Ten-year combination treatment with colchicine and ursodeoxycholic acid for primary biliary cirrhosis: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial on symptomatic patients

Incidence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Primary Biliary Cholangitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The risk and determinants of HCC in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) are unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence of HCC and risk factors associated with HCC risk among patients with PBC.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane databases and reference lists from relevant articles to identify cohort studies that examined incidence of HCC in patients with PBC from inception through November 2019.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies including 22,615 patients met the eligibility criteria. The median cohort size was 292 patients followed for an average of 76 months. The pooled incidence rate for patients with PBC was 4.17 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 3.17-5.47). On subgroup analysis, the incidence of HCC in patients with PBC cirrhosis was 15.7 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 8.73-28.24). The HCC incidence rate was 9.82 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 5.92-16.28) in men and 3.82 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 2.85-5.11) in women.

CONCLUSIONS

Cirrhosis is the strongest risk factor for HCC in patients with PBC. Male gender was also a risk factor. Our meta-analysis supports current recommendations of HCC surveillance in patients with PBC cirrhosis. Further studies are needed to evaluate risk factors in this population.

Adverse events during oral colchicine use: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Background

Colchicine is a widely used drug to treat inflammatory diseases. Due to its long historical use in medicine, controlled clinical trials have been small and there remains some caution with the use of this drug in patients with co-morbidities. The aim of the study is to systematically examine the side effect profile of colchicine in controlled clinical trials across all published indications.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA methodology. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for double-blind controlled trials of oral colchicine in adult patients that reported adverse event data. Meta-analyses were used to determine the relative risk (RR) of adverse events in colchicine users compared to comparator groups.

Results

A total of 4915 studies were initially identified and after exclusions, 35 randomised controlled trials with placebo (n = 35) or active comparators (n = 5) were included. The most common diseases studied were gout, liver cirrhosis and pericarditis. There were a total of 8659 pooled participants, 4225 participants were randomised to receive colchicine, 3956 to placebo and 411 to an active comparator. Diarrhoea was reported in 17.9% of colchicine users versus 13.1% in comparator groups (RR 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6, 3.7). Any gastrointestinal event was reported in 17.6% of colchicine users and 13.1% of comparators (RR 1.7, 95% CI 1.3, 2.3). Adverse liver events were reported in 1.9% of colchicine users versus 1.1% in the comparator groups (RR 1.6, 95% CI 0.9, 3.0). Muscle events were reported in 4.2% of colchicine users and 3.3% in the comparator groups (RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.8, 1.9). Haematology events were reported in 0.6% of colchicine users and 0.4% of comparator groups (RR 1.34 (0.64, 2.82). No study reported neuropathy events. Other sensory events were reported in 1.1% of colchicine users and 1.5% of comparator groups (RR 1.4, 95% CI 0.3, 6.7). Infectious events were reported in 0.4% of colchicine users and 2.1% of comparator groups (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7, 1.5). No study reported death as an adverse event.

Conclusion

Colchicine increases the rate of diarrhoea and gastrointestinal adverse events but does not increase the rate of liver, sensory, muscle, infectious or haematology adverse events or death.

Pharmacological interventions for primary biliary cholangitis: an attempted network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Primary biliary cholangitis (previously primary biliary cirrhosis) is a chronic liver disease caused by the destruction of small intra-hepatic bile ducts resulting in stasis of bile (cholestasis), liver fibrosis, and liver cirrhosis. The optimal pharmacological treatment of primary biliary cholangitis remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different pharmacological interventions in the treatment of primary biliary cholangitis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the available pharmacological interventions according to their safety and efficacy. However, it was not possible to assess whether the potential effect modifiers were similar across different comparisons. Therefore, we did not perform the network meta-analysis, and instead, assessed the comparative benefits and harms of different interventions using standard Cochrane methodology.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and randomised controlled trials registers to February 2017 to identify randomised clinical trials on pharmacological interventions for primary biliary cholangitis.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in participants with primary biliary cholangitis. We excluded trials which included participants who had previously undergone liver transplantation. We considered any of the various pharmacological interventions compared with each other or with placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and rate ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models based on available-participant analysis with Review Manager 5. We assessed risk of bias according to Cochrane, controlled risk of random errors with Trial Sequential Analysis, and assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 74 trials including 5902 participants that met the inclusion criteria of this review. A total of 46 trials (4274 participants) provided information for one or more outcomes. All the trials were at high risk of bias in one or more domains. Overall, all the evidence was low or very low quality. The proportion of participants with symptoms varied from 19.9% to 100% in the trials that reported this information. The proportion of participants who were antimitochondrial antibody (AMA) positive ranged from 80.8% to 100% in the trials that reported this information. It appeared that most trials included participants who had not received previous treatments or included participants regardless of the previous treatments received. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 1 to 96 months.The proportion of people with mortality (maximal follow-up) was higher in the methotrexate group versus the no intervention group (OR 8.83, 95% CI 1.01 to 76.96; 60 participants; 1 trial; low quality evidence). The proportion of people with mortality (maximal follow-up) was lower in the azathioprine group versus the no intervention group (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.98; 224 participants; 2 trials; I2 = 0%; low quality evidence). However, it has to be noted that a large proportion of participants (25%) was excluded from the trial that contributed most participants to this analysis and the results were not reliable. There was no evidence of a difference in any of the remaining comparisons. The proportion of people with serious adverse events was higher in the D-penicillamine versus no intervention group (OR 28.77, 95% CI 1.57 to 526.67; 52 participants; 1 trial; low quality evidence). The proportion of people with serious adverse events was higher in the obeticholic acid plus ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) group versus the UDCA group (OR 3.58, 95% CI 1.02 to 12.51; 216 participants; 1 trial; low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in any of the remaining comparisons for serious adverse events (proportion) or serious adverse events (number of events). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life at any time point.

FUNDING

nine trials had no special funding or were funded by hospital or charities; 31 trials were funded by pharmaceutical companies; and 34 trials provided no information on source of funding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low quality evidence, there is currently no evidence that any intervention is beneficial for primary biliary cholangitis. However, the follow-up periods in the trials were short and there is significant uncertainty in this issue. Further well-designed randomised clinical trials are necessary. Future randomised clinical trials ought to be adequately powered; performed in people who are generally seen in the clinic rather than in highly selected participants; employ blinding; avoid post-randomisation dropouts or planned cross-overs; should have sufficient follow-up period (e.g. five or 10 years or more); and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, health-related quality of life, cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, and liver transplantation. Alternatively, very large groups of participants should be randomised to facilitate shorter trial duration.

Optimal drug regimens for primary biliary cirrhosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective

Most comprehensive treatments for PBC include UDCA, combination of methotrexate (MTX), corticosteroids (COT), colchicine (COC) or bezafibrate (BEF), cyclosporin A (CYP), D-penicillamine (DPM), methotrexate (MTX), or azathioprine (AZP). Since the optimum treatment regimen remains inconclusive, we aimed to compare these therapies in terms of patient mortality or liver transplantation (MOLT) and adverse event (AE).

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials until August 2014. We estimated HRs for MOLT and ORs for AE. The sensitivity analysis based on dose of UDCA was also performed.

Results

The search identified 49 studies involving 12 different treatment regimens and 4182 patients. Although no statistical significance can be found in MOLT, COT plus UDCA was ranked highest for efficacy outcome amongst all the treatment regimes. While for AEs, compared with OBS or UDCA, monotherapy with COC (OR 5.6, P < 0.001; OR 5.89, P < 0.001), CYP (OR 3.24, P < 0.001; OR 3.42, P < 0.001), DPM (OR 8.00, P < 0.001; OR 8.45, P < 0.001) and MTX (OR 5.31, P < 0.001; OR 5.61, P < 0.001) were associated with statistically significant increased risk of AEs. No significant differences were found for other combination regimes. Effect estimates from indirect comparisons matched closely to estimates derived from pairwise comparisons. Consistently, in the sensitivity analysis, results closely resembled our primary analysis.

Conclusions

COT plus UDCA was the most efficacious among treatment regimens both for MOLT and AEs.

Colchicine for prevention of cardiovascular events

BACKGROUND

Colchicine is an anti-inflammatory drug that is used for a wide range of inflammatory diseases. Cardiovascular disease also has an inflammatory component but the effects of colchicine on cardiovascular outcomes remain unclear. Previous safety analyses were restricted to specific patient populations.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate potential cardiovascular benefits and harms of a continuous long-term treatment with colchicine in any population, and specifically in people with high cardiovascular risk.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry, citations of key papers, and study references in January 2015. We also contacted investigators to gain unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (parallel-group or cluster design or first phases of cross-over studies) comparing colchicine over at least six months versus any control in any adult population.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, stroke, heart failure, non-scheduled hospitalisations, and non-scheduled cardiovascular interventions. We conducted predefined subgroup analyses, in particular for participants with high cardiovascular risk. .

MAIN RESULTS

We included 39 randomised parallel-group trials with 4992 participants. Colchicine had no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.09; participants = 4174; studies = 30; I² = 27%; moderate quality of evidence). There is uncertainty surrounding the effect of colchicine in reducing cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.21, I² = 9%; participants = 1132; studies = 7; moderate quality of evidence). Colchicine reduced the risk for total myocardial infarction (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.57; participants = 652; studies = 2; moderate quality of evidence). There was no effect on total adverse events (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.46; participants = 1313; studies = 11; I² = 45%; very low quality of evidence) but gastrointestinal intolerance was increased (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.26; participants = 1258; studies = 11; I² = 74%; low quality of evidence). Colchicine showed no effect on heart failure (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.88; participants = 462; studies = 3; I² = 45%; low quality of evidence) and no effect on stroke (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.70; participants = 874; studies = 3; I² = 45%; low quality of evidence). Reporting of serious adverse events was inconsistent; no event occurred over 824 patient-years (4 trials). Effects on other outcomes were very uncertain. Summary effects of RCTs specifically focusing on participants with high cardiovascular risk were similar (4 trials; 1230 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is much uncertainty surrounding the benefits and harms of colchicine treatment. Colchicine may have substantial benefits in reducing myocardial infarction in selected high-risk populations but uncertainty about the size of the effect on survival and other cardiovascular outcomes is high, especially in the general population from which most of the studies in our review were drawn. Colchicine is associated with gastrointestinal side effects based on low-quality evidence. More evidence from large-scale randomised trials is needed.

Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: efficacy and safety of UDCA-based therapies in primary biliary cirrhosis

Major ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-based therapies for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) include UDCA only, or combined with either methotrexate (MTX), corticosteroids (COT), colchicine (COC), or bezafibrate (BEF). As the optimum treatment regimen is unclear and warrants exploration, we aimed to compare these therapies in terms of patient mortality or liver transplantation (MOLT) and adverse events (AE).PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials up to August 31, 2014. We estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) for MOLT and odds ratios (ORs) for AE. A sensitivity analysis based on the dose of UDCA was also executed.Thirty-one eligible articles were included. Compared with COT plus UDCA, UDCA (HR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-1.39), BEF plus UDCA (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.02-4.83), COC plus UDCA (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.07-2.25), MTX plus UDCA (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05-1.63), or OBS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.11-2.01) all provided an increased risk of MOLT. With respect to drug AE profile, although not differing appreciably, BEF plus UDCA was associated with more AEs compared with UDCA (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.59-20.67), COT plus UDCA (OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.15-33.36), COC plus UDCA (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09-12.16), MTX plus UDCA (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.23-17.82), or OBS (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.53-20.75). The results of sensitivity analyses were highly consistent with previous analyses.COT plus UDCA was the optimal UDCA-based regimen for both MOLT and AEs. BEF plus UDCA was most likely to cause AEs, whereas monotherapy with UDCA and coadministriation of COT plus UDCA appeared to be associated with the fewest AEs for PBC treatment.

Bezafibrate normalizes alkaline phosphatase in primary biliary cirrhosis patients with incomplete response to ursodeoxycholic acid

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the standard treatment for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) but excellent response is not observed in all cases. Since potential favourable effects of fibrates have been reported in short series with inconclusive results, we have carried out a pilot study to analyse the effects of bezafibrate in patients with suboptimal response to UDCA.

METHODS

Thirty women (age 52.3 ± 2.3 years) treated with UDCA and abnormal alkaline phosphatase (AP) levels received bezafibrate (400 mg/d) for 1 year. Changes were measured every 3 months during the study period of 12 months, 3 months after discontinuation and 3 months after resuming bezafibrate.

RESULTS

Two patients discontinued the treatment after few days, three at 6 and one at 9 months. Bezafibrate treatment resulted in a significant decrease in AP as early as 3 months. Normalization or decrease of AP below 1.5 times normal levels was observed in 13 and 4 patients respectively. There was also a significant decrease in γ-glutamyl transferase and alanine aminotransferase, cholesterol and triglyceride levels. Bezafibrate treatment resulted in significant improvement of pruritus. A rebound in liver biochemistries and pruritus occurred upon drug discontinuation, changes which improved again after resuming bezafibrate. Response to bezafibrate was associated with lower liver stiffness and severity of cholestasis. No severe adverse effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination treatment of bezafibrate and UDCA is associated with marked decrease or normalization of alkaline phosphatase as early as 3 months in patients with PBC. Better biochemical response was observed in patients with early disease and lower cholestasis.

Immunosuppressive therapy in immune-mediated liver disease in the non-transplanted patient

Autoimmune liver disease management goals are primarily slowing disease progression and symptomatic treatment. There are few options for curative medical management other than transplant for a spectrum of autoimmune liver disease that encompasses autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis as well as their overlap syndromes. These diseases are managed primarily with immunosuppressive therapy. Herein, we review the current literature, detailing the promise and pitfalls of the recommended immunosuppressive therapy for these challenging diseases.

The diagnosis and treatment of primary biliary cirrhosis

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) is a slowly progressive cholestatic liver disease of autoimmune etiology. The initial presentation of PBC is various from asymptomatic, abnormal liver biochemical tests to overt cirrhosis. The diagnosis of PBC is based on cholestatic biochemical liver tests, presence of antimitochondrial antibody and histologic findings of nonsuppurative destructive cholangitis. Although the diagnosis is straightforward, it could be underdiagnosed because of its asymptomatic presentation, or underrecognition of the disease. UDCA in a dose of 13-15 mg/kg is the widely approved therapy which can improve the prognosis of patients with PBC. However, one-third of patients does not respond to UDCA therapy and may require liver transplantation. Every effort to diagnose PBC in earlier stage and to develop new therapeutic drugs and clinical trials should be made.

Liver transplantation in PBC and PSC: indications and disease recurrence

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) represent major indications for liver transplantation (LT). Despite the steady increase in the incidence and prevalence of PBC, the number of liver transplants for PBC has fallen in recent years, whereas the number of transplants for PSC has remained stable. Indications for LT for PBC and PSC are no different from those of other causes of chronic liver disease, apart from some disease-specific indications. PBC and PSC have more favourable outcomes after LT, compared to viral hepatitis and alcohol-associated liver disease. Numerous studies have clearly demonstrated that PBC and PSC recur after LT. The diagnosis of recurrent disease should be made on agreed criteria. The impact of recurrent disease on survival is unclear. Study of recurrent PBC and PSC may provide a better understanding of the mechanisms of these diseases in the native liver.

Fatigue in primary biliary cirrhosis

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) is a chronic, autoimmune, cholestatic liver disease with a slowly progressive course. Without treatment, most patients eventually develop fibrosis of the liver and may need liver transplantation in the late stage of disease. Fatigue and pruritus are the most common symptoms of PBC, but the majority of patients are asymptomatic at first presentation. There is no specific treatment for fatigue in PBC, but modafinil has shown some potential beneficial effects, such as increased energy levels and decreased total sleep time. This Review article discusses the natural history and the measurement of fatigue in patients with PBC. The central and the peripheral mechanisms that have been suggested for the pathogenesis of fatigue in PBC are also discussed and treatment options are reviewed.

Modafinil in the treatment of debilitating fatigue in primary biliary cirrhosis: a clinical experience

Modafinil may be a potentially effective treatment for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC)-related fatigue. About 42 patients were given a 3-day trial of 100-200 mg modafinil. Response was defined as increased energy, decreased somnolence and sleep requirements, and improved daily function. Patients with positive responses were continued indefinitely on the medication. During the initial trial period, 31 (73%) patients had complete response and continued to take the medication. Eleven (26%) had no response. In long-term follow-up (average 17.7 months), 25 (81%) patients continued to take 100-200 mg modafinil daily. Some required an increased dosage and some took the medication as needed. Four (12%) patients stopped the medication because of side-effects or reduced efficacy; one patient (3%) stopped due to medication cost and one (3%) due to resolution of fatigue. Side-effects included insomnia, nausea, nervousness, and headaches. Modafinil appears to be a safe, effective treatment for PBC-related fatigue.

Clinical features and management of primary biliary cirrhosis

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC), which is characterized by progressive destruction of intrahepatic bile ducts, is not a rare disease since both prevalence and incidence are increasing during the last years mainly due to the improvement of case finding strategies. The prognosis of the disease has improved due to both the recognition of earlier and indolent cases, and to the wide use of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). New indicators of prognosis are available that will be useful especially for the growing number of patients with less severe disease. Most patients are asymptomatic at presentation. Pruritus may represent the most distressing symptom and, when UDCA is ineffective, cholestyramine represents the mainstay of treatment. Complications of long-standing cholestasis may be clinically relevant only in very advanced stages. Available data on the effects of UDCA on clinically relevant end points clearly indicate that the drug is able to slow but not to halt the progression of the disease while, in advanced stages, the only therapeutic option remains liver transplantation.

Clinical epidemiology of primary biliary cirrhosis: incidence, prevalence, and impact of therapy

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) is a chronic cholestatic liver disease of unknown etiology. It is typically characterized by a trio of criteria including cholestatic liver biochemistry tests for at least 6 month's duration, the presence of a positive serum antimitochondrial antibody, and histologic findings from liver biopsy that are compatible or diagnostic with PBC. Although no unifying mechanism of action has been described to explain the pathogenesis of PBC to date, the natural history of this condition is greatly influenced by several known and unknown risk factors. In turn, a number of publications have focused on describing the burden of disease and prognosis in patients with PBC, This review article will summarize the descriptive epidemiology of PBC including new insights on risk factors, prognosis, and the effect of medical therapy in contemporary patients.

Primary sclerosing cholangitis: summary of a workshop

Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a rare but important liver disease that leads to cirrhosis and need for liver transplantation in a high proportion of cases. The disease occurs in approximately 1 per 100,000 population per year, usually presents in adulthood, and affects men more often than women. Typical serum biochemical results, autoantibodies and liver biopsy are suggestive but not diagnostic of PSC, the diagnosis requiring cholangiographic demonstration of stricturing and dilatation of the intra- and/or extra-hepatic bile ducts. The natural history of PSC is variable, the average survival being 12 to 17 years. The cause of PSC is still unknown. Although considered an autoimmune disease, PSC has several atypical features and a strong genetic component. The therapy of PSC is unsatisfactory. Standard doses of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) lead to improvements in biochemical abnormalities but not in histology, cholangiographic appearance or survival. Several innovative therapies have been tried in PSC, but with scant evidence of benefit. For patients with high grade strictures, endoscopic dilatation is beneficial. Liver transplantation is successful for end-stage liver disease due to PSC and improves survival. PSC may recur after transplantation but is rarely progressive. The most dreaded complication of PSC is cholangiocarcinoma. Diagnosis of this highly malignant tumor is difficult, and there are no biomarkers for its early detection. Liver transplantation for cholangiocarcinoma has an exceedingly poor outcome, although transplantation with neoadjuvant chemoirradiation holds promise in selected patients. Thus, significant opportunities remain for basic and clinical research into the cause, natural history, and therapy of PSC.

High-dose ursodeoxycholic acid in primary sclerosing cholangitis: a 5-year multicenter, randomized, controlled study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is no medical treatment of proven benefit for primary sclerosing cholangitis. This study aimed at studying the effect of a higher dose of ursodeoxycholic acid than previously used on survival, symptoms, biochemistry, and quality of life in this disease.

METHODS

A randomized placebo-controlled study was performed in tertiary and secondary gastroenterology units. A total of 219 patients were randomized to 17 to 23 mg/kg body weight per day of ursodeoxycholic acid (n = 110) or placebo (n = 109) for 5 years. Follow-up data are available from 97 patients randomized to ursodeoxycholic acid and for 101 randomized to placebo. Quality of life was assessed by using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey.

RESULTS

The combined end point "death or liver transplantation" occurred in 7 of 97 (7.2%) patients in the ursodeoxycholic acid group vs 11 of 101 (10.9%) patients in the placebo group (P = .368; 95% confidence interval, -12.2% to 4.7%). The occurrence of liver transplantation as a single end point showed a similar positive trend for ursodeoxycholic acid treatment (5/97 [5.2%] vs 8/101 [7.9%]; 95% confidence interval, -10.4% to 4.6%). Three ursodeoxycholic acid and 4 placebo patients died from cholangiocarcinoma, and 1 placebo patient died from liver failure. Alkaline phosphatase and alanine aminotransferase tended to decrease during the first 6 months. There were no differences between the 2 groups in symptoms or quality of life. Analyses of serum ursodeoxycholic acid concentration gave no evidence that noncompliance may have influenced the results.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found no statistically significant beneficial effect of a higher dose of ursodeoxycholic acid than previously used on survival or prevention of cholangiocarcinoma in primary sclerosing cholangitis.

Mechanisms of liver fibrosis

Liver fibrosis represents a significant health problem worldwide of which no acceptable therapy exists. The most characteristic feature of liver fibrosis is excess deposition of type I collagen. A great deal of research has been performed to understand the molecular mechanisms responsible for the development of liver fibrosis. The activated hepatic stellate cell (HSC) is the primary cell type responsible for the excess production of collagen. Following a fibrogenic stimulus, HSCs change from a quiescent to an activated, collagen-producing cell. Numerous changes in gene expression are associated with HSC activation including the induction of several intracellular signaling cascades, which help maintain the activated phenotype and control the fibrogenic and proliferative state of the cell. Detailed analyses in understanding the molecular basis of collagen gene regulation have revealed a complex process offering the opportunity for multiple potential therapeutic strategies. However, further research is still needed to gain a better understanding of HSC activation and how this cell maintains its fibrogenic nature. In this review we describe many of the molecular events that occur following HSC activation and collagen gene regulation that contribute to the fibrogenic nature of these cells and provide a review of therapeutic strategies to treat this disease.

Colchicine for primary biliary cirrhosis: a Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group systematic review of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

Colchicine is used for patients with primary biliary cirrhosis due to its immunomodulatory and antifibrotic potential. The results from randomized clinical trials have, however, been inconsistent. We conducted a systematical review to evaluate the effect of colchicine for primary biliary cirrhosis.

METHODS

We identified randomized clinical trials comparing colchicine with placebo/no intervention. We analyzed effects by fixed and random effects model. We investigated heterogeneity by subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

We included 10 trials involving 631 patients, four of which were high-quality trials. No significant differences were detected between colchicine and placebo/no intervention regarding mortality (relative risk (RR), 1.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.71-2.06), mortality or liver transplantation (RR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.67-1.49), liver complications, liver biochemical variables, liver histology, or adverse events. Regarding mortality, an extreme case analysis favoring colchicine did not demonstrate beneficial effects of colchicine, whereas an extreme case analysis favoring placebo/no intervention demonstrated a detrimental effect of colchicine (RR = 2.28; 95% CI, 1.17-4.44). The number of patients without improvement of pruritus significantly decreased in the colchicine group (RR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.87). However, this estimate was based on only 156 patients from three trials.

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the use of colchicine for patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. As we are unable to exclude a risk of increased mortality, we recommend to use colchicine only in randomized clinical trials.

A randomized controlled trial of colchicine plus ursodiol versus methotrexate plus ursodiol in primary biliary cirrhosis: ten-year results

Primary biliary cirrhosis frequently progresses despite treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), the only approved therapy. Previous studies suggested that colchicine and methotrexate may improve biochemical tests of liver function, symptoms, and liver histology. The aim of the present study was to determine if the addition of colchicine or methotrexate to UDCA would improve survival free of liver transplantation. Eighty-five patients with histologically confirmed primary biliary cirrhosis whose serum alkaline phosphatase levels were at least twice the normal level and who were not yet candidates for liver transplantation were randomly assigned to receive colchicine or methotrexate in a double-blind study. UDCA was administered to all patients after 2 years. The primary end point was survival free of liver transplantation. Patients were followed up for a total of up to 10 years or until treatment failure. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Transplant-free survival was similar in both groups: 0.57 for colchicine plus UDCA and 0.44 for methotrexate plus UDCA, results that are similar to those predicted by the Mayo prognostic model. Significant improvement in liver biochemical tests and liver histology was observed in a subset of patients in both treatment groups who remained in the study for all 10 years. In conclusion, neither colchcine plus UDCA nor methotrexate plus UDCA improved survival beyond that predicted by the Mayo prognostic model. However, clinical, histologic, and biochemical improvement observed among those who remained in the study for 10 years suggests a possible benefit of these drugs in a subset of patients.

Colchicine for primary biliary cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Colchicine has been used for patients with primary biliary cirrhosis because of its immunomodulatory and antifibrotic potential. The therapeutical responses to colchicine in randomised clinical trials were inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of colchicine in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through electronic searches of The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE (September 2003), and manual searches of bibliographies. We contacted authors of trials and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing colchicine with any kind of control therapy were included irrespective of language, year of publication, and publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcomes were the number of deaths and the number of death and/or patients who underwent liver transplantation. Dichotomous outcomes were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We examined intervention effects by using both a fixed effect model and a random effects model. Heterogeneity was investigated by subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven randomised clinical trials involving 716 patients with primary biliary cirrhosis fulfilled the inclusion criteria. No significant differences were detected between colchicine and placebo/no intervention on the number of deaths (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.06), the number of deaths and/or patients who underwent liver transplantation (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.49), liver complications, liver biochemical variables, liver histological measurements, and adverse events. Trial methodology was generally low and some trials had high drop-out rate. A best-worst-case-scenario analysis showed no significant effect of colchicine on mortality (RR 0.59, 95%CI 0.30 to 1.15), while a worst-best-case-scenario analysis showed a significant detrimental effect of colchicine on mortality (RR 2.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.44). Colchicine significantly decreased the number of patients without improvement of pruritus (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.87). However, this estimate was based on only 156 patients from three trials. The effect of the combined treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid was not significantly different from that of colchicine alone.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find evidence either to support or refute the use of colchicine for patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. As we are not able to exclude a detrimental effect of colchicine, we suggest that it is only used in randomised clinical trials.

Primary biliary cirrhosis: specific treatment

No single agent or combination of agents has been shown to unequivocally delay the need for liver transplantation or reduce mortality in patients with PBC. Given this uncertainty, what, if any, specific therapy should be recommended? The agents with the strongest scientific proof of efficacy in well-designed clinical trials are ursodiol, azathioprine, and cyclosporine. Ursodiol is clearly the least toxic of these three. Other agents, such as methotrexate, have shown impressive results in anecdotal studies but have never been adequately tested in randomized clinical trials. Thus, based on the current evidence, imperfect as it is, ursodiol appears to be the safest and potentiaily the most effective specific therapy for patients with PBC. Azathioprine and methotrexate may be the best alternatives for patients who cannot tolerate or do not respond to ursodiol therapy, primarily because their safety has been established in large and lengthy clinical trials. Cylosporine could be considered in patients who fail other treatments (Table 3). We can hope that a safe, highly-effective treatment for patients with PBC will ultimately be discovered. Trials to unequivocally demonstrate the efficacy of new agents will have to be extremely well designed, however, and will require large numbers of patients followed for an extended period of time.

Beta-phenylethylamines and the isoquinoline alkaloids

This review covers beta-phenylethylamines and isoquinoline alkaloids and compounds derived from them, including further products of oxidation, condensation with formaldehyde and rearrangement, some of which do not contain an isoquinoline system, together with naphthylisoquinoline alkaloids, which have a different biogenetic origin. The occurrence of the alkaloids, with the structures of new bases, together with their reactions, syntheses and biological activities are reported. The literature from July 2001 to June 2002 is reviewed, with 581 references cited.

Treatment Options for Primary Biliary Cirrhosis and Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) are chronic cholestatic liver diseases that affect 0.5 to 40 per 100,000 and 1 to 6 per 100,000 Americans, respectively. Prompt recognition and management of the clinical manifestations of these diseases is essential for the patients' well-being and ultimate outcome. Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), 13 to 15 mg/kg per day, is the standard therapy for PBC and should be offered to every patient. It has been shown to slow progression of the disease and prevent the need for liver transplantation, which is the last recourse for patients with end-stage disease. However, there is no effective therapy for PSC yet. Patients are managed symptomatically, with surgical or endoscopic interventions as needed in cases of significant biliary obstruction. Complications of chronic cholestasis are seen in both PBC and PSC, with pruritus and fatigue being the most common complaints. The first choice for the treatment of pruritus is still cholestyramine, starting at 4 g/d. The pathogenesis of fatigue is poorly understood in this population; unrecognized hypothyroidism should be excluded. The use of antidepressants is currently under evaluation, but there is no specific therapy for fatigue as of yet. For prevention of severe osteoporosis, we recommend supplementation with 800 IU vitamin D and 1500 mg calcium/d. In patients with PBC and established osteoporosis, the use of alendronate and vitamin K appears to cause an increase in bone mineral density. Further studies are necessary before either of these drugs is routinely recommended. Finally, fat-soluble vitamin deficiencies are noted with more advanced disease. We recommend that serum levels be checked in high-risk patients, and that vitamins are replaced as appropriate with water-soluble supplements. However, other causes of malabsorption must be ruled out, including pancreatic insufficiency and celiac sprue.

Cholestatic syndromes

Further insights into the molecular regulation of bile acid transport and metabolism have provided the basis for a better understanding of the pathogenesis of cholestatic liver diseases. Novel insights into the mechanisms of action of ursodeoxycholic acid should advance our understanding of the treatment of cholestatic liver diseases. Mutations of transporter genes can cause hereditary cholestatic syndromes in both infants and adults as well as cholesterol gallstone disease. Important studies have been published on the pathogenesis, clinical features, and treatment of primary biliary cirrhosis, drug-induced cholestasis, and cholestasis of pregnancy.