Liver transplantation for hepatitis B: the con aspect

Management of recurrent viral hepatitis B and C after liver transplantation

Liver transplant teams are often faced with the challenges of managing viral recurrence after liver transplantation. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) remains the most challenging viral disease in the transplant community. Strategies to prevent and delay viral recurrence have slowly developed over the past 5 years. Hepatitis B virus (HBV), previously a contraindication for liver transplantation due to recurrence and cholestasis with allograft failure, is now one of the more favorable indications for liver transplantation as a result of current therapeutic options. This review investigates the up-to-date information on treatment outcomes for HCV and HBV in the period following liver transplant.

Low-Dose Hepatitis B Immune Globulin and Higher-Dose Lamivudine Combination to Prevent Hepatitis B Virus Recurrence after Liver Transplantation

Post-transplant prevention of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is based on treatment with lamivudine and/or hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG). However, optimum doses and duration for these drugs are not yet clear. We tested high doses of lamivudine (300 mg/day) in combination with low doses of HBIG (200–400 IU/2–4 weeks). Eighty patients who had post-transplant prophylaxis of lamivudine and HBIG were included in the study. Of those, 20 had hepatitis D virus co-infection and eight were HBV DNA-positive at the time of transplantation. Ten HBV DNA-positive patients were treated with lamivudine (150 mg/day) before transplantation; all were HBV DNA-negative after lamivudine treatment.

All patients in the anhepatic phase were given 4000 IU of HBIG. Following this, 400 or 800 IU HBIG was administered intramuscularly daily for 5–10 days post-transplantation and 2–4 times weekly thereafter, according to serum titre of antibodies to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs). Lamivudine was maintained or initiated at the time of transplantation and was continued indefinitely.

Median follow-up was 21 months (range 3–73 months). Recurrence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positivity occurred in only three out of 78 (4%) patients; two of these three were HBV DNA-positive. Median anti-HBs titre at the final follow-up was 68 IU. Patient and graft survival was 85% at 1 year.

In conclusion, a combination of lamivudine 300 mg/day and low-dose HBIG prevents post-transplantation recurrence of hepatitis B, even in the presence of viral replication in the pre-transplant period.

Increasing applicability of liver transplantation for patients with hepatitis B-related liver disease

Liver transplantation in patients with hepatitis B has been under discussion for 20 years because of inferior results without reinfection prophylaxis; therefore, we analyzed our overall experience with liver transplantation in hepatitis B patients with immunoprophylaxis, particularly the influence of the available antiviral treatment in different periods. From 1988 to 2000, 228 liver transplants in 206 hepatitis B patients were performed. Indications were acute liver failure (10%), hepatitis B virus (HBV) cirrhosis alone (67%) or with hepatitis D virus (HDV) (13%), or hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection (7%). All patients received long-term immunoprophylaxis (anti-HBs > 100 U/L). HBV DNA-positive patients were treated before and after surgery with famciclovir or lamivudine since 1993 and 1996, respectively. Since 1993, antivirals also were used for HBV reinfection. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival rates were 91%, 81%, and 73%. In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (60% 5-year survival, P <.01) or HBV reinfection (69% 5-year survival, P <.01) survival was significantly impaired. Those with HDV or HCV coinfection had a slightly better survival than with HBV monoinfection (P >.05, not significant). Preoperative positive HBV DNA (hybridization-assay) test results were associated with a slightly impaired patient survival (78% 5-year survival, P >.05, not significant versus DNA-negative). Preoperative positive hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) predicted significantly worse survival (P <.05 versus negative HBeAg). Graft loss caused by reinfection was most frequent before the availability of antiviral drugs. Two-year patient survival increased from 85% in era I (1988-1993) to 94% in era III (1997-2000, P <.05). The 2-year recurrence rates in these 2 periods were 42% and 8% (P <.05). In conclusion, excellent long-term results can be achieved in hepatitis B patients after liver transplantation with modern strategies, and survival rates are similar to other indications. Based on our experience, hepatitis B patients, including those with active viral replication, should not be excluded from liver transplantation.

Palliative care for patients with a failed liver transplant

The aim of liver transplantation is to cure the patient with acute or chronic liver disease. While this is often achieved, some patients will experience continued acute rejection of their transplanted liver (graft), established chronic rejection or disease recurrence. In these circumstances, it is necessary to re-assess the patient for treatment by re-transplantation but, with an increased mortality rate, the decision to proceed with this treatment must be carefully considered by the healthcare team, the patient and their family. For patients with diseases which are associated with a high risk of recurrence, quality of life as well as long-term prognosis are the principal aims of care. Integral to the decision to re-transplant is the ethical issue of allocating scarce organs where there is a reduced chance of graft and patient survival. The focus of the healthcare team in a liver transplant unit is commonly curative but, when caring for a patient with graft failure, the team must consider and, when appropriate, facilitate the palliative care approach.

Combination low-dose hepatitis B immune globulin and lamivudine therapy provides effective prophylaxis against posttransplantation hepatitis B

Although antiviral prophylaxis with lamivudine monotherapy appears to reduce post-liver transplantation recurrence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, breakthrough infections occur in at least 20% of the patients because of the development of drug resistance. Combined lamivudine and intravenous hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) therapy (10,000-IU doses) may reduce this risk, but its use is limited by cost ( approximately US $45,000/yr) and availability. We report the experience at liver transplant centers in Australia and New Zealand in which lamivudine has been used in combination with much lower doses of HBIG than used in conventional HBIG prophylaxis. Lamivudine, 100 mg/d, was administered to hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive candidates on listing for transplantation and was continued posttransplantation. HBIG, 400 or 800 IU, was administered intramuscularly (IM) daily for 1 week from transplantation and monthly thereafter. Thirty-seven HBsAg-positive patients underwent transplantation using this protocol. Thirty-six of these patients were HBV DNA positive by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or hybridization assay. Thirty-four patients had chronic HBV, 2 patients had hepatitis B and C, and 1 patient had hepatitis B, C, and D. Five patients died within 1 month of transplantation and are not included in the analysis. Mean follow-up in the remaining 32 patients was 18.4 months (range, 5 to 45 months). Treatment was well tolerated, with no significant adverse events. Thirty-one of 32 patients were HBsAg negative, and all 32 patients were HBV DNA negative by PCR at latest follow-up. The cost of treatment was US $967 for lamivudine and between $2,290 and $4,480/yr for IM HBIG. Lamivudine and low-dose HBIG treatment prevents posttransplantation recurrence of hepatitis B and is likely to be more cost-effective than high-dose HBIG regimens.

High pre-treatment serum hepatitis B virus titre predicts failure of lamivudine prophylaxis and graft re-infection after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Orthotopic liver transplantation has an established role for the treatment of patients with chronic liver failure secondary to hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Unfortunately, recurrent infection of the graft can be associated with aggressive disease, and with diminished graft and patient survival. Currently, the role of nucleoside analogues for prevention of graft re-infection is being evaluated. Preliminary results are encouraging, but treatment failure has been associated with emergence of drug-resistant virus.

METHODS

We have studied ten consecutive patients who received lamivudine prophylaxis for prevention of HBV graft reinfection. Sequential sera, collected prelamivudine then during treatment before and after liver transplantation, were examined. Conventional serological markers were measured, as were serum viral DNA levels with a sensitive quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay.

RESULTS

Lamivudine treatment effected a reduction in serum HBV levels, but six patients still had measurable viral DNA at the time of transplantation. Five patients developed graft re-infection with lamivudine-resistant virus. Resistant virus emerged 8 to 15 months post-transplant. The likelihood of emergence of resistant virus was related to the pre-treatment serum HBV titre. Persistent serum viral DNA positivity and evidence of graft re-infection during the early post-transplant period did not predict the subsequent emergence of resistant virus.

CONCLUSIONS

Our observations suggest that the resistant species may be present in the viral quasispecies in the serum and liver of patients with high-level replication prior to lamivudine exposure. The resistant species can persist during lamivudine treatment prior to transplantation, and emerge following transplantation. These observations suggest strategies which might prevent the emergence of drug-resistant species, and imply that graft re-infection may be a preventable phenomenon.

A model to predict survival following liver retransplantation

In the current era of critical-organ shortage, one of the most controversial questions facing transplantation teams is whether hepatic retransplantation, which has historically been associated with increased resource utilization and diminished survival, should be offered to a patient whose first allograft is failing. Retransplantation effectively denies access to orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) to another candidate and further depletes an already-limited organ supply. The study group was comprised of 1,356 adults undergoing hepatic retransplantation in the United States between 1990 and 1996 as reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS). We analyzed numerous donor and recipient variables and created Cox proportional-hazards models on 900 randomly chosen patients, validating the results on the remaining cohort. Five variables consistently provided significant predictive power and made up the final model: age, bilirubin, creatinine, UNOS status, and cause of graft failure. Although both hepatitis C seropositivity and donor age were significant by univariate and multivariate analyses, neither contributed independently to the estimation of prognosis when added to the final model. The final model was highly predictive of survival (whole model chi2 = 139.63). The risk scores for individual patients were calculated, and patients were assigned into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups (P <.00001). The low degree of uncertainty in the probability estimates as reflected by confidence intervals, even in our high-risk patients, underscores the applicability of our model as an adjunct to clinical judgment. We have developed and validated a model that uses five readily accessible "bedside" variables to accurately predict survival in patients undergoing liver retransplantation.

Retransplantation of patients with severe posttransplant hepatitis B in the first allograft

BACKGROUND

The outcome of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTX) in patients retransplanted for severe hepatitis B virus (HBV) in the first allograft has been poor due to high rates of HBV reinfection and even more aggressive disease in the second graft. Recent data suggest that hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIg) given after transplantation can be successful in delaying or preventing HBV reinfection in patients transplanted for chronic hepatitis B cirrhosis. We report the successful retransplantation of patients who developed recurrent or de novo hepatitis B after OLTXY.

METHODS

Using similar HBIg regimens, two centers retransplanted seven patients after they developed recurrent or de novo hepatitis B in the first allograft. At retransplantation all seven patients were HBs antigen (Ag) positive; four patients were positive for HBeAg and HBV DNA by immunoblot assay, two patients were negative for HBeAg and HBV DNA, and one patient was positive for HBV DNA and negative for HBeAg. All patients were either HDV Ag or anti-HDV negative. One patient was anti-HCV positive. All patients received HBIg infusions after retransplantation to maintain serum anti-HBs levels >500 IU/L indefinitely.

RESULTS

After retransplantation, six of seven patients are alive (86%): all are without evidence of HBV recurrence with serum negative for HBsAg, HBeAg, and HBV DNA by immunoblot assay. Liver biopsies are normal on routine studies with immunohistochemical stains for HBcAg and HBsAg also being negative. Mean follow-up of these six patients is 40.1 months (range 21-63 months). One patient (14%) developed HBV reinfection 7 months after his second transplant, in spite of maintaining target anti-HBs levels. He maintained stable liver function with minimal evidence of clinical hepatitis B, but died 8 months later from an unrelated stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that patients with recurrent or de novo hepatitis B after OLTX can be successfully retransplanted using aggressive immunoprophylaxis to prevent HBV reinfection. The failure of HBIg therapy in one patient underscores the need for other effective adjunctive anti-HBV modalities.

Graft loss following liver transplantation in patients with chronic hepatitis C

Liver disease due to hepatitis C (HCV) is an increasingly frequent indication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The aim of the current study was to analyze the causes of graft loss following OLT for chronic hepatitis C and the longterm outcome following retransplantation in a large university program. Between January 1990 and December 1995, 1183 patients underwent primary OLT at our center. In 304 patients, HCV was diagnosed by seropositivity and/or polymerase chain reaction. Fifty-six (18.4%) of these patients underwent retransplantation. The 36 patients retransplanted for primary non-function were excluded from further analysis. The other indications for regrafting (>30 days following primary transplant) included hepatic artery thrombosis (5), chronic rejection (4), severe HCV recurrence (5), and other etiologies (6). The cumulative survival rates for the 248 patients who received 1 OLT (group 1) were 84% after one year and 75% after three years. The corresponding rates for the 20 non-PNF patients who were retransplanted (group 2) were 60% and 43%, respectively (P<.0001). Moreover, logistic regression analysis confirmed that patients in group 2 were more than 4 times likely to die than patients in group 1 (P<.0034; risk ratio, 4.2; 95% confidence interval 1.61 to 11.37). Patients undergoing retransplantation had a high incidence of serious infectious complications leading to mortality. Two additional patients with severe recurrent HCV died awaiting liver retransplantation. Eight of the 304 total patients (2.6%) transplanted for chronic HCV developed graft failure secondary to HCV recurrence and 6 of the 8 were retransplanted; 3 of the 6 patients retransplanted are alive without evidence of histologic recurrence (mean follow-up less than 1 year). In summary, despite the high frequency of recurrent histologic evidence of HCV following primary OLT (70% at 3 years), graft loss attributable solely to HCV is an infrequent finding. Retransplantation per se is a risk factor for a fatal outcome, and the indication for reOLT does not appear to impact ultimate outcome. Serious infectious complications were the leading cause of mortality in patients retransplanted. Furthermore, given the indolent natural history of HCV, longer follow-up is necessary to determine the ultimate rate of graft loss due to HCV recurrence.

Indications for and timing of liver transplantation

The tremendous success of OLT as a highly effective treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease has resulted in a rapid increase in the number of candidates for the procedure. Refinements in organ preservation, improvements in surgical technique and immunosuppression, and better postoperative management have contributed to improved survival rates. The discrepancy between the paucity of organs and the increasing numbers of potential recipients will continue to worsen until there are extraordinary breakthroughs in providing alternatives to human whole-organ livers, such as xenografts or cultured hepatocyte infusions. For now, the vast majority of patients with life-threatening liver disease are not likely to receive a liver graft. Thus, the issues of patient selection and timing of OLT have become even more relevant. Prompt referral to a transplant center is not only in the patient's best interest, but also it has been shown to be cost-effective. Over the last 30 years, it has become clear that hepatic malignancy, initially a common reason for OLT, should be an indication for transplantation only in highly selected individuals. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy needs to be defined, and proven treatment alternatives need to be developed. New antiviral agents may enable a large group of patients with chronic hepatitis B to be successfully transplanted, placing even greater demands on the already limited supply of donor livers. Hepatitis B appears to be species specific, and it is conceivable that xenotransplantation from a nonsusceptible donor species may confer protection to HBV reinfection, eliminating the problems of an inadequate donor supply. Until novel approaches, including xenotransplantation, gene therapy, or replacement of hepatic function by cultured hepatocyte infusions, become a widespread reality, future allocation policies may highlight outcome as well as urgency as a fundamental variable to determine if transplantation is reasonable. Survival rates have been shown to fall with advancing levels of urgency, resulting in a conflict between equity and efficacy in organ allocation. As waiting lists for liver transplantation continue to grow, it is becoming increasingly apparent that patients must be referred to a transplant center earlier in the course of liver disease.