Review article: the treatment of hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantation

A retrospective 15-year review: survival advantage after switching to sirolimus in hepatitis C virus infected liver graft recipients

BACKGROUND

The use of sirolimus-based immune suppression in liver transplantation, particularly in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected recipients, remains contentious. There is some evidence that sirolimus retards hepatic fibrosis, is renal sparing and may be of benefit in preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence. Sirolimus has not been adopted by many transplant centres because of persistent concerns regarding an increased risk of hepatic artery thrombosis, graft loss and death with de novo sirolimus.

AIM

To review the impact of switching to sirolimus monotherapy in HCV-infected liver recipients with respect to survival, graft loss and hepatic fibrosis.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 190 patients from a single centre undergoing first liver transplantation for HCV over 15 years. 113 patients were switched from calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-based therapy to low-dose sirolimus monotherapy at a median of 15 months after transplantation for HCV-related fibrosis (72%), renal impairment (14%) or high-risk HCC (5%).

RESULTS

Patients switched to sirolimus had improved survival (P < 0.001) and slower progression to cirrhosis (P = 0.001). In patients with HCC (n = 91), sirolimus duration rather than strategy was an independent predictor of survival (P = 0.001) and extended time to HCC recurrence (33 vs. 16 months). Patients switched for renal dysfunction showed improvement in serum creatinine (140-108 μmol/L, P = 0.001). Those remaining on CNI-therapy were more likely to develop post-transplant diabetes (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest selective switching to low-dose sirolimus monotherapy in HCV-positive liver recipients improves clinical outcome.

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.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in liver transplant recipients with HCV infection

Within 5-10 years, 20-40% of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected liver transplant recipients can be expected to develop cirrhosis. Here, cost-effectiveness of antiviral therapy was assessed. A Markov model was developed to simulate disease progression and calculate outcome and costs of treatment. In the baseline analysis, Peg-IFN/RBV treatment prevented organ loss/death, gained quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and undercut the limit of cost-effectiveness of €50 000/QALY with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of approximately €40 400/QALY and €21 000/QALY for HCV genotype 1 and 2/3 patients, respectively. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis testing modified model parameters according to extreme data described in the literature confirmed cost-effectiveness for a lower or higher rate of fibrosis progression, increased non-HCV-related mortality, lower limits of utilities, a time horizon of 30 years, and additional costs in the year of death. On the other hand, cost-effectiveness was lost for patients with genotype 1 in case of doubled antiviral or life-time costs or an increased discount rate of 7%. New treatment strategies for HCV genotype 1 infected patients remained on the same level cost-effective, if additional costs did not exceed €10 774 per 10% sustained virologic response gain. We conclude that Peg-IFN/RBV treatment is cost-effective post transplant. This may support treatment decision in individual cases.

Early activation of interferon-stimulated genes in human liver allografts: relationship with acute rejection and histological outcome

BACKGROUND

Innate immunity mechanisms have been shown to play a paramount role in organ transplantation. Our aim was to investigate the hypothesis that activation of the interferon system may affect clinically relevant outcomes, such as acute rejection and/or early fibrosis progression, after liver transplantation.

METHODS

We studied 71 consecutive recipients (57 males; 25 with hepatitis C) who underwent two per protocol graft biopsies: the first, within 60 days after the transplant operation (median 24) and the second, after 1 year. The mRNA expression for five interferon-stimulated genes (Mx1, OAS2, PKR, IRF7A, IFI16) was measured on the first biopsy specimens. The main outcome measures were acute rejection during the first post-transplant year and fibrosis progression at the second biopsy.

RESULTS

On multivariate analysis, the independent predictors of gene expression were hepatitis C (Mx1, OAS2, PKR and IFI16), donor age (IFI16) and recipient gender (IRF7A) (P < .05 for all). During the first post-transplant year, 19/71 patients (27%) had acute cellular rejection. At multivariate analysis, acute cellular rejection was independently predicted by high IRF7A mRNA expression. At the end of follow-up, 25 patients had some degree of fibrosis (F2 or higher in seven cases). On multivariate analysis, hepatitis C etiology, recipient age, and OAS2 overexpression were independent predictors of early fibrosis progression.

CONCLUSIONS

In the early postoperative period of liver transplantation, interferon-stimulated gene activation is dependent on hepatitis C recurrence (the main factor responsible for early fibrosis progression) and donor age, and is related to the risk of acute cellular rejection.

Management of hepatitis C virus infection recurrence after liver transplantation: an overview

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the major indication for liver transplantation worldwide. Its recurrence is virtually universal. Once reinfection is established, progression to cirrhosis occurs in 25%-30% of recipients within 5 years. Several studies have attempted to identify the ideal antiviral treatment for liver transplant recipients. At present, the management of recurrent HCV infection in liver transplant recipients is based on widely accepted indications, which represent a reliable guide to identify the "ideal" candidate for therapy, when therapy should be started, and what is to be expected in terms of side effects and response to treatment.

Practice guidelines for the treatment of hepatitis C: recommendations from an AISF/SIMIT/SIMAST Expert Opinion Meeting

It is increasingly clear that a tailored therapeutic approach to patients with hepatitis C virus infection is needed. Success rates in difficult to treat and low-responsive hepatitis C virus patients are not completely satisfactory, and there is the need to optimise treatment duration and intensity in patients with the highest likelihood of response. In addition, the management of special patient categories originally excluded from phase III registration trials needs to be critically re-evaluated. This article reports the recommendations for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection on an individual basis, drafted by experts of three scientific societies.

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.

Endoscopic and percutaneous preoperative biliary drainage in patients with suspected hilar cholangiocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Controversy exists over the preferred technique of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) requiring major liver resection. The current study compared outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients with resectable HCCA.

METHODS

One hundred fifteen consecutive patients were explored for HCCA between 2001 and July 2008 and assigned by initial PBD procedure to either EBD or PTBD.

RESULTS

Of these patients, 101 (88%) underwent PBD; 90 patients underwent EBD as primary procedure, and 11 PTBD. The technical success rate of initial drainage was 81% in the EBD versus 100% in the PTBD group (P = 0.20). Stent dislocation was similar in the EBD and PTBD groups (23% vs. 20%, P = 0.70). Infectious complications were significantly more common in the endoscopic group (48% vs. 9%, P < 0.05). Patients in the EBD group underwent more drainage procedures (2.8 vs. 1.4, P < 0.01) and had a significantly longer drainage period until laparotomy (mean 15 weeks vs. 11 weeks in the PTBD group; P < 0.05). In 30 patients, EBD was converted to PTBD due to failure of the endoscopic approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative percutaneous drainage could outperform endoscopic stent placement in patients with resectable HCCA, showing fewer infectious complications, using less procedures.

Human liver transplantation as a model to study hepatitis C virus pathogenesis

Hepatitis C is a leading etiology of liver cancer and a leading reason for liver transplantation. Although new therapies have improved the rates of sustained response, a large proportion of patients (approximately 50%) fail to respond to antiviral treatment, thus remaining at risk for disease progression. Although chimpanzees have been used to study hepatitis C virus biology and treatments, their cost is quite high, and their use is strictly regulated; indeed, the National Institutes of Health no longer supports the breeding of chimpanzees for study. The development of hepatitis C virus therapies has been hindered by the relative paucity of small animal models for studying hepatitis C virus pathogenesis. This review presents the strengths of human liver transplantation and highlights the advances derived from this model, including insights into viral kinetics and quasispecies, viral receptor binding and entry, and innate and adaptive immunity. Moreover, consideration is given to current and emerging antiviral therapeutic approaches based on translational research results.

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.

Pegylated-interferon and ribavirin in liver transplant candidates and recipients with HCV cirrhosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective controlled studies

Pegylated interferon with ribavirin (Peg/R) is the most effective therapy for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) but its utility and effectiveness after liver transplantation has been difficult to assess. We evaluated efficacy, tolerability, and safety of Peg/R in liver transplant candidates and recipients with HCV cirrhosis. We searched medical databases and conference proceedings between January 1999 and January 2008 selecting randomized and nonrandomized studies. Primary end points meta-analytically were: (1) sustained viral response (SVR) and (2) histological response. Secondary end points were: (1) treatment discontinuation, (2) mortality, and (3) rejection episodes. Pegylated interferons using either 1-1.5 mcg/kg of pegylated interferon alpha-2b or 180 microg (pegylated interferon alpha-2a combined with ribavirin 800-1200 mg/day were the most effective compared to any other regimen or no therapy. In three pretransplant studies the median SVR was 19.6% (19.6-50%). In six postransplant studies where a meta-analysis was done the cumulative risk difference in SVR was 0.31% (95% CI, 0.18-0.44, p < 0.001). However histological response was not significantly better compared to no therapy or other antiviral regimens. There were no significant differences in discontinuation of therapy, acute or chronic rejection or mortality between optimal Peg/R vs no treatment or other regimens. Hence pegylated interferon plus ribavirin in full doses is effective pre and post transplant but has a low SVR rate. To date no significant histological improvement has been reported.

Sustained clearance of serum hepatitis C virus-RNA independently predicts long-term survival in liver transplant patients with recurrent hepatitis C

The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of virological response to long-term antiviral therapy using interferon plus ribavirin on survival of 30 liver transplant patients with recurrent hepatitis C. Mean treatment duration is currently 46 months (range: 3-144 months). Sustained clearance of serum hepatitis C virus RNA was achieved in 18 patients (60%). Allograft biopsies demonstrated fibrosis progression in seven virological nonresponders (66.6%), and none of the recipients with viral elimination (0%; P<0.001). Univariately, low pretransplant viral loads, the absence of cytomegalovirus infection, as well as biochemical and virological response to antiviral therapy indicated a positive impact on outcome (P<0.05). Only antiviral treatment induced clearance of viremia, however, was identified as independent predictor of long-term survival (P=0.02). Our data indicate that an antiviral combination should aim at viral eradication in liver transplant patients with recurrent hepatitis C, because it improves survival.

Prevalent immunosuppressive strategies in liver transplantation for hepatitis C: results of a multi-center international survey

To determine current immunosuppression regimens and strategies for acute cellular rejection in hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients after liver transplantation (LT), questionnaires were sent to 264 LT programs worldwide. Surveys from 81 programs were reviewed. In 27 centers (33.8%) the immunosuppression protocol used in HCV differed from non-HCV patients. Tacrolimus-based immunosuppression is utilized in 70 centers (86.42%). Triple therapy using tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil and steroids is the most common regimen (41%). Six programs (7.4%) use steroid-free protocols. In nine centers (11%) steroids are discontinued within a week, 56% within 3 months, and 98% within the first year. At 75% of centers, mild rejection is treated by increasing baseline immunosuppression. Moderate rejection is treated by increasing baseline immunosuppression in 38% of centers, steroid bolus in 44%, and either in 16%. For severe rejection, 46% of centers give bolus steroid, and 16% administer antibodies. Among respondents, non-US programs use significantly more cyclosporine than US programs (35.6% vs. 2.8%, P<0.001). Duration of steroid therapy is significantly shorter in US programs than non-US (10.8 vs. 29.4 weeks, P<0.001). There is no consensus regarding the best immunosuppressive regimen and rejection treatments in HCV patients after LT. Our results reveal the most prevalent management practices in this difficult group of patients.

Controversies in liver transplantation for hepatitis C

Hepatitis C is one of the most common indications for liver transplantation in the United States, accounting for approximately 40%-45% of all liver transplants. Unfortunately, recurrent disease is universal in patients who are viremic before transplantation. This can lead to cirrhosis in at least 25% of patients 5 years after liver transplantation, and recurrent hepatitis C is now emerging as an important but occasionally contentious indication for retransplantation. Several attempts have been undertaken to identify patients at high risk for severe recurrent disease who may benefit from treatment, but unfortunately antiviral therapy frequently is ineffective and often is associated with numerous side effects. Although we have made significant strides in understanding the natural history of this disease in nontransplant patients, this does not hold true for the transplant population in which several uncertainties covering virtually the entire spectrum of liver transplantation persist. Despite these concerns, on a more practical level, it is usually only in the postoperative setting that clinicians truly can assess the impact of their interventions on the natural history of recurrent hepatitis C, for example, by adjusting immunosuppression or prescribing antiviral therapy. Preoperative and perioperative (including donor) factors often are outside the control of hepatologists and transplant surgeons. This review is not an inclusive review of the literature but summarizes what we believe are the more controversial topics of this disease.

Current concepts in the evaluation of patients for liver transplantation

Candidates for liver transplantation undergo a thorough medical, surgical, psychosocial and financial evaluation prior to listing for transplantation. Prioritization for allocating livers is based upon the model for end-stage liver disease score and waiting-time mortality with the fundamental concept of giving organs to the sickest first. In the upcoming years the allocation system may be modified to include other factors associated with mortality, such as serum sodium, and may incorporate both pre- and post-transplant mortality. Strategies to expand the donor pool include utilizing livers from donors after cardiac death, split liver transplantation and living donor liver transplantation. Future challenges for liver transplantation will include the obesity epidemic and the prevention and treatment of recurrent disease, particularly hepatitis C.