Refine
Year of publication
Language
- English (42)
Has Fulltext
- yes (42)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (42)
Keywords
Institute
- Medizin (42)
The case of a 64 year old female patient is presented who has treated herself for 9 months with various Indian Ayurvedic herbal products for her vitiligo and experienced a causally related severe hepatotoxicity (ALT, 601 U/L; AST, 663 U/L; Bilirubin, 5.0 mg/dL). After discontinuation, a rapid improvement was observed. Causality assessment with the updated CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) scale showed a probable causality (+8 points) for Bakuchi tablets containing extracts from Psoralea corylifolia leaves with psoralens as ingredients, as the primary candidate causing the hepatotoxic reaction. The degree of probability was lower with +6 points for other used herbs: Khadin tablets containing extracts from Acacia catechu leaves; Brahmi tablets containing Eclipta alba or Bacopa monnieri; and Usheer tea prepared from Vetivexia zizaniodis. The case is the first report of Indian Ayurvedic herbal products being potentially hepatotoxic in analogy to some other herbs.
This review critically analyzes the clinical data of patients with suspected kava hepatotoxicity and suggests recommendations for minimizing risk. Kava is a plant (Piper methysticum) of the pepper family Piperaceae, and its rhizome is used for traditional aqueous extracts in the South Pacific Islands and for commercial ethanolic and acetonic medicinal products as anxiolytic herbs in Western countries. A regulatory ban for ethanolic and acetonic kava extracts was issued in 2002 for Germany on the basis of reports connecting liver disease with the use of kava, but the regulatory causality assessment was a matter of international discussions. Based on one positive reexposure test with the kava drug, it was indeed confirmed that kava is potentially hepatotoxic. In subsequent studies using a structured, quantitative and hepatotoxicity specific causality assessment method in 14 patients with liver disease described worldwide, causality for kava ± co-medicated drugs and dietary supplements including herbal ones was highly probable (n = 1), probable (n = 4) or possible (n = 9) regarding aqueous extracts (n = 3), ethanolic extracts (n = 5), acetonic extracts (n = 4), and mixtures containing kava (n = 2). Risk factors included overdose, prolonged treatment, and comedication with synthetic drugs and dietary supplements comprizing herbal ones in most of the 14 patients. Hepatotoxicity occurred independently of the used solvent, suggesting poor kava raw material quality as additional causative factor. In conclusion, in a few individuals kava may be hepatotoxic due to overdose, prolonged treatment, comedication, and probably triggered by an unacceptable quality of the kava raw material; standardization is now required, minimizing thereby hepatotoxic risks.
Background. Spontaneous reports of herb induced liver injury (HILI) represent a major regulatory issue, and it is in the interest of pharmacovigilance to identify and quantify previously unrecognized adverse reactions and to confirm or refute false positive signals of safety concerns. In a total of 13 spontaneous cases, liver disease has initially been attributed to the use of Pelargonium sidoides (PS), a plant from the South African region. Water/ethanol extracts derived from its roots are available as registered herbal drugs for the treatment of upper respiratory tract infections including acute bronchitis. Objectives. The present study examines whether and to what extent treatment by PS was associated with the risk of liver injury in these spontaneous cases. Study design: Overall, 13 spontaneous cases with primarily suspected PS hepatotoxicity were included in the study. Their data were submitted to a thorough clinical evaluation that included the use of the original and updated scale of CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) to assess causality levels. These scales are liver specific, validated for liver toxicity, structured and quantitative.
Results. None of the 13 spontaneous cases of liver disease generated a positive signal of safety concern, since causality for PS could not be established on the basis of the applied CIOMS scales in any of the assessed patients. Confounding variables included comedication with synthetic drugs, major comorbidities, low data quality, lack of appropriate consideration of differential diagnoses, and multiple alternative diagnoses. Among these were liver injury due to comedication, acute pancreatitis and cholangitis, acute cholecystitis, hepatic involvement following lung contusion, hepatitis in the course of virus and bacterial infections, ANA positive autoimmune hepatitis, and other preexisting liver diseases. In the course of the case assessments and under pharmacovigilance aspects, data and interpretation deficits became evident. Possible improvements include appropriate data quality of cases in spontaneous reports, case assessment by skilled specialists, use of a validated liver specific causality assessment method, and inclusion only of confirmed cases into the final regulatory case database.
Conclusions. This study shows lack of hepatotoxicity by PS in all 13 spontaneous cases as opposed to initial judgment that suggested a toxic potential of PS. Major shortcomings emerged in the pharmacovigilance section that require urgent improvements.
Herbal hepatotoxicity is a rare and poorly described disease because reported cases are mostly scattered and lack an appropriate causality assessment. We now describe in detail the clinical picture of herbal hepatotoxicity by extracts of Greater Celandine (GC), syn. Chelidonium majus L. from the Papaveraceae family, which contain more than 20 ingredients including various biologically active isoquinoline alkaloids. For this purpose, we analyzed and reviewed published cases of 16 patients from various European countries. In all patients, herbal hepatotoxicity was of probable and highly probable causality for GC, using the original and updated scale of CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences). GC associated hepatotoxicity usually has an acute clinical course exhibiting a hepatocellular pattern of injury and is correlated to an idiosyncratic reaction with its metabolic subtype. Jaundice combined with high values of serum aminotransferases was present in virtually all cases with favourable outcome despite severe clinical course. In conclusion, GC hepatotoxicity is a typical herbal hepatotoxicity with a sound causality track for GC, but there is uncertainty regarding the respective causative compound(s). The present detailed review of GC hepatotoxicity may serve as an example for clinical causality assessments of future cases of liver injury due to other herbs.
Drugs may cause liver injury in a few susceptible individuals, but the molecular events that lead to this idiosyncratic, largely dose-independent and non-predictable drug-induced liver injury (DILI) are mostly unknown, since animal models to explore the pathogenetic mechanisms of human idiosyncratic DILI are not yet reliable.
Background: A large number of idiosyncratic drug induced liver injury (iDILI) and herb induced liver injury(HILI) cases of variable quality has been published but some are a matter of concern if the cases were not evaluated for causality using a robust causality assessment method (CAM) such as RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) as diagnostiinjuryc algorithm. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the worldwide use of RUCAM in iDILI and HILI cases. Methods: The PubMed database (1993–30 June 2020) was searched for articles by using the following key terms: Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method; RUCAM; Idiosyncratic drug induced liver injury; iDILI; Herb induced liver injury; HILI. Results: Considering reports published worldwide since 1993, our analysis showed the use of RUCAM for causality assessment in 95,885 cases of liver injury including 81,856 cases of idiosyncratic DILI and 14,029 cases of HILI. Among the top countries providing RUCAM based DILI cases were, in decreasing order, China, the US, Germany, Korea, and Italy, with China, Korea, Germany, India, and the US as the top countries for HILI. Conclusion: Since 1993 RUCAM is certainly the most widely used method to assess causality in IDILI and HILI. This should encourage practitioner, experts, and regulatory agencies to use it in order to reinforce their diagnosis and to take sound decisions.
Among the causality assessment methods used for the diagnosis of drug-induced liver injury (DILI), Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) remains the most widely used not only for individual cases but also for prospective and retrospective studies worldwide. This first place is justified by the characteristics of the method such as precise definition and classification of the liver injury, which determines the right scale in the scoring system, precise definition of the seven criteria, and the validation approach based on cases with positive rechallenge. RUCAM is used not only for any types of drugs but also for herbal medicines causing herb-induced liver injury, (HILI) and dietary supplements. In 2016, the updated RUCAM provided further specifications of criteria and instructions to improve interobserver variability. Although this method was criticized for criteria such as the age and alcohol consumption, recent consensus meeting of experts has recognized their value and recommended their incorporation into any method. While early studies searching for DILI in large databases especially in electronic medical records were based on codes of diseases or natural language without causality assessment, the recommendation is now to include RUCAM in the search for DILI/HILI. There are still studies on DILI detection or the identification of biomarkers that take into consideration the cases assessed as “possible,” although it is well known that these cases reduce the strength of the association between the cases and the offending compound or the new biomarker to be validated. Attempts to build electronic RUCAM or automatized application of this method were successful despite some weaknesses to be corrected. In the future, more reflections are needed on an expert system to standardize the exclusion of alternative causes according to the clinical context. Education and training on RUCAM should be encouraged to improve the results of the studies and the day-to-day work in pharmacovigilance departments in companies or in regulatory agencies. It is also expected to improve RUCAM with biomarkers or other criteria provided that the validation process replaces expert opinion by robust standards such as those used for the original method.
Is obesity rather than the dietary supplement used for weight reduction the cause of liver injury?
(2018)
Acute liver injury has been attributed to dietary supplements (DS) used for weight loss, but their causal role was much questioned, and obesity as an alternative cause of the liver injury remained unclear. A comprehensive search of the Medline database was conducted with terms that included "DS," "liver injury," "obesity," "obesity‐related liver diseases," and "nonalcoholic steatohepatitis." For each term, we focused on the first 50 publications. We undertook a manual search to identify additional reports. Underlying liver diseases and other health issues are common in patients taking DS for weight reduction. These include obesity or morbid obesity, as well as complex metabolic disorders complicated by excess morbidity and mortality due to associated liver diseases. Among these are nonalcoholic fatty liver disease with potential progression to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and cirrhosis, often classified as cryptogenic with a rare risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. With the exception of hepatocellular carcinoma, these obesity‐related liver diseases were observed to varying degrees in patients, and some even required a liver transplant. This raises the question whether the liver injury that occurred in these patients is due to DS consumed for weight loss or to the underlying obesity‐related liver diseases. This analysis showed that, in many instances, the causal role of obesity has been neglected. Obesity‐associated liver diseases should be considered as differential diagnosis of liver injury in obese patients using DS.
Causality assessment in liver injury induced by drugs and herbs remains a debated issue, requiring innovation and thorough understanding based on detailed information. Artificial intelligence (AI) principles recommend the use of algorithms for solving complex processes and are included in the diagnostic algorithm of Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) to help assess causality in suspected cases of idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and herb-induced liver injury (HILI). From 1993 until the middle of 2020, a total of 95,865 DILI and HILI cases were assessed by RUCAM, outperforming by case numbers any other causality assessment method. The success of RUCAM can be traced back to its quantitative features with specific data elements that are individually scored leading to a final causality grading. RUCAM is objective, user friendly, transparent, and liver injury specific, with an updated version that should be used in future DILI and HILI cases. Support of RUCAM was also provided by scientists from China, not affiliated to any network, in the results of a scientometric evaluation of the global knowledge base of DILI. They highlighted the original RUCAM of 1993 and their authors as a publication quoted the greatest number of times and ranked first in the category of the top 10 references related to DILI. In conclusion, for stakeholders involved in DILI and HILI, RUCAM seems to be an effective diagnostic algorithm in line with AI principles.
Herb induced liver injury (HILI) and drug induced liver injury (DILI) share the common characteristic of chemical compounds as their causative agents, which were either produced by the plant or synthetic processes. Both, natural and synthetic chemicals are foreign products to the body and need metabolic degradation to be eliminated. During this process, hepatotoxic metabolites may be generated causing liver injury in susceptible patients. There is uncertainty, whether risk factors such as high lipophilicity or high daily and cumulative doses play a pathogenetic role for HILI, as these are under discussion for DILI. It is also often unclear, whether a HILI case has an idiosyncratic or an intrinsic background. Treatment with herbs of Western medicine or traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) rarely causes elevated liver tests (LT). However, HILI can develop to acute liver failure requiring liver transplantation in single cases. HILI is a diagnosis of exclusion, because clinical features of HILI are not specific as they are also found in many other liver diseases unrelated to herbal use. In strikingly increased liver tests signifying severe liver injury, herbal use has to be stopped. To establish HILI as the cause of liver damage, RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) is a useful tool. Diagnostic problems may emerge when alternative causes were not carefully excluded and the correct therapy is withheld. Future strategies should focus on RUCAM based causality assessment in suspected HILI cases and more regulatory efforts to provide all herbal medicines and herbal dietary supplements used as medicine with strict regulatory surveillance, considering them as herbal drugs and ascertaining an appropriate risk benefit balance.
Hepatology highlights
(2016)
Pawar SV, et al. Most overweight and obese Indian children have nonalcoholic fatty liver disease
De Keyzer B, et al. Percutaneous shunt reduction for the management of TIPS-induced acute liver decompensation. A follow-up study
Baptista-González H, et al. Frequency of hepatitis C virus infection in a single institution in Mexico with a focus on birth-cohort population
Background and aim. In the fall of 2013, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a preliminary report on a cluster of liver disease cases that emerged in Hawaii in the summer 2013. This report claimed a temporal association as sufficient evidence that OxyELITE Pro (OEP), a dietary supplement (DS) mainly for weight loss, was the cause of this mysterious cluster. However, the presented data were inconsistent and required a thorough reanalysis.
Material and methods. To further investigate the cause(s) of this cluster, we critically evaluated redacted raw clinical data of the cluster patients, as the CDC report received tremendous publicity in local and nationwide newspapers and television. This attention put regulators and physicians from the medical center in Honolulu that reported the cluster, under enormous pressure to succeed, risking biased evaluations and hasty conclusions.
Results. We noted pervasive bias in the documentation, conclusions, and public statements, also poor quality of case management. Among the cases we reviewed, many causes unrelated to any DS were evident, including decompensated liver cirrhosis, acute liver failure by acetaminophen overdose, acute cholecystitis with gallstones, resolving acute hepatitis B, acute HSV and VZV hepatitis, hepatitis E suspected after consumption of wild hog meat, and hepatotoxicity by acetaminophen or ibuprofen. Causality assessments based on the updated CIOMS scale confirmed the lack of evidence for any DS including OEP as culprit for the cluster.
Conclusions. Thus, the Hawaii liver disease cluster is now best explained by various liver diseases rather than any DS, including OEP.
Hepatology highlights
(2015)
Hepatology highlights
(2013)
For the pathologist, the diagnosis of drug induced liver injury (DILI) is challenging, because histopathological features mimic all primary hepatic and biliary diseases, lacking changes that are specific for DILI. Therefore, in any patient of suspected DILI who underwent liver biopsy, the pathologist will assure the clinician that the observed hepatic changes are compatible with DILI, but this information is less helpful due to lack of specificity. Rather, the pathologist should assess liver biopsies blindly, without knowledge of prior treatment by drugs. This will result in a detailed description of the histological findings, associated with suggestions for potential causes of these hepatic changes. Then, it is up to the physician to reassess carefully the differential diagnoses, if not done before. At present, liver histology is of little impact establishing the diagnosis of DILI with the required degree of certainty, and this shortcoming also applies to herb induced liver injury (HILI). To reach at the correct diagnoses of DILI and HILI, clinical and structured causality assessments are therefore better approaches than liver histology results obtained through liver biopsy, an invasive procedure with a low complication rate.
The diagnosis of drug induced liver injury (DILI) is based primarily on the exclusion of alternative causes. To assess the frequency of alternative causes in initially suspected DILI cases, we searched the Medline database with the following terms: drug hepatotoxicity, drug induced liver injury, and hepatotoxic drugs. For each term, we used the first 100 publications. We reviewed references, selected those reports relevant to our study, and retrieved finally 15 publications related to DILI and alternative causes. A total of 2,906 cases of initially assumed DILI were analyzed in these 15 publications, with diagnoses missed in 14% of the cases due to overt alternative causes. In another 11%, the diagnosis of DILI could not be established because of confounding variables. Alternative diagnoses included hepatitis B, C, and E, CMV, EBV, ischemic hepatitis, autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, hemochromatosis, Wilson’s disease, Gilbert’s syndrome, fatty liver, non alcoholic steatohepatitis, alcoholic liver diseases, cardiac and thyroid causes, rhabdomyolysis, polymyositis, postictal state, tumors, lymphomas, chlamydial and HIV infections. Causality assessment methods applied in these 15 publications were the CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) scale alone (n = 5) or combined with the Maria and Victorino (MV) scale (n = 1), the DILIN (Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network) method (n = 4), or the Naranjo scale (n = 1); the qualitative CIOMS method alone (n = 3) or combined with the MV scale (n = 1). In conclusion, alternative diagnoses are common in primarily suspected DILI cases and should be excluded early in future cases, requiring a thorough clinical and causality assessment.
Herbal hepatotoxicity is a rare but highly disputed disease because numerous confounding variables may complicate accurate causality assessment. Case evaluation is even more difficult when the WHO global introspection method (WHO method) is applied as diagnostic algorithm. This method lacks liver specificity, hepatotoxicity validation, and quantitative items, basic qualifications required for a sound evaluation of hepatotoxicity cases. Consequently, there are no data available for reliability, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value. Its scope is also limited by the fact that it cannot discriminate between a positive and a negative causality attribution, thereby stimulating case overdiagnosing and overreporting. The WHO method ignores uncertainties regarding daily dose, temporal association, start, duration, and end of herbal use, time to onset of the adverse reaction, and course of liver values after herb discontinuation. Insufficiently considered or ignored are comedications, preexisting liver diseases, alternative explanations upon clinical assessment, and exclusion of infections by hepatitis A-C, cytomegalovirus (CMV), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), herpes simplex virus (HSV), and varicella zoster virus (VZV). We clearly prefer as alternative the scale of CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) which is structured, quantitative, liver specific, and validated for hepatotoxicity. In conclusion, causality of herbal hepatotoxicity is best assessed by the liver specific CIOMS scale validated for hepatotoxicity rather than the obsolete WHO method that is liver unspecific and not validated for hepatotoxicity. CIOMS based assessments will ensure the correct diagnosis and exclude alternative diagnosis that may require other specific therapies.
Hepatic cells are sensitive to internal and external signals. Ethanol is one of the oldest and most widely used drugs in the world. The focus on the mechanistic engine of the alcohol-induced injury has been in the liver, which is responsible for the pathways of alcohol metabolism. Ethanol undergoes a phase I type of reaction, mainly catalyzed by the cytoplasmic enzyme, alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH), and by the microsomal ethanol-oxidizing system (MEOS). Reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated by cytochrome (CYP) 2E1 activity and MEOS contribute to ethanol-induced toxicity. We aimed to: (1) Describe the cellular, pathophysiological and clinical effects of alcohol misuse on the liver; (2) Select the biomarkers and analytical methods utilized by the clinical laboratory to assess alcohol exposure; (3) Provide therapeutic ideas to prevent/reduce alcohol-induced liver injury; (4) Provide up-to-date knowledge regarding the Corona virus and its affect on the liver; (5) Link rare diseases with alcohol consumption. The current review contributes to risk identification of patients with alcoholic, as well as non-alcoholic, liver disease and metabolic syndrome. Additional prevalence of ethnic, genetic, and viral vulnerabilities are presented.
Patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) commonly show abnormalities of liver tests (LTs) of undetermined cause. Considering drugs as tentative culprits, the current systematic review searched for published COVID-19 cases with suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and established diagnosis using the diagnostic algorithm of RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method). Data worldwide on DILI cases assessed by RUCAM in COVID-19 patients were sparse. A total of 6/200 reports with initially suspected 996 DILI cases in COVID-19 patients and using all RUCAM-based DILI cases allowed for a clear description of clinical features of RUCAM-based DILI cases among COVID-19 patients: (1) The updated RUCAM published in 2016 was equally often used as the original RUCAM of 1993, with both identifying DILI and other liver diseases as confounders; (2) RUCAM also worked well in patients treated with up to 18 drugs and provided for most DILI cases a probable or highly probable causality level for drugs; (3) DILI was preferentially caused by antiviral drugs given empirically due to their known therapeutic efficacy in other virus infections; (4) hepatocellular injury was more often reported than cholestatic or mixed injury; (5) maximum LT values were found for alanine aminotransferase (ALT) 1.541 U/L and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) 1.076 U/L; (6) the ALT/AST ratio was variable and ranged from 0.4 to 1.4; (7) the mean or median age of the COVID-19 patients with DILI ranged from 54.3 to 56 years; (8) the ratio of males to females was 1.8–3.4:1; (9) outcome was favorable for most patients, likely due to careful selection of the drugs and quick cessation of drug treatment with emerging DILI, but it was fatal in 19 patients; (10) countries reporting RUCAM-based DILI cases in COVID-19 patients included China, India, Japan, Montenegro, and Spain; (11) robust estimation of the percentage contribution of RUCAM-based DILI for the increased LTs in COVID-19 patients is outside of the current scope. In conclusion, RUCAM-based DILI with its clinical characteristics in COVID-19 patients and its classification as a confounding variable is now well defined, requiring a new correct description of COVID-19 features by removing DILI characteristics as confounders.