Carvedilol in patients with compensated cirrhosis: The ongoing benefits of definitive randomised trials over meta-analysis in patients with small varices

Unlocking the potential of the ACE2/Ang-(1-7)/Mas Axis in liver diseases: From molecular mechanisms to translational applications

Over the past two decades, the identification of new functions within the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has extended beyond its traditional roles, with the emergence of the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2)/Ang-(1-7)/Mas axis being particularly significant. This axis is hypothesized to balance or modulate the effects of the traditional ACE/Ang II/AT1 axis in various physiological and pathological contexts. ACE2, a membrane-bound carboxypeptidase and an ancient homologue of ACE converts Angiotensin II (Ang II) into Angiotensin 1-7 (Ang-(1-7)). The Mas receptor is a G-protein-coupled receptor that specifically binds Ang-(1-7). Recent research has increasingly focused on the local expression of RAS in different tissues. Ang-(1-7) produces a variety of biological effects by binding to the Mas receptor, including anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, anti-apoptotic and anti-fibrotic actions, thereby influencing a range of mechanisms in the heart, kidneys, brain and other tissues. Preclinical animal model studies indicate that manipulating the protective RAS can significantly alter the progression of multiple liver diseases. Hepatic overexpression of ACE2 or administration of Ang-(1-7) and its analogues has been shown to be therapeutically effective against drug-induced liver injury, metabolic-associated fatty liver disease, liver fibrosis and hepatocellular carcinoma progression. These effects are achieved through various pathways, including the regulation of lipid metabolism, inhibition of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and extracellular matrix (ECM) production, as well as suppression of aerobic glycolysis. In current clinical trials, while recombinant human ACE2 (Rh-ACE2) has demonstrated safety and good tolerance in most studies, research on the relevance of activating the ACE2/Ang-(1-7) axis in the mechanisms and evolution of human diseases remains in its early stages. Therefore, further elucidation of the complex interactions between the classical and counter-regulatory RAS axes in clinical settings is crucial. This review will summarize the roles of selective activation of the ACE2/Ang-(1-7)/Mas axis, with a focus on its mechanisms in the treatment of liver diseases. Additionally, we will discuss the safety concerns regarding selective activation of the ACE2/Ang-(1-7)/Mas axis in clinical applications and the challenges of tissue-specific activation of this axis, providing effective therapeutic strategies for targeted activation of the hepatic ACE2/Ang-(1-7)/Mas axis in clinical practice.

Endoscopic variceal ligation combined with carvedilol versus endoscopic variceal ligation combined with propranolol for the treatment of oesophageal variceal bleeding in cirrhosis: study protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Liver cirrhosis and its severe complication, oesophageal variceal bleeding (EVB), pose significant health risks. Standard treatment for EVB combines non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) with endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL). Carvedilol, an NSBB with additional benefits, is preferred for compensated cirrhosis. However, no randomised controlled trial (RCT) has compared carvedilol with propranolol, a conventional NSBB, in combination with EVL for secondary prophylaxis. This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of these treatments in preventing variceal rebleeding or death in patients with cirrhosis and EVB.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multicentre, RCT is scheduled to begin in December 2024, with recruitment and follow-up continuing until December 2026. Eligible participants are patients with liver cirrhosis and EVB. Participants are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive EVL combined with either carvedilol or propranolol. The primary endpoint is the incidence of variceal rebleeding or all-cause death. Secondary endpoints include all-cause death, liver-related death, each of the complications of portal hypertension (overt ascites, overt hepatic encephalopathy, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, hepatorenal syndrome, portal vein thrombosis), hepatocellular carcinoma, changes in liver function (assessed by Child-Pugh and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores), changes in liver stiffness, changes in spleen stiffness, and adverse events. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to evaluate the consistency and robustness of the treatment effects. A total sample size of 524 patients (262 per group) is required to detect a significant difference between the treatment arms.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol has been approved by the ethics committee of the First Hospital of China Medical University (No. 2024-656-2). The study will follow the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. The findings of this trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and healthcare professionals to guide future clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR2400089692).

Comprehensive approach to esophageal variceal bleeding: From prevention to treatment

Esophageal variceal bleeding is a severe complication often associated with portal hypertension, commonly due to liver cirrhosis. Prevention and treatment of this condition are critical for patient outcomes. Preventive strategies focus on reducing portal hypertension to prevent varices from developing or enlarging. Primary prophylaxis involves the use of non-selective beta-blockers, such as propranolol or nadolol, which lower portal pressure by decreasing cardiac output and thereby reducing blood flow to the varices. Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) may also be employed as primary prophylaxis to prevent initial bleeding episodes. Once bleeding occurs, immediate treatment is essential. Initial management includes hemodynamic stabilization followed by pharmacological therapy with vasoactive drugs such as octreotide or terlipressin to control bleeding. Endoscopic intervention is the cornerstone of treatment, with techniques such as EVL or sclerotherapy applied to directly manage the bleeding varices. In cases where bleeding is refractory to endoscopic treatment, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt may be considered to effectively reduce portal pressure. Long-term management after an acute bleeding episode involves secondary prophylaxis using beta-blockers and repeated EVL sessions to prevent rebleeding, complemented by monitoring and managing liver function to address the underlying disease. In light of new scientific evidence, including the findings of the study by Peng et al, this editorial aims to review available strategies for the prevention and treatment of esophageal varices.

Cost-Effectiveness of the Baveno VI Criteria Compared With Endoscopy for High-Risk Varices in Patients With Child-Pugh A Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Although upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EGD) remains the gold standard for detecting varices in cirrhosis, the Baveno VI criteria proposed a combination of transient elastography and platelet count that could rule out high-risk varices, therefore sparing the need for an endoscopy, with significant potential cost savings. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of the Baveno VI criteria compared with EGD in the diagnosis of high-risk varices in cirrhosis.

METHODS

We built an analytical decision model to estimate the cost and benefits of using the Baveno VI criteria compared with EGD in patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis. The analysis was performed from the UK National Health Service perspective, over 1, 5, and 20 years. A Markov model was populated with data from published evidence. Outcomes were measured in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and avoided deaths. The analyses were repeated for Canada and Spain, using relevant cost inputs.

RESULTS

The Baveno VI criteria were cost effective compared with endoscopy in all analyses. For 1000 patients, they produced 0.16 additional QALYs at an incremental cost of £326 ($443.41) over 5 years, resulting in an incremental cost of £2081 ($2830) per additional QALY gained. The incremental net monetary benefit of Baveno VI compared with EGD was £2808 ($3819) over 5 years per patient. Baveno VI criteria also were cost effective in Canada and Spain. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis supported these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings demonstrate that the Baveno VI criteria are cost effective, suggesting that they should be considered for widespread implementation on the basis of safety, appropriateness, and economic grounds.

Spleen Stiffness-Based Algorithms Are Superior to Baveno VI Criteria to Rule Out Varices Needing Treatment in Patients With Advanced Chronic Liver Disease

INTRODUCTION

The Baveno VI criteria have set the stage for noninvasive assessment of compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD). The algorithm combining liver stiffness measurement (LSM, <20 kPa) and platelet count (>150,000/μL) safely avoids screening endoscopy for varices needing treatment (VNT) but identifies only a relatively low number of patients. We aimed to evaluate the value of spleen stiffness measurement (SSM) using spleen-dedicated elastography in ruling out VNT.

METHODS

In this real-life multicenter retrospective derivation-validation cohort, all consecutive patients with ACLD (defined by LSM ≥10 kPa) with available upper endoscopy, laboratory results, spleen diameter, LSM, and SSM measured with spleen-dedicated transient elastography were included. VNT were defined as medium-to-large varices or small varices with red spots.

RESULTS

In the derivation cohort (n = 201, 11.9% VNT), SSM demonstrated excellent capability at identifying VNT (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] 0.88), outperforming LSM (AUROC 0.77, P = 0.03) and platelets (AUROC 0.73, P = 0.002). In comparison with Baveno VI criteria (33.8% spared endoscopies), the sequential Baveno VI plus SSM and a novel spleen size and stiffness model were able to increase the number of patients avoiding endoscopy (66.2% and 71.1%, respectively) without missing more than 5% of VNT. These findings were confirmed in an external validation cohort of patients with more advanced liver disease (n = 176, 34.7% VNT) in which the number of spared endoscopies tripled (27.3% and 31.3% for SSM-based algorithms) compared with Baveno VI criteria (8.5%).

DISCUSSION

Spleen stiffness-based algorithms are superior to Baveno VI criteria in ruling out VNT in patients with ACLD and double the number of patients avoiding screening endoscopy.

Beta-blockers or Placebo for Primary Prophylaxis (BOPPP) of oesophageal varices: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Liver disease is within the top five causes of premature death in adults. Deaths caused by complications of cirrhosis continue to rise, whilst deaths related to other non-liver disease areas are declining. Portal hypertension is the primary sequelae of cirrhosis and is associated with the development of variceal haemorrhage, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and infection, collectively termed hepatic decompensation, which leads to hospitalisation and mortality. It remains uncertain whether administering a non-selective beta-blocker (NSBB), specifically carvedilol, at an earlier stage, i.e. when oesophageal varices are small, can prevent VH and reduce all-cause decompensation (ACD).

METHODS/DESIGN

The BOPPP trial is a pragmatic, multicentre, placebo-controlled, triple-blinded, randomised controlled trial (RCT) in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Patients aged 18 years or older with cirrhosis and small oesophageal varices that have never bled will be recruited, subject to exclusion criteria. The trial aims to enrol 740 patients across 55 hospitals in the UK. Patients are allocated randomly on a 1:1 ratio to receive either carvedilol 6.25 mg (a NSBB) or a matched placebo, once or twice daily, for 36 months, to attain adequate power to determine the effectiveness of carvedilol in preventing or reducing ACD. The primary outcome is the time to first decompensating event. It is a composite primary outcome made up of variceal haemorrhage (VH, new or worsening ascites, new or worsening hepatic encephalopathy (HE), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), hepatorenal syndrome, an increase in Child-Pugh grade by 1 grade or MELD score by 5 points, and liver-related mortality. Secondary outcomes include progression to medium or large oesophageal varices, development of gastric, duodenal, or ectopic varices, participant quality of life, healthcare costs and transplant-free survival.

DISCUSSION

The BOPPP trial aims to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of carvedilol in patients with cirrhosis and small oesophageal varices to determine whether this non-selective beta-blocker can prevent or reduce hepatic decompensation. There is clinical equipoise on whether intervening in cirrhosis, at an earlier stage of portal hypertension, with NSBB therapy is beneficial. Should the trial yield a positive result, we anticipate that the administration and use of carvedilol will become widespread with pathways developed to standardise the administration of the medication in primary care.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial has been approved by the National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committee (REC) (reference number: 19/YH/0015). The results of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Participants will be informed of the results via the BOPPP website ( www.boppp-trial.org ) and partners in the British Liver Trust (BLT) organisation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EUDRACT reference number: 2018-002509-78. ISRCTN reference number: ISRCTN10324656. Registered on April 24 2019.