Role of portal venous platelet activation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis and TIPS

N

Janus kinase 2 inhibition by pacritinib as potential therapeutic target for liver fibrosis

anus kinase 2 (JAK2) signaling is increased in human and experimental liver fibrosis with portal hypertension. JAK2 inhibitors, such as pacritinib, are already in advanced clinical development for other indications and might also be effective in liver fibrosis. Here, we investigated the antifibrotic role of the JAK2 inhibitor pacritinib on activated hepatic stellate cells (HSCs) in vitro and in two animal models of liver fibrosis in vivo.Jonel Trebicka is supported by the German Research Foundation project ID 403224013–SFB 1382 (A09); by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) for the DEEP‐HCC project; by the Hessian Ministry of Higher Education, Research, and the Arts (HMWK) for the ENABLE cluster project; and by Eurostars (Grant ID 12350). The MICROB‐PREDICT (project ID 825694), DECISION (project ID 847949), GALAXY (project ID 668031), LIVERHOPE (project ID 731875), and IHMCSA (project ID 964590) projects have received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program. The manuscript reflects only the authors' views, and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. The funders had no influence on study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript

Endpoints and design of clinical trials in patients with decompensated cirrhosis: Position paper of the LiverHope Consortium

Management of decompensated cirrhosis is currently geared towards the treatment of complications once they occur. To date there is no established disease-modifying therapy aimed at halting progression of the disease and preventing the development of complications that can be used for patients with decompensated cirrhosis. The design of clinical trials to investigate new therapies for patients with decompensated cirrhosis is complex. The population of patients with decompensated cirrhosis is heterogeneous (i.e., different etiologies, comorbidities, severity of the disease), leading to the inclusion of diverse populations in clinical trials. In addition, primary endpoints selected for trials that include patients with decompensated cirrhosis are not homogeneous and at times may not be appropriate endpoints. This leads to difficulties in comparing of results obtained from different trials. Against this background, the LiverHope Consortium organized a meeting of experts with the goal of making recommendations for the design of clinical trials and defining appropriate endpoints both for trials aimed at modifying the natural history and preventing progression of decompensated cirrhosis and trials aimed at investigating new therapies for the management of each complication of cirrhosis

Safety of two different doses of simvastatin plus rifaximin in decompensated cirrhosis (LIVERHOPE-SAFETY): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND: Statins have beneficial effects on intrahepatic circulation and decrease portal hypertension and rifaximin modulates the gut microbiome and might prevent bacterial translocation in patients with cirrhosis. Therefore, this drug combination might be of therapeutic benefit in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. However, there is concern regarding the safety of statins in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. We assessed the safety of two different doses of simvastatin, in combination with rifaximin, in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. // METHODS: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial in patients with decompensated cirrhosis and moderate-to-severe liver failure from nine university hospitals in six European countries (Italy, France, Holland, Germany, the UK, and Spain). Patients older than 18 years with Child-Pugh class B or C disease were eligible. We randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to receive either simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin 1200 mg/day, simvastatin 20 mg/day plus rifaximin 1200 mg/day, or placebo of both medications for 12 weeks. Randomisation was stratified according to Child-Pugh class (B vs C) and restricted using blocks of multiples of three. The primary endpoint was development of liver or muscle toxicity, as defined by changes in liver aminotransferases (aspartate aminotransferase [AST] and alanine aminotransferase [ALT]), alkaline phosphastase, and creatine kinase. The study is registered with the European Union Clinical Trials Register, 2016-004499-23, and with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03150459. // FINDINGS: The study recruitment period was between July 28, 2017, and Jan 2, 2018. Follow-up finished on March 12, 2018. 50 patients were randomly assigned to simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin 1200 mg/day (n=18), simvastatin 20 mg/day plus rifaximin 1200 mg/day (n=16), or placebo of both medications (n=16). Six patients (two from each group) were excluded. Therefore, the full analysis set included 44 patients (16 in the simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin 1200 mg/day group, 14 in the simvastatin 20 mg/day plus rifaximin mg/day group, and 14 in the placebo group). After a safety analyses when the first ten patients completed treatment, treatment was stopped prematurely in the simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin group due to recommendations by the data safety monitoring board. Patients in the simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin group showed a significant increase in AST and ALT compared with the placebo group (mean differences between the groups at the end of treatment for AST 130 IU/L [95% CI 54 to 205; p=0·0009] and for ALT 61 IU/L [22 to 100; p=0·0025]. We observed no significant differences at 12 weeks in AST and ALT between the simvastatin 20 mg/day plus rifaximin and placebo group (for AST -14 IU/L [-91 to 64; p=0·728] and for ALT -8 IU/L [-49 to 33; p=0·698]). We observed no significant differences in alkaline phosphatase between the the simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin or the simvastatin 20 mg/day plus rifaximin groups compared with placebo. Patients in the simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin group showed an increase in creatine kinase at the end of treatment compared with patients in the placebo group (1009 IU/L [208 to 1809]; p=0·014). We observed no significant changes in creatine kinase in the simvastatin 20 mg/day plus rifaximin group (4·2 IU/L [-804 to 813]; p=0·992). Three (19%) patients in the simvastatin 40 mg/day group developed liver and muscle toxicity consistent with rhabdomyolysis. The number of patients who stopped treatment because of adverse events was significantly higher in the simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin group (nine [56%] of 16 patients) compared with the other two groups (two [14%] of 14 for both groups; p=0·017). There were no serious unexpected adverse reactions reported during the study. // INTERPRETATION: Treatment with simvastatin 40 mg/day plus rifaximin in patients with decompensated cirrhosis was associated with a significant increase in adverse events requiring treatment withdrawal, particularly rhabdomyolysis, compared with simvastatin 20 mg/day plus rifaximin. We recommend simvastatin 20 mg/day as the dose to be used in studies investigating the role of statins in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. //FUNDING: Horizon 20/20 European programme

Treatment With Simvastatin and Rifaximin Restores the Plasma Metabolomic Profile in Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis

Patients with decompensated cirrhosis, particularly those with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), show profound alterations in plasma metabolomics. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of treatment with simvastatin and rifaximin on plasma metabolites of patients with decompensated cirrhosis, specifically on compounds characteristic of the ACLF plasma metabolomic profile. Two cohorts of patients were investigated. The first was a descriptive cohort of patients with decompensated cirrhosis (n = 42), with and without ACLF. The second was an intervention cohort from the LIVERHOPE-SAFETY randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial treated with simvastatin 20 mg/day plus rifaximin 1,200 mg/day (n = 12) or matching placebo (n = 13) for 3 months. Plasma samples were analyzed using ultrahigh performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectroscopy for plasma metabolomics characterization. ACLF was characterized by intense proteolysis and lipid alterations, specifically in pathways associated with inflammation and mitochondrial dysfunction, such as the tryptophan–kynurenine and carnitine beta-oxidation pathways. An ACLF-specific signature was identified. Treatment with simvastatin and rifaximin was associated with changes in 161 of 985 metabolites in comparison to treatment with placebo. A remarkable reduction in levels of metabolites from the tryptophan–kynurenine and carnitine pathways was found. Notably, 18 of the 32 metabolites of the ACLF signature were affected by the treatment. Conclusion: Treatment with simvastatin and rifaximin modulates some of the pathways that appear to be key in ACLF development. This study unveils some of the mechanisms involved in the effects of treatment with simvastatin and rifaximin in decompensated cirrhosis and sets the stage for the use of metabolomics to investigate new targeted therapies in cirrhosis to prevent ACLF development

A roadmap to using randomization in clinical trials

Background Randomization is the foundation of any clinical trial involving treatment comparison. It helps mitigate selection bias, promotes similarity of treatment groups with respect to important known and unknown confounders, and contributes to the validity of statistical tests. Various restricted randomization procedures with different probabilistic structures and different statistical properties are available. The goal of this paper is to present a systematic roadmap for the choice and application of a restricted randomization procedure in a clinical trial. Methods We survey available restricted randomization procedures for sequential allocation of subjects in a randomized, comparative, parallel group clinical trial with equal (1:1) allocation. We explore statistical properties of these procedures, including balance/randomness tradeoff, type I error rate and power. We perform head-to-head comparisons of different procedures through simulation under various experimental scenarios, including cases when common model assumptions are violated. We also provide some real-life clinical trial examples to illustrate the thinking process for selecting a randomization procedure for implementation in practice. Results Restricted randomization procedures targeting 1:1 allocation vary in the degree of balance/randomness they induce, and more importantly, they vary in terms of validity and efficiency of statistical inference when common model assumptions are violated (e.g. when outcomes are affected by a linear time trend; measurement error distribution is misspecified; or selection bias is introduced in the experiment). Some procedures are more robust than others. Covariate-adjusted analysis may be essential to ensure validity of the results. Special considerations are required when selecting a randomization procedure for a clinical trial with very small sample size. Conclusions The choice of randomization design, data analytic technique (parametric or nonparametric), and analysis strategy (randomization-based or population model-based) are all very important considerations. Randomization-based tests are robust and valid alternatives to likelihood-based tests and should be considered more frequently by clinical investigators

Total area of spontaneous portosystemic shunts independently predicts hepatic encephalopathy and mortality in liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous portosystemic shunts (SPSS) frequently develop in liver cirrhosis. Recent data suggested that presence of a single large SPSS is associated with complications, especially overt hepatic encephalopathy (oHE). However, presence of >1 SPSS is common. This study evaluates the impact of total cross-sectional SPSS area (TSA) on outcome of patients with liver cirrhosis. METHODS: In this retrospective international multicentric study, computed tomography (CT) scans of 908 cirrhotic patients with SPSS were evaluated for TSA. Clinical and laboratory data were recorded. Each detected SPSS radius was measured and TSA calculated. 1-year survival was primary and acute decompensation (oHE, variceal bleeding, ascites) secondary endpoint. RESULTS: 301 patients (169 male) were included in the training cohort. 30% of all patients presented >1 SPSS. TSA cut-off of 83 mm2 was determined to classify patients with small or large TSA (S-/L-TSA). L-TSA patients presented higher MELD (11 vs. 14) and more commonly history of oHE (12% vs. 21%, p83mm2 increases the risk for oHE and mortality in liver cirrhosis. Our results may have impact on clinical use of TSA/SPSS for risk stratification and clinical decision-making considering management of SPSS

Liver transplantation for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) in Europe: Results of the ELITA/EF-CLIF collaborative study (ECLIS)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Liver transplantation (LT) has been proposed to be an effective salvage therapy even for the sickest patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). This large collaborative study was designed to address the current clinical practice and outcomes of ACLF patients wait listed (WL) for LT in Europe. METHODS: Retrospective study including 308 consecutive ACLF patients, listed in 20 centres across 8 European countries, from January 2018 to June 2019. RESULTS: 2677 patients received a LT, 1216 (45.4%) for decompensated cirrhosis (DC). Of these, 234 (19.2%) had ACLF at LT: ACLF-1, 58 (4.8%); ACLF-2, 78 (6.4%); and ACLF-3, 98 (8.1%). Wide variations were observed amongst countries: France and Germany had high rates of ACLF-2/3 (27-41%); Italy, Switzerland, Poland and Netherlands had medium rates (9-15%); and United Kingdom and Spain had low rates (3-5%) (p 4 mmol/L (HR 3.14, 95% CI 1.37-7.19), recent infection from multi-drug resistant organisms (HR 3.67, 95% CI 1.63-8.28), and renal replacement therapy (HR 2.74, 95% CI 1.37-5.51) were independent predictors of post-LT mortality. During the same period, 74 patients with ACLF died on the WL. In an intention-to-treat analysis, one-year survival of ACLF patients on the LT WL was 73% for ACLF-1 or -2 and 50% for ACLF-3. CONCLUSION: The results reveal wide variations in listing patients with ACLF in Europe despite favorable post-LT survival. Risk factors for mortality were identified, allowing a more precise prognostic assessment of ACLF patients for potential LT. LAY SUMMARY: Acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a severe clinical condition for which liver transplantation is an effective therapeutic option. This study has demonstrated that in Europe, referral and access to liver transplantation (LT) for patients with ACLF needs to be harmonized to avoid inequities. Post-LT survival for patients with ACLF was >80% after 1 year and some factors have been identified for selecting patients with favorable outcomes

The PREDICT study uncovers three clinical courses of acutely decompensated cirrhosis that have distinct pathophysiology

Background & Aims: Acute decompensation (AD) of cirrhosis is defined as the acute development of ascites, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, hepatic encephalopathy, infection or any combination thereof, requiring hospitalization. The presence of organ failure(s) in patients with AD defines acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). The PREDICT study is a European, prospective, observational study, designed to characterize the clinical course of AD and to identify predictors of ACLF. Methods: A total of 1,071 patients with AD were enrolled. We collected detailed pre-specified information on the 3-month period prior to enrollment, and clinical and laboratory data at enrollment. Patients were then closely followed up for 3 months. Outcomes (liver transplantation and death) at 1 year were also recorded. Results: Three groups of patients were identified. Pre-ACLF patients (n = 218) developed ACLF and had 3-month and 1-year mortality rates of 53.7% and 67.4%, respectively. Unstable decompensated cirrhosis (UDC) patients (n = 233) required ≥1 readmission but did not develop ACLF and had mortality rates of 21.0% and 35.6%, respectively. Stable decompensated cirrhosis (SDC) patients (n = 620) were not readmitted, did not develop ACLF and had a 1-year mortality rate of only 9.5%. The 3 groups differed significantly regarding the grade and course of systemic inflammation (high-grade at enrollment with aggravation during follow-up in pre-ACLF; low-grade at enrollment with subsequent steady-course in UDC; and low-grade at enrollment with subsequent improvement in SDC) and the prevalence of surrogates of severe portal hypertension throughout the study (high in UDC vs. low in pre-ACLF and SDC). Conclusions: Acute decompensation without ACLF is a heterogeneous condition with 3 different clinical courses and 2 major pathophysiological mechanisms: systemic inflammation and portal hypertension. Predicting the development of ACLF remains a major future challenge. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03056612. Lay summary: Herein, we describe, for the first time, 3 different clinical courses of acute decompensation (AD) of cirrhosis after hospital admission. The first clinical course includes patients who develop acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) and have a high short-term risk of death – termed pre-ACLF. The second clinical course (unstable decompensated cirrhosis) includes patients requiring frequent hospitalizations unrelated to ACLF and is associated with a lower mortality risk than pre-ACLF. Finally, the third clinical course (stable decompensated cirrhosis), includes two-thirds of all patients admitted to hospital with AD – patients in this group rarely require hospital admission and have a much lower 1-year mortality risk

Psychosocial Factors Predicting Healthcare Usage in Young Adults with Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes: The TODAY2 iCount Observational Study

BACKGROUND: Established diabetes care ( diabetes home ) and regular healthcare visits are important to achieve optimal health. Nothing is known about psychosocial factors that predict healthcare usage (HCU) in young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes, at risk for early complications. OBJECTIVE: To identify psychosocial predictors of HCU in the Treatment Options for type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY2) cohort. DESIGN: Longitudinal, measured at T1 (baseline) and T2 (1 year later). Logistic and linear regressions, adjusted for potential confounders, identified predictors of sub-optimal HCU (defined as no diabetes home, 0 visits for routine care, or  ≥ 1 urgent care visit in prior 6 months). PARTICIPANTS: N = 366 TODAY2 participants with T1 and T2 data (381 consented). Mean age = 26.0 years, 67.8% female, 37.7% non-Hispanic Black, 35.8% Hispanic, 20.2% non-Hispanic white, 6.3% other, mean HbA1c = 9.4%. MAIN MEASURES: HCU survey; reliable and valid measures of diabetes self-efficacy, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, diabetes distress, beliefs about medicines, diabetes attitudes, material need insecurities, self-management support. KEY RESULTS: 25.4% had no diabetes home, 23.7% had 0 routine care visits, 46% had  ≥ 1 urgent care visit (prior 6 months). Beliefs in the necessity of (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12, 1.46, p \u3c 0.001), and concerns about (OR = 1.29;CI = 1.08,1.54, p = 0.004), diabetes medicines, and its negative psychosocial impacts (OR = 1.57;CI = 1.04, 2.38, p = 0.03), predicted higher odds of having a diabetes home at T2. Beliefs that medicines are harmful predicted lower odds of a diabetes home (OR = 0.56;CI = 0.37,0.85, p = 0.006). Necessity beliefs (OR = 1.2;CI = 1.06,1.36, p = 0.004), and self-management support (OR = 1.5;CI = 1.08,2.07, p = 0.01) predicted higher odds of having  ≥ 1 diabetes care visit, harm beliefs predicted lower odds (OR = 0.6;CI = 0.41,0.88, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Sub-optimal healthcare usage, common in young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes, is predicted by beliefs about medicines, diabetes impact, and self-management support. We must address these factors to help this vulnerable group establish stable diabetes care