Retransplantation for graft failure in chronic hepatitis C infection: A good use of a scarce resource?

Improved retransplant outcomes: early evidence of the share35 impact

BACKGROUND

Share 35 prioritizes offers of deceased donor livers to regional candidates with Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) ≥35 over local candidates with lower MELD scores. Analysis of Share35 has shown that overall 1- or 2-year post-transplant (LTx) outcomes have been unchanged while waitlist mortality has been reduced. However, these studies exclude retransplant (reLTx) recipients. This study aims to investigate the outcomes of liver retransplants in evaluating the impact of the Share35 policy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of data from the United Network for Organ Sharing database over the period June 2011-June 2015 was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 19,748 LTx and 312 reLTx recipients were identified. Of the LTx recipients, 9626 (48.7%) underwent transplant pre-Share 35 and 10,122 (51.3%) post-Share 35. 123 (39.4%) reLTx recipients underwent retransplantation pre-Share 35 and 189 (60.6%) post-Share 35. ReLTx recipients experienced improved 2-year graft survival post-Share 35 compared to pre-Share 35 (67% vs. 21.1%). Patient survival also improved at 2-years for reLTx recipients post-Share 35 compared to pre-Share 35 (69.2% vs. 33.1%). Transplant post-Share 35 was protective for both 2-year graft (HR = 0.669, CI = 0.454-0.985, p = 0.04) and patient (HR = 0.659, CI = 0.44-0.987, p = 0.003) survival.

CONCLUSION

Share35 is associated with improved outcomes after retransplantation.

Predictive factors for survival and score application in liver retransplantation for hepatitis C recurrence

AIM: To identify risk factors associated with survival in patients retransplanted for hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence and to apply a survival score to this population.

METHODS: We retrospectively identified 108 patients retransplanted for HCV recurrence in eight European liver transplantation centers (seven in France, one in Spain). Data collection comprised clinical and laboratory variables, including virological and antiviral treatment data. We then analyzed the factors associated with survival in this population. A recently published score that predicts survival in retransplantation in patients with hepatitis C was applied. Because there are currently no uniform recommendations regarding selection of the best candidates for retransplantation in this setting, we also described the clinical characteristics of 164 patients not retransplanted, with F3, F4, or fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) post-first graft presenting with hepatic decompensation.

RESULTS: Overall retransplantation patient survival rates were 55%, 47%, and 43% at 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Patients who were retransplanted for advanced cirrhosis had survival rates of 59%, 52%, and 49% at 3, 5, and 10 years, while those retransplanted for FCH had survival rates of 34%, 29%, and 11%, respectively. Under multivariate analysis, and adjusting for the center effect and the occurrence of FCH, factors associated with better survival after retransplantation were: negative HCV viremia before retransplantation, antiviral therapy after retransplantation, non-genotype 1, a Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score < 25 when replaced on the waiting list, and a retransplantation donor age < 60 years. Although the numbers were small, in the context of the new antivirals era, we showed that outcomes in patients who underwent retransplantation with undetectable HCV viremia did not depend on donor age and MELD score. The Andrés score was applied to 102 patients for whom all score variables were available, producing a mean score of 43.4 (SD = 6.6). Survival rates after the date of the first decompensation post-first liver transplantation (LT1) in the liver retransplantation (reLT) group (94 patients decompensated) at 3, 5, and 10 years were 62%, 59%, and 51%, respectively, among 78 retransplanted individuals with advanced cirrhosis, and 42%, 32%, and 16% among 16 retransplanted individuals with FCH. In the non-reLT group with hepatic decompensation, survival rates were 27%, 18%, and 9% at 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively (P < 0.0001). Compared with non-retransplanted patients, retransplanted patients were younger at LT1 (mean age 48 ± 8 years compared to 53 ± 9 years in the no reLT group, P < 0.0001), less likely to have human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infection (4% vs 14% among no reLT patients, P = 0.005), more likely to have received corticosteroid bolus therapy after LT1 (25% in reLT vs 12% in the no reLT group, P = 0.01), and more likely to have presented with sustained virological response (SVR) after the first transplantation (20% in the reLT group vs 7% in the no reLT group, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION: Antiviral therapy before and after retransplantation had a substantial impact on survival in the context of retransplantation for HCV recurrence, and with the new direct-acting antivirals now available, outcomes should be even better in the future.

Secondary analysis of large databases for hepatology research

Secondary analysis of large datasets involves the utilization of existing data that has typically been collected for other purposes to advance scientific knowledge. This is an established methodology applied in health services research with the unique advantage of efficiently identifying relationships between predictor and outcome variables but which has been underutilized for hepatology research. Our review of 1431 abstracts published in the 2013 European Association for the Study of Liver (EASL) abstract book showed that less than 0.5% of published abstracts utilized secondary analysis of large database methodologies. This review paper describes existing large datasets that can be exploited for secondary analyses in liver disease research. It also suggests potential questions that could be addressed using these data warehouses and highlights the strengths and limitations of each dataset as described by authors that have previously used them. The overall goal is to bring these datasets to the attention of readers and ultimately encourage the consideration of secondary analysis of large database methodologies for the advancement of hepatology.

Optimizing repeat liver transplant graft utility through strategic matching of donor and recipient characteristics

Repeat liver transplantation (LT) is controversial because of inferior outcomes versus primary LT. A minimum 1-year expected post-re-LT survival of 50% has been proposed. We aimed to identify combinations of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), donor risk index (DRI), and recipient characteristics achieving this graft survival threshold. We identified re-LT recipients listed in the United States from March 2002 to January 2010 with > 90 days between primary LT and listing for re-LT. Using Cox regression, we estimated the expected probability of 1-year graft survival and identified combinations of MELD, DRI, and recipient characteristics attaining >50% expected 1-year graft survival. Re-LT recipients (n = 1418) had a median MELD of 26 and median age of 52 years. Expected 1-year graft survival exceeded 50% regardless of MELD or DRI in Caucasian recipients who were not infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) of all ages and Caucasian HCV-infected recipients <50 years old. As age increased in HCV-infected Caucasian and non-HCV-infected African American recipients, lower MELD scores or lower DRI grafts were needed to attain the graft survival threshold. As MELD scores increased in HCV-infected African American recipients, lower-DRI livers were required to achieve the graft survival threshold. Use of high-DRI livers (>1.44) in HCV-infected recipients with a MELD score > 26 at re-LT failed to achieve the graft survival threshold with recipient age ≥ 60 years (any race), as well as at age ≥ 50 years for Caucasians and at age < 50 years for African Americans. Strategic donor selection can achieve >50% expected 1-year graft survival even in high-risk re-LT recipients (HCV infected, older age, African American race, high MELD scores). Low-risk transplant recipients (age < 50 years, non-HCV-infected) can achieve the survival threshold with varying DRI and MELD scores.

Liver transplantation in treatment of colorectal liver metastases

Surgical resection is the only curative modality for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) and 5-year overall survival after resection is about 40%. Nonresectable CLM is not curable and 5-year overall survival is currently about 10%. Before 1995, several liver transplantations for CLMs were performed, but outcome was poor (5-year survival rate: 18%). Liver transplantation for CLMs was abandoned and CLMs were even considered a contraindication to the procedure. Since then, the survival rate after liver transplantation in general has improved by almost 30%. In a prospective pilot study of liver transplantation for nonresectable CLM, a 5-year overall survival rate of 60% was demonstrated, however 19 of 21 patients experienced recurrence of disease. Here, current knowledge and ongoing research in this field is reviewed, and the potential role for liver transplantation as one of several treatment modalities for CLM discussed.

Hepatic retransplant: what have we learned?

Hepatic retransplant accounts for 5% to 15% of liver transplants in most series and is associated with significantly increased hospital costs and inferior patient survival when compared with primary liver transplant. Early retransplants are usually due to primary graft nonfunction or vascular thrombosis, whereas later retransplants are most commonly necessitated by chronic rejection or recurrent primary liver disease. Hepatic retransplant remains the sole option for survival in many patients facing allograft failure after liver transplant. With improved techniques to match retransplant candidates with appropriate donor grafts, it is hoped that the outcomes of retransplant will continue to improve in future.

Retransplantation using living-donor right-liver grafts

BACKGROUND

This study reviews the outcomes of retransplantation using living-donor right-liver grafts.

METHODS

A retrospective study of liver retransplants performed between 1996 and 2013 was conducted. The retransplants were divided into the DD group (with deceased donors) and the LD group (with living donors). Survival outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The DD group contained 23 patients and 27 retransplants using whole-liver grafts and the LD group contained 11 patients and 11 retransplants using right-liver grafts. Vascular and biliary complications were the main indications for retransplantation in both groups. The LD group had significantly younger donors, lighter grafts, shorter cold ischemia and longer operations. The two groups were comparable in age, preoperative liver function, warm ischemia, blood loss, transfusion, intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, hospital mortality, complication and graft loss. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year patient survival rates were 78.3%, 73.7% and 63.8%, respectively, in the DD group. The LD group had the corresponding rates all at 90.9% (P = 0.246). The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year graft survival rates were 74.1%, 65.8% and 61.5%, respectively, in the DD group. The LD group had the corresponding rates all at 90.9% (P = 0.132).

CONCLUSION

Excellent long-term survival after retransplantation using living-donor right-liver grafts can be achieved.

Have we changed the liver retransplantation survival?

INTRODUCTION

Orthotropic liver retransplantation (RT) is the therapeutic option for the failure of an allograft. Patient and graft survival rates after RT are inferior to primary liver transplantation (OLT). Because of the limited number of donors, it is essential that we optimize their use. We reviewed 68 consecutive retransplantations to evaluate their results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using registry data from our Liver Transplantation Unit, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adult RT between 1991 and 2010. Patients were divided into 2 groups (urgent vs elective RT) to compare the utility of RT. We also analyzed data collected at the time of RT, including age, gender, indications for primary OLT and RT (hepatitis C virus [HCV]+ and HCV-). At various stages (1991-2000, 2001-2006, and 2007-2010), we calculated probability survival curves according to the Kaplan-Meier method with comparisons using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Among 771 adult liver transplantations, 68 (8.8%) underwent late secondary OLT. 21 (31%) cases were urgent and 47 elective RT (69%). Vascular complications was the most common cause for urgent RT, and chronic rejection, for elective RT. Differences were also detected in the overall survival of RT patients; mortality was significantly lower among the urgent procedures (15% vs 47.8%). Significantly differences were also detected in overall survival for RT patients between 2007 and 2010 (81.7% with urgent RT and 76.5% with elective situations).

CONCLUSION

These data confirmed the utility of RT in elective and emergency situations. Overall survival of elective RT patients has improved in recent years. Liver RT requires a multidisciplinary team to decide the inclusion and prioritization of elective RT cases on the OLT waiting list.

Recurrence of hepatitis C after liver transplantation

Recurrence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection following liver transplantation is a major source of morbidity and mortality. The natural history of hepatitis C in the transplant setting is shortened. Overall, one third of HCV-infected recipients have developed allograft cirrhosis due to HCV recurrence by the 5^th-7^th year post-transplantation. The most significant variables which determine disease progression are the use of organs from old donors, the use of an inadequate immunosuppression (too low, inducing treatment rejection episodes, too potent or too rapidly changing), and the presence of comorbid conditions that also impact the quality of the graft (biliary complications, metabolic syndrome). The only factor consistently shown to modify the natural history of recurrent disease is antiviral therapy. A sustained viral response, achieved by one third of those treated with dual therapy, is associated with improved histology, reduced liver-related complications and increased survival. Variables associated with enhanced viral response with dual therapy include an adequate genetic background (IL28B C/C of both donor and recipient), good treatment adherence (full doses of ribavirin, treatment duration), lack of graft cirrhosis at baseline, and viral genotype non-1. Data with triple therapy are encouraging. Response rates of about 60% at end-of-therapy have been described. Drug-drug interactions with calcineurin inhibitors are present but easily manageable with strict trough levels monitoring. Side effects are frequent and severe, particularly anemia, infections and acute renal insufficiency. In the future new oral antivirals will likely prevent viral reinfection. In this review, we will cover the most significant but also controversial aspects regarding recurrent HCV infection, including the natural history, retransplantation, antiviral therapy, and outcome in HIV-HCV patients.

Long-term antiviral treatment for recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The management of patients treated for hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation and not achieving virological response following treatment with interferon plus ribavirin is controversial.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the outcomes of 70 patients non-responders to antiviral treatment after liver transplantation was performed. Twenty-one patients (30.0%; Group A) were treated for ≤ 12 months and 49 (70.0%; Group B) for more than 12 months.

RESULTS

The 2 groups were comparable for main demographic, clinical and pathological variables. Median duration of antiviral treatment was 8.2 months in Group A and 33.4 months in Group B. No patient achieved a complete virological response. The 5-year patient hepatitis C-related survival rate was 49.2% in Group A and 88.3% in Group B (P=0.002), while the 5-year graft survival rate was 49.2% in Group A and 85.9% in Group B (P=0.007). The median yearly fibrosis progression rate was 1.21 per year in Group A and 0.40 per year in Group B (P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged antiviral treatment showed an overall beneficial effect in transplanted patients with a recurrent hepatitis C infection and not responding to conventional therapy. The treatment should be continued as long as it is permitted, in order to improve clinical and histological outcomes.

Early transcriptional programming links progression to hepatitis C virus-induced severe liver disease in transplant patients

Liver failure resulting from chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause for liver transplantation worldwide. Recurrent infection of the graft is universal in HCV patients after transplant and results in a rapid progression to severe fibrosis and end-stage liver disease in one third of all patients. No single clinical variable, or combination thereof, has, so far, proven accurate in identifying patients at risk of hepatic decompensation in the transplant setting. A combination of longitudinal, dimensionality reduction and categorical analysis of the transcriptome from 111 liver biopsy specimens taken from 57 HCV-infected patients over time identified a molecular signature of gene expression of patients at risk of developing severe fibrosis. Significantly, alterations in gene expression occur before histologic evidence of liver disease progression, suggesting that events that occur during the acute phase of infection influence patient outcome. Additionally, a common precursor state for different severe clinical outcomes was identified.

CONCLUSION

Based on this patient cohort, incidence of severe liver disease is a process initiated early during HCV infection of the donor organ. The probable cellular network at the basis of the initial transition to severe liver disease was identified and characterized.

A dual role for hypoxia inducible factor-1α in the hepatitis C virus lifecycle and hepatoma migration

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) causes progressive liver disease and is a major risk factor for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the role of infection in HCC pathogenesis is poorly understood. We investigated the effect(s) of HCV infection and viral glycoprotein expression on hepatoma biology to gain insights into the development of HCV associated HCC.

METHODS

We assessed the effect(s) of HCV and viral glycoprotein expression on hepatoma polarity, migration and invasion.

RESULTS

HCV glycoproteins perturb tight and adherens junction protein expression, and increase hepatoma migration and expression of epithelial to mesenchymal transition markers Snail and Twist via stabilizing hypoxia inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α). HIF-1α regulates many genes involved in tumor growth and metastasis, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β). Neutralization of both growth factors shows different roles for VEGF and TGFβ in regulating hepatoma polarity and migration, respectively. Importantly, we confirmed these observations in virus infected hepatoma and primary human hepatocytes. Inhibition of HIF-1α reversed the effect(s) of infection and glycoprotein expression on hepatoma permeability and migration and significantly reduced HCV replication, demonstrating a dual role for HIF-1α in the cellular processes that are deregulated in many human cancers and in the viral life cycle.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide new insights into the cancer-promoting effects of HCV infection on HCC migration and offer new approaches for treatment.

Antiviral treatment for HCV recurrence after liver transplantation: when, how much and for how long?

Chronic HCV infection is one of the leading causes of end-stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma worldwide, and it constitutes one of the principal indications for liver transplant. However, recurrent HCV infection after liver transplant is nearly universal, and leads to decreased patient and graft survival in the long-term. Strategies to approach this problem that is commonly encountered in clinical practice include treating patients in order to obtain viral clearance before the transplant, pre-emptive treatment, which refers to therapy initiation before there is histological evidence of disease, and treatment for established recurrence. Therapy at these diverse time points poses varied challenges regarding the feasibility of the treatment, possibility of treatment completion, risk of adverse effects and different response rates. Furthermore, advances are being made in identifying prognostic markers of viral response, which could aid in decreasing the disease burden.