Humoral Response to 2-dose BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination in Liver Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In the context of the Italian severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination program, liver transplant (LT) recipients were prioritized for vaccine administration, although the lower response to vaccines is a well-known problem in this population. We aimed to evaluate immunogenicity of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in LT recipients and healthy controls and to identify factors associated with negative response to vaccine. METHODS: In a cohort of adult patients with LT, we prospectively evaluated the humoral response (with anti-Spike protein IgG-LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2-IgG chemiluminescent assay) at 1 and 3 months after 2-dose vaccination. A group of 307 vaccinated health care workers, matched by age and sex, served as controls. RESULTS: Overall, 492 LT patients were enrolled (75.41% male; median age, 64.85 years). Detectable antibodies were observed in the 75% of patients, with a median value of 73.9 AU/mL after 3 months from 2-dose vaccination. At multivariable analysis, older age (>40 years; P = .016), shorter time from liver transplantation (<5 years; P = .004), and immunosuppression with antimetabolites (P = .029) were significantly associated with non-response to vaccination. Moreover, the LT recipients showed antibody titers statistically lower than the control group (103 vs 261 AU/mL; P < .0001). Finally, in both controls and LT patients, we found a trend of inverse correlation between age and antibody titers (correlation coefficients: -0.2023 and -0.2345, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Three months after vaccination, LT recipients showed humoral response in 75% of cases. Older age, shorter time from transplantation, and use of antimetabolites were factors associated with non-response to vaccination, and LT recipients at risk of non-response to vaccination needed to be kept under close monitoring.

Switch from intravenous or intramuscular to subcutaneous hepatitis B immunoglobulin: effect on quality of life after liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) therapy is available in intravenous (IV) or intra-muscular (IM) formulations. Recently, a subcutaneous (SC) formulation was introduced. This study evaluated changes in quality of life when liver transplant (LT) recipients were switched from IV or IM HBIG to the SC formulation. METHODS: This multicentre, observational study involved adults who had undergone LT at least 1 year prior to study entry. Quality of life was evaluated using the ITaLi-Q questionnaire, assessing the impact of HBIG therapy on daily activities and patient satisfaction, and the SF-36 Health Survey. Patients completed the questionnaires prior to switching from IV or IM HBIG to SC HBIG and 6 months later. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were enrolled; before the switch, 68.6% were receiving IM HBIG and 31.4% IV HBIG. After 6 months, significant improvements in 7 of the 8 ITaLi-Q domains were found, particularly side effects, need for support to adhere to the therapy and satisfaction with the HBIG therapy. Significant improvements in several SF-36 domains were documented, including physical functioning, physical and emotional role limitations, pain, social functioning, physical and mental summary scores. CONCLUSIONS: The SC route of administration reduces side effects and their interference with daily life, ameliorates negative feelings, and increases patient autonomy.

Radiofrequency ablation versus laser ablation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: In patients with cirrhosis and small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), thermal ablation is currently recognized as an effective local treatment. Among thermal procedures, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the most diffusely used and is the standard against which any new treatment should be compared. In retrospective studies, laser ablation (LA) resulted as safe and effective as RFA. Therefore, we performed a non-inferiority randomized trial comparing RFA with LA in patients with cirrhosis and HCC within Milan criteria. METHODS: Overall, 140 patients with 157 HCC nodules were randomly assigned to receive RFA or LA. The primary end-point was the proportion of complete tumor ablation (CTA). Secondary end-points were time to local progression (TTLP) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Per patient CTA rates after RFA and LA were 97.4% (95% CI, 91.0-99.3) and 95.7% (88.1-98.5), respectively (difference = 1.4%, 95% CI from -6.0% to + 9.0%). Per nodule CTA rates for RFA and LA were 97.4% (91.0-99.3) and 96.3% (89.6-98.7), respectively (difference = 1.1%, from -5.7% to + 8.1%). The mean TTLP was comparable between RFA group (42.0 months; 95% CI, 36.83-47.3) and LA group (46.7 months; 95% CI, 41.5-51.9) (P = .591). The mean OS was 42 months in both groups and survival probability at 1 and 3 years was 94% and 89% in RFA group, and 94% and 80% in LA group. CONCLUSION: LA resulted not inferior to RFA in inducing the CTA of HCC nodules and therefore it should be considered as an evaluable alternative for thermal ablation of small HCC in cirrhotic patients.

COVID-19 in liver transplant recipients: incidence, hospitalization and outcome in an Italian prospective double-centre study.

Liver transplant (LT) recipients are vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2-infection (COVID-19), due to immunosuppression and comorbidities. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on LT recipients compared to general population in the Campania region. In this prospective double-centre study, we enrolled all consecutive adult LT recipients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infection. Data were collected at diagnosis of COVID-19 and during follow-up and compared with the regional population. Thirty LT recipients (3.28%) developed SARS-CoV-2-infection (76.66% male, median age 62.61 years). Sixteen (53.33%) were symptomatic. Common symptoms were fever, cough, fatigue, and anosmia. Twenty-five (83.33%) were outpatients, 5 (16.66%) required hospitalization (6.66% admitted to Intensive Care Unit, 6.62% developed Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and 6.66% died). Immunosuppressors were in 3 (10%) patients. Incidence rate of COVID-19 was similar between LT patients and general population (3.28% vs 4.37%, p = 0.142) with higher rate of symptoms in LT patients (53.33% vs 15.87%, p < 0.000). At univariate analysis, hospitalization and case fatality rates were higher in LT patients compared to general population (16.66% vs 4.54%, p = 0.001; and 6.66% vs 1.76%, p = 0.041, respectively). At multivariable logistic regression analysis, LT patients with COVID-19 were more frequently symptomatic (OR 5.447 [95% CI 2.437-12.177], p < 0.000), whereas hospitalization and death for COVID-19 were not significatively associated with LT condition (p = 0.724 and p = 0.462, respectively) and were comparable with general population. LT is not a risk factor for acquiring COVID-19. Nonetheless, LT patients are more frequently symptomatic, although comparable to the general population for hospitalization rate and mortality.

Peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin is more effective than peginterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin for treating chronic hepatitis C virus infection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are frequently treated with a combination of pegylated interferon (peginterferon) and ribavirin. This study compared the efficacy and safety of peginterferon alfa-2a and peginterferon alfa-2b, each in combination with ribavirin. METHODS: A total of 320 consecutive, treatment-naive, HCV RNA-positive patients with chronic hepatitis were randomly assigned to once-weekly peginterferon alfa-2a (180 microg, group A) or peginterferon alfa-2b (1.5 microg/kg, group B) plus ribavirin 1000 mg/day (body weight <75 kg) or 1200 mg/day (body weight >or=75 kg) for 48 weeks (genotype 1 or 4) or 24 weeks (genotype 2 or 3). The primary end point was sustained virological response (SVR) by intention-to-treat. RESULTS: More patients in group A than group B achieved an SVR (110/160 [68.8%] vs 87/160 [54.4%]; P = .008). Higher SVR rates were obtained in group A than group B among patients with genotype 1/4 (51/93 [54.8%] vs 37/93 [39.8%]; P = .04), with genotype 2/3 (59/67 [88.1%] vs 50/67 [74.6%]; P = .046), without cirrhosis (96/127 [75.6%] vs 75/134 [55.9%]; P = .005), and with baseline levels HCV RNA >500,000 IU/mL (58/84 [69%] vs 43/93 [46.2%]; P = .002). SVR rates in groups A and B were not statistically different among patients with baseline HCV RNA

Effect of alcohol, cigarette smoking, and diabetes on occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with transfusion-acquired hepatitis C virus infection who develop cirrhosis.

AIM: Alcohol drinking, cigarette smoking, and diabetes have been claimed as risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma in case-control studies. The aim of this study was to define the impact of these risk factors on the development of hepatocellular carcinoma in hepatitis C virus-related liver cirrhosis. METHODS: A historical cohort of 138 patients with posttransfusion hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis was selected by reviewing all files of patients referred to our liver unit. Sixty-three of them (46%) developed hepatocellular carcinoma. RESULTS: At univariate analysis, risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma were observed in patients aged above 59 years [P=0.004; relative risk (RR): 2.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.19-3.68], male sex (P<0.001; RR: 2.48, 95% CI: 1.59-3.87), habit of alcohol drinking (P=0.001; RR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.24-2.88), and duration of alcohol consumption of more than 30 years (P=0.02; RR: 2.08, 95% CI: 0.98-4.40). At Cox regression analysis, only male sex was an independent predictive factor (beta=0.86; P=0.002; hazard ratio=2.4, 95% CI: 1.3-4.1). CONCLUSION: Diabetes, smoking, and alcohol drinking were not independently related to the risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma in hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis.

Incidence of side effects during therapy with different types of alpha interferon: a randomised controlled trial comparing recombinant alpha 2b versus leukocyte interferon in the therapy of naive patients with chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Alpha interferon (IFN) alone or in combination with Ribavirin (RBV) is the treatment of choice for HCV related chronic liver disease. There are many types of alpha IFN and to date only few reports are available comparing different types of alpha interferon. We run a randomised controlled trial with the aim to compare tolerability and efficacy of two different types of IFN: recombinant alpha 2b interferon (IFN-R) and leukocyte alpha n-3 interferon (IFN-L) at the same dosage of 3 MU subcutaneously thrice weekly for one year. METHODS: one hundred sixty eight consecutive anti-HCV positive naive patients, 34 mild chronic active hepatitis (MCH), 81 moderate-severe hepatitis (MSCR) and 53 active cirrhosis (CIRR) that met the inclusion criteria were enrolled into the study. The diagnosis of HCV chronic liver disease was established by liver biopsy performed on patients with abnormal serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) value for at least one year. HCV serology: all patients were tested for confirmatory test RIBA II, HCV-RNA, and identification of viral genotype. Patients were randomised to receive either IFN-R or IFN-L. Follow-up continued for at least two years after stopping treatment. RESULTS: no significant differences were observed between the two groups of treatment as far as the incidence of side effects is concerned. Tolerability was good: only 11 in IFN-R and 8 patients IFN-L group respectively had to stop therapy due to side effects. The two types of IFN showed a comparable efficacy: an end of therapy response was observed in 34% of IFN-R and 30% of IFN-L patients; a sustained response was seen in 16% of IFN-R and in 19% of IFN-L patients. CONCLUSIONS: in the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C there was no statistically significant difference in tolerability and efficacy between the two IFNs tested.

Three cases of severe acute hepatitis after parenteral administration of amiodarone: the active ingredient is not the only agent responsible for hepatotoxicity.

Amiodarone is one of the most effective antiarrhythmic drugs available and is widely prescribed despite several potentially life-threatening side-effects. Hepatotoxicity is the most frequent one during long-term oral therapy: occasionally acute hepatitis necessitates the suspension of treatment but monitoring of a transient increase in serum aminotransferases is usually sufficient; the clinical-morphological pictures of liver cirrhosis have also been reported. Fulminant hepatitis soon after a parenteral load of the drug is far less well described in the literature. Most published cases were reversible after the suspension of treatment. A negative challenge after oral amiodarone exposure suggested that polysorbate 80, a solvent added to the intravenous infusion and already implied in the pathogenesis of a similar syndrome observed in infants, is a more likely cause of this complication. The occurrence of acute hepatitis complicating parenteral amiodarone treatment does not preclude subsequent oral use of the drug: an evidence-based therapeutic behavior now definitively consolidated. Because of the rarity of this diagnosis, we report 3 cases of short-term hepatotoxicity secondary to amiodarone treatment for supraventricular tachyarrhythmias: in 2 male patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and in a female with liver disease. The diagnosis was presumptive and based on a thorough drug history, the temporal relationship, the time-course of liver dysfunction, the exclusion of other causes and on the rapid improvement observed after parenteral amiodarone withdrawal in 2 cases; in no case could we find any other explanation for the liver damage. Since amiodarone is sometimes still an irreplaceable antiarrhythmic drug, we raise the question of whether careful and continuous vigilance should be mandatory in patients receiving the drug or whether it is possible to introduce a pharmaceutical preparation not containing the vehicle that induces acute liver toxicity.

Impact of age on toxicity and efficacy of sorafenib-targeted therapy in cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasing worldwide and the proportion of older patients with HCC is expected to steadily rise in the next years. Sorafenib is the standard of care for patients with advanced HCC but there is a lack of detailed data on how older patients with cirrhosis tolerate this drug. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the impact of age on the effects of sorafenib-targeted therapy in patients with HCC and cirrhosis. We analyzed a consecutive cohort of HCC patients not eligible for surgery or locoregional treatment, with Child-Pugh score ≤ 7, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, treated with sorafenib. Clinical outcomes and treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were compared between younger (< 70 years) and older (≥ 70 years) patients. Overall, 150 patients, 90 in the younger (median age 60 years) and 60 in the older (median age 72 years) group, were evaluated. Treatment duration was 4 months in both groups. The median time to progression and overall survival were longer in older than in younger group (12 vs. 8 months and 16 vs. 12 months, respectively), although the differences did not reach a statistical significance. Grade 3-4 AEs were more frequently observed in younger than in older group (15.7 vs. 9.2 %, respectively; p = .0146). In field practice, sorafenib treatment in elderly patients with cirrhosis and HCC resulted at least as effective and safe as in younger patients. However, severe AEs occurred more frequently in younger patients.

Safety and effectiveness of sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is currently the only approved systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma. AIM: to evaluate safety and effectiveness of sorafenib in the field of practice. METHODS: We report a single-centre experience on 116 advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib between February 2008 and March 2011. Every 4 weeks, adverse events were graded using Common Toxicity Criteria version 3.0, and every 3 months tumour response was assessed according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours for hepatocellular carcinoma. RESULTS: Cirrhosis was present in 95.7% of patients (83.6% Child-Pugh A class), hepatitis C was the main etiological factor. Median therapy duration was 3 months and median daily dose was 642 mg. Median time-to-radiological progression in the per-protocol population was 12 months and median overall survival in the intention-to-treat population was 13 months. 91.4% of patients experienced mild adverse events (grade 1 or 2), the most frequent were gastrointestinal and dermatological. Jaundice and bleeding were the main causes of definitive drug discontinuation. 3-month overall disease control rate was 70.6%: stable disease in 37.2%, partial response in 30.8%, and complete response in 2.6% patients. The 3-month radiological response correlated with overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: In daily clinical practice, sorafenib confirmed its safety and efficacy in hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

Sustained virological response to antiviral therapy reduces mortality in HCV reinfection after liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: HCV infection recurs almost in all HCV-positive patients receiving liver transplantation and carries a poor prognosis. Aim of this study was to analyze efficacy and effect on survival of antiviral therapy in this clinical setting. METHODS: Pegylated-interferon alpha-2b and ribavirin were administered at a dose of 1 microg/kg of bwt weekly and 600-800 mg/day. Planned duration of treatment was 24 or 48 weeks according to HCV genotype. Patients who failed to respond at week 24 were considered as non-responders. RESULTS: 61 patients were enrolled. According to intention-to-treat analysis, 44 (72%) patients were considered as treatment failure (31 non-responders, 4 relapsers, 9 dropout). Sustained virological response was achieved in 17 cases (28%). Genotype 2, higher doses of antivirals and absence of histological cirrhosis were predictors of sustained virological response. In the follow up, patients with sustained virological response had a significantly lower mortality compared to patients with treatment failure (chi2=6.9; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Response rate to antiviral therapy in HCV reinfection after liver transplantation is higher if a full dose of antiviral drugs is administered and if treatment starts before histological cirrhosis has developed. Sustained virological response improves patient survival.

Hepatic splenosis misinterpreted as hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients referred for liver transplantation: report of two cases.

Liver transplantation is one of the main therapeutic options for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) occurring in cirrhotic patients; an accurate diagnosis and staging of this cancer is crucial to selecting the candidates for this treatment. Although the best diagnostic strategy is debated, the guidelines proposed by the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) are used by many centers. We report 2 cases of cirrhotic patients with hepatic splenosis, a rare condition that may be misinterpreted as HCC. In conclusion, the application of the EASL guidelines in the first case would have led to an incorrect staging of the cancer and in the second case would have led to a false diagnosis of HCC.