Ribavirin in the treatment of recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation: difficult to manage but essential for success

Effect of cyclosporine A versus tacrolimus on the response to antiviral therapy after hepatitis C genotype-4 recurrence post-liver transplantation: A prospective cohort trial

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The influence of immunosuppression on the response to antiviral therapy (AVT) for recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in liver transplant (LT) recipients remains controversial, especially for the rarely investigated genotype 4. This study aims to compare the effects of the two widely used calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) (cyclosporine A (CsA) and tacrolimus (Tac)) on the therapeutic response to different AVT regimens.

METHODS

A prospective, dual-centre, cohort study of 126 Egyptian living donor liver transplant (LDLT) recipients with recurrent HCV genotype 4 infection, who were categorized into three groups according to the AVT used. Group I received pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN-α 2a) plus ribavirin (RBV) (n = 44), group II received the direct antiviral agent (DAA) sofosbuvir plus RBV (n = 52) and group III received daclatasvir and sofosbuvir (also DAAs) plus RBV (n = 30). Each group was further subdivided according to the primary immunosuppression (CsA or Tac). The sustained virological response (SVR) and relapse rates were considered the primary therapeutic outcomes of AVT.

RESULTS

No significant intergroup differences were observed in the achievement of primary and secondary outcomes. SVR rates in the IFN-based regimen were 75% and 66.7% in CsA and Tac users and 81.2% and 83% in DAAs, respectively. Relapse rates in the IFN-based regimen were 10% and 16.7% in CsA and Tac users and 12.5% and 14.9% in DAAs, respectively.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of a relatively small study, CsA did not offer an advantage over Tac regarding the response to AVT after HCV genotype 4 recurrence in LDLT recipients.

Clinical and Morphologic Diagnostic Assessments of Liver Diseases After Liver Transplant

OBJECTIVES

At the National Scientific Center of Surgery named A. Syzganova, more than 100 liver transplants have been conducted from 2012 to November 2017. Survival and quality of life of patients in the posttransplant period largely depend on the compliance of patients, monitoring of complications, cause of liver disease, the severity of the condition of patients in the pretransplant period, and the technical features of the operation. The aims of the study were to analyze the results of liver biopsy in patients after liver transplant and to evaluate the value of morphologic studies of the liver for the diagnosis of complications in the posttransplant period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Liver transplant recipients undergoing liver biopsy between 2012 and 2017 were analyzed. Our study included 40 liver biopsies in 29 patients after orthotopic liver transplant who fulfilled the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

In 51.7% of cases in patients (that is, in 15 of 29 patients), biopsy data revealed changes characteristic of rejection. Biliary complications were found in 10.34% of patients, recurrent liver diseases were confirmed in 17.24% of patients, 3.45% of patients had confirmed cholangitis, and 6.90% of patients were diagnosed with liver steatosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Histopathology assessment of allograft liver biopsies plays an important role in the differential diagnosis of posttransplant complications and in identifying the cause of graft damage; having this information can lead to the appropriate therapeutic intervention.

Hepatitis C in Liver Allograft Recipients: Utility of One-Year Post-Transplantation Biopsy as an Indicator of Antiviral Therapy

Background

All-oral interferon-free regimens for hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection are highly efficacious; however, high cost is a barrier to applicability. Liver allograft recipients are particularly likely to benefit from therapy as HCV often leads to graft dysfunction and loss. In this study, we aimed to establish the utility of allograft biopsy at 1 year post-transplant as an indicator of treatment.

Methods and Results

Among 252 liver recipients enrolled, 136 (54%) developed severe disease (fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) or fibrosis stage ≥ 2 at 1 year post-transplant). Multivariable analysis revealed younger recipient age and female gender, older donor age and T cell depletive therapy to be independent predictors of severe disease. Recipients with severe disease had higher rate of further graft loss compared to those with mild disease. Patients with mild disease and sustained virologic response (SVR) had the best survival rate, whereas those with severe disease and viremia had the worst survival (96% versus 63% at 5 years).

Conclusion

In conclusion, allograft biopsy at 1 year helps identify recipients at high risk of further graft dysfunction and loss. In view of high cost of therapy, treatment should be preferably directed to high-risk patients including those with FCH or fibrosis stage ≥ 2 by 1 year post-transplant.

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.

Cyclosporine a-based immunosuppression reduces relapse rate after antiviral therapy in transplanted patients with hepatitis C virus infection: a large multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

The influence of immunosuppression on the response to antiviral treatment in recurrent hepatitis C is still under debate. The purpose of this study was to identify those factors that might predict sustained viral response and relapse.

METHODS

The ReViS-TC, a multicenter cohort study conducted in 14 Spanish liver centers, included data from liver transplant recipients from January 2000 to December 2006 who had recurrent hepatitis C virus and who had undergone antiviral treatment with pegylated interferon plus ribavirin. Sustained virological response (SVR) and viral relapse were evaluated. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to investigate host, donor, and therapeutic factors associated with SVR and relapse.

RESULTS

The analysis included 410 patients, 30% treated with cyclosporine A (CsA) and 70% with tacrolimus. SVR was achieved in 48% of patients with CsA and in 37% with tacrolimus (P=0.037), with a relapse rate of 18% and 36%, respectively (P=0.008). In the multivariate model, the administration of CsA (odds ratio [OR] 0.37, P=0.021) in conjunction with a longer antiviral treatment duration (OR 0.86, P=0.024) correlated with lower relapse rate, whereas the older age of the donor (OR 1.03, P=0.006) and the presence of genotype 1 (OR 3.45, P=0.032) were associated with a higher probability of relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the use of CsA-based immunosuppression regimens and longer treatment duration may protect patients against viral relapse after a positive response to pegylated interferon plus ribavirin therapy. These data need to be further confirmed in clinical trials.

What is the long-term outcome of the liver allograft?

With improved long-term survival following liver transplantation (LT), issues relating to the assessment of the liver allograft in long-term survivors are becoming increasingly relevant. Histological abnormalities are commonly present in late post-transplant biopsies, including protocol biopsies from patients who appear to be well with good graft function. Recurrent disease is the commonest recognised cause of abnormal graft histology, but may be modified by the effects of immunosuppression or interactions with other graft complications, resulting in complex or atypical changes. Other abnormalities seen in late post-transplant biopsies include rejection (which often has different appearances to those seen in the post-transplant period), de novo disease, "idiopathic" post-transplant hepatitis (IPTH) and nodular regenerative hyperplasia. In many cases graft dysfunction has more than one cause and liver biopsy may help to identify the predominant cause of graft damage. Problems exist with the terminology used to describe less well understood patterns of graft injury, but there is emerging evidence to suggest that late rejection, de novo autoimmune hepatitis and IPTH may all be part of an overlapping spectrum of immune-mediated injury occurring in the late post-transplant liver allograft. Careful clinico-pathological correlation is very important and the wording of the biopsy report should take into account therapeutic implications, particularly whether changes in immunosuppression may be indicated. This article will provide an overview of the main histological changes occurring in long-term survivors post-LT, focusing on areas where the assessment of late post-transplant biopsies is most relevant clinically.

Antiviral therapy for recurrent liver graft infection with hepatitis C virus

BACKGROUND

Antiviral therapy to treat 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 STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until March 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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 were considered 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 trial for a dichotomous outcome, we performed the Fisher's exact test.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 425 liver transplant recipients with proven hepatitis C recurrence were randomised in twelve trials to various interventions and controls. The mean proportion of genotype I was 79.9% in the nine trials that reported the genotype. All the trials were of high risk of bias. One to two trials were included under each comparison including single drug or multidrug regimens of interferon, ribavirin, and amantadine. There was no significant difference in the mortality, graft rejection, or in re-transplantation between intervention and control in any of the comparisons that reported these outcomes. None of the trials reported liver decompensation or quality of life. Life-threatening adverse effects were not reported in either group in any of the comparisons. Up to 87.5% of patients required reduction in dose and up to 42.9% of patients required cessation of treatment in the various comparisons because of adverse effects or because of patient's choice to stop treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Considering the lack of clinical benefit and the frequent adverse effects, there is currently no evidence to recommend antiviral treatment for recurrent liver graft infection with HCV. Further randomised clinical trials with adequate trial methodology and adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.

[Hepatitis C recurrence after living donor and cadaveric liver transplantation]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the recurrence of hepatitis C in patients subjected to living donor liver transplantation compared to those subjected to cadaveric liver transplantation.

METHODS

Of a total of 333 liver transplantations, 279 (83.8%) were cadaveric liver transplantation and 54 (16.2%) living donor liver transplantation. Hepatic cirrhosis due to hepatitis C virus was the most common indication of both cadaveric liver transplantation (82 patients) and living donor liver transplantation (19 patients). The electronic study protocols of all patients with hepatic cirrhosis due to hepatitis C virus were reviewed. All data, including patients' age and sex, laboratory tests, hepatitis C virus recurrence and acute rejection were evaluated statistically.

RESULTS

A total of 55 cadaveric liver transplantation and 10 living donor liver transplantation performed in patients with liver cirrhosis due to hepatitis C virus was included in the study. Clinical and laboratory characteristics of the two groups before the transplantation were similar, except for the prothrombin time that was higher for the cadaveric liver transplantation than the living donor liver transplantation (P = 0.04). Hepatitis C virus recurrence was similar in the cadaveric liver transplantation (n = 37; 69.3%) and living donor liver transplantation (n = 7; 70%) groups (P = 0.8). The incidence of acute rejection was similar in cadaveric liver transplantation (n = 27; 49%) and living donor liver transplantation (n = 2; 20%) groups (P = 0.08). Hepatitis C virus recurrence in patients of the cadaveric liver transplantation group who received bolus doses of corticosteroids (9 of 11 patients) was similar to the remained patients (28 of 44 patients) (P = 0.25). Recurrence was also similar in patients of the living donor liver transplantation group who received bolus doses of corticosteroids (one of one patient) in relation to those who did not receive them (six of nine patients) (P = 0.7).

CONCLUSION

Hepatitis C recurrence is similar in patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation or cadaveric liver transplantation.

Antiviral therapy for recurrent liver graft infection with hepatitis C virus

BACKGROUND

Antiviral therapy to treat recurrent hepatitis C infection after liver transplantation is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until September 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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 were considered for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 389 liver transplant recipients with proven hepatitis C recurrence were randomised in eleven trials to various interventions and controls. The mean proportion of genotype I was 77.8% 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. There was no difference in the mortality, graft rejection, or in re-transplantation between intervention and control in any of the comparisons that reported these outcomes. None of the trials reported liver decompensation or quality of life. Life-threatening adverse effects were not reported in either group in any of the comparisons. Up to 87.5% of patients required reduction in dose and up to 42.9% of patients required cessation of treatment in the various comparisons because of adverse effects or because of patient's choice to stop treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

1. Considering the lack of clinical benefit and the frequent adverse effects, there is currently no evidence to recommend antiviral treatment for recurrent liver graft infection with HCV. 2. Further randomised clinical trials with adequate trial methodology and adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.