Role of silymarin as antioxidant in clinical management of chronic liver diseases: a narrative review.

Chronic liver disease (CLD), manifested as hepatic injury, is a major cause of global morbidity and mortality. CLD progresses to fibrosis, cirrhosis, and-ultimately-hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) if left untreated. The different phenotypes of CLD based on their respective clinical features and causative agents include alcoholic liver disease (ALD), non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD), and drug-induced liver injury (DILI). The preferred treatment modality for CLD includes lifestyle modification and diet, along with limited pharmacological agents for symptomatic treatment. Moreover, oxidative stress (OS) is an important pathological mechanism underlying all CLD phenotypes; hence, the use of antioxidants to manage the disease is justified. Based on available clinical evidence, silymarin can be utilized as a hepatoprotective agent, given its potent antioxidant, antifibrotic, and anti-inflammatory properties. The role of silymarin in suppressing OS has been well established, and therefore silymarin is recommended for use in ALD and NAFLD in the guidelines approved by the Russian Medical Scientific Society of Therapists and the Gastroenterology Scientific Society of Russia. However, to discuss the positioning of the original silymarin in clinical guidelines and treatment protocols as a hepatoprotective agent for managing CLD concomitantly with other therapies, an expert panel of international and Russian medical professionals was convened on 11 November 2020. The panel reviewed approaches for the prevention and treatment of OS, existing guidelines for patient management for CLD, and available evidence on the effectiveness of silymarin in reducing OS, fibrosis, and hepatic inflammation and presented in the form of a narrative review. Key messagesAn expert panel of international and Russian medical professionals reviewed existing guidelines for ALD, NAFLD, MAFLD, and DILI to establish consensus recommendations that oxidative stress is the common pathophysiological mechanism underlying these conditions.The panel also discussed the positioning of original silymarin in clinical guidelines and treatment protocols as a hepatoprotective agent for managing CLD concomitantly with other therapies.The panel reviewed the effectiveness of 140 mg original silymarin three times a day in reducing oxidative stress in chronic liver diseases such as ALD, NAFLD, MAFLD, and DILI.

May Previous Hepatitis B Virus Infection Be Involved in Etiology and Pathogenesis of Autoimmune Liver Diseases?

INTRODUCTION: Viral infections, especially with hepatotropic viruses, may trigger autoimmune liver diseases (AILDs) and deteriorate their course. However, association of previous hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection (presence of anti-HBc with or without anti-HBs or HBV DNA in serum) with AILDs is poorly studied so far. The aim of the study was to assess the prevalence of previous hepatitis B virus infection markers and its clinical significance in patients with autoimmune liver diseases. METHODS: The study was based on the data obtained from 234 consecutive HBsAg-negative patients with AILDs [81 with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), 122 with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and 31 with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC)] and 131 subjects of the control group without liver diseases. Blood samples of the enrolled patients were tested for anti-HBc and HBV DNA. Samples of liver tissue were examined by standard morphologic protocol and, in anti-HBc positive subjects, for HBV DNA. We assessed estimated risks of AILDs according to anti-HBc positivity and association of anti-HBc positivity with stage of liver fibrosis. RESULTS: Anti-HBc was detected in 14.5% participants in the control group vs 26.1% (p = 0.016) in patients with AILDs (including 27.1% subjects with PBC (p = 0.021 vs control group), in 29% of PSC and 23.5% in AIH. HBV DNA was detected in three patients with PBC and in one with AIH. Positive anti-HBc test result was associated with higher risk of AILDs-odds ratio (OR) = 2.078 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.179-3.665], especially in PBC: OR (95% CI) 2.186 (1.165-4.101). Odds of advanced stage of liver fibrosis (F3-F4 by METAVIR) in anti-HBc-positive subjects with PBC were also higher compared to those who had no previous HBV infection: OR (95% CI) 2.614 (1.153-5.926). CONCLUSIONS: Significant proportions of patients with AILDs are anti-HBc positive, and some of them have OBI. Among patients with AILDs, anti-HBc-positivity is most widespread in the PBC group and in subjects with advanced stage of liver fibrosis. Our data may support the idea of an important role of previous HBV infection in the etiology and pathogenesis of AILDs (namely PBC).