MyMedR

Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext An expert review on the use of tenofovir alafenamide for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection in Asia

Charlton MR, Alam A, Shukla A, Dashtseren B, Lesmana CRA, Duger D, et al.

J Gastroenterol, 2020 Sep;55(9):811-823.
PMID: 32666200 DOI: 10.1007/s00535-020-01698-4

Asia has intermediate-to-high prevalence and high morbidity of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. The use of guideline-recommended nucleos(t)ide analogs with high barrier to resistance, such as entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), is one of the key interventions for curbing HBV infection and associated morbidity in Asia. However, there are some challenges to the use of ETV and TDF; while ETV is associated with high resistance in lamivudine (LAM)-exposed (especially LAM-refractory) patients; bone and renal safety issues are a major concern with TDF. Hence, a panel of twenty-eight expert hepatologists from Asia convened, reviewed the literature, and developed the current expert opinion-based review article for the use of TAF in the resource-constrained settings in Asia. This article provides a comprehensive review of two large, phase 3, double-blind, randomized controlled trials of TAF versus TDF in HBeAg-negative (study 0108) and HBeAg-positive (study 0110) chronic HBV patients (> 70% Asians). These studies revealed as follows: (1) non-inferiority for the proportion of patients who had HBV DNA
Asian consensus recommendations on optimizing the diagnosis and initiation of treatment of hepatitis B virus infection in resource-limited settings

Gane EJ, Charlton MR, Mohamed R, Sollano JD, Tun KS, Pham TTT, et al.

J Viral Hepat, 2020 05;27(5):466-475.
PMID: 31785182 DOI: 10.1111/jvh.13244

Asia has an intermediate-to-high prevalence of and high morbidity and mortality from hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Optimization of diagnosis and initiation of treatment is one of the crucial strategies for lowering disease burden in this region. Therefore, a panel of 24 experts from 10 Asian countries convened, and reviewed the literature, to develop consensus guidance on diagnosis and initiation of treatment of HBV infection in resource-limited Asian settings. The panel proposed 11 recommendations related to diagnosis, pre-treatment assessment, and indications of therapy of HBV infection, and management of HBV-infected patients with co-infections. In resource-limited Asian settings, testing for hepatitis B surface antigen may be considered as the primary test for diagnosis of HBV infection. Pre-treatment assessments should include tests for complete blood count, liver and renal function, hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg), anti-HBe, HBV DNA, co-infection markers and assessment of severity of liver disease. Noninvasive tests such as AST-to-platelet ratio index, fibrosis score 4 or transient elastography may be used as alternatives to liver biopsy for assessing disease severity. Considering the high burden of HBV infection in Asia, the panel adopted an aggressive approach, and recommended initiation of antiviral therapy in all HBV-infected, compensated or decompensated cirrhotic individuals with detectable HBV DNA levels, regardless of HBeAg status or alanine transaminase levels. The panel also developed a simple algorithm for guiding the initiation of treatment in noncirrhotic, HBV-infected individuals. The recommendations proposed herein, may help guide clinicians, to optimize the diagnosis and improvise the treatment rates for HBV infection in Asia.
Fulltext APASL clinical practice guideline on hepatitis B reactivation related to the use of immunosuppressive therapy

Lau G, Yu ML, Wong G, Thompson A, Ghazinian H, Hou JL, et al.

Hepatol Int, 2021 Oct;15(5):1031-1048.
PMID: 34427860 DOI: 10.1007/s12072-021-10239-x

BACKGROUND & AIM: Hepatitis B reactivation related to the use of immunosuppressive therapy remains a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality in hepatitis B endemic Asia-Pacific region. This clinical practice guidelines aim to assist clinicians in all disciplines involved in the use of immunosuppressive therapy to effectively prevent and manage hepatitis B reactivation.
METHODS: All publications related to hepatitis B reactivation with the use of immunosuppressive therapy since 1975 were reviewed. Advice from key opinion leaders in member countries/administrative regions of Asian-Pacific Association for the study of the liver was collected and synchronized. Immunosuppressive therapy was risk-stratified according to its reported rate of hepatitis B reactivation.
RECOMMENDATIONS: We recommend the necessity to screen all patients for hepatitis B prior to the initiation of immunosuppressive therapy and to administer pre-emptive nucleos(t)ide analogues to those patients with a substantial risk of hepatitis and acute-on-chronic liver failure due to hepatitis B reactivation.
Correction to: APASL clinical practice guideline on hepatitis B reactivation related to the use of immunosuppressive therapy

Lau G, Yu ML, Wong G, Thompson A, Ghazinian H, Hou JL, et al.

Hepatol Int, 2022 Jan 25.
PMID: 35076895 DOI: 10.1007/s12072-022-10301-2
Identifying the early predictors of non-response to steroids in patients with flare of autoimmune hepatitis causing acute-on-chronic liver failure

Sharma S, Agarwal S, Saraya A, Choudhury AK, Saigal S, Soin AS, et al.

Hepatol Int, 2023 Aug;17(4):989-999.
PMID: 36790652 DOI: 10.1007/s12072-023-10482-4

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Early identification of non-response to steroids is critical in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) causing acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). We assessed if this non-response can be accurately identified within first few days of treatment.
METHODS: Patients with AIH-ACLF without baseline infection/hepatic encephalopathy were identified from APASL ACLF research consortium (AARC) database. Diagnosis of AIH-ACLF was based mainly on histology. Those treated with steroids were assessed for non-response (defined as death or liver transplant at 90 days for present study). Laboratory parameters, AARC, and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores were assessed at baseline and day 3 to identify early non-response. Utility of dynamic SURFASA score [- 6.80 + 1.92*(D0-INR) + 1.94*(∆%3-INR) + 1.64*(∆%3-bilirubin)] was also evaluated. The performance of early predictors was compared with changes in MELD score at 2 weeks.
RESULTS: Fifty-five out of one hundred and sixty-five patients (age-38.2 ± 15.0 years, 67.2% females) with AIH-ACLF [median MELD 24 (IQR: 22-27); median AARC score 7 (6-9)] given oral prednisolone 40 (20-40) mg per day were analyzed. The 90 day transplant-free survival in this cohort was 45.7% with worse outcomes in those with incident infections (56% vs 28.0%, p = 0.03). The AUROC of pre-therapy AARC score [0.842 (95% CI 0.754-0.93)], MELD [0.837 (95% CI 0.733-0.94)] score and SURFASA score [0.795 (95% CI 0.678-0.911)] were as accurate as ∆MELD at 2 weeks [0.770 (95% CI 0.687-0.845), p = 0.526] and better than ∆MELD at 3 days [0.541 (95% CI 0.395, 0.687), p 6, MELD score > 24 with SURFASA score ≥ - 1.2, could identify non-responders at day 3 (concomitant- 75% vs either - 42%, p
Fulltext An international Delphi consensus statement on metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease and risk of chronic kidney disease

Sun DQ, Targher G, Byrne CD, Wheeler DC, Wong VW, Fan JG, et al.

Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr, 2023 Jun 01;12(3):386-403.
PMID: 37351121 DOI: 10.21037/hbsn-22-421

BACKGROUND: With the rising global prevalence of fatty liver disease related to metabolic dysfunction, the association of this common liver condition with chronic kidney disease (CKD) has become increasingly evident. In 2020, the more inclusive term metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) was proposed to replace the term non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The observed association between MAFLD and CKD and our understanding that CKD can be a consequence of underlying metabolic dysfunction support the notion that individuals with MAFLD are at higher risk of having and developing CKD compared with those without MAFLD. However, to date, there is no appropriate guidance on CKD in individuals with MAFLD. Furthermore, there has been little attention paid to the link between MAFLD and CKD in the Nephrology community.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a Delphi-based approach, a multidisciplinary panel of 50 international experts from 26 countries reached a consensus on some of the open research questions regarding the link between MAFLD and CKD.
CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi-based consensus statement provided guidance on the epidemiology, mechanisms, management and treatment of MAFLD and CKD, as well as the relationship between the severity of MAFLD and risk of CKD, which establish a framework for the early prevention and management of these two common and interconnected diseases.