Two drinks per day does not take your fatty liver away

The alleviative effects of viable and inactive Lactobacillus paracasei CCFM1120 against alcoholic liver disease via modulation of gut microbiota and the Nrf2/HO-1 and TLR4/MyD88/NF-κB pathways

Probiotics can alleviate alcoholic liver disease. However, whether inactive counterparts can produce similar outcomes requires further investigation. We investigated the effects of viable (V) and dead (D) Lactobacillus paracasei CCFM1120 on alcohol-induced ALD mice. The results showed that CCFM1120V and D ameliorated the disease symptoms and intestinal injury. Specifically, these interventions strengthened the intestinal barrier, as evidenced by the increased expression of ZO-1 (zonula occludens 1), occludin, and claudin-1 in the colon and the restored ileal microstructure, including the villi and crypts. In addition, they enhanced the antioxidant capacity of the liver by reducing the production of malondialdehyde and increasing the levels of glutathione and superoxide dismutase. The activation of Nrf2 and HO-1 may be responsible for recovering the antioxidant capacity. Interventions can decrease mouse TNF-α, IL-6 and IL-1β content in serum, probably through the TLR4/MyD88/NF-κB pathway. Furthermore, they possess the ability to restore the quantities of bacteria responsible for producing butyric acid, such as Lactobacillus, Blautia, Bifidobacterium, Ruminococcaceae, Faecalibaculum and Lachnospiraceae. Taken together, CCFM1120V and D apparently can modify the composition of the gut microbiota, foster the gastrointestinal equilibrium, fortify the intestinal barrier, augment the antioxidant capacity of the liver, and effectively shield it from ethanol-induced injury.

The characteristics and risk factors of hepatocellular carcinoma in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease without cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We evaluated the characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients who had non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) without cirrhosis.

METHODS

We prospectively followed NAFLD patients at our University hospital. NAFLD was diagnosed from detection of steatosis by histology or imaging, no alcohol intake, and exclusion of other liver diseases. Cirrhosis was defined by histological features, imaging data, and symptoms. We compared NAFLD-related HCC with or without cirrhosis and non-cirrhotic NAFLD with or without HCC.

RESULTS

There were 48 non-cirrhotic HCC patients and 71 cirrhotic HCC patients. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that other than liver function factors, male gender (OR: 5.603, 95%CI: 1.577-19.900), light drinker (OR: 2.797, 95%CI: 1.031-7.589), and tumor size (OR: 1.031, 95%CI 1.009-1.055) differ significantly between these two groups. The recurrence rate was significantly lower in the non-cirrhotic HCC group than the cirrhotic HCC group, with risk factors being des-γ-carboxy prothrombin and the number of HCCs. The non-cirrhotic HCC group showed significantly better survival because of absence of non-cancerous liver failure. Comparison between non-cirrhotic NAFLD patients with or without HCC (n = 612) revealed the following risk factors for HCC: male gender (OR: 7.774, 95%CI: 2.176-27.775), light drinker (OR: 4.893, 95%CI: 1.923-12.449), and high FIB4 index (OR 2.634, 95%CI: 1.787-3.884).

CONCLUSION

In patients with non-cirrhotic NAFLD, important risk factors for HCC were male gender, alcohol consumption, and the FIB4 index. HCC recurrence and survival were only influenced by the tumor stage. We should be aware of alcohol consumption as a modifiable risk factor for HCC.

Alcohol or Not: A Review Comparing Initial Mechanisms, Contributing Factors, and Liver Transplantation Outcomes Between Alcoholic and Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis

Chronic liver diseases take many forms; alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are two common illnesses that potentially lead to cirrhosis, liver failure, and liver cancer. It is estimated that a quarter of heavy drinkers develop ALD and the same portion of people without heavy drinking habits have NAFLD. Alcohol intake is regularly used to differentiate NAFLD from ALD; however, diagnosis based on the discrimination threshold may be suboptimal when facing an obese patient with a high level of alcohol exposure. Therefore, understanding the common and/or different mechanism(s) driving each disease is extremely important. The ‘two-hit’ or ‘multi-hit’ hypothesis is used to explain the pathogenesis of both diseases. The ‘first hit’ refers to developing steatosis, the accumulation of fat components in the liver, and the ‘second hits’ are factors leading to oxidative stress, inflammation, and fibrosis, such as metabolic syndromes (e.g., morbid obesity, hyperglycaemia, hyperlipidaemia, disturbed circadian cycles, and altered intestinal microbiota) and environmental toxins (e.g., cigarette smoke and pollutants). Heritable factors also affect the probability and disease progression of both ALD and NAFLD. Whereas PNPLA3 and TM6SF2 variants are influential genetic risk factors for the diseases, epigenetic factors, such as DNA methylation, post-translational histone modifications, and small non-coding RNA, are of paramount importance. Moreover, considering that both ALD and NAFLD patients may eventually develop end-stage liver disease and require liver transplantation, the authors extensively investigated the worldwide outcomes from original literature for these two aetiologies, and the results showed no obvious differences in post-transplantation survival between them. Precise percentage determination of these two aetiologies contributing to steatohepatitis and its secondary injuries in the future would allow for better strategies for therapeutic and preventive intervention.