Recompensation in treatment-naïve HBV-related decompensated cirrhosis: a 5-year multi-center observational study comparing patients with ascites and bleeding

Validation and expansion of Baveno VII recompensation criteria in patients with cirrhosis and curable liver disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Baveno-VII consensus recently defined recompensation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis achieving etiological cure. However, incidence, predictors and clinical significance of recompensation are poorly known. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and prognostic impact of recompensation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

METHODS

Outpatients with cirrhosis and curable etiologies (alcohol, HCV, HBV) were consecutively included and followed up. Recompensation was defined according to Baveno VII criteria. Additionally, expanded recompensation criteria were evaluated for patients on low dose diuretics and/or lactulose/rifaximin for ≥12 months. In 160 patients, inflammatory cytokines (IL-6,IL-1β, IL-10) were measured in serum samples. An external cohort was used to validate study findings.

RESULTS

298 out of 525 decompensated cirrhotic outpatients achieved an effective etiological treatment and 21 (7%) achieved recompensation (Baveno-VII criteria), while 112 patients achieved expanded recompensation criteria (37.6%). MELD score (sHR=0.89; p<0.001), BMI (sHR=0.93; p=0.020), hemoglobin (sHR=1.14; p=0.010) and further decompensation (sHR=0.50; p=0.001) were independent predictors of recompensation. In multivariable analysis, mortality risk was not significantly different between patients achieving recompensation and compensated patients (HR=0.97; p=0.947), while decompensated patients had the highest mortality risk (HR=4.96; p<0.001). Mortality risk was not significantly different between patients meeting expanded recompensation criteria and Baveno-VII criteria (HR=0.97; p=0.938). Serum IL-6, IL-1beta and IL-10 were significantly higher in decompensated patients than in compensated and recompensated patients.

CONCLUSION

Baveno-VII criteria identify cirrhotic patients with a good prognosis, but fewer than 10% of decompensated patients achieve recompensation. Expanding these criteria to include patients receiving minimal decompensation treatment identifies those with similarly low mortality risk.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

In recent years, growing evidence has shown that achieving an etiological cure can significantly improve the prognosis of decompensated patients, leading to the development of the concept of recompensation. Baveno VII recently proposed a definition for recompensation; however, data on the clinical impact of this condition remain limited. In this study we evaluated Baveno VII criteria and developed and validated expanded Baveno VII criteria for recompensation. Our findings demonstrates that recompensation is associated with improved survival, reduced hyperdynamic circulation and decreased systemic inflammation in outpatients with decompensated cirrhosis. These results are valuable for hepatologists and researchers aiming to refine patient management strategies and risk stratification in cirrhosis care.

Recompensation in Cirrhosis: Biomarkers and Strategies

The onset of decompensation in advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) is a hallmark in natural history, with a poor prognosis and a significantly increased liver-related mortality. Etiological treatments for viral hepatitis or abstinence in cirrhosis due to alcohol abuse have demonstrated that some patients experience partial to complete clinical and analytical improvement, a stage termed "recompensation." Although recompensation is primarily defined clinically based on treatable etiologies, it is still evolving for conditions like metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). Despite the need for specific biomarkers in hepatic recompensation, no biomarkers have been thoroughly studied in this context. Biomarkers identified in compensated ACLD (cACLD) following etiological treatment might be explored for recompensation. Although the pathophysiology mechanisms underlying the hepatic recompensation remain unclear, understanding the mechanism involved in cirrhosis decompensation could help identify potential targets for recompensation. This review provides an update on the hepatic recompensation concept, examines the existing data on invasive and non-invasive biomarkers, mainly in cACLD after cure, that could be raised in recompensation, and explores future therapeutic targets for the hepatic recompensation process.

Delisting From Liver Transplant List for Improvement and Recompensation Among Decompensated Patients at One Year

INTRODUCTION

Data are limited regarding etiology-specific trends for delisting and recompensation for liver disease improvement among liver transplantation (LT)-listed candidates in the United States.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A retrospective cohort (2002-2022) using United Network of Organ Sharing database examined etiology-specific trends for delisting and recompensation due to liver disease improvement among candidates listed for LT. Of 120,451 listings in adults, 34,444 (2002-2008), 38,296 (2009-2015), 47,711 (2016-2022) were analyzed. A total of 7,196 (6.2%) were delisted for liver disease improvement, with 5.6%, 7.2%, and 5.3% in 3 respective time periods, Armitage trend P < 0.001. Delisting for improvement of liver disease was 8.1%, 5.8%, 4.0%, 3.9%, and 3.1% among listings for alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD n = 41,647), hepatitis C virus infection (HCV n = 38,797), autoimmune (n = 12,131), metabolic-associated steatohepatitis (MASH n = 22,162), hepatitis B virus infection (HBV n = 3,027), and metabolic liver disease (MLD n = 2,687), respectively. One thousand one hundred twenty-two (15.6% or 0.9%) were delisted for improvement at 1 year with cumulative incidence competing for waitlist mortality and receipt of LT of 1.18, 1.17, 0.64, 0.59, 0.50, and 0.34 for ALD, HBV, HCV, MASH, MLD, and autoimmune, respectively. In a fine and gray model, compared with metabolic, subhazard ratio (95% confidence interval) on delisting at 1 year was 3.47 (31.6-3.81) and 3.44 (2.96-3.99), P < 0.001, for ALD and for HBV, respectively. Of 7,196 delisting for improvement, 567 of 5,750 (9.9%) decompensated at listing had recompensation, 19.5% for HBV, 16.6% for MLD and autoimmune, 9.9% ALD, 8.6% for HCV, and 6.9% for MASH. In a logistic regression model among delisted candidates for improved liver disease, HBV vs MASH etiology was associated with recompensation, 2.37 (1.40-4.03), P < 0.001.

DISCUSSION

ALD and HBV are most frequent etiologies for delisting due to liver disease improvement. About 10% of delisted patients develop recompensation, with HBV etiology most likely to recompensate. Models and biomarkers are needed to identify these candidates for optimal use of deceased donor livers.

Mechanisms and implications of recompensation in cirrhosis

Decompensated cirrhosis has long been considered the irreversible end stage of liver disease, characterised by further decompensating events until death or liver transplantation. However, the observed clinical improvements after effective antiviral treatments for HBV and HCV and after sustained alcohol abstinence have changed this paradigm, leading to the concept of "recompensation" of cirrhosis. Recompensation of cirrhosis was recently defined by Baveno VII as (i) cure of the primary liver disease aetiology; (ii) disappearance of signs of decompensation (ascites, encephalopathy and portal hypertensive bleeding) off therapy; and (iii) stable improvement of liver function tests (bilirubin, international normalised ratio and albumin). Achieving these recompensation criteria is linked to a significant survival benefit. However, apart from aetiological therapies, no interventions/treatments that facilitate recompensation are available, the molecular mechanisms underlying recompensation remain incompletely understood, and early predictors of recompensation are lacking. Moreover, current recompensation criteria are based on expert opinion and may be refined in the future. Herein, we review the available evidence on cirrhosis recompensation, provide guidance on the clinical management of recompensated patients and discuss future challenges related to cirrhosis recompensation.