Sofosbuvir plus simeprevir for the treatment of HCV genotype 4 patients with advanced fibrosis or compensated cirrhosis is highly efficacious in real life.

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause of chronic liver disease and liver-related death. Recently, multiple regimens of different direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have been registered. Although treatment with sofosbuvir (SOF) and simeprevir (SMV) is registered for the treatment of genotype 4 patients in some countries, data on efficacy of this combination are lacking. We aimed to assess the efficacy of SOF and SMV with or without RBV during 12 weeks in a real-life cohort of genotype 4 HCV patients. A retrospective multicentre observational study was conducted in 4 hospitals in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, including patients with advanced liver fibrosis or liver cirrhosis treated with SOF plus SMV with or without RBV during 12 weeks for a genotype 4 chronic HCV infection from 1 January 2015 to 1 August 2015. Sustained viral response (SVR) was established at week 12 after end of treatment. A total of 53 patients with genotype 4 HCV infection, treatment naïve and experienced, were included. SVR was achieved in 49 of 53 patients (92%). The four failures all had a virological relapse and did not receive ribavirin. Three were nonresponder to earlier interferon-based treatment, and one was treatment naive. In this real-life cohort of patients with HCV genotype 4 infection and advanced liver fibrosis/cirrhosis, we show that treatment with SOF and SMV is effective. The addition of RBV could be considered in treatment-experienced patients as recommended in guidelines.

HLA-DRB1*03:01 and HLA-DRB1*04:01 modify the presentation and outcome in autoimmune hepatitis type-1.

The classical human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DRB1*03:01 and HLA-DRB1*04:01 alleles are established autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) risk alleles. To study the immune-modifying effect of these alleles, we imputed the genotypes from genome-wide association data in 649 Dutch AIH type-1 patients. We therefore compared the international AIH group (IAIHG) diagnostic scores as well as the underlying clinical characteristics between patients positive and negative for these HLA alleles. Seventy-five percent of the AIH patients were HLA-DRB1*03:01/HLA-DRB1*04:01 positive. HLA-DRB1*03:01/HLA-DRB1*04:01-positive patients had a higher median IAIHG score than HLA-DRB1*03:01/HLA-DRB1*04:01-negative patients (P<0.001). We did not observe associations between HLA alleles and alanine transaminase levels (HLA-DRB1*03:01: P=0.2; HLA-DRB1*04:01; P=0.5); however, HLA-DRB1*03:01 was independently associated with higher immunoglobulin G levels (P=0.04). The HLA-DRB1*04:01 allele was independently associated with presentation at older age (P=0.03) and a female predominance (P=0.04). HLA-DRB1*03:01-positive patients received immunosuppressive medication and liver transplantation. In conclusion, the HLA-DRB1*03:01 and HLA-DRB1*04:01 alleles are both independently associated with the aggregate diagnostic IAIHG score in type-1 AIH patients, but are not essential for AIH development. HLA-DRB1*03:01 is the strongest genetic modifier of disease severity in AIH.

Genotype distribution amongst hepatitis C patients in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of the genotypes of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) differs according to geographical location. In the United States and in European countries, the majority of patients are infected with genotype 1, 2 or 3. There is a lack of data on the distribution of HCV genotypes in The Netherlands. METHODS: The current survey determined the distribution of HCV genotypes amongst recently genotyped patients seen by physicians treating hepatitis C in The Netherlands. RESULTS: Almost half of the 351 patients (49.3%) were infected with genotype 1. Genotype 3 was the second most dominant genotype with a prevalence of 29.3%. Genotypes 2 and 4 were found in 9.7 and 10.5% of the patients, respectively. For 61.5% of the patients (n=216), the subtype was available. For genotype 1 the prevalence of subtype 1a and 1b was very similar, while for genotype 3 a large majority of patients were infected with subtype 3a. CONCLUSION: This survey gives the first estimation of the distribution of HCV genotypes amongst unselected HCV patients in The Netherlands.

How the concept of biochemical response influenced the management of primary biliary cholangitis over time.

BACKGROUND: Criteria assessing biochemical response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) are established risk stratification tools in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). We aimed to evaluate to what extent liver tests influenced patient management during a three decade period, and whether this changed over time. METHODS: 851 Dutch PBC patients diagnosed between 1988 and 2012 were reviewed to assess patient management in relation to liver test results during UDCA treatment. To do so, biochemical response at one year was analysed retrospectively according to Paris-1 criteria. RESULTS: Response was assessable for 687/851 (81%) patients; 157/687 non-responders. During a follow-up of 8.8 years (IQR 4.8-13.9), 141 died and 30 underwent liver transplantation. Transplant-free survival of non-responders (60%) was significantly worse compared with responders (87%) (p < 0.0001). Management was modified in 46/157 (29%) non-responders. The most frequent change observed, noted in 26/46 patients, was an increase in UDCA dosage. Subsequently, 9/26 (35%) non-responders became responders within the next two years. Steroid treatment was started in one patient; 19 patients were referred to a tertiary centre. No trend towards more frequent changes in management over time was observed (p = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Changes in medical management occurred in a minority of non-responders. This can largely be explained by the lack of accepted response criteria and of established second-line treatments for PBC. Nevertheless, the observation that response-guided management did not increase over time suggests that awareness of the concept of biochemical response requires further attention,particularly since new treatment options for PBC will soon become available.

Dutch guidance for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection in a new therapeutic era.

BACKGROUND: A new era for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C is about to transpire. With the introduction of the first-generation protease inhibitors the efficacy of hepatitis C treatment improved significantly. Since then, the therapeutic agenda has moved further forward with the recent approval of sofosbuvir and the expected approval of agents such as simeprevir and daclatasvir. This paper, developed parallel to the approval of sofosbuvir, is to serve as a guidance for the therapeutic management of chronic hepatitis C. METHODS: We performed a formal search through PubMed, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all clinical trials that have been conducted with EMA-approved new agents in hepatitis C; for this version (April 2014) we focused on sofosbuvir. For each disease category, the evidence was reviewed and recommendations are based on GRADE. RESULTS: We identified 11 clinical trials with sofosbuvir and for each disease category recommendations for treatment are made. Not all disease categories were studied extensively and therefore in some cases we were unable to provide recommendations. CONCLUSION: The recent approval of sofosbuvir will most likely change the therapeutic landscape of chronic hepatitis C. The use of sofosbuvir-containing regimens can shorten the duration of therapy, increase efficacy and result in less side effects, compared with standard of care. The efficacy relative to standard of care needs to be weighed against the increased costs of sofosbuvir. With future approval of the other direct-acting antivirals, the outcome of hepatitis C treatment will likely improve further and this guidance will be updated.

Allopurinol safely and effectively optimises thiopurine metabolites in patients with autoimmune hepatitis.

BACKGROUND: Ten percent of patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) are nonresponsive or intolerant to thiopurine therapy. A skewed metabolism, leading to the preferential generation of (hepato)toxic thiopurine metabolites (6-MMPs) instead of the metabolic active 6-tioguanine (thioguanine) nucleotides (6-TGNs), may explain this unfavourable outcome. Co-administration of allopurinol to low-dose thiopurine therapy may effectively revert this deviant metabolism, as has been shown in inflammatory bowel disease. AIM: To describe the effect of adding allopurinol to low-dose thiopurine therapy in patients with AIH with intolerance or nonresponse to normal thiopurine dosages due to a skewed metabolism. METHODS: We describe the clinical efficacy and tolerability of allopurinol-thiopurine combination therapy with allopurinol 100 mg and low-dose thiopurine (25-33% of the original dosage) in eight AIH patients with a skewed thiopurine metabolism. Patients were switched because of dose-limiting intolerance (n = 3), nonresponse (n = 3) or loss of response (n = 2) to conventional thiopurine treatment. RESULTS: All eight patients showed biochemical improvement with a reduction in median alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels of 62 U/L at start to 35 U/L at 1 month (P = 0.03). This clinical benefit was sustained in seven patients. Allopurinol-thiopurine combination therapy effectively bypassed thiopurine side effects in four of five patients. Median 6-tioguanine nucleotides levels increased from 100 to 200 pmol/8 × 10(8) red blood cells (RBC) at 3 months (P = 0.04). Median 6-MMP levels decreased in all patients from 6090 to 175 pmol/8 × 10(8) RBC (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Allopurinol safely and effectively optimises thiopurine therapy in patients with autoimmune hepatitis with intolerance and/or nonresponse due to an unfavourable thiopurine metabolism.

A case of autoimmune hepatitis and bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a chronic inflammatory liver disease of unknown aetiology usually requiring long-term immunosuppressive therapy. We present the case of an AIH patient who received long-term corticosteroids and azathioprine. As treatment for concomitant osteoporosis she was also treated with potent intravenous bisphosphonate (BP). This treatment was complicated by the development of BP-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ). BRONJ is an uncommon complication of BP treatment regimes that occurs at increased frequency in the presence of other risk factors, including chronic inflammatory conditions. Our patient suffered from a severe and complicated clinical course of BRONJ which, despite adequate therapy, resulted in death of the patient. Here we discuss the risk factors for the development and clinical course of BRONJ in AIH and the implications for management of these patients.

The role of mycophenolate mofetil in the management of autoimmune hepatitis and overlap syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Treatment failure occurs in 20% of autoimmune hepatitis patients on prednisolone and azathioprine (AZA). There is no established second line treatment. AIM: To assess the efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil as second line treatment after AZA-intolerance or AZA-nonresponse in autoimmune hepatitis and overlap syndromes. METHODS: Consecutive patients from the Dutch Autoimmune Hepatitis Group cohort, consisting of 661 patients, with autoimmune hepatitis or overlap syndromes, AZA-intolerance or AZA-nonresponse and past or present use of mycophenolate mofetil were included. Primary endpoint of mycophenolate mofetil treatment was biochemical remission. Secondary endpoints were biochemical response (without remission), treatment failure and prevention of disease progression. RESULTS: Forty-five patients treated with mycophenolate mofetil were included. In autoimmune hepatitis remission or response was achieved in 13% and 27% in the AZA-nonresponse group compared to 67% and 0% in the AZA-intolerance group (P = 0.008). In overlap-syndromes remission or response was reached in 57% and 14% in the AZA-nonresponse group and 63% and 25% of the AZA-intolerance group (N.S.); 33% had side effects and 13% discontinued mycophenolate mofetil. Overall 38% had treatment failure; this was 60% in the autoimmune hepatitis AZA-nonresponse group. Decompensated liver cirrhosis, liver transplantations and death were only seen in the autoimmune hepatitis AZA-nonresponse group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mycophenolate mofetil induced response or remission in a majority of patients with autoimmune hepatitis and azathioprine-intolerance and with overlap syndromes, irrespective of intolerance or nonresponse for azathioprine. In autoimmune hepatitis with azathioprine nonresponse mycophenolate mofetil is less often effective.