Early ribavirin treatment and avoidance of corticosteroids in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive liver transplant recipients: interim report of a prospective randomized trial

Induction immunosuppression in adults undergoing liver transplantation: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is considered the definitive treatment for people with liver failure. As part of post-liver transplantation management, immunosuppression (suppressing the host immunity) is given to prevent graft rejections. Immunosuppressive drugs can be classified into those that are used for a short period during the beginning phase of immunosuppression (induction immunosuppression) and those that are used over the entire lifetime of the individual (maintenance immunosuppression), because it is widely believed that graft rejections are more common during the first few months after liver transplantation. Some drugs such as glucocorticosteroids may be used for both induction and maintenance immunosuppression because of their multiple modalities of action. There is considerable uncertainty as to whether induction immunosuppression is necessary and if so, the relative efficacy of different immunosuppressive agents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different induction immunosuppressive regimens in adults undergoing liver transplantation through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different induction immunosuppressive regimens according to their safety and efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until July 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in adults undergoing liver transplantation.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults undergoing liver transplantation. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had multivisceral transplantation and those who already had graft rejections.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio (OR), rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) based on an available case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 25 trials (3271 participants; 8 treatments) in the review. Twenty-three trials (3017 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people undergoing primary liver transplantation for various indications and excluded those with HIV and those with renal impairment. The follow-up in the trials ranged from three to 76 months, with a median follow-up of 12 months among trials. All except one trial were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was very low. Overall, approximately 7.4% of people who received the standard regimen of glucocorticosteroid induction died and 12.2% developed graft failure. All-cause mortality and graft failure was lower with basiliximab compared with glucocorticosteroid induction: all-cause mortality (HR 0.53, 95% CrI 0.31 to 0.93; network estimate, based on 2 direct comparison trials (131 participants; low-certainty evidence)); and graft failure (HR 0.44, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.70; direct estimate, based on 1 trial (47 participants; low-certainty evidence)). There was no evidence of differences in all-cause mortality and graft failure between other induction immunosuppressants and glucocorticosteroids in either the direct comparison or the network meta-analysis (very low-certainty evidence). There was also no evidence of differences in serious adverse events (proportion), serious adverse events (number), renal failure, any adverse events (proportion), any adverse events (number), liver retransplantation, graft rejections (any), or graft rejections (requiring treatment) between other induction immunosuppressants and glucocorticosteroids in either the direct comparison or the network meta-analysis (very low-certainty evidence). However, because of the wide CrIs, clinically important differences in these outcomes cannot be ruled out. None of the studies reported health-related quality of life.

FUNDING

the source of funding for 14 trials was drug companies who would benefit from the results of the study; two trials were funded by neutral organisations who have no vested interests in the results of the study; and the source of funding for the remaining nine trials was unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low-certainty evidence, basiliximab induction may decrease mortality and graft failure compared to glucocorticosteroids induction in people undergoing liver transplantation. However, there is considerable uncertainty about this finding because this information is based on small trials at high risk of bias. The evidence is uncertain about the effects of different induction immunosuppressants on other clinical outcomes, including graft rejections. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered, employ blinding, avoid post-randomisation dropouts (or perform intention-to-treat analysis), and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, graft failure, and health-related quality of life.

Glucocorticosteroid-free versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver transplanted patients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. Now that newer, more potent immunosuppressants have been developed, glucocorticosteroids may no longer be needed and their removal may prevent adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression following liver transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, Literatura Americano e do Caribe em Ciencias da Saude (LILACS), World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and The Transplant Library until May 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver transplanted people. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants should have received the same co-interventions. We included trials that assessed complete glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids, as well as trials that assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan to conduct meta-analyses, calculating risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a random-effects model and a fixed-effect model and reported both results where a discrepancy existed; otherwise we reported only the results from the fixed-effect model. We assessed the risk of systematic errors using 'Risk of bias' domains. We controlled for random errors by performing Trial Sequential Analysis. We presented our results in a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 completed randomised clinical trials, but only 16 studies with 1347 participants provided data for the meta-analyses. Ten of the 16 trials assessed complete postoperative glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids (782 participants) and six trials assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids (565 participants). One additional study assessed complete post-operative glucocorticosteroid avoidance but could only be incorporated into qualitative analysis of the results due to limited data published in an abstract. All trials were at high risk of bias. Only eight trials reported on the type of donor used. Overall, we found no statistically significant difference for mortality (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.44; low-quality evidence), graft loss including death (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.46; low-quality evidence), or infection (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.05; very low-quality evidence) when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression. Acute rejection and glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection were statistically significantly more frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.64; low-quality evidence; and RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.02; very low-quality evidence). Diabetes mellitus and hypertension were statistically significantly less frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99; low-quality evidence; and RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.90; low-quality evidence). We performed Trial Sequential Analysis for all outcomes. None of the outcomes crossed the monitoring boundaries or reached the required information size. Hence, we cannot exclude random errors from the results of the conventional meta-analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Many of the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal remain uncertain because of the limited number of published randomised clinical trials, limited numbers of participants and outcomes, and high risk of bias in the trials. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal appears to reduce diabetes mellitus and hypertension whilst increasing acute rejection, glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection, and renal impairment. We could identify no other benefits or harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal may be of benefit in selected patients, especially those at low risk of rejection and high risk of hypertension or diabetes mellitus. The optimal duration of glucocorticosteroid administration remains unclear. More randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal are needed. These should be large, high-quality trials that minimise the risk of random and systematic error.

Glucocorticosteroid-free versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver transplanted patients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. Now that newer, more potent immunosuppressants have been developed, glucocorticosteroids may no longer be needed and their removal may prevent adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use) or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression following liver transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index, The Transplant Library, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) until September 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver-transplanted people. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants should have received the same co-interventions. We included trials that assessed complete glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding the perioperative period and excluding the occurrence of acute rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids, as well as trials that assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan to conduct meta-analyses, calculating risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a random-effects model and a fixed-effect model and reported both results where a discrepancy existed. We assessed the risk of systematic errors using risk of bias domains. We controlled for random errors by performing Trial Sequential Analysis. We presented our results in a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 completed randomised clinical trials with a total of 1347 participants. We found 10 trials that assessed complete postoperative glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use and treatment of rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids (782 participants) and six trials that assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids (565 participants). We found one ongoing trial assessing complete postoperative glucocorticosteroid avoidance versus short-term glucocorticosteroids, which is expected to enrol 300 participants. All trials were at high risk of bias. Overall, we found no statistically significant difference for mortality (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.44; low-quality evidence), graft loss including death (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.48; low-quality evidence), or infection (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.05; low-quality evidence) when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression. Acute rejection and glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection were statistically significantly more frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.64; moderate-quality evidence; and RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.02; very low-quality evidence). Diabetes mellitus and hypertension were statistically significantly less frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99; low-quality evidence; and RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.90; low-quality evidence). We performed Trial Sequential Analysis for all outcomes. None of the outcomes crossed the monitoring boundaries or reached the required information size. Hence, we cannot exclude random errors from the results of the conventional meta-analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Many of the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal remain uncertain because of the limited number of published randomised clinical trials, limited numbers of participants and outcomes, and high risk of bias in the trials. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal appears to reduce diabetes mellitus and hypertension whilst increasing acute rejection, glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection, and renal impairment. We could identify no other benefits or harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal may be of benefit in selected patients, especially those at low risk of rejection and high risk of hypertension or diabetes mellitus. The optimal duration of glucocorticosteroid administration remains unclear. More randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal are needed. These should be large, high-quality trials that minimise the risk of random and systematic error.

Antiviral prophylaxis for the prevention of chronic hepatitis C virus in patients undergoing liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether prophylactic antiviral therapy is indicated to improve patient and graft survival in patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic decompensated hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different prophylactic antiviral therapies for patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 1, 2013), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to February 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised clinical trials irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status and comparing various prophylactic antiviral therapies (alone or in combination) in the prophylactic treatment of patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors collected the data independently. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on available case analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 501 liver transplant recipients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection were randomised in 12 trials to various experimental interventions and control interventions. The proportion of genotype I varied between 49% and 100% in the seven trials that reported the genotype. Only one or two trials were included under each comparison. All the trials were of high risk of bias. Ten trials including 441 liver transplant recipients provided data for this review.There were no significant differences in the 90-day mortality (1 trial; 81 participants; 5/35 (adjusted proportion: 14.2%) in interferon group versus 5/46 (10.9%) in control group; RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.41 to 4.19); mortality at maximal follow-up (2 trials; 105 participants; 7/47 (adjusted proportion: 14.8%) in interferon group versus 10/58 (17.2%) in control group; RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.08); long-term mortality (1 trial; 81 participants; HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.56); mortality at maximal follow-up (1 trial; 54 participants; 1/26 (3.9%) in pegylated interferon group versus 2/28 (7.1%) in control group; RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.05 to 5.59); 90-day mortality (1 trial; 115 participants; 5/55 (9.1%) in pegylated interferon plus ribavirin group versus 3/60 (5.0%) in control group; RR 1.82; 95% 0.46 to 7.25); 90-day mortality (3 trials; 53 participants; 3/37 (adjusted proportion: 4.3%) in HCV antibody group versus 1/16 (6.3%) in placebo group; RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.15 to 3.11); or 90-day mortality (2 trials; 31 participants; 2/14 (adjusted proportion: 16.2%) in HCV antibody high-dose group versus 1/17 (5.9%) in HCV antibody low-dose group; RR 2.75; 95% CI; 0.30 to 25.35). There were no significant differences in the retransplantation at maximal follow-up (2 trials; 105 participants; 2/47 (adjusted proportion: 4.0%) in interferon group versus 2/58 (3.4%) in control group; RR 1.17; 95% CI 0.22 to 6.2); 90-day retransplantation (1 trial; 18 participants; 1/12 (8.3%) in HCV antibody group versus 0/6 (0%) in control group; RR 1.71; 95% CI 0.09 to 32.93); or 90-day retransplantation (1 trial; 12 participants; 1/6 (17.7%) in HCV antibody high-dose group versus 0/6 (0%) in HCV antibody low-dose group; RR 3.00; 95% CI 0.15 to 61.74). There were no significant differences in serious adverse events, graft rejection, worsening of fibrosis, or HCV recurrence between intervention and control groups in any of the comparisons that reported these outcomes. None of the trials reported quality of life, liver decompensation, intensive therapy unit stay, or hospital stay. Life-threatening adverse events were not reported in either group in any of the comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no evidence to recommend prophylactic antiviral treatment to prevent recurrence of HCV infection either in primary liver transplantation or retransplantation. Further randomised clinical trials with adequate trial methodology and adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.

Completely steroid-free immunosuppression in liver transplantation: a randomized study

INTRODUCTION

Corticosteroids (CS) have been standard immunosuppression to prevent and treat rejection. However, CS are associated with increased risk of infection, obesity, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and accelerated hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence post-orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). This study assesses the safety and efficacy of CS-free immunosuppressive regimen in adult OLT.

METHODS

A two-yr, prospective, randomized study of CS with delayed withdrawal (CS) or CS-free regimen with basiliximab, tacrolimus, and enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) was performed in 39 patients (CS=20; CS-free=19). CS group received intra-operative methylprednisolone weaned by six months. HCV patients had HCV PCR pre-OLT and 0.5, one, three, and six months post-OLT. Protocol liver biopsies were performed at OLT, 2 and 24 wk post-OLT or when indicated.

RESULTS

Rejection occurred in two patients. Patient survival at one yr (100% vs. 95%), three yr (85% vs. 63%), and five yr (80% vs. 63%) post-OLT were similar between CS and CS-free group, respectively. Death-censored graft survival at one yr (100% vs. 95%), three yr (85% vs. 63%), and five yr (75% vs. 63%) were also similar. The risk of new-onset DM, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and weight gain was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

CS avoidance with basiliximab, calcineurin inhibitor, and EC-MPS is safe and effective as CS- containing immunosuppression in adult OLT.

Management of hepatitis C virus infection recurrence after liver transplantation: an overview

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the major indication for liver transplantation worldwide. Its recurrence is virtually universal. Once reinfection is established, progression to cirrhosis occurs in 25%-30% of recipients within 5 years. Several studies have attempted to identify the ideal antiviral treatment for liver transplant recipients. At present, the management of recurrent HCV infection in liver transplant recipients is based on widely accepted indications, which represent a reliable guide to identify the "ideal" candidate for therapy, when therapy should be started, and what is to be expected in terms of side effects and response to treatment.

Antiviral prophylactic intervention for chronic hepatitis C virus in patients undergoing liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether prophylactic antiviral therapy is indicated in patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic decompensated hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different prophylactic anti-viral therapies for patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until August 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised clinical trials irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status and comparing various prophylactic antiviral therapies (alone or in combination) in the prophylactic treatment of patients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors collected the data independently. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on available case analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 477 liver transplant recipients undergoing liver transplantation for chronic HCV infection were randomised in eleven trials to various interventions and controls. The proportion of genotype I varied between 49% to 88% in the five trials that reported the genotype. Only one or two trials were included under each comparison. All the trials were of high risk of bias. There was no significant differences in the patient survival, graft rejection, re-transplantation, or HCV recurrence between intervention and control groups in any of the comparisons that reported these outcomes. None of the trials reported liver decompensation, primary graft non-function, intensive therapy unit stay, hospital stay, or quality of life. Life-threatening adverse events were not reported in either group in any of the comparisons. Up to 91% of patients required reduction in dose and up to 36% of patients required cessation of treatment in the various comparisons because of adverse events or because of patient's choice to stop treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no evidence to recommend prophylactic antiviral treatment to prevent recurrence of HCV infection either in primary liver transplantation or re-transplantation. Further randomised clinical trials with adequate trial methodology and adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.

Ribavirin monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. A high proportion of patients never experience symptoms. Peginterferon plus ribavirin is the recommended treatment for chronic hepatitis C. However, ribavirin monotherapy may be considered for some patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of ribavirin monotherapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through electronic databases, manual searches of bibliographies and journals, authors of trials, and pharmaceutical companies until March 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status comparing ribavirin versus no intervention, placebo, or interferon for chronic hepatitis C.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measures were serum sustained virological response (loss of hepatitis C virus RNA at least six months after treatment), liver-related morbidity plus all-cause mortality, and adverse events. Secondary outcome measures were end of treatment virological response, biochemical response (transaminase activity), and histological response. Randomisation methods, blinding, data handling, and funding were extracted as measures of bias control. Random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses were performed for all outcomes. We only present the results of the fixed-effect model if both models provide the same result regarding statistical significance. We present data as risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 randomised trials with 657 patients. The majority of trials had unclear control of bias. Compared with placebo or no intervention, ribavirin had no significant effect on the sustained virological response (RD 0%, 95% CI -2% to 3%, five trials) or end of treatment virological response (RD 0% 95% CI -3% to 3%, ten trials). Ribavirin had no significant effect on liver-related morbidity plus mortality (RD 0%, 95% CI -2% to 3%, 11 trials). Ribavirin significantly increased the risk of adverse reactions, including anaemia. Ribavirin significantly improved end of treatment biochemical and histological response but not the sustained biochemical response. Ribavirin was significantly inferior to interferon regarding virological and biochemical responses (five trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ribavirin seems without beneficial effects on serum virological response and liver-related morbidity or mortality, and significantly increased the risk of adverse reactions. Ribavirin monotherapy seems significantly inferior to interferon monotherapy. The total number of included patients is small, and more trials are perhaps needed. The use of ribavirin monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C cannot be recommended outside randomised trials.

Corticosteroid-free immunosuppression in liver transplantation: a meta-analysis and meta-regression of outcomes

To examine the impact of steroid withdrawal from the immunosuppression protocols in liver transplantation. The electronic databases Medline, Embase, Pubmed and the Cochrane Library were searched. Meta-analysis pooled the effects of outcomes of a total of 2590 patients enrolled into 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), using classic and modern meta-analytic methods. Meta-analysis of RCTs addressing patients transplanted for any indication showed no differences between corticosteroid-free immunosuppression and steroid-based protocols in most of the analyzed outcomes. More importantly, steroid-free cohorts appeared to benefit in terms of de novo diabetes mellitus development [R.R = 1.86 (1.43, 2.41)], Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection [R.R = 1.47 (0.99, 2.17)], cholesterol levels [WMD = 19.71 (13.7, 25.7)], the number of patients that received the allocated treatment [O.R = 1.55 (1.17, 2.05)], severe acute rejection [R.R = 1.71 (1.14, 2.54)] and overall acute rejection [R.R = 1.31 (1.09, 1.58)] (when steroids were replaced in the steroid-free arm). Taking RCTs into account independently when steroids were not replaced, overall acute rejection was favoring the steroid-based arm [R.R = 0.75 (0.58, 0.98)]. Studies addressing exclusively transplanted HCV patients demonstrated a significant advantage of steroid-free protocols considering HCV recurrence [R.R = 1.15 (1.01, 1.13)], acute graft hepatitis [O.R = 3.15 (1.18, 8.40)], and treatment failure [O.R = 1.87 (1.33, 2.63)]. No unfavorable effects were observed after steroid withdrawal during short-term follow-up. On the contrary, significant advantages were documented.

Steroid avoidance in liver transplantation: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomized trials

Steroid use after liver transplantation (LT) has been associated with diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, obesity, and hepatitis C (HCV) recurrence. We performed meta-analysis and meta-regression of 30 publications representing 19 randomized trials that compared steroid-free with steroid-based immunosuppression (IS). There were no differences in death, graft loss, and infection. Steroid-free recipients demonstrated a trend toward reduced hypertension [relative risk (RR) 0.84, P = 0.08], and statistically significant decreases in cholesterol (standard mean difference -0.41, P < 0.001) and cytomegalovirus (RR 0.52, P = 0.001). In studies where steroids were replaced by another IS agent, the risks of diabetes (RR 0.29, P < 0.001), rejection (RR 0.68, P = 0.03), and severe rejection (RR 0.37, P = 0.001) were markedly lower in steroid-free arms. In studies in which steroids were not replaced, rejection rates were higher in steroid-free arms (RR 1.31, P = 0.02) and reduction of diabetes was attenuated (RR 0.74, P = 0.2). HCV recurrence was lower with steroid avoidance and, although no individual trial reached statistical significance, meta-analysis demonstrated this important effect (RR 0.90, P = 0.03). However, we emphasize the heterogeneity of trials performed to date and, as such, do not recommend basing clinical guidelines on our conclusions. We believe that a large, multicenter trial will better define the role of steroid-free regimens in LT.

Effect of nonviral factors on hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE

Hepatitis C (HCV) is now the most common indication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). While graft reinfection remains universal, progression to graft cirrhosis is highly variable. This study examined donor, recipient, and operative variables to identify factors that affect recurrence of HCV post-OLT to facilitate graft-recipient matching.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 307 patients who underwent OLT for HCV over a 10-year period at our center. Recurrence of HCV was identified by the presence of biochemical graft dysfunction and concurrent liver biopsy showing diagnostic pathologic features. Time to recurrence was the endpoint for statistical analysis. Five donor, 6 recipient, and 2 operative variables that may affect recurrence were analyzed by univariate comparison and Cox proportional hazard regression models.

RESULTS

Recurrence-free survival in the 307 study patients was 69% and 34% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Four predictive variables related to either donor or recipient characteristics were identified. Advanced donor age, prolonged donor hospitalization, increasing recipient age, and elevated recipient MELD scores were found to increase the relative risk of HCV recurrence. Examination of HLA disparity between donors and recipients demonstrated no correlation between class I or class II mismatches and recurrence-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified donor and recipient characteristics that significantly predict hepatitis C recurrence following liver transplantation. These factors are identifiable before transplant and, if considered when matching donors to HCV recipients, may decrease the incidence of HCV recurrence after OLT. A change in the current national liver allocation system would be needed to realize the full value of this benefit.

Ribavirin monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. The disease progresses without symptoms for several decades. Ribavirin monotherapy may represent a treatment for some patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effect of ribavirin monotherapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through electronic databases, manual searches of bibliographies and journals, authors of trials, and pharmaceutical companies until May 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status comparing ribavirin versus no intervention, placebo, or interferon for chronic hepatitis C.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measures were the six months sustained loss of hepatitis C virus RNA in blood after end of treatment and liver-related morbidity plus all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome measures were end of treatment virological response, biochemical response, histological response, and adverse events. Random- and fixed-effects meta-analyses with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were performed for all outcomes. We used Peto odds ratios (OR) for analysis of morbidity plus mortality and relative risks (RR) for the remaining outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 13 randomised trials including 594 patients with chronic hepatitis C. Most trials had low methodological quality. Compared with placebo/no intervention, ribavirin had no significant effect on sustained (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.07, five trials) or end of treatment virological response (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.07, ten trials). Ribavirin had no significant effect on liver-related morbidity plus mortality (Peto OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.20 to 19.0, eleven trials). Ribavirin significantly improved end of treatment biochemical and histological response but not sustained biochemical response. Further, ribavirin significantly increased the risk of anaemia. Ribavirin was significantly inferior to interferon regarding virological and biochemical response (four trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that ribavirin versus placebo/no intervention had no significant beneficial effect on virological response and liver morbidity, but may improve biochemical and histological response transiently. Ribavirin increased the risk of anaemia. Therefore, we cannot recommend ribavirin monotherapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C outside randomised trials.

Liver transplantation and hepatitis C virus: systematic review of antiviral therapy

Antiviral therapy for recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation is increasingly used. This systematic review presents both viral and histological response in three areas: pretransplant (5 studies/180 patients), preemptive therapy soon after transplant (10 studies/417 patients), and therapy for established disease (75 studies/2027 patients). There were only 16 randomized studies (543 patients). Significant dose reductions and drug stoppage rates occurred. The data on histological improvement and risk of rejection are conflicting. Even the best antiviral therapy (pegylated interferon/ribavirin) is neither easily used nor reasonably effective. The best strategy will be pretransplant treatment, most likely with newer agents.

Glucocorticosteroids for viral hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus may cause liver inflammation and fibrosis. It is not known whether glucocorticosteroids are beneficial or harmful for patients with hepatitis C infection.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of glucocorticosteroids for patients with acute or chronic hepatitis C infection with or without hepatitis C related autoimmune disorders.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches of The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and reference lists of relevant articles and hand searches of relevant journals were performed in July 2003. Principal authors of clinical trials were approached.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials dealing with glucocorticosteroids for viral hepatitis C - acute or chronic with or without autoimmune disorders.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one reviewer and validated by another. Further information was sought by correspondence with the principal investigator of the trial in case the relevant data were not published. Disagreements were solved by discussion before the meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight trials randomised 384 patients with chronic hepatitis C to glucocorticosteroids plus interferon versus interferon plus placebo/no intervention, glucocorticosteroids versus interferon, or glucocorticosteroids versus placebo. Glucocorticosteroids treatment given as short pre-treatment followed by interferon or as long-term parallel treatment combined with interferon versus interferon monotherapy had no significant effect on mortality (no deaths occurred; 342 patients), virological response at six months follow-up (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; 38 patients), or biochemical response at six months follow-up (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.06; 307 patients). There was no significant difference in serious adverse events between combination therapy versus interferon monotherapy (RR 4.76; 95% CI 0.24 to 93.19; 342 patients). Glucocorticosteroids versus interferon had no significant effect on mortality (RR 2.33; 95% CI 0.27 to 17.80; 13 patients) or virological response at follow-up (RR 1.17; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.58; 13 patients). We found no trials on glucocorticosteroids for acute hepatitis C.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence neither to confirm nor exclude both beneficial and harmful effects of glucocorticosteroids for chronic hepatitis C with or without autoimmune disorders. This Review is not able to rule out potential serious adverse effects of glucocorticosteroids. Therefore, this Review cannot establish whether glucocorticosteroids treatment can be safely administrated for indications requiring glucocorticosteroids without analysing for hepatitis C virus. The effect of glucocorticosteroids for acute hepatitis C has not been examined in randomised trials.

The clinical and immunologic impact of using interferon and ribavirin in the immunosuppressed host

1. Allograft infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) in immunosuppressed adults results in decreased allograft and patient survival. 2. Risk factors for accelerated progression of hepatitis C related to immunosuppression include treated episodes of acute cellular rejection (ACR), pulse therapy with methylprednisolone, and use of OKT3. 3. Both interferon alfa (IFN-alpha) and ribavirin (RVN) show antiviral actions against HCV and stimulate innate and adaptive immunity to increase cytolysis and polarize T helper subtype 1 (T(H)1) responses. In addition, IFN-alpha inhibits fibrogenesis in the liver. 4. Both IFN-alpha and RVN have been studied in immunosuppressed liver transplant recipients as prophylaxis or treatment of established hepatitis C to reduce allograft failure and patient mortality. Reported protocols include monotherapies with RVN, standard IFN-alpha, and pegylated IFN-alpha and combination therapies using RVN and either standard IFN-alpha or pegylated IFN-alpha. 5. The clinical impact of using IFN-alpha and RVN in highly selected immunosuppressed patients varied among studies. Combination therapy with standard IFN-alpha and RVN resulted in the greatest sustained biochemical and virological responses. However, no therapy prevented progression of acute cholestatic hepatitis C despite evidence of virological responses. Substantial proportions of patients developed adverse events requiring dose reduction or discontinuation that compromised efficacy. RVN monotherapy was not only virologically ineffective, but may have stimulated hepatic fibrosis. Current data regarding monotherapy or combination therapy with pegylated IFN-alpha are limited, but encouraging. 6. Despite potent immunostimulatory actions of both IFN-alpha and RVN that enhance natural killer, T(H)1, their use did not significantly increase the incidence of ACR. 7. Additional studies are needed to resolve the controversy over prophylaxis versus treatment of established disease and the potential utility of low-dose maintenance IFN-alpha therapy to retard fibrogenesis without clearing HCV. 8. After new, less toxic, and more potent antiviral agents become available, they should be tested immediately in patients with hepatitis C post-liver transplantation.

Recurrent hepatitis C following liver transplant: diagnosis, natural history, and therapeutic options

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) related cirrhosis is the most common indication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Updated data suggest worse long-term outcomes for those transplanted with HCV than those transplanted for other indications. Re-infection with HCV post-OLT is universal, therefore diagnosis of recurrence should be based on histological findings in the setting of persistent viremia. Variables associated with worse outcome of recurrent disease include early recurrence, degree of immunosuppression, and donor age. Antiviral therapy has been used in the prevention and treatment of recurrent disease, and can be initiated prior to transplantation, prophylactically after transplantation, and during recurrence. Preliminary studies of pre-transplantation treatment demonstrate virological responses, but tolerance is common. Higher efficacy has been associated with combination therapy for recurrent disease. Adverse effects limit its widespread use.

Steroid-free liver transplantation using rabbit antithymocyte globulin and early tacrolimus monotherapy

BACKGROUND

In 2001, we published early results of a prospective randomized trial of 71 patients who received either steroids or rabbit antithymocyte globulin (RATG) for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). We now report follow-up on these patients and additional patients undergoing steroid-free OLT.

METHODS

A total of 119 adult OLT recipients were prospectively randomized to receive either methylprednisolone 1,000 mg followed by a 3-month steroid taper or a steroid-free regimen of RATG 1.5 mg/kg during the anhepatic phase followed by a 1.5 mg/kg dose on posttransplant day 1. Maintenance immunosuppression consisted of tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil in both groups. Mycophenolate mofetil was weaned over 3 months in the first 71 patients and over 2 weeks in the last 48 patients, achieving tacrolimus monotherapy by 2 weeks posttransplant. Subsequently, a group of 24 sequential OLT recipients received the steroid-free (RATG) protocol. Endpoints of the study were survival, rejection, infectious complications, posttransplant diabetes, and recurrent hepatitis C virus.

RESULTS

One-year patient survival was 85% in each group of the prospective randomized trial with a mean follow-up of 18.5 months. One-year graft survival was 82% in the RATG group and 80% in the steroid group (P=not significant). Patient and graft survival of the 24 nonrandomized RATG patients was 96% with a mean follow-up of 3 months. The incidence of rejection was not significantly different; however, 50% of the patients in the steroid group required pulse steroids to reverse the rejection compared with only one patient (1.6%) in the RATG group (P=.03). The incidence of cytomegalovirus infection (P<.05) and posttransplant diabetes was higher in the steroid group (P=.03). There was a trend toward decreased severity of hepatitis C virus in the RATG group.

CONCLUSIONS

Steroid-free liver transplantation using RATG and early tacrolimus monotherapy effectively reduces immunosuppression-related complications with excellent survival.

Update on the Management of Hepatitis C in Liver Transplant Recipients

Hepatic failure due to hepatitis C is the leading indicator for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) in the United States. Unfortunately, recurrent hepatitis C virus infection is essentially universal following orthotopic liver transplantation. Although significant advances have been made in the past decade for the treatment of hepatitis C, a similar level of success has not yet been achieved for most hepatitis C virus-infected liver transplant recipients. In addition, deleterious side effects of the currently available antiviral agents continue to significantly hamper their use. Several recent reports, however, indicate that newer immunosuppressive regimens combined with novel modifications of existing treatment paradigms will likely lead to improved clinical outcomes for the hepatitis C virus-infected liver transplant recipient.