Strain-specific responsiveness of hepatitis D virus to interferon-alpha treatment.

Background & Aims: Pegylated interferon alpha (pegIFNα) is commonly used for the treatment of people infected with HDV. However, its mode of action in HDV-infected cells remains elusive and only a minority of people respond to pegIFNα therapy. Herein, we aimed to assess the responsiveness of three different cloned HDV strains to pegIFNα. We used a previously cloned HDV genotype 1 strain (dubbed HDV-1a) that appeared insensitive to interferon-α in vitro, a new HDV strain (HDV-1p) we isolated from an individual achieving later sustained response to IFNα therapy, and one phylogenetically distant genotype 3 strain (HDV-3). Methods: PegIFNα was administered to human liver chimeric mice infected with HBV and the different HDV strains or to HBV/HDV infected human hepatocytes isolated from chimeric mice. Virological parameters and host responses were analysed by qPCR, sequencing, immunoblotting, RNA in situ hybridisation and immunofluorescence staining. Results: PegIFNα treatment efficiently reduced HDV RNA viraemia (∼2-log) and intrahepatic HDV markers both in mice infected with HBV/HDV-1p and HBV/HDV-3. In contrast, HDV parameters remained unaffected by pegIFNα treatment both in mice (up to 9 weeks) and in isolated cells infected with HBV/HDV-1a. Notably, HBV viraemia was efficiently lowered (∼2-log) and human interferon-stimulated genes similarly induced in all three HBV/HDV-infected mouse groups receiving pegIFNα. Genome sequencing revealed highly conserved ribozyme and L-hepatitis D antigen post-translational modification sites among all three isolates. Conclusions: Our comparative study indicates the ability of pegIFNα to lower HDV loads in stably infected human hepatocytes in vivo and the existence of complex virus-specific determinants of IFNα responsiveness. Impact and implications: Understanding factors counteracting HDV infections is paramount to develop curative therapies. We compared the responsiveness of three different cloned HDV strains to pegylated interferon alpha in chronically infected mice. The different responsiveness of these HDV isolates to treatment highlights a previously underestimated heterogeneity among HDV strains.

Management of Chronic Hepatitis B: Knowledge and Practices of Physicians in Pakistan.

BACKGROUND: In Pakistan, approximately 4.5 million people are afflicted with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). The compliance with hepatitis B virus (HBV) management guidelines is still unknown. This was the first study from Pakistan in which the knowledge and practices of treating physicians were compared with three standardized guidelines (Asia Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) 2012/European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) 2012/American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) 2009). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted during 2014-2015 at four tertiary care teaching hospitals of Karachi, Pakistan. The study participants were internists, gastroenterologist, senior residents who were involved in the management of CHB patients. All participants were offered to fill the study questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 179 physicians (103 residents, 76 consultants) participated. Mean age of participant was 35 ± 9.3 years. Approximately one-third of them followed AASLD (27.3%) and EASL (24.0%) guidelines. Entecavir, tenofovir or Peg IFN ∞ 2a were considered as first line therapy by 43%, 38.5% and 30.2% respectively. However, 17.9% preferred entecavir with tenofovir for rescue therapy, 25.7% and 23.5% preferred tenofovir or entecavir as both first line and rescue therapy respectively. Serum HBV DNA, alanine transaminase levels were used to monitor during oral antivirals therapy by 45.3%. hepatocellular carcinoma screening was considered for all HBV cases by 51.4% using ultrasound (55.3%) and alfa fetoprotein (52.5%) every 6 months.Overall 40.2% participants had poor knowledge about indication of liver biopsy, treatment initiation and antiviral prophylaxis. Significant association was found between grades of knowledge and gender, age group, designation and specialty (P < 0.05). Younger physicians, consultants (age 25-40 years) and those who were practicing gastroenterology/hepatology were more likely to have higher knowledge scores in compliance with the guidelines as compared to others. CONCLUSION: Our study highlighted the gaps in knowledge and practices in managing CHB patients according to guidelines. Efforts to improve knowledge, refresher courses and appropriate coordination between gastroenterologists and internal medicine physicians could enable management and follow-up of patients with CHB effectively.

INASL Guidelines on Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Patients receiving Chemotherapy, Biologicals, Immunosupressants, or Corticosteroids.

Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) reactivation in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids is emerging to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with current or prior exposure to HBV infection. These patients suffer a dual onslaught of illness: one from the primary disease for which they are receiving the culprit drug that led to HBV reactivation, and the other from HBV reactivation itself. The HBV reactivation not only leads to a compromised liver function, which may culminate into hepatic failure; it also adversely impacts the treatment outcome of the primary illness. Hence, identification of patients at risk of reactivation before starting these drugs, and starting treatment aimed at prevention of HBV reactivation is the best strategy of managing these patients. There are no Indian guidelines on management of HBV infection in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids for the treatment of rheumatologic conditions, malignancies, inflammatory bowel disease, dermatologic conditions, or solid-organ or bone marrow transplantation. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) had set up a taskforce on HBV in 2016, with a mandate to develop consensus guidelines for management of various aspects of HBV infection, relevant to India. In 2017 the taskforce had published the first INASL guidelines on management of HBV infection in India. In the present guidelines, which are in continuation with the previous guidelines, the issues on management of HBV infection in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids are addressed.

INASL Position Statements on Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection in India: The Andaman Statements.

Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) infection is one of the major causes of morbidity, mortality and healthcare expenditure in India. There are no Indian consensus guidelines on prevention, diagnosis and management of HBV infection. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) set up a taskforce on HBV in 2016, with a mandate to develop consensus guidelines for diagnosis and management of HBV infection, relevant to disease patterns and clinical practices in India. The taskforce first identified contentious issues on various aspects of HBV management, which were allotted to individual members of the taskforce who reviewed them in detail. A 2-day round table discussion was held on 11th and 12th February 2017 at Port Blair, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, to discuss, debate, and finalize the consensus statements. The members of the taskforce reviewed and discussed the existing literature threadbare at this meeting and formulated the 'INASL position statements' on each of the issues. The evidence and recommendations in these guidelines have been graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system with minor modifications. The strength of recommendations (strong: 1, weak: 2) thus reflects the quality (grade) of underlying evidence (A, B, C, D). We present here the INASL position statements on prevention, diagnosis and management of HBV in India.

Liver Transplantation: East versus West.

Liver transplantation (LT) has evolved rapidly since the first successful liver transplant performed in1967. Despite a humble beginning, this procedure gained widespread acceptance in the western world as a suitable option for patients with end stage liver disease (ESLD) by the beginning of the 1980s. At present, approximately 25,000 liver transplants are being performed worldwide every year with approximately 90% one year survival. The techniques of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) developed in East Asia in the 1990s to overcome the shortage of suitable grafts for children and scarcity of deceased donors. While deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) constitutes more than 90% of LT in the western world, in India and other Asian countries, most transplants are LDLT. Despite the initial disparity, outcomes following LDLT in eastern countries have been quite satisfactory when compared to the western programs. The etiologies of liver failure requiring LT vary in different parts of the world. The commonest etiology for acute liver failure (ALF) leading to LT is drugs in the west and acute viral hepatitis in Asia. The most common indication for LT due to ESLD in west is alcoholic cirrhosis and hepatitis C virus (HCV), while hepatitis B virus (HBV) predominates in the east. There is a variation in prognostic models for assessing candidature and prioritizing organ allocation across the world. Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) is followed in United States and some European centers. Other European countries rely on the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score. Some parts of Asia still follow chronological order of listing. The debate regarding the best model for organ allocation is far from over.