Leflunomide for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in clinical practice: incidence and severity of hepatotoxicity.

OBJECTIVE: Leflunomide is a novel disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). Because of reports on possible hepatotoxicity and adaptations in the recommendations for monitoring liver function during leflunomide treatment, we conducted a study to evaluate the incidence and severity of hepatotoxicity. METHODS: We included consecutive rheumatoid arthritis patients starting treatment with leflunomide in the region of Friesland (The Netherlands) between January 2000 and January 2002. During follow-up patient characteristics, disease characteristics, and clinical and laboratory data on liver functions were registered. Severity of hepatotoxicity was categorised using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, as moderate (grade 2), severe (grade 3) or life threatening (grade 4). RESULTS: One hundred and one patients were followed for a median period of 10 months (range 0.5-12). Grade 2 or 3 elevations in any liver function blood test were recorded in a total of nine patients (8.9%). No grade 4 elevations were recorded. Four patients (4%) showed grade 2-3 aminotransferase elevations. Due to grade 2 hepatotoxicity one patient (1%) was withdrawn from leflunomide treatment, and one patient continued leflunomide at a reduced dose. In eight of nine patients with grade 2-3 liver function blood tests, these elevated liver function tests occurred within 6 months after starting leflunomide. None of the patients with grade 2 or 3 toxicity had a history of hepatic disease, eight patients concomitantly used potential hepatotoxic co-medication. Eight (8%) patients used leflunomide in combination with methotrexate, and one of these patients developed hepatotoxicity. No clinical signs of serious hepatotoxicity were recorded during follow-up. DISCUSSION: In 8.9% of the patients, grade 2 or 3 hepatotoxicity was recorded within the first year after the start of leflunomide therapy based on liver enzyme determinations. In the majority of the patients liver enzyme elevations occurred within the first 6 months of therapy and resolved during continued follow-up. None of the patients showed clinical signs of hepatotoxicity. CONCLUSION: Under continued monitoring of liver functions hepatotoxicity during leflunomide use does not seem to be a major problem in our population.

Effects of active and passive smoking on Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis in a cohort from a regional hospital.

OBJECTIVE: Smoking is detrimental for Crohn's disease (CD), but beneficial for ulcerative colitis (UC). Earlier, we studied the effects of active and passive smoking in CD and UC patients from a university hospital. This study was conducted to assess the same effects in patients from a regional hospital. METHODS: A questionnaire focusing on cigarette smoke exposure was sent to 382 patients. Returned questionnaires (84%: 128 CD and 192 UC patients) were incorporated into a retrospective chart review about disease behaviour and received therapy. RESULTS: At diagnosis there were 52% (95% confidence interval: 43-60%) smokers among CD patients, 40% in a control population and 25% (95% confidence interval: 18-31%) among UC patients. There were less former (19 vs. 31%, P = 0.013) and never smokers at diagnosis (30 vs. 44%, P = 0.009) in CD than in UC. No detrimental effects of active or passive smoking on the course of CD were observed. UC patients who continued smoking after diagnosis needed less often two or more hospitalizations than never smokers (5 vs. 25%, P = 0.036). Otherwise no clear beneficial effects of active smoking on UC were observed. Passively smoking UC patients experienced more often extraintestinal manifestations (25 vs. 7%, P = 0.029) than nonpassive smokers. CONCLUSION: Also in a regional hospital inflammatory bowel disease population smoking is a risk factor to develop CD and protects against developing UC. We found no detrimental effects of smoking on the disease course of CD and no clear beneficial effects on the course of UC.

Relatively high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis not responding to ursodeoxycholic acid.

BACKGROUND: The reported incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) among patients with primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) varies from 0.7-3.8%, whereas in cirrhotic patients the risk is considerably higher. Age, male sex, cirrhosis, and portal hypertension are reported risk factors. It has been suggested that ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) may protect against HCC. We aimed to define risk factors for the development of HCC at the time of PBC diagnosis and to identify, among patients treated with UDCA for a long term, a subgroup that could benefit from screening. METHODS: Prospective multicenter cohort study of patients with established PBC treated with 13-15 mg/kg/day UDCA. Age, sex, antimitochondrial antibodies, bilirubin, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate amino transferase, cirrhosis, portal hypertension, Mayo Risk Score, prognostic class (based on bilirubin and albumin levels), and response to UDCA (normalization of bilirubin and/or albumin levels) were analyzed as potential risk factors in Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Three hundred and seventy-five patients were included, median follow-up was 9.7 years. HCC occurred in nine patients, corresponding with an annual incidence of 0.2%. The factor significantly associated with the development of HCC was the response to UDCA (P<0.001). The risk for HCC was highest in the group of nonresponders to UDCA: the 10 years incidence of HCC was 9% and the 15 years incidence was 20%. The number needed to screen in this subgroup was 11. CONCLUSION: In UDCA treated PBC patients the risk of HCC is relatively low. The main risk factor for HCC in this study was the absence of biochemical response to UDCA after 1-year treatment.