Search

Background: Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a rare, chronic inflammatory disease of the liver. The treatment goal is reaching complete biochemical response (CR), defined as the normalisation of aspartate and alanine aminotransferases and immunoglobulin gamma. Ongoing AIH activity can lead to fibrosis and (decompensated) cirrhosis. Incomplete biochemical response is the most important risk factor for liver transplantation or liver-related mortality. First-line treatment consists of a combination of azathioprine and prednisolone. If CR is not reached, tacrolimus (TAC) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can be used as second-line therapy. Both products are registered for the prevention of graft rejection in solid organ transplant recipients. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of TAC and MMF as second-line treatment for AIH. Methods: The TAILOR study is a phase IIIB, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised (1:1) controlled trial performed in large teaching and university hospitals in the Netherlands. We will enrol 86 patients with AIH who have not reached CR after at least 6 months of treatment with first-line therapy. Patients are randomised to TAC (0.07 mg/kg/day initially and adjusted by trough levels) or MMF (max 2000 mg/day), stratified by the presence of cirrhosis at inclusion. The primary endpoint is the difference in the proportion of patients reaching CR after 12 months. Secondary endpoints include the difference in the proportion of patients reaching CR after 6 months, adverse effects, difference in fibrogenesis, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Discussion: This is the first randomised controlled trial comparing two second-line therapies for AIH. Currently, second-line treatment is based on retrospective cohort studies. The rarity of AIH is the main issue in clinical research for alternative treatment options. The results of this trial can be implemented in existing international clinical guidelines. Trial registra

Background: Liver transplantation is traditionally performed around the clock to minimize organ ischemic time. However, the prospect of prolonging preservation times holds the potential to streamline logistics and transform liver transplantation into a semi-elective procedure, reducing the need for nighttime surgeries. Dual hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (DHOPE) of donor livers for 1–2 h mitigates ischemia-reperfusion injury and improves transplant outcomes. Preclinical studies have shown that DHOPE can safely extend the preservation of donor livers for up to 24 h. Methods: We conducted an IDEAL stage 2 prospective clinical trial comparing prolonged (≥4 h) DHOPE to conventional (1–2 h) DHOPE for brain-dead donor livers, enabling transplantation the following morning. Liver allocation to each group was based on donor hepatectomy end times. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of all serious adverse events (SAE) within 30 days after transplantation. The primary feasibility endpoint was defined as the number of patients assigned and successfully receiving a prolonged DHOPE-perfused liver graft. Trial registration at: WHO International Clinical Trial Registry Platform, number NL8740. Findings: Between November 1, 2020 and July 16, 2022, 24 patients were enrolled. The median preservation time was 14.5 h (interquartile range [IQR], 13.9–15.5) for the prolonged group (n = 12) and 7.9 h (IQR, 7.6–8.6) for the control group (n = 12; p = 0.01). In each group, three patients (25%; 95% CI 3.9–46%, p = 1) experienced a SAE. Markers of ischemia-reperfusion injury and oxidative stress in both perfusate and recipients were consistently low and showed no notable discrepancies between the two groups. All patients assigned to either the prolonged group or control group successfully received a liver graft perfused with either prolonged DHOPE or control DHOPE, respectively. Interpretation: This first-in-human clinical trial demonstrates the safety and feasibility of

Background and Aims: Previous trials comparing cyclosporine and tacrolimus after liver transplantation (LT) showed conflicting results. Most used trough monitoring for cyclosporine (C0), leading to less accurate dosing than with 2-h monitoring (C2). Only one larger trial compared C2 with tacrolimus based on trough level (T0) after LT, with similar treated biopsy-proven acute rejection (tBPAR) and graft loss, while a smaller trial had less tBPAR with C2 compared to T0. Therefore, it is still unclear which calcineurin inhibitor is preferred after LT. We aimed to demonstrate superior efficacy (tBPAR), tolerability, and safety of C2 or T0 after first LT. Methods: Patients after first LT were randomized to C2 or T0. tBPAR, patient-and graft survival, safety and tolerability were the main endpoints, with analysis by Fisher test, Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and log-rank test. Results: In intention-to treat analysis 84 patients on C2 and 85 on T0 were included. Cumulative incidence of tBPAR C2 vs. T0 was 17.7% vs. 8.4% at 3 months (p=0.104), and 21.9% vs. 9.7% at 6 and 12 months (p=0.049). One-year cumulative mortality C2 vs. T0 was 15.5% vs. 5.9% (p=0.049) and graft loss 23.8% vs. 9.4% (p=0.015). Serum triglyceride and LDL-cholesterol was lower with T0 than with C2. Incidence of diarrhea in T0 vs, C2 was 64% vs. 31% (p≤0.001), with no other differences in safety and tolerability. Conclusions: In the first year after LT immunosuppression with T0 leads to less tBPAR and better patient-/re-transplant-free survival as compared to C2.

Background: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. Methods: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. Discussion: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. Trial registration: EudraCT 2016-001038-91. Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016. Graphical Abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.].