Hepatitis C management in post-transplant patients.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related cirrhosis is the leading cause for liver transplantation (LT) in developed countries. One of the most troubling complications following LT in patients with HCV is that of recurrence. Unfortunately, this occurs in nearly all patients with HCV. Patients suffering recurrence are known to have faster times to fibrosis and consequently higher rates of graft failure. In general, patients whom undergo transplantation for HCV cirrhosis have higher mortalities comparatively. It is for this reason that HCV in post-transplant patients must be strictly monitored for and treated. Until recently, treatment with standard therapy or pegylated interferon and ribavirin was only marginally effective and the use in this population was off-label. With the advent of direct acting antivirals (DAA), hopes for improved sustained virologic response (SVR) exists. This review will attempt to provide an update regarding recent data for HCV treatment in post-transplant patients, and by doing so, hopefully shed light on a previously dim and dreaded illness.

Transfusion has no effect on recurrence in hepatitis C after liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The literature suggests that blood product transfusions have a negative impact on the survival of liver transplant patients. We investigated the impact of intraoperative blood product usage on the survival of liver transplantation patients being transplanted for hepatitis C-related end-stage liver disease. In addition, we analyzed a potentially more sensitive metric, namely disease recurrence and fibrosis progression, obtained from follow-up liver biopsies. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 194 consecutive patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) undergoing liver transplantation. To investigate the effect of red blood cell (RBC) or platelet transfusions on post-transplant HCV recurrence, hepatic biopsy data from 4 months and 1 year after transplantation were studied. In addition, survival data were analyzed. RESULTS: There was no effect of intraoperative RBC or platelet transfusion on either 1- or 5-year patient survival following liver transplantation. There was no difference in HCV disease recurrence or progression of hepatic fibrosis at 4 months or 1 year attributable either to RBC or to platelet transfusion. CONCLUSION: This study was not able to confirm an effect on the survival of HCV-infected liver transplant patients related to intraoperative transfusion of RBCs or platelets. In addition, these transfusions had no effect on HCV recurrence or fibrosis progression. This is not to condone a liberal transfusion practice, but rather to reassure that when clinically indicated, transfusion does not have a significant impact on patient survival or disease recurrence in HCV-infected liver transplant patients.

The management of hepatitis C.

Hepatitis C is a serious public health problem with more than 170 million chronic carriers worldwide. Although hepatitis C infection can be cured in up to 40% of patients, current treatment is not ideal and is associated with a wide spectrum of side effects and complications. Therefore, emerging evidence suggests that patients can receive tailored therapy based on their viral kinetic changes during treatment. With better knowledge of hepatitis C viral genome and life cycle, compounds so called ''Specifically Targeted Antiviral Therapy for HCV or STAT-C'' are under development. This review will discuss current therapies and recent advances in new therapies for hepatitis C.

Is sonographic surveillance of polytetrafluoroethylene-covered transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) necessary? A single centre experience comparing both types of stents.

AIM: To investigate whether sonographic (US) surveillance of polytetrafluoroethylene covered transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) is necessary. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 128 patients who underwent TIPS for complications of portal hypertension between January 2001 and December 2005 at a large tertiary centre. Procedural data were retrospectively analysed. US surveillance of the TIPS was performed at baseline with scheduled follow-up or whenever shunt dysfunction was suspected. Clinical and radiology reports were compared to assess US surveillance of the TIPS. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty-six US studies were performed, with a median of three per patient (range 1-5). The median follow-up period was 378 days (range 1-1749 days). Twenty-three patients (18%) had baseline US studies performed only whereas 105 (82%) also had follow-up studies. Forty-one (32%) of 128 patients [32 (78%) Wallstent, nine (22%) Viatorr] had Doppler ultrasound abnormalities noted. Venography was performed in all 41 patients. Abnormal venography and elevated hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) was seen in 34 (82.9%) of the 41 patients [29 (85.3%) Wallstent, five (14.7%) Viatorr]. Among the 34 patients, 17 (50%) [13 (76.5%) Wallstent, four (23.5%) Viatorr] had venographic abnormalities noted at the hepatic venous end accompanied by increased HVPG. All four of the Viatorr patients had minor narrowing at the hepatic venous end and HVPG measurements that ranged 3-4 mm Hg above 12 mm Hg. CONCLUSION: Considering the improved patency of covered stents in TIPS, US surveillance may be superfluous after the baseline study.

Liver retransplantation: a single-center outcome and financial analysis.

Retransplantation of the liver (re-OLTx) accounts for approximately 10% of all liver transplants in the United States. The decision to offer a patient a second liver transplant has significant financial, ethical, and outcome implications. This large, single-center experience describes some outcome and financial data to consider when making this decision. One thousand three liver transplants were performed in 921 patients at our center. Patients were divided into adult and pediatric groups, and further by whether they received a single transplant or more than one. Overall survival, variation in survival by timing of re-OLTx, and survival in adults with hepatitis C were investigated, as were hospital charges and cost of re-OLTx. Adults, but not children, had a significant decrement in survival following a second transplant. Second transplants more than double the cost of the initial transplant, but there is a significantly higher cost associated with early retransplantation compared to the cost associated with late retransplantation (costs of first and second transplants included in both cases). This difference is due to a longer length of stay and associated cost in the ICU. Adult patients retransplanted early have the same overall survival compared to those done late. The sample size of the adult HCV re-OLTx population was too small to reach statistical significance despite their observed poorer outcome.

Sirolimus-induced hyperlipidaemia in liver transplant recipients is not dose-dependent.

BACKGROUND: Sirolimus is a potent immunosuppressive medication that acts by inhibiting T-cell proliferation. It has been used in kidney transplantation because of its lack of nephrotoxicity. It is now being investigated in liver transplantation, but there are concerns about safety and long-term side effects such as dyslipidaemia. Hypertriglyceridaemia is a common adverse event seen with sirolimus use, and often does not respond to dose reduction or anti-lipemic drugs. METHOD: We report six patients who have developed significant hyperlipidaemia while receiving sirolimus, in spite of therapeutic trough levels. CONCLUSION: All six patients showed either resolution or improvement in lipid levels with discontinuation of sirolimus.

Fine-needle aspiration diagnosis of hydatid cyst.

The diagnosis of hydatid disease outside endemic areas is usually not suspected. Hydatid cysts in imaging studies can be confused with hepatic tumors, abscesses, cystadenomas, liver cysts or other lesions. Serology is the usual confirmatory test, but cytologic diagnosis has been described. Aspiration of the cysts has not been employed as a routine diagnostic method for fear of spillage and anaphylactic reactions. We report a case of unsuspected hepatic echinococcosis that was confirmed by fine-needle aspiration of the lesion and cytologic confirmation without complications.

The anti-viral effect of sorafenib in hepatitis C-related hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is currently the only approved systemic therapy shown to have efficacy in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recent studies suggest that hepatitis C (HCV)-related HCC patients derive more clinical benefit from sorafenib than other subgroups, but the mechanism for this effect is unknown. In vitro data suggest that sorafenib may exert anti-viral properties, and thus our aim in this study was to evaluate potential anti-viral activity of sorafenib in patients with HCV-related HCC. AIM: To evaluate potential anti-viral activity of sorafenib in patients with HCV-related HCC. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients with HCV-related HCC treated with sorafenib for up to 6 months. Baseline clinical, viral and oncologic data were collected. Patients' HCV viral loads were obtained at various time points, and compared with their baseline viral levels. No patients received any known anti-viral therapy during this time. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were identified with baseline and subsequent HCV levels available for analysis. Six patients completed 6 months of full dose sorafenib, and comparisons of their HCV viral loads showed no significant change at week 24 (difference of means = 0.3500, CI: -0.1799-0.8799, P = 0.150), or the interim time points. Similarly, the HCV viral loads of all patients who received sorafenib and the viral loads of those patients who had tumour response to sorafenib showed no significant changes at any time point. CONCLUSION: Despite preclinical data and previous subgroup analyses suggesting that sorafenib has an anti-viral effect against HCV, this study suggests that sorafenib lacks significant anti-viral activity in HCV patients with HCC.

Pilot study: fenofibrate for patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and an incomplete response to ursodeoxycholic acid.

BACKGROUND: Newer therapies are needed for patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and incomplete response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). Fenofibrate is a fibric acid postulated to regulate immune response and cell proliferation. AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fenofibrate in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and incomplete response to UDCA. METHODS: We undertook a pilot study involving 20 patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) ≥ 2× ULN. Nonparametric statistical tests and Spearman correlation test were used as appropriate. RESULTS: Twenty patients received fenofibrate (160 mg/day) in addition to UDCA for 48 weeks. Median serum ALP decreased significantly at 48 weeks compared with baseline values [351 (214-779) U/L at baseline vs. 177 (60-384) U/L at 48 weeks, P < 0.05]. A rebound in ALP occurred upon drug discontinuation. Serum aspartate aminotransferase and Immunoglobulin M also decreased significantly, while bilirubin and albumin remained unchanged. Median IL-1 decreased from 28.9 (2.7-10 000) to 11.3 (2.5-277.7) pg/mL (P = 0.049), and median IL-6 from 4.6 (3.2-5205) to 3.5 (3.2-73.4) pg/mL (P = 0.027). Heartburn was the most frequent adverse event, leading to discontinuation of two study subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy of fenofibrate and UDCA induced significant biochemical improvement in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and incomplete response to UDCA. Further studies are warranted.

The combination of sorafenib with transarterial chemoembolisation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Standard of practice involves using transarterial therapy for multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) alone and sorafenib only for more advanced HCC, but the sorafenib and transarterial therapy combination may provide greater efficacy. AIM: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of concurrent sorafenib and transarterial therapy in HCC. METHODS: Consecutive cases of HCC were treated with sorafenib and transarterial therapy, receiving sorafenib 2 to 4weeks before transarterial therapy. Baseline clinical parameters, adverse events (AEs) and survival were collected. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients received sorafenib and transarterial therapy. The majority of the patients were male (70%) with HCV (60%), median age of 60years, good performance status (0-1), stable cirrhosis (Child: A 72%; B 28%), unresectable tumour (stage: B 81%; C 19%) and median AFP of 24ng/mL. Median follow-up was 12months and median time on sorafenib was 6months. LC Bead TACE was used with a median frequency of 3. The majority of the patients (89%) experienced AEs. The most common AEs were fatigue (51%), hand-foot skin reaction (51%) and diarrhoea (43%). Grade 3 and 4 AEs included fatigue (13%) and hand-foot skin reaction (26%). Most patients required a dose reduction (66%). The main AE related to transarterial therapy was post-TACE syndrome (23%). The disease control rate was 68% at 6months. Overall median survival rate was 18.5months (95% CI 16.1-20.9months). CONCLUSION: Concurrent sorafenib and transarterial therapy is overall safe with no unexpected side effects and encouraging efficacy that warrants further study.