Institutes
Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3) (remove)
Keywords
- HBV (1)
- HCV (1)
- Predictors (1)
- Sustained virologic response (1)
- acoustic radiation force impulse (1)
- autoantibodies (1)
- chronic hepatitis C (1)
- direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment (1)
- liver cirrhosis (1)
- portal hypertension (1)
Institute
- Medizin (3)
Treatment predictors are important tools for the management of therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B and C virus (HBV, HCV) infection. In chronic hepatitis B, several pretreatment parameters have been identified for prediction of virologic response to interferon alfa-based antiviral therapies or treatment with polymerase inhibitors. In interferon alfa and pegylated interferon alfa-treated patients, low baseline HBV DNA concentrations, HBV genotype A (B), and high baseline ALT levels are significantly associated with treatment response. In patients treated with nucleos(t)ide analogues, low baseline HBV DNA but not viral genotype is positively associated with virologic response. During treatment the best predictor of response is HBV DNA kinetics. Early viral suppression is associated with favourable virologic response and reduced risk for subsequent resistance mutations. For the current standard treatment with pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C, infection with HCV genotypes 2 and 3, baseline viral load below 400,000–800,000 IU/ml, Asian and Caucasian ethnicity, younger age, low GGT levels, absence of advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis, and absence of steatosis in the liver have been identified as independent pretreatment predictors of a sustained virologic response. After initiation of treatment, initial viral decline with undetectable HCV-RNA at week 4 of therapy (RVR) is the best predictor of sustained virologic response independent of HCV genotype.
Long-term effects on cirrhosis and portal hypertension of direct antiviral agent (DAA)-based eradication of hepatitis C virus (HCV) are still under debate. We analysed dynamics of liver and spleen elastography to assess potential regression of cirrhosis and portal hypertension 3 years post-treatment. Fifty-four patients with HCV-associated cirrhosis and DAA-induced SVR were included. Liver and spleen stiffness were measured at baseline (BL), end of treatment (EOT), 24 weeks after EOT (FU24) and 1, 2 and 3 (FU144) years post-treatment by transient liver elastography (L-TE) and point shear wave elastography (pSWE) using acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) of the liver (L-ARFI) and spleen (S-ARFI). Biochemical, virological and clinical data were also obtained. Liver stiffness assessed by L-TE decreased between BL [median (range), 32.5(9.1–75) kPa] and EOT [21.3(6.7–73.5) kPa; p < .0001] and EOT and FU144 [16(4.1–75) kPa; p = .006]. L-ARFI values improved between EOT [2.5(1.2–4.1) m/s] and FU144 [1.7(0.9–4.1) m/s; p = .001], while spleen stiffness remained unchanged. Overall, L-TE improved in 38 of 54 (70.4%) patients at EOT and 29 of 38 (76.3%) declined further until FU144, whereas L-ARFI values decreased in 30/54 (55.6%) patients at EOT and continued to decrease in 28/30 (93.3%) patients at FU144. Low bilirubin and high albumin levels at BL were associated with improved L-ARFI values (p = .048) at EOT or regression of cirrhosis (<12.5 kPa) by L-TE at FU144 (p = .005), respectively. Liver stiffness, but not spleen stiffness, continued to decline in a considerable proportion of patients with advanced liver disease after HCV eradication.
Background: Clinical practice guidelines for patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) have been recently revised and implemented for well-established response criteria to standard first-line ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) therapy at 12 months after treatment initiation for the early identification of high-risk patients with inadequate treatment responses who may require treatment modification. However, there are only very limited data concerning the real-world clinical management of patients with PBC in Germany. Objective: The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to evaluate response rates to standard first-line UDCA therapy and subsequent Second-line treatment regimens in a large cohort of well-characterized patients with PBC from 10 independent hepatological referral centers in Germany prior to the introduction of obeticholic acid as a licensed second-line treatment option. Methods: Diagnostic confirmation of PBC, standard first-line UDCA treatment regimens and response rates at 12 months according to Paris-I, Paris-II, and Barcelona criteria, the follow-up cut-off alkaline phosphatase (ALP) ≤ 1.67 × upper limit of normal (ULN) and the normalization of bilirubin (bilirubin ≤ 1 × ULN) were retrospectively examined between June 1986 and March 2017. The management and hitherto applied second-line treatment regimens in patients with an inadequate response to UDCA and subsequent response rates at 12 months were also evaluated. Results: Overall, 480 PBC patients were included in this study. The median UDCA dosage was 13.2 mg UDCA/kg bodyweight (BW)/d. Adequate UDCA treatment response rates according to Paris-I, Paris-II, and Barcelona criteria were observed in 91, 71.3, and 61.3% of patients, respectively. In 83.8% of patients, ALP ≤ 1.67 × ULN were achieved. A total of 116 patients (24.2%) showed an inadequate response to UDCA according to at least one criterion. The diverse second-line treatment regimens applied led to significantly higher response rates according to Paris-II (35 vs. 60%, p = 0.005), Barcelona (13 vs. 34%, p = 0.0005), ALP ≤ 1.67 × ULN and bilirubin ≤ 1 × ULN (52.1 vs. 75%, p = 0.002). The addition of bezafibrates appeared to induce the strongest beneficial effect in this cohort (Paris II: 24 vs. 74%, p = 0.004; Barcelona: 50 vs. 84%, p = 0.046; ALP < 1.67 × ULN and bilirubin ≤ 1 × ULN: 33 vs. 86%, p = 0.001). Conclusion: Our large retrospective multicenter study confirms high response rates following UDCA first-line standard treatment in patients with PBC and highlights the need for close monitoring and early treatment modification in high-risk patients with an insufficient response to UDCA since early treatment modification significantly increases subsequent response rates of these patients.