Garcinia cambogia, Either Alone or in Combination With Green Tea, Causes Moderate to Severe Liver Injury.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Garcinia cambogia, either alone or with green tea, is commonly promoted for weight loss. Sporadic cases of liver failure from G cambogia have been reported, but its role in liver injury is controversial. METHODS: Among 1418 patients enrolled in the Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) from 2004 to 2018, we identified 22 cases (adjudicated with high confidence) of liver injury from G cambogia either alone (n = 5) or in combination with green tea (n = 16) or Ashwagandha (n = 1). Control groups consisted of 57 patients with liver injury from herbal and dietary supplements (HDS) containing green tea without G cambogia and 103 patients from other HDS. RESULTS: Patients who took G cambogia were between 17 and 54 years, with liver injury arising 13-223 days (median = 51) after the start. One patient died, one required liver transplantation, and 91% were hospitalized. The liver injury was hepatocellular with jaundice. Although the peak values of aminotransferases were significantly higher (2001 ± 1386 U/L) in G cambogia group (P < .018), the median time for improvement in total bilirubin was significantly lower compared with the control groups (10 vs 17 and 13 days; P = .03). The presence of HLA-B∗35:01 allele was significantly higher in the G cambogia containing HDS (55%) compared with patients because of other HDS (19%) (P = .002) and those with acute liver injury from conventional drugs (12%) (P = 2.55 × 10-6). CONCLUSIONS: The liver injury caused by G cambogia and green tea is clinically indistinguishable. The possible association with HLA-B∗35:01 allele suggests an immune-mediated mechanism of injury. CLINICAL TRIALS: gov number: NCT00345930.

HLA-B*35:01 and Green Tea-Induced Liver Injury.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Herbal supplements, and particularly multi-ingredient products, have become increasingly common causes of acute liver injury. Green tea is a frequent component in implicated products, but its role in liver injury is controversial. The aim of this study was to better characterize the clinical features, outcomes, and pathogenesis of green tea-associated liver injury. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Among 1,414 patients enrolled in the U.S. Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network who underwent formal causality assessment, 40 cases (3%) were attributed to green tea, 202 to dietary supplements without green tea, and 1,142 to conventional drugs. The clinical features of green tea cases and representation of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I and II alleles in cases and control were analyzed in detail. Patients with green tea-associated liver injury ranged in age from 17 to 69 years (median = 40) and developed symptoms 15-448 days (median = 72) after starting the implicated agent. The liver injury was typically hepatocellular (95%) with marked serum aminotransferase elevations and only modest increases in alkaline phosphatase. Most patients were jaundiced (83%) and symptomatic (88%). The course was judged as severe in 14 patients (35%), necessitating liver transplantation in 3 (8%), but rarely resulting in chronic injury (3%). In three instances, injury recurred upon re-exposure to green tea with similar clinical features, but shorter time to onset. HLA typing revealed a high prevalence of HLA-B*35:01, found in 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58-87) of green tea cases, but only 15% (95% CI, 10-20) caused by other supplements and 12% (95% CI, 10-14) attributed to drugs, the latter rate being similar to population controls (11%; 95% CI, 10.5-11.5). CONCLUSIONS: Green tea-related liver injury has distinctive clinical features and close association with HLA-B*35:01, suggesting that it is idiosyncratic and immune mediated.

The Contents of Herbal and Dietary Supplements Implicated in Liver Injury in the United States Are Frequently Mislabeled.

The U.S. Drug Induced Liver Injury Network assayed the contents of herbal and dietary supplements collected from patients enrolled into its prospective study. The aim was to determine the accuracy of product labels, and to identify known hepatotoxins. Using high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry to assay 272 product, 51% were found to be mislabeled; that is, to have chemical contents that did not match the label. Appearance enhancement, sexual performance, and weight loss products were most commonly mislabeled. Whether the mislabeling contributed to liver injury is under study; however, the high mislabeling rate underscores the need for more stringent regulation of supplements.

Severe and protracted cholestasis in 44 young men taking bodybuilding supplements: assessment of genetic, clinical and chemical risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Bodybuilding supplements can cause a profound cholestatic syndrome. AIM: To describe the drug-Induced liver injury network's experience with liver injury due to bodybuilding supplements. METHODS: Liver injury pattern, severity and outcomes, potential genetic associations, and exposure to anabolic steroids by product analysis were analysed in prospectively enrolled subjects with bodybuilding supplement-induced liver injury with causality scores of probable or higher. RESULTS: Forty-four males (mean age 33 years) developed liver injury with a median latency of 73 days. Forty-one per cent presented with hepatocellular pattern of liver injury as defined by the R > 5 ([Fold elevation of ALT] ÷ [Fold elevation of Alk Phos] (mean, range = 6.4, 0.5-31.4, n = 42) despite all presenting with clinical features of cholestatic liver injury (100% with jaundice and 84% with pruritus). Liver biopsy (59% of subjects) demonstrated a mild hepatitis and profound cholestasis in most without bile duct injury, loss or fibrosis. Seventy-one per cent were hospitalised, and none died or required liver transplantation. In some, chemical analysis revealed anabolic steroid controlled substances not listed on the label. No enrichment of genetic variants associated with cholestatic syndromes was found, although mutations in ABCB11 (present in up to 20%) were significantly different than in ethnically matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with bodybuilding supplements liver injury uniformly presented with cholestatic injury, which slowly resolved. The ingested products often contained anabolic steroids not identified on the label, and no enrichment in genetic variants was found, indicating a need for additional studies.

Severe Acute Hepatocellular Injury Attributed to OxyELITE Pro: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Herbal and dietary supplement (HDS) hepatotoxicity is increasingly being reported in the USA. This case series describes the presenting clinical features and outcomes of seven patients with liver injury attributed to OxyELITE Pro enrolled in the Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) study. METHODS: The 6-month outcomes of patients with hepatotoxicity attributed to OxyELITE Pro enrolled in the DILIN prospective registry between 2004 and 2015 are presented. RESULTS: Six of the seven patients (86 %) presented in 2013 with symptoms of hepatitis and acute hepatocellular injury. The median duration of OxyELITE Pro use was 18 weeks (range 5-102 weeks). Median age was 36 years (range 28-62), 86 % were female, and 43 % were Asian. One patient had rash, none had eosinophilia, and three had antinuclear antibody reactivity. The median peak ALT was 2242 U/L, alkaline phosphatase 284 U/L and bilirubin 15.0 mg/dL. Six patients (86 %) were hospitalized, three developed acute liver failure and two underwent liver transplantation. DILIN causality scores for OxyELITE Pro were definite in 1, highly likely in 3, probable in 2, and possible in 1. Four of the five patients without liver transplant recovered completely within 6 months, while one patient had mild residual ALT elevations. CONCLUSIONS: Seven cases of severe acute hepatocellular injury attributed to OxyELITE Pro are reported. These results reinforce the need to assess for HDS supplement use in patients presenting with unexplained acute hepatitis and point to the need for additional regulatory oversight of HDS products.

Reliability of causality assessment for drug, herbal and dietary supplement hepatotoxicity in the Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Because of the lack of objective tests to diagnose drug-induced liver injury (DILI), causality assessment is a matter of debate. Expert opinion is often used in research and industry, but its test-retest reliability is unknown. To determine the test-retest reliability of the expert opinion process used by the Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN). METHODS: Three DILIN hepatologists adjudicate suspected hepatotoxicity cases to one of five categories representing levels of likelihood of DILI. Adjudication is based on retrospective assessment of gathered case data that include prospective follow-up information. One hundred randomly selected DILIN cases were re-assessed using the same processes for initial assessment but by three different reviewers in 92% of cases. RESULTS: The median time between assessments was 938 days (range 140-2352). Thirty-one cases involved >1 agent. Weighted kappa statistics for overall case and individual agent category agreement were 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50-0.71) and 0.60 (0.52-0.68) respectively. Overall case adjudications were within one category of each other 93% of the time, while 5% differed by two categories and 2% differed by three categories. Fourteen per cent crossed the 50% threshold of likelihood owing to competing diagnoses or atypical timing between drug exposure and injury. CONCLUSIONS: The DILIN expert opinion causality assessment method has moderate interobserver reliability but very good agreement within one category. A small but important proportion of cases could not be reliably diagnosed as ≥50% likely to be DILI.

Liver injury from herbals and dietary supplements in the U.S. Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network.

UNLABELLED: The Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) studies hepatotoxicity caused by conventional medications as well as herbals and dietary supplements (HDS). To characterize hepatotoxicity and its outcomes from HDS versus medications, patients with hepatotoxicity attributed to medications or HDS were enrolled prospectively between 2004 and 2013. The study took place among eight U.S. referral centers that are part of the DILIN. Consecutive patients with liver injury referred to a DILIN center were eligible. The final sample comprised 130 (15.5%) of all subjects enrolled (839) who were judged to have experienced liver injury caused by HDS. Hepatotoxicity caused by HDS was evaluated by expert opinion. Demographic and clinical characteristics and outcome assessments, including death and liver transplantation (LT), were ascertained. Cases were stratified and compared according to the type of agent implicated in liver injury; 45 had injury caused by bodybuilding HDS, 85 by nonbodybuilding HDS, and 709 by medications. Liver injury caused by HDS increased from 7% to 20% (P < 0.001) during the study period. Bodybuilding HDS caused prolonged jaundice (median, 91 days) in young men, but did not result in any fatalities or LT. The remaining HDS cases presented as hepatocellular injury, predominantly in middle-aged women, and, more frequently, led to death or transplantation, compared to injury from medications (13% vs. 3%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of liver injury cases attributed to HDS in DILIN has increased significantly. Liver injury from nonbodybuilding HDS is more severe than from bodybuilding HDS or medications, as evidenced by differences in unfavorable outcomes (death and transplantation). (Hepatology 2014;60:1399-1408).