Risk Of Developing Liver Cancer After HCV Treatment

▼

Friday, March 11, 2011

Assessment of Liver Fibrosis before and after Hepatitis C Antiviral Therapy Using Noninvasive Tests

Assessment of Liver Fibrosis before and after Antiviral Therapy by Different Serum Marker Panels in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C

S. M. Martinez; G. Fernández-Varo; P. González; E. Sampson; M. Bruguera; M. Navasa; W. Jiménez; J. M. Sánchez-Tapias; X. Forns
Authors and Disclosures
Posted: 03/08/2011; Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2011;33(1):138-148. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing


Abstract and Introduction

Abstract

Background Liver biopsy is the reference standard to assess liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C.
Aim To validate and compare the diagnostic performance of non-invasive tests for prediction of liver fibrosis severity and assessed changes in extracellular matrix markers after antiviral treatment.

Methods
The performances of Forns' score, AST to platelet ratio index (APRI), FIB-4 index and Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) score were validated in 340 patients who underwent antiviral therapy. These scores were determined 24 weeks after treatment in 161 patients.

Results
Forns' score, APRI, FIB-4 and ELF score showed comparable diagnostic accuracies for significant fibrosis [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) 0.83, 0.83, 0.85 and 0.81, respectively]. To identify cirrhosis, FIB-4 index showed a significantly better performance over APRI and ELF score (AUROC 0.89 vs. 0.83 and 0.82, respectively). ELF score decreased significantly in patients with sustained virological response (SVR) (P < 0.0001) but remained unchanged in nonresponders. Non-1 hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype, baseline lower HCV RNA, glucose, hyaluronic acid and higher cholesterol levels were independently associated with SVR.
.
Conclusions
Simple panel markers and ELF score are accurate at identifying significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in chronic hepatitis C. A decrease in ELF score after antiviral treatment reflects the impact of viral clearance in hepatic extracellular matrix and probably in the improvement of liver fibrosis.
.
Discussion Only; See Full Text Here
.

Discussion

The use of routine haematological and biochemical parameters combined in panels such as Forns' score, APRI or FIB-4 index, is an 'indirect', easy and inexpensive approach to identify patients with significant fibrosis and cirrhosis. The Forns' score was developed and validated in a population where only 25% of patients had significant hepatic fibrosis,[9] whereas the prevalence of significant fibrosis in the present cohort was much higher (67%). This difference may explain why this test performed better in the present cohort than in the original study to rule in significant fibrosis, with a PPV higher than 90%, but not to exclude significant fibrosis. Similarly, the PPV for significant fibrosis obtained in this study with APRI ≥1.5, compared favourably with that reported in the original study (93% vs. 88%), although the NPV at the 0.5 cutoff point was lower (74% vs. 86%).[10] Similar results were shown with the FIB-4 index. For the outcome of cirrhosis, all scores performed well but FIB-4 showed a significantly better accuracy as compared with APRI and ELF.

The results of our study are in accordance with recent reports evaluating the effect of anti-HCV treatment using other non-invasive methods. A comparison of HCV FibroSURE (or FT-AT) and FIBROSpect II (HA, TIMP-1 and α2-macroglobulin) during a phase 2b clinical trial with albinterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin noted a significant decline in the score values in patients with SVR compared with those in nonresponders.[32] Another study performed a longitudinal evaluation of FT-AT with HA as a comparative reference in CHC patients treated with IFN monotherapy; the authors observed a significant decrease of FT-AT in those who obtained SVR versus NR and relapsers, but with no significant changes noted in HA.[33] In a more recent study, a comparison of the effect of antiviral therapy on FT and FibroScan between treated and untreated patients showed a significant decrease of FT at the end of follow-up for those patients who obtained SVR or relapsed.[34]

In our study, the significant increase in serum TIMP-1 levels observed at the end of follow-up in nonsustained virological responders may indicate that fibrosis is progressing in these patients. Indeed, other reports found a similar TIMP-1 increase following interferon alfa therapy in nonresponder patients.[35–37] TIMP-1 protects collagen from fibrolysis by the matrix metalloproteinases and also inhibits the apoptosis of HSC.[38] In experimental models, overexpression of TIMP-1 was associated to enhanced fibrosis, supporting the hypothesis that inhibition of matrix degradation may contribute to progression of fibrosis.[39]

We also observed significant post-treatment changes of Forns' score, APRI and FIB-4 tests. However, several components of these tests, such as serum cholesterol, platelet counts and particularly transaminases, which are not directly involved in hepatic fibrogenesis or fibrolysis, may change under antiviral therapy, particularly in responders.

Of interest, by multivariate analysis, HA, a component of the ELF score showed an association with SVR. Previous studies have shown that HA levels reflect an increased production of this marker by HSC as well as a decreased removal from circulation, which depends on the uptake by specific receptors in hepatic sinusoidal endothelial cells.[40,41] Higher HA levels and lower probability of virological response could reflect dysfunction of endothelial sinusoidal cells that is present in patients with more advanced liver fibrosis, another independent predictor of virological response.

Our study has several limitations. First, the lack of a follow-up liver biopsy, which prevented us to assess directly the effect of treatment on liver fibrosis. Second, the short period of time that elapsed between baseline and follow-up evaluations. As liver fibrosis decreases progressively after a SVR,[42] the evaluation period of the study might have been too short to detect additional effects. Third, the proportion of patients with a biopsy size >20 mm was suboptimal. Finally, although this is a cohort study, ECM assays were performed on stored serum samples, which were not available for all included patients.

In summary, this study of a large cohort of patients with CHC confirms that both indirect fibrosis tests and measurement of ECM serum markers, included in the ELF score, are accurate to predict the severity of fibrosis. ECM markers and the composite ELF score significantly decreased in sustained virological responders but remained unchanged in nonsustained responders, suggesting that these markers may be useful as a non-invasive means to assess the effects of antiviral therapy on hepatic fibrosis and fibrogenesis. The potential utility of the ELF test in this setting as compared with other commercially available patented markers would require extensive validation and a cost-effective analysis.


References


  1. World Health Organization. Hepatitis C – global prevalence (update). World Health Org Weekly Epidemiol Rec 1999; 74: 421–8.

  2. Thomas DL, Seeff LB. Natural history of hepatitis C. Clin Liver Dis 2005; 9: 383– 98.

  3. Manns MP, McHutchison JG, Gordon SC, et al. Peginterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin compared with interferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin for initial treatment of chronic hepatitis C: a randomised trial. Lancet 2001; 358: 958–65.

  4. Fried MW, Shiffman ML, Reddy KR, et al. Peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin for chronic hepatitis C virus infection. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 975–82.

  5. National Institutes of Health consensus development conference statement: management of hepatitis C: 2002 – June 10–12, 2002. Hepatology 2002; 36: S3– 20.

  6. Perrault J, McGill DB, Ott BJ, Taylor WF. Liver biopsy: complications in 1000 inpatients and outpatients. Gastroenterology 1978; 74: 103–6.

  7. Regev A, Berho M, Jeffers LJ, et al. Sampling error and intraobserver variation in liver biopsy in patients withchronic HCV infection. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 2614–8.

  8. Bedossa P, Darge`re D, Paradis V. Sampling variability of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 2003; 38: 1449–57.

  9. Forns X, Ampurdanés S, Llovet JM, et al. Identification of chronic hepatitis C patients without hepatic fibrosis by a simple predictive model. Hepatology 2002; 36: 986–92.

  10. Wai CT, Greenson JK, Fontana RJ, et al. A simple noninvasive index can predict both significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 2003; 38: 518–26.

  11. Sterling RK, Lissen E, Clumeck N, et al. Development of a simple noninvasive index to predict significant fibrosis in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection. Hepatology 2006; 43: 1317–25.

  12. Vallet-Pichard A, Mallet V, Nalpas B, et al. FIB-4: an inexpensive and accurate marker of fibrosis in HCV infection. Comparison with liver biopsy and fibrotest. Hepatology 2007; 46: 32–6.

  13. Imbert-Bismut F, Ratziu V, Pieroni L, Charlotte F, Benhamou Y, Poynard T. Biochemical markers of liver fibrosis in patients with hepatitis C virus infection: a prospective study. Lancet 2001; 357: 1069–75.

  14. Poynard T, McHutchison J, Manns M, Myers RP, Albrecht J. Biochemical surrogate markers of liver fibrosis and activity in a randomized trial of peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin. Hepatology 2003; 38: 481–92.

  15. Castéra L, Vergniol J, Foucher J, et al. Prospective comparison of transient elastography, Fibrotest, APRI, and liver biopsy for the assessment of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Gastroenterology 2005; 128: 343–50.

  16. Ziol M, Handra-Luca A, Kettaneh A, et al. Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis by measurement of stiffness in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 2005; 41: 48–54.

  17. Rockey DC, Bissell DM. Noninvasive measures of liver fibrosis. Hepatology 2006; 43: S113–20.

  18. Guéchot J, Laudat A, Loria A, Serfaty L, Poupon R, Giboudeau J. Diagnostic accuracy of hyaluronan and type III procollagen amino-terminal peptide serum assays as markers of liver fibrosis in chronic viral hepatitis C evaluated by ROC curve analysis. Clin Chem 1996; 42: 558–63.

  19. Fontana RJ, Goodman ZD, Dienstag JL, et al. Relationship of serum fibrosis markers with liver fibrosis stage and collagen content in patients with advanced chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 2008; 47: 789–98.

  20. Kamal SM, Turner B, He Q, et al. Progression of fibrosis in hepatitis C with and without schistosomiasis: correlation with serum markers of fibrosis. Hepatology 2006; 43: 771–9.

  21. Trocme C, Leroy V, Sturm N, et al. Longitudinal evaluation of a fibrosis index combining MMP-1 and PIIINP compared with MMP-9, TIMP-1 and hyaluronic acid in patients with chronic hepatitis C treated by interferon-alpha and ribavirin. J Viral Hepat 2006; 13: 643–51.

  22. Fontana RJ, Bonkovsky HL, Naishadham D, et al. Serum fibrosis marker levels decrease after successful antiviral treatment in chronic hepatitis C patients with advanced fibrosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7: 219–26.

  23. Rosenberg WM, Voelker M, Thiel R, et al. Serum markers detect the presence of liver fibrosis: a cohort study. Gastroenterology 2004; 127: 1704–13.

  24. Guha IN, Parkes J, Roderick PR, Harris S, Rosenberg WM. Non-invasive markers associated with liver fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gut 2006; 55: 1650–60.

  25. Guha IN, Parkes J, Roderick P, et al. Noninvasive markers of fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: validating the European Liver Fibrosis Panel and exploring simple markers. Hepatology 2008; 47: 455–60.

  26. Mayo MJ, Parkes J, Adams-Huet B, et al. Prediction of clinical outcomes in primary biliary cirrhosis by serum enhanced liver fibrosis assay. Hepatology 2008; 48: 1549–57.

  27. The French METAVIR Cooperative Study Group. Intraobserver and interobserver variations in liver biopsy interpretation in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 1994; 20: 15–20.

  28. Poynard T, Halfon P, Castera L, et al. FibroPaca Group. Standardization of ROC curve areas for diagnostic evaluation of liver fibrosis markers based on prevalences of fibrosis stages. Clin Chem 2007; 53: 1615–22.

  29. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837–45.

  30. Poynard T, McHutchison J, Manns M, et al. Impact of pegylated interferon alfa-2b and ribavirin on liver fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Gastroenterology 2002; 122: 1303–13.

  31. Camma` C, Di Bona D, Schepis F, et al. Effect of peginterferon alfa-2a on liver histology in chronic hepatitis C: a metaanalysis of individual patient data. Hepatology 2004; 39: 333–42.

  32. Patel K, Benhamou Y, Yoshida EM, et al. An independent and prospective comparison of two commercial fibrosis marker panels (HCV FibroSURE and FIBROSpect II) during albinterferon alfa-2b combination therapy for chronic hepatitis C. J Viral Hepat 2009; 16: 178– 86.

  33. Poynard T, Imbert-Bismut F, Ratziu V, et al. Biochemical markers of liver fibrosis in patients infected by hepatitis C virus: longitudinal validation in a randomized trial. J Viral Hepat 2002; 9: 128–33.

  34. Vergniol J, Foucher J, Castéra L, et al. Changes of non-invasive markers and FibroScan values during HCV treatment. J Viral Hepat 2009; 16: 132–40.

  35. Arai M, Niioka M, Maruyama K, et al. Changes in serum levels of metalloproteinases and their inhibitors by treatment of chronic hepatitis C with interferon. Dig Dis Sci 1996; 41: 995– 1000.

  36. Mitsuda A, Suou T, Ikuta Y, Kawasaki H. Changes in serum tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase-1 after interferon alpha treatment in chronic hepatitis C. J Hepatol 2000; 32: 666–72.

  37. Ninomiya T, Yoon S, Nagano H, et al. Significance of serum matrix metalloproteinases and their inhibitors on the antifibrogenetic effect of interferon-alfa in chronic hepatitis C patients. Intervirology 2001; 44: 227–31.

  38. Murphy FR, Issa R, Zhou X, et al. Inhibition of apoptosis of activated hepatic stellate cells by tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 is mediated via effects on matrix metalloproteinase inhibition: implications for reversibility of liver fibrosis. J Biol Chem 2002; 277: 11069– 76.

  39. Yoshiji H, Kuriyama S, Miyamoto Y, et al. Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 promotes liver fibrosis development in a transgenic mouse model. Hepatology 2000; 32: 1248–54.

  40. Ueno T, Inuzuka S, Torimura T, et al. Serum hyaluronate reflects hepatic sinusoidal capillarization. Gastroenterology 1993; 105: 475–81.

  41. McCourt PA, Smedsrød BH, Melkko J, Johansson S. Characterization of a hyaluronan receptor on rat sinusoidal liver endothelial cells and its functional relationship to scavenger receptors. Hepatology 1999; 30: 1276–86.

  42. George SL, Bacon BR, Brunt EM, Mihindukulasuriya KL, Hoffmann J, Di Bisceglie AM. Clinical, virologic, histologic, and biochemical outcomes after successful HCV therapy: a 5-year followup of 150 patients. Hepatology 2009; 49: 729–38.

at

No comments:

Post a Comment