Liver injury after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination: Features of immune-mediated hepatitis, role of corticosteroid therapy and outcome.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A few case reports of autoimmune hepatitis-like liver injury have been reported after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination. We evaluated clinical features, treatment response and outcomes of liver injury following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in a large case series. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We collected data from cases in 18 countries. The type of liver injury was assessed with the R-value. The study population was categorized according to features of immune-mediated hepatitis (positive autoantibodies and elevated immunoglobulin G levels) and corticosteroid therapy for the liver injury. We identified 87 patients (63%, female), median age 48 (range: 18-79) years at presentation. Liver injury was diagnosed a median 15 (range: 3-65) days after vaccination. Fifty-one cases (59%) were attributed to the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccine, 20 (23%) cases to the Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOX1 nCoV-19) vaccine and 16 (18%) cases to the Moderna (mRNA-1273) vaccine. The liver injury was predominantly hepatocellular (84%) and 57% of patients showed features of immune-mediated hepatitis. Corticosteroids were given to 46 (53%) patients, more often for grade 3-4 liver injury than for grade 1-2 liver injury (88.9% vs. 43.5%, p = 0.001) and more often for patients with than without immune-mediated hepatitis (71.1% vs. 38.2%, p = 0.003). All patients showed resolution of liver injury except for one man (1.1%) who developed liver failure and underwent liver transplantation. Steroid therapy was withdrawn during the observation period in 12 (26%) patients after complete biochemical resolution. None had a relapse during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination can be associated with liver injury. Corticosteroid therapy may be beneficial in those with immune-mediated features or severe hepatitis. Outcome was generally favorable, but vaccine-associated liver injury led to fulminant liver failure in one patient.

Non-operative management of iatrogenic esophageal perforation in a 6-year-old child.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal perforations are rare, the most common encountered esophageal perforation is iatrogenic in origin. It can be life-threatening if not diagnosed and treated early. Medical treatment has been recommended primarily in hemodynamically stable children. Drainage of intrathoracic or periesophageal fluid formation should be reserved to patients with hemodynamic instability. Surgical intervention may seldomly be required, depending on the localization and size of the defect. CASE REPORT: A 6-year-old male patient was referred to our clinic due to an esophageal perforation whilst removing the foreign body from upper esophagus under direct vision of a rigid esophagoscope. A radiologic appearance similar to esophageal duplication was detected along the esophagus in the esophagogram. A secondary esophagoscopy was carried out by our clinic, laceration at the esophagopharyngeal junction and dissection along the esophagus were observed and the foreign body was propelled into the stomach. The patient, whose clinical condition was stable, was managed medically without the need for a surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal perforation is rare, yet perilous if not handled properly. We do not encounter this clinical entity frequently. Despite its rarity it can arise either iatrogenically or while managing a previous complication such as a simple nasogastric tube insertion in an infant or during an endoscopy for an esophageal foreign body. Its management is challenging, and we believe that non-operative treatment is still an important option in childhood esophageal perforations.

Risk factors and outcomes associated with recurrent autoimmune hepatitis following liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Autoimmune hepatitis can recur after liver transplantation (LT), though the impact of recurrence on patient and graft survival has not been well characterized. We evaluated a large, international, multicenter cohort to identify the probability and risk factors associated with recurrent AIH and the association between recurrent disease and patient and graft survival. METHODS: We included 736 patients (77% female, mean age 42±1 years) with AIH who underwent LT from January 1987 through June 2020, among 33 centers in North America, South America, Europe and Asia. Clinical data before and after LT, biochemical data within the first 12 months after LT, and immunosuppression after LT were analyzed to identify patients at higher risk of AIH recurrence based on histological diagnosis. RESULTS: AIH recurred in 20% of patients after 5 years and 31% after 10 years. Age at LT ≤42 years (hazard ratio [HR] 3.15; 95% CI 1.22-8.16; p = 0.02), use of mycophenolate mofetil post-LT (HR 3.06; 95% CI 1.39-6.73; p = 0.005), donor and recipient sex mismatch (HR 2.57; 95% CI 1.39-4.76; p = 0.003) and high IgG pre-LT (HR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.06; p = 0.004) were associated with higher risk of AIH recurrence after adjusting for other confounders. In multivariate Cox regression, recurrent AIH (as a time-dependent covariate) was significantly associated with graft loss (HR 10.79, 95% CI 5.37-21.66, p <0.001) and death (HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.48-4.33, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Recurrence of AIH following transplant is frequent and is associated with younger age at LT, use of mycophenolate mofetil post-LT, sex mismatch and high IgG pre-LT. We demonstrate an association between disease recurrence and impaired graft and overall survival in patients with AIH, highlighting the importance of ongoing efforts to better characterize, prevent and treat recurrent AIH. LAY SUMMARY: Recurrent autoimmune hepatitis following liver transplant is frequent and is associated with some recipient features and the type of immunosuppressive medications use. Recurrent autoimmune hepatitis negatively affects outcomes after liver transplantation. Thus, improved measures are required to prevent and treat this condition.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients with autoimmune hepatitis.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding outcome of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in vaccinated patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) are lacking. We evaluated the outcome of COVID-19 in AIH patients who received at least one dose of Pfizer- BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) or AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1-S) vaccine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective study on AIH patients with COVID-19. The outcomes of AIH patients who had acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) breakthrough infection after at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine were compared to unvaccinated patients with AIH. COVID-19 outcome was classified according to clinical state during the disease course as: (i) no hospitalization, (ii) hospitalization without oxygen supplementation, (iii) hospitalization with oxygen supplementation by nasal cannula or mask, (iv) intensive care unit (ICU) admission with non-invasive mechanical ventilation, (v) ICU admission with invasive mechanical ventilation or (vi) death, and data was analyzed using ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: We included 413 (258 unvaccinated and 155 vaccinated) patients (81%, female) with a median age of 52 (range: 17-85) years at COVID-19 diagnosis. The rates of hospitalization were (36.4% vs. 14.2%), need for any supplemental oxygen (29.5% vs. 9%) and mortality (7% vs. 0.6%) in unvaccinated and vaccinated AIH patients with COVID-19. Having received at least one dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was associated with a significantly lower risk of worse COVID-19 severity, after adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities and presence of cirrhosis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.18, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.31). Overall, vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality from COVID-19 (aOR 0.20, 95% CI 0.11-0.35). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination significantly reduced the risk of COVID-19 severity and mortality in patients with AIH.

Outcome of COVID-19 in Patients With Autoimmune Hepatitis: An International Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data regarding outcome of COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) are lacking. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective study on patients with AIH and COVID-19 from 34 centers in Europe and the Americas. We analyzed factors associated with severe COVID-19 outcomes, defined as the need for mechanical ventilation, intensive care admission, and/or death. The outcomes of patients with AIH were compared to a propensity score-matched cohort of patients without AIH but with chronic liver diseases (CLD) and COVID-19. The frequency and clinical significance of new-onset liver injury (alanine aminotransferase > 2 × the upper limit of normal) during COVID-19 was also evaluated. We included 110 patients with AIH (80% female) with a median age of 49 (range, 18-85) years at COVID-19 diagnosis. New-onset liver injury was observed in 37.1% (33/89) of the patients. Use of antivirals was associated with liver injury (P = 0.041; OR, 3.36; 95% CI, 1.05-10.78), while continued immunosuppression during COVID-19 was associated with a lower rate of liver injury (P = 0.009; OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.09-0.71). The rates of severe COVID-19 (15.5% versus 20.2%, P = 0.231) and all-cause mortality (10% versus 11.5%, P = 0.852) were not different between AIH and non-AIH CLD. Cirrhosis was an independent predictor of severe COVID-19 in patients with AIH (P < 0.001; OR, 17.46; 95% CI, 4.22-72.13). Continuation of immunosuppression or presence of liver injury during COVID-19 was not associated with severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: This international, multicenter study reveals that patients with AIH were not at risk for worse outcomes with COVID-19 than other causes of CLD. Cirrhosis was the strongest predictor for severe COVID-19 in patients with AIH. Maintenance of immunosuppression during COVID-19 was not associated with increased risk for severe COVID-19 but did lower the risk for new-onset liver injury during COVID-19.

Effects of immunosuppressive drugs on COVID-19 severity in patients with autoimmune hepatitis.

BACKGROUND: We investigated associations between baseline use of immunosuppressive drugs and severity of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of AIH patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 were retrospectively collected from 15 countries. The outcomes of AIH patients who were on immunosuppression at the time of COVID-19 were compared to patients who were not on AIH medication. The clinical courses of COVID-19 were classified as (i)-no hospitalization, (ii)-hospitalization without oxygen supplementation, (iii)-hospitalization with oxygen supplementation by nasal cannula or mask, (iv)-intensive care unit (ICU) admission with non-invasive mechanical ventilation, (v)-ICU admission with invasive mechanical ventilation or (vi)-death and analysed using ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: We included 254 AIH patients (79.5%, female) with a median age of 50 (range, 17-85) years. At the onset of COVID-19, 234 patients (92.1%) were on treatment with glucocorticoids (n = 156), thiopurines (n = 151), mycophenolate mofetil (n = 22) or tacrolimus (n = 16), alone or in combinations. Overall, 94 (37%) patients were hospitalized and 18 (7.1%) patients died. Use of systemic glucocorticoids (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.73, 95% CI 1.12-25.89) and thiopurines (aOR 4.78, 95% CI 1.33-23.50) for AIH was associated with worse COVID-19 severity, after adjusting for age-sex, comorbidities and presence of cirrhosis. Baseline treatment with mycophenolate mofetil (aOR 3.56, 95% CI 0.76-20.56) and tacrolimus (aOR 4.09, 95% CI 0.69-27.00) were also associated with more severe COVID-19 courses in a smaller subset of treated patients. CONCLUSION: Baseline treatment with systemic glucocorticoids or thiopurines prior to the onset of COVID-19 was significantly associated with COVID-19 severity in patients with AIH.

Extrahepatic autoimmune diseases in primary biliary cholangitis: Prevalence and significance for clinical presentation and disease outcome.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The prevalence and clinical significance of extrahepatic autoimmune diseases (EHAIDs) have not been evaluated in a large cohort of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). METHODS: The medical records of 1554 patients with PBC from 20 international centers were retrospectively reviewed. Development of decompensated cirrhosis (ascites, variceal bleeding, and/or hepatic encephalopathy) and hepatocellular carcinoma were considered clinical endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 35 different EHAIDs were diagnosed in 440 (28.3%) patients with PBC. Patients with EHAIDs were more often female (92.5% vs 86.1%, P < 0.001) and seropositive for anti-mitochondrial antibodies (88% vs 84%, P = 0.05) and antinuclear antibodies and/or smooth muscle antibodies (53.8% vs 43.6%, P = 0.005). At presentation, patients with EHAIDs had significantly lower levels of alkaline phosphatase (1.76 vs 1.98 × upper limit of normal [ULN], P = 0.006), aspartate aminotransferase (1.29 vs 1.50 × ULN, P < 0.001), and total bilirubin (0.53 vs 0.58 × ULN, P = 0.002). Patients with EHAIDs and without EHAIDs had similar rates of GLOBE high-risk status (12.3% vs 16.1%, P = 0.07) and Paris II response (71.4% vs 69.4%, P = 0.59). Overall, event-free survival was not different in patients with and without EHAIDs (90.8% vs 90.7%, P = 0.53, log rank). Coexistence of each autoimmune thyroid diseases (10.6%), Sjögren disease (8.3%), systemic sclerosis (2.9%), rheumatoid arthritis (2.7%), systemic lupus erythematosus (1.7%), celiac disease (1.7%), psoriasis (1.5%), and inflammatory bowel diseases (1.3%) did not influence the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that EHAIDs are frequently diagnosed in patients with PBC. The presence of EHAIDs may influence the clinical phenotype of PBC at presentation but has no impact on PBC outcome.

Rapid Response to Treatment of Autoimmune Hepatitis Associated With Remission at 6 and 12 Months.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Changes in serum levels of transaminases immediately after initiation of treatment for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) might be associated with biochemical markers of remission and liver-related events. We assessed the outcomes of patients with vs without rapid response to treatment of AIH in a large international cohort. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study, collecting data from 2 independent cohorts of adults with AIH from 12 centers in 7 countries in Europe. We collected information on patient demographics; serologic, histologic, and biochemical analyses; and treatment. We used a receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden index to calculate the optimal percentage decrease in level of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) after 8 weeks of treatment that associated with normalization of transaminase levels after 26 weeks of treatment with predniso(lo)ne (primary outcome) in the first (discovery) cohort (n = 370). We evaluated the results in the second (validation) cohort (n = 370). Secondary outcomes were liver-related death or transplantation. We performed univariate and multivariable logistic and Cox regression with correction for confounders. RESULTS: A significant decrease in level of AST after 8 weeks of treatment was significantly associated with normalization of transaminase levels at 26 and 52 weeks (P < .001); a decrease of more than 80% in level of AST was associated with optimal normalization. In both cohorts, rapid responders (≥80% decrease in level of AST after 8 weeks) were more likely to achieve normalization of transaminases at 26 and 52 weeks when compared to non-rapid responders. Rapid responders in the discovery cohort had lower risk of liver-related death or transplantation (adjusted hazard ratio 0.18; 95% CI 0.05-0.63; P = .007), although this was not confirmed in the validation cohort. Results from measurement of alanine aminotransferase did not differ significantly from those of AST for the primary outcome. Slow responders (without normalization of transaminases after 1 year) had the highest risk of liver transplantation or liver-related death. CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective study of patients with AIH, we found that a rapid response to treatment, based on level of AST after 8 weeks, associates with normalization of transaminase levels in the following year. Patients with a rapid response also have a lower risk of liver-related death or transplantation than patients without this rapid response.

High discontinuation rate of azathioprine in autoimmune hepatitis, independent of time of treatment initiation.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines regarding treatment for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) favour two strategies for azathioprine (AZA) introduction: concurrent with steroids at induction or delayed by 2-4 weeks. The safety and efficacy of both strategies have been unexplored. METHODS: We established a cohort of 900 AIH patients from 12 centres in 7 European countries. There were 631 patients who used AZA as part of the therapeutic regimen. We distinguished two groups: patients with early AZA (<2 weeks) or delayed AZA initiation (≥2 weeks). Primary outcome was discontinuation of AZA in the first year of treatment. Cox regression and propensity score matching was performed to determine difference in outcomes between groups. RESULTS: Patients with early AZA initiation had significantly lower transaminases and bilirubin at baseline. Discontinuation rates of AZA did not differ between early and delayed starters (16.6% vs 14.2%), which did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.61-1.55, P = .90). Stratification according to baseline disease activity or propensity score matching did not alter the results. Main reason for AZA discontinuation was intolerance to treatment (14.0% vs 13.2%, P = .78) with nausea and vomiting as main side effects. AIH remission rates were comparable among groups. CONCLUSION: The discontinuation rate of AZA in AIH treatment is ~15% in the first year of treatment. Early or delayed AZA initiation does not differ in remission and discontinuation rates in AIH induction therapy. Our data suggest that either strategy may be used as part of AIH treatment.

Validation of Risk Scoring Systems in Ursodeoxycholic Acid-Treated Patients With Primary Biliary Cholangitis.

INTRODUCTION: Risk stratification based on biochemical variables is a useful tool for monitoring ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-treated patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). Several UDCA response criteria and scoring systems have been proposed for risk prediction in PBC, but these have not been validated in large external cohorts. METHODS: We performed a study on data of 1746 UDCA-treated patients with PBC from 25 centers in Europe, United States, and Canada. The prognostic performance of the risk scoring systems (GLOBE and UK-PBC) and the UDCA response criteria (Barcelona, Paris I, Paris II, Rotterdam, and Toronto) were evaluated. We regarded cirrhosis-related complications (ascites, variceal bleeding, and/or hepatic encephalopathy) as clinical end points. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients reached a clinical end point during a median 7 years (range 1-16 years) of follow-up. The 5-, 10- and 15-year adverse outcome-free survivals were 95%, 85%, and 77%. The GLOBE and UK-PBC scores predicted cirrhosis-related complications better than the UDCA response criteria. The hazard ratio (HR) for a 1 standard deviation increase was HR 5.05 (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.43-5.74, P < 0.001) for the GLOBE score and HR 3.39 (95% CI: 3.10-3.72, P < 0.001) for the UK-PBC score. Overall, the GLOBE and UK-PBC risk scores showed similar and excellent prognostic performance (C-statistic, 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91%-95% vs 0.94; 95% CI: 0.91%-0.96%). DISCUSSION: In our international, multicenter PBC cohort, the GLOBE and UK-PBC risk scoring systems were good predictors of future cirrhosis-related complications.

Tacrolimus and Mycophenolate Mofetil as Second-Line Therapies for Pediatric Patients with Autoimmune Hepatitis.

BACKGROUND: We studied the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and tacrolimus as second-line therapy in pediatric patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) who were intolerant or non-responders to standard therapy (corticosteroid and azathioprine). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of data from 13 centers in Europe, USA, and Canada. Thirty-eight patients (< 18 years old) who received second-line therapy (18 MMF and 20 tacrolimus), for a median of 72 months (range 8-182) were evaluated. Patients were categorized into two groups: Group 1 (n = 17) were intolerant to corticosteroid or azathioprine, and group 2 (n = 21) were non-responders to standard therapy. RESULTS: Overall complete response rates were similar in patients treated with MMF and tacrolimus (55.6 vs. 65%, p = 0.552). In group 1, MMF and tacrolimus maintained a biochemical remission in 88.9 and 87.5% of patients, respectively (p = 0.929). More patients in group 2 given tacrolimus compared to MMF had a complete response, but the difference was not statistically significant (50.0 vs. 22.2%, p = 0.195). Biochemical remission was achieved in 71.1% (27/38) of patients by tacrolimus and/or MMF. Decompensated cirrhosis was more commonly seen in MMF and/or tacrolimus non-responders than in responders (45.5 vs. 7.4%, p = 0.006). Five patients who received second-line therapy (2 MMF and 3 tacrolimus) developed side effects that led to therapy withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term therapy with MMF or tacrolimus was generally well tolerated by pediatric patients with AIH. Both MMF and tacrolimus had excellent efficacy in patients intolerant to corticosteroid or azathioprine. Tacrolimus might be more effective than MMF in patients failing previous therapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Mycophenolate Mofetil and Tacrolimus as Second-line Therapy for Patients With Autoimmune Hepatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Predniso(lo)ne, alone or in combination with azathioprine, is the standard-of-care (SOC) therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). However, the SOC therapy is poorly tolerated or does not control disease activity in up to 20% of patients. We assessed the efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and tacrolimus as second-line therapy for patients with AIH. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of data (from 19 centers in Europe, the United States, Canada, and China) from 201 patients with AIH who received second-line therapy (121 received MMF and 80 received tacrolimus), for a median of 62 months (range, 6-190 mo). Patients were categorized according to their response to SOC. Patients in group 1 (n = 108) had a complete response to the SOC, but were switched to second-line therapy as a result of side effects of predniso(lo)ne or azathioprine, whereas patients in group 2 (n = 93) had not responded to SOC. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with a complete response to MMF (69.4%) vs tacrolimus (72.5%) (P = .639). In group 1, MMF and tacrolimus maintained a biochemical remission in 91.9% and 94.1% of patients, respectively (P = .682). Significantly more group 2 patients given tacrolimus compared with MMF had a complete response (56.5% vs 34%, respectively; P = .029) There were similar proportions of liver-related deaths or liver transplantation among patients given MMF (13.2%) vs tacrolimus (10.3%) (log-rank, P = .472). Ten patients receiving MMF (8.3%) and 10 patients receiving tacrolimus (12.5%) developed side effects that required therapy withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term therapy with MMF or tacrolimus generally was well tolerated by patients with AIH. The agents were equally effective in previous complete responders who did not tolerate SOC therapy. Tacrolimus led to a complete response in a greater proportion of previous nonresponder patients compared with MMF.

Treatment Response and Outcome with Two Different Prednisolone Regimens in Autoimmune Hepatitis.

BACKGROUND: Beyond available guidelines, therapy of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) shows wide variation among physicians. We compared two regimens for treatment naive AIH: one recommended protocol with an initial prednisolone dose of 30 mg/day and our own 40 mg/day prednisolone with a slow dose tapering protocol. We analyzed the safety, response rates, and outcomes for two groups of treated patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated data of 71 AIH patients including, group I (n = 32, prednisone 30 mg/day) and group II (n = 39, prednisone 40 mg/day). All patients also received azathioprine. RESULTS: The frequency of complete biochemical response was significantly higher in group II than in group I (69.2 vs. 43.8%, p = 0.031) after 3 months of therapy, but not after 6 and 12 months (79.5 vs. 59.4%, p = 0.065 and 89.5 vs. 80.6%, p = 0.30). In patients with severe interface hepatitis, the complete response rates were significantly higher in group II than in group I after 3 (63.6 vs. 23.1%, p = 0.02) and 6 months (72.7 vs. 38.5%, p = 0.046), but not after 12 months of therapy (86.4 vs. 69.2%, p = 0.221). Relapses were observed in 50% of group I and in 35.9% of group II during maintenance therapy (p = 0.23). Overall survival was significantly better in group II than in group I (100 vs. 87.5%, log-rank, p = 0.048). No severe steroid-related side effects were observed in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world experience suggests that an initial prednisolone dose of 40 mg/day with a slower tapering protocol induces earlier biochemical response, tends to result in less relapses during maintenance, and is associated with a better disease outcome.