Preemptive therapy for hepatitis C virus after living-donor liver transplantation.

Artificial Organ and Transplantation Division, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Transplantation (Impact Factor: 3.78). 12/2004; 78(9):1308-11. DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000142677.12473.E5
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is important for patients with end-stage viral hepatitis because of the cadaveric organ shortage. Preliminary results, however, indicate that LDLT might be disadvantageous for patients positive for hepatitis C virus (HCV).
The subjects were 23 patients who underwent LDLT for HCV cirrhosis. All the patients preemptively received antiviral therapy consisting of interferon-alfa2b and ribavirin, which was started approximately 1 month after the operation. The therapy continued for 12 months after the first negative HCV RNA test. The patients were then observed without the therapy for 6 months (group 1). The therapy was continued for at least 12 months even when the HCV RNA test remained positive (group 2). The subjects were removed from the protocol if they could not continue the therapy for 12 months because of adverse effects or could not start the therapy because of early death.
Eight patients were removed from the protocol. Nine patients were assigned to group 1 and the other six to group 2. The sustained virologic response ratio was 39% (9 of 23). There was a significant difference between the groups in the histologic activity score 1 year after the therapy. The cumulated 3-year survival of the HCV-positive patients was 85%, which was comparable with that of patients negative for HCV (n=93 [90%]).
The present preemptive antiviral protocol after LDLT is safe and might warrant a controlled study for confirming its benefit on graft survival.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease, including cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma is the main indication for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide. Post-transplant HCV re-infection is almost universal and results in accelerated progression from acute hepatitis to chronic hepatitis, and liver cirrhosis. Comprehension and treatment of recurrent HCV infection after LT have been major issues for all transplant hepatologists and transplant surgeons for the last decades. The aim of this paper is to review the evolution of our knowledge on the natural history of HCV recurrence after LT, including risk factors for disease progression, and antiviral therapy. We will focus our attention on possible ways (present and future) to improve the final long-term results of LT for HCV-related liver disease.
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 08/2014; 20(32):11069-11079. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v20.i32.11069 · 2.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the main indications for liver transplantation. Viral recurrence occurs in all patients with detectable serum HCV RNA at the time of transplantation leading to cirrhosis in 20-30 % of patients within 5 years. Viral eradication using antiviral therapy has been shown to improve patient and graft survival. Pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) antiviral therapy achieved SVR in around 30 % of transplant recipients. In the non-transplant setting, first generation NS3/4 protease inhibitors, boceprevir or telaprevir associated with PEG-IFN and RBV, has improved the SVR rates to 75 % in genotype 1 infected patients. However, tolerability and drug-drug interactions with calcineurin inhibitors are both limiting factors of their use in transplant recipients. In the non-transplant patients, using new direct-acting antiviral therapy has dramatically improved the efficacy of antiviral C therapy over recent years leading to SVR rates over 90 % in phase II and III clinical trials, without PEG-IFN and/or RBV. Preliminary results in transplant patients showed better efficacy, better tolerability and less drug-drug interactions.
    Hepatology International 03/2015; DOI:10.1007/s12072-015-9621-5 · 2.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the leading cause of death from liver disease and the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT) in the United States and Western Europe. LT represents the best therapeutic alternative for patients with advanced chronic liver disease caused by HCV or those who develop hepatocarcinoma. Reinfection by HCV of the graft is universal and occurs in 95% of transplant patients. This reinfection can compromise graft function and patient survival. In a few cases, the histological recurrence is minimal and non-progressive; however, in most patients it follows a more rapid course than in immunocompetent persons, and frequently evolves into cirrhosis with graft loss. In fact, the five-year and ten-year survival of patients transplanted because of HCV are 75% and 68%, respectively, compared with 85% and 78% in patients transplanted for other reasons. There is also a pattern of recurrence that is very severe, but rare (< 10%), called fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis, which often involves rapid graft loss. Patients who present a negative HCV viremia after antiviral treatment have better survival. Many studies published over recent years have shown that antiviral treatment of post-transplant HCV hepatitis carried out during the late phase is the best option for improving the prognosis of these patients. Until 2011, PEGylated interferon plus ribavirin was the standard of care, resulting in a sustained virological response in around 30% of recipients. The addition of protease inhibitors, such as boceprevir or telaprevir, to the standard of care, or the use of other direct-acting antiviral drugs may involve therapeutic changes in the context of HCV recurrence. This may result a better prognosis for these patients, particularly those with severe recurrence or factors predicting rapid progression of fibrosis. However, the use of these agents in LT still requires clarification in terms of safety and efficacy.