Long-term outcomes with oral therapy in liver transplant recipients with hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND: The long-term impact of oral hepatitis B antiviral therapy in liver transplant (LT) recipients is currently underexplored. The objective of this study was to evaluate how oral antiviral agents impact long-term renal function in this population. METHODS: We studied 79 patients who received a LT for hepatitis B and were placed on all-oral antiviral therapy after withdrawing from hepatitis B immune globulin therapy at the University of California, Los Angeles. Laboratory data were obtained through a retrospective chart review. Univariate analysis and two-sided t tests were performed. RESULTS: The mean (±SD [standard deviation]) age at the time of LT was 65.4 (± 8.2) years. The overall mean (±SD) follow-up from LT was 6.5 (±3.3) years. 22.8% (18/79) of recipients on all-oral therapy had worsening of their chronic kidney disease stage, and 17.7% (14/79) had an increase in creatinine of at least 0.3 mg/dL. There were no significant changes in creatinine and GFR in patients while on tenofovir alafenamide. Patient survival was decreased for recipients who developed detectable HBsAg. CONCLUSION: Tenofovir alafenamide appears to have less of an impact on renal function in LT recipients than other antiviral agents. HBV recurrence after transplant is associated with decreased patient survival and remains an important issue to address for LT recipients on oral antiviral therapy.

Use of Sofosbuvir-Based Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C in Liver Transplant Recipients on Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of direct acting agents has changed the management paradigm of hepatitis C (HCV) in liver transplant (LT) recipients. However, the appropriate antiviral regimen in LT recipients on hemodialysis (HD) remains unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir-based LT recipients on HD followed at the University of California Los Angeles. RESULTS: Twelve LT recipients on HD were treated for recurrent HCV with sofosbuvir-based therapy. Indications for antiviral therapy included fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis, symptomatic cryoglobulinemia, and recurrent HCV. The causes of renal failure included hepatorenal syndrome, acute tubular necrosis and cryoglobulinemia. Of those who were not on dialysis at the time of transplantation, the mean creatinine (±SD) was 1.7 (±0.8) mg/dL. The mean age (±SD) of the cohort was 62.2 (±6.0) years. Most recipients were male (67%) and infected with genotype 1 (83%). Baseline alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, hemoglobin and HCV RNA values (±SD) were 53.2 (±59.4) IU/L, 3.2 (±5.5) mg/dL, 10.5 (±1.8) g/dL, and 30,499,500 (±29,655,754) IU/mL. HCV RNA levels were undetectable in all recipients at the end of therapy. The trough mean (±SD) hemoglobin of patients on treatment and on HD was 8.4 (±2.3). The sustained viral response was 58% (7/12), and the overall patient survival was 42%. All the deaths occurred a mean (±SD) after 5.4 (±3.6) months after treatment was completed. CONCLUSIONS: All patients achieved viral suppression from therapy, and over half the recipients achieved a sustained virological response. A high mortality underscores the necessity of starting antiviral treatment sooner in LT recipients and the need for larger cohort studies.

Sofosbuvir and simeprevir is effective for recurrent hepatitis C in liver transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hepatitis C is the most common indication for liver transplantation (LT). Recurrent infection is universal and can lead to progressive liver disease. Widespread use of interferon-based therapy has been limited by intolerability and adverse effects. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of sofosbuvir and simeprevir in the treatment of recurrent hepatitis C in adult (age >18) LT recipients. RESULTS: Seventy-six percent of the recipients were male and the mean age [±standard deviation (SD)] was 61 (±6.0) years. The mean time (±SD) from LT to treatment initiation was 71.8 (±77.1) months. Of the 26 patients with viral levels measured 4 weeks after starting antiviral therapy, 58% were undetectable. At the end of therapy, viral load was undetectable in all transplant recipients. The 12 week sustained viral response (SVR) was 93%. All recipients were able to complete therapy and no patients required growth factors of blood product transfusion during treatment. No patient required drug interruption of their immunosuppressant therapy. CONCLUSION: The use of sofosbuvir and simeprevir is efficacious, safe, and tolerable and should be considered in LT recipients with recurrent HCV who are candidates for antiviral therapy.

Boceprevir in liver transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing interest in using protease inhibitors with pegylated interferon and ribavirin to treat recurrent hepatitis C (HCV) disease in liver transplant recipients. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy in liver transplant recipients treated for recurrent hepatitis C genotype 1 with the combination of peginterferon, ribavirin and boceprevir. RESULTS: Twenty liver transplant recipients were treated for recurrent hepatitis C. Baseline alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin and HCV RNA values (± SD) were 67.5 (±50.9) mg/dl, 1.78 (±1.99) U/L, and 16 955 510 (±21 620 675) IU/ml. Anaemia was a common adverse event requiring epoetin in 16 of 20 recipients and ribavirin dose reductions in 17 of 20 recipients. One-third of recipients required a blood transfusion. Filgrastim was used in 11 of 20 patients (55%) and eltrombopag in two of 20 recipients (10%) over the course of treatment. Serum creatinine level increased significantly from a baseline value of 1.33 mg/dl to 1.59 mg/dl at week 20 of boceprevir (P < 0.005). The overall sustained viral response (SVR) was 50%. Of the 14 patients who had a viral load less than 1000 IU/ml at week 4 of boceprevir, the SVR was 71%. The SVR was 83% of the 11 patients who had undetectable viral levels at week 4 of boceprevir. CONCLUSIONS: Antiviral therapy utilizing boceprevir in liver transplant recipients requires close monitoring. Anaemia and neutropenia were common requiring growth factors in most recipients. On-treatment viral responses appear promising but long-term data are needed.

Treating fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis C with sofosbuvir and ribavirin: a matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) is an uncommon but potentially fatal complication of recurrent hepatitis C (HCV) in liver transplant recipients. METHODS: We matched the treatment outcomes of 10 liver transplant recipients who developed FCH with those of 10 recipients with recurrent HCV without FCH treated with sofosbuvir and ribavirin. RESULTS: Baseline mean alanine transaminase, aspartate transaminase, alkaline phosphatase, and total bilirubin were 186 U/L, 197 U/L, 243 U/L, and 6.7 mg/dL, respectively, in the FCH recipients and 82 U/L, 60 U/L, 110 U/L, and 0.99 mg/dL, respectively, in non-FCH recipients. The sustained viral response in FCH and non-FCH recipients was 40% and 80%, respectively. One-yr patient and graft survival rates were 90% and 80%, respectively, in FCH recipients, and 100% in non-FCH recipients. Seven FCH and six non-FCH recipients were treated for anemia with blood transfusion and/or erythropoietin growth factors. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the use of sofosbuvir and ribavirin is effective and tolerable in liver transplant recipients treated for recurrent FCH. There is a trend of lower sustained viral response, patient survival, and graft survival in the FCH recipients.

Effectiveness of Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir with/without Ribavarin in Liver Transplant Recipients with Hepatitis C.

Background and Aims: Recurrent infection of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in liver transplant (LT) recipients is universal and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with and without ribavirin in LT recipients with recurrent genotype 1 hepatitis C. Results: Eighty-five LT recipients were treated for recurrent HCV with ledipasvir/sofosbuvirwith and without ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks. The mean (± standard deviation [SD]) time from LT to treatment initiation was 68 (±71) months. The mean (± SD) age of the cohort was 63 (±8.6) years old. Most recipients were male (70%). Baseline alanine transaminase, total bilirubin, and HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) values (± SD) were 76.8 (±126) mg/dL, 0.8 (±1.3) U/L, and 8,010,421.9 (±12,420,985) IU/mL, respectively. Five of 43 recipients who were treated with ribavirin required drug cessation due to side effects, with 4 of those being anemia complications. No recipient discontinued the ledipasvir/sofosbuvir. Eighty-one percent of recipients had undetectable viral levels at 4 weeks after starting therapy, and all recipients had complete viral suppression at the end of therapy. The sustained viral response at 12 weeks after completion of therapy was 94%. Conclusion : Ledipasvir and sofosbuvir with and without ribavirin therapy is an effective and well-tolerated interferon-free treatment for recurrent HCV infection after LT. Anemia is not uncommon in LT recipients receiving ribavirin.

Curing Hepatitis C in Liver Transplant Recipients Is Associated with Changes in Immunosuppressant Use.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: All-oral interferon-free antivirals are highly effective in treating recurrent hepatitis C (HCV) infection in liver transplant (LT) recipients. The aim of the study was to assess immunosuppression needs after achieving a sustained viral response (SVR). METHODS: We compared immunosuppression needs before and after achieving a SVR in adult LT recipients treated for recurrent HCV infection with all-oral direct acting agents. RESULTS: We identified 52 liver LT treated recipients who achieved a SVR. The median (25th and 75th percentile interquartile range [IQR]) age was 62 years (57.75, 65). Most recipients received tacrolimus (TAC) for their immunosuppressant regimen. After achieving SVR, there was no statistically significant difference in daily dose of TAC unadjusted per weight (p > 0.05). However, there was a statistically significant decrease in daily dose of TAC adjusted per weight, serum levels of TAC, and the product of glomerular filtration rate and TAC. No statistically significant differences in cyclosporine unadjusted/adjusted per weight daily dose or serum levels were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Immunosuppression needs were increased for those patients treated with TAC but not cyclosporine. LT recipients prescribed TAC require close monitoring after treatment completion to avoid potential risk of acute rejection.