Monoclonal antibodies against eosinophils in liver allograft rejection

Liver eosinophilic infiltrate is a significant finding in patients with chronic hepatitis C

Eosinophilic infiltrate of liver tissue is described in primary cholestatic diseases, hepatic allograft rejection and drug-induced liver injury, but its significance and its implications in chronic hepatitis C are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical significance of eosinophilic liver infiltrate in patients with chronic hepatitis C. We retrospectively evaluated 147 patients with chronic hepatitis C. The presence of eosinophilic infiltrate was investigated in liver biopsies, and a numeric count of eosinophilic leucocytes in every portal tract was assessed. An eosinophilic infiltrate of liver tissue (> or =3 cells evaluated in the portal / periportal spaces) was observed in 46 patients (31%), and patients who consumed drugs had an odds ratio (OR) of 4.02 (95% CI: 1.62-9.96) to have an eosinophilic infiltrate in liver biopsy. By logistic regression analysis, the presence of steatosis was independently associated with eosinophilic infiltrate (OR 5.86; 95% CI: 2.46-13.96) and homeostasis model assessment-score (OR 1.18; 95% CI: 1.00-1.39). Logistic regression analysis also showed that fibrosis staging > or = 2 by Scheuer score was associated with grading >1 by Scheuer score (OR 6.82; 95% CI 2.46-18.80) and eosinophilic infiltrate (OR 4.00; 95% CI 1.23-12.91). In conclusion, we observed that the eosinophilic infiltrate of liver tissue was significantly more frequent in patients who assumed drugs, and found a significant association between eosinophilic infiltrate, liver steatosis and liver fibrosis. These preliminary data could lead to a constant assumption of drugs as a co-factor of eosinophils-mediated liver injury in chronic hepatitis C.

Detection of HCV antigens in liver graft: relevance to the management of recurrent post-liver transplant hepatitis C

The aim of this study was to evaluate how the immunohistochemical detection of liver hepatitis C virus (HCV) antigens (HCV-Ag) could support the histologic diagnosis and influence the clinical management of post-liver transplantation (LT) liver disease. A total of 215 liver specimens from 152 HCV-positive patients with post-LT liver disease were studied. Histologic coding was: hepatitis (126), rejection (34), undefined (24; coexisting rejection grade I and hepatitis), or other (31). The percentage of HCV-Ag infected hepatocytes were evaluated, on frozen sections, by an immunoperoxidase technique. HCV-Ag were detectable early in 57% of cases within 30 days post-LT, 92% of cases between 31 and 180 days, and 74% of cases after more than 180 days. Overall, HCV-Ag were detected more frequently in histologic hepatitis as compared to rejection (P < 0.0001) with a higher percentage of positive hepatocytes (P < 0.00001). In 16 patients with a high number of HCV-Ag-positive hepatocytes (65%; range 40-90%) a clinical diagnosis of recurrent hepatitis (RHC) was made despite inconclusive histopathologic diagnosis. Multivariate analysis identified the percentage of HCV-Ag-positive hepatocytes and the time post-LT as independent predictors for RHC (P = 0.008 and P = 0.041, respectively) and the number of HCV-Ag-positive hepatocytes >/=50% as the only independent predictor for nonresponse (P < 0.001) in 26 patients treated with alpha-interferon plus ribavirin. In conclusion, HCV reinfection occurs early post-LT, reaching its peak within 6 months. Immunohistochemical detection of post-LT HCV reinfection support the diagnosis of hepatitis when the histologic features are not conclusive. A high number of infected cells, independently from the genotype, represents a negative predictive factor of response to antiviral treatment.

Eosinophil-induced liver injury: an experimental model using IL-5 transgenic mice

BACKGROUND/AIMS

In certain liver diseases, activated eosinophils are considered to be important effector cells in addition to T-cell-mediated cytotoxicity. No experimental model, however, has been developed for in vivo analysis of the cytotoxic mechanisms.

METHODS

Interleukin-5 (IL-5) transgenic mice (C3H/HeN-TgN(IL-5)Imeg), which exhibit marked eosinophilia without liver injury, were injected once with 25 microg of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) intraperitoneally. The mice were sacrificed weekly and eosinophilic injuries were assessed microscopically. To clarify the role of Kupffer cells and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) in the liver injury, gadolinium chloride (GdCl3) and anti-TNF-alpha neutralizing antibody were administrated before the LPS injection.

RESULTS

Two weeks after injection, transgenic mice exhibited marked infiltration of eosinophils and extensive lobular necrosis. Transmigration of eosinophils through vascular endothelium and degranulation of eosinophil cytotoxic granules in inflamed areas were observed. These eosinophilic injuries were transient, but liver-specific. Pre-administration of GdCl3 and anti-TNF-alpha markedly reduced the hepatic inflammation, suggesting that LPS-activated Kupffer cells play a key role in producing the cytotoxicity of eosinophils by releasing TNF-alpha.

CONCLUSIONS

We have established an experimental model of eosinophil-induced liver injury using IL-5 transgenic mice. Since this model is simple and highly reproducible, it will be useful for analysis of in vivo cytotoxic mechanisms of eosinophils.

Eosinophils in acute cellular rejection in liver allografts

Eosinophils have a role in various allergic and inflammatory disease processes and participate in the process of acute rejection in solid organ allografts. Initial studies described the diagnostic value of eosinophils in kidney allograft rejection. Graft eosinophilia is a sensitive and specific marker of acute rejection in liver allografts and has been incorporated as one of the diagnostic criteria of acute rejection by the Royal Free Hospital scoring system. Blood eosinophilia also has been investigated and is a useful diagnostic marker of acute rejection in liver and kidney allografts, although studies differ in defining the day of onset of eosinophilia in relation to rejection. Eosinophils probably act through the chemokines interleukin-5 and RANTES (regulated on activation, normal T cells expressed and secreted) in the pathogenesis of acute rejection. Basic cytotoxic proteins, such as eosinophil cationic protein and major basic protein, are released by the eosinophils, and their effector role in acute rejection has been studied through the use of specific monoclonal antibodies. Successful treatment of acute rejection with corticosteroids has been associated with a decrease in graft and blood eosinophil counts. Eosinophils also act as prognostic markers of acute rejection, as shown by studies reporting that patients with elevated eosinophil counts and steroid-resistant rejection showed a worse prognosis. Further research into the effector mechanisms of eosinophils in acute rejection needs to be performed. The ability of eosinophils to distinguish those diseases with different responses to standard immunosuppression and other diseases in the context of acute rejection also needs to be studied.