Liver Disease

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.

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.

The Food and Drug Administration has warned that certain hepatitis C virus medications have led to rare instances of worsening liver function or liver failure.

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.

cpalmer@mdedge.com

The Food and Drug Administration has warned that certain hepatitis C virus medications have led to rare instances of worsening liver function or liver failure.

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.

cpalmer@mdedge.com

The Food and Drug Administration has warned that certain hepatitis C virus medications have led to rare instances of worsening liver function or liver failure.

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.

cpalmer@mdedge.com

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has issued a draft recommendation statement for screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in adolescents and adults, and now suggests that all adults aged 18-79 years receive screening.

Wikimedia Commons/BruceBlaus

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.

lfranki@mdedge.com

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has issued a draft recommendation statement for screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in adolescents and adults, and now suggests that all adults aged 18-79 years receive screening.

Wikimedia Commons/BruceBlaus

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.

lfranki@mdedge.com

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has issued a draft recommendation statement for screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in adolescents and adults, and now suggests that all adults aged 18-79 years receive screening.

Wikimedia Commons/BruceBlaus

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.

lfranki@mdedge.com

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.

Wikimedia Commons/Cancer Research UK

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.

Wikimedia Commons/Cancer Research UK

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.

Wikimedia Commons/Cancer Research UK

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.

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.

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.

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 HbA_1c, 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 HbA_1c, 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 HbA_1c, 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.

The spleen stiffness (SS) to liver stiffness (LS) ratio was significantly higher in patients with hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) than in patients with alcohol-related liver disease (ALD), according to the results of a multicenter prospective study. In addition, long-term outcome and complications differed dramatically between HCV and ALD. Variceal bleeding was the most common sign of decompensation and cause of death in patients with HCV, while jaundice was the most common sign of decompensation in patients with ALD.

©pixologicstudio/thinkstockphotos.com

Omar Elshaarawy, MSc, of the University of Heidelberg (Germany) and colleagues reported on their prospective study of 411 patients with HCV (220 patients) or ALD (191 patients) that were assessed for both LS and SS using the Fibroscan device. They also discussed their retrospective analysis of LS and spleen length (SL) from a separate, retrospective cohort of 449 patients (267 with HCV, 182 with ALD) for whom long-term data on decompensation/death were available.

The researchers found that SS was significantly higher in HCV patients, compared with those with ALD (42.0 vs. 32.6 kPa; P less than .0001), as was SL (15.6 vs. 11.9 cm, P less than .0001); this was despite a lower mean LS in HCV. As a result, the SS/LS ratio and the SL/LS ratio were both significantly higher in HCV (3.8 vs. 1.72 and 1.46 vs. 0.86, P less than .0001) through all fibrosis stages.

They also found that patients with ALD had higher LS values (30.5 vs. 21.3 kPa) and predominantly presented with jaundice (65.2%), with liver failure as the major cause of death (P less than .01). In contrast, in HCV, spleens were larger (17.6 vs. 12.1 cm) while variceal bleeding was the major cause of decompensation (73.2%) and death (P less than .001).

“We have demonstrated the disease-specific differences in SS/LS and SL/LS ratio between HCV and ALD. They underscore the role of the intrahepatic histological site of inflammation/fibrosis. We suggest that the SS/LS ratio could be used to confirm the disease etiology and predict disease-specific complications,” the researchers concluded.

The study was supported by the Dietmar Hopp Foundation. The authors reported they had no conflicts.

mlesney@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Elshaarawy O et al. J Hepatol Reports. 2019 Jun 20. doi: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2019.05.003.

The spleen stiffness (SS) to liver stiffness (LS) ratio was significantly higher in patients with hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) than in patients with alcohol-related liver disease (ALD), according to the results of a multicenter prospective study. In addition, long-term outcome and complications differed dramatically between HCV and ALD. Variceal bleeding was the most common sign of decompensation and cause of death in patients with HCV, while jaundice was the most common sign of decompensation in patients with ALD.

©pixologicstudio/thinkstockphotos.com

Omar Elshaarawy, MSc, of the University of Heidelberg (Germany) and colleagues reported on their prospective study of 411 patients with HCV (220 patients) or ALD (191 patients) that were assessed for both LS and SS using the Fibroscan device. They also discussed their retrospective analysis of LS and spleen length (SL) from a separate, retrospective cohort of 449 patients (267 with HCV, 182 with ALD) for whom long-term data on decompensation/death were available.

The researchers found that SS was significantly higher in HCV patients, compared with those with ALD (42.0 vs. 32.6 kPa; P less than .0001), as was SL (15.6 vs. 11.9 cm, P less than .0001); this was despite a lower mean LS in HCV. As a result, the SS/LS ratio and the SL/LS ratio were both significantly higher in HCV (3.8 vs. 1.72 and 1.46 vs. 0.86, P less than .0001) through all fibrosis stages.

They also found that patients with ALD had higher LS values (30.5 vs. 21.3 kPa) and predominantly presented with jaundice (65.2%), with liver failure as the major cause of death (P less than .01). In contrast, in HCV, spleens were larger (17.6 vs. 12.1 cm) while variceal bleeding was the major cause of decompensation (73.2%) and death (P less than .001).

“We have demonstrated the disease-specific differences in SS/LS and SL/LS ratio between HCV and ALD. They underscore the role of the intrahepatic histological site of inflammation/fibrosis. We suggest that the SS/LS ratio could be used to confirm the disease etiology and predict disease-specific complications,” the researchers concluded.

The study was supported by the Dietmar Hopp Foundation. The authors reported they had no conflicts.

mlesney@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Elshaarawy O et al. J Hepatol Reports. 2019 Jun 20. doi: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2019.05.003.

The spleen stiffness (SS) to liver stiffness (LS) ratio was significantly higher in patients with hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) than in patients with alcohol-related liver disease (ALD), according to the results of a multicenter prospective study. In addition, long-term outcome and complications differed dramatically between HCV and ALD. Variceal bleeding was the most common sign of decompensation and cause of death in patients with HCV, while jaundice was the most common sign of decompensation in patients with ALD.

©pixologicstudio/thinkstockphotos.com

Omar Elshaarawy, MSc, of the University of Heidelberg (Germany) and colleagues reported on their prospective study of 411 patients with HCV (220 patients) or ALD (191 patients) that were assessed for both LS and SS using the Fibroscan device. They also discussed their retrospective analysis of LS and spleen length (SL) from a separate, retrospective cohort of 449 patients (267 with HCV, 182 with ALD) for whom long-term data on decompensation/death were available.

The researchers found that SS was significantly higher in HCV patients, compared with those with ALD (42.0 vs. 32.6 kPa; P less than .0001), as was SL (15.6 vs. 11.9 cm, P less than .0001); this was despite a lower mean LS in HCV. As a result, the SS/LS ratio and the SL/LS ratio were both significantly higher in HCV (3.8 vs. 1.72 and 1.46 vs. 0.86, P less than .0001) through all fibrosis stages.

They also found that patients with ALD had higher LS values (30.5 vs. 21.3 kPa) and predominantly presented with jaundice (65.2%), with liver failure as the major cause of death (P less than .01). In contrast, in HCV, spleens were larger (17.6 vs. 12.1 cm) while variceal bleeding was the major cause of decompensation (73.2%) and death (P less than .001).

“We have demonstrated the disease-specific differences in SS/LS and SL/LS ratio between HCV and ALD. They underscore the role of the intrahepatic histological site of inflammation/fibrosis. We suggest that the SS/LS ratio could be used to confirm the disease etiology and predict disease-specific complications,” the researchers concluded.

The study was supported by the Dietmar Hopp Foundation. The authors reported they had no conflicts.

mlesney@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Elshaarawy O et al. J Hepatol Reports. 2019 Jun 20. doi: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2019.05.003.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has updated and reaffirmed its 2009 recommendation for screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in pregnant women, according to task force member Douglas K. Owens, MD, of the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto (Calif.) Health Care System and other members of the task force.

CDC/Dr. Erskine Palmer

The recommendation statement, published in JAMA, was based on an evidence report and systematic review also published in JAMA. In that review, two studies of fair quality were identified; one included 155,081 infants born to HBV-positive women identified for case management through the national Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program from 1994 to 2008, and the other included 4,446 infants born in a large, regional health care organization in the United States between 1997 and 2010. In both, low rates of perinatal transmission were reported for those periods – between 0.5% and 1.9% – with the rate falling over time.

In the 2009 recommendation, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that serologic testing for hepatitis B surface antigen accurately identifies HBV infection, and that interventions were effective in preventing perinatal transmission. That recommendation has been reaffirmed in the current update, with HBV screening receiving a grade of A, which is the strongest the USPSTF offers.

In a related editorial, Neil S. Silverman, MD, of the Center for Fetal Medicine and Women’s Ultrasound in Los Angeles noted several improvements in maternal HBV therapy since the publication of the original 2009 recommendation, including maternal HBV-targeted antiviral therapy during pregnancy as an adjunct to neonatal immunoprophylaxis and the ability to refer women for chronic treatment of their HBV disease to prevent long-term infection complications. The task forces also noted that HBV screening of all pregnant women is mandated by law in 26 states.

One member of the task force reported receiving grants and/or personal fees from Healthwise, another member reported receiving personal fees from UpToDate; a third reported participating in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ Hepatitis B Guidance and Hepatitis B Systematic Review Group. The evidence and review study was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr. Silverman reported no disclosures.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCes: Owens DK et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9365; Henderson JT et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):360-2; Silverman NS. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):312-14.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has updated and reaffirmed its 2009 recommendation for screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in pregnant women, according to task force member Douglas K. Owens, MD, of the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto (Calif.) Health Care System and other members of the task force.

CDC/Dr. Erskine Palmer

The recommendation statement, published in JAMA, was based on an evidence report and systematic review also published in JAMA. In that review, two studies of fair quality were identified; one included 155,081 infants born to HBV-positive women identified for case management through the national Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program from 1994 to 2008, and the other included 4,446 infants born in a large, regional health care organization in the United States between 1997 and 2010. In both, low rates of perinatal transmission were reported for those periods – between 0.5% and 1.9% – with the rate falling over time.

In the 2009 recommendation, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that serologic testing for hepatitis B surface antigen accurately identifies HBV infection, and that interventions were effective in preventing perinatal transmission. That recommendation has been reaffirmed in the current update, with HBV screening receiving a grade of A, which is the strongest the USPSTF offers.

In a related editorial, Neil S. Silverman, MD, of the Center for Fetal Medicine and Women’s Ultrasound in Los Angeles noted several improvements in maternal HBV therapy since the publication of the original 2009 recommendation, including maternal HBV-targeted antiviral therapy during pregnancy as an adjunct to neonatal immunoprophylaxis and the ability to refer women for chronic treatment of their HBV disease to prevent long-term infection complications. The task forces also noted that HBV screening of all pregnant women is mandated by law in 26 states.

One member of the task force reported receiving grants and/or personal fees from Healthwise, another member reported receiving personal fees from UpToDate; a third reported participating in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ Hepatitis B Guidance and Hepatitis B Systematic Review Group. The evidence and review study was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr. Silverman reported no disclosures.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCes: Owens DK et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9365; Henderson JT et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):360-2; Silverman NS. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):312-14.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has updated and reaffirmed its 2009 recommendation for screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in pregnant women, according to task force member Douglas K. Owens, MD, of the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto (Calif.) Health Care System and other members of the task force.

CDC/Dr. Erskine Palmer

The recommendation statement, published in JAMA, was based on an evidence report and systematic review also published in JAMA. In that review, two studies of fair quality were identified; one included 155,081 infants born to HBV-positive women identified for case management through the national Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program from 1994 to 2008, and the other included 4,446 infants born in a large, regional health care organization in the United States between 1997 and 2010. In both, low rates of perinatal transmission were reported for those periods – between 0.5% and 1.9% – with the rate falling over time.

In the 2009 recommendation, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that serologic testing for hepatitis B surface antigen accurately identifies HBV infection, and that interventions were effective in preventing perinatal transmission. That recommendation has been reaffirmed in the current update, with HBV screening receiving a grade of A, which is the strongest the USPSTF offers.

In a related editorial, Neil S. Silverman, MD, of the Center for Fetal Medicine and Women’s Ultrasound in Los Angeles noted several improvements in maternal HBV therapy since the publication of the original 2009 recommendation, including maternal HBV-targeted antiviral therapy during pregnancy as an adjunct to neonatal immunoprophylaxis and the ability to refer women for chronic treatment of their HBV disease to prevent long-term infection complications. The task forces also noted that HBV screening of all pregnant women is mandated by law in 26 states.

One member of the task force reported receiving grants and/or personal fees from Healthwise, another member reported receiving personal fees from UpToDate; a third reported participating in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ Hepatitis B Guidance and Hepatitis B Systematic Review Group. The evidence and review study was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr. Silverman reported no disclosures.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCes: Owens DK et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9365; Henderson JT et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):360-2; Silverman NS. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):312-14.

The gut microbiota influences our biology through our mucosal immune system as well as by leading to the production of bioactive small molecules. I’ll describe how gut microbiota influences colon cancer, liver disease, the production of bioactive compounds, as well as the current status and future prospects of microbiota therapeutics.

The gut microbiota may be a factor in colon cancer. Studies have shown that bacterial biofilms are associated with right-sided colon cancers in humans. More recently, a study has shown that mucosal biofilm formation is carcinogenic in an animal model, suggesting that such biofilms may play a role in the disease pathogenesis. From the standpoint of the liver, the microbiome may be a biomarker for diseases such as cirrhosis and fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Therapeutically, a recent study suggests that the function of gut microbiota can be altered by introducing an engineered Escherichia coli bacterial strain to treat hyperammonemia by modifying its metabolism to overproduce arginine, thereby sequestering ammonia produced by gut bacteria into the amino acids (Sci Transl Med. 2019 Jan 16;11[475]. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau7975). Drug metabolism also can be influenced by the gut microbiota and vice versa. For example, drugs such as metformin have effects on the composition of the gut microbiota in humans. In turn, the gut microbiota and its metabolites can have an influence on hepatic drug metabolism, thereby altering xenobiotic pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.

The production of bioactive small molecules by bacterial metabolism is a topic of intense interest in the microbiome field. Such small molecules have been shown to act as antibiotics, neurotransmitters, immune modulators, and ligands for host receptors. Some of these small metabolites are generated through the dietary aromatic amino acids in which the bacterial enzymatic pathways are being elucidated. Such small molecules have a myriad of functions. For example, indole propionic acid, a bacterial metabolite of tryptophan, can activate the pregnane X receptor to fortify intestinal epithelial barrier function, a pathway that may have relevance to inflammatory bowel disease.

Probiotics that are found in dietary supplements represent our currently available strategy for the prevention and/or treatment of disease through the delivery of specific live microbes. However, there are limitations to their effectiveness since none have been approved for the prevention or treatment of any disease process. Via an intensive human subject study, (Cell. 2018 Sep 6;174[6]:1388-405) investigators have shown that the mucosally associated microbiota was a better biomarker for probiotic engraftment than stool was, where the response was very personalized. It’s possible that the personalized nature of probiotic engraftment may indicate that “one size may not fit all.” There will be a technical review and guideline document published by the American Gastroenterological Association early in 2020.

Currently, the only effective therapeutic modality for the treatment of a human disease by deeply altering the composition of the gut microbiota is the use of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for the treatment of recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). However, there is now early evidence that FMT might have efficacy in the treatment of a disease other than recurrent CDI, namely ulcerative colitis. Although the short-term risks for FMT are low and quantifiable and long-term risks are largely hypothetical, there is a need for caution and regulation in the practice of FMT. Indeed, long-term engraftment of bacterial strains from the donor into the recipient has been demonstrated. Ultimately, as the science in the microbiota field moves forward together with product development, more sophisticated microbiota-based therapeutics will be generated. During this interim period, the AGA and partner national societies have developed an FMT National Registry to gather information on FMT practice, assess effectiveness as well as short- and long-term safety, and promote scientific investigation.

In conclusion, the field of gut microbiome research is very dynamic and exciting with tremendous opportunities at the intersection between fabulous science and technology, clinical practice, and federal regulation involving the practice of FMT, concurrent in a significant interest in intellectual property and business.
 

Dr. Wu is the Ferdinand G. Weisbrod Professor in Gastroenterology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. He has received research funding from Seres Therapeutics, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda; is on the scientific advisory board for Danone and Biocodex; and does consulting for Hitachi High-Technologies. Dr. Wu made these comments during the AGA Institute Presidential Plenary at the annual Digestive Disease Week®.

The gut microbiota influences our biology through our mucosal immune system as well as by leading to the production of bioactive small molecules. I’ll describe how gut microbiota influences colon cancer, liver disease, the production of bioactive compounds, as well as the current status and future prospects of microbiota therapeutics.

The gut microbiota may be a factor in colon cancer. Studies have shown that bacterial biofilms are associated with right-sided colon cancers in humans. More recently, a study has shown that mucosal biofilm formation is carcinogenic in an animal model, suggesting that such biofilms may play a role in the disease pathogenesis. From the standpoint of the liver, the microbiome may be a biomarker for diseases such as cirrhosis and fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Therapeutically, a recent study suggests that the function of gut microbiota can be altered by introducing an engineered Escherichia coli bacterial strain to treat hyperammonemia by modifying its metabolism to overproduce arginine, thereby sequestering ammonia produced by gut bacteria into the amino acids (Sci Transl Med. 2019 Jan 16;11[475]. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau7975). Drug metabolism also can be influenced by the gut microbiota and vice versa. For example, drugs such as metformin have effects on the composition of the gut microbiota in humans. In turn, the gut microbiota and its metabolites can have an influence on hepatic drug metabolism, thereby altering xenobiotic pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.

The production of bioactive small molecules by bacterial metabolism is a topic of intense interest in the microbiome field. Such small molecules have been shown to act as antibiotics, neurotransmitters, immune modulators, and ligands for host receptors. Some of these small metabolites are generated through the dietary aromatic amino acids in which the bacterial enzymatic pathways are being elucidated. Such small molecules have a myriad of functions. For example, indole propionic acid, a bacterial metabolite of tryptophan, can activate the pregnane X receptor to fortify intestinal epithelial barrier function, a pathway that may have relevance to inflammatory bowel disease.

Probiotics that are found in dietary supplements represent our currently available strategy for the prevention and/or treatment of disease through the delivery of specific live microbes. However, there are limitations to their effectiveness since none have been approved for the prevention or treatment of any disease process. Via an intensive human subject study, (Cell. 2018 Sep 6;174[6]:1388-405) investigators have shown that the mucosally associated microbiota was a better biomarker for probiotic engraftment than stool was, where the response was very personalized. It’s possible that the personalized nature of probiotic engraftment may indicate that “one size may not fit all.” There will be a technical review and guideline document published by the American Gastroenterological Association early in 2020.

Currently, the only effective therapeutic modality for the treatment of a human disease by deeply altering the composition of the gut microbiota is the use of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for the treatment of recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). However, there is now early evidence that FMT might have efficacy in the treatment of a disease other than recurrent CDI, namely ulcerative colitis. Although the short-term risks for FMT are low and quantifiable and long-term risks are largely hypothetical, there is a need for caution and regulation in the practice of FMT. Indeed, long-term engraftment of bacterial strains from the donor into the recipient has been demonstrated. Ultimately, as the science in the microbiota field moves forward together with product development, more sophisticated microbiota-based therapeutics will be generated. During this interim period, the AGA and partner national societies have developed an FMT National Registry to gather information on FMT practice, assess effectiveness as well as short- and long-term safety, and promote scientific investigation.

In conclusion, the field of gut microbiome research is very dynamic and exciting with tremendous opportunities at the intersection between fabulous science and technology, clinical practice, and federal regulation involving the practice of FMT, concurrent in a significant interest in intellectual property and business.
 

Dr. Wu is the Ferdinand G. Weisbrod Professor in Gastroenterology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. He has received research funding from Seres Therapeutics, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda; is on the scientific advisory board for Danone and Biocodex; and does consulting for Hitachi High-Technologies. Dr. Wu made these comments during the AGA Institute Presidential Plenary at the annual Digestive Disease Week®.

The gut microbiota influences our biology through our mucosal immune system as well as by leading to the production of bioactive small molecules. I’ll describe how gut microbiota influences colon cancer, liver disease, the production of bioactive compounds, as well as the current status and future prospects of microbiota therapeutics.

The gut microbiota may be a factor in colon cancer. Studies have shown that bacterial biofilms are associated with right-sided colon cancers in humans. More recently, a study has shown that mucosal biofilm formation is carcinogenic in an animal model, suggesting that such biofilms may play a role in the disease pathogenesis. From the standpoint of the liver, the microbiome may be a biomarker for diseases such as cirrhosis and fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Therapeutically, a recent study suggests that the function of gut microbiota can be altered by introducing an engineered Escherichia coli bacterial strain to treat hyperammonemia by modifying its metabolism to overproduce arginine, thereby sequestering ammonia produced by gut bacteria into the amino acids (Sci Transl Med. 2019 Jan 16;11[475]. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau7975). Drug metabolism also can be influenced by the gut microbiota and vice versa. For example, drugs such as metformin have effects on the composition of the gut microbiota in humans. In turn, the gut microbiota and its metabolites can have an influence on hepatic drug metabolism, thereby altering xenobiotic pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.

The production of bioactive small molecules by bacterial metabolism is a topic of intense interest in the microbiome field. Such small molecules have been shown to act as antibiotics, neurotransmitters, immune modulators, and ligands for host receptors. Some of these small metabolites are generated through the dietary aromatic amino acids in which the bacterial enzymatic pathways are being elucidated. Such small molecules have a myriad of functions. For example, indole propionic acid, a bacterial metabolite of tryptophan, can activate the pregnane X receptor to fortify intestinal epithelial barrier function, a pathway that may have relevance to inflammatory bowel disease.

Probiotics that are found in dietary supplements represent our currently available strategy for the prevention and/or treatment of disease through the delivery of specific live microbes. However, there are limitations to their effectiveness since none have been approved for the prevention or treatment of any disease process. Via an intensive human subject study, (Cell. 2018 Sep 6;174[6]:1388-405) investigators have shown that the mucosally associated microbiota was a better biomarker for probiotic engraftment than stool was, where the response was very personalized. It’s possible that the personalized nature of probiotic engraftment may indicate that “one size may not fit all.” There will be a technical review and guideline document published by the American Gastroenterological Association early in 2020.

Currently, the only effective therapeutic modality for the treatment of a human disease by deeply altering the composition of the gut microbiota is the use of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for the treatment of recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). However, there is now early evidence that FMT might have efficacy in the treatment of a disease other than recurrent CDI, namely ulcerative colitis. Although the short-term risks for FMT are low and quantifiable and long-term risks are largely hypothetical, there is a need for caution and regulation in the practice of FMT. Indeed, long-term engraftment of bacterial strains from the donor into the recipient has been demonstrated. Ultimately, as the science in the microbiota field moves forward together with product development, more sophisticated microbiota-based therapeutics will be generated. During this interim period, the AGA and partner national societies have developed an FMT National Registry to gather information on FMT practice, assess effectiveness as well as short- and long-term safety, and promote scientific investigation.

In conclusion, the field of gut microbiome research is very dynamic and exciting with tremendous opportunities at the intersection between fabulous science and technology, clinical practice, and federal regulation involving the practice of FMT, concurrent in a significant interest in intellectual property and business.
 

Dr. Wu is the Ferdinand G. Weisbrod Professor in Gastroenterology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. He has received research funding from Seres Therapeutics, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda; is on the scientific advisory board for Danone and Biocodex; and does consulting for Hitachi High-Technologies. Dr. Wu made these comments during the AGA Institute Presidential Plenary at the annual Digestive Disease Week®.