MyMedR

Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

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 Pre-existing liver disease is associated with poor outcome in patients with SARS CoV2 infection; The APCOLIS Study (APASL COVID-19 Liver Injury Spectrum Study)

Sarin SK, Choudhury A, Lau GK, Zheng MH, Ji D, Abd-Elsalam S, et al.

Hepatol Int, 2020 Sep;14(5):690-700.
PMID: 32623632 DOI: 10.1007/s12072-020-10072-8

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: COVID-19 is a dominant pulmonary disease, with multisystem involvement, depending upon comorbidities. Its profile in patients with pre-existing chronic liver disease (CLD) is largely unknown. We studied the liver injury patterns of SARS-Cov-2 in CLD patients, with or without cirrhosis.
METHODS: Data was collected from 13 Asian countries on patients with CLD, known or newly diagnosed, with confirmed COVID-19.
RESULTS: Altogether, 228 patients [185 CLD without cirrhosis and 43 with cirrhosis] were enrolled, with comorbidities in nearly 80%. Metabolism associated fatty liver disease (113, 61%) and viral etiology (26, 60%) were common. In CLD without cirrhosis, diabetes [57.7% vs 39.7%, OR = 2.1 (1.1-3.7), p = 0.01] and in cirrhotics, obesity, [64.3% vs. 17.2%, OR = 8.1 (1.9-38.8), p = 0.002] predisposed more to liver injury than those without these. Forty three percent of CLD without cirrhosis presented as acute liver injury and 20% cirrhotics presented with either acute-on-chronic liver failure [5 (11.6%)] or acute decompensation [4 (9%)]. Liver related complications increased (p
Fulltext Association Between Administration of IL-6 Antagonists and Mortality Among Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Meta-analysis

WHO Rapid Evidence Appraisal for COVID-19 Therapies (REACT) Working Group, Shankar-Hari M, Vale CL, Godolphin PJ, Fisher D, Higgins JPT, et al.

JAMA, 2021 Aug 10;326(6):499-518.
PMID: 34228774 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.11330

IMPORTANCE: Clinical trials assessing the efficacy of IL-6 antagonists in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 have variously reported benefit, no effect, and harm.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association between administration of IL-6 antagonists compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality and other outcomes.
DATA SOURCES: Trials were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases between October 2020 and January 2021. Searches were not restricted by trial status or language. Additional trials were identified through contact with experts.
STUDY SELECTION: Eligible trials randomly assigned patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to a group in whom IL-6 antagonists were administered and to a group in whom neither IL-6 antagonists nor any other immunomodulators except corticosteroids were administered. Among 72 potentially eligible trials, 27 (37.5%) met study selection criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: In this prospective meta-analysis, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) for 28-day all-cause mortality.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. There were 9 secondary outcomes including progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death and risk of secondary infection by 28 days.
RESULTS: A total of 10 930 patients (median age, 61 years [range of medians, 52-68 years]; 3560 [33%] were women) participating in 27 trials were included. By 28 days, there were 1407 deaths among 6449 patients randomized to IL-6 antagonists and 1158 deaths among 4481 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.95]; P = .003 based on a fixed-effects meta-analysis). This corresponds to an absolute mortality risk of 22% for IL-6 antagonists compared with an assumed mortality risk of 25% for usual care or placebo. The corresponding summary ORs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92; P
Correction to: Acute-on-chronic liver failure: consensus recommendations of the Asian Pacific association for the study of the liver (APASL): an update

Sarin SK, Choudhury A, Sharma MK, Maiwall R, Al Mahtab M, Rahman S, et al.

Hepatol Int, 2019 11;13(6):826-828.
PMID: 31595462 DOI: 10.1007/s12072-019-09980-1

The article Acute-on-chronic liver failure: consensus recommendations of the Asian Pacific association for the study of the liver (APASL): an update, written by [Shiv Sarin], was originally published electronically on the publisher's internet portal (currently SpringerLink) on June 06, 2019 without open access.
Fulltext Acute-on-chronic liver failure: consensus recommendations of the Asian Pacific association for the study of the liver (APASL): an update

Sarin SK, Choudhury A, Sharma MK, Maiwall R, Al Mahtab M, Rahman S, et al.

Hepatol Int, 2019 Jul;13(4):353-390.
PMID: 31172417 DOI: 10.1007/s12072-019-09946-3

The first consensus report of the working party of the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) set up in 2004 on acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) was published in 2009. With international groups volunteering to join, the "APASL ACLF Research Consortium (AARC)" was formed in 2012, which continued to collect prospective ACLF patient data. Based on the prospective data analysis of nearly 1400 patients, the AARC consensus was published in 2014. In the past nearly four-and-a-half years, the AARC database has been enriched to about 5200 cases by major hepatology centers across Asia. The data published during the interim period were carefully analyzed and areas of contention and new developments in the field of ACLF were prioritized in a systematic manner. The AARC database was also approached for answering some of the issues where published data were limited, such as liver failure grading, its impact on the 'Golden Therapeutic Window', extrahepatic organ dysfunction and failure, development of sepsis, distinctive features of acute decompensation from ACLF and pediatric ACLF and the issues were analyzed. These initiatives concluded in a two-day meeting in October 2018 at New Delhi with finalization of the new AARC consensus. Only those statements, which were based on evidence using the Grade System and were unanimously recommended, were accepted. Finalized statements were again circulated to all the experts and subsequently presented at the AARC investigators meeting at the AASLD in November 2018. The suggestions from the experts were used to revise and finalize the consensus. After detailed deliberations and data analysis, the original definition of ACLF was found to withstand the test of time and be able to identify a homogenous group of patients presenting with liver failure. New management options including the algorithms for the management of coagulation disorders, renal replacement therapy, sepsis, variceal bleed, antivirals and criteria for liver transplantation for ACLF patients were proposed. The final consensus statements along with the relevant background information and areas requiring future studies are presented here.