Nomenclature, diagnosis and management of drug-induced autoimmune-like hepatitis (DI-ALH): An expert opinion meeting report.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) can mimic almost all other liver disorders. A phenotype increasingly ascribed to drugs is autoimmune-like hepatitis (ALH). This article summarises the major topics discussed at a joint International Conference held between the Drug-Induced Liver Injury consortium and the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group. DI-ALH is a liver injury with laboratory and/or histological features that may be indistinguishable from those of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Previous studies have revealed that patients with DI-ALH and those with idiopathic AIH have very similar clinical, biochemical, immunological and histological features. Differentiating DI-ALH from AIH is important as patients with DI-ALH rarely require long-term immunosuppression and the condition often resolves spontaneously after withdrawal of the implicated drug, whereas patients with AIH mostly require long-term immunosuppression. Therefore, revision of the diagnosis on long-term follow-up may be necessary in some cases. More than 40 different drugs including nitrofurantoin, methyldopa, hydralazine, minocycline, infliximab, herbal and dietary supplements (such as Khat and Tinospora cordifolia) have been implicated in DI-ALH. Understanding of DI-ALH is limited by the lack of specific markers of the disease that could allow for a precise diagnosis, while there is similarly no single feature which is diagnostic of AIH. We propose a management algorithm for patients with liver injury and an autoimmune phenotype. There is an urgent need to prospectively evaluate patients with DI-ALH systematically to enable definitive characterisation of this condition.

Best practices for detection, assessment and management of suspected immune-mediated liver injury caused by immune checkpoint inhibitors during drug development.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown significant efficacy in patients with various malignancies, however, they are associated with a wide range of immune-related toxicities affecting many organs, including the liver. Immune-mediated liver injury caused by checkpoint inhibitors (ILICI) is a distinctive form of drug induced liver injury (DILI), that differs from most DILI types in presumed underlying mechanism, incidence, and response to therapeutic interventions. Despite increased awareness of ILICI and other immune-related adverse effects of ICIs reflected by recent guidelines for their management in post marketing clinical practice, there is lack of uniform best practices to address ILICI risk during drug development. As efforts to develop safer and more effective ICIs for additional indications grow, and as combination therapies including ICIs are increasingly investigated, there is a growing need for consistent practices for ILICI in drug development. This publication summarizes current best practices to optimize the monitoring, diagnosis, assessment, and management of suspected ILICI in clinical trials using ICI as a single agent and in combination with other ICIs or other oncological agents. It is one of several publications developed by the IQ DILI Initiative in collaboration with DILI experts from academia and regulatory agencies. Recommended best practices are outlined pertaining to hepatic inclusion and exclusion criteria, monitoring of liver tests, ILICI detection, approach to a suspected ILICI signal, causality assessment, hepatic discontinuation rules and additional medical treatment.

Liver safety assessment in clinical trials of new agents for chronic hepatitis B.

Investigational agents that reduce or eliminate covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) or enhance host immunity against hepatitis B virus (HBV)-infected hepatocytes are intended to induce a durable off-treatment clearance of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) (referred to as functional cure). The aim of this paper was to highlight challenges in interpreting liver safety data in clinical trials of these agents when given alone or in combination regimens. The incidence, grading and management of spontaneous serum ALT flares in untreated chronic HBV patients are reviewed along with a summary of serum ALT flares observed during the registration trials for peginterferon and nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Recommendations regarding the detection, management and interpretation of liver safety biomarker data in future clinical trials as well as suggested inclusion and exclusion criteria for phase 1/2 vs phase 3 studies are provided. Criteria to help classify liver safety signals as being due to the intended therapeutic response, emergence of drug-resistant HBV virions, or idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury are provided along with a review of the role of an expert hepatic adjudication panel in assessing a compound's hepatotoxicity profile. Finally, an algorithmic approach to the differential diagnosis and recommended medical evaluation and management of individual clinical trial patients that develop a liver safety signal is provided along with the rationale to collect and test research blood samples for future mechanistic studies.

Drug rechallenge following drug-induced liver injury.

Drug-induced hepatocellular injury is identified internationally by alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels equal to or exceeding 5× the upper limit of normal (ULN) appearing within 3 months of drug initiation, after alternative causes are excluded. Upon withdrawing the suspect drug, ALT generally decrease by 50% or more. With drug readministration, a positive rechallenge has recently been defined by an ALT level of 3-5× ULN or greater. Nearly 50 drugs are associated with positive rechallenge after drug-induced liver injury (DILI): antimicrobials; and central nervous system, cardiovascular and oncology therapeutics. Drugs associated with high rates of positive rechallenge exhibit multiple risk factors: daily dose >50 mg, an increased incidence of ALT elevations in clinical trials, immunoallergic clinical injury, and mitochondrial impairment in vitro. These drug factors interact with personal genetic, immune, and metabolic factors to influence positive rechallenge rates and outcomes. Drug rechallenge following drug-induced liver injury is associated with up to 13% mortality in prospective series of all prescribed drugs. In recent oncology trials, standardized systems have enabled safer drug rechallenge with weekly liver chemistry monitoring during the high-risk period and exclusion of patients with hypersensitivity. However, high positive rechallenge rates with other innovative therapeutics suggest that caution should be taken with rechallenge of high-risk drugs. CONCLUSION: For critical medicines, drug rechallenge may be appropriate when 1) no safer alternatives are available, 2) the objective benefit exceeds the risk, and 3) patients are fully informed and consent, can adhere to follow-up, and alert providers to hepatitis symptoms. To better understand rechallenge outcomes and identify key risk factors for positive rechallenge, additional data are needed from controlled clinical trials, prospective registries, and large health care databases. (Hepatology 2017;66:646-654).

Dose-dependent acute liver injury with hypersensitivity features in humans due to a novel microsomal prostaglandin E synthase 1 inhibitor.

AIMS: LY3031207, a novel microsomal prostaglandin E synthase 1 inhibitor, was evaluated in a multiple ascending dose study after nonclinical toxicology studies and a single ascending dose study demonstrated an acceptable toxicity, safety and tolerability profile. METHODS: Healthy subjects were randomized to receive LY3031207 (25, 75 and 275 mg), placebo or celecoxib (400 mg) once daily for 28 days. The safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of LY3031207 were evaluated. RESULTS: The study was terminated when two subjects experienced drug-induced liver injury (DILI) after they had received 225 mg LY3031207 for 19 days. Liver biopsy from these subjects revealed acute liver injury with eosinophilic infiltration. Four additional DILI cases were identified after LY3031207 dosing had been stopped. All six DILI cases shared unique presentations of hepatocellular injury with hypersensitivity features and demonstrated a steep dose-dependent trend. Prompt discontinuation of the study drug and supportive medical care resulted in full recovery. Metabolites from metabolic activation of the imidazole ring were observed in plasma and urine samples from all subjects randomized to LY3031207 dosing. CONCLUSIONS: This study emphasized the importance of careful safety monitoring and serious adverse events management in phase I trials. Metabolic activation of the imidazole ring may be involved in the development of hepatotoxicity of LY3031207.

Treatment with LY2409021, a glucagon receptor antagonist, increases liver fat in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To evaluate whether treatment with LY2409021, a novel, selective glucagon receptor antagonist, is associated with changes in hepatic fat and other safety variables related to the benefit-risk profile for chronic use in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Safety and efficacy were assessed in patients with T2D taking metformin and sulphonylurea who were randomized to LY2409021 20 mg (n = 65), placebo (n = 68), or sitagliptin 100 mg (n = 41). Key endpoints included change from baseline to month 6 in hepatic fat fraction (HFF), assessed by magnetic resonance imaging; hepatic aminotransferases; blood pressure; lipid profile; fasting plasma glucose; and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). RESULTS: A significant increase in HFF was seen with LY2409021 vs sitagliptin (least squares [LS] mean difference 3.72%; P < .001) and placebo (4.44%; P < .001), accompanied by significant elevations in alanine aminotransferase levels with LY2409021 vs sitagliptin (6.8 U/L; P = .039) and vs placebo (10.7 U/L; P < .001). No patients had concomitant elevations in bilirubin levels. LY2409021 treatment showed significant HbA1c reductions vs placebo (LS mean difference -0.77%; P < .001) but not sitagliptin (-0.20%; P = .383). Similar results were observed for fasting plasma glucose. LY2409021 was also associated with significant increases in systolic blood pressure vs sitagliptin (4.9 mm Hg; P = .030) and vs placebo (4.3 mm Hg; P = .029), as well as significant increases in body weight and total cholesterol. All effects of LY2409021 were reversible. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of patients with T2D, chronic glucagon receptor antagonism with LY2409021 was associated with glucose-lowering but also demonstrated increases in hepatic fat, hepatic aminotransferases, and other adverse effects.

Hepatic outcomes among adults taking duloxetine: a retrospective cohort study in a US health care claims database.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic injury has been reported following duloxetine use. This study further examines the hepatic safety of duloxetine in a large US health insurance database. METHODS: In this propensity score-matched cohort analysis in a US commercially insured population (01 August 2004 to 31 December 2010), we compared individuals with depression and without liver disease who initiated duloxetine to comparators (venlafaxine or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs], and individuals with pharmacologically untreated depression). We estimated incidence rates (IR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for medical record-confirmed hepatic-related death, liver failure, and other clinically significant hepatic injury. RESULTS: Among 30,844 duloxetine initiators, 21,000 were matched to venlafaxine initiators, 28,479 to SSRI initiators, and 22,714 to untreated patients. There were no cases of hepatic-related death or liver failure. IRs of other clinically significant hepatic injury without documented alternate etiologies were higher but not statistically significant among duloxetine initiators compared to initiators of venlafaxine (0.7/1000 person-years [PY] [95 % CI: 0.2 - 1.5] vs. 0.0/1000 PY [95 % CI: 0.0 - 0.3]) and SSRIs (0.4/1000 PY [95 % CI: 0.1 - 1.0] vs. 0.0/1000 PY [95 % CI: 0.0 - 0.3]). IRs were similar among duloxetine and untreated patients (0.5/1000 PY [95 % CI: 0.1 - 1.3] vs. 0.5/1000 PY [95 % CI: 0.1 - 1.5]). When hepatic outcomes were considered irrespective of alternate etiologies, similar results were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, while not statistically significant, may suggest a higher incidence of hepatic injury other than hepatic-related death or liver failure among duloxetine initiators compared to venlafaxine and possibly SSRIs, but not untreated patients. These differences remain consistent with chance, and an elevated risk cannot be ruled in or out.

Drug-induced liver injury and drug development: industry perspective.

Despite intensive ongoing research, drug-induced live injury (DILI) remains a serious issue for care providers and patients, and has been a major cause of drug withdrawal and non-approval by regulatory authorities in the past 50 years. Consequently, DILI remains a major concern for the pharmaceutical industry and a leading cause for attrition during drug development. In most instances, severe DILI is an uncommon idiosyncratic reaction, which typically does not present during preclinical phases or early clinical phases of drug development. In the majority of cases, drugs that caused severe DILI in humans have not shown clear and consistent hepatotoxic signals in preclinical assessment including animal studies, cell cultures, or other methods. Despite intensive efforts to develop better biomarkers that would help in predicting DILI risk in earlier phases of drug development, such biomarkers are currently not supported by sufficient evidence and are not yet available for routine use by drug makers. Due to the lack of effective and accurate methods for prediction of idiosyncratic DILI during preclinical phases of drug development, different drug makers have adopted different approaches, which are often not supported by strong systematic evidence. Based on growing experience, it is becoming increasingly evident that milder forms of liver injury occurring during clinical development, when assessed correctly, may significantly enhance our ability to predict the drug's potential to cause more severe liver injury postmarketing. Strategies based on this concept have been adopted by many drug makers, and are being increasingly implemented during drug development. Meticulous causality assessment of individual hepatic cases and adherence to strict hepatic discontinuation rules are critical components of this approach and have to rely on thorough clinical evaluation and occasionally on assessment by liver experts experienced with DILI and drug development.

Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of an Oral Small Molecule Inhibitor of IL-17A (LY3509754): A Phase I Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study.

For some patients with psoriasis, orally administered small molecule inhibitors of interleukin (IL)-17A may represent a convenient alternative to IL-17A-targeting monoclonal antibodies. This first-in-human study assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PKs), and peripherally circulating IL-17A target engagement profile of single or multiple oral doses of the small molecule IL-17A inhibitor LY3509754 (NCT04586920). Healthy participants were randomly assigned to receive LY3509754 or placebo in sequential escalating single ascending dose (SAD; dose range 10-2,000 mg) or multiple ascending dose (MAD; dose range 100-1,000 mg daily for 14 days) cohorts. The study enrolled 91 participants (SAD, N = 51 and MAD, N = 40) aged 21-65 years (71% men). LY3509754 had a time to maximum concentration (Tmax) of 1.5-3.5 hours, terminal half-life of 11.4-19.1 hours, and exhibited dose-dependent increases in exposure. LY3509754 had strong target engagement, indicated by elevated plasma IL-17A levels within 12 hours of dosing. Four participants from the 400-mg (n = 1) and 1,000-mg (n = 3) MAD cohorts experienced increased liver transaminases or acute hepatitis (onset ≥ 12 days post-last LY3509754 dose), consistent with drug-induced liver injury (DILI). One case of acute hepatitis was severe, resulted in temporary hospitalization, and was classified as a serious adverse event. No adverse effects on other major organ systems were observed. Liver biopsies from three of the four participants revealed lymphocyte-rich, moderate-to-severe lobular inflammation. We theorize that the DILI relates to an off-target effect rather than IL-17A inhibition. In conclusion, despite strong target engagement and a PK profile that supported once-daily administration, this study showed that oral dosing with LY3509754 was poorly tolerated.

Review article: Recommendations for detection, assessment and management of suspected drug-induced liver injury during clinical trials in oncology patients.

BACKGROUND: Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a major concern for oncology drugs in clinical practice and under development. Monitoring cancer patients for hepatotoxicity is challenging as these patients may have abnormal liver tests pre-treatment or on-study for many reasons including liver injury due to past oncology treatments, hepatic metastases, medical co-morbidities such as heart failure, and concomitant medications. At present, there are no regulatory guidelines or position papers that systematically address best practices pertaining to DILI detection, assessment and management in oncology patients. AIMS: The goals of this review are (1) to examine and interpret the available evidence and (2) to make recommendations for detection, monitoring, adjudication, and management of suspected hepatocellular DILI during oncology clinical trials. METHODS: This manuscript was developed by the IQ Consortium (International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in pharmaceutical development) DILI Initiative that consists of members from 17 pharmaceutical companies, in collaboration with academic and regulatory DILI experts. The manuscript is based on extensive literature review, expert interpretation of the literature, and several rounds of consensus discussions. RESULTS: This review highlights recommendations for patient eligibility for clinical trials with or without primary/metastatic liver involvement, as well as changes in liver tests that should trigger increased monitoring and/or discontinuation of study drug. Guidance regarding causality assessment for suspected DILI events, rechallenge and dose-modification is provided. CONCLUSIONS: This review brings together evidence-based recommendations and expert opinion to provide the first dedicated consensus for best practices in detection, assessment, and management of DILI in oncology clinical trials.