Consensus: guidelines: best practices for detection, assessment and management of suspected acute drug-induced liver injury during clinical trials in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis

BACKGROUND: The last decade has seen a rapid growth in the number of clinical trials enrolling patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). Due to the underlying chronic liver disease, patients with NASH often require different approaches to the assessment and management of suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) compared to patients with healthy livers. However, currently no regulatory guidelines or position papers systematically address best practices pertaining to DILI in NASH clinical trials. AIMS: This publication focuses on best practices concerning the detection, monitoring, diagnosis and management of suspected acute DILI during clinical trials in patients with NASH. METHODS: This is one of several papers developed by the IQ DILI Initiative, comprised of members from 15 pharmaceutical companies, in collaboration with DILI experts from academia and regulatory agencies. This paper is based on extensive literature review, and discussions between industry members with expertise in drug safety and DILI experts from outside industry to achieve consensus on common questions related to this topic. RESULTS: Recommended best practices are outlined pertaining to hepatic inclusion and exclusion criteria, monitoring of liver tests, DILI detection, approach to a suspected DILI signal, causality assessment and hepatic discontinuation rules. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides a framework for the approach to assessment and management of suspected acute DILI during clinical trials in patients with NASH

Liver safety assessment: required data elements and best practices for data collection and standardization in clinical trials.

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked Files. This article is open access.A workshop was convened to discuss best practices for the assessment of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in clinical trials. In a breakout session, workshop attendees discussed necessary data elements and standards for the accurate measurement of DILI risk associated with new therapeutic agents in clinical trials. There was agreement that in order to achieve this goal the systematic acquisition of protocol-specified clinical measures and lab specimens from all study subjects is crucial. In addition, standard DILI terms that address the diverse clinical and pathologic signatures of DILI were considered essential. There was a strong consensus that clinical and lab analyses necessary for the evaluation of cases of acute liver injury should be consistent with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on pre-marketing risk assessment of DILI in clinical trials issued in 2009. A recommendation that liver injury case review and management be guided by clinicians with hepatologic expertise was made. Of note, there was agreement that emerging DILI signals should prompt the systematic collection of candidate pharmacogenomic, proteomic and/or metabonomic biomarkers from all study subjects. The use of emerging standardized clinical terminology, CRFs and graphic tools for data review to enable harmonization across clinical trials was strongly encouraged. Many of the recommendations made in the breakout session are in alignment with those made in the other parallel sessions on methodology to assess clinical liver safety data, causality assessment for suspected DILI, and liver safety assessment in special populations (hepatitis B, C, and oncology trials). Nonetheless, a few outstanding issues remain for future consideration

Liver Safety Assessment: Required Data Elements and Best Practices for Data Collection and Standardization in Clinical Trials

A workshop was convened to discuss best practices for the assessment of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in clinical trials. In a breakout session, workshop attendees discussed necessary data elements and standards for the accurate measurement of DILI risk associated with new therapeutic agents in clinical trials. There was agreement that in order to achieve this goal the systematic acquisition of protocol-specified clinical measures and lab specimens from all study subjects is crucial. In addition, standard DILI terms that address the diverse clinical and pathologic signatures of DILI were considered essential. There was a strong consensus that clinical and lab analyses necessary for the evaluation of cases of acute liver injury should be consistent with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on pre-marketing risk assessment of DILI in clinical trials issued in 2009. A recommendation that liver injury case review and management be guided by clinicians with hepatologic expertise was made. Of note, there was agreement that emerging DILI signals should prompt the systematic collection of candidate pharmacogenomic, proteomic and/or metabonomic biomarkers from all study subjects. The use of emerging standardized clinical terminology, CRFs and graphic tools for data review to enable harmonization across clinical trials was strongly encouraged. Many of the recommendations made in the breakout session are in alignment with those made in the other parallel sessions on methodology to assess clinical liver safety data, causality assessment for suspected DILI, and liver safety assessment in special populations (hepatitis B, C, and oncology trials). Nonetheless, a few outstanding issues remain for future consideration

Informatic Tools and Approaches in Postmarketing Pharmacovigilance Used by FDA

The safety profile of newly approved drugs and therapeutic biologics is less well developed by pre-marketing clinical testing than is the efficacy profile. The full safety profile of an approved product is established during years of clinical use. For nearly 40 years, the FDA has relied on the voluntary reporting of adverse events by healthcare practitioners and patients to help establish the safety of marketed products. Epidemiologic studies, including case series, secular trends, case-control and cohort studies, are used to supplement the investigation of a safety signal. Ideally, active surveillance systems would supplement the identification and exploration of safety signals. The FDA has implemented a number of initiatives to help identify safety problems with drugs and continues to evaluate their efforts

Nomenclature, diagnosis and management of drug-induced autoimmune-like hepatitis (DI-ALH): An expert opinion meeting report

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) can mimic almost all other liver disorders. A phenotype increasingly ascribed to drugs is autoimmune-like hepatitis (ALH). This article summarises the major topics discussed at a joint International Conference held between the Drug-Induced Liver Injury consortium and the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group. DI-ALH is a liver injury with laboratory and/or histological features that may be indistinguishable from those of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Previous studies have revealed that patients with DI-ALH and those with idiopathic AIH have very similar clinical, biochemical, immunological and histological features. Differentiating DI-ALH from AIH is important as patients with DI-ALH rarely require long-term immunosuppression and the condition often resolves spontaneously after withdrawal of the implicated drug, whereas patients with AIH mostly require long-term immunosuppression. Therefore, revision of the diagnosis on long-term follow-up may be necessary in some cases. More than 40 different drugs including nitrofurantoin, methyldopa, hydralazine, minocycline, infliximab, herbal and dietary supplements (such as Khat and Tinospora cordifolia) have been implicated in DI-ALH. Understanding of DI-ALH is limited by the lack of specific markers of the disease that could allow for a precise diagnosis, while there is similarly no single feature which is diagnostic of AIH. We propose a management algorithm for patients with liver injury and an autoimmune phenotype. There is an urgent need to prospectively evaluate patients with DI-ALH systematically to enable definitive characterisation of this condition

Nomenclature, Diagnosis and Management of Drug-induced Autoimmune-like hepatitis (DI-ALH): An expert opinion meeting report.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) can mimic almost all other liver disorders. A phenotype increasingly ascribed to drugs is autoimmune-like hepatitis (ALH). This article summarizes the major topics discussed at a joint International Conference held between Drug-Induced Liver Injury consortium and the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group. DI-ALH is a liver injury with laboratory and/or histological features that may be indistinguishable from those of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Previous studies have revealed that patients with DI-ALH and those with idiopathic AIH have very similar clinical, biochemical, immunological and histological features. Differentiating DI-ALH from AIH is important as patients with DI-ALH rarely require long-term immunosuppression and often resolve spontaneously after stopping the culprit drug whereas patients with AIH mostly need long-term immunosuppression. Therefore, revision of the diagnosis on long-term follow up may be necessary in some cases. More than 40 different drugs including nitrofurantoin, methyldopa, hydralazine, minocycline, infliximab, herbal and dietary supplements such as Khat and Tinospora cordifolia have been implicated in DI-ALH. Understanding of DI-ALH is limited by the lack of specific markers of the disease that could allow a precise diagnosis and similarly, there is no single feature which is diagnostic of AIH. A management algorithm is proposed. There is an urgent need to prospectively evaluate patients with DI-ALH systematically to enable definitive characterization of this condition

The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer consensus statement on immunotherapy for the treatment of hematologic malignancies: multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and acute leukemia

Increasing knowledge concerning the biology of hematologic malignancies as well as the role of the immune system in the control of these diseases has led to the development and approval of immunotherapies that are resulting in impressive clinical responses. Therefore, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a hematologic malignancy Cancer Immunotherapy Guidelines panel consisting of physicians, nurses, patient advocates, and patients to develop consensus recommendations for the clinical application of immunotherapy for patients with multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and acute leukemia. These recommendations were developed following the previously established process based on the Institute of Medicine’s clinical practice guidelines. In doing so, a systematic literature search was performed for high-impact studies from 2004 to 2014 and was supplemented with further literature as identified by the panel. The consensus panel met in December of 2014 with the goal to generate consensus recommendations for the clinical use of immunotherapy in patients with hematologic malignancies. During this meeting, consensus panel voting along with discussion were used to rate and review the strength of the supporting evidence from the literature search. These consensus recommendations focus on issues related to patient selection, toxicity management, clinical endpoints, and the sequencing or combination of therapies. Overall, immunotherapy is rapidly emerging as an effective therapeutic strategy for the management of hematologic malignances. Evidence-based consensus recommendations for its clinical application are provided and will be updated as the field evolves

Building Shared Experience to Advance Practical Application of Pathway-Based Toxicology: Liver Toxicity Mode-of-Action

A workshop sponsored by the Human Toxicology Project Consortium (HTPC), “Building Shared Experience to Advance Practical Application of Pathway-Based Toxicology: Liver Toxicity Mode-of-Action” brought together experts from a wide range of perspectives to inform the process of pathway development and to advance two prototype pathways initially developed by the European Commission Joint Research Center (JRC): liver-specific fibrosis and steatosis. The first half of the workshop focused on the theory and practice of pathway development; the second on liver disease and the two prototype pathways. Participants agreed pathway development is extremely useful for organizing information and found that focusing the theoretical discussion on a specific AOP is helpful. It is important to include several perspectives during pathway development, including information specialists, pathologists, human health and environmental risk assessors, and chemical and product manufacturers, to ensure the biology is well captured and end use is considered

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Standard Reporting and Evaluation Guidelines Results of a National Institutes of Health Working Group

Importance: Toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) and Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) are rare, acute, life-threatening dermatologic disorders involving the skin and mucous membranes. Research into these conditions is hampered by a lack of standardization of case reporting and data collection. Objective: To establish a standardized case report form to facilitate comparisons and maintain data quality based on an international panel of SJS/TEN experts who performed a Delphi consensus-building exercise. Evidence Review: The elements presented for committee scrutiny were adapted from previous case report forms and from PubMed literature searches of highly cited manuscripts pertaining to SJS/TEN. The expert opinions and experience of the members of the consensus group were included in the discussion. Findings: Overall, 21 out of 29 experts who were invited to participate in the online Delphi exercise agreed to participate. Surveys at each stage were administered via an online survery software tool. For the first 2 Delphi rounds, results were analyzed using the Interpercentile Range Adjusted for Symmetry method and statements that passed consensus formulated a new case report form. For the third Delphi round, the case report form was presented to the committee, who agreed that it was "appropriate and useful" for documenting cases of SJS/TEN, making it more reliable and valuable for future research endeavors. Conclusions and Relevance: With the consensus of international experts, a case report form for SJS/TEN has been created to help standardize the collection of patient information in future studies and the documentation of individual cases