Sofosbuvir and Simeprevir for Treatment of Recurrent Hepatitis C Infection After Liver Transplant

Impact of direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus therapy on tacrolimus dosing in liver transplant recipients

INTRODUCTION

Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have transformed hepatitis C virus (HCV) management post-liver transplant. As HCV clears during DAA treatment, hepatic metabolism improves, resulting in decreased tacrolimus concentrations that may require dose adjustment. The purpose of this study was to determine appropriate management of immunosuppression in liver transplant recipients during and following treatment of HCV.

METHODS

This study was a single-center retrospective analysis of 71 liver transplant recipients who were treated for HCV with DAAs. The primary outcome was change in dose-normalized tacrolimus concentrations from the start of DAA treatment to 12 weeks following therapy.

RESULTS

The mean change in log-transformed dose-normalized tacrolimus concentrations was a reduction of 0.43 ng/mL/mg (95% CI; 0.26-0.60, P < 0.0001). The greatest decrease occurred in the first 4 weeks of treatment, after which levels stabilized. The overall mean tacrolimus concentration was 4.8 ng/mL (±2.5). Two patients (3%) developed acute cellular rejection and two patients (3%) had graft loss and died.

CONCLUSION

From the start of treatment to 12 weeks post-DAA therapy, liver transplant recipients experienced a significant decrease in dose-normalized tacrolimus concentrations. In conclusion, close monitoring of tacrolimus concentrations is warranted during and following treatment with DAAs, as dose increases may be indicated in order to maintain therapeutic concentrations to prevent graft rejection.

Changes in practice and perception of hepatitis C and liver transplantation: Results of a national survey

With new practice guidelines, it is important to understand how liver transplant (LT) centers have incorporated direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) into the management of hepatitis C virus-infected (HCV+) candidates and recipients. To explore how DAAs have affected LT centers' willingness to treat HCV+ candidates and recipients and to use HCV+ donors, we surveyed high volume US LT centers (11/2014-12/2015) regarding practices for HCV+ candidates, recipients, and donors, before vs after DAAs. We used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to compare centers' number of LTs, HCV+ recipients, and HCV+ donors in the years before (1/1/2012-12/31/2013) and after (1/1/2016-12/31/2017) survey administration. Of 80 centers contacted, 57 (71.3%) responded, representing 69.0% of the total volume of LTs in 2013. After DAAs, most centers increased treating candidates with low (≤15) model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) (85.2%), intermediate/high (>15) MELD (92.6%), and hepatocellular carcinoma (79.6%). There was consensus to treat low MELD candidates (90.8% "most of the time/always"), but less certainty for intermediate/high MELD candidates (48.2% "sometimes"). Universal post-LT HCV treatment increased (7.4% vs 57.4%). After DAAs, 42.6% were more willing to use HCV+ donors for HCV+ candidates, and 38.9% were willing to consider using HCV+ donors for HCV- candidates. Overall, with DAAs, centers were more willing to treat HCV+ candidates and recipients and to use HCV+ donors; recent recommendations may help to guide treatment decisions for intermediate/high MELD candidates.

Virologic Cure of Hepatitis C: Impact on Hepatic Fibrosis and Patient Outcomes

Treatment with direct-acting antiviral agents has revolutionized the approach to hepatitis C. We are now able to obtain high sustained virological response (SVR) rates, even in the historically difficult-to-treat patient populations. SVR translates into improved clinical outcomes, particularly overall and liver-related mortality, and benefits are more striking in patients with cirrhosis. A 2.5- to 5-fold risk reduction in the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma and improvement in complications derived from portal hypertension have been reported as well. It is hypothesized that the benefits from SVR occur largely due to regression of fibrosis, which arises from the halt on the fibrogenic stimuli and activation of extracellular matrix reabsorption signals. Non-invasive markers of fibrosis are being utilized to assess regression, but it is still unclear how accurate they are in this clinical scenario. Interventions aiming to improve liver wellness and screening for cirrhosis-related complications should continue to be the norm after SVR.