Portal Hypertensive Gastropathy in Chronic Hepatitis C Patients with Bridging Fibrosis and Compensated Cirrhosis: Results from the HALT-C Trial

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72863/1/j.1572-0241.2006.00461.x.pd

Evolution of hepatic steatosis in patients with advanced hepatitis C: Results from the hepatitis C antiviral long-term treatment against cirrhosis (HALT-C) trial

Hepatic steatosis is a common histologic feature in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) but there are no large longitudinal studies describing the progression of steatosis in CHC. We examined changes in steatosis on serial biopsies among CHC patients participating in the Hepatitis C Antiviral Long-term Treatment against Cirrhosis (HALT-C) Trial. All 1050 patients in the trial had advanced fibrosis at baseline biopsy and were documented not to have had a sustained virological response to peginterferon and ribavirin. Most (94%) patients had genotype 1 infection. At least one protocol follow-up biopsy was read on 892 patients, and 699 had the last biopsy performed 3.5 years after randomization. At enrollment, 39% had cirrhosis and 61% had bridging fibrosis; 18%, 41%, 31%, and 10% had steatosis scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 or 4, respectively. The mean steatosis score decreased in the follow-up biopsies in both the interferon-treated patients and controls with no effect of treatment assignment ( P = 0.66). A decrease in steatosis score by ≥1 point was observed in 30% of patients and was associated with both progression to cirrhosis and continued presence of cirrhosis ( P = 0.02). Compared to patients without a decrease in steatosis, those with a decrease in steatosis had worse metabolic parameters at enrollment, and were more likely to have a decrease in alcohol intake, improvement in metabolic parameters, and worsening liver disease (cirrhosis, esophageal varices, and deterioration in liver function). Conclusion: Serial biopsies demonstrated that in patients with CHC, steatosis recedes during progression from advanced fibrosis to cirrhosis. Decreased alcohol intake and improved metabolic parameters are associated with a decline in steatosis and may modulate hepatitis C progression. (H EPATOLOGY 2009.)Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/63058/1/22865_ftp.pd

Liver transplant recipient survival benefit with living donation in the model for endstage liver disease allocation era

Receipt of a living donor liver transplant (LDLT) has been associated with improved survival compared with waiting for a deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT). However, the survival benefit of liver transplant has been questioned for candidates with Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) scores <15, and the survival advantage of LDLT has not been demonstrated during the MELD allocation era, especially for low MELD patients. Transplant candidates enrolled in the Adult‐to‐Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study after February 28, 2002 were followed for a median of 4.6 years. Starting at the time of presentation of the first potential living donor, mortality for LDLT recipients was compared to mortality for patients who remained on the waiting list or received DDLT (no LDLT group) according to categories of MELD score (<15 or ≥15) and diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Of 868 potential LDLT recipients (453 with MELD <15; 415 with MELD ≥15 at entry), 712 underwent transplantation (406 LDLT; 306 DDLT), 83 died without transplant, and 73 were alive without transplant at last follow‐up. Overall, LDLT recipients had 56% lower mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32‐0.60; P < 0.0001). Among candidates without HCC, mortality benefit was seen both with MELD <15 (HR = 0.39; P = 0.0003) and MELD ≥15 (HR = 0.42; P = 0.0006). Among candidates with HCC, a benefit of LDLT was not seen for MELD <15 (HR = 0.82, P = 0.65) but was seen for MELD ≥15 (HR = 0.29, P = 0.043). Conclusion: Across the range of MELD scores, patients without HCC derived a significant survival benefit when undergoing LDLT rather than waiting for DDLT in the MELD liver allocation era. Low MELD candidates with HCC may not benefit from LDLT. (H EPATOLOGY 2011;54:1313–1321)Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/86878/1/24494_ftp.pd

A randomized controlled trial of pretransplant antiviral therapy to prevent recurrence of hepatitis C after liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection recurs in liver recipients who are viremic at transplantation. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial to test the efficacy and safety of pretransplant pegylated interferon alpha‐2b plus ribavirin (Peg‐IFN‐α2b/RBV) for prevention of post‐transplant HCV recurrence. Enrollees had HCV and were listed for liver transplantation, with either potential living donors or Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease upgrade for hepatocellular carcinoma. Patients with HCV genotypes (G) 1/4/6 (n = 44/2/1) were randomized 2:1 to treatment (n = 31) or untreated control (n = 16); HCV G2/3 (n=32) were assigned to treatment. Overall, 59 were treated and 20 were not. Peg‐IFN‐α2b, starting at 0.75 μg/kg/week, and RBV, starting at 600 mg/day, were escalated as tolerated. Patients assigned to treatment versus control had similar baseline characteristics. Combined virologic response (CVR) included pretransplant sustained virologic response and post‐transplant virologic response (pTVR), defined as undetectable HCV RNA 12 weeks after end of treatment or transplant, respectively. In intent‐to‐treat analyses, 12 (19%) assigned to treatment and 1 (6%) assigned to control achieved CVR ( P = 0.29); per‐protocol values were 13 (22%) and 0 (0%) ( P = 0.03). Among treated G1/4/6 patients, 23 of 30 received transplant, of whom 22% had pTVR; among treated G2/3 patients 21 of 29 received transplant, of whom 29% had pTVR. pTVR was 0%, 18%, and 50% in patients treated for 16 weeks, respectively ( P = 0.01). Serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred with similar frequency in treated versus untreated patients (68% versus 55%; P = 0.30), but the number of SAEs per patient was higher in the treated group (2.7 versus 1.3; P = 0.003). Conclusion : Pretransplant treatment with Peg‐IFN‐α2b/RBV prevents post‐transplant recurrence of HCV in selected patients. Efficacy is higher with >16 weeks of treatment, but treatment is associated with increased risk of potentially serious complications. (H EPATOLOGY 2013)Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/97469/1/25976_ftp.pd

Sofosbuvir and Ribavirin Prevent Recurrence of HCV Infection After Liver Transplantation: An Open-Label Study

Background & AimsPatients with detectable hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA at the time of liver transplantation universally experience recurrent HCV infection. Antiviral treatment before transplantation can prevent HCV recurrence, but existing interferon-based regimens are poorly tolerated and are either ineffective or contraindicated in most patients. We performed a trial to determine whether sofosbuvir and ribavirin treatment before liver transplantation could prevent HCV recurrence afterward.MethodsIn a phase 2, open-label study, 61 patients with HCV of any genotype and cirrhosis (Child–Turcotte–Pugh score, ≤7) who were on waitlists for liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma, received up to 48 weeks of sofosbuvir (400 mg) and ribavirin before liver transplantation. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with HCV-RNA levels less than 25 IU/mL at 12 weeks after transplantation among patients with this HCV-RNA level at their last measurement before transplantation.ResultsSixty-one patients received sofosbuvir and ribavirin, and 46 received transplanted livers. The per-protocol efficacy population consisted of 43 patients who had HCV-RNA level less than 25 IU/mL at the time of transplantation. Of these 43 patients, 30 (70%) had a post-transplantation virologic response at 12 weeks, 10 (23%) had recurrent infection, and 3 (7%) died (2 from nonfunction of the primary graft and 1 from complications of hepatic artery thrombosis). Of all 61 patients given sofosbuvir and ribavirin, 49% had a post-transplantation virologic response. Recurrence was related inversely to the number of consecutive days of undetectable HCV RNA before transplantation. The most frequently reported adverse events were fatigue (in 38% of patients), headache (23%), and anemia (21%).ConclusionsAdministration of sofosbuvir and ribavirin before liver transplantation can prevent post-transplant HCV recurrence. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01559844

Outcomes in hepatitis C virus–infected recipients of living donor vs. deceased donor liver transplantation

In this retrospective study of hepatitis C virus (HCV)–infected transplant recipients in the 9-center Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study, graft and patient survival and the development of advanced fibrosis were compared among 181 living donor liver transplant (LDLT) recipients and 94 deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) recipients. Overall 3-year graft and patient survival were 68% and 74% in LDLT, and 80% and 82% in DDLT, respectively. Graft survival, but not patient survival, was significantly lower for LDLT compared to DDLT ( P = 0.04 and P = 0.20, respectively). Further analyses demonstrated lower graft and patient survival among the first 20 LDLT cases at each center (LDLT 20; P = 0.002 and P = 0.002, respectively) and DDLT recipients ( P 20 and DDLT were not significantly different ( P = 0.66 and P = 0.74, respectively). Overall, 3-year graft survival for DDLT, LDLT >20, and LDLT 20 were not significantly different. Important predictors of graft loss in HCV-infected patients were limited LDLT experience, pretransplant HCC, and higher MELD at transplantation. Liver Transpl 13:122–129, 2007. © 2006 AASLD.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55915/1/20995_ftp.pd

Efficacy of Sofosbuvir, Velpatasvir, and GS-9857 in Patients With Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 2, 3, 4, or 6 Infections in an Open-Label, Phase 2 Trial

Background & Aims Studies are needed to determine the optimal regimen for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 2, 3, 4, or 6 infections whose prior course of antiviral therapy has failed, and the feasibility of shortening treatment duration. We performed a phase 2 study to determine the efficacy and safety of the combination of the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir, and the NS3/4A protease inhibitor GS-9857 in these patients. Methods We performed a multicenter, open-label trial at 32 sites in the United States and 2 sites in New Zealand from March 3, 2015 to April 27, 2015. Our study included 128 treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients (1 with HCV genotype 1b; 33 with HCV genotype 2; 74 with HCV genotype 3; 17 with genotype HCV 4; and 3 with HCV genotype 6), with or without compensated cirrhosis. All patients received sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (400 mg/100 mg fixed-dose combination tablet) and GS-9857 (100 mg) once daily for 6–12 weeks. The primary end point was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12). Results After 6 weeks of treatment, SVR12s were achieved by 88% of treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis (29 of 33; 95% confidence interval, 72%–97%). After 8 weeks of treatment, SVR12s were achieved by 93% of treatment-naïve patients with cirrhosis (28 of 30; 95% CI, 78%–99%). After 12 weeks of treatment, SVR12s were achieved by all treatment-experienced patients without cirrhosis (36 of 36; 95% CI, 90%–100%) and 97% of treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis (28 of 29; 95% CI, 82%–100%). The most common adverse events were headache, diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea. Three patients (1%) discontinued treatment due to adverse events. Conclusions In a phase 2 open-label trial, we found sofosbuvir-velpatasvir plus GS-9857 (8 weeks in treatment-naïve patients or 12 weeks in treatment-experienced patients) to be safe and effective for patients with HCV genotype 2, 3, 4, or 6 infections, with or without compensated cirrhosis

Liver transplant recipient survival benefit with living donation in the MELD allocation era,,

Receipt of a living donor liver transplant (LDLT) has been associated with improved survival compared with waiting for a deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT). However, the survival benefit of liver transplant has been questioned for candidates with model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores< 15, and the survival advantage of LDLT has not been demonstrated during the MELD allocation era, especially for low MELD patients. Transplant candidates enrolled in the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study after 02/28/02 were followed for a median of 4.6 years. Starting at the time of presentation of the first potential living donor, mortality for LDLT recipients was compared to mortality for patients who remained on the waiting list or received DDLT (no LDLT group) according to categories of MELD score

Prolonged Therapy of Advanced Chronic Hepatitis C with Low-Dose Peginterferon

Background In patients with chronic hepatitis C who do not have a response to antiviral treatment, the disease may progress to cirrhosis, liver failure, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. Whether long-term antiviral therapy can prevent progressive liver disease in such patients remains uncertain. Methods We conducted a randomized, controlled trial of peginterferon alfa-2a at a dosage of 90 μg per week for 3.5 years, as compared with no treatment, in 1050 patients with chronic hepatitis C and advanced fibrosis who had not had a response to previous therapy with peginterferon and ribavirin. The patients, who were stratified according to stage of fibrosis (622 with noncirrhotic fibrosis and 428 with cirrhosis), were seen at 3-month intervals and underwent liver biopsy at 1.5 and 3.5 years after randomization. The primary end point was progression of liver disease, as indicated by death, hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatic decompensation, or, for those with bridging fibrosis at baseline, an increase in the Ishak fibrosis score of 2 or more points. Results We randomly assigned the patients to receive peginterferon (517 patients) or no therapy (533 patients) for 3.5 years. The level of serum aminotransferases, the level of serum hepatitis C virus RNA, and histologic necroinflammatory scores all decreased significantly (P\u3c0.001) with treatment, but there was no significant difference between the groups in the rate of any primary outcome (34.1% in the treatment group and 33.8% in the control group; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.27; P=0.90). The percentage of patients with at least one serious adverse event was 38.6% in the treatment group and 31.8% in the control group (P=0.07). Conclusions Long-term therapy with peginterferon did not reduce the rate of disease progression in patients with chronic hepatitis C and advanced fibrosis, with or without cirrhosis, who had not had a response to initial treatment with peginterferon and ribavirin. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00006164.

The impact of viral mutations on recognition by SARS-CoV-2 specific T cells.

We identify amino acid variants within dominant SARS-CoV-2 T cell epitopes by interrogating global sequence data. Several variants within nucleocapsid and ORF3a epitopes have arisen independently in multiple lineages and result in loss of recognition by epitope-specific T cells assessed by IFN-γ and cytotoxic killing assays. Complete loss of T cell responsiveness was seen due to Q213K in the A∗01:01-restricted CD8+ ORF3a epitope FTSDYYQLY207-215; due to P13L, P13S, and P13T in the B∗27:05-restricted CD8+ nucleocapsid epitope QRNAPRITF9-17; and due to T362I and P365S in the A∗03:01/A∗11:01-restricted CD8+ nucleocapsid epitope KTFPPTEPK361-369. CD8+ T cell lines unable to recognize variant epitopes have diverse T cell receptor repertoires. These data demonstrate the potential for T cell evasion and highlight the need for ongoing surveillance for variants capable of escaping T cell as well as humoral immunity.This work is supported by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC); Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences(CAMS) Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS), China; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, and UK Researchand Innovation (UKRI)/NIHR through the UK Coro-navirus Immunology Consortium (UK-CIC). Sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 samples and collation of data wasundertaken by the COG-UK CONSORTIUM. COG-UK is supported by funding from the Medical ResearchCouncil (MRC) part of UK Research & Innovation (UKRI),the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR),and Genome Research Limited, operating as the Wellcome Sanger Institute. T.I.d.S. is supported by a Well-come Trust Intermediate Clinical Fellowship (110058/Z/15/Z). L.T. is supported by the Wellcome Trust(grant number 205228/Z/16/Z) and by theUniversity of Liverpool Centre for Excellence in Infectious DiseaseResearch (CEIDR). S.D. is funded by an NIHR GlobalResearch Professorship (NIHR300791). L.T. and S.C.M.are also supported by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Medical Countermeasures Initiative contract75F40120C00085 and the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) inEmerging and Zoonotic Infections (NIHR200907) at University of Liverpool inpartnership with Public HealthEngland (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford.L.T. is based at the University of Liverpool. M.D.P. is funded by the NIHR Sheffield Biomedical ResearchCentre (BRC – IS-BRC-1215-20017). ISARIC4C is supported by the MRC (grant no MC_PC_19059). J.C.K.is a Wellcome Investigator (WT204969/Z/16/Z) and supported by NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centreand CIFMS. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or MRC