Search

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the fifth leading cause of cancer death worldwide, is a tumour with dismal prognosis [1]. In recent years, significant advances have been made and survival of patients with HCC has been prolonged and even cure can be achieved in a sizeable number of patients. The biggest advances are viable through screening and surveillance programmes of the population at risk, which includes all patients with cirrhosis of the liver and patients chronically infected with hepatitis B virus. Through regular ultrasound screening at 6-month intervals, detection rates and through this treatment and survival have been improved dramatically [2]. Through these surveillance programmes, at least 80% of the patients with HCC in western countries will undergo treatment for HCC of any kind with proven efficacy on survival. Only about 20% of patients with endstage tumours at the time of diagnosis will have no other option left than supportive care [3].

Liver fibrosis evaluation is essential in patients with chronic viral liver disease with major impact on treatment decisions. Liver biopsy is still considered the "gold-standard", but it is an invasive method, non-totally risk free, not very well accepted by patients, and unsuitable for regular follow-up examinations. In the last 10-15 years, several non-invasive methods for liver fibrosis assessment were developed: serological tests (simple or complex), ultrasound based elastographic methods (which can be classified in shear wave elastography methods and strain elastography methods) and magnetic resonance elastography. Today in clinical practice, ultrasound based elastographic methods are mostly used. From this category of methods, the oldest and more used is transient elastography, which was included also in several guidelines for assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B and C patients. Each method has his advantages and weakness and today there is no consensus regarding which method should be considered the best "surrogate" for liver biopsy. Here we will try to give a comprehensive overview about the different techniques and depict the advantages and disadvantages of each of these methods.

Data on the efficacy of lamivudine (LAM)-, tenofovir (TDF)- and emtricitabine (FTC)-based antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in HBV-HIV coinfection are limited. We completed a retrospective analysis of HBV-HIV-coinfected patients treated at the Medical University of Vienna. One-hundred and ten coinfected patients were included, with 57% being initially HBV e-Antigen (HBeAg) positive. Baseline HBV load was significantly higher in HBeAg+ than in HBeAg- patients (5962 ± 3663 vs 20 ± 19 × 10(6) IU/mL; P0.0001). Over a median observation period of 83 month (range: 26-183), 87% received HAART and 91% showed a suppression of HBV replication. After 5 years of continuous treatment, HBeAg seroconversion was achieved in 21% of LAM-, 50% of TDF- (P = 0.042 vs LAM) and in 57% of TDF + FTC (P = 0.008 vs LAM)-treated patients, respectively. HBsAg loss after 5 years was found in 8% (LAM), 25% (TDF; P = 0.085 vs LAM) and 29% (TDF + FTC; P = 0.037 vs LAM) of HBeAg+ patients. In HBeAg- patients, HBsAg loss was achieved in 11% (LAM), 27% (TDF; P = 0.263 vs LAM) and 36% (TDF + FTC; P = 0.05 vs LAM), respectively. Pretreatment CD4+ counts did not influence rates of HBeAg seroconversion and of HBsAg loss. Patients with HBsAg loss had lower baseline HBV-DNA levels and higher AST/ALT levels than patients without HBsAg loss. Transient HAART-related hepatotoxicity was found in 32% (Grade I: 21%; II:7%; III:2%; IV:0%). Most HBV-HIV-coinfected patients achieve complete suppression of HBV replication despite high baseline viremia. TDF-based HAART leads to high rates of HBeAg seroconversion and HBsAg loss after 5 years of continuous exposure. One-third of HBV-HIV-coinfected patients may experience transient HAART-related hepatotoxicity.

With the approval of boceprevir and telaprevir the standard treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection will be the triple therapy of a HCV protease inhibitor together with pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin. In clinical studies a significant increase of sustained virological response rates from 38 - 44 % to 63 - 75 % for treatment-naïve and from 17 - 21 % to 59 - 66 % in treatment-experienced patients in comparison to the dual combination therapy with pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin alone has been demonstrated. In addition, a large number of treatment-naïve patients and relapsers benefit from shorten treatment durations to 24 - 28 weeks. However, important differences exist between the administration of boceprevir and telaprevir in terms of a pegylated interferon alfa/ribavirin lead-in phase, the duration of dosing of the protease inhibitor, the overall treatment duration, HCV RNA measurements for response guided treatment durations and stopping rules. Furthermore, triple therapies with boceprevir and telaprevir may be associated with selection of resistant viral variants, new adverse events and clinically relevant drug-drug interactions. The present review gives an overview on the results of underlying clinical studies together with a guideline for the practical management of boceprevir- and telaprevir-based triple therapies.

Increased intrahepatic vascular resistance and hyperperfusion in the splanchnic circulation are the principal mechanisms leading to portal hypertension in cirrhosis. Several preclinical studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect of the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib on the portal hypertensive syndrome.To investigate the effect of sorafenib on hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), systemic hemodynamics and intrahepatic mRNA expression of proangiogenic, profibrogenic and proinflammatory genes.Patients with liver fibrosis/cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma were treated with sorafenib 400 mg b.d. HVPG measurement and transjugular liver biopsy were performed at baseline and at week 2. Changes in HVPG and intrahepatic mRNA expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), RhoA, tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and placental growth factor (PlGF) were evaluated.Thirteen patients (m/f = 12/1; Child-Pugh class A/B = 10/3) were included. The most common aetiology of liver disease was alcohol consumption (n = 7). Eleven patients had an elevated portal pressure, including eight patients with clinically significant portal hypertension. A significant decrease of HVPG (≥ 20% from baseline) was observed in four subjects. In HVPG responders, we observed mRNA downregulation of VEGF, PDGF, PlGF, RhoA kinase and TNF-α, while no substantial mRNA decrease was found in nonresponders in any of the five genes. In two of the four HVPG responders we observed a dramatic (43-85%) mRNA decrease of all five investigated genes.Larger controlled clinical trials are needed to demonstrate any potential beneficial effect of sorafenib on portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis.

Sorafenib is the new reference standard for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).To identify prognostic factors in sorafenib-treated HCC patients and to evaluate outcomes with respect to liver function.In this retrospective study, 148 HCC patients received sorafenib 400 mg b.d. across 11 Austrian institutions. Seventy-eight HCC patients who received best supportive care (BSC) in the pre-sorafenib era served as a control.In sorafenib-treated patients, low baseline α-fetoprotein, low Child-Pugh (CP) score, compensated cirrhosis, and low baseline aspartate aminotransferase (AST) were associated with significantly longer overall survival (OS) on univariate analysis. CP score and baseline AST remained independent prognostic factors on multivariate analysis. In patients with Barcelona Clinic liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B or C HCC (sorafenib: n = 139; BSC: n = 39), CP-A patients had a median OS of 11.3 (sorafenib [n = 76]) vs. 6.4 (BSC [n = 17]) months (P = 0.010), and CP-B patients had a median OS of 5.5 (sorafenib [n = 55]) vs. 1.9 (BSC [n = 22]) months (P = 0.021). In the sorafenib group, median OS according to baseline AST was 11.8 (100 U/L [n = 58]) vs. 3.9 (≥100 U/L [n = 15]) months for CP-A patients (P = 0.127), and 6.5 (100 U/L [n = 33]) vs. 2.1 (≥100 U/L [n = 21]) months for CP-B patients (P = 0.011). There was no survival difference between sorafenib and BSC in patients with BCLC stage D HCC (1.5 vs. 1.4 months; P = 0.116).Sorafenib was associated with improved survival in both CP-A and CP-B patients. In CP-B patients, baseline AST may be helpful in determining which patients are most likely to benefit from sorafenib.

Patients co-infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and the hepatitis C virus (HCV) are fraught with a rapid fibrosis progression rate and with complications of portal hypertension (PHT) We aimed to assess the influence of immune function [Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stage] on development of PHT and disease progression in HIV-HCV co-infection. Data of 74 interferon-naïve HIV-HCV co-infected patients undergoing liver biopsy, measurement of portal pressure and of liver stiffness and routine laboratory tests (including CD4+ cell count, HIV and HCV viral load) were analysed. Time of initial exposure (risk behaviour) was used to assess fibrosis progression. Fibrosis progression, time to cirrhosis and portal pressure were correlated with HIV status (CDC stage). HIV-HCV patients had rapid progression of fibrosis [0.201 +/- 0.088 METAVIR fibrosis units/year (FU/y)] and accelerated time to cirrhosis (24 +/- 13 years), high HCV viral loads (4.83 x 10(6) IU/mL) and a mean HVPG at the upper limit of normal (5 mmHg). With moderate or severe immunodeficiency, fibrosis progression was even higher (CDC-2 = 0.177 FU/y; CDC-3 = 0.248 FU/y) compared with patients with higher CD4+ nadirs (CDC-1 = 0.120 FU/y; P = 0.0001). An indirect correlation between CD4+ cell count and rate of fibrosis progression (R = -0.6654; P0.001) could be demonstrated. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) showed early elevation of portal pressure with median values of 4, 8 and 12 mmHg after 10, 15 and 20 years of HCV infection for CDC-3 patients. Patients treated with highly active anti-retroviral therapy (HAART) had similar rates of progression and portal pressure values than patients without HAART. Progression of HCV disease is accelerated in HIV-HCV co-infection, being more pronounced in patients with low CD4+ cell count. A history of a CD4+ cell nadir200/microL is a risk factor for rapid development of cirrhosis and PHT. Thus, HCV treatment should be considered early in patients with HIV-HCV co-infection and largely preserved CD4+ cell counts.

The liver is the site for synthesis of the vast majority of proteins that play a central role in maintaining hemostasis, by participating in the regulation of coagulation and fibrinolysis.To summarize the available data on the impact of coagulation disorders in patients with chronic liver disease.Hepatocellular damage in patients with severe liver disease can lead to abnormalities in the production and function of coagulation and fibrinolytic factors, disrupting the balance between coagulation and anticoagulation systems.Hemostatic abnormalities (eg. impaired synthesis of clotting factors, heightened fibrinolysis, disseminated intravascular coagulation, thrombocytopenia, and platelet dysfunction) can increase the risk of bleeding in cirrhotic patients.