[Non-invasive assessment of fatty liver]

As the result of various harmful effects (infectious agents, metabolic diseases, unhealthy diet, obesity, toxic agents, autoimmune processes) hepatic damage may develop, which can progress towards liver steatosis, and fibrosis as well. The most common etiological factors of liver damages are hepatitis B and C infection, alcohol consumption and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Liver biopsy is considered as the gold standard for the diagnosis of chronic liver diseases. Due to the dangers and complications of liver biopsy, studies are focused on non-invasive markers and radiological imaging for liver steatosis, progression of fatty liver, activity of the necroinflammation and the severity of the fibrosis. Authors review the possibilities of non-invasive assessment of liver steatosis. The statistical features of the probes (positive, negative predictive values, sensitivity, specificity) are reviewed. The role of radiological imaging is also discussed. Although the non-invasive methods discussed in this article are useful to assess liver steatosis, further studies are needed to validate to follow progression of the diseases and to control therapeutic response.

[In Process Citation]

Approximately 70,000 people are infected with hepatitis C virus in Hungary, and more than half of them are not aware of their infection. From the point of infected individuals early recognition and effective treatment of related liver injury may prevent consequent advanced liver diseases and complications (liver cirrhosis, liver failure and liver cancer) and can increase work productivity and life expectancy. From a socioeconomic aspect, this could also prevent further spread of the virus as well as reduce substantially long term financial burden of related morbidity. Pegylated interferon + ribavirin dual therapy, which is available in Hungary since 2003, can clear the virus in 40-45% of previously not treated (naïve), and in 5-21% of previous treatment-failure patients. Addition of a direct acting first generation protease inhibitor drug (boceprevir or telaprevir) to the dual therapy increases the chance of sustained viral response to 63-75% and 59-66%, respectively. These two protease inhibitors are available and financed for a segment of Hungarian patients since May 2013. Between 2013 and February 2015, other direct acting antiviral interferon-free combination therapies have been registered for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C, with a potential efficacy over 90% and typical short duration of 8-12 weeks. Indication of therapy includes exclusion of contraindications to the drugs and demonstration of viral replication with consequent liver injury, i.e., inflammation and / or fibrosis in the liver. Non-invasive methods (elastography and biochemical methods) are accepted and preferred for staging liver damage (fibrosis). For initiation of treatment as well as for on-treatment decisions, accurate and timely molecular biology tests are mandatory. Eligibility for treatment is a subject of individual central medical review. Due to budget limitations therapy is covered only for a proportion of patients by the National Health Insurance Fund. Priority is given to those with urgent need based on a Hungarian Priority Index system reflecting primarily the stage of liver disease, and considering also additional factors, i.e., activity and progression of liver disease, predictive factors of treatment and other special issues. Approved treatments are restricted to the most cost-effective combinations based on the cost per sustained viral response value in different patient categories with consensus between professional organizations, National Health Insurance Fund and patient organizations. More expensive therapies might be available upon co-financing by the patient or a third party. Interferon-free treatments and shorter therapy durations preferred as much as financially feasible. A separate budget is allocated to cover interferon-free treatments for the most-in-need interferon ineligible/intolerant patients, and for those who have no more interferon-based therapy option. Orv. Hetil., 2015, 156(Suppl. 1), 3-23.

Diagnosis and treatment of chronic hepatitis B and D.Hungarian national consensus guideline

Diagnosis and treatment of hepatitis B and D virus infections mean that the patient is able to maintain working capacity, increase quality of life, prevent cancer, and prolong life expectancy, while the society benefits from eliminating the chances of further transmission of the viruses, and decreasing the overall costs of serious complications. The guideline delineates the treatment algorithms for 2015, which is agreed on a consensus meeting of specialists involved in the treatment of the above diseases. The prevalence of hepatitis B virus infection in the Hungarian general population is 0.5–0.7%. The indications of treatment is based upon viral examinations (including viral nucleic acid determination), determinations of disease activity and stage (including biochemical, pathologic, and/or non-invasive methods), and excluding contraindications. To avoid unnecessary side effects and for cost-effective approach the guideline emphasizes the importance of quick and detailed virologic evaluations, the applicability of transient elastography as an acceptable alternative of liver biopsy in this regard, as well as the relevance of appropriate consistent follow up schedule for viral response during therapy. The first choice of therapy in chronic hepatitis B infection can be pegylated interferon for 48 weeks or continuous entecavir or tenofovir therapy. The latter two must be continued for at least 12 months after hepatitis B surface antigen seroconversion. Adefovir dipivoxil is recommended mainly in combination therapy. Lamivudine is no longer a first choice; patients currently taking lamivudine must switch if response is inadequate. Appropriate treatment of patients taking immunosuppressive medications is highly recommended. Pegylated interferon based therapy is recommended for the treatment of concomitant hepatitis D infection. Orv. Hetil., 2015, 156(Suppl. 1), 25–35.