of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive recipients will develop fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) after LT. FCH is clinically characterized as marked jaundice with cholestatic hepatic dysfunction and high titers of viremia. Pathologically, FCH manifests as marked hepatocyte swelling, cholestasis, periportal peritrabecular fibrosis and only mild inflammation. This progressive form usually involves acute liver failure, and rapidly results in graft loss. A real-time and precise diagnosis based on histopathological examination and viral measurement is indispensable for the adequate treatment of FCH. Typical pathological findings of FCH are shown. Currently, carefully selected combinations of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) offer the potential for highly effective and safe regimens for hepatitis C, both in the pre- and post-transplant settings. Here, we review FCH caused by HCV in LT recipients, and current strategies for sustained virological responses after LT. Only a few cases of successfully treated FCH C after LT by DAAs have been reported. The diagnostic findings and therapeutic dilemma are discussed based on a literature review.

New perspectives for preventing hepatitis C virus liver graft infection

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a leading cause of end-stage liver disease that necessitates liver transplantation. The incidence of virus-induced cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma continues to increase, making liver transplantation increasingly common. Infection of the engrafted liver is universal and accelerates progression to advanced liver disease, with 20-30% of patients having cirrhosis within 5 years of transplantation. Treatments of chronic HCV infection have improved dramatically, albeit with remaining challenges of failure and access, and therapeutic options to prevent graft infection during liver transplantation are emerging. Developments in directed use of new direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) to eliminate circulating HCV before or after transplantation in the past 5 years provide renewed hope for prevention and treatment of liver graft infection. Identification of the ideal regimen and use of DAAs reveals new ways to treat this specific population of patients. Complementing DAAs, viral entry inhibitors have been shown to prevent liver graft infection in animal models and delay graft infection in clinical trials, which shows their potential for use concomitant to transplantation. We review the challenges and pathology associated with HCV liver graft infection, highlight current and future strategies of DAA treatment timing, and discuss the potential role of entry inhibitors that might be used synergistically with DAAs to prevent or treat graft infection.

Two-Year Follow-Up Analysis of Telaprevir-Based Antiviral Triple Therapy for HCV Recurrence in Genotype 1 Infected Liver Graft Recipients as a First Step towards Modern HCV Therapy

Objective. The introduction of protease inhibitors telaprevir and boceprevir in 2011 had extended the antiviral treatment options especially in genotype 1 infected hepatitis C relapsers and nonresponders to interferon/ribavirin therapy. The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term treatment efficiency of telaprevir-based triple therapy for patients with hepatitis C reinfection after orthotopic liver transplantation. Patients and Methods. We included 12 patients with histologically confirmed graft fibrosis due to hepatitis C reinfection. The treatment duration was scheduled as 12 weeks of telaprevir-based antiviral triple therapy followed by 36 weeks of dual therapy with pegylated interferon/ribavirin. The patients were followed up for two years after the end of triple therapy. Results. Of the 12 patients, 6 (50%) completed the full 48 weeks of antiviral treatment. An end of treatment response and a sustained virological response 52 weeks after the end of the antiviral treatment course were achieved in 8/12 (67%) and 7/12 (58%) patients, respectively. Conclusion. Telaprevir-based triple therapy was shown to be a long-term effective but complex treatment option for individual patients with hepatitis C graft. With the recent improvements in hepatitis C therapy options telaprevir may not be recommended as a standard therapy for this indication anymore.

Management of hepatitis c genotype 4 in the liver transplant setting

End-stage liver disease secondary to hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the major indication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) worldwide. The percentage of HCV patients infected with genotype 4 (G4) among recipients of OLT varies depending on geographic location. In the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, G4 infection is the most common genotype among transplant recipients. Due to the low prevalence of HCV-G4 in Europe and the United States, this genotype has not been adequately studied in prospective trials evaluating treatment outcomes and remains the least studied variant. The aim of this review is to summarize the natural history and treatment outcome of HCV-G4 following liver transplantation, with particular attention to new HCV therapies. This review incorporates all published studies and abstracts including HCV-G4 patients.

Prevention of hepatitis C virus infection using a broad cross-neutralizing monoclonal antibody (AR4A) and epigallocatechin gallate

The anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) activity of a novel monoclonal antibody (mAb; AR4A) and epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) were studied in vitro using a HCV cell culture system and in vivo using a humanized liver mouse model capable of supporting HCV replication. Alone, both exhibit reliable cross-genotype HCV inhibition in vitro, and combination therapy completely prevented HCV infection. In vitro AR4A mAb (alone and combined with EGCG) robustly protects against the establishment of HCV genotype 1a infection. EGCG alone fails to reliably protect against an HCV challenge. In conclusion, AR4A mAb represents a safe and efficacious broadly neutralizing antibody against HCV applicable to strategies to safely prevent HCV reinfection following liver transplantation, and it lends further support to the concept of HCV vaccine development. The poor bioavailability of EGCG limits HCV antiviral activity in vitro.

Outcomes for patients with HCV after liver transplantation in Korea: a multicenter study

PURPOSE

HCV-related liver disease is the most common indication for liver transplantation (LT) in Western countries, whereas HCV LT is rare in Korea. We conducted a survey of HCV RNA-positive patients who underwent LT and investigated the prognostic factors for patient survival and the effects of immunosuppression.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the multicenter records of 192 HCV RNA-positive patients who underwent LT.

RESULTS

The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 78.8%, 75.3%, and 73.1%, respectively. Excluding the cases of hospital mortality (n = 23), 169 patients were evaluated for patient survival. Most patients were genotype 1 (n = 111, 65.7%) or genotype 2 (n = 42, 24.9%). The proportion of living donors for LT (n = 135, 79.9%) was higher than that of deceased donors (deceased donor liver transplantation [DDLT], n = 34, 20.1%). The median donor and recipient ages were 32 years and 56 years, respectively. Twenty-eight patients (16.6%) died during the observation period. Seventy-five patients underwent universal prophylaxis and 15 received preemptive therapy. HCV recurrence was detected in 97 patients. Recipients who were older than 60, received DDLT, used cyclosporine, or suffered acute rejection had lower rates of survival.

CONCLUSION

Patent survival rates of HCV patients after LT in Korea were comparable with other countries.

Response-Guided Therapy for Hepatitis C Virus Recurrence Based on Early Protocol Biopsy after Liver Transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) is universal and progressive. Here, we report recent results of response-guided therapy for HCV recurrence based on early protocol biopsy after LT. We reviewed patients who underwent LT for HCV related liver disease between 2010 and 2012. Protocol biopsies were performed at 3, 6, and 12 months after LT in HCV recurrence (positive HCV-RNA). For any degree of fibrosis, ≥ moderate inflammation on histology or HCV hepatitis accompanying with abnormal liver function, we treated with pegylated interferon and ribavirin. We adjusted treatment period according to individual response to treatment. Among 41 HCV related recipients, 25 (61.0%) who underwent protocol biopsies more than once were enrolled in this study. The mean follow-up time was 43.1 (range, 23-55) months after LT. Genotype 1 and 2 showed in 56.0% and 36.0% patients, respectively. Of the 25 patients, 20 (80.0%) started HCV treatment after LT. Rapid or early virological response was observed in 20 (100%) patients. Fifteen (75.0%) patients finished the treatment with end-of-treatment response. Sustained virological response (SVR) was in 11 (55.0%) patients, including 5 (41.7%) of 12 genotype 1 and 6 (75.0%) of 8 non-genotype 1 (P = 0.197). Only rapid or complete early virological response was a significant predictor for HCV treatment response after LT (100% in SVR group vs. 55.6% in non-SVR group, P = 0.026). Overall 3-yr survival rate was 100%. In conclusion, response-guided therapy for HCV recurrence based on early protocol biopsy after LT shows encouraging results.

Slower Fibrosis Progression Among Liver Transplant Recipients With Sustained Virological Response After Hepatitis C Treatment

Background

The natural course of hepatic fibrosis in HCV allograft recipients with sustained virological response (SVR) after anti-HCV therapy remains debatable. The aim of this study was to examine the progression of fibrosis in a cohort of patients who achieved SVR compared with those without treatment.

Methods

The 167 patients who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were chosen from a transplant database. All patients were required to have histological evidence of recurrent HCV infection post-liver transplantation and a follow-up biopsy. The 140 of these patients had received anti-viral therapy. Twenty-seven patients were identified as controls and were matched with the treatment group in all respects. The patients were categorized into four groups based on treatment response: 1) no treatment (control) (n = 27); 2) non-responders (n = 81); 3) relapsers (n = 32); and 4) SVR (n = 27). The endpoint was the stage of fibrosis on the follow-up liver biopsy.

Results

The treated and untreated groups were similar in clinical characteristics at the time of transplantation and prior to the initiation of treatment. The 72% of the cohort showed a fibrosis progression of ≥ 1 stage; this change did not significantly differ between the patient groups. Nonetheless, the fibrosis progression rate was the highest in the untreated group and lowest in the patients who achieved SVR. A coefficient of determination was used. Improvements in fibrosis scores were found with greater treatment duration. These improvements were most evident with the achievement of SVR.

Conclusions

In conclusion, SVR after anti-viral therapy for recurrent hepatitis C infection post-transplantation was associated with slower fibrosis progression and significantly improved graft survival.

HCV targeting of patients with cirrhosis

Interferon (IFN)-free treatments are now the treatment of choice for patients with chronic hepatitis C. Previously difficult to treat patients by IFN-containing treatments can now be treated safely by IFN-free therapies. More than 90% of hepatitis C genotype 1 and 4 patients with compensated cirrhosis or after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) can be cured by sofosbuvir combined with simeprevir, daclatasvir or ledipasvir, or by the paritaprevir/ritona-vir/ombitasvir/±dasabuvir (3D) combination. Addition of ribavirin confers to a minimal, if any, benefit to increase SVR. The need for ribavirin is controversial and remains to be studied. The optimal length of treatment is still unknown, and an individual approach may be needed. Most patients require only 12weeks of therapy. The safety of these drugs is not fully explored in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (Child-Pugh C), who should not be treated with protease inhibitors. In cirrhosis hepatitis C virus eradication does not necessarily mean a cure of the disease and patients regularly require follow-up. Drug-drug interactions with immunosuppressant in patients after OLT are easier to manage but still require attention. Better drugs are needed for genotype 3 patients.

Interferon-Free Hepatitis C Treatment before and after Liver Transplantation: The Role of HCV Drug Resistance

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the leading causes of end-stage liver disease and the main indication for liver transplantation (LT) in most countries. All patients who undergo LT with detectable serum HCV RNA experience graft reinfection progressing to cirrhosis within five years in 20% to 30% of them. Obtaining a sustained virological response (SVR) greatly improves overall and graft survival. Until 2011, standard antiviral therapy using PEGylated interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) was the only effective therapy, with an SVR rate around 30% in this setting. For patients infected with genotype 1, first generation NS3/4A protease inhibitors (PIs), boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR), associated with PEG-IFN and RBV for 48 weeks have increased the SVR rates to 60% in non-transplant patients. However, tolerability and drug-drug interactions with calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) are both limiting factors of their use in the liver transplant setting. Over recent years, the efficacy of antiviral C therapy has improved dramatically using new direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents without PEG-IFN and/or RBV, leading to SVR rates over 90% in non-transplant patients. Results available for transplant patients showed a better efficacy and tolerability and less drug-drug interactions than with first wave PIs. However, some infrequent cases of viral resistance have been reported using PIs or NS5A inhibitors pre- or post-LT that can lead to difficulties in the management of these patients.

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C in liver transplant candidates and recipients: Where do we stand?

The first generation direct antiviral agents (DAAs) highlighted substantial prognosis improvement among liver transplant (LT) candidates and recipients with recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. During 2014, second generation DAAs are associated with high sustained virological response rates (> 95%), shortened duration courses and relatively few toxicities. In keeping with the currently available data, patients with decompensated cirrhosis awaiting LT is preferable to be treated with interferon-free, new generation DAAs, with or without ribavirin combinations. Although data about the safety of new DAAs combinations in this patient population are limited, sofosbuvir and daclatasvir pharmacokinetics do not appear to change significantly in moderate or severe liver impairment, while other new DAAs (simeprevir, asunaprevir) seem to be contraindicated in patients with severe liver impairment (Child-Pugh class C). On the other hand, sofosbuvir should not be given in patients with glomerular filtration rate ≤ 30 mL/min, but ongoing trials will clarify better this issue. With the objective that newer antiviral combinations will yield safer and more efficient manipulation of HCV recurrence post-transplant, the European Association for the Study of the Liver has recently updated its recommendations towards this direction. Nevertheless the new antivirals' high cost may be the biggest challenge to their implementation worldwide.

Interferon Treatment of Hepatitis C Reinfection after Liver Transplantation: A Meta-Analysis

Background. Graft reinfection with hepatitis C (HCV) after liver transplantation is a significant problem in transplant hepatology. This meta-analysis was performed to compare the effectiveness and risk of adverse events of interferon-based therapy with no treatment after liver transplantation. Methods. We searched electronic databases up to July 31, 2013, to obtain relevant research reports that satisfied the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses were done on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized trials. Results. A meta-analysis was performed on 2 RCTs and 2 cohort studies comprising a total of 326 patients (171 of whom accepted interferon-based antiviral therapy). The treatment group was found to have higher virological response (VR) rates than controls at 12, 24, 48, and 72 weeks. Patients in the antiviral group had higher sustained virological response (SVR) rates and lower mean alanine aminotransferase levels relative to controls at 48 weeks, but more total serious adverse events (AEs) than controls. Conclusions. Interferon-based treatment has some efficacy in the treatment of HCV graft reinfection following liver transplantation.

Utility of the low-accelerating-dose regimen in 182 liver recipients with recurrent hepatitis C virus

AIM

To describe our experience using a low-accelerating-dose regimen (LADR) with pegylated interferon alpha-2a and ribavirin in treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence.

METHODS

From 2003, a protocolized LADR strategy was employed to treat liver transplant (LT) recipients with recurrent HCV at our institution. Medical records of 182 adult patients with recurrent HCV treated with LADR between 1/2003 and 1/2011 were reviewed. Histopathology from all post-LT liver biopsies were reviewed in a blinded fashion. Paired recipient and donor IL28B status were assessed. A novel technique was employed to ascertain recipient and donor IL28B (rs12979860) Gt data using DNA extracted from archival FFPE tissue from explanted native livers and donor gallbladders respectively. The primary endpoint was SVR; secondary endpoints examined include (1) patient and graft survival; (2) effect of anti-viral therapy on liver histology (fibrosis and inflammation); (3) incidence of on-treatment development of ACR, CDR, or PCH; (4) association of recipient and donor IL28B genotype with SVR; and (5) incidence of anti-viral therapy-associated adverse events (anemia, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, depression) and hepatic decompensation.

RESULTS

The overall SVR rate was 38% (29% Gt1, 67% Gt2, 86% Gt3 and 58% Gt4). HCV Gt (P < 0.0001), donor age (P = 0.003), cytomegalovirus mismatch (P = 0.001), baseline serum bilirubin (P = 0.002), and baseline viral load (P = 0.04) were independent predictors for SVR. SVR rates were significantly higher in the recipient-CC/donor-non CC pairs (P = 0.007). Neither baseline fibrosis nor change in fibrosis stage after anti-viral therapy were associated with SVR. Fibrosis progressed in 72% of patients despite SVR. Median graft survival was 91 mo. Five-year patient survival was superior in patients who achieved SVR (97% vs 82%, P = 0.001). Pre-treatment ALP ≥ 150 U/L (P = 0.01), total bilirubin ≥ 1.5 mg/dL (P = 0.001) and creatinine ≥ 2 mg/dL (P = 0.001) were independently associated with patient survival. Only 13% of patients achieving SVR died during the follow-up period. Treatment discontinuation and treatment-related mortality occurred in 35% and 2.2% of patients, respectively. EPO, G-CSF and blood transfusion were needed in 89%, 40% and 23% of patients, respectively. Overall hospitalization rate for treatment-related serious adverse events was 21%. Forty-six (25%) of the patients were deceased; among those who died, 25 (54%) were due to liver-related complications, and 4 deaths (9%) occurred while receiving therapy (2 patients experienced hepatic decompensation and 2 sepsis).

CONCLUSION

LADR strategy remains relevant in managing post-LT recurrent HCV where access to DAAs is limited. SVR is associated with improved survival, but fibrosis progression still occurs.

Sofosbuvir compassionate use program for patients with severe recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation

Recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after liver transplantation (LT) is associated with accelerated progression of liver disease, frequently leading to graft loss and early death. Existing treatment options for severe recurrent HCV infection are limited by suboptimal efficacy, poor tolerability, and numerous drug interactions. We provided sofosbuvir (SOF) and ribavirin (RBV) on a compassionate-use basis to patients with severe recurrent hepatitis C, including those with fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) and decompensated cirrhosis who had a life expectancy of 1 year or less. All patients were to receive 24-48 weeks of SOF plus RBV. Investigators could add pegylated interferon to the regimen at their discretion. Data from the first 104 patients who completed or prematurely discontinued treatment by January 1, 2014 are presented. Of the 104 patients analyzed, 52 had an early severe recurrence (diagnosed <12 months after LT) and 52 had cirrhosis (diagnosed >12 months after LT). Twelve patients who underwent retransplantation were excluded from our efficacy analysis. Of the 92 patients assessed, 54 (59%) achieved sustained virological response (SVR) at 12 weeks after the end of treatment, with a higher rate (73%; 35 of 48) in patients with early severe recurrence. Of the 103 patients assessed for clinical outcome, 59 (57%) reported clinical improvement at the last study visit, 23 (22%) were unchanged, 3 (3%) had a worsened clinical status, and 13 (13%) died. Overall, 123 serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 49 patients (47%). SAEs associated with hepatic decompensation were the most frequent, with 26 SAEs occurring in 19 patients (18%).

CONCLUSION

SOF and RBV provide high rates of SVR in patients with severe recurrent HCV, including patients with early severe recurrence, FCH, and cirrhosis.

Hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantation: A 10-year evaluation

AIM: To evaluate the predictors of 10-year survival of patients with hepatitis C recurrence.

METHODS: Data from 358 patients transplanted between 1989 and 2010 in two Italian transplant centers and with evidence of hepatitis C recurrence were analyzed. A χ², Fisher’s exact test and Kruskal Wallis’ test were used for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Survival analysis was performed at 10 years after transplant using the Kaplan-Meier method, and a log-rank test was used to compare groups. A P level less than 0.05 was considered significant for all tests. Multivariate analysis of the predictive role of different variables on 10-year survival was performed by a stepwise Cox logistic regression.

RESULTS: The ten-year survival of the entire population was 61.2%. Five groups of patients were identified according to the virological response or lack of a response to antiviral treatment and, among those who were not treated, according to the clinical status (mild hepatitis C recurrence, “too sick to be treated” and patients with comorbidities contraindicating the treatment). While the 10-year survival of treated and untreated patients was not different (59.1% vs 64.7%, P = 0.192), patients with a sustained virological response had a higher 10-year survival rate than both the “non-responders” (84.7% vs 39.8%, P < 0.0001) and too sick to be treated (84.7% vs 0%, P < 0.0001). Sustained virological responders had a survival rate comparable to patients untreated with mild recurrence (84.7% vs 89.3%). A sustained virological response and young donor age were independent predictors of 10-year survival.

CONCLUSION: Sustained virological response significantly increased long-term survival. Awaiting the interferon-free regimen global availability, antiviral treatment might be questionable in selected subjects with mild hepatitis C recurrence.

Management of post transplant hepatitis C in the direct antiviral agents era

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the main indications for liver transplantation. Viral recurrence occurs in all patients with detectable serum HCV RNA at the time of transplantation leading to cirrhosis in 20-30% of patients within 5 years. Viral eradication using antiviral therapy has been shown to improve patient and graft survival. Pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) antiviral therapy achieved SVR in around 30% of transplant recipients. In the non-transplant setting, first generation NS3/4 protease inhibitors, boceprevir or telaprevir associated with PEG-IFN and RBV, has improved the SVR rates to 75% in genotype 1 infected patients. However, tolerability and drug-drug interactions with calcineurin inhibitors are both limiting factors of their use in transplant recipients. In the non-transplant patients, using new direct-acting antiviral therapy has dramatically improved the efficacy of antiviral C therapy over recent years leading to SVR rates over 90% in phase II and III clinical trials, without PEG-IFN and/or RBV. Preliminary results in transplant patients showed better efficacy, better tolerability and less drug-drug interactions.

Hepatitis C virus reinfection after liver transplant: New chances and new challenges in the era of direct-acting antiviral agents

The first interferon-free regimens have been approved for the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV). In the liver transplant (LT) setting, these regimens are expected to have an important effect, because graft loss due to HCV recurrence is a serious problem after LT. The response to the hitherto conventional treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin is poor. The significantly better response rates achieved with boceprevir-based and telaprevir-based triple therapy have led to better graft and patient survival rates, but severe drug interactions with immunosuppressants limit the feasibility of this therapy for LT patients. With the approval of sofosbuvir in January 2014, of simeprevir in May 2014, and of daclatasvir in August 2014, three antiviral agents are now available and promise to be applicable without relevant adverse effects or negative interactions with immunosuppressants. Thus, 2014 marks the beginning of a new era of treatment options for HCV recurrence after LT. Although safety and efficacy studies of several interferon-free regimens for patients with HCV recurrence after LT have achieved good preliminary results, reports of clinical experiences with LT patients are scarce. The lack of randomized studies, the small number of enrolled and carefully selected patients, and the heterogeneity of these studies make the results questionable. Real-life experiences are eagerly awaited so that clinicians can estimate the usefulness and the pitfalls of these new regimens. Additionally, the high costs of these agents may limit their accessibility for many patients. The aim of this review is to summarize the current experience with and the expectations of the new direct-acting antiviral agents for LT patients.

Optimal therapy in hepatitis C virus liver transplant patients with direct acting antivirals

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) end stage liver disease is a main indication for liver transplantation (LT). Recurrent HCV always occurs when patients are transplanted with a detectable viral load, leading to cirrhosis in 20-30% of patients within 5 years. Achieving a sustained virological response (SVR) with antiviral treatment is the only way to improve patient and graft survival. Dual therapy based on pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PEG-IFN/RBV) was the standard of care for many years with limited efficacy and a poor safety profile. The addition of first generation NS3/4 protease inhibitors (PI) improved SVR rates from 30 to 50-60%. But the occurrence of serious adverse events and drug-drug interactions with calcineurin inhibitors have both been limiting factors for their use during LT. The preliminary results of the use of second generation direct acting antivirals (DAA) in transplant patients showed better efficacy with an SVR rate >70%. The pre- and post-transplantation safety profile is good. Although fewer drug-drug interactions are expected, some new DAA still interact with immunosuppressive drugs. Certain questions such as the use of RBV or the optimal duration of therapy have still not been resolved but should be answered by the many ongoing studies in the coming year.

Efficacy of new direct acting antivirals in transplant recipients and patients with advanced disease

The development of new direct acting antivirals constitutes a clinical revolution in the field of hepatitis C therapy and, most probably, in the history of Hepatology. Difficult-to-treat patients, such as cirrhotics or patients in the peri-transplant setting, will clearly benefit from these therapies, particularly from interferon-free all-oral combinations. However, despite the substantial improvement of the hepatitis C drug market, access to these therapies will likely be different around the world due to economic restrictions. This review aims to clarify the current stage of different antiviral strategies (with or without interferon) in these difficult populations by analysing specific efficacy and safety results in patients with cirrhosis, patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation and recipients with hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation. Hitherto, some important challenges still remain unanswered in these patients and will need to be assessed in clinical practice, such as the evaluation of safety and efficacy in advanced cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension, the impact (if any) of viral clearance on clinical outcomes in patients with decompensated liver disease, the role of ribavirin in all-oral combinations, the relevance of the development of multi-drug viral resistant strains and the drug-drug interaction profiles of these drugs, especially after liver transplantation.

Management of recurrent hepatitis C virus after liver transplantation

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the leading cause of death from liver disease and the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT) in the United States and Western Europe. LT represents the best therapeutic alternative for patients with advanced chronic liver disease caused by HCV or those who develop hepatocarcinoma. Reinfection by HCV of the graft is universal and occurs in 95% of transplant patients. This reinfection can compromise graft function and patient survival. In a few cases, the histological recurrence is minimal and non-progressive; however, in most patients it follows a more rapid course than in immunocompetent persons, and frequently evolves into cirrhosis with graft loss. In fact, the five-year and ten-year survival of patients transplanted because of HCV are 75% and 68%, respectively, compared with 85% and 78% in patients transplanted for other reasons. There is also a pattern of recurrence that is very severe, but rare (< 10%), called fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis, which often involves rapid graft loss. Patients who present a negative HCV viremia after antiviral treatment have better survival. Many studies published over recent years have shown that antiviral treatment of post-transplant HCV hepatitis carried out during the late phase is the best option for improving the prognosis of these patients. Until 2011, PEGylated interferon plus ribavirin was the standard of care, resulting in a sustained virological response in around 30% of recipients. The addition of protease inhibitors, such as boceprevir or telaprevir, to the standard of care, or the use of other direct-acting antiviral drugs may involve therapeutic changes in the context of HCV recurrence. This may result a better prognosis for these patients, particularly those with severe recurrence or factors predicting rapid progression of fibrosis. However, the use of these agents in LT still requires clarification in terms of safety and efficacy.

Treatment options in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, pre- and post-transplantation

Interferon-based treatments have a poor safety profile and limited efficacy in patients with advanced liver disease and in patients with hepatitis C (HCV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). Despite the recent approval of the first interferon-free regimen, which will be followed by several other interferon-free combinations in 2014 and 2015, data in patients with advanced cirrhosis and hepatitis C after LT are still limited. One study has already proven the concept that graft HCV infection can be prevented in a significant proportion of patients by treating them with sofosbuvir and ribavirin while awaiting LT. Two interferon-free regimens have also demonstrated a high efficacy in patients with hepatitis C recurrence after transplantation. Before these treatment strategies can be implemented in clinical practice, a few issues need to be addressed: (1) safety and efficacy of new antivirals in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, (2) the impact of viral clearance on liver function, (3) the potential consequences of virological failure (and the selection of multi-drug resistant HCV strains) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis or with severe hepatitis C recurrence after LT, and (4) drug-drug interactions (DDI) profiles. Finally, in the transplant setting it is also relevant to learn which strategy is most cost-effective in minimizing the negative impact of hepatitis C: preventing graft infection by treating patients before transplantation or treating hepatitis C recurrence after LT.

Natural history, treatment and prevention of hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation: Past, present and future

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease, including cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma is the main indication for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide. Post-transplant HCV re-infection is almost universal and results in accelerated progression from acute hepatitis to chronic hepatitis, and liver cirrhosis. Comprehension and treatment of recurrent HCV infection after LT have been major issues for all transplant hepatologists and transplant surgeons for the last decades. The aim of this paper is to review the evolution of our knowledge on the natural history of HCV recurrence after LT, including risk factors for disease progression, and antiviral therapy. We will focus our attention on possible ways (present and future) to improve the final long-term results of LT for HCV-related liver disease.

Hepatitis C virus reinfection after liver transplantation: Is there a role for direct antiviral agents?

Recurrence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection following liver transplantation (LT) is almost universal and can accelerate graft cirrhosis in up to 30% of patients. The development of effective strategies to treat or prevent HCV recurrence after LT remains a major challenge, considering the shortage of donor organs and the accelerated progression of HCV in LT recipients. Standard antiviral therapy with pegylated-interferon plus ribavirin is the current treatment of choice for HCV LT recipients, even though the combination is not as effective as it is in immunocompetent patients. A sustained virological response in the setting of LT improves patient and graft survival, but this is only achieved in 30%-45% of patients and the treatment is poorly tolerated. To improve the efficacy of pre- and post-transplant antiviral therapy, a new class of potent direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) has been developed. The aim of this review is to summarize the use of DAAs in LT HCV patients. PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and clinical trial databases were searched for this purpose. To date, only three clinical studies on the topic have been published and most of the available data are in abstract form. Although a moderately successful early virological response has been reported, DAA treatment regimens were associated with severe toxicity mitigating their potential usefulness. Moreover, the ongoing nature of data, the lack of randomized studies, the small number of enrolled patients and the heterogeneity of these studies make the results largely anecdotal and questionable. In conclusion, large well-designed clinical studies on DAAs in HCV LT patients are required before these drugs can be recommended after transplantation.

Μanagement of patients with hepatitis B and C before and after liver and kidney transplantation

New nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) with high genetic barrier to hepatitis B virus (HBV) resistance (such as entecavir, tenofovir) have improved the prognosis of patients with HBV decompensated cirrhosis and have prevented HBV recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). NAs are considered the most proper approach for HBV infection in patients under renal replacement therapy but their doses should be adjusted according to the patient's creatinine clearance. In addition, physicians should be aware of the potential nephrotoxicity. However, patients with chronic hepatitis C and decompensated cirrhosis can receive only one therapeutic option before LT, as well as for Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence after LT, which is the combination of subcutaneous Peg-IFN and ribavirin. Generally, therapy for HCV after renal transplantation should be avoided. Although the optimal antiviral therapy for HCV infection has not been established, attention has turned to a new, oral direct acting antiviral treatment which marks a promising strategy in prognosis and in amelioration of these diseases.

Management of HCV transplant patients with triple therapy

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the leading causes of end-stage liver disease and the main indication for liver transplantation (LT) in most countries. All patients who undergo LT with detectable serum HCV RNA experience graft reinfection. Between 20 and 30% of patients have developed cirrhosis at 5 years post-LT. The outcome of transplant patients with cirrhosis on the graft is severe, with a rate of decompensation at 1 year of approximately 40%. To date, retransplantation is the only option in patients with decompensated liver disease. Until 2011, standard antiviral therapy with pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV), was the only effective therapy. Obtaining a sustained virological response (SVR) in patients with LT greatly improves overall and graft survival but this only occurs in 30% of transplanted patients. Direct acting antivirals (DAAs) such as protease inhibitors (PI), polymerase or other non-structural proteins inhibitors represent a new era in HCV associated liver disease. Although their use in the field of LT will certainly be essential there are some limitations because of safety and tolerance. One limitation is the potential interaction with calcineurin inhibitors. We describe the results of triple therapy with boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR) for efficacy and safety and comment on future therapeutic strategies in liver transplant recipients.

Individualized therapy for hepatitis C infection: focus on the interleukin-28B polymorphism in directing therapy

Hepatitis C virus—a major global cause of chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma—affects millions of people worldwide. Pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) had been the standard treatment for a decade until availability of the protease inhibitors in 2011. However, current antiviral therapy is still IFN-based and is associated with significant side effects and variable treatment response. Thus, various host and viral factors have been evaluated before and during treatment for the prediction of sustained virologic response to antiviral therapy. In 2009, genome-wide association studies found the single-nucleotide polymorphisms, located near the host interleukin-28B (IL28B) gene that encodes IFN-λ3, to be the best pretreatment predictor of virologic response to Peg-IFN and RBV therapy in chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 patients. Additionally, inosine triphosphatase (ITPA) gene variants were found to be associated with RBV-induced hemolytic anemia, which could affect treatment dose for selected patients. IL28B, ITPA, and other treatment predictors allowed for a potential individualized approach to treat hepatitis C. In the era of increased overall virologic response rates and good tolerability of the rapidly developing non-IFN oral direct-acting antiviral therapy regimens, the need for individualized treatment is likely to diminish. Various predictors of response, including IL28B will likely be of reduced importance in the near future.

Hepatitis C recurrence: the Achilles heel of liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the most common indication for liver transplantation worldwide; however, recurrence post transplant is almost universal and follows an accelerated course. Around 30% of patients develop aggressive HCV recurrence, leading to rapid fibrosis progression (RFP) and culminating in liver failure and either death or retransplantation. Despite many advances in our knowledge of clinical risks for HCV RFP, we are still unable to accurately predict those most at risk of adverse outcomes, and no clear consensus exists on the best approach to management. This review presents a critical overview of clinical factors shown to influence the course of HCV recurrence post transplant, with particular focus on recent data identifying the important role of metabolic factors, such as insulin resistance, in HCV recurrence. Emerging data for genetic markers of HCV recurrence and their usefulness for predicting adverse outcomes will also be explored.

Antiviral interventions for liver transplant patients with recurrent graft infection due to hepatitis C virus

BACKGROUND

Antiviral therapy for recurrent hepatitis C infection after liver transplantation is controversial due to unresolved balance between benefits and harms.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the therapeutic benefits and harms of different antiviral regimens in patients with hepatitis C re-infected grafts after liver transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 1, 2013), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to February 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing various antiviral therapies (alone or in combination) in the treatment of hepatitis C virus recurrence in liver transplantation for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors collected the data independently. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on available case-analysis. In the presence of only trials for a dichotomous outcome, we performed the Fisher's exact test.

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, 17 trials with 736 patients met the inclusion criteria for this review. All trials had high risk of bias. Five hundred and one patients randomised in 11 trials provided information for various comparisons in this systematic review after excluding post-randomisation drop-outs and patients from trials that did not report any of the outcomes of interest for this review. The comparisons for which outcomes were available included pegylated (peg) interferon versus control; peg interferon plus ribavirin versus control; ribavirin plus peg interferon versus peg interferon; peg interferon (1.5 μg/kg/week) plus ribavirin versus peg interferon (0.5 μg/kg/week) plus ribavirin; amantadine plus peg interferon plus ribavirin versus peg interferon plus ribavirin; interferon versus control; interferon plus ribavirin versus control; ribavirin versus interferon; and ribavirin versus placebo. Long-term follow-up was not available in these trials. There were no significant differences in mortality, retransplantation, graft rejections requiring retransplantation or medical treatment, or fibrosis worsening between the groups in any of the comparisons in which these outcomes were reported. Quality of life and liver decompensation were not reported in any of the trials. There was a significantly higher proportion of participants who developed serious adverse events in the ribavirin plus peg interferon combination therapy group than in the peg interferon monotherapy group (1 trial; 56 participants; 17/28 (60.7%) in the intervention group versus 5/28 (17.9%) in the control group; RR 3.40; 95% CI 1.46 to 7.94). There was no significant difference in proportion of participants who developed serious adverse events or in the number of serious adverse events between the intervention and control groups in the other comparisons that reported serious adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Considering the lack of clinical benefit, there is currently no evidence to recommend or refute antiviral treatment for recurrent liver graft infection with hepatitis C virus. Further randomised clinical trials with low risk of bias and low risk of random errors with adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.

Antiviral prophylaxis for the prevention of chronic hepatitis C virus in patients undergoing liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether prophylactic antiviral therapy is indicated to improve patient and graft survival in patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic decompensated hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different prophylactic antiviral therapies for patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 1, 2013), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to February 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised clinical trials irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status and comparing various prophylactic antiviral therapies (alone or in combination) in the prophylactic treatment of patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors collected the data independently. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on available case analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 501 liver transplant recipients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection were randomised in 12 trials to various experimental interventions and control interventions. The proportion of genotype I varied between 49% and 100% in the seven trials that reported the genotype. Only one or two trials were included under each comparison. All the trials were of high risk of bias. Ten trials including 441 liver transplant recipients provided data for this review.There were no significant differences in the 90-day mortality (1 trial; 81 participants; 5/35 (adjusted proportion: 14.2%) in interferon group versus 5/46 (10.9%) in control group; RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.41 to 4.19); mortality at maximal follow-up (2 trials; 105 participants; 7/47 (adjusted proportion: 14.8%) in interferon group versus 10/58 (17.2%) in control group; RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.08); long-term mortality (1 trial; 81 participants; HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.56); mortality at maximal follow-up (1 trial; 54 participants; 1/26 (3.9%) in pegylated interferon group versus 2/28 (7.1%) in control group; RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.05 to 5.59); 90-day mortality (1 trial; 115 participants; 5/55 (9.1%) in pegylated interferon plus ribavirin group versus 3/60 (5.0%) in control group; RR 1.82; 95% 0.46 to 7.25); 90-day mortality (3 trials; 53 participants; 3/37 (adjusted proportion: 4.3%) in HCV antibody group versus 1/16 (6.3%) in placebo group; RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.15 to 3.11); or 90-day mortality (2 trials; 31 participants; 2/14 (adjusted proportion: 16.2%) in HCV antibody high-dose group versus 1/17 (5.9%) in HCV antibody low-dose group; RR 2.75; 95% CI; 0.30 to 25.35). There were no significant differences in the retransplantation at maximal follow-up (2 trials; 105 participants; 2/47 (adjusted proportion: 4.0%) in interferon group versus 2/58 (3.4%) in control group; RR 1.17; 95% CI 0.22 to 6.2); 90-day retransplantation (1 trial; 18 participants; 1/12 (8.3%) in HCV antibody group versus 0/6 (0%) in control group; RR 1.71; 95% CI 0.09 to 32.93); or 90-day retransplantation (1 trial; 12 participants; 1/6 (17.7%) in HCV antibody high-dose group versus 0/6 (0%) in HCV antibody low-dose group; RR 3.00; 95% CI 0.15 to 61.74). There were no significant differences in serious adverse events, graft rejection, worsening of fibrosis, or HCV recurrence between intervention and control groups in any of the comparisons that reported these outcomes. None of the trials reported quality of life, liver decompensation, intensive therapy unit stay, or hospital stay. Life-threatening adverse events were not reported in either group in any of the comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no evidence to recommend prophylactic antiviral treatment to prevent recurrence of HCV infection either in primary liver transplantation or retransplantation. Further randomised clinical trials with adequate trial methodology and adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.

Interaction between calcineurin inhibitors and IL-28B rs12979860 C>T polymorphism and response to treatment for post-transplant recurrent hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

The impact of calcineurin inhibitors on achievement of sustained virological response to antiviral therapy for post-transplant recurrent hepatitis C is controversial. This study aimed at investigating the interactions between calcineurin inhibitors and interleukin-28B (IL-28B) gene polymorphisms and sustained virological response.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 147 liver transplant recipients with recurrent hepatitis C, who received 48 weeks of peg-interferon-α (N=113) or standard interferon (N=34), in association with ribavirin. Cyclosporine and tacrolimus were administered in 68 and 79 patients, respectively. IL-28B rs12979860 allele frequency was assessed in both donors and recipients.

RESULTS

Overall, 57 patients (38.8%) obtained sustained virological response; no difference was found between cyclosporine and tacrolimus-treated patients (42.6% vs. 35.4%, p=0.371). Recipient and donor IL-28B genotypic frequencies were C/C=30.6%, C/T=51.7%, T/T=17.7% and C/C=44.9%, C/T=50.3%, T/T=4.8%, respectively. Combining donor and recipient alleles, response rates decreased from cyclosporine-treated patients carrying ≤ 1 T allele (56.1%) to tacrolimus-treated patients carrying ≤ 1 T allele (44.7%) to patients carrying ≥ 2 T alleles (25.0%, p=0.0009).

CONCLUSIONS

Donor and recipient rs12979860 alleles synergistically influence sustained virological response rate to antiviral treatment for recurrent hepatitis C. In patients carrying <2 T alleles cyclosporine favours a better response than tacrolimus, while no difference was found in the presence of ≥ 2 T alleles.

Intravenous interferon administered during liver transplantation is not effective in preventing hepatitis C reinfection

BACKGROUND

Post-transplant hepatitis C is a major challenge after liver transplantation (LT). Antiviral therapy is associated with lower efficacy in the post-transplant setting.

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and effect of intravenous interferon (IFN) during the anhepatic phase of LT on hepatitis C viral load.

METHODS

Fifteen consecutive subjects undergoing liver transplant for hepatitis C cirrhosis were enrolled in the study, ten of which received study drug and five subjects served as controls. Cases received weight-based ribavirin and subcutaneous IFN at time of incision followed by intravenous IFN at the start of the anhepatic phase. Adverse events and viral levels were recorded. Repeated measures ANOVA was employed to test for differences over time, between the groups, and time by group interaction.

RESULTS

All subjects had genotype 1 virus. Hepatitis C viral load was lower at week 4 in cases compared to controls (769,004 ± 924,082 IU/ml and 2,329,896 ± 3,731,749 IU/ml, respectively), but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.50). Three subjects developed adverse events related to IFN including pulmonary edema, rejection, and neutropenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous IFN administered during the anhepatic phase of liver transplant did not prevent graft reinfection and was associated with manageable adverse events. This regimen could be further studied if direct acting antiviral agents alone are insufficient for treating post-transplant hepatitis C.

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection after liver transplantation

Chronic hepatitis C virus infection is a leading cause of end stage liver disease and one of the leading indications for liver transplantation. Furthermore, hepatitis C virus recurrence is universal post-transplant leading to decreased graft and patient survival. Recurrent disease related to hepatitis C virus can lead to between 20 and 30% of patients developing recurrent cirrhosis within 5 years. Treatment options with antiviral therapy are limited and are associated with a significant side-effect profile, suboptimal tolerability and inferior response rates. Attention has therefore turned to strategies that can reduce hepatitis C virus recurrence rates post-transplant. Approximately only 30% of patients will achieve a sustained virologic response with current therapy with pegylated interferon and ribavirin. Successful hepatitis C virus eradication is the only factor associated with improved graft and patient survival post liver transplantation. Here we provide an overview of antiviral treatment in patients in the transplant arena and the potential opportunities and challenges with the introduction of new directly acting antivirals in G1 patients.

New insights in recurrent HCV infection after liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a small-enveloped RNA virus belonging to the Flaviviridae family. Since first identified in 1989, HCV has been estimated to infect 170 million people worldwide. Mostly chronic hepatitis C virus has a uniform natural history, from liver cirrhosis to the development of hepatocellular carcinoma. The current therapy for HCV infection consists of a combination of Pegylated interferon and ribavirin. On the other hand, HCV-related liver disease is also the leading indication for liver transplantation. However, posttransplant HCV re-infection of the graft has been reported to be universal. Furthermore, the graft after HCV re-infection often results in accelerated progression to liver failure. In addition, treatment of recurrent HCV infection after liver transplantation is often compromised by enhanced adverse effects and limited efficacy of interferon-based therapies. Taken together, poor outcome after HCV re-infection, regardless of grafts or recipients, poses a major issue for the hepatologists and transplant surgeons. The aim of this paper is to review several specific aspects regarding HCV re-infection after transplant: risk factors, current therapeutics for HCV in different stages of liver transplantation, cellular function of HCV proteins, and molecular mechanisms of HCV entry. Hopefully, this paper will inspire new strategies and novel inhibitors against recurrent HCV infection after liver transplantation and greatly improve its overall outcome.

Review article: the treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C virus infection in liver transplant candidates and recipients

BACKGROUND

Recently, the therapeutic landscape with regard to anti-HCV therapy has changed dramatically. The new directly acting anti-virals (DAAs) have demonstrated improved sustained virological response (SVR) compared with pegylated-interferon and ribavirin.

AIM

To examine and present the latest data with regard to anti-viral therapy in genotype 1 HCV-positive transplant candidates and recipients.

METHODS

An electronic search using Medline was performed. Search terms included 'HCV, DAA and protease inhibitor' in combination with 'treatment pre-transplantation' and 'treatment post-transplantation'.

RESULTS

Patients with advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis have inferior SVR rates compared with patients with minimal fibrosis. A low accelerating dose regimen (LADR) of pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PR) appears to be a safe therapeutic option. Side effects also appear to be more pronounced in patients with advanced disease. Data from the large registration studies with triple therapy (boceprevir or telaprevir plus PR) demonstrated improved SVR rates even in patients with advanced disease, although virological relapse rates were highest amongst these patients. In transplant recipients, initial data are being reported on the use of triple therapy, and although no SVR data are available, promising results are accruing. The drug-drug interactions appear to be manageable. Side effects in particular anaemia appear to be markedly increased in the posttransplant setting.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the new DAAs in patients with advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis pretransplant and posttransplant appears possible, with manageable side effects and drug-drug interactions, and improved early virological response rates. We recommend that these patients are managed in centres with the appropriate expertise.