Transarterial embolization as neo-adjuvant therapy pretransplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Neo-adjuvant transarterial therapies are commonly used for patients with HCC in the waiting list for liver transplantation (LT) to delay tumour progression, however, their effectiveness is not well-established. We studied the effect of pre-LT transarterial therapies on post-LT HCC recurrence, using the explanted liver histology to assess therapeutic efficacy and the predictors of response to these therapies. METHODS: We included 150 consecutive patients from our prospectively compiled database, listed for liver transplantation using the Milan criteria. Transarterial embolization without chemotherapeutic agents was the transarterial therapy used as standard of care. PVA particles were the embolizing agent of choice. RESULTS: Sixty-seven (45%) patients had TAE as bridging therapy to liver transplantation, of which 60 were transplanted after 2001. The majority of patients (36, 54%) had partial tumour necrosis after transarterial therapy, whereas 22 (33%) had complete tumour necrosis and 9 (13%) had no necrosis. HCC post-transplant recurrence was independently associated with no neo-adjuvant transarterial therapy (OR 5.395, 95% CI 1.289-22.577; P = 0.021) and the total radiological size of HCC nodules (OR 1.037, 95% CI 1.006-1.069; P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-transplant TAE with the more permanently occluding PVA particles significantly reduces post-transplant HCC recurrence in patients within the Milan criteria.

Antiviral prophylaxis for the prevention of chronic hepatitis C virus in patients undergoing liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether prophylactic antiviral therapy is indicated to improve patient and graft survival in patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic decompensated hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different prophylactic antiviral therapies for patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 1, 2013), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to February 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised clinical trials irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status and comparing various prophylactic antiviral therapies (alone or in combination) in the prophylactic treatment of patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors collected the data independently. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on available case analysis. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 501 liver transplant recipients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection were randomised in 12 trials to various experimental interventions and control interventions. The proportion of genotype I varied between 49% and 100% in the seven trials that reported the genotype. Only one or two trials were included under each comparison. All the trials were of high risk of bias. Ten trials including 441 liver transplant recipients provided data for this review.There were no significant differences in the 90-day mortality (1 trial; 81 participants; 5/35 (adjusted proportion: 14.2%) in interferon group versus 5/46 (10.9%) in control group; RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.41 to 4.19); mortality at maximal follow-up (2 trials; 105 participants; 7/47 (adjusted proportion: 14.8%) in interferon group versus 10/58 (17.2%) in control group; RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.08); long-term mortality (1 trial; 81 participants; HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.56); mortality at maximal follow-up (1 trial; 54 participants; 1/26 (3.9%) in pegylated interferon group versus 2/28 (7.1%) in control group; RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.05 to 5.59); 90-day mortality (1 trial; 115 participants; 5/55 (9.1%) in pegylated interferon plus ribavirin group versus 3/60 (5.0%) in control group; RR 1.82; 95% 0.46 to 7.25); 90-day mortality (3 trials; 53 participants; 3/37 (adjusted proportion: 4.3%) in HCV antibody group versus 1/16 (6.3%) in placebo group; RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.15 to 3.11); or 90-day mortality (2 trials; 31 participants; 2/14 (adjusted proportion: 16.2%) in HCV antibody high-dose group versus 1/17 (5.9%) in HCV antibody low-dose group; RR 2.75; 95% CI; 0.30 to 25.35). There were no significant differences in the retransplantation at maximal follow-up (2 trials; 105 participants; 2/47 (adjusted proportion: 4.0%) in interferon group versus 2/58 (3.4%) in control group; RR 1.17; 95% CI 0.22 to 6.2); 90-day retransplantation (1 trial; 18 participants; 1/12 (8.3%) in HCV antibody group versus 0/6 (0%) in control group; RR 1.71; 95% CI 0.09 to 32.93); or 90-day retransplantation (1 trial; 12 participants; 1/6 (17.7%) in HCV antibody high-dose group versus 0/6 (0%) in HCV antibody low-dose group; RR 3.00; 95% CI 0.15 to 61.74). There were no significant differences in serious adverse events, graft rejection, worsening of fibrosis, or HCV recurrence between intervention and control groups in any of the comparisons that reported these outcomes. None of the trials reported quality of life, liver decompensation, intensive therapy unit stay, or hospital stay. Life-threatening adverse events were not reported in either group in any of the comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no evidence to recommend prophylactic antiviral treatment to prevent recurrence of HCV infection either in primary liver transplantation or retransplantation. Further randomised clinical trials with adequate trial methodology and adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.

Antiviral interventions for liver transplant patients with recurrent graft infection due to hepatitis C virus.

BACKGROUND: Antiviral therapy for recurrent hepatitis C infection after liver transplantation is controversial due to unresolved balance between benefits and harms. OBJECTIVES: To compare the therapeutic benefits and harms of different antiviral regimens in patients with hepatitis C re-infected grafts after liver transplantation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 1, 2013), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to February 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing various antiviral therapies (alone or in combination) in the treatment of hepatitis C virus recurrence in liver transplantation for the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors collected the data independently. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on available case-analysis. In the presence of only trials for a dichotomous outcome, we performed the Fisher's exact test. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 17 trials with 736 patients met the inclusion criteria for this review. All trials had high risk of bias. Five hundred and one patients randomised in 11 trials provided information for various comparisons in this systematic review after excluding post-randomisation drop-outs and patients from trials that did not report any of the outcomes of interest for this review. The comparisons for which outcomes were available included pegylated (peg) interferon versus control; peg interferon plus ribavirin versus control; ribavirin plus peg interferon versus peg interferon; peg interferon (1.5 µg/kg/week) plus ribavirin versus peg interferon (0.5 µg/kg/week) plus ribavirin; amantadine plus peg interferon plus ribavirin versus peg interferon plus ribavirin; interferon versus control; interferon plus ribavirin versus control; ribavirin versus interferon; and ribavirin versus placebo. Long-term follow-up was not available in these trials. There were no significant differences in mortality, retransplantation, graft rejections requiring retransplantation or medical treatment, or fibrosis worsening between the groups in any of the comparisons in which these outcomes were reported. Quality of life and liver decompensation were not reported in any of the trials. There was a significantly higher proportion of participants who developed serious adverse events in the ribavirin plus peg interferon combination therapy group than in the peg interferon monotherapy group (1 trial; 56 participants; 17/28 (60.7%) in the intervention group versus 5/28 (17.9%) in the control group; RR 3.40; 95% CI 1.46 to 7.94). There was no significant difference in proportion of participants who developed serious adverse events or in the number of serious adverse events between the intervention and control groups in the other comparisons that reported serious adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Considering the lack of clinical benefit, there is currently no evidence to recommend or refute antiviral treatment for recurrent liver graft infection with hepatitis C virus. Further randomised clinical trials with low risk of bias and low risk of random errors with adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.

Interferon for interferon nonresponding and relapsing patients with chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: The widely-accepted treatment outcome for chronic hepatitis C is the sustained viral response (that is, no measurable viral RNA in blood six months after treatment). However, this surrogate outcome (as well as the previously employed biochemical and histologic ones) has never been validated. This situation exists because there are very few randomized clinical trials that have used clinical events (mortality or manifestations of decompensated cirrhosis) as outcomes, because those clinical events only occur after many years of infection. Patients in whom initial therapy fails to produce sustained viral responses do become potential candidates for retreatment; some of these individuals are not candidates for ribavirin or protease inhibitors and consideration could be given to retreatment with interferon alone. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of interferon monotherapy retreatment in chronic hepatitis C patients and to validate the currently employed surrogate outcomes in this group of patients. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until 16 August 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized trials comparing interferon versus placebo or no treatment in chronic hepatitis C nonresponders and relapsers to previous interferon. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcomes were mortality (all-cause and hepatic), quality of life, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were liver-related morbidity, sustained viral responses, biochemical responses, histologic improvements, and costs. We used both fixed-effect and random-effects model meta-analyses, reporting only the former if no difference existed. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials were identified. Two of them were at low risk of bias (the HALT-C and EPIC3 trials) and included 1676 patients. Both of these trials addressed the role of long-term low-dose pegylated interferon therapy in patients with severe fibrosis (demonstrated on liver biopsy) and were designed to assess the clinical outcomes. The remaining five trials included 300 patients and were at high risk of bias. Based on all trials reporting the outcomes, no significant difference was observed in either all-cause mortality (78/843 (9.3%) versus 62/867 (7.2%); risk ratio (RR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.79; 3 trials) or hepatic mortality (41/532 (7.7%) versus 40/552 (7.2%); RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.63; 2 trials); however, when only the two trials at low risk of bias were combined, all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the recipients of the pegylated interferon (78/828 (9.4%) versus 57/848 (6.7%); RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.96) although trial sequential analysis could not exclude the possibility of random error. There was less variceal bleeding in the recipients of the interferon (4/843 (0.5%) versus 18/867 (2.1%); RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.67; 3 trials), although again trial sequential analysis could not exclude the presence of a type I error and the effect could not be confirmed in a random-effects model meta-analysis. No significant differences were seen with regard to the development of ascites, encephalopathy, hepatocellular carcinoma, or the need for liver transplantation. One trial reported quality of life data; the pain score was significantly worse in the recipients of the pegylated interferon. Adverse effects tended to be more common in the interferon recipients; the ones that were significantly more common included hematologic complications, infections, flu-like symptoms, and rash. The recipients of interferon had significantly more sustained viral responses (20/557 (3.6%) versus 1/579 (0.2%); RR 15.38, 95% CI 2.93 to 80.71; 4 trials) and a type I error was excluded by trial sequential analysis. The METAVIR activity score also improved (36/55 (65%) versus 20/46 (43.5%); RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.18; 2 trials). No significant differences were seen with regard to histologic fibrosis assessments. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The clinical data were limited to patients with histologic evidence of severe fibrosis who were retreated with pegylated interferon. In this scenario, retreatment with interferon did not appear to provide significant clinical benefit and, when only the trials at low risk of bias were considered, retreatment for several years may even have increased all-cause mortality. Such treatment also produced adverse events. On the other hand, the treatment did result in improvement in some surrogate outcomes, namely sustained viral responses and histologic evidence of inflammation. Interferon monotherapy retreatment cannot be recommended for these patients. No clinical data are available for patients with less severe fibrosis. The sustained viral response cannot be used as a surrogate marker for hepatitis C treatment in this clinical setting with low sustained viral response rates and needs to be validated in others in which higher sustained viral response rates are reported.

Cytomegalovirus glycoprotein-B vaccine with MF59 adjuvant in transplant recipients: a phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus end-organ disease can be prevented by giving ganciclovir when viraemia is detected in allograft recipients. Values of viral load correlate with development of end-organ disease and are moderated by pre-existing natural immunity. Our aim was to determine whether vaccine-induced immunity could do likewise. METHODS: We undertook a phase-2 randomised placebo controlled trial in adults awaiting kidney or liver transplantation at the Royal Free Hospital, London, UK. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, receipt of blood products (except albumin) in the previous 3 months, and simultaneous multiorgan transplantation. 70 patients seronegative and 70 seropositive for cytomegalovirus were randomly assigned from a scratch-off randomisation code in a 1:1 ratio to receive either cytomegalovirus glycoprotein-B vaccine with MF59 adjuvant or placebo, each given at baseline, 1 month and 6 months later. If a patient was transplanted, no further vaccinations were given and serial blood samples were tested for cytomegalovirus DNA by real-time quantitative PCR (rtqPCR). Any patient with one blood sample containing more than 3000 cytomegalovirus genomes per mL received ganciclovir until two consecutive undetectable cytomegalovirus DNA measurements. Safety and immunogenicity were coprimary endpoints and were assessed by intention to treat in patients who received at least one dose of vaccine or placebo. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00299260. FINDINGS: 67 patients received vaccine and 73 placebo, all of whom were evaluable. Glycoprotein-B antibody titres were significantly increased in both seronegative (geometric mean titre 12,537 (95% CI 6593-23,840) versus 86 (63-118) in recipients of placebo recipients; p<0.0001) and seropositive (118,395; 64,503-217,272) versus 24,682 (17,909-34,017); p<0.0001) recipients of vaccine. In those who developed viraemia after transplantation, glycoprotein-B antibody titres correlated inversely with duration of viraemia (p=0.0022). In the seronegative patients with seropositive donors, the duration of viraemia (p=0.0480) and number of days of ganciclovir treatment (p=0.0287) were reduced in vaccine recipients. INTERPRETATION: Although cytomegalovirus disease occurs in the context of suppressed cell-mediated immunity post-transplantation, humoral immunity has a role in reduction of cytomegalovirus viraemia. Vaccines containing cytomegalovirus glycoprotein B merit further assessment in transplant recipients. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Grant R01AI051355 and Wellcome Trust, Grant 078332. SPONSOR: University College London (UCL).

Antiviral prophylactic intervention for chronic hepatitis C virus in patients undergoing liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether prophylactic antiviral therapy is indicated in patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic decompensated hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different prophylactic anti-viral therapies for patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until August 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised clinical trials irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status and comparing various prophylactic antiviral therapies (alone or in combination) in the prophylactic treatment of patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors collected the data independently. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on available case analysis. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 477 liver transplant recipients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection were randomised in eleven trials to various interventions and controls. The proportion of genotype I varied between 49% to 88% in the five trials that reported the genotype. Only one or two trials were included under each comparison. All the trials were of high risk of bias. There was no significant differences in the patient survival, graft rejection, re-transplantation, or HCV recurrence between intervention and control groups in any of the comparisons that reported these outcomes. None of the trials reported liver decompensation, primary graft non-function, intensive therapy unit stay, hospital stay, or quality of life. Life-threatening adverse events were not reported in either group in any of the comparisons. Up to 91% of patients required reduction in dose and up to 36% of patients required cessation of treatment in the various comparisons because of adverse events or because of patient's choice to stop treatment. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no evidence to recommend prophylactic antiviral treatment to prevent recurrence of HCV infection either in primary liver transplantation or re-transplantation. Further randomised clinical trials with adequate trial methodology and adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.

Repeated courses of transarterial embolization with polyvinyl alcohol particles: 'long life elixir' in a cirrhotic patient with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Chemoembolization improves survival in selected cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, but prolonged survival is unusual. In this study, a 70-year-old cirrhotic patient, who had a histologically proven hepatocellular carcinoma of 5 cm diameter, embolization with polyvinyl alcohol particles alone, without chemotherapeutic agent, has resulted in continued survival, of 5 years to date, with virtual elimination of residual hypervascularity following 10 sessions of embolization, and with continued patency of the injected branch of the hepatic artery. Provided liver function is maintained, embolization alone appears a feasible long term and effective therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Antiviral therapy and fibrosis progression in patients with mild-moderate hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation. A randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: We evaluated the effect of antiviral therapy on fibrosis progression in patients with histological features of mild/moderate HCV disease recurrence defined by a Grading score≥4 and Staging score up to 3 (Ishak) at 1 year after liver transplantation. METHODS: Seventy-three consecutive patients with mild/moderate recurrence were randomized either to no treatment or to receive Pegilated-Interferon-alfa-2b and ribavirin for 52 weeks. Liver biopsies obtained at baseline (1 year after transplantation) and 2 years afterwards were evaluated for assessment of disease progression, defined as worsening of at least 2 staging points or progression to stage 4 or higher. RESULTS: As for these two major histological end points there were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups (36.1% vs. 50%, p=0.34 and 36.1% vs. 38.9%, p=1). Fifteen treated patients (41%) achieved a sustained virological response which was associated with a reduced risk of fibrosis worsening for both endpoints when compared to viremic patients (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Although antiviral-therapy was beneficial in preventing fibrosis progression in patients achieving a sustained virological response, the majority of the overall population of our patients with mild-moderate disease recurrence could not benefit from antiviral therapy either because they either could not be treated or did not respond to treatment (EudraCT number: 2005-005760).