Acute Hepatitis E Infection Accounts for Some Cases of Suspected Drug-Induced Liver Injury

Department of Transplantation, California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA.
Gastroenterology (Impact Factor: 13.93). 08/2011; 141(5):1665-72.e1-9. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.07.051
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The diagnosis of drug-induced liver injury relies on exclusion of other causes, including viral hepatitis A, B, and C. Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection has been proposed as another cause of suspected drug-induced liver disease. We assessed the frequency of HEV infection among patients with drug-induced liver injury in the United States.
The Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) is a prospective study of patients with suspected drug-induced liver injury; clinical information and biological samples are collected to investigate pathogenesis and disease progression. We analyzed serum samples, collected from patients enrolled in DILIN, for immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgM against HEV; selected samples were tested for HEV RNA.
Among 318 patients with suspected drug-induced liver injury, 50 (16%) tested positive for anti-HEV IgG and 9 (3%) for anti-HEV IgM. The samples that contained anti-HEV IgM (collected 2 to 24 weeks after onset of symptoms) included 4 that tested positive for HEV RNA genotype 3. Samples from the 6-month follow-up visit were available from 4 patients; they were negative for anti-HEV IgM, but levels of anti-HEV IgG increased with time. Patients who had anti-HEV IgM were mostly older men (89%; mean age, 67 years), and 2 were human immunodeficiency virus positive. Clinical reassessment of the 9 patients with anti-HEV IgM indicated that acute hepatitis E was the most likely diagnosis for 7 and might be the primary diagnosis for 2.
HEV infection contributes to a small but important proportion of cases of acute liver injury that are suspected to be drug induced. Serologic testing for HEV infection should be performed, particularly if clinical features are compatible with acute viral hepatitis.

Download full-text


Available from: Hanh Nguyen, Aug 20, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The subject of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) has been evolving for decades. While various guidance and other documents have been produced to help identify and manage DILI in the clinical trial setting, as well as the clinic, there are still many aspects of the process that remain incomplete. I have selected those aspects where guidance documents either do not cover all possible scenarios or where other recommendations are open to interpretation or where controversies still exist. The following discussion includes a number of these topics, including: when is it acceptable to continue development of a drug where hepatotoxicity is observed in animal models or other preclinical assessments? Should patients with underlying liver disease be routinely included in clinical trials? Are the current clinical and biochemical stopping rules for suspected DILI appropriate for all situations? Should we still be using fold elevations based on upper limits of normal or a subject’s own baseline values to assess the level of alanine aminotransferase or other liver-associated enzyme elevations? How can we best integrate the expanding fields of toxicogenomics, pharmacogenomics, metobolomics, proteomics and other new drug and host profiling into predicting DILI? Where do we stand with respect to a DILI biomarker to replace traditional liver associated enzymes? How do we improve upon the voluntary reporting system for adverse drug reactions? What are the most useful causality assessment methodologies to diagnose DILI and is it ever possible to exclude the drug in question? And how do we best determine and manage the competing benefits and risks of an agent causing DILI?
    Pharmaceutical Medicine 06/2013; 27(3). DOI:10.1007/s40290-013-0015-5
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the 2006 Report of the National Lipid Association's Statin Safety Task Force, a panel of experts in hepatology published their findings on specific questions related to the liver blood testing during statin therapy. Among their recommendations was that regulatory agencies reconsider the statin-labeling recommendation at that time, which required post-statin liver enzyme testing. Since then, the Food and Drug Administration altered statin labeling such that unless clinically indicated for other reasons, after a pre-statin therapy baseline evaluation, follow-up liver enzyme testing was not uniformly required after statin initiation. This 2014 report provides an update on interim issues relevant to statins and liver safety. Some of the points discussed include the value of baseline liver enzymes before initiating statin therapy, safety of statin use in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, potential drug interactions between statins and drugs used to treat hepatitis, the use of statins in liver transplant recipients, and the use of statins in patients with autoimmune liver disease. Finally, this panel provides diagnostic and algorithmic approaches when evaluating statin-treated patients who experience elevations in liver enzymes.
    Journal of Clinical Lipidology 01/2014; 8(3 Suppl):S47-57. DOI:10.1016/j.jacl.2014.02.011 · 3.59 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Gastroenterology and Hepatology 11/2011; 7(11):759-61.
Show more