Liver blood marker testing in UK primary care: a UK wide cohort study, 2004-2016.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine (1) the temporal trends of liver enzyme testing in UK general practice and (2) how these vary among different subgroups at risk of chronic liver disease (CLD). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: UK primary care database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)), 2004-2016. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 18 years or over, registered in the CPRD from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2016. OUTCOME MEASURES: The frequency of testing recorded within the study period in general practice was calculated for: alanine aminotransferase (ALT); aspartate aminotransferase (AST); gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT); alkaline phosphatase (ALP); bilirubin and platelets. Analyses were conducted in subgroups of patients at high risk of developing liver disease. RESULTS: The study cohort included 2 912 066 individuals with median follow-up of 3.2 years. The proportion of patients with at least one measurement for ALT, ALP, bilirubin or platelet test gradually increased over the course of the study period and fell for AST and GGT. By 2016, the proportion of the population receiving one of more tests in that year was: platelet count 28.0%, ALP 26.2%, bilirubin 25.6%, ALT 23.7%, GGT 5.1% and AST 2.2%. Those patients with risk factors for CLD had higher proportions receiving liver marker assessments than those without risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The striking finding that AST is now only measured in a fraction of the population has significant implications for routine guidance which frequently expects it. A more nuanced approach where non-invasive markers are targeted towards individuals with risk factors for CLD may be a solution.

Characterizing the risk interplay between alcohol intake and body mass index on cirrhosis morbidity.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: It is thought that alcohol intake and body mass index (BMI) interact supra-additively to modulate the risk of cirrhosis, but evidence for this phenomenon is limited. We investigated the interrelationship between alcohol and BMI on the incidence of cirrhosis morbidity for participants of the United Kingdom Biobank (UKB) study. APPROACH AND RESULTS: The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of cirrhosis morbidity, defined as a first-time hospital admission for cirrhosis (with noncirrhosis mortality incorporated as a competing risk). All UKB participants without a previous hospital admission for cirrhosis were included in the analysis. We determined the ratio of the 10-year cumulative incidence in harmful drinkers versus safe drinkers according to BMI. We also calculated the excess cumulative incidence at 10 years for individuals with obesity and/or harmful alcohol compared to safe drinkers with a healthy BMI of 20-25.0 kg/m2 . A total of 489,285 UK Biobank participants were included, with mean of 10.7 person-years' follow-up. A total of 2070 participants developed the primary outcome, equating to a crude cumulative incidence of 0.36% at 10 years (95% CI:0.34-0.38). The 10-year cumulative incidence was 8.6 times higher for harmful (1.38%) versus safe drinkers (0.16%) if BMI was healthy. Conversely, it was only 3.6 times higher for obese participants (1.99% vs. 0.56%). Excess cumulative incidence was 1.22% (95% CI:0.89-1.55) for harmful drinkers with a healthy BMI, 0.40% (95% CI:0.34-0.46) for obese individuals drinking at safe levels, and 1.83% (95% CI:1.46-2.20) for obese harmful drinkers (all compared to safe drinkers with a healthy BMI). CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol intake and obesity are independent risk factors for cirrhosis morbidity, but they do not interact supra-additively to modulate the cumulative incidence of this outcome.

Non-invasive risk scores do not reliably identify future cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma in Type 2 diabetes: The Edinburgh type 2 diabetes study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increased in Type 2 diabetes, primarily secondary to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). European guidelines recommend screening for NAFLD in Type 2 diabetes. American guidelines, while not advocating a screening protocol, suggest using non-invasive markers of fibrosis for risk-stratification and guiding onward referral. AIMS: To test the ability of individual fibrosis scores and the European screening algorithm to predict 11-year incident cirrhosis/HCC in an asymptomatic community cohort of older people with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: The Edinburgh Type 2 Diabetes Study investigated men and women with Type 2 diabetes (n = 1066, aged 60-75 at baseline). Liver markers were measured at baseline and year 1; steatosis and fibrosis markers were calculated according to independently published calculations. During 11 years of follow-up, cases of cirrhosis and HCC were identified. RESULTS: Forty-three out of 1059 participants with no baseline cirrhosis/HCC developed incident disease. All scores were significantly associated with incident liver disease by odds ratio (P < .05). The ability of the risk-stratification tools to accurately identify those who developed incident cirrhosis/HCC was poor with low-positive predictive values (5-46%) and high false-negative and -positive rates (up to 60% and 77%) respectively. When fibrosis risk scores were used in conjunction with the European algorithm, they performed modestly better than when applied in isolation. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort with a moderately low incidence of cirrhosis/HCC, existing risk scores did not reliably identify participants at high risk. Better prediction models for cirrhosis/HCC in people with Type 2 diabetes are required.

Acceptability to patients of screening disposable transnasal endoscopy: qualitative interview analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Screening in selected high risk populations for Barrett's oesophagus (BO) and oesophageal varices (OVs) has been proposed, but there are obstacles with conventional oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (C-OGD), including patient acceptability. Portable and disposable office-based transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is a feasible and accurate alternative to C-OGD that may have use in primary and secondary care. This article outlines a qualitative analysis of patient experiences of TNE and C-OGD in order to gain an insight into an acceptable delivery of an endoscopic screening service. DESIGN: Purposeful sampling identified 23 participants who then underwent semi-structured interviews to determine their experiences of both procedures. Thematic analysis was conducted to derive meaning from their lived experiences. SETTING: A secondary care endoscopy unit, clinic room and interview room. PARTICIPANTS: Patients referred for BO or OV surveillance and for endoscopy to investigate dyspepsia underwent unsedated TNE using the EG Scan II device followed by C-OGD with or without sedation (patient choice), as part of a clinical trial. RESULTS: The themes that arose from our analysis were: inclusivity in one's own healthcare, comfort level and convenience, validity of the procedure and application to a screening population and a sense of altruism and reciprocity. Positive aspects of TNE included participant empowerment, reduced discomfort and avoidance of conscious sedation. Participants felt that if TNE screening was of proven efficacy it would be welcomed, though views on use in a community setting were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients preferred TNE to unsedated C-OGD and the reasons they gave featured strongly in the emerging themes. Preferences between TNE and sedated C-OGD were more subtle, with equivalent comfort scores but merits and drawbacks of both being discussed. This information identifies opportunities and challenges in establishing an endoscopic screening service. Trial registration number ISRCTNregistry identifier: 70595405; Pre-results.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and autologous CD133-positive stem-cell therapy in liver cirrhosis (REALISTIC): an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Results of small-scale studies have suggested that stem-cell therapy is safe and effective in patients with liver cirrhosis, but no adequately powered randomised controlled trials have been done. We assessed the safety and efficacy of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and haemopoietic stem-cell infusions in patients with liver cirrhosis. METHODS: This multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial was done in three UK hospitals and recruited patients with compensated liver cirrhosis and MELD scores of 11·0-15·5. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive standard care (control), treatment with subcutaneous G-CSF (lenograstim) 15 µg/kg for 5 days, or treatment with G-CSF for 5 days followed by leukapheresis and intravenous infusion of three doses of CD133-positive haemopoietic stem cells (0·2 × 106 cells per kg per infusion). Randomisation was done by Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit staff with a minimisation algorithm that stratified by trial site and cause of liver disease. The coprimary outcomes were improvement in severity of liver disease (change in MELD) at 3 months and the trend of change in MELD score over time. Analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who received at least one day of treatment. Safety was assessed on the basis of the treatment received. This trial was registered at Current Controlled Trials on Nov 18, 2009; ISRCTN, number 91288089; and the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2009-010335-41. FINDINGS: Between May 18, 2010, and Feb 26, 2015, 27 patients were randomly assigned to the standard care, 26 to the G-CSF group, and 28 to the G-CSF plus stem-cell infusion group. Median change in MELD from day 0 to 90 was -0·5 (IQR -1·5 to 1·1) in the standard care group, -0·5 (-1·7 to 0·5) in the G-CSF group, and -0·5 (-1·3 to 1·0) in the G-CSF plus stem-cell infusion group. We found no evidence of differences between the treatment groups and control group in the trends of MELD change over time (p=0·55 for the G-CSF group vs standard care and p=0·75 for the G-CSF plus stem-cell infusion group vs standard care). Serious adverse events were more frequent the in G-CSF and stem-cell infusion group (12 [43%] patients) than in the G-CSF (three [11%] patients) and standard care (three [12%] patients) groups. The most common serious adverse events were ascites (two patients in the G-CSF group and two patients in the G-CSF plus stem-cell infusion group, one of whom was admitted to hospital with ascites twice), sepsis (four patients in the G-CSF plus stem-cell infusion group), and encephalopathy (three patients in the G-CSF plus stem-cell infusion group, one of whom was admitted to hospital with encephalopathy twice). Three patients died, including one in the standard care group (variceal bleed) and two in the G-CSF and stem-cell infusion group (one myocardial infarction and one progressive liver disease). INTERPRETATION: G-CSF with or without haemopoietic stem-cell infusion did not improve liver dysfunction or fibrosis and might be associated with increased frequency of adverse events compared with standard care. FUNDING: National Institute of Health Research, The Sir Jules Thorn Charitable Trust.

Trans-jugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt placement for refractory ascites: a 'real-world' UK health economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefit of trans-jugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt (TIPS) placement for refractory ascites. DESIGN: A retrospective observational study of all patients undergoing TIPS for refractory ascites in our hospital between 2003 and 2012. SETTING: Secondary care. PATIENTS: Cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We examined direct real-world (National Health Service) health related costs in the year before and after the TIPS procedure took place. Data were collected relating to the need for reintervention and hepatic encephalopathy. RESULTS: Data were available for 24 patients who underwent TIPS for refractory ascites (86% of eligible patients). TIPS was technically successful in all cases. Mean number of bed days in the year prior to TIPS was 30.3 and 14.3 in the year following (p=0.005). No patient had ascites at the end of the year after the TIPS with less requirement for paracentesis over the course of the year (p<0.001). Mean reduction in cost was £2759 per patient. TIPS was especially cost-effective in patients requiring between 6 and 12 drains per year with a mean saving of £9204 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: TIPS is both a clinically effective and economically advantageous therapeutic option for selected patients with refractory ascites.