|
| ||
|
|
||
C Virus Recurrence (c + virus_recurrence)
Kinds of C Virus Recurrence Selected AbstractsLiver stiffness identifies two different patterns of fibrosis progression in patients with hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantation,HEPATOLOGY, Issue 1 2010José A. Carrión Significant liver fibrosis (F , 2) and portal hypertension (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] , 6 mmHg) at 1 year after liver transplantation (LT) identify patients with severe hepatitis C recurrence. We evaluated whether repeated liver stiffness measurements (LSM) following LT can discriminate between slow and rapid "fibrosers" (fibrosis stage F2-F4 at 1 year after LT). Eighty-four patients who had undergone LT and who were infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and 19 LT controls who were not infected with HCV underwent LSM at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after LT. All HCV-infected patients underwent liver biopsy 12 months after LT (paired HVPG measurements in 74); 31 (37%) were rapid fibrosers. Median LSM (in kilopascal) at months 6, 9, and 12 were significantly higher in rapid fibrosers (9.9, 9.5, 12.1) than in slow fibrosers (6.9, 7.5, 6.6) (P < 0.01 all time points). The slope of liver stiffness progression (kPa × month) in rapid fibrosers (0.42) was significantly greater than in slow fibrosers (0.05) (P < 0.001), suggesting two different speeds of liver fibrosis progression. Figures were almost identical for patients with HVPG , 6 mmHg or HVPG < 6 mmHg at 1 year after LT. Multivariate analysis identified donor age, bilirubin level, and LSM as independent predictors of fibrosis progression and portal hypertension in the estimation group (n = 50) and were validated in a second group of 34 patients. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve that could identify rapid fibrosers and patients with portal hypertension as early as 6 months after LT were 0.83 and 0.87, respectively, in the estimation group and 0.75 and 0.80, respectively, in the validation group. Conclusion: Early and repeated LSM following hepatitis C recurrence in combination with clinical variables discriminates between rapid and slow fibrosers after LT. (HEPATOLOGY 2009.) [source] Review article: the treatment of hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantationALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 2 2007R. R. ARJAL Summary Background Recurrent hepatitis C represents a major challenge for the liver transplant community. Given the potentially significant impact that hepatitis C recurrence has on graft and patient survival, several treatment strategies have been utilized to prevent/slow the progression to hepatitis C-related graft failure. Aim To review the efficacy and applicability of treatment strategies for managing recurrent hepatitis C. Methods Search of MEDLINE (1990 to December 2006) and national meeting abstracts. Search terms included hepatitis C, liver transplantation, treatment, sustained virological response (SVR), and end of treatment virological response. An emphasis was placed on randomized trials. Results The largest study of treatment prior to liver transplantation (n = 124) achieved SVR in 24%. Eight randomized trials (n = 383) examined the efficacy of preemptive therapy with SVR ranging from 0,33%. Eligibility for treatment was low and dose reduction common. Four randomized trials (n = 245; all abstracts) have reported SVR from 33,42% for treating those with histological evidence of recurrent disease. Conclusions Therapies for treating hepatitis C recurrence have limited applicability and tolerability, and they have a low SVR. Based on available results, preemptive therapy is not recommended. Pegylated interferon and ribavirin is currently the preferred choice for treating established recurrence. There is an urgent need for safer and more effective anti-viral therapy in this situation. [source] Obesity, hyperlipidemia, and metabolic syndromeLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue S2 2009Michael Charlton Key Points 1. Obesity is increasingly common among liver transplantation (LT) recipients and donors. Outcomes following LT for selected patients with class I-III obesity are similar to those for nonobese recipients. In patients who are otherwise satisfactory candidates for LT, a high body mass index, as long as it does not present a technical barrier, should not be considered to be an absolute contraindication to LT. 2. The most common causes of death beyond the first year of LT are, in descending order of frequency, graft failure (especially secondary to hepatitis C virus recurrence), malignancy, cardiovascular disease, infections, and renal failure. Metabolic syndrome is an important risk factor for each of these etiologies of posttransplant death. Posttransplant diabetes, posttransplant hypertension, and an original diagnosis of cryptogenic cirrhosis, which is commonly associated with metabolic syndrome, are all associated with an increased risk of post-LT mortality. Features of metabolic syndrome should be screened for and treated in LT recipients. 3. Because of the physiological mechanism of post-LT hypertension, which includes renal arteriolar constriction secondary to calcineurin inhibition, calcium channel blocking agents are a good pharmacological treatment modality and have been shown to be effective in renal protection in randomized controlled trials of posttransplant hypertension. 4. It is rare for dietary changes and weight reduction to result in normalization of the lipid profile. Statins should thus be initiated early in the course of management of post-LT dyslipidemia. Forty milligrams of simvastatin per day, 40 mg of atorvastatin per day, and 20 mg of pravastatin per day are reasonable starting doses for post-LT hypercholesterolemia. It is important to remember that the effects of statin therapy are additive to those of a controlled diet (eg, a Mediterranean diet rich in omega-3 fatty acids, fruits, vegetables, and dietary fiber). 5. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, an increasingly common etiology of cirrhosis and liver failure, recurs commonly after LT and may also arise de novo. Treatment should be directed at managing obesity and complications of metabolic syndrome. Optimal immunosuppression in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is still evolving but should include steroid minimization. Liver Transpl 15:S83,S89, 2009. © 2009 AASLD. [source] Natural killer cells play divergent roles in shaping the outcome of hepatitis C virus recurrence following liver transplantation,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2009Lucy Golden-Mason [source] Interfering with interferon: Re-igniting the debate on calcineurin inhibitor choice and antiviral therapy for hepatitis C virus recurrence,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 3 2008Koichi Watashi [source] 12-month follow-up analysis of a multicenter, randomized, prospective trial in de novo liver transplant recipients (LIS2T) comparing cyclosporine microemulsion (C2 monitoring) and tacrolimus,,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 10 2006Gary Levy The LIS2T study was an open-label, multicenter study in which recipients of a primary liver transplant were randomized to cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME) (Neoral) (n = 250) (monitoring of blood concentration at 2 hours postdose) C2 or tacrolimus (n = 245) (monitoring of trough drug blood level [predose]) C0 to compare efficacy and safety at 3 and 6 months and to evaluate patient status at 12 months. All patients received steroids with or without azathioprine. At 12 months, 85% of CsA-ME patients and 86% of tacrolimus patients survived with a functioning graft (P not significant). Efficacy was similar in deceased- and living-donor recipients. Significantly fewer hepatitis C,positive patients died or lost their graft by 12 months with CsA-ME (5/88, 6%) than with tacrolimus (14/85, 16%) (P < 0.03). Recurrence of hepatitis C virus in liver grafts was similar in each group. Based on biopsies driven by clinical events, the mean time to histological diagnosis of hepatitis C virus recurrence was significantly longer with CsA-ME (100 ± 50 days) than with tacrolimus (70 ± 40 days) (P < 0.05). Median serum creatinine at 12 months was 106 ,mol/L with CsA-ME and with tacrolimus. More patients who were nondiabetic at baseline received antihyperglycemic therapy in the tacrolimus group at 12 months (13% vs. 5%, P < 0.01). Of patients who were diabetic at baseline, more tacrolimus-treated individuals required anti-diabetic treatment at 12 months (70% vs. 49%, P = 0.02). Treatment for de novo or preexisting hypertension or hyperlipidemia was similar in both groups. In conclusion, the efficacy of CsA-ME monitored by blood concentration at 2 hours postdose and tacrolimus in liver transplant patients is equivalent to 12 months, and renal function is similar. More patients required antidiabetic therapy with tacrolimus regardless of diabetic status at baseline. Liver Transpl 12:1464,1472, 2006. © 2006 AASLD. [source] | ||||||||||