Prevention of hepatitis C recurrence by bridging sofosbuvir/ribavirin from pre- to post-liver transplant: a real-life strategy

Direct antiviral therapy for hepatitis C cirrhotic patients in liver transplantation settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C (HCV)-induced decompensated cirrhosis warrants liver transplantation (LT) as the only ultimate solution. These patients experience liver deterioration, while on the transplant waitlist. However, debate remains over the optimal timing for treating HCV relative to before or after LT.

METHODS

We performed a literature search between 1/2011 and 1/2022 on PubMed and OVID Medline. Data were extracted from direct antiviral agent (DAA) studies in English. The outcomes of interest included sustained virological response (SVR) rates from various cohorts as well as long- and short-term outcomes in the LT settings.

RESULTS

After screening, 54 studies were eligible and included into the review. In aligning with the EASL and AASLD guidelines and suggestions, many studies supported DAA therapy before LT in patients with Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores < 18 and DAA therapy post-LT in MELD scores > 20 through SVR rates, long-term survival factors, liver deterioration, and incidences of severe adverse events. However, uncertainty still lies in the guideline recommendations and unsettled issues remain for various patient cohorts that may benefit from opposing the guideline cutoffs. Based on the recent studies on predictors of treatment outcomes in decompensated patients and the impact of DAA on the waiting list for LT, we proposed an algorithm to manage patients with MELD scores between 18 and 20.

CONCLUSION

DAA therapy for decompensated patients must be personalized with consideration of different factors, particularly among those with MELD scores between the two cutoff-values proposed by the current associational guidelines.

Current and forthcoming perspectives in linkage to care of hepatitis C virus infection: Assessment of an Italian focus group

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) remains a significant public health problem and is one of the major causes of chronic liver disease worldwide. In recent years many new tools to facilitate widespread HCV screening and new therapeutic options with excellent efficacy and tolerability profiles and cost lowering policies have become available. To fully utilise these new tools, the link between local and specialist centres for the management of HCV infection must be reinforced. In order to GAIN further insight into these aspects, with a particular focus on the Italian scenario, a group of experts met to discuss relevant aspects and open issues on chronic HCV. As a summary of that meeting, the following aspects are here overviewed: (i) global situation of HCV; (ii) screening, diagnosis and indications for the treatment of HCV; (iii) the Italian situation of HCV referrals; (iv) 'hard to reach' patients; (v) treatment of HCV with extrahepatic manifestations; (vi) treatment of patients with advanced cirrhosis. It is the intention of the expert panel to further promote widespread screening and eradication policies that should be accompanied by greater interaction, by attempting to involve all healthcare providers in an organised process to facilitate linkage to care of patients with HCV infections.

The road map toward an hepatitis C virus-free transplant population

Antiviral therapy to eradicate hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection improves outcomes in patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT) for advanced chronic HCV with or without hepatocellular carcinoma. Traditionally, antiviral therapy focused on the use of interferon (IFN)-based regimens, with antiviral treatment initiated in the posttransplant period once recurrent HCV disease with fibrosis in the allograft was identified. The use of IFN-based therapy was limited in pretransplant patients with advanced liver disease. Earlier intervention, either before transplantation or early after LT, is now feasible with the advent of second-generation direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) with superior tolerability and efficacy to IFN-based therapy. These agents have the potential to reduce the number of patients developing HCV-related complications requiring LT and retransplantation, as well as reducing the demand for donor organs. We discuss the pros and cons of pretransplant, peritransplant, and posttransplant therapy with current DAAs, citing available data from clinical trials and real-world experience.

Specific issues concerning the management of patients on the waiting list and after liver transplantation

The present document is a second contribution collecting the recommendations of an expert panel of transplant hepatologists appointed by the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF) concerning the management of certain aspects of liver transplantation, including: the issue of prompt referral; the management of difficult candidates; malnutrition; living related liver transplants; hepatocellular carcinoma; and the role of direct acting antiviral agents before and after transplantation. The statements on each topic were approved by participants at the AISF Transplant Hepatology Expert Meeting organized by the Permanent Liver Transplant Commission in Mondello on 12-13 May 2017. They are graded according to the GRADE grading system.

The Italian compassionate use of sofosbuvir in HCV patients waitlisted for liver transplantation: A national real-life experience

BACKGROUND & AIMS

This study aimed to assess the real-life clinical and virological outcomes of HCV waitlisted patients for liver transplantation (LT) who received sofosbuvir/ribavirin (SOF/R) within the Italian compassionate use program.

METHODS

Clinical and virological data were collected in 224 patients with decompensated cirrhosis and/or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving daily SOF/R until LT or up a maximum of 48 weeks.

RESULTS

Of 100 transplanted patients, 51 were HCV-RNA negative for >4 weeks before LT (SVR12: 88%) and 49 negative for <4 weeks or still viraemic at transplant: 34 patients continued treatment after LT (bridging therapy) (SVR12: 88%), while 15 stopped treatment (SVR12: 53%). 98 patients completed SOF/R without LT (SVR12: 73%). In patients with advanced decompensated cirrhosis (basal MELD ≥15 and/or C-P ≥B8), a marked improvement of the scores occurred in about 50% of cases and almost 20% of decompensated patients without HCC reached a condition suitable for inactivation and delisting.

CONCLUSIONS

These real-life data indicate that in waitlisted patients: (i) bridging antiviral therapy can be an option for patients still viraemic or negative <4 weeks at LT; and (ii) clinical improvement to a condition suitable for delisting can occur even in patients with advanced decompensated cirrhosis.

Direct-acting agents for hepatitis C virus before and after liver transplantation

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains a widespread public health concern and many people are infected with HCV. HCV is one of the leading indications for liver transplantation. Direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) against HCV have changed the course of chronic HCV infection, however, making it a curable disease. DAA treatment may be initiated before or after liver transplantation. In the present review, we present the available data on DAA treatment of HCV in liver transplant recipients.

Treatment of Patients With Hepatitis C Virus Infection With Ledipasvir-Sofosbuvir in the Liver Transplant Setting

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause of liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma and the leading indication for liver transplantation. In the Middle East, genotype 4 HCV infection is the most common genotype. However, limited data exists on the treatment of genotype-4 in the liver transplant setting. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ledipasvir (LDV)-sofosbuvir (SOF) in treating HCV genotype-4 infected patients with cirrhosis or postliver transplantation.

METHODS

This prospective, single-arm, observational study includes cohort of patients with cirrhosis before liver transplantation (cohort A) and a cohort of postliver transplantation patients (cohort B). Patients received LDV/SOF (90-400 mg) once daily for 12 to 24 weeks with or without ribavirin (RBV). Patients with creatinine clearance below 30 were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients (61 cirrhotic; 50 postliver transplants) with HCV genotype 4 were treated in King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center; 55% cohort A and 44% cohort B received RBV. Sustained virological response sustain virological response (SVR)12 was 91.8% and 86% of cohorts A and B, respectively. There were no treatment-related mortality or serious adverse effects. RBV dose reduction occurred in 25% without any treatment discontinuation. SVR12 rates in cohort A were significantly higher in patients with a viral load below 800 000 (100% vs 83.9%, P value = 0.022). Viral load did not impact SVR rates in cohort B. The use of RBV did not increase SVR12 and was associated with anemia.

CONCLUSIONS

LDV/SOF without RBV is an effective and safe treatment option for patients with HCV genotype 4 infection in preliver and postliver transplant settings.

ELITA consensus statements on the use of DAAs in liver transplant candidates and recipients

The advent of safe and highly effective direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) has had huge implications for the hepatitis C virus (HCV) transplant field, and changed our management of both patients on the waiting list and those with HCV graft re-infection after liver transplantation (LT). When treating HCV infection before LT, HCV re-infection of the graft can be prevented in nearly all patients. In addition, some candidates show a remarkable clinical improvement and may be delisted. Alternatively, HCV infection can be treated post-LT either soon after the transplant, taking advantage of the removal of the infected native liver, or at the time of disease recurrence, as was carried out in the past. In either case, some DAAs have a limited use because of their drug to drug interactions with various immunosuppressants as well as the many other drugs liver transplant recipients are often prescribed. In addition, some DAAs should be avoided in case of severe renal failure, which is not an unusual complication after LT. The present document provides a series of consensus statements on the LT issues that have not been extensively addressed previously. These statements have been developed to support physicians and other stakeholders in charge of LT candidates and recipients when deciding to treat HCV, especially in difficult situations.

Negativization of viremia prior to liver transplant reduces early allograft dysfunction in hepatitis C-positive recipients

Although early allograft dysfunction (EAD) negatively impacts survival from the first months following liver transplantation (LT), direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have revolutionized hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy. We investigated the EAD definition best predicting 90-day graft loss and identified EAD risk factors in HCV-positive recipients. From November 2002 to June 2016, 603 HCV-positive patients (hepatocellular carcinoma, 53.4%) underwent a first LT with HCV-negative donors. The median recipient Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 15, and the median donor age was 63 years. At LT, 77 (12.8%) patients were HCV RNA negative; negativization was achieved and maintained by pre-LT antiviral therapy (61 patients) or pre-LT plus a pre-emptive post-LT course (16 patients); 60 (77.9%) patients received DAAs and 17 (22.1%) interferon. We compared 3 different EAD definitions: (1) bilirubin ≥ 10 mg/dL or international normalized ratio ≥ 1.6 on day 7 after LT or aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase > 2000 IU/L within 7 days of LT; (2) bilirubin > 10 mg/dL on days 2-7 after LT; and (3) MELD ≥ 19 on day 5 after LT. EAD defined by MELD ≥ 19 on day 5 after LT had the lowest negative (0.1) and the highest positive (1.9) likelihood ratio to predict 90-day graft loss. At 90 days after LT, 9.2% of recipients with EAD lost their graft as opposed to 0.7% of those without EAD (P < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, considering variables available at LT, MELD at LT of >25 (OR = 7.4) or 15-25 (OR = 3.2), graft macrovesicular steatosis ≥ 30% (OR = 6.7), HCV RNA positive at LT (OR = 2.7), donor age > 70 years (OR = 2.0), earlier LT era (OR = 1.8), and cold ischemia time ≥ 8 hours (OR = 1.8) were significant risk factors for EAD. In conclusion, in HCV-positive patients, MELD ≥ 19 on day 5 after LT best predicts 90-day graft loss. Preventing graft infection by pre-/peri-LT antiviral therapy reduces EAD incidence and could be most beneficial in high-MELD patients and recipients of suboptimal grafts. Liver Transplantation 23 915-924 2017 AASLD.