Medical treatment of primary biliary cirrhosis and primary sclerosing cholangitis

Tauroursodeoxycholate-Bile Acid with Chaperoning Activity: Molecular and Cellular Effects and Therapeutic Perspectives

Tauroursodeoxycholic acid (TUDCA) is a naturally occurring hydrophilic bile acid that has been used for centuries in Chinese medicine. Chemically, TUDCA is a taurine conjugate of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), which in contemporary pharmacology is approved by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treatment of primary biliary cholangitis. Interestingly, numerous recent studies demonstrate that mechanisms of TUDCA functioning extend beyond hepatobiliary disorders. Thus, TUDCA has been demonstrated to display potential therapeutic benefits in various models of many diseases such as diabetes, obesity, and neurodegenerative diseases, mostly due to its cytoprotective effect. The mechanisms underlying this cytoprotective activity have been mainly attributed to alleviation of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress and stabilization of the unfolded protein response (UPR), which contributed to naming TUDCA as a chemical chaperone. Apart from that, TUDCA has also been found to reduce oxidative stress, suppress apoptosis, and decrease inflammation in many in-vitro and in-vivo models of various diseases. The latest research suggests that TUDCA can also play a role as an epigenetic modulator and act as therapeutic agent in certain types of cancer. Nevertheless, despite the massive amount of evidence demonstrating positive effects of TUDCA in pre-clinical studies, there are certain limitations restraining its wide use in patients. Here, molecular and cellular modes of action of TUDCA are described and therapeutic opportunities and limitations of this bile acid are discussed.

Gastrointestinal Manifestations of Autoimmune Diseases Requiring Critical Care

Proper functioning within the gastrointestinal (GI) system is essential to immune integrity. Autoimmune diseases (ADs) can disrupt GI integrity and cause serious derangements of organ function. ADs exist on a continuum of mild to severe. Life-threatening presentations of ADs can lead to rapid clinical demise. Additionally, the medications used to control ADs can precipitate gastric bleeding and predispose patients to sepsis in critical care. AD treatment focuses on diminishing symptoms through reducing autoantibody production that leads to cytokine release. This article details common and rare presentations of acute ADs associated with GI manifestations in critically ill patients.

Diagnosis and evaluation of hyperbilirubinemia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Jaundice, the physical finding associated with hyperbilirubinemia, results when the liver is unable to properly metabolize or excrete bilirubin. The purpose of this review is to examine some of the most common causes of jaundice in adults, provide insight into the diagnostic evaluation of jaundice, and review information on the outcomes of patients with jaundice.

RECENT FINDINGS

An elevated level of bilirubin almost always indicates the presence of an underlying disease state. The best approach to evaluating a patient with jaundice is to start with a careful history and physical examination, followed by imaging assessment of the biliary tree and liver. There are algorithm models that incorporate bilirubin levels in their predictor models for outcomes in patients with chronic liver disease (i.e., the model for end-stage liver disease). However, there are few studies that have examined the outcomes of patients with jaundice.

SUMMARY

Evaluation of patients with jaundice starts with a careful history and physical examination, followed by directed imaging of the biliary tree and liver. Although jaundice is generally believed to be a serious medical condition, there is little literature that addresses outcomes in patients with jaundice.

Substitutes for Bear Bile for the Treatment of Liver Diseases: Research Progress and Future Perspective

Bear bile has been a well-known Chinese medicine for thousands of years. Because of the endangered species protection, the concept on substitutes for bear bile was proposed decades ago. Based on their chemical composition and pharmacologic actions, artificial bear bile, bile from other animals, synthetic compounds, and medicinal plants may be the promising candidates to replace bear bile for the similar therapeutic purpose. Accumulating research evidence has indicated that these potential substitutes for bear bile have displayed the same therapeutic effects as bear bile. However, stopping the use of bear bile is a challenging task. In this review, we extensively searched PubMed and CNKI for literatures, focusing on comparative studies between bear bile and its substitutes for the treatment of liver diseases. Recent research progress in potential substitutes for bear bile in the last decade is summarized, and a strategy for the use of substitutes for bear bile is discussed carefully.

A novel, protective role of ursodeoxycholate in bile-induced pancreatic ductal injury

We have previously shown that chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA) strongly inhibits pancreatic ductal HCO3 (-) secretion through the destruction of mitochondrial function, which may have significance in the pathomechanism of acute pancreatitis (AP). Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is known to protect the mitochondria against hydrophobic bile acids and has an ameliorating effect on cell death. Therefore, our aim was to investigate the effect of UDCA pretreatment on CDCA-induced pancreatic ductal injury. Guinea pig intrainterlobular pancreatic ducts were isolated by collagenase digestion. Ducts were treated with UDCA for 5 and 24 h, and the effect of CDCA on intracellular Ca(2+) concentration ([Ca(2+)]i), intracellular pH (pHi), morphological and functional changes of mitochondria, and the rate of apoptosis were investigated. AP was induced in rat by retrograde intraductal injection of CDCA (0.5%), and the disease severity of pancreatitis was assessed by measuring standard laboratory and histological parameters. Twenty-four-hour pretreatment of pancreatic ducts with 0.5 mM UDCA significantly reduced the rate of ATP depletion, mitochondrial injury, and cell death induced by 1 mM CDCA and completely prevented the inhibitory effect of CDCA on acid-base transporters. UDCA pretreatment had no effect on CDCA-induced Ca(2+) signaling. Oral administration of UDCA (250 mg/kg) markedly reduced the severity of CDCA-induced AP. Our results clearly demonstrate that UDCA 1) suppresses the CDCA-induced pancreatic ductal injury by reducing apoptosis and mitochondrial damage and 2) reduces the severity of CDCA-induced AP. The protective effect of UDCA against hydrophobic bile acids may represent a novel therapeutic target in the treatment of biliary AP.

Ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Ursodeoxycholic acid is administered to patients with primary biliary cirrhosis, a chronic progressive inflammatory autoimmune-mediated liver disease with unknown aetiology. Despite its controversial effects, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved its usage for primary biliary cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of ursodeoxycholic acid in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for eligible randomised trials in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The literature search was performed until January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing the beneficial and harmful effects of ursodeoxycholic acid versus placebo or 'no intervention' in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data. Continuous data were analysed using mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD). Dichotomous data were analysed using risk ratio (RR). Meta-analyses were conducted using both a random-effects model and a fixed-effect model, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Random-effects model meta-regression was used to assess the effects of covariates across the trials. Trial sequential analysis was used to assess risk of random errors (play of chance). Risks of bias (systematic error) in the included trials were assessed according to Cochrane methodology bias domains.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen randomised clinical trials with 1447 patients with primary biliary cirrhosis were included. One trial had low risk of bias, and the remaining fifteen had high risk of bias. Fourteen trials compared ursodeoxycholic acid with placebo and two trials compared ursodeoxycholic acid with 'no intervention'. The percentage of patients with advanced primary biliary cirrhosis at baseline varied from 15% to 83%, with a median of 51%. The duration of the trials varied from 3 to 92 months, with a median of 24 months. The results showed no significant difference in effect between ursodeoxycholic acid and placebo or 'no intervention' on all-cause mortality (45/699 (6.4%) versus 46/692 (6.6%); RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.42, I² = 0%; 14 trials); on all-cause mortality or liver transplantation (86/713 (12.1%) versus 89/706 (12.6%); RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.25, I² = 15%; 15 trials); on serious adverse events (94/695 (13.5%) versus 107/687 (15.6%); RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.12, I² = 23%; 14 trials); or on non-serious adverse events (27/643 (4.2%) versus 18/634 (2.8%); RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.56, I² = 0%; 12 trials). The random-effects model meta-regression showed that the risk of bias of the trials, disease severity of patients at entry, ursodeoxycholic acid dosage, and trial duration were not significantly associated with the intervention effects on all-cause mortality, or on all-cause mortality or liver transplantation. Ursodeoxycholic acid did not influence the number of patients with pruritus (168/321 (52.3%) versus 166/309 (53.7%); RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.09, I² = 0%; 6 trials) or with fatigue (170/252 (64.9%) versus 174/244 (71.3%); RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.00, I² = 62%; 4 trials). Two trials reported the number of patients with jaundice and showed a significant effect of ursodeoxycholic acid versus placebo or no intervention in a fixed-effect meta-analysis (5/99 (5.1%) versus 15/99 (15.2%); RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.90, I² = 51%; 2 trials). The result was not supported by the random-effects meta-analysis (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.06 to 4.95). Portal pressure, varices, bleeding varices, ascites, and hepatic encephalopathy were not significantly affected by ursodeoxycholic acid. Ursodeoxycholic acid significantly decreased serum bilirubin concentration (MD -8.69 µmol/l, 95% CI -13.90 to -3.48, I² = 0%; 881 patients; 9 trials) and activity of serum alkaline phosphatases (MD -257.09 U/L, 95% CI -306.25 to -207.92, I² = 0%; 754 patients, 9 trials) compared with placebo or no intervention. These results were supported by trial sequential analysis. Ursodeoxycholic acid also seemed to improve serum levels of gamma-glutamyltransferase, aminotransferases, total cholesterol, and plasma immunoglobulin M concentration. Ursodeoxycholic acid seemed to have a beneficial effect on worsening of histological stage (random; 66/281 (23.5%) versus 103/270 (38.2%); RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88, I² = 35%; 7 trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review did not demonstrate any significant benefits of ursodeoxycholic acid on all-cause mortality, all-cause mortality or liver transplantation, pruritus, or fatigue in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. Ursodeoxycholic acid seemed to have a beneficial effect on liver biochemistry measures and on histological progression compared with the control group. All but one of the included trials had high risk of bias, and there are risks of outcome reporting bias and risks of random errors as well. Randomised trials with low risk of bias and low risks of random errors examining the effects of ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis are needed.

Induction of regulatory T cells and indefinite survival of fully allogeneic cardiac grafts by ursodeoxycholic acid in mice

BACKGROUND

Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) has been used to treat patients with cholestatic and autoimmune liver diseases. Several studies have addressed whether UDCA can inhibit graft rejection in experimental and clinical transplantation, but the results have varied. We investigated the effect of UDCA and the mechanism of its effect on alloimmune responses in a murine model of cardiac transplantation.

METHODS

CBA mice underwent transplantation of a C57BL/10 heart and received a single dose of UDCA. Survival times of the allografts were recorded. An adoptive transfer study was conducted to determine whether regulatory cells were generated. The effects on graft survival of adding FK506 or cyclosporine A (CyA) to UDCA treatment were assessed. Histologic, cell proliferation, and cytokine assessments were performed.

RESULTS

CBA recipients given UDCA (25 mg/kg) had indefinite allograft survival (median survival time [MST], >100 days). UDCA also suppressed proliferation of splenocytes and production of interleukin (IL)-2, IL-6, and interferon-gamma, and up-regulated IL-10 production. Adoptive transfer of either whole splenocytes or CD4+ cells from UDCA-treated allograft recipients resulted in indefinite survival of allografts in naive secondary recipients (MST, >100 days). Adoptive transfer of CD4+ CD25+ cells from UDCA-treated recipients significantly prolonged allograft survival in naive secondary recipients (MST, >80 days). FK506 (0.1 mg/kg/day) was compatible with the induction of indefinite allograft survival by UDCA, whereas CyA (10 mg/kg/day) abrogated the effect of UDCA.

CONCLUSION

UDCA induced unresponsiveness to fully allogeneic cardiac allografts and generated CD4+ CD25+ regulatory cells in our model. FK506, but not CyA, was compatible with UDCA treatment.

Immune-mediated liver diseases: programmed cell death ligands and circulating apoptotic markers

Primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis and autoimmune hepatitis are the three major immune-mediated liver diseases. The etiologies of primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis and autoimmune hepatitis are largely unknown, but seem to be influenced by genetic and environmental factors. Autoantibodies can be found in nearly all patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and autoimmune hepatitis, and in the vast majority of patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. In addition, autoimmune hepatitis is associated with high concentrations of serum globulins. Enhanced liver cell death by apoptosis has been described in all of these liver diseases, although the precise mechanisms remain unclear. In general, apoptosis can be initiated via an extrinsic pathway that is triggered by engagement of death receptors on the cell surface, or via an intrinsic pathway that is induced by mitochondrial injury and is influenced by members of the Bcl-2 family. In both pathways, effector caspases are finally activated that cleave and degrade cell structures, resulting in the release of apoptotic products into the circulation. New diagnostic tests can detect these apoptotic markers and programmed cell death ligands such as Fas and Fas-ligands, nucleosomes, caspases, cytokeratin fragments, macrophage migration inhibitory factor, soluble intracellular adhesion molecule, natural killer cells group 2D and programmed death ligands. Several of these markers have been found to be altered in tissue and/or blood of immune-mediated liver diseases, some also in nonimmune-mediated liver diseases. Beyond their potential usefulness as additional diagnostic markers, they may be valuable for the estimation of disease severity and therapy monitoring. This review summarizes current knowledge on apoptotic mechanisms, death receptor ligands and circulating apoptotic markers in immune-mediated liver diseases.

Ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Primary biliary cirrhosis is an uncommon autoimmune liver disease with unknown aetiology. Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) has been used for primary biliary cirrhosis, but the effects remain controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of UDCA on patients with primary biliary cirrhosis against placebo or no intervention.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCI-EXPANDED, The Chinese Biomedical CD Database, LILACS, and the references of identified studies. The last search was performed in January 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials evaluating UDCA versus placebo or no intervention in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcomes were mortality and mortality or liver transplantation. Binary outcomes were reported as odds ratio (OR) or relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as weighted mean difference, all with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Meta-regression was used to investigate the associations between UDCA effects and quality of the trial, UDCA dose, trial duration, and patient's severity of primary biliary cirrhosis. We also used Bayesian meta-analytic approach to estimate the UDCA effect as sensitivity analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen randomised clinical trials evaluating UDCA against placebo or no intervention were identified. Data from three trials have been updated. Nearly half of the trials had high risk of bias. The combined results demonstrated no significant effects favouring UDCA on mortality (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.42) and mortality or liver transplantation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.21). The findings were supported by the Bayesian meta-analyses. UDCA did not improve pruritus, fatigue, autoimmune conditions, liver histology, or portal pressure. UDCA seemed to improve biochemical variables, like serum bilirubin, ascites, and jaundice, but the findings were based on few trials with sparse data. The use of UDCA is significantly associated with adverse events, mainly weight gain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review did not demonstrate any benefit of UDCA on mortality and mortality or liver transplantation of patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. The few beneficial effects could not be due to random errors or outcome reporting bias.

Overlap syndromes among autoimmune liver diseases

The three major immune disorders of the liver are autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). Variant forms of these diseases are generally called overlap syndromes, although there has been no standardized definition. Patients with overlap syndromes present with both hepatitic and cholestatic serum liver tests and have histological features of AIH and PBC or PSC. The AIH-PBC overlap syndrome is the most common form, affecting almost 10% of adults with AIH or PBC. Single cases of AIH and autoimmune cholangitis (AMA-negative PBC) overlap syndrome have also been reported. The AIH-PSC overlap syndrome is predominantly found in children, adolescents and young adults with AIH or PSC. Interestingly, transitions from one autoimmune to another have also been reported in a minority of patients, especially transitions from PBC to AIH-PBC overlap syndrome. Overlap syndromes show a progressive course towards liver cirrhosis and liver failure without treatment. Therapy for overlap syndromes is empiric, since controlled trials are not available in these rare disorders. Anticholestatic therapy with ursodeoxycholic acid is usually combined with immunosuppressive therapy with corticosteroids and/or azathioprine in both AIH-PBC and AIH-PSC overlap syndromes. In end-stage disease, liver transplantation is the treatment of choice.

Tauroursodeoxycholic acid reduces bile acid-induced apoptosis by modulation of AP-1

Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is used in the therapy of cholestatic liver diseases. Apoptosis induced by toxic bile acids plays an important role in the pathogenesis of liver injury during cholestasis and appears to be mediated by the human transcription factor AP-1. We aimed to study if TUDCA can decrease taurolitholic acid (TLCA)-induced apoptosis by modulating AP-1. TLCA (20 microM) upregulated AP-1 proteins cFos (26-fold) and JunB (11-fold) as determined by quantitative real-time PCR in HepG2-Ntcp hepatoma cells. AP-1 transcriptional activity increased by 300% after exposure to TLCA. cFos and JunB expression as well as AP-1 transcriptional activity were unaffected by TUDCA (75 microM). However, TUDCA significantly decreased TLCA-induced upregulation of cFos and JunB. Furthermore, TUDCA inhibited TLCA-induced AP-1 transcriptional activity and reduced TLCA-induced apoptosis. These data suggest that reversal of bile acid-induced AP-1 activation may be relevant for the antiapoptotic effect of TUDCA in liver cells.

Ursodeoxycholic acid for patients with primary biliary cirrhosis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials using Bayesian approach as sensitivity analyses

OBJECTIVES

Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is used for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC), but the beneficial effects remain controversial.

METHODS

We performed an updated systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of UDCA in patients with PBC. We included randomized clinical trials evaluating UDCA versus placebo or no intervention in patients with PBC. The primary outcomes, mortality and mortality or liver transplantation, were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Meta-regression was used to investigate the associations between UDCA effects and the trial's risk of bias, UDCA dose, duration, and PBC severity at trial entry. We used Bayesian meta-analytic approaches as sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Sixteen randomized clinical trials (1,447 patients) evaluating UDCA versus placebo or no intervention were identified. Over half of the trials had high risk of bias. Comparing with placebo or no intervention, UDCA did not significantly affect mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.67-1.42) and mortality or liver transplantation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71-1.21). The findings were supported by the Bayesian meta-analyses. Meta-regression analyses suggested that UDCA effects seem to be associated with patient's disease severity and trial duration. UDCA did not improve pruritus, fatigue, autoimmune conditions, liver histology, or portal pressure. UDCA seemed to improve biochemical variables, such as serum bilirubin, and ascites and jaundice, but the findings were based on few trials with sparse data. The use of UDCA was significantly associated with adverse events, mainly weight gain.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated systematic review did not demonstrate any benefit of UDCA on mortality and mortality or liver transplantation in patients with PBC.

Ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Primary biliary cirrhosis is a rare autoimmune liver disease and an effective treatment has been difficult to establish. Some randomised clinical trials have found an effect of ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the beneficial effects and adverse effects of peroral ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis versus placebo or no intervention.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Controlled Trials Register of The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the full text of the identified studies were searched until April 2001. The electronic searches were done by entering the search terms 'ursodeoxycholic acid', 'UDCA', 'primary biliary cirrhosis', and 'PBC'.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials evaluating ursodeoxycholic acid administered perorally at any dose versus placebo or no intervention in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis diagnosed by any method. Only trials using an adequate method for randomisation were included, regardless of blinding and language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The methodologic quality of the randomised clinical trials was evaluated by components and the Jadad-score. The following outcomes were extracted: mortality, liver transplantation, pruritus, other clinical symptoms (jaundice, portal pressure, (bleeding) oesophageal varices, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, hepato-renal syndrome, autoimmune conditions), liver biochemistry, liver function, liver biopsy findings, quality of life, and adverse events. All analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat method.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 16 randomised clinical trials evaluating ursodeoxycholic acid against placebo (n = 15) or no intervention (n = 1) in 1422 patients were identified. The median Jadad-score was 3 (range 1-5). A number of trials described as double blind had problems with the blinding. Neither mortality (odds ratio = 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 1.48), liver transplantation (odds ratio = 0.83; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.32), mortality or liver transplantation (odds ratio = 0.90; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.26), pruritus, fatigue, autoimmune conditions, quality of life, liver histology, or portal pressure were significantly affected by ursodeoxycholic acid (given in doses of 8-15 mg/kg/day for three months to five years). However, ursodeoxycholic acid significantly (P < 0.05) reduced ascites, jaundice, and biochemical variables such as serum bilirubin and liver enzymes. Ursodeoxycholic acid was not significantly associated with adverse events. Including data after patients had been switched onto open label ursodeoxycholic acid confirmed the findings regarding the lack of a significant effect of ursodeoxycholic acid on mortality and mortality or liver transplantation. A significant (P = 0.04) effect was, however, observed on the incidence of liver transplantation (odds ratio = 0.68; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.98).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Ursodeoxycholic acid has a marginal therapeutic effect for primary biliary cirrhosis. On the positive side, ursodeoxycholic acid has few side effects. The general usage of ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis needs reevaluation.