New biomarkers for drug-induced liver injury: are they really better? What do they diagnose?

Glutamate dehydrogenase combined with ferrochelatase as a biomarker of liver injury induced by antituberculosis drugs

AIMS

To explore the potential value of serum glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH), ferrochelatase (FECH), heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) and glutathione-S-transferase-α (GST-α) as diagnostic biomarkers for liver injury caused by antituberculosis drugs.

METHODS

We established a rat model of isoniazide-induced liver injury and recruited 122 hospitalized tuberculosis patients taking antituberculosis drugs. We detected the concentration of GLDH, FECH, HO-1 and GST-α by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. GraphPad Prism8 and SPSS 26.0 were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In the rat model, serum GLDH concentration gradually increased during isoniazid (INH) administration, while serum FECH, HO-1 and GST-α concentrations significantly increased after INH administration was stopped. The receiver operating characteristic curve showed that the areas under the curve (AUCs) of serum GLDH and FECH for the diagnosis of anti-tuberculosis (TB) drug-induced liver injury (anti-TB-DILI) were 0.7692 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.5442-0.9943) and 0.7284 (95% CI 0.4863-0.9705) and the diagnostic accuracies were 81.25% and 78.79%, respectively. In clinical research, the AUCs of GLDH and FECH were 0.9124 (95% CI 0.8380-0.9867) and 0.6634 (95% CI 0.5391-0.7877), and the optimal thresholds were 10.40 mIU/mL and 1.304 ng/mL, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of GLDH were 82.61%, 79.38% and 47.22%. We performed a joint diagnostic test for GLDH and FECH. The diagnostic accuracy (90.43%), specificity (91.75%) and PPV (65.21%) of serial tests were better than for GLDH and FECH alone.

CONCLUSIONS

GLDH in the diagnosis of liver injury induced by anti-TB drugs has high sensitivity, but low specificity and low PPV. The combination of GLDH and FECH could significantly improve the specificity, PPV and diagnostic accuracy, and reduce the false-positive rate of anti-TB-DILI.

Mechanism of idiosyncratic drug induced liver injury (DILI): unresolved basic issues

Clinical features of idiosyncratic drug induced liver injury (DILI) are well described in cases that have been assessed for causality using the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM), but our understanding of the mechanistic steps leading to injury is fragmentary. The difficulties describing mechanistic events can be traced back to the lack of an animal model of experimental idiosyncratic DILI that can mimic the genetic requirements of human idiosyncratic DILI. However, immune tolerance plays a dominant role in the immune response of the liver, and impairment of immune tolerance with immune checkpoint inhibitors increases DILI in both humans and animals. This may provide one method to study the individual steps involved. In general. the human DILI liver is a secret keeper providing little insight into what occurs in the diseased organ. Sufficient evidence exists that most idiosyncratic cases are mediated by the adaptive immune system, which depends on stimulation of the innate immune system, but the triggering factors are unknown. It is attractive to hypothesize that the gut microbiome plays a role; however, it is very difficult to study. Similarly, exosomes are likely to play an important role in communication between hepatic cells and the immune system, but there is a lack of data on blood exosomes in affected patients. Reactive metabolites are likely to play an important role. This is supported by the current analysis, which revealed an association between metabolism by cytochrome P450 and drugs most commonly involved in causing idiosyncratic DILI with causality verified by RUCAM. Circumstantial evidence suggests that reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated by cytochrome P450 could be responsible for the initial steps of injury, but details are unknown. In conclusion, most of the mechanistic steps leading to idiosyncratic DILI remain unclear.

New Perspectives on Drug-Induced Liver Injury Risk Assessment of Acyl Glucuronides

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains one of the key challenges in drug development due to the mechanisms of action being multifactorial in nature. This is particularly the case for idiosyncratic DILI which occurs in a very low frequency in humans (e.g., 1:10,000). Despite perceptions that acyl glucuronide metabolites are defacto risks for DILI, scientific evidence suggests that acyl glucuronide formation alone does not pose an increased risk compared to other drug metabolites. This applies in particular to those acyl glucuronides which are not reactive and do not form covalent adducts with proteins. The goal of this paper is to provide guidance on preclinical and clinical strategies to evaluate the potential for acyl glucuronide formation to contribute to DILI. A key element of our proposed safety assessment is to investigate whether a particular acyl glucuronide is reactive or not and whether systemic exposure in humans can be demonstrated in animal toxicology studies following administration of the parent drug. While standard animal toxicology studies can identify overtly hepatotoxic compounds, these studies are not predictive for drugs that produce idiosyncratic forms of DILI. In addition, we do not recommend conducting toxicology studies of administered individual acyl glucuronides due to differences in pharmacokinetic and dispositional properties from the endogenously produced metabolites. Once a drug candidate has entered clinical trials, the focus should be on clinical safety data and emerging risk-benefit analysis.

Diagnostic Biomarkers in Liver Injury by Drugs, Herbs, and Alcohol: Tricky Dilemma after EMA Correctly and Officially Retracted Letter of Support

Liver injuries caused by the use of exogenous compounds such as drugs, herbs, and alcohol are commonly well diagnosed using laboratory tests, toxin analyses, or eventually reactive intermediates generated during metabolic degradation of the respective chemical in the liver and subject to covalent binding by target proteins. Conditions are somewhat different for idiosyncratic drug induced liver injury (DILI), for which metabolic intermediates as diagnostic aids are rarely available. Although the diagnosis of idiosyncratic DILI can well be established using the validated, liver specific, structured, and quantitative RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method), there is an ongoing search for new diagnostic biomarkers that could assist in and also confirm RUCAM-based DILI diagnoses. With respect to idiosyncratic DILI and following previous regulatory letters of recommendations, selected biomarkers reached the clinical focus, including microRNA-122, microRNA-192, cytokeratin analogues, glutamate dehydrogenase, total HMGB-1 (High Mobility Group Box), and hyperacetylated HMGB-1 proteins. However, the new parameters total HMGB-1, and even more so the acetylated HMGB-1, came under critical scientific fire after misconduct at one of the collaborating partner centers, leading the EMA to recommend no longer the exploratory hyperacetylated HMGB1 isoform biomarkers in clinical studies. The overall promising nature of the recommended biomarkers was considered by EMA as highly dependent on the outstanding results of the now incriminated biomarker hyperacetylated HMGB-1. The EMA therefore correctly decided to officially retract its Letter of Support affecting all biomarkers listed above. New biomarkers are now under heavy scrutiny that will require re-evaluations prior to newly adapted recommendations. With Integrin beta 3 (ITGB3), however, a new diagnostic biomarker may emerge, possibly being drug specific but tested in only 16 patients; due to substantial remaining uncertainties, final recommendations would be premature. In conclusion, most of the currently recommended new biomarkers have lost regulatory support due to scientific misconduct, requiring now innovative approaches and re-evaluation before they can be assimilated into clinical practice.

Biomarkers of drug-induced liver injury

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a major clinical and regulatory challenge. As a result, interest in DILI biomarkers is growing. So far, considerable progress has been made in identification of biomarkers for diagnosis (acetaminophen-cysteine protein adducts), prediction (genetic biomarkers), and prognosis (microRNA-122, high mobility group box 1 protein, keratin-18, glutamate dehydrogenase, mitochondrial DNA). Many of those biomarkers also provide mechanistic insight. The purpose of this chapter is to review major advances in DILI biomarker research over the last decade, and to highlight some of the challenges involved in implementation. Although much work has been done, more liver-specific biomarkers, more DILI-specific biomarkers, and better prognostic biomarkers for survival are all still needed. Furthermore, more work is needed to define reference intervals and medical decision limits.

Top-ranking drugs out of 3312 drug-induced liver injury cases evaluated by the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method

INTRODUCTION

A list presenting a valid ranking of drugs most commonly implicated is hardly to be found. Areas covered: Published cases of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) with verified causality using RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) were used for a ranking of drugs most commonly implicated in causing DILI. Expert opinion: RUCAM-based DILI cases were retrieved from 15 reports published by six international databases of DILI registries and three large medical centers, which provided 3312 cases. Overall 48 drugs with the highest number of DILI cases were listed. Among the top 10 ranking drugs implicated in causing DILI were, in decreasing order: amoxicillin-clavulanate, flucloxacilllin, atorvastatin, disulfiram, diclofenac, simvastatin, carbamazepine, ibuprofen, erythromycin, and anabolic steroids as bodybuilding agents. For these 10 drugs, respective DILI case numbers were highest for Amoxicillin-clavulanate (n=333) and lowest for anabolic steroids (n=26). The author classifies the databases of national DILI registries and large medical centers as best sources of drugs implicated in DILI. Presently discouraged is the use of the LiverTox website because many cases were derived from published cases of poor quality and could previously not be classified as DILI, calling for the inclusion of DILI cases with established causality by the updated RUCAM.

Drug Induced Liver Injury: Can Biomarkers Assist RUCAM in Causality Assessment?

Drug induced liver injury (DILI) is a potentially serious adverse reaction in a few susceptible individuals under therapy by various drugs. Health care professionals facing DILI are confronted with a wealth of drug-unrelated liver diseases with high incidence and prevalence rates, which can confound the DILI diagnosis. Searching for alternative causes is a key element of RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) to assess rigorously causality in suspected DILI cases. Diagnostic biomarkers as blood tests would be a great help to clinicians, regulators, and pharmaceutical industry would be more comfortable if, in addition to RUCAM, causality of DILI can be confirmed. High specificity and sensitivity are required for any diagnostic biomarker. Although some risk factors are available to evaluate liver safety of drugs in patients, no valid diagnostic or prognostic biomarker exists currently for idiosyncratic DILI when a liver injury occurred. Identifying a biomarker in idiosyncratic DILI requires detailed knowledge of cellular and biochemical disturbances leading to apoptosis or cell necrosis and causing leakage of specific products in blood. As idiosyncratic DILI is typically a human disease and hardly reproducible in animals, pathogenetic events and resulting possible biomarkers remain largely undisclosed. Potential new diagnostic biomarkers should be evaluated in patients with DILI and RUCAM-based established causality. In conclusion, causality assessment in cases of suspected idiosyncratic DILI is still best achieved using RUCAM since specific biomarkers as diagnostic blood tests that could enhance RUCAM results are not yet available.

Drug-induced liver injury: Do we know everything?

Interest in drug-induced liver injury (DILI) has dramatically increased over the past decade, and it has become a hot topic for clinicians, academics, pharmaceutical companies and regulatory bodies. By investigating the current state of the art, the latest scientific findings, controversies, and guidelines, this review will attempt to answer the question: Do we know everything? Since the first descriptions of hepatotoxicity over 70 years ago, more than 1000 drugs have been identified to date, however, much of our knowledge of diagnostic and pathophysiologic principles remains unchanged. Clinically ranging from asymptomatic transaminitis and acute or chronic hepatitis, to acute liver failure, DILI remains a leading causes of emergent liver transplant. The consumption of unregulated herbal and dietary supplements has introduced new challenges in epidemiological assessment and clinician management. As such, numerous registries have been created, including the United States Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network, to further our understanding of all aspects of DILI. The launch of LiverTox and other online hepatotoxicity resources has increased our awareness of DILI. In 2013, the first guidelines for the diagnosis and management of DILI, were offered by the Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology, and along with the identification of risk factors and predictors of injury, novel mechanisms of injury, refined causality assessment tools, and targeted treatment options have come to define the current state of the art, however, gaps in our knowledge still undoubtedly remain.

Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and Herbal Hepatotoxicity: RUCAM and the Role of Novel Diagnostic Biomarkers Such as MicroRNAs

Background: Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) with its focus on herbal use is popular and appreciated worldwide with increased tendency, although its therapeutic efficacy is poorly established for most herbal TCM products. Treatment was perceived as fairly safe but discussions emerged more recently as to whether herb induced liver injury (HILI) from herbal TCM is a major issue; Methods: To analyze clinical and case characteristics of HILI caused by herbal TCM, we undertook a selective literature search in the PubMed database with the search items Traditional Chinese Medicine, TCM, alone and combined with the terms herbal hepatotoxicity or herb induced liver injury; Results: HILI caused by herbal TCM is rare and similarly to drugs can be caused by an unpredictable idiosyncratic or a predictable intrinsic reaction. Clinical features of liver injury from herbal TCM products are variable, and specific diagnostic biomarkers such as microsomal epoxide hydrolase, pyrrole-protein adducts, metabolomics, and microRNAs are available for only a few TCM herbs. The diagnosis is ascertained if alternative causes are validly excluded and causality levels of probable or highly probable are achieved applying the liver specific RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) as the most commonly used diagnostic tool worldwide. Case evaluation may be confounded by inappropriate or lacking causality assessment, poor herbal product quality, insufficiently documented cases, and failing to exclude alternative causes such as infections by hepatotropic viruses including hepatitis E virus infections; Conclusion: Suspected cases of liver injury from herbal TCM represent major challenges that deserve special clinical and regulatory attention to improve the quality of case evaluations and ascertain patients' safety and benefit.

Current and future directions in the treatment and prevention of drug-induced liver injury: a systematic review

While the pace of discovery of new agents, mechanisms and risk factors involved in drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains brisk, advances in the treatment of acute DILI seems slow by comparison. In general, the key to treating suspected DILI is to stop using the drug prior to developing irreversible liver failure. However, predicting when to stop is an inexact science, and commonly used ALT monitoring is an ineffective strategy outside of clinical trials. The only specific antidote for acute DILI remains N-acetylcysteine (NAC) for acetaminophen poisoning, although NAC is proving to be beneficial in some cases of non-acetaminophen DILI in adults. Corticosteroids can be effective for DILI associated with autoimmune or systemic hypersensitivity features. Ursodeoxycholic acid, silymarin and glycyrrhizin have been used to treat DILI for decades, but success remains anecdotal. Bile acid washout regimens using cholestyramine appear to be more evidenced based, in particular for leflunomide toxicity. For drug-induced acute liver failure, the use of liver support systems is still investigational in the United States and emergency liver transplant remains limited by its availability. Primary prevention appears to be the key to avoiding DILI and the need for acute treatment. Pharmacogenomics, including human leukocyte antigen genotyping and the discovery of specific DILI biomarkers offers significant promise for the future. This article describes and summarizes the numerous and diverse treatment and prevention modalities that are currently available to manage DILI.

The Art and Science of Diagnosing and Managing Drug-induced Liver Injury in 2015 and Beyond

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains a leading reason why new compounds are dropped from further study or are the subject of product warnings and regulatory actions. Hy's Law of drug-induced hepatocellular jaundice causing a case-fatality rate or need for transplant of 10% or higher has been validated in several large national registries, including the ongoing, prospective U.S. Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network. It serves as the basis for stopping rules in clinical trials and in clinical practice. Because DILI can mimic all known causes of acute and chronic liver disease, establishing causality can be difficult. Histopathologic findings are often nonspecific and rarely, if ever, considered pathognomonic. A daily drug dose >50-100 mg is more likely to be hepatotoxic than does <10 mg, especially if the compound is highly lipophilic or undergoes extensive hepatic metabolism. The quest for a predictive biomarker to replace alanine aminotransferase is ongoing. Markers of necrosis and apoptosis such as microRNA-122 and keratin 18 may prove useful in identifying patients at risk for severe injury when they initially present with a suspected acetaminophen overdose. Although a number of drugs causing idiosyncratic DILI have HLA associations that may allow for pre-prescription testing to prevent hepatotoxicity, the cost and relatively low frequency of injury among affected patients limit the current usefulness of such genome-wide association studies. Alanine aminotransferase monitoring is often recommended but has rarely been shown to be an effective method to prevent serious DILI. Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of DILI have recently been published, although specific therapies remain limited. The LiverTox Web site has been introduced as an interactive online virtual textbook that makes the latest information on more than 650 agents available to clinicians, regulators, and drug developers alike.