Suspected herbal hepatotoxicity: The pharmacovigilance dilemma with disputed and obsolete evaluation methods

Herbal Hepatotoxicity: Clinical Characteristics and Listing Compilation

Herb induced liver injury (HILI) and drug induced liver injury (DILI) share the common characteristic of chemical compounds as their causative agents, which were either produced by the plant or synthetic processes. Both, natural and synthetic chemicals are foreign products to the body and need metabolic degradation to be eliminated. During this process, hepatotoxic metabolites may be generated causing liver injury in susceptible patients. There is uncertainty, whether risk factors such as high lipophilicity or high daily and cumulative doses play a pathogenetic role for HILI, as these are under discussion for DILI. It is also often unclear, whether a HILI case has an idiosyncratic or an intrinsic background. Treatment with herbs of Western medicine or traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) rarely causes elevated liver tests (LT). However, HILI can develop to acute liver failure requiring liver transplantation in single cases. HILI is a diagnosis of exclusion, because clinical features of HILI are not specific as they are also found in many other liver diseases unrelated to herbal use. In strikingly increased liver tests signifying severe liver injury, herbal use has to be stopped. To establish HILI as the cause of liver damage, RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) is a useful tool. Diagnostic problems may emerge when alternative causes were not carefully excluded and the correct therapy is withheld. Future strategies should focus on RUCAM based causality assessment in suspected HILI cases and more regulatory efforts to provide all herbal medicines and herbal dietary supplements used as medicine with strict regulatory surveillance, considering them as herbal drugs and ascertaining an appropriate risk benefit balance.

Drug-induced liver injury: results from the hospital-based Berlin Case-Control Surveillance Study

AIM

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is often responsible for acute liver failure, drug withdrawal, boxed warnings or drug non-approval. Therefore, we conducted a case-control study to determine the hepatotoxic risk of a wide range of drugs.

METHODS

The Berlin Case-Control Surveillance Study FAKOS included all 51 Berlin hospitals in a hospital network. Between 2002 and 2011, 198 patients with acute idiopathic hepatitis, 377 inpatient controls and 708 outpatient controls were ascertained. Case patients were thoroughly validated using anamnestic, clinical, laboratory and histological data. Drug exposure was obtained in a face-to-face interview. A possible drug aetiology was assessed in individual patients by applying the updated Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) scale. Drug risks were further quantified [odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI)] in a case-control design with unconditional logistic regression analysis. Drug intake in the last 28 days before index date was considered for the analysis.

RESULTS

The study corroborated hepatotoxic risks for a number of drugs, including phenprocoumon (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5, 6.7), amiodarone (OR 5.5, 95% CI 1.3, 21.2), clozapine (OR 34.6, 95% CI 2.8, 824.9) and flupirtine (OR 40.2, 95% CI 5.5, 856.9). Increased risks were also suggested for less commonly reported substances such as angiotensin II receptor blockers, atypical antipsychotics and for biperiden, a drug never before reported to be hepatotoxic.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified a large number of drugs as possible causes of hepatotoxicity. The observed risk for seldom reported substances highlights the need for further post-authorization safety studies not exclusively focusing on drugs already labelled as potentially hepatotoxic.

Herbal hepatotoxicity: suspected cases assessed for alternative causes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Alternative explanations are common in suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and account for up to 47.1% of analyzed cases. This raised the question of whether a similar frequency may prevail in cases of assumed herb-induced liver injury (HILI).

METHODS

We searched the Medline database for the following terms: herbs, herbal drugs, herbal dietary supplements, hepatotoxic herbs, herbal hepatotoxicity, and herb-induced liver injury. Additional terms specifically addressed single herbs and herbal products: black cohosh, Greater Celandine, green tea, Herbalife products, Hydroxycut, kava, and Pelargonium sidoides. We retrieved 23 published case series and regulatory assessments related to hepatotoxicity by herbs and herbal dietary supplements with alternative causes.

RESULTS

The 23 publications comprised 573 cases of initially suspected HILI; alternative causes were evident in 278/573 cases (48.5%). Among them were hepatitis by various viruses (9.7%), autoimmune diseases (10.4%), nonalcoholic and alcoholic liver diseases (5.4%), liver injury by comedication (DILI and other HILI) (43.9%), and liver involvement in infectious diseases (4.7%). Biliary and pancreatic diseases were frequent alternative diagnoses (11.5%), raising therapeutic problems if specific treatment is withheld; pre-existing liver diseases including cirrhosis (9.7%) were additional confounding variables. Other diagnoses were rare, but possibly relevant for the individual patient.

CONCLUSION

In 573 cases of initially assumed HILI, 48.5% showed alternative causes unrelated to the initially incriminated herb, herbal drug, or herbal dietary supplement, calling for thorough clinical evaluations and appropriate causality assessments in future cases of suspected HILI.

Herbal hepatotoxicity: Challenges and pitfalls of causality assessment methods

The diagnosis of herbal hepatotoxicity or herb induced liver injury (HILI) represents a particular clinical and regulatory challenge with major pitfalls for the causality evaluation. At the day HILI is suspected in a patient, physicians should start assessing the quality of the used herbal product, optimizing the clinical data for completeness, and applying the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) scale for initial causality assessment. This scale is structured, quantitative, liver specific, and validated for hepatotoxicity cases. Its items provide individual scores, which together yield causality levels of highly probable, probable, possible, unlikely, and excluded. After completion by additional information including raw data, this scale with all items should be reported to regulatory agencies and manufacturers for further evaluation. The CIOMS scale is preferred as tool for assessing causality in hepatotoxicity cases, compared to numerous other causality assessment methods, which are inferior on various grounds. Among these disputed methods are the Maria and Victorino scale, an insufficiently qualified, shortened version of the CIOMS scale, as well as various liver unspecific methods such as the ad hoc causality approach, the Naranjo scale, the World Health Organization (WHO) method, and the Karch and Lasagna method. An expert panel is required for the Drug Induced Liver Injury Network method, the WHO method, and other approaches based on expert opinion, which provide retrospective analyses with a long delay and thereby prevent a timely assessment of the illness in question by the physician. In conclusion, HILI causality assessment is challenging and is best achieved by the liver specific CIOMS scale, avoiding pitfalls commonly observed with other approaches.

Clinical and causality assessment in herbal hepatotoxicity

INTRODUCTION

Herbal hepatotoxicity represents a poorly understood, neglected and multifaceted disease with numerous confounding variables and missing established causality in the majority of cases. This review discusses overt shortcomings in its clinical and causality assessment and suggests improvements.

AREAS COVERED

A selective literature search of PubMed using the terms herbal hepatotoxicity, herb-induced liver injury, drug hepatotoxicity and drug-induced liver injury was performed to identify published case reports, spontaneous case reports, case series and review articles regarding hepatotoxicity due to herbs, herbal drugs and herbal dietary supplements. Covered areas focused on confounding variables related to the documentation of the herbal product and the clinical course, hepatotoxicity and reexposure criteria, temporal association, comedication and alternative causes with special attention to preexisting diseases of the liver, bile ducts and the pancreas. Of particular interest were recent discussions of approaches designed and validated for hepatotoxicity causality, such as the scale of CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences).

EXPERT OPINION

The authors call for substantial improvements in data quality of herbal products and case characteristics and strongly recommend using the CIOMS scale to assess causality in suspected herbal hepatotoxicity.

Herbal hepatotoxicity: a critical review

This review deals with herbal hepatotoxicity, identical to herb induced liver injury (HILI), and critically summarizes the pitfalls associated with the evaluation of assumed HILI cases. Analysis of the relevant publications reveals that several dozens of different herbs and herbal products have been implicated to cause toxic liver disease, but major quality issues limit the validity of causality attribution. In most of these reports, discussions around quality specifications regarding herbal products, case data presentations and causality assessment methods prevail. Though the production of herbal drugs is under regulatory surveillance and quality aspects are normally not a matter of concern, low quality of the less regulated herbal supplements may be a critical issue considering product batch variability, impurities, adulterants and herb misidentifications. Regarding case data presentation, essential diagnostic information is often lacking, as is the use of valid and liver specific causality assessment methods that also consider alternative diseases. At present, causality is best assessed by using the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences scale ( CIOMS) in its original or updated form, which should primarily be applied prospectively by the treating physician when evaluating a patient rather than retrospectively by regulatory agencies. To cope with these problems, a common quality approach by manufacturers, physicians and regulatory agencies should strive for the best quality. We propose steps for improvements with impact on future cases of liver injury by herbs, herbal drugs and herbal supplements.