© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017
Cataldo Doria (ed.)Contemporary Liver TransplantationOrgan and Tissue Transplantation10.1007/978-3-319-07209-8_1713. Hepatitis C Virus Infection: A New Era
(1)
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Liver Transplant Program, Section of Hepatology, Hahnemann University Hospital, Drexel College of Medicine, 245 N. 15th Street, New College Building, 12th Floor, Room 12318, Philadelphia, PA 19102, USA
(2)
Regional Gastroenterology Associates of Lancaster, 2104 Harrisburg Pike, Suite 300, Lancaster, PA 17604, USA
Santiago J. Munoz (Corresponding author)
Email: Santiago.Munoz@DrexelMed.edu
Email: santiago.munoz@comcast.net
Abstract
Rapid and dramatic advances in development of the modern generation of direct antiviral agents specific for hepatitis C have occurred over the last 3 years. In this chapter, we discuss the applications of the new antiviral agents to patients with hepatitis C infection relevant to liver transplantation, namely, those with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis, patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) related to HCV, and in liver transplant recipients with recurrent HCV. The limits of applicability of the new direct antiviral agents (DAAs) are reviewed, as well as the new issues raised by the high rates of HCV cure. The global impact of high cure rates of HCV has not yet been fully appreciated. Access to the new antiviral agents and diagnosing the large numbers of patients currently unaware of this infection are clearly now the major challenges, rather than discovering new agents to optimizing cure rates. Liver transplantation for HCV and HCV-related HCC is likely to remain at current levels for the rest of the decade, but recipients and allografts are likely to enjoy a much longer useful life following HCV eradication with DAAs.
Keywords
HepatitisTransplantationCirrhosisAntiviralHepatocellular carcinomaAscitesChildsMELDDAAsHepatitis CIntroduction
The relationship between chronic hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) and liver transplantation (LTx) has rapidly evolved through several stages over the last three decades. When LTx first reached clinical medicine and became an accepted therapeutic modality for irreversible liver failure in the early 1980s, the viral etiology of HCV was unknown; most patients transplanted had cirrhosis caused by autoimmune liver disorders such as primary biliary cirrhosis, autoimmune hepatitis, and primary sclerosis cholangitis. Nonetheless, it was noted that some patients had cryptogenic cirrhosis preceded by chronic hepatitis, which was provisionally called chronic “non-A, non-B” hepatitis. Eventually, the hepatitis C virus was identified, and it became apparent that many patients previously diagnosed with cirrhosis of unknown cause were indeed infected with this new hepatotropic flavivirus virus. The life-saving effect of LTx for decompensated HCV cirrhosis was rapidly apparent on thousands of transplanted patients and soon this procedure became standard care for HCV-related cirrhosis. In the USA, about 35 % of LTx is performed in patients with liver failure due to HCV cirrhosis, and in some geographical areas, the majority of the wait-list is accounted for patients with HCV cirrhosis or HCC caused by HCV. Indeed, HCC has risen from a relatively uncommon malignancy in the 1980s to an aggressive neoplasm of nearly epidemic proportions. HCC is currently the fastest rising cause of cancer-related mortality in the USA (El Serag 2011).
The HCV quasispecies nature with highly conserved genomic areas results in several genotypes of worldwide distribution. The most common genotypes in the USA are 1, 2, and 3. For many years, genotype 1 was the most difficult to cure with interferon-based therapies, although it was believed that the severity was not particularly worse for any of the HCV genotypes. Within the last few years, several of these concepts have dramatically changed. The historic events of the late twentieth century in viral hepatitis discovery and causality of various syndromes of liver disease have been reviewed elsewhere (Alter 2014).
It is now clear that the majority of patients infected with HCV were born between 1945 and 1965. Consequently, many of them have now had the disease for more than 50 years. Since the risk of progression to cirrhosis is directly related to disease duration, a striking increase in cirrhosis due to HCV and associated complications, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), has been observed over the last decade. Conservative predictions suggest that the peak frequency of decompensated cirrhosis due to HCV is still to come and may occur during the midpoint of the next decade.
The current antiviral therapy of HCV-chronic hepatitis cures the viral infection and halts the progression to cirrhosis and associated complications. For the last three decades, antiviral therapy was limited to variants of interferon-based combinations. Such therapies had severe adverse events, poor tolerability, and achieved a cure of the HCV infection only in a minority of cases. The use of interferon reached maximal intolerance and adverse events when it was combined with the first generation of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) in 2011. Although cure rates climbed to the 60–80 % range, systemic toxicity was much worse, sometimes even fatal, resulting in substantial dropout rates during therapy (Hezode et al. 2014; Saxena et al. 2014).
Nevertheless, the introduction of DAAs in the medical therapy of HCV constitutes a true revolution in the management of HCV, not only in hepatology but also in the realm of infectious diseases and medicine at large. Within only 2 years from their introduction, the new generation of DAAs have now entirely displaced interferon from the therapy of HCV. The current DAAs induce a cure of HCV at nearly universal rates in the absence of interferon (Shiffman et al. 2015; Zeuzem et al. 2014, 2015; Lawitz et al. 2013, 2014; Afdhal et al. 2014a, b; Poordad et al. 2014; Feld et al. 2014; Sulkowski et al. 2014; Jacobson et al. 2013; American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, IDSA, IAS-USA). Very high cure rates are now routinely achieved for genotypes 1 and 2 HCV. HCV genotype 3 is now associated with the “lowest” success rate at only 80 % and 60 % in treatment-experienced cirrhotics (Nelson et al. 2015). Additionally, it is now clear that genotype 3 is associated with more severe liver disease and greater progression to cirrhosis (Nkontchou et al. 2011).
This review summarizes the currently approved DAAs (and advanced clinical trials) in settings directly related to liver transplantation, namely in patients with cirrhosis, liver transplant candidates (decompensated cirrhosis and patients with HCC), and in the post-transplant management of HCV recurrence in liver transplant recipients.
Types of Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents for Hepatitis C Virus Infection
The three major classes of DAAs include HCV-specific protease inhibitors (NS3/4 inhibitors), polymerase inhibitors (NS5B nucleotide and non-nucleotides inhibitors), and replication complex inhibitors (NS5A inhibitors). In contrast to α-interferon, these agents are orally administered and have a much better tolerance and adverse event profile. At present, 3 of the 4 DAAs programs of treatment for HCV approved by the Food and Drug Administration do not contain ribavirin, an agent with weak antiviral potency, but associated with reduced relapse rates. It is almost certain that ribavirin is destined to be replaced by DAAs in the near future as well.
Use of DAAs Prior to Liver Transplantation
Compensated HCV Cirrhosis
The patient with compensated HCV cirrhosis has an advanced form of HCV infection and is at risk of developing complications that may require LTx. As the necroinflammatory activity driven by ongoing HCV infection continues to cause apoptosis and fibrosis, decompensation of the cirrhosis eventually occurs and/or HCC develops. For both of these late complications of end-stage cirrhosis, liver transplantation is the only curative therapy at the present time. Therefore, antiviral therapy with DAAs is considered a high priority for patients with compensated HCV cirrhosis, as the cure of a cirrhotic patient has the greatest impact on patient’s life expectancy and on consumption of health care resources. It is now clear that patients who are cured from HCV have substantially improved survival due to reduction in liver- and non-liver-related causes of death (van der Meer et al. 2012).
Although the presence of cirrhosis was a negative predictor of response in the interferon era, the effect of cirrhosis on response rates to DAAs is greatly diminished. In fact, in most of the DAAs large clinical trials, patients with cirrhosis responded equally well compared to those with early disease (Nelson et al. 2015; Zeuzem et al. 2014; Lawitz et al. 2013, 2014; Afdhal et al. 2014; Poordad et al. 2014; Feld et al. 2014; Sulkowski et al. 2014; Jacobson et al. 2013). Thus, cirrhosis has now essentially vanished as a predictor of response in the DAA era, just as ethnicity, HIV coinfection, and obesity have also proved to be no longer predictors of lower response to DAA therapy. A notable exception remains that of genotype 3 cirrhosis, in which response rates with the currently approved therapy are only 60 %. However, noncirrhotic patients with genotype 3 currently enjoy very high cure rates, as shown in recent studies (Nelson et al. 2015).
A large, recent clinical trial enrolled only compensated cirrhotic patients, who were treated with 3 DAAs plus or minus ribavirin depending on the subtype of genotype 1 (1a or 1b) for durations between 3 and 6 months (Poordad et al. 2014). Between 90 % and 100 % of patients achieved a cure (SVR12), a rate similar to those with early, noncirrhotic disease. The response to modern DAA therapy in patients with HCV cirrhosis can be summarized by stating that over 90 % of these patients are now able to achieve a cure, with the exception of HCV genotype 3 patients, who achieve a cure in 60–80 % of cases (Poordad et al. 2014).
Antiviral Therapy in Decompensated Cirrhosis
The onset of ascites , hepatic encephalopathy, jaundice, or variceal hemorrhage in a patient with HCV cirrhosis signals the final stages of the disease, commonly referred as decompensation. The onset of decompensation is associated with markedly decreased survival at 1 and 2 years and constitutes a clinical indication to determine if the patient is a viable liver transplant candidate. Antiviral treatment with alpha-interferon of patients with decompensated HCV cirrhosis was fraught with risks and frequent severe complications, on occasion fatal. The allure of inducing sustained virological response (SVR) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis lies in the potential to avoid liver transplantation. One of the first DAA developed was the nucleoside analog lamivudine for hepatitis B virus infection back in 1995. Although not very potent and limited by frequent emergence of resistant variants, lamivudine had a profound impact on transplantation for HBV cirrhosis, decreasing the frequency of HBV by approximately 70 %. Refractory ascites, encephalopathy, and other manifestations of decompensated HBV cirrhosis often substantially improved on lamivudine, leading to removal of many patients from the transplant waiting list. In the case of HCV cirrhosis, the introduction of safe and very effective DAA antiviral therapy has raised the hopes that a similar phenomenon could potentially be observed. In this regard, a multicenter study of sofosfuvir/ledipasvir and ribavirin in decompensated Childs B and C cirrhotics recently reported SVR rates of nearly 90 % (Charlton et al. 2015a).