Suspected herbal hepatotoxicity: requirements for appropriate causality assessment by the US Pharmacopeia

United States Pharmacopeia (USP) comprehensive review of the hepatotoxicity of green tea extracts

As part of the United States Pharmacopeia's ongoing review of dietary supplement safety data, a new comprehensive systematic review on green tea extracts (GTE) has been completed. GTEs may contain hepatotoxic solvent residues, pesticide residues, pyrrolizidine alkaloids and elemental impurities, but no evidence of their involvement in GTE-induced liver injury was found during this review. GTE catechin profiles vary significantly with manufacturing processes. Animal and human data indicate that repeated oral administration of bolus doses of GTE during fasting significantly increases bioavailability of catechins, specifically EGCG, possibly involving saturation of first-pass elimination mechanisms. Toxicological studies show a hepatocellular pattern of liver injury. Published adverse event case reports associate hepatotoxicity with EGCG intake amounts from 140 mg to ∼1000 mg/day and substantial inter-individual variability in susceptibility, possibly due to genetic factors. Based on these findings, USP included a cautionary labeling requirement in its Powdered Decaffeinated Green Tea Extract monograph that reads as follows: "Do not take on an empty stomach. Take with food. Do not use if you have a liver problem and discontinue use and consult a healthcare practitioner if you develop symptoms of liver trouble, such as abdominal pain, dark urine, or jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes)."

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.

Drug-induced liver injury associated with Complementary and Alternative Medicine: a review of adverse event reports in an Asian community from 2009 to 2014

BACKGROUND

The use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has been increasing over the years. A recent review of adverse event reports (AERs) associated with CAM in Singapore found a notable number of AERs submitted. The objectives of this study are to analyse hepatotoxicity cases associated with CAM in Singapore based on spontaneous adverse event reporting to the Health Sciences Authority (HSA), and to highlight safety signals for specific herbal ingredients.

METHODS

AERs associated with CAM and hepatotoxicity submitted to the Vigilance and Compliance Branch (VCB) of the HSA from 2009 to 2014 were compiled. The following information was extracted and analysed: Demographic information; time to onset; hospitalisation status; outcome; type of hepatotoxicity; ingredients of CAM, and the total daily doses (TDD); concurrent western medicines and health supplements; and reporter details.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven reports were eligible for analysis. Thirty-five (61.4 %) cases involved Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). The Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method was applied in 29 (82.9 %) of these cases, and the median score was 4 (range: 1-8). Chai Hu (Radix bupleuri) was suspected in 11 (31.4 %) cases. TDDs of most ingredients were within recommended doses of the Chinese Pharmacopoeia.

CONCLUSIONS

Drug-induced liver injury is still poorly understood and more objective assessments are warranted. Reporting of adverse events should be strongly advocated to facilitate future analyses and the understanding of risk-benefit profiles of CAM.

Herbal Hepatotoxicity: Clinical Characteristics and Listing Compilation

Herb induced liver injury (HILI) and drug induced liver injury (DILI) share the common characteristic of chemical compounds as their causative agents, which were either produced by the plant or synthetic processes. Both, natural and synthetic chemicals are foreign products to the body and need metabolic degradation to be eliminated. During this process, hepatotoxic metabolites may be generated causing liver injury in susceptible patients. There is uncertainty, whether risk factors such as high lipophilicity or high daily and cumulative doses play a pathogenetic role for HILI, as these are under discussion for DILI. It is also often unclear, whether a HILI case has an idiosyncratic or an intrinsic background. Treatment with herbs of Western medicine or traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) rarely causes elevated liver tests (LT). However, HILI can develop to acute liver failure requiring liver transplantation in single cases. HILI is a diagnosis of exclusion, because clinical features of HILI are not specific as they are also found in many other liver diseases unrelated to herbal use. In strikingly increased liver tests signifying severe liver injury, herbal use has to be stopped. To establish HILI as the cause of liver damage, RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) is a useful tool. Diagnostic problems may emerge when alternative causes were not carefully excluded and the correct therapy is withheld. Future strategies should focus on RUCAM based causality assessment in suspected HILI cases and more regulatory efforts to provide all herbal medicines and herbal dietary supplements used as medicine with strict regulatory surveillance, considering them as herbal drugs and ascertaining an appropriate risk benefit balance.

The Honolulu Liver Disease Cluster at the Medical Center: Its Mysteries and Challenges

In 2013, physicians at the Honolulu Queen’s Medical Center (QMC) noticed that seven liver disease patients reported the use of OxyELITE Pro (OEP), a widely consumed dietary supplement (DS). Assuming a temporal association between OEP use and disease, they argued that OEP was the cause of this mysterious cluster. Subsequent reexamination, however, has revealed that this QMC cohort is heterogeneous and not a cluster with a single agent causing a single disease. It is heterogeneous because patients used multiple DS’s and drugs and because patients appeared to have suffered from multiple liver diseases: liver cirrhosis, liver failure by acetaminophen, hepatotoxicity by non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), resolving acute viral hepatitis by hepatitis B virus (HBV), herpes simplex virus (HSV), and varicella zoster virus (VZV), and suspected hepatitis E virus (HEV). Failing to exclude these confounders and to consider more viable diagnoses, the QMC physicians may have missed specific treatment options in some of their patients. The QMC physicians unjustifiably upgraded their Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) causality scores so that all patients would appear to be “probable” for OEP. However, subsequent RUCAM reassessments by our group demonstrated a lack of causality for OEP in the evaluated QMC cases. The QMC’s questionable approaches explain the extraordinary accumulation of suspected OEP cases at the QMC in Hawaii as single place, whereas similar cohorts were not published by any larger US liver center, substantiating that the problem is with the QMC. In this review article, we present and discuss new case data and critically evaluate upcoming developments of problematic regulatory assessments by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as based on invalid QMC conclusions, clarifying now also basic facts and facilitating constructive discussions.

RUCAM in Drug and Herb Induced Liver Injury: The Update

RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) or its previous synonym CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) is a well established tool in common use to quantitatively assess causality in cases of suspected drug induced liver injury (DILI) and herb induced liver injury (HILI). Historical background and the original work confirm the use of RUCAM as single term for future cases, dismissing now the term CIOMS for reasons of simplicity and clarity. RUCAM represents a structured, standardized, validated, and hepatotoxicity specific diagnostic approach that attributes scores to individual key items, providing final quantitative gradings of causality for each suspect drug/herb in a case report. Experts from Europe and the United States had previously established in consensus meetings the first criteria of RUCAM to meet the requirements of clinicians and practitioners in care for their patients with suspected DILI and HILI. RUCAM was completed by additional criteria and validated, assisting to establish the timely diagnosis with a high degree of certainty. In many countries and for more than two decades, physicians, regulatory agencies, case report authors, and pharmaceutical companies successfully applied RUCAM for suspected DILI and HILI. Their practical experience, emerging new data on DILI and HILI characteristics, and few ambiguous questions in domains such alcohol use and exclusions of non-drug causes led to the present update of RUCAM. The aim was to reduce interobserver and intraobserver variability, to provide accurately defined, objective core elements, and to simplify the handling of the items. We now present the update of the well accepted original RUCAM scale and recommend its use for clinical, regulatory, publication, and expert purposes to validly establish causality in cases of suspected DILI and HILI, facilitating a straightforward application and an internationally harmonized approach of causality assessment as a common basic tool.

Herbal hepatotoxicity in traditional and modern medicine: actual key issues and new encouraging steps

Plants are natural producers of chemical substances, providing potential treatment of human ailments since ancient times. Some herbal chemicals in medicinal plants of traditional and modern medicine carry the risk of herb induced liver injury (HILI) with a severe or potentially lethal clinical course, and the requirement of a liver transplant. Discontinuation of herbal use is mandatory in time when HILI is first suspected as diagnosis. Although, herbal hepatotoxicity is of utmost clinical and regulatory importance, lack of a stringent causality assessment remains a major issue for patients with suspected HILI, while this problem is best overcome by the use of the hepatotoxicity specific CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) scale and the evaluation of unintentional reexposure test results. Sixty five different commonly used herbs, herbal drugs, and herbal supplements and 111 different herbs or herbal mixtures of the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) are reported causative for liver disease, with levels of causality proof that appear rarely conclusive. Encouraging steps in the field of herbal hepatotoxicity focus on introducing analytical methods that identify cases of intrinsic hepatotoxicity caused by pyrrolizidine alkaloids, and on omics technologies, including genomics, proteomics, metabolomics, and assessing circulating micro-RNA in the serum of some patients with intrinsic hepatotoxicity. It remains to be established whether these new technologies can identify idiosyncratic HILI cases. To enhance its globalization, herbal medicine should universally be marketed as herbal drugs under strict regulatory surveillance in analogy to regulatory approved chemical drugs, proving a positive risk/benefit profile by enforcing evidence based clinical trials and excellent herbal drug quality.

Drug- and Herb-Induced Liver Injury in Clinical and Translational Hepatology: Causality Assessment Methods, Quo Vadis?

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and herb-induced liver injury (HILI) are typical diseases of clinical and translational hepatology. Their diagnosis is complex and requires an experienced clinician to translate basic science into clinical judgment and identify a valid causality algorithm. To prospectively assess causality starting on the day DILI or HILI is suspected, the best approach for physicians is to use the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) scale in its original or preferably its updated version. The CIOMS scale is validated, liver-specific, structured, and quantitative, providing final causality grades based on scores of specific items for individual patients. These items include latency period, decline in liver values after treatment cessation, risk factors, co-medication, alternative diagnoses, hepatotoxicity track record of the suspected product, and unintentional re-exposure. Provided causality is established as probable or highly probable, data of the CIOMS scale with all individual items, a short clinical report, and complete raw data should be transmitted to the regulatory agencies, manufacturers, expert panels, and possibly to the scientific community for further refinement of the causality evaluation in a setting of retrospective expert opinion. Good-quality case data combined with thorough CIOMS-based assessment as a standardized approach should avert subsequent necessity for other complex causality assessment methods that may have inter-rater problems because of poor-quality data. In the future, the CIOMS scale will continue to be the preferred tool to assess causality of DILI and HILI cases and should be used consistently, both prospectively by physicians, and retrospectively for subsequent expert opinion if needed. For comparability and international harmonization, all parties assessing causality in DILI and HILI cases should attempt this standardized approach using the updated CIOMS scale.

Differentiated Evaluation of Extract-Specific Evidence on Cimicifuga racemosa's Efficacy and Safety for Climacteric Complaints

Past reviews on Cimicifuga racemosa (CR) without differentiation between extracts, quality, and indication altogether led to inconsistent data. Therefore, for the first time, we meet the requirements of the system's logic of evidence-based phytotherapy by taking into consideration extracts, pharmaceutical quality (reflected in a regulatory status as medicinal product), and indication. A literature search for clinical studies examining CR's efficacy and safety for menopausal complaints was conducted. The results were sorted by type of extract, regulatory status, and indication. Accordingly, Oxford Levels of Evidence (LOE) and Grades of Recommendation (GR) were determined. CR extracts demonstrated a good to very good safety in general, on estrogen-sensitive organs and the liver. However, only registered CR medicinal products were able to prove their efficacy. Best evidence was provided by the isopropanolic CR extract (iCR): the multitude of studies including more than 11,000 patients demonstrated consistent confirmatory evidence of LOE 1b (LOE 1a for safety) leading to GR A. The studies on the ethanolic extract BNO 1055 including more than 500 patients showed exploratory evidence of LOE 2b resulting in GR B. A positive benefit-risk profile is stated and limited to Cimicifuga racemosa products holding a marketing authorisation for treating climacteric complaints.

Herbal hepatotoxicity: Challenges and pitfalls of causality assessment methods

The diagnosis of herbal hepatotoxicity or herb induced liver injury (HILI) represents a particular clinical and regulatory challenge with major pitfalls for the causality evaluation. At the day HILI is suspected in a patient, physicians should start assessing the quality of the used herbal product, optimizing the clinical data for completeness, and applying the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) scale for initial causality assessment. This scale is structured, quantitative, liver specific, and validated for hepatotoxicity cases. Its items provide individual scores, which together yield causality levels of highly probable, probable, possible, unlikely, and excluded. After completion by additional information including raw data, this scale with all items should be reported to regulatory agencies and manufacturers for further evaluation. The CIOMS scale is preferred as tool for assessing causality in hepatotoxicity cases, compared to numerous other causality assessment methods, which are inferior on various grounds. Among these disputed methods are the Maria and Victorino scale, an insufficiently qualified, shortened version of the CIOMS scale, as well as various liver unspecific methods such as the ad hoc causality approach, the Naranjo scale, the World Health Organization (WHO) method, and the Karch and Lasagna method. An expert panel is required for the Drug Induced Liver Injury Network method, the WHO method, and other approaches based on expert opinion, which provide retrospective analyses with a long delay and thereby prevent a timely assessment of the illness in question by the physician. In conclusion, HILI causality assessment is challenging and is best achieved by the liver specific CIOMS scale, avoiding pitfalls commonly observed with other approaches.