An open-label randomised-controlled trial of azathioprine vs. mycophenolate mofetil for the induction of remission in treatment-naive autoimmune hepatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) almost invariably require lifelong immunosuppressive treatment. There is genuine concern about the efficacy and tolerability of the current standard combination therapy of prednisolone and azathioprine. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) has emerged as an alternative option. The aim of this study was to compare MMF to azathioprine as induction therapy for AIH. METHODS: In this 24-week, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre superiority trial, 70 patients with treatment-naive AIH received either MMF or azathioprine, both in combination with prednisolone. The primary endpoint was biochemical remission defined as normalisation of serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and IgG after 24 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints included safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Seventy patients (mean 57.9 years [SD 14.0]; 72.9% female) were randomly assigned to the MMF plus prednisolone (n = 39) or azathioprine plus prednisolone (n = 31) group. The primary endpoint was met in 56.4% and 29.0% of patients assigned to the MMF group and the azathioprine group, respectively (difference, 27.4 percentage points; 95% CI 4.0 to 46.7; p = 0.022). The MMF group exhibited higher complete biochemical response rates at 6 months (72.2% vs. 32.3%; p = 0.004). No serious adverse events occurred in patients who received MMF (0%) but serious adverse events were reported in four patients who received azathioprine (12.9%) (p = 0.034). Two patients in the MMF group (5.1%) and eight patients in the azathioprine group (25.8%) discontinued treatment owing to adverse events or serious adverse events (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with treatment-naive AIH, MMF with prednisolone led to a significantly higher rate of biochemical remission at 24 weeks compared to azathioprine combined with prednisolone. Azathioprine use was associated with more (serious) adverse events leading to cessation of treatment, suggesting superior tolerability of MMF. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: This randomised-controlled trial directly compares azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil, both in combination with prednisolone, for the induction of biochemical remission in treatment-naive patients with autoimmune hepatitis. Achieving complete remission is desirable to prevent disease progression. Patients assigned to the mycophenolate mofetil group reached biochemical remission more often and experienced fewer adverse events. The findings in this trial may contribute to the re-evaluation of international guidelines for the standard of care in treatment-naive patients with autoimmune hepatitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: #NCT02900443.

Treatment responses and outcomes in patients with autoimmune hepatitis and concomitant features of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

Background & Aims: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and steatohepatitis (NASH) affect 17-46% of Western countries, making coexistence with other liver diseases inevitable. We investigated the prevalence and clinical significance of NAFLD/NASH or the components of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in a large multicentric cohort of patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Methods: Data from six academic centres (Greece, Canada, Japan, Germany, The Netherlands, and Spain) were evaluated. The presence of NAFLD/NASH in liver biopsy, MetS components, and clinical and laboratory parameters were recorded. Results: A total of 640 patients (474 females, age 49 [4-87] years; follow-up 78 [1-521] months) were included. NAFLD was present in 146 (22.8%) patients (AIH/non-alcoholic fatty liver [NAFL] 115 [18%], AIH/NASH 31 [4.8%]). AIH/NAFL patients were older (p = 0.017), more frequently overweight or obese (p = 0.002), had hypertension (p = 0.001), and had diabetes (p = 0.016), whereas they less frequently had acute presentation (p = 0.002) and soluble liver antigen/liver pancreas positivity (p <0.05), lower transaminases (p <0.001), ALP (p = 0.028) and IgG (p = 0.004) and higher albumin (p <0.001) than patients with AIH only. Patients with AIH/NASH more frequently had cirrhosis at diagnosis (p = 0.036) and higher IgG (p = 0.009). Response to treatment did not differ between groups. Patients with cirrhosis with AIH/NAFL had higher frequency of decompensation compared with patients with AIH only (p <0.05). Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidaemia had increased hazard of disease progression (p <0.05 for each). Conclusions: The prevalence of NAFLD in AIH is similar to the general population. Concurrence of NASH in patients with AIH signifies a more severe disease, whereas that of NAFL may indicate a worse prognosis in patients with cirrhosis. T2DM and dyslipidaemia in AIH patients are associated with dismal parameters of outcome. Our findings suggest that NAFLD presence or even components of MetS in patients with AIH may affect prognosis, so closer follow-up of such patients is warranted. Impact and implications: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and steatohepatitis (NASH) affect many people, making coexistence with other liver diseases inevitable. We investigated the prevalence and clinical significance of NAFLD/NASH or the components of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). NAFLD and NASH presence in patients with AIH is as frequent as in the general population. The concurrence of NASH in patients with AIH seems to signify a more severe disease, whereas that of non-alcoholic fatty liver may indicate a worse prognosis in a specific subgroup of patients who already have cirrhosis at diagnosis. Diabetes or dyslipidaemia in patients with AIH were associated with worse prognosis. Therefore, it seems that closer follow-up of patients with concurrent AIH and NAFLD or AIH and components of MetS is needed.

Research gaps and opportunities in autoimmune hepatitis-Results of the international autoimmune hepatitis group research workshop 2022.

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a rare autoimmune liver disease that is characterised by a chronic inflammatory immune reaction directed against hepatocytes. The disease results in a substantial reduction in quality of life and potentially leads to liver-related complications or death. The International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group (IAIHG) initiated a series of research workshops to uncover the scientific gaps and opportunities in AIH. This review summarises the results of the latest workshop in Maastricht in 2022 and reviews the current challenges in adult AIH, particularly in relation to four important aspects of AIH: diagnostics; new immunomodulatory therapies; clinical trial design; and unmet clinical needs. This review also summarises the progress made since the AIH workshop in 2017. Patients and patient representatives were actively involved in the parallel working groups alongside clinicians and researchers. Despite 40 years of experience with diagnosing and treating AIH, false diagnoses occur and treatment is still based on nonselective immunosuppression. In addition to the need for more specific diagnostic tests, prognostic markers and tailor-based treatments, a major unmet clinical need was identified in areas of care delivery and health-related quality of life.

Assessing the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (CAMARO trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. METHODS: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. DISCUSSION: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2016-001038-91 . Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016.

Systematic review of response criteria and endpoints in autoimmune hepatitis by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) has been well characterised and codified through the development of diagnostic criteria. These criteria have been adapted and simplified and are widely used in clinical practice. However, there is a need to update and precisely define the criteria for both treatment response and treatment. METHODS: A systematic review was performed and a modified Delphi consensus process was used to identify and redefine the response criteria in autoimmune hepatitis. RESULTS: The consensus process initiated by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group proposes that the term 'complete biochemical response' defined as 'normalization of serum transaminases and IgG below the upper limit of normal' be adopted to include a time point at 6 months after initiation of treatment. An insufficient response by 6 months was a failure to meet the above definition. Non-response was defined as '<50% decrease of serum transaminases within 4 weeks after initiation of treatment'. Remission is defined as liver histology with a Hepatitis Activity Index <4/18. Intolerance to treatment was agreed to stand for 'any adverse event possibly related to treatment leading to potential drug discontinuation'. CONCLUSIONS: These definitions provide a simple and reproducible framework to define treatment response and non-response, irrespective of the therapeutic intervention. A consensus on endpoints is urgently required to set a global standard for the reporting of study results and to enable inter-study comparisons. Future prospective database studies are needed to validate these endpoints. LAY SUMMARY: Consensus among international experts on response criteria and endpoints in autoimmune hepatitis is lacking. A consensus on endpoints is urgently required to set a global standard for the reporting of study results and to enable the comparison of results between clinical trials. Therefore, the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group (IAIHG) herein presents a statement on 5 agreed response criteria and endpoints: complete biochemical response, insufficient response, non-response, remission, and intolerance to treatment, which can be used to guide future reporting.

Drug withdrawal in patients with autoimmune hepatitis in long-term histological remission: A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Recommendations for drug withdrawal in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) in longstanding remission are conflicting and rely on retrospective data. We prospectively investigated the predictive value of histological normalisation for successful treatment withdrawal in AIH patients. METHODS: Non-cirrhotic patients with established AIH and complete biochemical remission (normalisation of serum alanine aminotransferase [ALT] or aspartate aminotransferase [AST] and immunoglobulin G [IgG]) of at least 2 years were biopsied. Immunosuppressive therapy was only withdrawn in patients with histological normalisation (histological activity index [HAI] ≤3) with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients in biochemical remission for at least 2 years were included. Persistent histological inflammatory activity (HAI >3) precluded drug withdrawal in five patients. These had higher values of ALT (25 vs. 16 U/L; p = 0.01) and AST (26 vs. 22 U/L; p = 0.01) compared with patients in histological remission. Immunosuppressive medication was withdrawn in 12 patients; eight (67%, C.I. 40-93% p = 0.4) remained in remission during a median follow-up of 62 months (range: 13-75 months); and four (33%, C.I. 7-60% p = 0.4) required reinstitution of therapy after 1, 6, 11, and 40 months, all without clinical signs of disease progression or hepatic decompensation. No predictors of relapse were identified. CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of the patients who prove to have histological normalisation after at least 2 years of biochemical remission achieve treatment-free remission. Although patient numbers were small and results should be interpreted with caution, these findings support a liver biopsy prior to drug withdrawal.