Tacrolimus without or with the addition of conventional immunosuppressive treatment in juvenile autoimmune hepatitis

Juvenile Autoimmune Hepatitis: Recent Advances in Diagnosis, Management and Long-Term Outcome

Juvenile autoimmune hepatitis (JAIH) is severe immune-mediated necro-inflammatory disease of the liver with spontaneous progression to cirrhosis and liver failure if left untreated. The diagnosis is based on the combination of clinical, laboratory and histological findings. Prothrombin ratio is a useful prognostic factor to identify patients who will most likely require a liver transplant by adolescence or early adulthood. JAIH treatment consists of immune suppression and should be started promptly at diagnosis to halt inflammatory liver damage and ultimately prevent fibrosis and progression to end-stage liver disease. The risk of relapse is high especially in the setting of poor treatment compliance. Recent evidence however suggests that treatment discontinuation is possible after a prolonged period of normal aminotransferase activity without the need for liver biopsy prior to withdrawal.

A reasoned approach to the treatment of autoimmune hepatitis

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a chronic inflammatory liver disease affecting all ages, characterised by elevated transaminase and immunoglobulin G levels, positive autoantibodies, interface hepatitis on histology and good response to immunosuppressive treatment. If untreated, it has a poor prognosis. The aim of this review is to analyse AIH therapeutic interventions with reference to our knowledge of the pathogenesis of AIH. Standard treatment, based on steroids and azathioprine, leads to disease remission in 80-90% of patients. Alternative first-line treatment with budesonide is effective in adults, but less so in the juvenile form of AIH; first-line treatment with ciclosporin does not provide convincing advantages compared to standard treatment. Second-line treatments are needed for patients not responding or intolerant to first-line standard management. Mycophenolate mofetil is the most widely used second-line drug, and has good efficacy particularly for patients intolerant to azathioprine, but is teratogenic. Only few and heterogeneous data on calcineurin inhibitors and m-TOR inhibitors are available. Biologicals, including anti-tumour necrosis factor- α and anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, have given ambivalent results and may have severe side-effects. Clinical trials with new therapeutic options aiming at targeting B lymphocytes and proinflammatory cytokines, or expanding regulatory T cells to restore tolerance are ongoing.

Second-line and third-line therapy for autoimmune hepatitis: A position statement from the European Reference Network on Hepatological Diseases and the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group

Most patients with autoimmune hepatitis respond well to standard immunosuppressive therapy with steroids and azathioprine, and while untreated disease is usually fatal, patients who respond well to therapy have an excellent prognosis. However, insufficient response to standard therapy or intolerable side effects requiring dose adaptions or treatment changes occur in 10-20% of patients. While there is fairly good agreement on second-line treatment options, there is very wide variation in the indication and use of possible third-line therapies. Herein, the European Reference Network on Hepatological Diseases (ERN RARE-LIVER) and the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group (IAIHG) outline a treatment algorithm for both children and adults that should help to standardise treatment approaches, in order to improve patient care and to enable the comparison of treatment results between scientific publications.

Autoimmune hepatitis: Current and future therapeutic options

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a rare immune-mediated liver disease with few major advances in treatment options over the last several decades. Available options are effective in most patients albeit are imprecise in their mechanisms. Novel and more tolerable induction regimens and alternative options for management of patients intolerant or with suboptimal response to traditional therapies including in the post-transplant setting remain an important unmet need. This review aims to summarize recent data on pharmacological options and investigational drugs in development for patients with AIH. Standard therapy using prednisone with or without azathioprine remains the mainstay of therapy and is effective in most patients. Budesonide may be considered for induction in early disease and in those with mild fibrosis, but has not been approved for maintenance therapy. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in combination with steroids might be an alternative first-line therapy, but results from a randomized trial are awaited. MMF as a second-line maintenance agent has moderate efficacy though more frequent adverse events in patients with cirrhosis may be seen. Tacrolimus may be an equally effective second-line option particularly in non-responders, but data remain limited. Management of recurrent AIH post-liver transplantation remains controversial with insufficient data to support long-term steroid use. Moving forward, expanding the scope of therapeutic options to include biologics including B-cell depleting agents may be a promising step. Recent insights in understanding the pathogenesis of AIH could serve as a basis for future therapies, including the elucidation of different immunoregulatory pathways and the potential role of the intestinal microbiome.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of treatments for adult autoimmune hepatitis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

The most suitable treatment regimen for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) in adults remains unknown and requires further investigation. The current study therefore aimed to integrate evidence to provide hierarchies of the comparative efficacies of treatments measured by clinical and biochemical remission. A Bayesian-framework network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was preformed to compare eight treatments for AIH. Eligible RCTs were identified by searching Embase, Pubmed and the Cochrane Library for publications between 1966 and April 2017. All outcomes were independently extracted from the included studies by two authors. A total of six RCTs were subsequently included in the current study. The network of comparisons on remission indicated that patients treated with prednisone (pred) experienced significantly increased rates of remission compared with those treated with azathioprine [AZA; odds ratio (OR), 0.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.06-0.71] and budesonide (bude) + AZA significantly increased remission compared with placebo treatment (OR, 36.66; 95% CI, 1.40-962.49) or AZA (OR, 10.30; 95% CI, 1.50-70.70). Based on the cumulative ranking probabilities, bude + AZA (89.4) was ranked first, pred (69.1) was ranked second, pred + AZA (63.2) was ranked third and placebo (7.8) treatment was ranked last. Bude + AZA may be the most appropriate candidate for the treatment of non-cirrhotic patients. However, bude + AZA as frontline therapy for AIH requires more large-scale studies with a longer duration of follow-up histology and a focus on dose-response. Additionally, development of other prospective treatments, which may be used as alternative therapy or first line therapy, and their subsequent evaluation in clinical RCTs is required.

Tacrolimus and Mycophenolate Mofetil as Second-Line Therapies for Pediatric Patients with Autoimmune Hepatitis

BACKGROUND

We studied the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and tacrolimus as second-line therapy in pediatric patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) who were intolerant or non-responders to standard therapy (corticosteroid and azathioprine).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of data from 13 centers in Europe, USA, and Canada. Thirty-eight patients (< 18 years old) who received second-line therapy (18 MMF and 20 tacrolimus), for a median of 72 months (range 8-182) were evaluated. Patients were categorized into two groups: Group 1 (n = 17) were intolerant to corticosteroid or azathioprine, and group 2 (n = 21) were non-responders to standard therapy.

RESULTS

Overall complete response rates were similar in patients treated with MMF and tacrolimus (55.6 vs. 65%, p = 0.552). In group 1, MMF and tacrolimus maintained a biochemical remission in 88.9 and 87.5% of patients, respectively (p = 0.929). More patients in group 2 given tacrolimus compared to MMF had a complete response, but the difference was not statistically significant (50.0 vs. 22.2%, p = 0.195). Biochemical remission was achieved in 71.1% (27/38) of patients by tacrolimus and/or MMF. Decompensated cirrhosis was more commonly seen in MMF and/or tacrolimus non-responders than in responders (45.5 vs. 7.4%, p = 0.006). Five patients who received second-line therapy (2 MMF and 3 tacrolimus) developed side effects that led to therapy withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term therapy with MMF or tacrolimus was generally well tolerated by pediatric patients with AIH. Both MMF and tacrolimus had excellent efficacy in patients intolerant to corticosteroid or azathioprine. Tacrolimus might be more effective than MMF in patients failing previous therapy.

Diagnosis and Management of Pediatric Autoimmune Liver Disease: ESPGHAN Hepatology Committee Position Statement

Paediatric autoimmune liver disease is characterized by inflammatory liver histology, circulating autoantibodies, and increased levels of IgG, in the absence of a known etiology. Three conditions have a likely autoimmune pathogenesis: autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), autoimmune sclerosing cholangitis, and de novo AIH after liver transplantation. Two types of pediatric AIH are recognized according to seropositivity for smooth muscle and/or antinuclear antibody (AIH-1) or liver kidney microsomal type 1 and/or anti-liver cytosol type 1 antibodies (AIH-2).Pertinent issues addressing the diagnosis, treatment, and long-term follow-up were formulated by a core group of ESPGHAN members. They have commissioned the first authors with execution of this project. Initially, they have performed a systematic literature search on MEDLINE, ResearchGate, and Mendeley databases during the last 30 years and produced a document focusing on prospective and retrospective studies in children. The ESPGHAN core group and ESPGHAN Hepatology Committee members voted on each recommendation, using a formal voting technique.

Efficacy and Safety of Mycophenolate Mofetil and Tacrolimus as Second-line Therapy for Patients With Autoimmune Hepatitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Predniso(lo)ne, alone or in combination with azathioprine, is the standard-of-care (SOC) therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). However, the SOC therapy is poorly tolerated or does not control disease activity in up to 20% of patients. We assessed the efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and tacrolimus as second-line therapy for patients with AIH.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of data (from 19 centers in Europe, the United States, Canada, and China) from 201 patients with AIH who received second-line therapy (121 received MMF and 80 received tacrolimus), for a median of 62 months (range, 6-190 mo). Patients were categorized according to their response to SOC. Patients in group 1 (n = 108) had a complete response to the SOC, but were switched to second-line therapy as a result of side effects of predniso(lo)ne or azathioprine, whereas patients in group 2 (n = 93) had not responded to SOC.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with a complete response to MMF (69.4%) vs tacrolimus (72.5%) (P = .639). In group 1, MMF and tacrolimus maintained a biochemical remission in 91.9% and 94.1% of patients, respectively (P = .682). Significantly more group 2 patients given tacrolimus compared with MMF had a complete response (56.5% vs 34%, respectively; P = .029) There were similar proportions of liver-related deaths or liver transplantation among patients given MMF (13.2%) vs tacrolimus (10.3%) (log-rank, P = .472). Ten patients receiving MMF (8.3%) and 10 patients receiving tacrolimus (12.5%) developed side effects that required therapy withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term therapy with MMF or tacrolimus generally was well tolerated by patients with AIH. The agents were equally effective in previous complete responders who did not tolerate SOC therapy. Tacrolimus led to a complete response in a greater proportion of previous nonresponder patients compared with MMF.

Autoimmune hepatitis: Standard treatment and systematic review of alternative treatments

Autoimmune hepatitis is a rare chronic inflammatory liver disease, affecting all ages, characterised by elevated transaminase and immunoglobulin G levels, positive autoantibodies, interface hepatitis at liver histology and good response to immunosuppressive treatment. If untreated, it has a poor prognosis. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence for standard treatment and to provide a systematic review on alternative treatments for adults and children. Standard treatment is based on steroids and azathioprine, and leads to disease remission in 80%-90% of patients. Alternative first line treatment has been attempted with budesonide or cyclosporine, but their superiority compared to standard treatment remains to be demonstrated. Second-line treatments are needed for patients not responding or intolerant to standard treatment. No randomized controlled trials have been performed for second-line options. Mycophenolate mofetil is the most widely used second-line drug, and has good efficacy particularly for patients intolerant to azathioprine, but has the major disadvantage of being teratogenic. Only few and heterogeneous data on cyclosporine, tacrolimus, everolimus and sirolimus are available. More recently, experience with the anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha infliximab and the anti-CD20 rituximab has been published, with ambivalent results; these agents may have severe side-effects and their use should be restricted to specialized centres. Clinical trials with new therapeutic options are ongoing.

Second-line Agents in Pediatric Patients With Autoimmune Hepatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Ten percent to 20% of children with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) require second-line therapy to achieve remission. Although current guidelines exist on first-line management, evidence for second-line therapy in treatment-refractory patients is lacking. Our aim was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of second-line treatments used in this population.

METHODS

Electronic and manual searches were used to identify potential studies for inclusion. Studies were selected based on reported response rates to second-line therapies in children who failed response to prednisone and azathioprine. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Meta-analysis using weighted estimate of response rates at 6 months was performed for each treatment option. Heterogeneity was assessed.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies of 76 pediatric patients with AIH were included in the review. Overall response rates at 6 months were estimated as 36% for mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (N = 34, 95% confidence interval [CI] (16-57)), and 50% for tacrolimus (N = 4, 95% CI (0-100%)) and 83% for cyclosporine (N = 15, 95% CI (66%-100%)). Adverse effects were most frequent with cyclosporine (64% experiencing at least 1 adverse effect) followed by tacrolimus (54%) and MMF (48%). Pooled estimates of adverse events were 78% for cyclosporine (95% CI (54%-100%)), 42% for tacrolimus (95% CI (0%-85%)) and 45% for MMF (95% CI (25%-68%)). Sensitivity analyses were not performed due to small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Cyclosporine had the highest response rate at 6 months in children with standard-treatment-refractory AIH; however, it also had the highest rate of adverse events. MMF was the second most efficacious option with a low adverse effect rate.

Brazilian society of hepatology recommendations for the diagnosis and management of autoimmune diseases of the liver

ABSTRACT In order to draw evidence-based recommendations concerning the management of autoimmune diseases of the liver, the Brazilian Society of Hepatology has sponsored a single-topic meeting in October 18th, 2014 at São Paulo. An organizing committee comprised of seven investigators was previously elected by the Governing Board to organize the scientific agenda as well as to select twenty panelists to make a systematic review of the literature and to present topics related to the diagnosis and treatment of autoimmune hepatitis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, primary biliary cirrhosis and their overlap syndromes. After the meeting, all panelists gathered together for the discussion of the topics and the elaboration of those recommendations. The text was subsequently submitted for suggestions and approval of all members of the Brazilian Society of Hepatology through its homepage. The present paper is the final version of the reviewed manuscript organized in topics, followed by the recommendations of the Brazilian Society of Hepatology.

The clinical phenotypes of autoimmune hepatitis: A comprehensive review

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) fulfills the generally accepted contemporary criteria of an autoimmune liver disease: the presence of autoantibodies and autoreactive T cells, a female gender bias, association with other autoimmune diseases, response to immunosuppressive therapy and strong associations with the major histocompatibility complex HLA loci. It occurs worldwide in both children and adults and is marked by both etiopathogenic and clinical heterogeneity, differing from the other putative autoimmune liver diseases, primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), albeit occasionally presenting with overlapping features of PBC or PSC. Although diagnostic criteria have been established and validated, there are still major issues to be clarified due to its variability, such as autoantibody-negative AIH, drug-induced AIH, AIH sharing features with PBC or PSC, and post-transplant de novo AIH. In view of the diverse presentations and courses, including classical chronic onset, acute and acute severe onset, cirrhosis and decompensated cirrhosis, individualized management of patients is indicated. Each patient should receive a personalized analysis of the benefits and side effect risks of drugs. Herein we describe a comprehensive review of the clinical phenotypes of AIH underscoring its clinical heterogeneity.

Budesonide versus prednisone with azathioprine for the treatment of autoimmune hepatitis in children and adolescents

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of budesonide vs prednisone therapy both in combination with azathioprine in pediatric patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH).

STUDY DESIGN

Forty-six patients with AIH (11 males and 35 females) aged 9-17 years were enrolled in a 6-month, prospective, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled, multicenter phase IIb study evaluating budesonide (n = 19; 3 mg twice or 3 times daily) vs prednisone (n = 27; 40 mg/day tapered to 10 mg/day), both with azathioprine (1-2 mg/kg/day), followed by a further 6 months of open-label budesonide therapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete biochemical remission (normal serum alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels) without predefined steroid-specific side effects.

RESULTS

We observed no statistically significant difference in the percentage of patients who met the primary endpoint between the budesonide (3 of 19; 16%) and prednisone groups (4 of 27; 15%) after 6 months, nor in the percentage of patients who experienced biochemical remission (budesonide, 6 of 19 [32%]; prednisone, 9 of 27 [33%]), lack of steroid-specific side effects (budesonide, 10 of 19 [53%]; prednisone, 10 of 27 [37%]). The mean weight gain was 1.2 ± 3.5 kg in the budesonide group and 5.1 ± 4.9 kg in the prednisone group (P = .006). A total of 42 patients received open-label budesonide treatment for another 6 months. After 12 months, 46% of these patients achieved complete remission.

CONCLUSION

Oral budesonide with azathioprine can induce and maintain remission in pediatric patients with AIH and may be considered an alternative therapy to prednisone. The treatment causes fewer side effects and does not lead to weight gain; however, it may be less effective than prednisone in inducing remission.

Review article: autoimmune hepatitis -- current management and challenges

BACKGROUND

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a disease of unknown aetiology characterised by interface hepatitis, hypergammaglobulinaemia, circulating autoantibodies and a favourable response to immunosuppression.

AIM

To review recent advancements in understanding aetiopathogenesis, clinical, serological and histological features, diagnostic criteria and treatment strategies of AIH.

METHODS

Published studies on AIH extracted mainly from PubMed during the last 15 years.

RESULTS

Autoimmune hepatitis has a global distribution affecting any age, both sexes and all ethnic groups. Clinical manifestations are variable ranging from no symptoms to severe acute hepatitis and only seldom to fulminant hepatic failure. Autoimmune attack is perpetuated, possibly via molecular mimicry mechanisms, and favoured by the impaired control of regulatory T-cells. A typical laboratory finding is hypergammaglobulinaemia with selective elevation of IgG, although in 15-25% of patients - particularly children, elderly and acute cases - IgG levels are normal. Liver histology and autoantibodies, although not pathognomonic, still remain the hallmark for diagnosis. Immunosuppressive treatment is mandatory and life-saving; however, to meet strict response criteria, the conventional therapy with prednisolone with or without azathioprine is far from ideal.

CONCLUSIONS

Autoimmune hepatitis remains a major diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The clinician, the hepato-pathologist and the laboratory personnel need to become more familiar with different expressions of the disease, interpretation of liver histology and autoimmune serology. According to the strict definition of treatment response issued by the 2010 AASLD guidelines, many patients are nonresponders to conventional treatment. Newer immunosuppressive agents targeting pathogenetic mechanisms can improve patient management, which needs to be tailored on a case-by-case basis.

The interplay between regulatory and effector T cells in autoimmune hepatitis: Implications for innovative treatment strategies

Autoimmune hepatitis is an immuno-mediated inflammatory liver disorder of unknown etiology and is characterized by hypergammaglobulinaemia, circulating autoantibodies and interface hepatitis. The disease may often present as an acute icteric hepatitis, or run an insidious and progressive course, and in most of the cases it is expected to evolve toward liver cirrhosis and end-stage liver failure, without prompt and appropriate treatment with steroids and other immunosuppressive drugs. Nonetheless, several patients are non-responsive or become non-tolerant to conventional therapy with prednisone/prednisolone with or without azathioprine. Recent findings highlight the role of the interplay between CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells and Th17 cells in the pathogenesis of autoimmune hepatitis. A numerical and functional imbalance between regulatory and effector cells in favor of the latter appears to be pivotal in the progression of the disease. In addition, the intra-hepatic microenvironment of autoimmune hepatitis is particularly rich in pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6, IL-17, IL-23, IL-1β which play a crucial role in perpetuating and expanding effector cells and subsequent liver damage, whereas regulatory T cells are greatly disadvantaged and inhibited in such polarized habitat. Novel therapeutic interventions should aim at modulating the intra-hepatic pro-inflammatory milieu while favoring the expansion of regulatory T cells. Liver autoantigen-specific regulatory T cells generated and expanded in vitro from patients' own cells might offer a potentially curative approach to autoimmune hepatitis by inhibiting effector cells of the same specificity without inducing pan-immunosuppression.