Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection currently remains the leading indication for liver transplant in the United States. However, recurrent HCV infection after transplant is universal in those who enter transplant with viremia resulting in reduced posttransplant graft and patient survival rates, caused in large part by progressive recurrent HCV disease. Therefore, successful treatment of HCV in the peri-transplant period, either before or after transplant, is paramount in ensuring improved posttransplant outcomes. This article reviews the experience to date treating HCV in wait-listed patients and liver transplant recipients and the unique challenges encountered when treating this population.

Purpose of review

Alcohol-related liver disease is now the most common indication for liver transplant in the United States. Acute alcoholic hepatitis represents a subpopulation with short-term mortality approaching 70% in severe cases - these patients are not typically eligible for liver transplant, as most centers require a period of alcohol abstinence (typically 6 months) prior to transplant. Early liver transplant (prior to a requisite period of abstinence) is being increasingly offered in a minority of U.S. centers. The present review examines clinical and ethical considerations surrounding liver transplant for severe alcoholic hepatitis, key published studies and knowledge gaps, and future directions for clinical research to achieve optimal patient outcomes.

Recent findings

Since a European pilot study published in 2011, published U.S. original studies in early liver transplantation for severe alcoholic hepatitis are limited to 1 UNOS review, and 2 retrospective single-center studies. A preliminary report from the ACCELERATE-AH consortium show short-term outcomes are acceptable and that use of alcohol posttransplant occurs in 25% of patients. These studies confirm the survival benefit of early liver transplant for alcoholic hepatitis and report rates of alcohol use posttransplant similar to historic cohorts in alcohol-related cirrhosis.

Summary

Early liver transplantation for severe alcoholic hepatitis is lifesaving, with acceptable short to intermediate-term patient survival and rates of alcohol use posttransplant. Further study is needed to determine long-term outcomes, and how best to select and manage patients for this new indication for liver transplant.

There is a growing need for kidney and liver transplants in persons living with HIV. Fortunately, with the significant advances in antiretroviral therapy and management of opportunistic infections, HIV infection is no longer an absolute contraindication for solid organ transplantation. Data from several large prospective multi-center cohort studies have shown that solid organ transplantation in carefully selected HIV-infected individuals is safe. However, significant challenges have been identified including prevention of acute rejection, management of drug-drug interactions and treatment of recurrent viral hepatitis. This article reviews the selection criteria, outcomes, and special management considerations for HIV-infected patients undergoing liver or kidney transplantation.

With the decrease in transmission via transfusions and injection drug use, acute symptomatic hepatitis C is infrequently seen in developed countries. We report a case of a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected adult who presented with abdominal pain. His alanine aminotransferase was greater than sixty times the upper limit of normal without any evidence on examination of fulminant hepatic failure. His workup revealed an elevated hepatitis C viral level with a negative hepatitis C antibody. He was discharged once his liver function tests improved. As an outpatient, he had a recurrent bout of symptoms with an elevation of his alanine aminotransferase and hepatitis C viral levels that promoted anti-hepatitis C virus treatment. This case illustrates the importance of considering acute hepatitis C as a cause of acute hepatitis in HIV-infected men who have sex with men. While patients with acute symptomatic hepatitis C generally have a higher rate of spontaneous viral clearance compared to those with an insidious acute infection, most still progress to chronic hepatitis C infection, and patients with HIV coinfection carry a higher risk of progression to chronic disease.

Moderate alcohol consumption in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is common, yet the effects on cardiovascular and liver health are unclear. Moderate alcohol use is associated with improved insulin sensitivity and decreased cardiovascular mortality in the general population, but whether similar benefits would be observed in persons with NAFLD remains largely unstudied. There is significant overlap in the pathogenesis of alcoholic liver disease (ALD) and NAFLD, although studies of ALD have focused on pathological alcohol intake and few mechanistic studies of moderate alcohol use in NAFLD exist. We undertook a critical review of the effect of moderate alcohol use on cardiovascular and liver disease in patients with NAFLD. A total of seven observational studies met the criteria for inclusion (one for cardiovascular endpoints and six for liver endpoints). Insufficient studies have assessed the association of moderate alcohol use with cardiovascular outcomes. There was a positive association between moderate alcohol use and decreased NASH and fibrosis; however, heavy episodic drinking may accelerate fibrosis progression and moderate alcohol use may increase the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with advanced fibrosis. Significant methodological limitations were present, including incomplete adjustment for confounding factors and failure to measure lifetime use or the pattern of alcohol intake. Thus, a strong recommendation of benefit of moderate alcohol use in NAFLD cannot be made. There remains a need for additional high-quality longitudinal studies that evaluate both cardiovascular and liver outcomes among NAFLD patients with moderate or lesser degrees of alcohol use. (Hepatology 2017;65:2090-2099).

BACKGROUND: The 2013-2014 approvals of new direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have engendered a paradigm shift in HCV treatment and management, offering the potential for a cure at a population level. The availability of the highly effective and relatively safe DAAs prompted revisions to guidance recommendations based on new clinical trial evidence. In the context of this paradigm shift and considerations of the costs associated with the new DAAs, managed care professionals face new questions and challenges regarding HCV treatment and management approaches. To address the continuing education needs of this group, PRIME Education, Inc. (PRIME) conducted a symposium on HCV at the 27th Annual Meeting Expo of the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. Moderated by Michael R. Stinchon, Jr., RPh, the program panel featured 2 internationally recognized leaders in hepatitis C treatment and research: Norah Terrault, MD, MPH, and Alex Monto, MD.  OBJECTIVE: To summarize the educational symposium presentations and discussions. METHODS: This article is organized by key questions that the panelists and attendees raised for discussion during the 2-hour symposium. The questions addressed methods for assessing liver fibrosis; comprehensive patient assessment to inform treatment decisions; the influence of viral load on decisions about treatment duration; the role of ribavirin in optimizing treatment efficacy; unmet treatment needs for patients with HCV genotype 3 or advanced liver disease; and managed care strategies for patient education, adherence promotion, and care coordination. In answering attendee questions on these issues, the expert panelists presented established evidence, and recognizing limitations to current evidence and guidance recommendations, they discussed applications of clinical judgment and offered their views and practices regarding individualized care for patients with HCV.  SUMMARY: In response to questions about the utility of noninvasive methods for assessing liver fibrosis, the expert panel presented a comparative overview of the methodology, accuracy, risks, limitations, and costs of noninvasive tests and liver biopsy. Discussion highlighted the strengths of noninvasive methods for diagnosing advanced disease and cirrhosis and the methods limitations that pose barriers to ensuring that patients receive necessary antiviral therapy. Based on guidance recommendations, treatment should be prioritized in patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis (Metavir score F3 to F4). While acknowledging the importance of this recommendation, the symposium panelists also argued that making effective decisions about whom, and when, to treat requires a more comprehensive clinical approach to patient assessment and adjusting recommended priorities according to individual patient considerations. This approach involves evaluating outcomes such as extrahepatic complications, including those affecting quality of life, functional status, and work productivity. In response to questions regarding decisions about DAA therapy duration based on viral load, the panel engaged the audience in thinking critically about evidence-based cutoff values and natural fluctuations of HCV RNA concentrations. Discussions centered on the importance of clinical judgment to ensure that the treatment duration promotes the highest efficacy and avoids risks of relapse. The panel responded to several audience questions about the role of ribavirin in new DAA regimens. Evidence-based presentations and discussions focused on patient-specific factors that must be considered to inform effective decisions about adding ribavirin. The panel took a similar approach to answering questions about emerging challenges and the difficult-to-treat populations of patients with HCV genotype 3 or advanced liver disease. The symposium concluded with presentation of, and discussion on, managed care strategies for educating patients about appropriate HCV medication use, improving adherence, and coordinating care provided by the interprofessional team.  CONCLUSIONS: The availability of new DAAs for HCV raises new questions and challenges for managed care professionals, especially regarding prioritizing patients for immediate therapy as well as treatment and management approaches that account for the needs of individual patients and subpopulations. The educational symposium summarized in this article directly addressed key questions and challenges through presentations of evidence, guidance recommendations, and interactive discussions on the views and practices of international leaders in HCV treatment and research.

Background and aim

The American Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD) recommends screening for esophageal varices (EV) by esophagoduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients with cirrhosis to guide decisions regarding primary prophylaxis for EV hemorrhage. We aimed to identify patient and facility factors associated with EV screening in veterans with hepatitis C (HCV)-associated cirrhosis.

Methods

This was a population-based cohort study. Veterans with HCV and newly diagnosed cirrhosis between 1/1/2004 and 12/31/2005 and followed until 12/31/2011 were included. The primary outcome was receipt of EGD within 1 year of cirrhosis diagnosis. Patient- and facility-level factors associated with EV screening were determined.

Results

A total of 4230 patients with HCV cirrhosis were identified. During median follow-up of 6.1 years (IQR: 4.0-8.0), 21.5 % developed a decompensating event, and 38.3 % died. Fifty-four percent received an EGD, and 33.8 % had an EGD within guidelines. Median time from cirrhosis diagnosis to EGD was 72 days (IQR: 12-176). Factors independently associated with receipt of EV screening were a decompensation event (OR 1.16, CI 1.01-1.32) and gastroenterology/hepatology clinic access (OR 2.1, CI 1.73-2.46), whereas cardiovascular (OR 0.81, CI 0.69-0.95), mental health (OR 0.79, CI 0.68-0.91), and respiratory (OR 0.85, CI 0.72-0.99) comorbidities were associated with reduced likelihood of EV screening.

Conclusion

EV screening per AASLD guidelines occurs in only one-third of patients. This missed opportunity was strongly associated with access to gastroenterology/hepatology specialty care. Additionally, providers may be relying on clinical cues (i.e., decompensation) to prompt referral for endoscopy suggesting education to improve compliance with guidelines is needed.

Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, recently approved for patients with decompensated cirrhosis (DC) secondary to hepatitis C virus (HCV), is associated with improved hepatic function. We analyzed trends in liver transplant (LT) wait-listing (WL) to explore potential impact of effective medical therapy on WL registration. This is a cohort study using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database from 2003 to 2015. A total of 47,591 adults wait-listed for LT from HCV, hepatitis B virus (HBV), and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) were identified. LT indication was defined as DC if the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) at WL was ≥15 or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Era of listing was divided into interferon (IFN; 2003-2010), protease inhibitor (PI; 2011-2013), and direct-acting antiviral (DAA; 2014-2015). Annual standardized incidence rates of WL were analyzed using Poisson regression. Adjusted incidences of LT WL for DC in HCV patients decreased by 5% in the PI era (P = 0.004) and 32% in the DAA era (P < 0.001) compared to the IFN era. Listing for DC in HBV also decreased in the PI (-17%; P = 0.002) and DAA eras (-24%; P < 0.001). Conversely, WL for DC in NASH increased by 41% in the PI era (P < 0.001) and 81% in the DAA era (P < 0.001). WL for HCC in both the HCV and NASH populations increased in both the PI and DAA eras (P < 0.001 for all) whereas HCC WL in HBV remained stable (P > 0.05 for all).

Conclusion

The rate of LT WL for HCV complicated by DC has decreased by over 30% in the era of DAA therapy. Further reductions in WL are anticipated with increased testing, linkage to care, and access to DAA therapy. (Hepatology 2017;65:804-812).

There is a rising prevalence of hepatitis C (HCV) among women of child-bearing age nationally, which prompted a recommendation by national guidelines to screen all women for HCV during pregnancy. Women with HCV during pregnancy are at risk of perinatal transmission of HCV. Directly acting antiviral (DAA) therapy during pregnancy can potentially reduce the risk of perinatal transmission as well as cure women while they are engaged in antenatal care. However, data on the safety and efficacy of DAAs during pregnancy are limited. We aimed to evaluate the preferences of women with HCV regarding potential DAA treatment during pregnancy. We conducted a survey of women with a history of HCV followed in the University of California, San Francisco HCV clinic and in the Women's Interagency HIV Study (most of whom are coinfected with HIV) to determine their preferences for DAA treatment during pregnancy. A total of 141 women completed the survey. Sixty percent reported that they would be willing to take antepartum DAA therapy if it lowered the risk of perinatal transmission. Only 21% reported that they would agree to take DAA therapy during pregnancy for self-cure; 20% of women stated that they would not, yet indicated that they might change their minds if there were more human data available regarding use of DAAs during pregnancy. In multivariable analysis, having a previous history of taking DAAs and being of childbearing age at the time of the survey were associated with willingness to take DAA medication during pregnancy (odds ratios 4.29 and 4.11, respectively). Conclusion: These results point to the need for further investigation of the role of HCV therapy during pregnancy.