User login
Three factors predict 6-month mortality in patients with DILI
Medical comorbidity burden is significantly associated with 6-month and overall mortality in individuals with suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI). In addition,
Those are key findings from a study which set out to investigate the association between comorbidity burden and outcomes of patients with DILI and to develop a model to calculate risk of death within 6 months.
“Drug-induced liver injury is an important cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality that is likely under-recognized,” investigators led by Marwan S. Ghabril, MD, of the division of gastroenterology and hepatology at Indiana University, Indianapolis, wrote in a study published in Gastroenterology. “Its diagnosis depends on high index of suspicion, compatible temporal relationship, and thorough exclusion of competing etiologies. DILI by an implicated drug commonly occurs in patients with one or several comorbid conditions such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, renal disease, and malignancy. However, the impact of comorbidity burden on mortality in patients with suspected DILI has not been previously investigated.”
For the current analysis and model development, the researchers drew from 306 patients enrolled in the multicenter Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network Prospective Study at Indiana University between 2003 and 2017 (discovery cohort; Drug Saf. 2009;32:55-68). To validate their model, they used data from 247 patients who were enrolled in the same study at the University of North Carolina (validation cohort). The primary outcome of interest was mortality within 6 months of onset of liver injury.
The mean ages of the discovery and validation cohorts were 49 years and 51 years, respectively. Dr. Ghabril and colleagues found that 6-month mortality was 8.5% in the discovery cohort and 4.5% in the validation cohort. “The most common class of implicated agent was antimicrobials with no significant differences between groups,” they wrote. “However, herbal and dietary supplements were predominantly implicated in patients with none to mild comorbidity, while cardiovascular agents were predominantly implicated in patients with significant comorbidity.”
Among patients in the discovery cohort, the presence of significant comorbidities, defined as a Charlson Comorbidity Index score greater than 2, was independently associated with 6-month mortality (odds ratio, 5.22), as was model for end-stage liver disease score (OR, 1.11) and serum level of albumin at presentation (OR, 0.39). When the researchers created a morbidity risk model based on those three clinical variables, it performed well, identifying patients who died within 6 months with a C statistic value of 0.89 in the discovery cohort and 0.91 in the validation cohort. This spurred the development of a web-based risk calculator, which clinicians can access at http://gihep.com/calculators/hepatology/dili-cam/.
“Since DILI is not a unique cause of liver injury, it is conceivable that models incorporating comorbidity burden and severity of liver injury could prove useful in improving the prediction of mortality in a variety of liver injuries and diseases, and as such warrants further studies,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by grants from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Ghabril reported having no financial disclosures, but two coauthors reported having numerous financial ties to industry.
SOURCE: Ghabril M et al. Gastroenterology. 2019 Jul 11. doi: 10/1053/j.gastro.2019.07.006.
Medical comorbidity burden is significantly associated with 6-month and overall mortality in individuals with suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI). In addition,
Those are key findings from a study which set out to investigate the association between comorbidity burden and outcomes of patients with DILI and to develop a model to calculate risk of death within 6 months.
“Drug-induced liver injury is an important cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality that is likely under-recognized,” investigators led by Marwan S. Ghabril, MD, of the division of gastroenterology and hepatology at Indiana University, Indianapolis, wrote in a study published in Gastroenterology. “Its diagnosis depends on high index of suspicion, compatible temporal relationship, and thorough exclusion of competing etiologies. DILI by an implicated drug commonly occurs in patients with one or several comorbid conditions such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, renal disease, and malignancy. However, the impact of comorbidity burden on mortality in patients with suspected DILI has not been previously investigated.”
For the current analysis and model development, the researchers drew from 306 patients enrolled in the multicenter Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network Prospective Study at Indiana University between 2003 and 2017 (discovery cohort; Drug Saf. 2009;32:55-68). To validate their model, they used data from 247 patients who were enrolled in the same study at the University of North Carolina (validation cohort). The primary outcome of interest was mortality within 6 months of onset of liver injury.
The mean ages of the discovery and validation cohorts were 49 years and 51 years, respectively. Dr. Ghabril and colleagues found that 6-month mortality was 8.5% in the discovery cohort and 4.5% in the validation cohort. “The most common class of implicated agent was antimicrobials with no significant differences between groups,” they wrote. “However, herbal and dietary supplements were predominantly implicated in patients with none to mild comorbidity, while cardiovascular agents were predominantly implicated in patients with significant comorbidity.”
Among patients in the discovery cohort, the presence of significant comorbidities, defined as a Charlson Comorbidity Index score greater than 2, was independently associated with 6-month mortality (odds ratio, 5.22), as was model for end-stage liver disease score (OR, 1.11) and serum level of albumin at presentation (OR, 0.39). When the researchers created a morbidity risk model based on those three clinical variables, it performed well, identifying patients who died within 6 months with a C statistic value of 0.89 in the discovery cohort and 0.91 in the validation cohort. This spurred the development of a web-based risk calculator, which clinicians can access at http://gihep.com/calculators/hepatology/dili-cam/.
“Since DILI is not a unique cause of liver injury, it is conceivable that models incorporating comorbidity burden and severity of liver injury could prove useful in improving the prediction of mortality in a variety of liver injuries and diseases, and as such warrants further studies,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by grants from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Ghabril reported having no financial disclosures, but two coauthors reported having numerous financial ties to industry.
SOURCE: Ghabril M et al. Gastroenterology. 2019 Jul 11. doi: 10/1053/j.gastro.2019.07.006.
Medical comorbidity burden is significantly associated with 6-month and overall mortality in individuals with suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI). In addition,
Those are key findings from a study which set out to investigate the association between comorbidity burden and outcomes of patients with DILI and to develop a model to calculate risk of death within 6 months.
“Drug-induced liver injury is an important cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality that is likely under-recognized,” investigators led by Marwan S. Ghabril, MD, of the division of gastroenterology and hepatology at Indiana University, Indianapolis, wrote in a study published in Gastroenterology. “Its diagnosis depends on high index of suspicion, compatible temporal relationship, and thorough exclusion of competing etiologies. DILI by an implicated drug commonly occurs in patients with one or several comorbid conditions such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, renal disease, and malignancy. However, the impact of comorbidity burden on mortality in patients with suspected DILI has not been previously investigated.”
For the current analysis and model development, the researchers drew from 306 patients enrolled in the multicenter Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network Prospective Study at Indiana University between 2003 and 2017 (discovery cohort; Drug Saf. 2009;32:55-68). To validate their model, they used data from 247 patients who were enrolled in the same study at the University of North Carolina (validation cohort). The primary outcome of interest was mortality within 6 months of onset of liver injury.
The mean ages of the discovery and validation cohorts were 49 years and 51 years, respectively. Dr. Ghabril and colleagues found that 6-month mortality was 8.5% in the discovery cohort and 4.5% in the validation cohort. “The most common class of implicated agent was antimicrobials with no significant differences between groups,” they wrote. “However, herbal and dietary supplements were predominantly implicated in patients with none to mild comorbidity, while cardiovascular agents were predominantly implicated in patients with significant comorbidity.”
Among patients in the discovery cohort, the presence of significant comorbidities, defined as a Charlson Comorbidity Index score greater than 2, was independently associated with 6-month mortality (odds ratio, 5.22), as was model for end-stage liver disease score (OR, 1.11) and serum level of albumin at presentation (OR, 0.39). When the researchers created a morbidity risk model based on those three clinical variables, it performed well, identifying patients who died within 6 months with a C statistic value of 0.89 in the discovery cohort and 0.91 in the validation cohort. This spurred the development of a web-based risk calculator, which clinicians can access at http://gihep.com/calculators/hepatology/dili-cam/.
“Since DILI is not a unique cause of liver injury, it is conceivable that models incorporating comorbidity burden and severity of liver injury could prove useful in improving the prediction of mortality in a variety of liver injuries and diseases, and as such warrants further studies,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by grants from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Ghabril reported having no financial disclosures, but two coauthors reported having numerous financial ties to industry.
SOURCE: Ghabril M et al. Gastroenterology. 2019 Jul 11. doi: 10/1053/j.gastro.2019.07.006.
FROM GASTROENTEROLOGY
Supercooling extends donor liver viability by 27 hours
Standard cooling to 4°C provides just 12 hours of organ preservation, but laboratory testing showed that supercooling to –4°C added 27 hours of viability, reported lead author Reinier J. de Vries, MD, of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and colleagues.
“The absence of technology to preserve organs for more than a few hours is one of the fundamental causes of the donor organ–shortage crisis,” the investigators wrote in Nature Biotechnology.
Supercooling organs to high-subzero temperatures has been shown to prolong organ life while avoiding ice-mediated injury, but techniques that are successful for rat livers have been difficult to translate to human livers because of their larger size, which increases the risk of ice formation, the investigators explained.
Three strategies were employed to overcome this problem: minimization of air-liquid interfaces, development of a new supercooling-preservation solution, and hypothermic machine perfusion to more evenly distribute preservation solution throughout the liver tissue. For recovery of organs after supercooling, the investigators used subnormothermic machine perfusion, which has been used effectively in rat transplants.
In order to measure the impact of this process on organ viability, the investigators first measured adenylate energy content, both before supercooling and after recovery.
“Adenylate energy content, and, particularly, the organ’s ability to recover it during (re)perfusion, is considered the most representative metric for liver viability,” they wrote.
The difference between pre- and postsupercooling energy charge was less than 20%; in comparison, failed liver transplants in large animals and clinical trials have typically involved an energy-charge loss of 40% or more.
To further test organ viability, the investigators measured pre- and postsupercooling levels of bile production, oxygen uptake, and vascular resistance. All of these parameters have been shown to predict transplant success in rats, and bile production has additional precedent from human studies.
On average, bile production, portal resistance, and arterial resistance were not significantly affected by supercooling. Although portal vein resistance was 20% higher after supercooling, this compared favorably with increases of 100%-150% that have been measured in nonviable livers. Similarly, oxygen uptake increased by a mean of 17%, but this was three times lower than changes that have been observed in livers with impaired viability, at 51%.
Additional measures of hepatocellular injury, including AST and ALT, were also supportive of viability after supercooling. Histopathology confirmed these findings by showing preserved tissue architecture.
“In summary, we find that the human livers tested displayed no substantial difference in viability before and after extended subzero supercooling preservation,” the investigators wrote.
To simulate transplantation, the investigators reperfused the organs with blood at a normal temperature, including platelets, complement, and white blood cells, which are drivers of ischemia reperfusion injury. During this process, energy charge remained stable, which indicates preserved mitochondrial function. While energy charge held steady, lactate metabolism increased with bile and urea production, suggesting increased liver function. Bile pH and HCO3– levels fell within range for viability. Although bile glucose exceeded proposed criteria, the investigators pointed out that levels still fell within parameters for research-quality livers. Lactate levels also rose within the first hour of reperfusion, but the investigators suggested that this finding should be interpreted with appropriate context.
“It should be considered that the livers in this study were initially rejected for transplantation,” they wrote, “and the confidence intervals of the lactate concentration at the end of reperfusion largely overlap with time-matched values reported by others during [normothermic machine perfusion] of rejected human livers.”
Hepatocellular injury and histology also were evaluated during and after simulated transplantation, respectively, with favorable results. Although sites of preexisting hepatic injury were aggravated by the process, and rates of apoptosis increased, the investigators considered these changes were clinically insignificant.
Looking to the future, the investigators suggested that further refinement of the process could facilitate even-lower storage temperatures while better preserving liver viability.
“The use of human livers makes this study clinically relevant and promotes the translation of subzero organ preservation to the clinic,” the investigators concluded. “However, long-term survival experiments of transplanted supercooled livers in swine or an alternative large animal model will be needed before clinical translation.”
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defense. Dr. de Vries and four other coauthors have provisional patent applications related to the study, and one coauthor disclosed a financial relationship with Organ Solutions.
SOURCE: de Vries RJ et al. Nature Biotechnol. 2019 Sep 9. doi: 10.1038/s41587-019-0223-y.
Standard cooling to 4°C provides just 12 hours of organ preservation, but laboratory testing showed that supercooling to –4°C added 27 hours of viability, reported lead author Reinier J. de Vries, MD, of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and colleagues.
“The absence of technology to preserve organs for more than a few hours is one of the fundamental causes of the donor organ–shortage crisis,” the investigators wrote in Nature Biotechnology.
Supercooling organs to high-subzero temperatures has been shown to prolong organ life while avoiding ice-mediated injury, but techniques that are successful for rat livers have been difficult to translate to human livers because of their larger size, which increases the risk of ice formation, the investigators explained.
Three strategies were employed to overcome this problem: minimization of air-liquid interfaces, development of a new supercooling-preservation solution, and hypothermic machine perfusion to more evenly distribute preservation solution throughout the liver tissue. For recovery of organs after supercooling, the investigators used subnormothermic machine perfusion, which has been used effectively in rat transplants.
In order to measure the impact of this process on organ viability, the investigators first measured adenylate energy content, both before supercooling and after recovery.
“Adenylate energy content, and, particularly, the organ’s ability to recover it during (re)perfusion, is considered the most representative metric for liver viability,” they wrote.
The difference between pre- and postsupercooling energy charge was less than 20%; in comparison, failed liver transplants in large animals and clinical trials have typically involved an energy-charge loss of 40% or more.
To further test organ viability, the investigators measured pre- and postsupercooling levels of bile production, oxygen uptake, and vascular resistance. All of these parameters have been shown to predict transplant success in rats, and bile production has additional precedent from human studies.
On average, bile production, portal resistance, and arterial resistance were not significantly affected by supercooling. Although portal vein resistance was 20% higher after supercooling, this compared favorably with increases of 100%-150% that have been measured in nonviable livers. Similarly, oxygen uptake increased by a mean of 17%, but this was three times lower than changes that have been observed in livers with impaired viability, at 51%.
Additional measures of hepatocellular injury, including AST and ALT, were also supportive of viability after supercooling. Histopathology confirmed these findings by showing preserved tissue architecture.
“In summary, we find that the human livers tested displayed no substantial difference in viability before and after extended subzero supercooling preservation,” the investigators wrote.
To simulate transplantation, the investigators reperfused the organs with blood at a normal temperature, including platelets, complement, and white blood cells, which are drivers of ischemia reperfusion injury. During this process, energy charge remained stable, which indicates preserved mitochondrial function. While energy charge held steady, lactate metabolism increased with bile and urea production, suggesting increased liver function. Bile pH and HCO3– levels fell within range for viability. Although bile glucose exceeded proposed criteria, the investigators pointed out that levels still fell within parameters for research-quality livers. Lactate levels also rose within the first hour of reperfusion, but the investigators suggested that this finding should be interpreted with appropriate context.
“It should be considered that the livers in this study were initially rejected for transplantation,” they wrote, “and the confidence intervals of the lactate concentration at the end of reperfusion largely overlap with time-matched values reported by others during [normothermic machine perfusion] of rejected human livers.”
Hepatocellular injury and histology also were evaluated during and after simulated transplantation, respectively, with favorable results. Although sites of preexisting hepatic injury were aggravated by the process, and rates of apoptosis increased, the investigators considered these changes were clinically insignificant.
Looking to the future, the investigators suggested that further refinement of the process could facilitate even-lower storage temperatures while better preserving liver viability.
“The use of human livers makes this study clinically relevant and promotes the translation of subzero organ preservation to the clinic,” the investigators concluded. “However, long-term survival experiments of transplanted supercooled livers in swine or an alternative large animal model will be needed before clinical translation.”
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defense. Dr. de Vries and four other coauthors have provisional patent applications related to the study, and one coauthor disclosed a financial relationship with Organ Solutions.
SOURCE: de Vries RJ et al. Nature Biotechnol. 2019 Sep 9. doi: 10.1038/s41587-019-0223-y.
Standard cooling to 4°C provides just 12 hours of organ preservation, but laboratory testing showed that supercooling to –4°C added 27 hours of viability, reported lead author Reinier J. de Vries, MD, of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and colleagues.
“The absence of technology to preserve organs for more than a few hours is one of the fundamental causes of the donor organ–shortage crisis,” the investigators wrote in Nature Biotechnology.
Supercooling organs to high-subzero temperatures has been shown to prolong organ life while avoiding ice-mediated injury, but techniques that are successful for rat livers have been difficult to translate to human livers because of their larger size, which increases the risk of ice formation, the investigators explained.
Three strategies were employed to overcome this problem: minimization of air-liquid interfaces, development of a new supercooling-preservation solution, and hypothermic machine perfusion to more evenly distribute preservation solution throughout the liver tissue. For recovery of organs after supercooling, the investigators used subnormothermic machine perfusion, which has been used effectively in rat transplants.
In order to measure the impact of this process on organ viability, the investigators first measured adenylate energy content, both before supercooling and after recovery.
“Adenylate energy content, and, particularly, the organ’s ability to recover it during (re)perfusion, is considered the most representative metric for liver viability,” they wrote.
The difference between pre- and postsupercooling energy charge was less than 20%; in comparison, failed liver transplants in large animals and clinical trials have typically involved an energy-charge loss of 40% or more.
To further test organ viability, the investigators measured pre- and postsupercooling levels of bile production, oxygen uptake, and vascular resistance. All of these parameters have been shown to predict transplant success in rats, and bile production has additional precedent from human studies.
On average, bile production, portal resistance, and arterial resistance were not significantly affected by supercooling. Although portal vein resistance was 20% higher after supercooling, this compared favorably with increases of 100%-150% that have been measured in nonviable livers. Similarly, oxygen uptake increased by a mean of 17%, but this was three times lower than changes that have been observed in livers with impaired viability, at 51%.
Additional measures of hepatocellular injury, including AST and ALT, were also supportive of viability after supercooling. Histopathology confirmed these findings by showing preserved tissue architecture.
“In summary, we find that the human livers tested displayed no substantial difference in viability before and after extended subzero supercooling preservation,” the investigators wrote.
To simulate transplantation, the investigators reperfused the organs with blood at a normal temperature, including platelets, complement, and white blood cells, which are drivers of ischemia reperfusion injury. During this process, energy charge remained stable, which indicates preserved mitochondrial function. While energy charge held steady, lactate metabolism increased with bile and urea production, suggesting increased liver function. Bile pH and HCO3– levels fell within range for viability. Although bile glucose exceeded proposed criteria, the investigators pointed out that levels still fell within parameters for research-quality livers. Lactate levels also rose within the first hour of reperfusion, but the investigators suggested that this finding should be interpreted with appropriate context.
“It should be considered that the livers in this study were initially rejected for transplantation,” they wrote, “and the confidence intervals of the lactate concentration at the end of reperfusion largely overlap with time-matched values reported by others during [normothermic machine perfusion] of rejected human livers.”
Hepatocellular injury and histology also were evaluated during and after simulated transplantation, respectively, with favorable results. Although sites of preexisting hepatic injury were aggravated by the process, and rates of apoptosis increased, the investigators considered these changes were clinically insignificant.
Looking to the future, the investigators suggested that further refinement of the process could facilitate even-lower storage temperatures while better preserving liver viability.
“The use of human livers makes this study clinically relevant and promotes the translation of subzero organ preservation to the clinic,” the investigators concluded. “However, long-term survival experiments of transplanted supercooled livers in swine or an alternative large animal model will be needed before clinical translation.”
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defense. Dr. de Vries and four other coauthors have provisional patent applications related to the study, and one coauthor disclosed a financial relationship with Organ Solutions.
SOURCE: de Vries RJ et al. Nature Biotechnol. 2019 Sep 9. doi: 10.1038/s41587-019-0223-y.
FROM NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY
Patients with viral hepatitis are living longer, increasing risk of extrahepatic mortality
Patients with viral hepatitis may live longer after treatment with direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs), but their risk of extrahepatic causes of death may rise as a result, according to investigators.
Importantly, this increasing rate of extrahepatic mortality shouldn’t be seen as a causal link with DAA use, cautioned lead author Donghee Kim, MD, PhD, of Stanford (Calif.) University, and colleagues. Instead, the upward trend is more likely because of successful treatment with DAAs, which can increase lifespan, and with it, time for susceptibility to extrahepatic conditions.
This was just one finding from a retrospective study that used U.S. Census and National Center for Health Statistics mortality records to evaluate almost 28 million deaths that occurred between 2007 and 2017. The investigators looked for mortality trends among patients with common chronic liver diseases, including viral hepatitis, alcoholic liver disease (ALD), and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), noting that each of these conditions is associated with extrahepatic complications. The study included deaths due to extrahepatic cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes.
While the efficacy of therapy for viral hepatitis has improved markedly since 2014, treatments for ALD and NAFLD have remained static, the investigators noted.
“Unfortunately, there have been no significant breakthroughs in the treatment of [ALD] over the last 2 decades, resulting in an increase in estimated global mortality to 3.8%,” the investigators wrote in Gastroenterology.
“[NAFLD] is the most common chronic liver disease in the world,” they added. “The leading cause of death in individuals with NAFLD is cardiovascular disease, followed by extrahepatic malignancies, and then liver-related mortality. However, recent trends in ALD and NAFLD-related extrahepatic complications in comparison to viral hepatitis have not been studied.”
The results of the current study supported the positive impact of DAAs, which began to see widespread use in 2014. Age-standardized mortality among patients with hepatitis C virus rose until 2014 (2.2% per year) and dropped thereafter (–6.5% per year). Mortality among those with hepatitis B virus steadily decreased over the study period (–1.2% per year).
Of note, while deaths because of HCV-related liver disease dropped from 2014 to 2017, extrahepatic causes of death didn’t follow suit. Age-standardized mortality for cardiovascular disease and diabetes increased at average annual rates of 1.9% and 3.3%, respectively, while the rate of extrahepatic cancer-related deaths held steady.
“The widespread use, higher efficacy and durable response to DAA agents in individuals with HCV infection may have resulted in a paradigm shift in the clinical progression of coexisting disease entities following response to DAA agents in the virus-free environment,” the investigators wrote. “These findings suggest assessment and identification of risk and risk factors for extrahepatic cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes in individuals who have been successfully treated and cured of HCV infection.”
In sharp contrast with the viral hepatitis findings, mortality rates among patients with ALD and NAFLD increased at an accelerating rate over the 11-year study period.
Among patients with ALD, all-cause mortality increased by an average of 3.4% per year, at a higher rate in the second half of the study than the first (4.6% vs 2.1%). Liver disease–related mortality rose at a similar, accelerating rate. In the same group, deaths due to cardiovascular disease increased at an average annual rate of 2.1%, which was accelerating, while extrahepatic cancer-related deaths increased at a more constant rate of 3.6%.
For patients with NAFLD, all-cause mortality increased by 8.1% per year, accelerating from 6.1% in the first half of the study to 11.2% in the second. Deaths from liver disease increased at an average rate of 12.6% per year, while extrahepatic deaths increased significantly for all three included types: cardiovascular disease (2.0%), extrahepatic cancer (15.1%), and diabetes (9.7%).
Concerning the worsening rates of mortality among patients with ALD and NAFLD, the investigators cited a lack of progress in treatments, and suggested that “the quest for newer therapies must remain the cornerstone in our efforts.”
The investigators reported no external funding or conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Kim D et al. Gastroenterology. 2019 Jun 25. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.06.026.
Chronic liver disease is one of the leading causes of death in the United States. Whereas mortality from other causes (e.g., heart disease and cancer) has declined, age-adjusted mortality from chronic liver disease has continued to increase. There have been a few major advances in the treatment of several chronic liver diseases in recent years. These include nucleos(t)ide analogues for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and direct-acting antiviral agents for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection (HCV). Many studies show that these treatments are highly effective in improving patient outcomes, including patient survival. However, whether these individual-level benefits have translated into population-level improvements remains unclear.
Overall, the results were mixed; they were encouraging for viral hepatitis but concerning for alcoholic and nonalcoholic liver disease. Specifically, all-cause mortality from HCV was on an upward trajectory in the first 7 years (from 2007 to 2014) but the trend shifted from 2014 onward. Importantly, this inflection point coincided with the timing of the new HCV treatments. Most of this positive shift post 2014 was related to a strong downward trend in liver-related mortality. In contrast, upward trends in mortality related to extrahepatic causes (such as cardiovascular mortality) continued unabated. The authors found similar results for HBV. The story, however, was different for alcohol and nonalcohol-related liver disease – both conditions lacking effective treatments; liver-related mortality for both continued to increase during the study period.
Although we cannot make causal inferences from this study, overall, the results are good news. They suggest that HBV and HCV treatments have reached enough infected people to result in tangible improvements in the burden of chronic liver disease. We may now need to shift the focus of secondary prevention efforts from liver to nonliver (extrahepatic) morbidity in the newer cohorts of patients with treated HCV and HBV.
Fasiha Kanwal, MD, MSHS, is an investigator in the clinical epidemiology and comparative effectiveness program for the Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety in collaboration with the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, as well as an associate professor of medicine in gastroenterology and hepatology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. She has no conflicts of interest.
Chronic liver disease is one of the leading causes of death in the United States. Whereas mortality from other causes (e.g., heart disease and cancer) has declined, age-adjusted mortality from chronic liver disease has continued to increase. There have been a few major advances in the treatment of several chronic liver diseases in recent years. These include nucleos(t)ide analogues for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and direct-acting antiviral agents for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection (HCV). Many studies show that these treatments are highly effective in improving patient outcomes, including patient survival. However, whether these individual-level benefits have translated into population-level improvements remains unclear.
Overall, the results were mixed; they were encouraging for viral hepatitis but concerning for alcoholic and nonalcoholic liver disease. Specifically, all-cause mortality from HCV was on an upward trajectory in the first 7 years (from 2007 to 2014) but the trend shifted from 2014 onward. Importantly, this inflection point coincided with the timing of the new HCV treatments. Most of this positive shift post 2014 was related to a strong downward trend in liver-related mortality. In contrast, upward trends in mortality related to extrahepatic causes (such as cardiovascular mortality) continued unabated. The authors found similar results for HBV. The story, however, was different for alcohol and nonalcohol-related liver disease – both conditions lacking effective treatments; liver-related mortality for both continued to increase during the study period.
Although we cannot make causal inferences from this study, overall, the results are good news. They suggest that HBV and HCV treatments have reached enough infected people to result in tangible improvements in the burden of chronic liver disease. We may now need to shift the focus of secondary prevention efforts from liver to nonliver (extrahepatic) morbidity in the newer cohorts of patients with treated HCV and HBV.
Fasiha Kanwal, MD, MSHS, is an investigator in the clinical epidemiology and comparative effectiveness program for the Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety in collaboration with the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, as well as an associate professor of medicine in gastroenterology and hepatology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. She has no conflicts of interest.
Chronic liver disease is one of the leading causes of death in the United States. Whereas mortality from other causes (e.g., heart disease and cancer) has declined, age-adjusted mortality from chronic liver disease has continued to increase. There have been a few major advances in the treatment of several chronic liver diseases in recent years. These include nucleos(t)ide analogues for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and direct-acting antiviral agents for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection (HCV). Many studies show that these treatments are highly effective in improving patient outcomes, including patient survival. However, whether these individual-level benefits have translated into population-level improvements remains unclear.
Overall, the results were mixed; they were encouraging for viral hepatitis but concerning for alcoholic and nonalcoholic liver disease. Specifically, all-cause mortality from HCV was on an upward trajectory in the first 7 years (from 2007 to 2014) but the trend shifted from 2014 onward. Importantly, this inflection point coincided with the timing of the new HCV treatments. Most of this positive shift post 2014 was related to a strong downward trend in liver-related mortality. In contrast, upward trends in mortality related to extrahepatic causes (such as cardiovascular mortality) continued unabated. The authors found similar results for HBV. The story, however, was different for alcohol and nonalcohol-related liver disease – both conditions lacking effective treatments; liver-related mortality for both continued to increase during the study period.
Although we cannot make causal inferences from this study, overall, the results are good news. They suggest that HBV and HCV treatments have reached enough infected people to result in tangible improvements in the burden of chronic liver disease. We may now need to shift the focus of secondary prevention efforts from liver to nonliver (extrahepatic) morbidity in the newer cohorts of patients with treated HCV and HBV.
Fasiha Kanwal, MD, MSHS, is an investigator in the clinical epidemiology and comparative effectiveness program for the Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety in collaboration with the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, as well as an associate professor of medicine in gastroenterology and hepatology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. She has no conflicts of interest.
Patients with viral hepatitis may live longer after treatment with direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs), but their risk of extrahepatic causes of death may rise as a result, according to investigators.
Importantly, this increasing rate of extrahepatic mortality shouldn’t be seen as a causal link with DAA use, cautioned lead author Donghee Kim, MD, PhD, of Stanford (Calif.) University, and colleagues. Instead, the upward trend is more likely because of successful treatment with DAAs, which can increase lifespan, and with it, time for susceptibility to extrahepatic conditions.
This was just one finding from a retrospective study that used U.S. Census and National Center for Health Statistics mortality records to evaluate almost 28 million deaths that occurred between 2007 and 2017. The investigators looked for mortality trends among patients with common chronic liver diseases, including viral hepatitis, alcoholic liver disease (ALD), and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), noting that each of these conditions is associated with extrahepatic complications. The study included deaths due to extrahepatic cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes.
While the efficacy of therapy for viral hepatitis has improved markedly since 2014, treatments for ALD and NAFLD have remained static, the investigators noted.
“Unfortunately, there have been no significant breakthroughs in the treatment of [ALD] over the last 2 decades, resulting in an increase in estimated global mortality to 3.8%,” the investigators wrote in Gastroenterology.
“[NAFLD] is the most common chronic liver disease in the world,” they added. “The leading cause of death in individuals with NAFLD is cardiovascular disease, followed by extrahepatic malignancies, and then liver-related mortality. However, recent trends in ALD and NAFLD-related extrahepatic complications in comparison to viral hepatitis have not been studied.”
The results of the current study supported the positive impact of DAAs, which began to see widespread use in 2014. Age-standardized mortality among patients with hepatitis C virus rose until 2014 (2.2% per year) and dropped thereafter (–6.5% per year). Mortality among those with hepatitis B virus steadily decreased over the study period (–1.2% per year).
Of note, while deaths because of HCV-related liver disease dropped from 2014 to 2017, extrahepatic causes of death didn’t follow suit. Age-standardized mortality for cardiovascular disease and diabetes increased at average annual rates of 1.9% and 3.3%, respectively, while the rate of extrahepatic cancer-related deaths held steady.
“The widespread use, higher efficacy and durable response to DAA agents in individuals with HCV infection may have resulted in a paradigm shift in the clinical progression of coexisting disease entities following response to DAA agents in the virus-free environment,” the investigators wrote. “These findings suggest assessment and identification of risk and risk factors for extrahepatic cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes in individuals who have been successfully treated and cured of HCV infection.”
In sharp contrast with the viral hepatitis findings, mortality rates among patients with ALD and NAFLD increased at an accelerating rate over the 11-year study period.
Among patients with ALD, all-cause mortality increased by an average of 3.4% per year, at a higher rate in the second half of the study than the first (4.6% vs 2.1%). Liver disease–related mortality rose at a similar, accelerating rate. In the same group, deaths due to cardiovascular disease increased at an average annual rate of 2.1%, which was accelerating, while extrahepatic cancer-related deaths increased at a more constant rate of 3.6%.
For patients with NAFLD, all-cause mortality increased by 8.1% per year, accelerating from 6.1% in the first half of the study to 11.2% in the second. Deaths from liver disease increased at an average rate of 12.6% per year, while extrahepatic deaths increased significantly for all three included types: cardiovascular disease (2.0%), extrahepatic cancer (15.1%), and diabetes (9.7%).
Concerning the worsening rates of mortality among patients with ALD and NAFLD, the investigators cited a lack of progress in treatments, and suggested that “the quest for newer therapies must remain the cornerstone in our efforts.”
The investigators reported no external funding or conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Kim D et al. Gastroenterology. 2019 Jun 25. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.06.026.
Patients with viral hepatitis may live longer after treatment with direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs), but their risk of extrahepatic causes of death may rise as a result, according to investigators.
Importantly, this increasing rate of extrahepatic mortality shouldn’t be seen as a causal link with DAA use, cautioned lead author Donghee Kim, MD, PhD, of Stanford (Calif.) University, and colleagues. Instead, the upward trend is more likely because of successful treatment with DAAs, which can increase lifespan, and with it, time for susceptibility to extrahepatic conditions.
This was just one finding from a retrospective study that used U.S. Census and National Center for Health Statistics mortality records to evaluate almost 28 million deaths that occurred between 2007 and 2017. The investigators looked for mortality trends among patients with common chronic liver diseases, including viral hepatitis, alcoholic liver disease (ALD), and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), noting that each of these conditions is associated with extrahepatic complications. The study included deaths due to extrahepatic cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes.
While the efficacy of therapy for viral hepatitis has improved markedly since 2014, treatments for ALD and NAFLD have remained static, the investigators noted.
“Unfortunately, there have been no significant breakthroughs in the treatment of [ALD] over the last 2 decades, resulting in an increase in estimated global mortality to 3.8%,” the investigators wrote in Gastroenterology.
“[NAFLD] is the most common chronic liver disease in the world,” they added. “The leading cause of death in individuals with NAFLD is cardiovascular disease, followed by extrahepatic malignancies, and then liver-related mortality. However, recent trends in ALD and NAFLD-related extrahepatic complications in comparison to viral hepatitis have not been studied.”
The results of the current study supported the positive impact of DAAs, which began to see widespread use in 2014. Age-standardized mortality among patients with hepatitis C virus rose until 2014 (2.2% per year) and dropped thereafter (–6.5% per year). Mortality among those with hepatitis B virus steadily decreased over the study period (–1.2% per year).
Of note, while deaths because of HCV-related liver disease dropped from 2014 to 2017, extrahepatic causes of death didn’t follow suit. Age-standardized mortality for cardiovascular disease and diabetes increased at average annual rates of 1.9% and 3.3%, respectively, while the rate of extrahepatic cancer-related deaths held steady.
“The widespread use, higher efficacy and durable response to DAA agents in individuals with HCV infection may have resulted in a paradigm shift in the clinical progression of coexisting disease entities following response to DAA agents in the virus-free environment,” the investigators wrote. “These findings suggest assessment and identification of risk and risk factors for extrahepatic cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes in individuals who have been successfully treated and cured of HCV infection.”
In sharp contrast with the viral hepatitis findings, mortality rates among patients with ALD and NAFLD increased at an accelerating rate over the 11-year study period.
Among patients with ALD, all-cause mortality increased by an average of 3.4% per year, at a higher rate in the second half of the study than the first (4.6% vs 2.1%). Liver disease–related mortality rose at a similar, accelerating rate. In the same group, deaths due to cardiovascular disease increased at an average annual rate of 2.1%, which was accelerating, while extrahepatic cancer-related deaths increased at a more constant rate of 3.6%.
For patients with NAFLD, all-cause mortality increased by 8.1% per year, accelerating from 6.1% in the first half of the study to 11.2% in the second. Deaths from liver disease increased at an average rate of 12.6% per year, while extrahepatic deaths increased significantly for all three included types: cardiovascular disease (2.0%), extrahepatic cancer (15.1%), and diabetes (9.7%).
Concerning the worsening rates of mortality among patients with ALD and NAFLD, the investigators cited a lack of progress in treatments, and suggested that “the quest for newer therapies must remain the cornerstone in our efforts.”
The investigators reported no external funding or conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Kim D et al. Gastroenterology. 2019 Jun 25. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.06.026.
FROM GASTROENTEROLOGY
Type of renal dysfunction affects liver cirrhosis mortality risk
For non–status 1 patients with cirrhosis who are awaiting liver transplantation, type of renal dysfunction may be a key determinant of mortality risk, based on a retrospective analysis of more than 22,000 patients.
Risk of death was greatest for patients with acute on chronic kidney disease (AKI on CKD), followed by AKI alone, then CKD alone, reported lead author Giuseppe Cullaro, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues.
Although it is well known that renal dysfunction worsens outcomes among patients with liver cirrhosis, the impact of different types of kidney pathology on mortality risk has been minimally researched, the investigators wrote in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. “To date, studies evaluating the impact of renal dysfunction on prognosis in patients with cirrhosis have mostly focused on AKI.”
To learn more, the investigators performed a retrospective study involving acute, chronic, and acute on chronic kidney disease among patients with cirrhosis. They included data from 22,680 non–status 1 adults who were awaiting liver transplantation between 2007 and 2014, with at least 90 days on the wait list. Information was gathered from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network registry.
AKI was defined by fewer than 72 days of hemodialysis, or an increase in creatinine of at least 0.3 mg/dL or at least 50% in the last 7 days. CKD was identified by more than 72 days of hemodialysis, or an estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 for 90 days with a final rate of at least 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Using these criteria, the researchers put patients into four possible categories: AKI on CKD, AKI, CKD, or normal renal function. The primary outcome was wait list mortality, which was defined as death, or removal from the wait list for illness. Follow-up started at the time of addition to the wait list and continued until transplant, removal from the wait list, or death.
Multivariate analysis, which accounted for final MELD-Na score and other confounders, showed that patients with AKI on CKD fared worst, with a 2.86-fold higher mortality risk (subhazard [SHR] ratio, 2.86) than that of patients with normal renal function. The mortality risk for acute on chronic kidney disease was followed closely by patients with AKI alone (SHR, 2.42), and more distantly by patients with CKD alone (SHR, 1.56). Further analysis showed that the disparity between mortality risks of each subgroup became more pronounced with increased MELD-Na score. In addition, evaluation of receiver operating characteristic curves for 6-month wait list mortality showed that the addition of renal function to MELD-Na score increased the accuracy of prognosis from an area under the curve of 0.71 to 0.80 (P less than .001).
“This suggests that incorporating the pattern of renal function could provide an opportunity to better prognosticate risk of mortality in the patients with cirrhosis who are the sickest,” the investigators concluded.
They also speculated about why outcomes may vary by type of kidney dysfunction.
“We suspect that those patients who experience AKI and AKI on CKD in our cohort likely had a triggering event – infection, bleeding, hypovolemia – that put these patients at greater risk for waitlist mortality,” the investigators wrote. “These events inherently carry more risk than stable nonliver-related elevations in serum creatinine that are seen in patients with CKD. Because of this heterogeneity of etiology in renal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis, it is perhaps not surprising that unique renal function patterns variably impact mortality.”
The investigators noted that the findings from the study have “important implications for clinical practice,” and suggested that including type of renal dysfunction would have the most significant affect on accuracy of prognoses among patients at greatest risk of mortality.
The study was funded by a Paul B. Beeson Career Development Award and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Verna disclosed relationships with Salix, Merck, and Gilead.
SOURCE: Cullaro et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Feb 1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.043.
Cirrhotic patients with renal failure have a sevenfold increase in mortality compared with those without renal failure. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in cirrhosis; increasingly, cirrhotic patients awaiting liver transplantation have or are also at risk for CKD. They are sicker, older, and have more comorbidities such as obesity and diabetes. In this study, the cumulative incidence of death on the wait list was much more pronounced for any form of AKI, with those with AKI on CKD having the highest cumulative incidence of wait list mortality compared with those with normal renal function. The study notably raises several important issues. First, AKI exerts a greater influence in risk of mortality on CKD than it does on those with normal renal function. This is relevant given the increasing prevalence of CKD in this population. Second, it emphasizes the need to effectively measure renal function. All serum creatinine-based equations overestimate glomerular filtration rate in the presence of renal dysfunction. Finally, the study highlights the importance of extrahepatic factors in determining mortality on the wait list. While in all comers, a mathematical model such as the MELDNa score may be able to predict mortality, for a specific patient the presence of comorbid conditions, malnutrition and sarcopenia, infections, critical illness, and now pattern of renal dysfunction, may all play a role.
Sumeet K. Asrani, MD, MSc, is a hepatologist affiliated with Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas. He has no conflicts of interest.
Cirrhotic patients with renal failure have a sevenfold increase in mortality compared with those without renal failure. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in cirrhosis; increasingly, cirrhotic patients awaiting liver transplantation have or are also at risk for CKD. They are sicker, older, and have more comorbidities such as obesity and diabetes. In this study, the cumulative incidence of death on the wait list was much more pronounced for any form of AKI, with those with AKI on CKD having the highest cumulative incidence of wait list mortality compared with those with normal renal function. The study notably raises several important issues. First, AKI exerts a greater influence in risk of mortality on CKD than it does on those with normal renal function. This is relevant given the increasing prevalence of CKD in this population. Second, it emphasizes the need to effectively measure renal function. All serum creatinine-based equations overestimate glomerular filtration rate in the presence of renal dysfunction. Finally, the study highlights the importance of extrahepatic factors in determining mortality on the wait list. While in all comers, a mathematical model such as the MELDNa score may be able to predict mortality, for a specific patient the presence of comorbid conditions, malnutrition and sarcopenia, infections, critical illness, and now pattern of renal dysfunction, may all play a role.
Sumeet K. Asrani, MD, MSc, is a hepatologist affiliated with Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas. He has no conflicts of interest.
Cirrhotic patients with renal failure have a sevenfold increase in mortality compared with those without renal failure. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in cirrhosis; increasingly, cirrhotic patients awaiting liver transplantation have or are also at risk for CKD. They are sicker, older, and have more comorbidities such as obesity and diabetes. In this study, the cumulative incidence of death on the wait list was much more pronounced for any form of AKI, with those with AKI on CKD having the highest cumulative incidence of wait list mortality compared with those with normal renal function. The study notably raises several important issues. First, AKI exerts a greater influence in risk of mortality on CKD than it does on those with normal renal function. This is relevant given the increasing prevalence of CKD in this population. Second, it emphasizes the need to effectively measure renal function. All serum creatinine-based equations overestimate glomerular filtration rate in the presence of renal dysfunction. Finally, the study highlights the importance of extrahepatic factors in determining mortality on the wait list. While in all comers, a mathematical model such as the MELDNa score may be able to predict mortality, for a specific patient the presence of comorbid conditions, malnutrition and sarcopenia, infections, critical illness, and now pattern of renal dysfunction, may all play a role.
Sumeet K. Asrani, MD, MSc, is a hepatologist affiliated with Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas. He has no conflicts of interest.
For non–status 1 patients with cirrhosis who are awaiting liver transplantation, type of renal dysfunction may be a key determinant of mortality risk, based on a retrospective analysis of more than 22,000 patients.
Risk of death was greatest for patients with acute on chronic kidney disease (AKI on CKD), followed by AKI alone, then CKD alone, reported lead author Giuseppe Cullaro, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues.
Although it is well known that renal dysfunction worsens outcomes among patients with liver cirrhosis, the impact of different types of kidney pathology on mortality risk has been minimally researched, the investigators wrote in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. “To date, studies evaluating the impact of renal dysfunction on prognosis in patients with cirrhosis have mostly focused on AKI.”
To learn more, the investigators performed a retrospective study involving acute, chronic, and acute on chronic kidney disease among patients with cirrhosis. They included data from 22,680 non–status 1 adults who were awaiting liver transplantation between 2007 and 2014, with at least 90 days on the wait list. Information was gathered from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network registry.
AKI was defined by fewer than 72 days of hemodialysis, or an increase in creatinine of at least 0.3 mg/dL or at least 50% in the last 7 days. CKD was identified by more than 72 days of hemodialysis, or an estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 for 90 days with a final rate of at least 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Using these criteria, the researchers put patients into four possible categories: AKI on CKD, AKI, CKD, or normal renal function. The primary outcome was wait list mortality, which was defined as death, or removal from the wait list for illness. Follow-up started at the time of addition to the wait list and continued until transplant, removal from the wait list, or death.
Multivariate analysis, which accounted for final MELD-Na score and other confounders, showed that patients with AKI on CKD fared worst, with a 2.86-fold higher mortality risk (subhazard [SHR] ratio, 2.86) than that of patients with normal renal function. The mortality risk for acute on chronic kidney disease was followed closely by patients with AKI alone (SHR, 2.42), and more distantly by patients with CKD alone (SHR, 1.56). Further analysis showed that the disparity between mortality risks of each subgroup became more pronounced with increased MELD-Na score. In addition, evaluation of receiver operating characteristic curves for 6-month wait list mortality showed that the addition of renal function to MELD-Na score increased the accuracy of prognosis from an area under the curve of 0.71 to 0.80 (P less than .001).
“This suggests that incorporating the pattern of renal function could provide an opportunity to better prognosticate risk of mortality in the patients with cirrhosis who are the sickest,” the investigators concluded.
They also speculated about why outcomes may vary by type of kidney dysfunction.
“We suspect that those patients who experience AKI and AKI on CKD in our cohort likely had a triggering event – infection, bleeding, hypovolemia – that put these patients at greater risk for waitlist mortality,” the investigators wrote. “These events inherently carry more risk than stable nonliver-related elevations in serum creatinine that are seen in patients with CKD. Because of this heterogeneity of etiology in renal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis, it is perhaps not surprising that unique renal function patterns variably impact mortality.”
The investigators noted that the findings from the study have “important implications for clinical practice,” and suggested that including type of renal dysfunction would have the most significant affect on accuracy of prognoses among patients at greatest risk of mortality.
The study was funded by a Paul B. Beeson Career Development Award and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Verna disclosed relationships with Salix, Merck, and Gilead.
SOURCE: Cullaro et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Feb 1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.043.
For non–status 1 patients with cirrhosis who are awaiting liver transplantation, type of renal dysfunction may be a key determinant of mortality risk, based on a retrospective analysis of more than 22,000 patients.
Risk of death was greatest for patients with acute on chronic kidney disease (AKI on CKD), followed by AKI alone, then CKD alone, reported lead author Giuseppe Cullaro, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues.
Although it is well known that renal dysfunction worsens outcomes among patients with liver cirrhosis, the impact of different types of kidney pathology on mortality risk has been minimally researched, the investigators wrote in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. “To date, studies evaluating the impact of renal dysfunction on prognosis in patients with cirrhosis have mostly focused on AKI.”
To learn more, the investigators performed a retrospective study involving acute, chronic, and acute on chronic kidney disease among patients with cirrhosis. They included data from 22,680 non–status 1 adults who were awaiting liver transplantation between 2007 and 2014, with at least 90 days on the wait list. Information was gathered from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network registry.
AKI was defined by fewer than 72 days of hemodialysis, or an increase in creatinine of at least 0.3 mg/dL or at least 50% in the last 7 days. CKD was identified by more than 72 days of hemodialysis, or an estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 for 90 days with a final rate of at least 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Using these criteria, the researchers put patients into four possible categories: AKI on CKD, AKI, CKD, or normal renal function. The primary outcome was wait list mortality, which was defined as death, or removal from the wait list for illness. Follow-up started at the time of addition to the wait list and continued until transplant, removal from the wait list, or death.
Multivariate analysis, which accounted for final MELD-Na score and other confounders, showed that patients with AKI on CKD fared worst, with a 2.86-fold higher mortality risk (subhazard [SHR] ratio, 2.86) than that of patients with normal renal function. The mortality risk for acute on chronic kidney disease was followed closely by patients with AKI alone (SHR, 2.42), and more distantly by patients with CKD alone (SHR, 1.56). Further analysis showed that the disparity between mortality risks of each subgroup became more pronounced with increased MELD-Na score. In addition, evaluation of receiver operating characteristic curves for 6-month wait list mortality showed that the addition of renal function to MELD-Na score increased the accuracy of prognosis from an area under the curve of 0.71 to 0.80 (P less than .001).
“This suggests that incorporating the pattern of renal function could provide an opportunity to better prognosticate risk of mortality in the patients with cirrhosis who are the sickest,” the investigators concluded.
They also speculated about why outcomes may vary by type of kidney dysfunction.
“We suspect that those patients who experience AKI and AKI on CKD in our cohort likely had a triggering event – infection, bleeding, hypovolemia – that put these patients at greater risk for waitlist mortality,” the investigators wrote. “These events inherently carry more risk than stable nonliver-related elevations in serum creatinine that are seen in patients with CKD. Because of this heterogeneity of etiology in renal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis, it is perhaps not surprising that unique renal function patterns variably impact mortality.”
The investigators noted that the findings from the study have “important implications for clinical practice,” and suggested that including type of renal dysfunction would have the most significant affect on accuracy of prognoses among patients at greatest risk of mortality.
The study was funded by a Paul B. Beeson Career Development Award and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Verna disclosed relationships with Salix, Merck, and Gilead.
SOURCE: Cullaro et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Feb 1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.01.043.
FROM CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
Some HCV medications associated with serious liver injury
Many of the affected patients had signs or symptoms of moderate to severe liver impairment (Child-Pugh class B or C), and given that these medications – glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (Mavyret), elbasvir/grazoprevir (Zepatier), and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir (Vosevi) – are not indicated for such patients, they should not have been prescribed in the first place, the FDA noted in the drug safety communication. Some cases had other preexisting risk factors, such as liver cancer, alcohol abuse, or serious medical illnesses associated with liver problems.
In most cases, impairment or decompensation occurred within the first 4 weeks of starting treatment, and symptoms resolved or new-onset worsening of liver function improved after stopping. These medicines have been widely used and, among patients with no or mild liver impairment, have been shown to be safe and effective.
Health care professionals should continue prescribing these medicines as indicated; they should assess patients at baseline for severity of liver disease and other risk factors and closely monitor these patients after for signs and symptoms of worsening liver function. Patients should be aware that the risk of injury is rare and continue taking prescribed medicines; if they develop fatigue, weakness, loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting, yellow eyes or skin, or light-colored stools, they should talk with their health care professional but should continue taking the medications in question until instructed to do otherwise.
The full communication is available on the FDA website and includes more facts about these drugs and information for patients and health care professionals.
Many of the affected patients had signs or symptoms of moderate to severe liver impairment (Child-Pugh class B or C), and given that these medications – glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (Mavyret), elbasvir/grazoprevir (Zepatier), and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir (Vosevi) – are not indicated for such patients, they should not have been prescribed in the first place, the FDA noted in the drug safety communication. Some cases had other preexisting risk factors, such as liver cancer, alcohol abuse, or serious medical illnesses associated with liver problems.
In most cases, impairment or decompensation occurred within the first 4 weeks of starting treatment, and symptoms resolved or new-onset worsening of liver function improved after stopping. These medicines have been widely used and, among patients with no or mild liver impairment, have been shown to be safe and effective.
Health care professionals should continue prescribing these medicines as indicated; they should assess patients at baseline for severity of liver disease and other risk factors and closely monitor these patients after for signs and symptoms of worsening liver function. Patients should be aware that the risk of injury is rare and continue taking prescribed medicines; if they develop fatigue, weakness, loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting, yellow eyes or skin, or light-colored stools, they should talk with their health care professional but should continue taking the medications in question until instructed to do otherwise.
The full communication is available on the FDA website and includes more facts about these drugs and information for patients and health care professionals.
Many of the affected patients had signs or symptoms of moderate to severe liver impairment (Child-Pugh class B or C), and given that these medications – glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (Mavyret), elbasvir/grazoprevir (Zepatier), and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir (Vosevi) – are not indicated for such patients, they should not have been prescribed in the first place, the FDA noted in the drug safety communication. Some cases had other preexisting risk factors, such as liver cancer, alcohol abuse, or serious medical illnesses associated with liver problems.
In most cases, impairment or decompensation occurred within the first 4 weeks of starting treatment, and symptoms resolved or new-onset worsening of liver function improved after stopping. These medicines have been widely used and, among patients with no or mild liver impairment, have been shown to be safe and effective.
Health care professionals should continue prescribing these medicines as indicated; they should assess patients at baseline for severity of liver disease and other risk factors and closely monitor these patients after for signs and symptoms of worsening liver function. Patients should be aware that the risk of injury is rare and continue taking prescribed medicines; if they develop fatigue, weakness, loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting, yellow eyes or skin, or light-colored stools, they should talk with their health care professional but should continue taking the medications in question until instructed to do otherwise.
The full communication is available on the FDA website and includes more facts about these drugs and information for patients and health care professionals.
USPSTF issues draft recommendation statement for HCV screening in adults
and now suggests that all adults aged 18-79 years receive screening.
This proposal represents an update and expansion of its current recommendation for screening for HCV infection. The draft recommendation incorporates new evidence and would replace the recommendation made in 2013, which calls for screening in persons at high risk for infection and one-time screening in adults born between 1945 and 1965 (Grade B).
“Today, more people are infected with hepatitis C than there were a decade ago, but there are now better treatments available. The evidence now shows more people can benefit from screening; therefore, we are recommending to screen all adults ages 18-79 for hepatitis C,” task force chair Douglas K. Owens, MD, MS, said in a bulletin issued by the USPSTF.
To update the previous recommendation, the USPSTF conducted a systematic review that included a total of 97 studies. No direct evidence was found regarding the benefits of HCV screening versus no screening or repeat versus one-time screening, and no new studies analyzed the psychological and social consequences of HCV screening.
Evidence concerning direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment was more compelling given that 49 trials found DAA therapy to be associated with pooled sustained virologic response (SVR) rates between 95.5% and 98.9% across genotypes. The rate of serious adverse events caused by DAA treatment was 1.9%, and the discontinuation of treatment because of adverse events was 0.4%. In seven trials involving adolescents, SVR rates after antiviral treatment were similar to those in adults.
Achieving an SVR after DAA treatment was associated with a decreased risk in those treated of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.56), liver mortality (HR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.27), cirrhosis (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.33-0.40), and hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.23-0.38), compared with those who did not respond.
Because of the evidence collected, the USPSTF issued a B recommendation for HCV screening in adults and recommended screening for all people aged 18-79 years in the draft recommendation statement. “Clinicians may want to consider screening in adolescents younger than age 18 years and in adults older than age 79 years who are at high risk [for HCV],” the proposal says.
The draft recommendation statement and evidence review is available at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org. The public comment period will last until Sept. 23, 2019.
Help educate your patients about hepatitis C, their risks and treatment options using AGA patient education, which can be found in the GI Patient Center at https://www.gastro.org/practice-guidance/gi-patient-center/topic/hepatitis-c-hcv.
and now suggests that all adults aged 18-79 years receive screening.
This proposal represents an update and expansion of its current recommendation for screening for HCV infection. The draft recommendation incorporates new evidence and would replace the recommendation made in 2013, which calls for screening in persons at high risk for infection and one-time screening in adults born between 1945 and 1965 (Grade B).
“Today, more people are infected with hepatitis C than there were a decade ago, but there are now better treatments available. The evidence now shows more people can benefit from screening; therefore, we are recommending to screen all adults ages 18-79 for hepatitis C,” task force chair Douglas K. Owens, MD, MS, said in a bulletin issued by the USPSTF.
To update the previous recommendation, the USPSTF conducted a systematic review that included a total of 97 studies. No direct evidence was found regarding the benefits of HCV screening versus no screening or repeat versus one-time screening, and no new studies analyzed the psychological and social consequences of HCV screening.
Evidence concerning direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment was more compelling given that 49 trials found DAA therapy to be associated with pooled sustained virologic response (SVR) rates between 95.5% and 98.9% across genotypes. The rate of serious adverse events caused by DAA treatment was 1.9%, and the discontinuation of treatment because of adverse events was 0.4%. In seven trials involving adolescents, SVR rates after antiviral treatment were similar to those in adults.
Achieving an SVR after DAA treatment was associated with a decreased risk in those treated of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.56), liver mortality (HR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.27), cirrhosis (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.33-0.40), and hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.23-0.38), compared with those who did not respond.
Because of the evidence collected, the USPSTF issued a B recommendation for HCV screening in adults and recommended screening for all people aged 18-79 years in the draft recommendation statement. “Clinicians may want to consider screening in adolescents younger than age 18 years and in adults older than age 79 years who are at high risk [for HCV],” the proposal says.
The draft recommendation statement and evidence review is available at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org. The public comment period will last until Sept. 23, 2019.
Help educate your patients about hepatitis C, their risks and treatment options using AGA patient education, which can be found in the GI Patient Center at https://www.gastro.org/practice-guidance/gi-patient-center/topic/hepatitis-c-hcv.
and now suggests that all adults aged 18-79 years receive screening.
This proposal represents an update and expansion of its current recommendation for screening for HCV infection. The draft recommendation incorporates new evidence and would replace the recommendation made in 2013, which calls for screening in persons at high risk for infection and one-time screening in adults born between 1945 and 1965 (Grade B).
“Today, more people are infected with hepatitis C than there were a decade ago, but there are now better treatments available. The evidence now shows more people can benefit from screening; therefore, we are recommending to screen all adults ages 18-79 for hepatitis C,” task force chair Douglas K. Owens, MD, MS, said in a bulletin issued by the USPSTF.
To update the previous recommendation, the USPSTF conducted a systematic review that included a total of 97 studies. No direct evidence was found regarding the benefits of HCV screening versus no screening or repeat versus one-time screening, and no new studies analyzed the psychological and social consequences of HCV screening.
Evidence concerning direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment was more compelling given that 49 trials found DAA therapy to be associated with pooled sustained virologic response (SVR) rates between 95.5% and 98.9% across genotypes. The rate of serious adverse events caused by DAA treatment was 1.9%, and the discontinuation of treatment because of adverse events was 0.4%. In seven trials involving adolescents, SVR rates after antiviral treatment were similar to those in adults.
Achieving an SVR after DAA treatment was associated with a decreased risk in those treated of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.56), liver mortality (HR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.27), cirrhosis (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.33-0.40), and hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.23-0.38), compared with those who did not respond.
Because of the evidence collected, the USPSTF issued a B recommendation for HCV screening in adults and recommended screening for all people aged 18-79 years in the draft recommendation statement. “Clinicians may want to consider screening in adolescents younger than age 18 years and in adults older than age 79 years who are at high risk [for HCV],” the proposal says.
The draft recommendation statement and evidence review is available at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org. The public comment period will last until Sept. 23, 2019.
Help educate your patients about hepatitis C, their risks and treatment options using AGA patient education, which can be found in the GI Patient Center at https://www.gastro.org/practice-guidance/gi-patient-center/topic/hepatitis-c-hcv.
Lowering portal pressure boosts cirrhosis outcomes
Use of nonselective beta-blockers to reduce portal pressure in cirrhosis improved outcomes in adults with or without ascites, based on data from a meta-analysis of more than 1,000 patients.
Previous research has suggested that nonselective beta-blockers (NSBBs) might have a negative effect on patients with refractory ascites, but the effect on patients with and without ascites has not been assessed, wrote Laura Turco, MD, of the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Emilia-Romagna, Italy, and colleagues.
In a study published in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, the researchers analyzed 1,113 cirrhosis patients including 452 with ascites. Overall, 968 patients had received treatment with NSBBs. Response to pressure reduction was defined as a decrease of more than 20% from baseline or a decrease to less than 12 mm Hg.
A total of 329 of the 661 patients without ascites (50%) met the definition as responders. These responders had significantly lower odds than did nonresponders of a combination of clinical events including ascites, variceal hemorrhage, or encephalopathy (odds ratio, 0.35) and also had significantly lower odds than nonresponders of liver transplantation or death (OR, 0.50).
A total of 188 of the 452 patients with ascites were responders (42%). These responders had significantly lower odds than those of nonresponders (OR, 0.27) of variceal hemorrhage, refractory ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, or hepatorenal syndrome. The responders also had significantly lower odds of liver transplantation or death (OR, 0.47).
The results are important in light of concerns about the impact of NSBBs on renal function and mortality in cirrhosis patients with ascites, the researchers said.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of retrospective data from prospective studies, and the incomplete collection of data on the variables of comorbidities, hepatocellular carcinoma, and other predictive scores; alcohol use or abstinence was a potential confounder as well, the researchers noted.
However, “By showing that reductions in portal pressure induced by NSBB-based pharmacologic therapy improve outcomes and decrease mortality, our study supports the use of NSBB in all clinical settings (primary or secondary prophylaxis) and in both patients with or without ascites,” they concluded. They found no heterogeneity among the studies included in the analysis.
The study was supported by multiple sources including the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Yale Liver Center, National Institutes of Health, and Instituto de Salud Carlos III, and was cofunded by the European Union. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Turco L et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 June 5. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.05.050.
Use of nonselective beta-blockers to reduce portal pressure in cirrhosis improved outcomes in adults with or without ascites, based on data from a meta-analysis of more than 1,000 patients.
Previous research has suggested that nonselective beta-blockers (NSBBs) might have a negative effect on patients with refractory ascites, but the effect on patients with and without ascites has not been assessed, wrote Laura Turco, MD, of the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Emilia-Romagna, Italy, and colleagues.
In a study published in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, the researchers analyzed 1,113 cirrhosis patients including 452 with ascites. Overall, 968 patients had received treatment with NSBBs. Response to pressure reduction was defined as a decrease of more than 20% from baseline or a decrease to less than 12 mm Hg.
A total of 329 of the 661 patients without ascites (50%) met the definition as responders. These responders had significantly lower odds than did nonresponders of a combination of clinical events including ascites, variceal hemorrhage, or encephalopathy (odds ratio, 0.35) and also had significantly lower odds than nonresponders of liver transplantation or death (OR, 0.50).
A total of 188 of the 452 patients with ascites were responders (42%). These responders had significantly lower odds than those of nonresponders (OR, 0.27) of variceal hemorrhage, refractory ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, or hepatorenal syndrome. The responders also had significantly lower odds of liver transplantation or death (OR, 0.47).
The results are important in light of concerns about the impact of NSBBs on renal function and mortality in cirrhosis patients with ascites, the researchers said.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of retrospective data from prospective studies, and the incomplete collection of data on the variables of comorbidities, hepatocellular carcinoma, and other predictive scores; alcohol use or abstinence was a potential confounder as well, the researchers noted.
However, “By showing that reductions in portal pressure induced by NSBB-based pharmacologic therapy improve outcomes and decrease mortality, our study supports the use of NSBB in all clinical settings (primary or secondary prophylaxis) and in both patients with or without ascites,” they concluded. They found no heterogeneity among the studies included in the analysis.
The study was supported by multiple sources including the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Yale Liver Center, National Institutes of Health, and Instituto de Salud Carlos III, and was cofunded by the European Union. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Turco L et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 June 5. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.05.050.
Use of nonselective beta-blockers to reduce portal pressure in cirrhosis improved outcomes in adults with or without ascites, based on data from a meta-analysis of more than 1,000 patients.
Previous research has suggested that nonselective beta-blockers (NSBBs) might have a negative effect on patients with refractory ascites, but the effect on patients with and without ascites has not been assessed, wrote Laura Turco, MD, of the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Emilia-Romagna, Italy, and colleagues.
In a study published in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, the researchers analyzed 1,113 cirrhosis patients including 452 with ascites. Overall, 968 patients had received treatment with NSBBs. Response to pressure reduction was defined as a decrease of more than 20% from baseline or a decrease to less than 12 mm Hg.
A total of 329 of the 661 patients without ascites (50%) met the definition as responders. These responders had significantly lower odds than did nonresponders of a combination of clinical events including ascites, variceal hemorrhage, or encephalopathy (odds ratio, 0.35) and also had significantly lower odds than nonresponders of liver transplantation or death (OR, 0.50).
A total of 188 of the 452 patients with ascites were responders (42%). These responders had significantly lower odds than those of nonresponders (OR, 0.27) of variceal hemorrhage, refractory ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, or hepatorenal syndrome. The responders also had significantly lower odds of liver transplantation or death (OR, 0.47).
The results are important in light of concerns about the impact of NSBBs on renal function and mortality in cirrhosis patients with ascites, the researchers said.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of retrospective data from prospective studies, and the incomplete collection of data on the variables of comorbidities, hepatocellular carcinoma, and other predictive scores; alcohol use or abstinence was a potential confounder as well, the researchers noted.
However, “By showing that reductions in portal pressure induced by NSBB-based pharmacologic therapy improve outcomes and decrease mortality, our study supports the use of NSBB in all clinical settings (primary or secondary prophylaxis) and in both patients with or without ascites,” they concluded. They found no heterogeneity among the studies included in the analysis.
The study was supported by multiple sources including the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Yale Liver Center, National Institutes of Health, and Instituto de Salud Carlos III, and was cofunded by the European Union. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Turco L et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 June 5. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.05.050.
FROM CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
Statins hamper hepatocellular carcinoma in viral hepatitis patients
Lipophilic statin therapy significantly reduced the incidence and mortality of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults with viral hepatitis, based on data from 16,668 patients.
The mortality rates for hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States and Europe have been on the rise for decades, and the risk may persist in severe cases despite the use of hepatitis B virus suppression or hepatitis C virus eradication, wrote Tracey G. Simon, MD, of Harvard Medical School, Boston, and colleagues. Previous studies suggest that statins might reduce HCC risk in viral hepatitis patients, but evidence supporting one type of statin over another for HCC prevention is limited, they said.
In a study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, the researchers reviewed data from a national registry of hepatitis patients in Sweden to assess the effect of lipophilic or hydrophilic statin use on HCC incidence and mortality.
They found a significant reduction in 10-year HCC risk for lipophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (8.1% vs. 3.3%. However, the difference was not significant for hydrophilic statin users vs. nonusers (8.0% vs. 6.8%). The effect of lipophilic statin use was dose dependent; the largest effect on reduction in HCC risk occurred with 600 or more lipophilic statin cumulative daily doses in users, compared with nonusers (8.4% vs. 2.5%).
The study population included 6,554 lipophilic statin users and 1,780 hydrophilic statin users, matched with 8,334 nonusers. Patient demographics were similar between both types of statin user and nonuser groups.
In addition, 10-year mortality was significantly lower for lipophilic statin users compared with nonusers (15.2% vs. 7.3%) and also for hydrophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (16.0% vs. 11.5%).
In a small number of patients with liver disease (462), liver-specific mortality was significantly reduced in lipophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.76 vs. 0.98).
“Of note, our findings were robust across several sensitivity analyses and were similar in all predefined subgroups, including among men and women and persons with and without cirrhosis or antiviral therapy use,” the researchers noted.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the potential confounding from variables such as smoking, hepatitis B viral DNA, hepatitis C virus eradication, stage of fibrosis, and HCC screening, as well as a lack of laboratory data to assess cholesterol levels’ impact on statin use, the researchers said. In addition, the study did not compare lipophilic and hydrophilic statins.
However, the results suggest potential distinct benefits of lipophilic statins to reduce HCC risk and support the need for further research, the researchers concluded.
Dr. Simon had no financial conflicts to disclose, but disclosed support from a North American Training Grant from the American College of Gastroenterology. Several coauthors disclosed relationships with multiple companies including AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Janssen, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. The study was supported in part by the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, the Boston Nutrition Obesity Research Center, the National Institutes of Health, Nyckelfonden, Region Orebro (Sweden) County, and the Karolinska Institutet.
SOURCE: Simon TG et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Aug 19. doi: 10.7326/M18-2753.
Lipophilic statin therapy significantly reduced the incidence and mortality of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults with viral hepatitis, based on data from 16,668 patients.
The mortality rates for hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States and Europe have been on the rise for decades, and the risk may persist in severe cases despite the use of hepatitis B virus suppression or hepatitis C virus eradication, wrote Tracey G. Simon, MD, of Harvard Medical School, Boston, and colleagues. Previous studies suggest that statins might reduce HCC risk in viral hepatitis patients, but evidence supporting one type of statin over another for HCC prevention is limited, they said.
In a study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, the researchers reviewed data from a national registry of hepatitis patients in Sweden to assess the effect of lipophilic or hydrophilic statin use on HCC incidence and mortality.
They found a significant reduction in 10-year HCC risk for lipophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (8.1% vs. 3.3%. However, the difference was not significant for hydrophilic statin users vs. nonusers (8.0% vs. 6.8%). The effect of lipophilic statin use was dose dependent; the largest effect on reduction in HCC risk occurred with 600 or more lipophilic statin cumulative daily doses in users, compared with nonusers (8.4% vs. 2.5%).
The study population included 6,554 lipophilic statin users and 1,780 hydrophilic statin users, matched with 8,334 nonusers. Patient demographics were similar between both types of statin user and nonuser groups.
In addition, 10-year mortality was significantly lower for lipophilic statin users compared with nonusers (15.2% vs. 7.3%) and also for hydrophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (16.0% vs. 11.5%).
In a small number of patients with liver disease (462), liver-specific mortality was significantly reduced in lipophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.76 vs. 0.98).
“Of note, our findings were robust across several sensitivity analyses and were similar in all predefined subgroups, including among men and women and persons with and without cirrhosis or antiviral therapy use,” the researchers noted.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the potential confounding from variables such as smoking, hepatitis B viral DNA, hepatitis C virus eradication, stage of fibrosis, and HCC screening, as well as a lack of laboratory data to assess cholesterol levels’ impact on statin use, the researchers said. In addition, the study did not compare lipophilic and hydrophilic statins.
However, the results suggest potential distinct benefits of lipophilic statins to reduce HCC risk and support the need for further research, the researchers concluded.
Dr. Simon had no financial conflicts to disclose, but disclosed support from a North American Training Grant from the American College of Gastroenterology. Several coauthors disclosed relationships with multiple companies including AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Janssen, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. The study was supported in part by the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, the Boston Nutrition Obesity Research Center, the National Institutes of Health, Nyckelfonden, Region Orebro (Sweden) County, and the Karolinska Institutet.
SOURCE: Simon TG et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Aug 19. doi: 10.7326/M18-2753.
Lipophilic statin therapy significantly reduced the incidence and mortality of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults with viral hepatitis, based on data from 16,668 patients.
The mortality rates for hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States and Europe have been on the rise for decades, and the risk may persist in severe cases despite the use of hepatitis B virus suppression or hepatitis C virus eradication, wrote Tracey G. Simon, MD, of Harvard Medical School, Boston, and colleagues. Previous studies suggest that statins might reduce HCC risk in viral hepatitis patients, but evidence supporting one type of statin over another for HCC prevention is limited, they said.
In a study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, the researchers reviewed data from a national registry of hepatitis patients in Sweden to assess the effect of lipophilic or hydrophilic statin use on HCC incidence and mortality.
They found a significant reduction in 10-year HCC risk for lipophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (8.1% vs. 3.3%. However, the difference was not significant for hydrophilic statin users vs. nonusers (8.0% vs. 6.8%). The effect of lipophilic statin use was dose dependent; the largest effect on reduction in HCC risk occurred with 600 or more lipophilic statin cumulative daily doses in users, compared with nonusers (8.4% vs. 2.5%).
The study population included 6,554 lipophilic statin users and 1,780 hydrophilic statin users, matched with 8,334 nonusers. Patient demographics were similar between both types of statin user and nonuser groups.
In addition, 10-year mortality was significantly lower for lipophilic statin users compared with nonusers (15.2% vs. 7.3%) and also for hydrophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (16.0% vs. 11.5%).
In a small number of patients with liver disease (462), liver-specific mortality was significantly reduced in lipophilic statin users, compared with nonusers (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.76 vs. 0.98).
“Of note, our findings were robust across several sensitivity analyses and were similar in all predefined subgroups, including among men and women and persons with and without cirrhosis or antiviral therapy use,” the researchers noted.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the potential confounding from variables such as smoking, hepatitis B viral DNA, hepatitis C virus eradication, stage of fibrosis, and HCC screening, as well as a lack of laboratory data to assess cholesterol levels’ impact on statin use, the researchers said. In addition, the study did not compare lipophilic and hydrophilic statins.
However, the results suggest potential distinct benefits of lipophilic statins to reduce HCC risk and support the need for further research, the researchers concluded.
Dr. Simon had no financial conflicts to disclose, but disclosed support from a North American Training Grant from the American College of Gastroenterology. Several coauthors disclosed relationships with multiple companies including AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Janssen, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. The study was supported in part by the American College of Gastroenterology, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, the Boston Nutrition Obesity Research Center, the National Institutes of Health, Nyckelfonden, Region Orebro (Sweden) County, and the Karolinska Institutet.
SOURCE: Simon TG et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Aug 19. doi: 10.7326/M18-2753.
FROM THE ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
Key clinical point: Use of lipophilic statins significantly reduced incidence and mortality of hepatocellular cancer in adults with viral hepatitis.
Major finding: The 10-year risk of HCC was 8.1% among patients taking lipophilic statins, compared with 3.3% among those not on statins.
Study details: The data come from a population-based cohort study of 16,668 adult with viral hepatitis from a national registry in Sweden.
Disclosures: Dr. Simon had no financial conflicts to disclose, but disclosed support from a North American Training Grant from the American College of Gastroenterology. Several coauthors disclosed relationships with multiple companies including AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Janssen, and MSD.
Source: Simon TG et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Aug 19. doi: 10.7326/M18-2753.
The postgraduate course on liver, pancreas, and biliary tract
The course was framed with the theme, “The Practice of Gastroenterology: The Literature and the Art,” with each speaker highlighting not only the relevant updates in the literature, but also sharing the insights into the art of medical practice. The course incorporated an audience response system to fully utilize the available educational technology and increase participant engagement.
Manal Abdelmalek, MD, provided an update on the hot topic of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, including new developments in pharmacotherapy. The AGA President-elect, Hashem El-Serag, MD, MPH, AGAF, delivered a state-of-the-art presentation on the burgeoning burden of hepatocellular carcinoma and cutting-edge multidisciplinary management. Vijay Shah, MD, then reminded us of the persistent presence of alcoholic liver disease in the United States and the controversies surrounding liver transplantation in this setting. Steven Flamm, MD, completed the liver session by sharing the secrets of managing the complications of cirrhosis.
The second session, on the pancreas and biliary tract, was headed by Timothy Gardner, MD, who shared the pearls of the management of pancreatitis. Michelle Kim, MD, provided fresh and up-to-date insights on the management of pancreatic and biliary cancer, including updated technological options. Finally, Marcia Canto, MD, discussed the hot topic of pancreatic cancer and whether screening should be instituted. Both of these sessions had designated time set aside for panel discussions with questions from the audience.
This is a summary provided by the moderator of one of the AGA Postgraduate Course sessions held at DDW 2019. Dr. Ahn, MD, MS, MBA, is professor of medicine and director of clinical hepatology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland. He has no relevant conflicts of interest.
The course was framed with the theme, “The Practice of Gastroenterology: The Literature and the Art,” with each speaker highlighting not only the relevant updates in the literature, but also sharing the insights into the art of medical practice. The course incorporated an audience response system to fully utilize the available educational technology and increase participant engagement.
Manal Abdelmalek, MD, provided an update on the hot topic of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, including new developments in pharmacotherapy. The AGA President-elect, Hashem El-Serag, MD, MPH, AGAF, delivered a state-of-the-art presentation on the burgeoning burden of hepatocellular carcinoma and cutting-edge multidisciplinary management. Vijay Shah, MD, then reminded us of the persistent presence of alcoholic liver disease in the United States and the controversies surrounding liver transplantation in this setting. Steven Flamm, MD, completed the liver session by sharing the secrets of managing the complications of cirrhosis.
The second session, on the pancreas and biliary tract, was headed by Timothy Gardner, MD, who shared the pearls of the management of pancreatitis. Michelle Kim, MD, provided fresh and up-to-date insights on the management of pancreatic and biliary cancer, including updated technological options. Finally, Marcia Canto, MD, discussed the hot topic of pancreatic cancer and whether screening should be instituted. Both of these sessions had designated time set aside for panel discussions with questions from the audience.
This is a summary provided by the moderator of one of the AGA Postgraduate Course sessions held at DDW 2019. Dr. Ahn, MD, MS, MBA, is professor of medicine and director of clinical hepatology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland. He has no relevant conflicts of interest.
The course was framed with the theme, “The Practice of Gastroenterology: The Literature and the Art,” with each speaker highlighting not only the relevant updates in the literature, but also sharing the insights into the art of medical practice. The course incorporated an audience response system to fully utilize the available educational technology and increase participant engagement.
Manal Abdelmalek, MD, provided an update on the hot topic of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, including new developments in pharmacotherapy. The AGA President-elect, Hashem El-Serag, MD, MPH, AGAF, delivered a state-of-the-art presentation on the burgeoning burden of hepatocellular carcinoma and cutting-edge multidisciplinary management. Vijay Shah, MD, then reminded us of the persistent presence of alcoholic liver disease in the United States and the controversies surrounding liver transplantation in this setting. Steven Flamm, MD, completed the liver session by sharing the secrets of managing the complications of cirrhosis.
The second session, on the pancreas and biliary tract, was headed by Timothy Gardner, MD, who shared the pearls of the management of pancreatitis. Michelle Kim, MD, provided fresh and up-to-date insights on the management of pancreatic and biliary cancer, including updated technological options. Finally, Marcia Canto, MD, discussed the hot topic of pancreatic cancer and whether screening should be instituted. Both of these sessions had designated time set aside for panel discussions with questions from the audience.
This is a summary provided by the moderator of one of the AGA Postgraduate Course sessions held at DDW 2019. Dr. Ahn, MD, MS, MBA, is professor of medicine and director of clinical hepatology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland. He has no relevant conflicts of interest.
Inflammation diminishes quality of life in NAFLD, not fibrosis
A variety of demographic and disease-related factors contribute to poorer quality of life in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), based on questionnaires involving 304 European patients.
In contrast with previous research, lobular inflammation, but not hepatic fibrosis, was associated with worse quality of life, reported to lead author Yvonne Huber, MD, of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, and colleagues. Women and those with advanced disease or comorbidities had the lowest health-related quality of life (HRQL) scores. The investigators suggested that these findings could be used for treatment planning at a population and patient level.
“With the emergence of medical therapy for [nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)], it will be of importance to identify patients with the highest unmet need for treatment,” the investigators wrote in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, emphasizing that therapies targeting inflammation could provide the greatest relief.
To determine which patients with NAFLD were most affected by their condition, the investigators used the Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire (CLDQ), which assesses physical, mental, social, and emotional function, with lower scores indicating poorer health-related quality of life. “[The CLDQ] more specifically addresses symptoms of patients with chronic liver disease, including extrahepatic manifestations, compared with traditional HRQL measures such as the [Short Form–36 (SF-36)] Health Survey Questionnaire,” the investigators explained. Recent research has used the CLDQ to reveal a variety of findings, the investigators noted, such as a 2016 study by Alt and colleagues outlining the most common symptoms in noninfectious chronic liver disease (abdominal discomfort, fatigue, and anxiety), and two studies by Younossi and colleagues describing quality of life improvements after curing hepatitis C virus, and negative impacts of viremia and hepatic inflammation in patients with hepatitis B.
The current study involved 304 patients with histologically confirmed NAFLD who were prospectively entered into the European NAFLD registry via centers in Germany (n = 133), the United Kingdom (n = 154), and Spain (n = 17). Patient data included demographic factors, laboratory findings, and histologic features. Within 6 months of liver biopsy, patients completed the CLDQ.
The mean patient age was 52.3 years, with slightly more men than women (53.3% vs. 46.7%). Most patients (75%) were obese, leading to a median body mass index of 33.3 kg/m2. More than two-thirds of patients (69.1%) had NASH, while approximately half of the population (51.4%) had moderate steatosis, no or low-grade fibrosis (F0-2, 58.2%), and no or low-grade lobular inflammation (grade 0 or 1, 54.7%). The three countries had significantly different population profiles; for example, the United Kingdom had an approximately 10% higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes and obesity compared with the entire cohort, but a decreased arterial hypertension rate of a similar magnitude. The United Kingdom also had a significantly lower mean CLDQ score than that of the study population as a whole (4.73 vs. 4.99).
Analysis of the entire cohort revealed that a variety of demographic and disease-related factors negatively impacted health-related quality of life. Women had a significantly lower mean CLDQ score than that of men (5.31 vs. 4.62; P less than .001), more often reporting abdominal symptoms, fatigue, systemic symptoms, reduced activity, diminished emotional functioning, and worry. CLDQ overall score was negatively influenced by obesity (4.83 vs. 5.46), type 2 diabetes (4.74 vs. 5.25), and hyperlipidemia (4.84 vs. 5.24), but not hypertension. Laboratory findings that negatively correlated with CLDQ included aspartate transaminase (AST) and HbA1c, whereas ferritin was positively correlated.
Generally, patients with NASH reported worse quality of life than that of those with just NAFLD (4.85 vs. 5.31). Factors contributing most to this disparity were fatigue, systemic symptoms, activity, and worry. On a histologic level, hepatic steatosis, ballooning, and lobular inflammation predicted poorer quality of life; although advanced fibrosis and compensated cirrhosis were associated with a trend toward reduced quality of life, this pattern lacked statistical significance. Multivariate analysis, which accounted for age, sex, body mass index, country, and type 2 diabetes, revealed independent associations between reduced quality of life and type 2 diabetes, sex, age, body mass index, and hepatic inflammation, but not fibrosis.
“The striking finding of the current analysis in this well-characterized European cohort was that, in contrast to the published data on predictors of overall and liver-specific mortality, lobular inflammation correlated independently with HRQL,” the investigators wrote. “These results differ from the NASH [Clinical Research Network] cohort, which found lower HRQL using the generic [SF-36 Health Survey Questionnaire] in NASH compared with a healthy U.S. population and a significant effect in cirrhosis only.” The investigators suggested that mechanistic differences in disease progression could explain this discordance.
Although hepatic fibrosis has been tied with quality of life by some studies, the investigators pointed out that patients with chronic hepatitis B or C have reported improved quality of life after viral elimination or suppression, which reduce inflammation, but not fibrosis. “On the basis of the current analysis, it can be expected that improvement of steatohepatitis, and in particular lobular inflammation, will have measurable influence on HRQL even independently of fibrosis improvement,” the investigators concluded.
The study was funded by H2020. The investigators reported no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Huber Y et al. CGH. 2018 Dec 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.016.
A variety of demographic and disease-related factors contribute to poorer quality of life in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), based on questionnaires involving 304 European patients.
In contrast with previous research, lobular inflammation, but not hepatic fibrosis, was associated with worse quality of life, reported to lead author Yvonne Huber, MD, of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, and colleagues. Women and those with advanced disease or comorbidities had the lowest health-related quality of life (HRQL) scores. The investigators suggested that these findings could be used for treatment planning at a population and patient level.
“With the emergence of medical therapy for [nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)], it will be of importance to identify patients with the highest unmet need for treatment,” the investigators wrote in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, emphasizing that therapies targeting inflammation could provide the greatest relief.
To determine which patients with NAFLD were most affected by their condition, the investigators used the Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire (CLDQ), which assesses physical, mental, social, and emotional function, with lower scores indicating poorer health-related quality of life. “[The CLDQ] more specifically addresses symptoms of patients with chronic liver disease, including extrahepatic manifestations, compared with traditional HRQL measures such as the [Short Form–36 (SF-36)] Health Survey Questionnaire,” the investigators explained. Recent research has used the CLDQ to reveal a variety of findings, the investigators noted, such as a 2016 study by Alt and colleagues outlining the most common symptoms in noninfectious chronic liver disease (abdominal discomfort, fatigue, and anxiety), and two studies by Younossi and colleagues describing quality of life improvements after curing hepatitis C virus, and negative impacts of viremia and hepatic inflammation in patients with hepatitis B.
The current study involved 304 patients with histologically confirmed NAFLD who were prospectively entered into the European NAFLD registry via centers in Germany (n = 133), the United Kingdom (n = 154), and Spain (n = 17). Patient data included demographic factors, laboratory findings, and histologic features. Within 6 months of liver biopsy, patients completed the CLDQ.
The mean patient age was 52.3 years, with slightly more men than women (53.3% vs. 46.7%). Most patients (75%) were obese, leading to a median body mass index of 33.3 kg/m2. More than two-thirds of patients (69.1%) had NASH, while approximately half of the population (51.4%) had moderate steatosis, no or low-grade fibrosis (F0-2, 58.2%), and no or low-grade lobular inflammation (grade 0 or 1, 54.7%). The three countries had significantly different population profiles; for example, the United Kingdom had an approximately 10% higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes and obesity compared with the entire cohort, but a decreased arterial hypertension rate of a similar magnitude. The United Kingdom also had a significantly lower mean CLDQ score than that of the study population as a whole (4.73 vs. 4.99).
Analysis of the entire cohort revealed that a variety of demographic and disease-related factors negatively impacted health-related quality of life. Women had a significantly lower mean CLDQ score than that of men (5.31 vs. 4.62; P less than .001), more often reporting abdominal symptoms, fatigue, systemic symptoms, reduced activity, diminished emotional functioning, and worry. CLDQ overall score was negatively influenced by obesity (4.83 vs. 5.46), type 2 diabetes (4.74 vs. 5.25), and hyperlipidemia (4.84 vs. 5.24), but not hypertension. Laboratory findings that negatively correlated with CLDQ included aspartate transaminase (AST) and HbA1c, whereas ferritin was positively correlated.
Generally, patients with NASH reported worse quality of life than that of those with just NAFLD (4.85 vs. 5.31). Factors contributing most to this disparity were fatigue, systemic symptoms, activity, and worry. On a histologic level, hepatic steatosis, ballooning, and lobular inflammation predicted poorer quality of life; although advanced fibrosis and compensated cirrhosis were associated with a trend toward reduced quality of life, this pattern lacked statistical significance. Multivariate analysis, which accounted for age, sex, body mass index, country, and type 2 diabetes, revealed independent associations between reduced quality of life and type 2 diabetes, sex, age, body mass index, and hepatic inflammation, but not fibrosis.
“The striking finding of the current analysis in this well-characterized European cohort was that, in contrast to the published data on predictors of overall and liver-specific mortality, lobular inflammation correlated independently with HRQL,” the investigators wrote. “These results differ from the NASH [Clinical Research Network] cohort, which found lower HRQL using the generic [SF-36 Health Survey Questionnaire] in NASH compared with a healthy U.S. population and a significant effect in cirrhosis only.” The investigators suggested that mechanistic differences in disease progression could explain this discordance.
Although hepatic fibrosis has been tied with quality of life by some studies, the investigators pointed out that patients with chronic hepatitis B or C have reported improved quality of life after viral elimination or suppression, which reduce inflammation, but not fibrosis. “On the basis of the current analysis, it can be expected that improvement of steatohepatitis, and in particular lobular inflammation, will have measurable influence on HRQL even independently of fibrosis improvement,” the investigators concluded.
The study was funded by H2020. The investigators reported no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Huber Y et al. CGH. 2018 Dec 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.016.
A variety of demographic and disease-related factors contribute to poorer quality of life in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), based on questionnaires involving 304 European patients.
In contrast with previous research, lobular inflammation, but not hepatic fibrosis, was associated with worse quality of life, reported to lead author Yvonne Huber, MD, of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, and colleagues. Women and those with advanced disease or comorbidities had the lowest health-related quality of life (HRQL) scores. The investigators suggested that these findings could be used for treatment planning at a population and patient level.
“With the emergence of medical therapy for [nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)], it will be of importance to identify patients with the highest unmet need for treatment,” the investigators wrote in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, emphasizing that therapies targeting inflammation could provide the greatest relief.
To determine which patients with NAFLD were most affected by their condition, the investigators used the Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire (CLDQ), which assesses physical, mental, social, and emotional function, with lower scores indicating poorer health-related quality of life. “[The CLDQ] more specifically addresses symptoms of patients with chronic liver disease, including extrahepatic manifestations, compared with traditional HRQL measures such as the [Short Form–36 (SF-36)] Health Survey Questionnaire,” the investigators explained. Recent research has used the CLDQ to reveal a variety of findings, the investigators noted, such as a 2016 study by Alt and colleagues outlining the most common symptoms in noninfectious chronic liver disease (abdominal discomfort, fatigue, and anxiety), and two studies by Younossi and colleagues describing quality of life improvements after curing hepatitis C virus, and negative impacts of viremia and hepatic inflammation in patients with hepatitis B.
The current study involved 304 patients with histologically confirmed NAFLD who were prospectively entered into the European NAFLD registry via centers in Germany (n = 133), the United Kingdom (n = 154), and Spain (n = 17). Patient data included demographic factors, laboratory findings, and histologic features. Within 6 months of liver biopsy, patients completed the CLDQ.
The mean patient age was 52.3 years, with slightly more men than women (53.3% vs. 46.7%). Most patients (75%) were obese, leading to a median body mass index of 33.3 kg/m2. More than two-thirds of patients (69.1%) had NASH, while approximately half of the population (51.4%) had moderate steatosis, no or low-grade fibrosis (F0-2, 58.2%), and no or low-grade lobular inflammation (grade 0 or 1, 54.7%). The three countries had significantly different population profiles; for example, the United Kingdom had an approximately 10% higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes and obesity compared with the entire cohort, but a decreased arterial hypertension rate of a similar magnitude. The United Kingdom also had a significantly lower mean CLDQ score than that of the study population as a whole (4.73 vs. 4.99).
Analysis of the entire cohort revealed that a variety of demographic and disease-related factors negatively impacted health-related quality of life. Women had a significantly lower mean CLDQ score than that of men (5.31 vs. 4.62; P less than .001), more often reporting abdominal symptoms, fatigue, systemic symptoms, reduced activity, diminished emotional functioning, and worry. CLDQ overall score was negatively influenced by obesity (4.83 vs. 5.46), type 2 diabetes (4.74 vs. 5.25), and hyperlipidemia (4.84 vs. 5.24), but not hypertension. Laboratory findings that negatively correlated with CLDQ included aspartate transaminase (AST) and HbA1c, whereas ferritin was positively correlated.
Generally, patients with NASH reported worse quality of life than that of those with just NAFLD (4.85 vs. 5.31). Factors contributing most to this disparity were fatigue, systemic symptoms, activity, and worry. On a histologic level, hepatic steatosis, ballooning, and lobular inflammation predicted poorer quality of life; although advanced fibrosis and compensated cirrhosis were associated with a trend toward reduced quality of life, this pattern lacked statistical significance. Multivariate analysis, which accounted for age, sex, body mass index, country, and type 2 diabetes, revealed independent associations between reduced quality of life and type 2 diabetes, sex, age, body mass index, and hepatic inflammation, but not fibrosis.
“The striking finding of the current analysis in this well-characterized European cohort was that, in contrast to the published data on predictors of overall and liver-specific mortality, lobular inflammation correlated independently with HRQL,” the investigators wrote. “These results differ from the NASH [Clinical Research Network] cohort, which found lower HRQL using the generic [SF-36 Health Survey Questionnaire] in NASH compared with a healthy U.S. population and a significant effect in cirrhosis only.” The investigators suggested that mechanistic differences in disease progression could explain this discordance.
Although hepatic fibrosis has been tied with quality of life by some studies, the investigators pointed out that patients with chronic hepatitis B or C have reported improved quality of life after viral elimination or suppression, which reduce inflammation, but not fibrosis. “On the basis of the current analysis, it can be expected that improvement of steatohepatitis, and in particular lobular inflammation, will have measurable influence on HRQL even independently of fibrosis improvement,” the investigators concluded.
The study was funded by H2020. The investigators reported no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Huber Y et al. CGH. 2018 Dec 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.016.
FROM CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY