Changes in Hepatic Venous Pressure Gradient Predict Hepatic Decompensation in Patients Who Achieved Sustained Virologic Response to Interferon-Free Therapy.
Journal
Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.)
ISSN: 1527-3350
Titre abrégé: Hepatology
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8302946
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
received:
17
05
2019
accepted:
27
07
2019
pubmed:
1
8
2019
medline:
18
2
2021
entrez:
1
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Sustained virologic response (SVR) to interferon (IFN)-free therapies ameliorates portal hypertension (PH); however, it remains unclear whether a decrease in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) after cure of hepatitis C translates into a clinical benefit. We assessed the impact of pretreatment HVPG, changes in HVPG, and posttreatment HVPG on the development of hepatic decompensation in patients with PH who achieved SVR to IFN-free therapy. Moreover, we evaluated transient elastography (TE) and von Willebrand factor to platelet count ratio (VITRO) as noninvasive methods for monitoring the evolution of PH. The study comprised 90 patients with HVPG ≥ 6 mm Hg who underwent paired HVPG, TE, and VITRO assessments before (baseline [BL]) and after (follow-up [FU]) IFN-free therapy. FU HVPG but not BL HVPG predicted hepatic decompensation (per mm Hg, hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.28; P < 0.001). Patients with BL HVPG ≤ 9 mm Hg or patients who resolved clinically significant PH (CSPH) were protected from hepatic decompensation. In patients with CSPH, an HVPG decrease ≥ 10% was similarly protective (36 months, 2.5% vs. 40.5%; P < 0.001) but was observed in a substantially higher proportion of patients (60% vs. 24%; P < 0.001). Importantly, the performance of noninvasive methods such as TE/VITRO for diagnosing an HVPG reduction ≥ 10% was inadequate for clinical use (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], < 0.8), emphasizing the need for HVPG measurements. However, TE/VITRO were able to rule in or rule out FU CSPH (AUROC, 0.86-0.92) in most patients, especially if assessed in a sequential manner. Reassessment of HVPG after SVR improved prognostication in patients with pretreatment CSPH. An "immediate" HVPG decrease ≥ 10% was observed in the majority of these patients and was associated with a clinical benefit, as it prevented hepatic decompensation. These results support the use of HVPG as a surrogate endpoint for interventions that lower portal pressure by decreasing intrahepatic resistance.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Sustained virologic response (SVR) to interferon (IFN)-free therapies ameliorates portal hypertension (PH); however, it remains unclear whether a decrease in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) after cure of hepatitis C translates into a clinical benefit. We assessed the impact of pretreatment HVPG, changes in HVPG, and posttreatment HVPG on the development of hepatic decompensation in patients with PH who achieved SVR to IFN-free therapy. Moreover, we evaluated transient elastography (TE) and von Willebrand factor to platelet count ratio (VITRO) as noninvasive methods for monitoring the evolution of PH.
APPROACH AND RESULTS
The study comprised 90 patients with HVPG ≥ 6 mm Hg who underwent paired HVPG, TE, and VITRO assessments before (baseline [BL]) and after (follow-up [FU]) IFN-free therapy. FU HVPG but not BL HVPG predicted hepatic decompensation (per mm Hg, hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.28; P < 0.001). Patients with BL HVPG ≤ 9 mm Hg or patients who resolved clinically significant PH (CSPH) were protected from hepatic decompensation. In patients with CSPH, an HVPG decrease ≥ 10% was similarly protective (36 months, 2.5% vs. 40.5%; P < 0.001) but was observed in a substantially higher proportion of patients (60% vs. 24%; P < 0.001). Importantly, the performance of noninvasive methods such as TE/VITRO for diagnosing an HVPG reduction ≥ 10% was inadequate for clinical use (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], < 0.8), emphasizing the need for HVPG measurements. However, TE/VITRO were able to rule in or rule out FU CSPH (AUROC, 0.86-0.92) in most patients, especially if assessed in a sequential manner.
CONCLUSIONS
Reassessment of HVPG after SVR improved prognostication in patients with pretreatment CSPH. An "immediate" HVPG decrease ≥ 10% was observed in the majority of these patients and was associated with a clinical benefit, as it prevented hepatic decompensation. These results support the use of HVPG as a surrogate endpoint for interventions that lower portal pressure by decreasing intrahepatic resistance.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31365764
doi: 10.1002/hep.30885
pmc: PMC7155089
doi:
Substances chimiques
Interferons
9008-11-1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1023-1036Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. Hepatology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., on behalf of American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.
Références
Gastroenterology. 2019 Jul;157(1):149-162
pubmed: 30905652
J Hepatol. 2016 Oct;65(4):692-699
pubmed: 27242316
Hepatology. 2011 Aug;54(2):555-61
pubmed: 21567436
J Hepatol. 2017 Jan;66(1):153-194
pubmed: 27667367
Hepatol Int. 2016 May;10(3):424-35
pubmed: 26758592
AIDS. 2016 Apr 24;30(7):1039-47
pubmed: 26760453
Z Gastroenterol. 2015 Apr;53(4):320-34
pubmed: 25867048
Gastroenterology. 2007 Aug;133(2):481-8
pubmed: 17681169
J Viral Hepat. 2017 Oct;24(10):823-831
pubmed: 28295923
J Hepatol. 2015 Sep;63(3):743-52
pubmed: 26047908
Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2017 Nov;129(Suppl 3):135-158
pubmed: 29063233
Gastroenterology. 2017 Nov;153(5):1273-1283.e1
pubmed: 28734831
J Hepatol. 2018 Aug;69(2):461-511
pubmed: 29650333
Dig Liver Dis. 2017 Jan;49(1):3-10
pubmed: 27717792
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2015 Sep;42(6):707-18
pubmed: 26179884
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 19;11(2):e0149230
pubmed: 26895398
Gastroenterology. 2019 Mar;156(4):997-1009.e5
pubmed: 30768988
Gastroenterology. 2018 Oct;155(4):1140-1153
pubmed: 29990488
J Hepatol. 2016 Jun;64(6):1388-402
pubmed: 27062661
Gastroenterology. 1996 Sep;111(3):701-9
pubmed: 8780575
J Hepatol. 2017 Apr;66(4):849-859
pubmed: 27864004
Liver Int. 2015 Mar;35(3):695-703
pubmed: 24628960
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2014 Feb;39(3):331-8
pubmed: 24308724
Hepatology. 2019 Dec;70(6):1913-1927
pubmed: 30993748
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Oct;13(10):1846-1853.e1
pubmed: 25912838
Gastroenterology. 2017 May;152(6):1578-1587
pubmed: 28344022
J Hepatol. 2009 Sep;51(3):468-74
pubmed: 19616339
Gastroenterology. 2019 Jan;156(2):446-460.e2
pubmed: 30367836
Gut. 2011 Aug;60(8):1133-8
pubmed: 21427197
J Hepatol. 2015 Jul;63(1):199-236
pubmed: 25911336
J Hepatol. 2018 Mar;68(3):563-576
pubmed: 29111320
J Gastroenterol. 2012 May;47(5):561-8
pubmed: 22170417
Liver Int. 2019 Jan;39(1):127-135
pubmed: 30107095
Z Gastroenterol. 2018 Jul;56(7):756-838
pubmed: 29945279
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Apr;47(7):980-988
pubmed: 29377193
J Hepatol. 2019 Mar;70(3):412-422
pubmed: 30389550
J Hepatol. 2013 May;58(5):911-21
pubmed: 23262249
Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2018 Nov 25;11:1756284818811294
pubmed: 30505350
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Oct;6(10):573-82
pubmed: 19724251
Hepatology. 2019 Mar;69(3):1287-1299
pubmed: 30318607
J Hepatol. 2009 May;50(5):923-8
pubmed: 19303163
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2017 Jan;45(1):139-149
pubmed: 27910154
J Hepatol. 2015 Oct;63(4):1015-22
pubmed: 26100497