Multicenter Experience using Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir ± RBV to Treat HCV GT 1 Relapsers after Simeprevir and Sofosbuvir Treatment

Introduction and aim. Approximately 10%-15% of patients with hepatitis C genotype 1 (HCV GT1) experience virological relapse after all-oral antiviral regimen using simeprevir (SMV) and sofosbuvir (SOF). The efficacy and safety of treating such relapsers using ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) with/without ribavirin (RBV) has been limited.Objective. Report the virological response and safety of LDV/SOF with/without RBV for 12-24 weeks in treating HCV GT1 relapsers after SMV + SOF.Material and methods. Patients treated with standardized clinical protocol utilizing LDV/SOF with/without RBV at three transplant centers were retrospectively reviewed.Results. Forty-five patients (29% post-LT, 82% male, 13% non-white, 73% subtype 1a, 86% IL28B CT/ TT, 78% F3-4) started LDV/SOF with/without RBV at a median of 22 weeks (range 7-55 weeks) after the last dose of SMV+SOF treatment. Thirty-seven patients received LDV/SOF for 24 weeks (24/37 patients with RBV) and eight patients received LDV/SOF for 12 weeks (5/8 patients with RBV). RBV dose was adjusted for renal function. Sixteen patients who were RBV-ineligible received LDV/SOF without RBV for 12 or 24 weeks. SVR 12 was achieved in 96% (43/45) of patients. Baseline viral load, RBV use, or GT1 subtype did not impact SVR 12. Minimal adverse events were reported in those without RBV; 45% of patients who received RBV developed significant anemia requiring RBV dose reduction and/or discontinuation. In LT recipients, minimal immunosuppression dose adjustments were required and no biopsy-proven acute rejection occurred.Conclusions. Treatment with LDV/SOF with/without RBV for 12-24 weeks was very well tolerated and resulted in high SVR 12 rates (96%) in HCV GT1 relapsers to SMV + SOF treatment

An Argument for Vitamin D, A, and Zinc Monitoring in Cirrhosis

Malnutrition is prevalent in cirrhosis. Vitamin and mineral deficiencies, including vitamin D, vitamin A, and zinc, are common and have been shown to correlate with survival. Our aim was to review the mechanisms of vitamin D, vitamin A, and zinc deficiencies in cirrhosis and the clinical assessment of affected patients, their outcomes based on the current literature, and management. This is a narrative review including the relevant literature for cirrhosis and vitamin D, vitamin A, and zinc deficiencies. Vitamin D deficiency has important effects in cirrhosis, regardless of the cause of chronic liver disease.These effects include associations with fibrosis and outcomes such as infections, hepatocellular carcinoma, and mortality. Vitamin A deficiency is associated with liver disease progression to cirrhosis and clinical decompensation, including occurrence of ascites or hepatic encephalopathy. Zinc deficiency can lead to hepatic encephalopathy and impaired immune function. Such deficiencies correlate with patient survival and disease severity. Caution should be applied when replacing vitamin D, vitamin A, and zinc to avoid toxicity. Identification and appropriate treatment of vitamin and mineral deficiencies in cirrhosis may reduce specific nutritional and cirrhosis-related adverse events. Routine monitoring of vitamin A, vitamin D and zinc levels in cirrhosis should be considered

Cost-Effectiveness of an Adjuvanted Hepatitis B Vaccine (HEPLISAV-B) in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BackgroundCompare the cost-effectiveness of 2 recombinant hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccines in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).MethodsMarkov models were developed for 2 IBD cohorts: (1) 40-year-old patients prior to starting IBD treatment and (2) 40-year-old patients already receiving therapy. Cohort A received full vaccination series, cohort B had primary vaccine failure and received a vaccine booster. Two vaccines were compared: adjuvanted HEPLISAV-B and nonadjuvanted Engerix-B. Clinical probabilities of acute hepatitis, chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, fulminant hepatic failure and death, treatment costs, and effectiveness estimates were obtained from published literature. A lifetime analysis and a US payer perspective were used. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed for different hypothetical scenarios.ResultsAnalysis of cohort A showed moderate cost-effectiveness of HEPLISAV-B ($88,114 per quality-adjusted life year). Analysis of cohort B showed increased cost-effectiveness ($35,563 per quality-adjusted life year). Changing Engerix-B to HEPLISAV-B in a hypothetical group of 100,000 patients prevented 6 and 30 cases of acute hepatitis; and 4 and 5 cases of chronic hepatitis annually for cohorts A and B, respectively. It also prevented 1 and 2 cases of cirrhosis, and 1 and 2 deaths over 20 years for each cohort. Cost-effectiveness was determined by vaccination costs, patient age, and progression rate from chronic hepatitis to cirrhosis.ConclusionsHEPLISAV-B is cost-effective over Engerix-B in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for IBD. Benefits increase with population aging and lower costs of vaccines. We advocate measuring levels of HBV antibodies in patients with IBD and favor adjuvanted vaccines when vaccination is needed

Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Impact of Wait Time at a Single Center

Introduction and aim: Liver transplantation (LT) provides durable survival for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there is continuing debate concerning the impact of wait time and acceptable tumor burden on outcomes after LT. We sought to review outcomes of LT for HCC at a single, large U.S. center, examining the influence of wait time on post-LT outcomes. Material and Methods: We reviewed LT for HCC at Mayo Clinic in Florida from 1/1/2003 until 6/30/2014. Follow up was updated through 8/1/ 2015. Results: From 2003-2014, 978 patients were referred for management of HCC. 376 patients were transplanted for presumed HCC within Milan criteria, and the results of these 376 cases were analyzed. The median diagnosis to LT time was 183 days (8 - 4,337), and median transplant list wait time was 62 days (0 - 1815). There was no statistical difference in recurrence-free or overall survival for those with wait time of less than or greater than 180 days from diagnosis of HCC to LT. The most important predictor of long term survival after LT was HCC recurrence (HR: 18.61, p < 0.001). Recurrences of HCC as well as survival were predicted by factors related to tumor biology, including histopathological grade, vascular invasion, and pre-LT serum alpha-fetoprotein levels. Disease recurrence occurred in 13%. The overall 5-year patient survival was 65.8%, while the probability of 5-year recurrence-free survival was 62.2%. Conclusions: In this large, single-center experience with long-term data, factors of tumor biology, but not a longer wait time, were associated with recurrence-free and overall survival