Brown, Robert S.

Background and Aims The role of the intestinal microbiome in alcoholic hepatitis is not established. The aims of this study were to (1) characterize the fecal microbial ecology associated with alcoholic hepatitis, (2) relate microbiome changes to disease severity, and (3) infer the functional relevance of shifts in microbial ecology. Approach and Results The fecal microbiome in patients with moderate alcoholic hepatitis (MAH) or severe alcoholic hepatitis (SAH) was compared with healthy controls (HCs) and heavy drinking controls (HDCs). Microbial taxa were identified by 16S pyrosequencing. Functional metagenomics was performed using PICRUSt. Fecal short chain fatty acids (SCFAs) were measured using a liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry platform. A total of 78 participants (HC, n = 24; HDC, n = 20; MAH, n = 10; SAH, n = 24) were studied. HDC had a distinct signature compared with HC with depletion of Bacteroidetes (46% vs. 26%; P = 0.01). Alcoholic hepatitis was associated with a distinct microbiome signature compared with HDC (area under the curve = 0.826); differential abundance of Ruminococcaceae , Veillonellaceae , Lachnospiraceae , Porphyromonadaceae , and Rikenellaceae families were the key contributors to these differences. The beta diversity was significantly different among the groups (permutational multivariate analysis of variance [PERMANOVA] P < 0.001). SAH was associated with increased Proteobacteria (SAH 14% vs. HDC 7% and SAH vs. HC 2%, P = 0.20 and 0.01, respectively). Firmicutes abundance declined from HDC to MAH to SAH (63% vs. 53% vs. 48%, respectively; P = 0.09, HDC vs. SAH). Microbial taxa did not distinguish between MAH and SAH (PERMANOVA P = 0.785). SCFAs producing bacteria (Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcaceae) were decreased in alcoholic hepatitis, and a similar decrease was observed in fecal SCFAs among alcoholic hepatitis patients. Conclusions There are distinct changes in fecal microbiome associated with the development, but not severity, of alcoholic hepatitis.

The development of multiple highly effective and safe direct-acting antivirals to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) has resulted in greater ease and confidence in managing HCV infection in transplant recipients that in turn has impacted the solid organ transplant community as well. In the United States, the opioid epidemic has increased the number of overdose deaths with a concomitant increase in younger HCV viremic donors after brain death being identified. At the same time, a decrease in HCV viremic transplant candidates has led to a growing interest in exploring the use of HCV viremic liver and kidney donor allografts in HCV-negative recipients. To date, experience with the use of HCV viremic liver and kidney allografts in HCV-negative recipients is limited to a few small prospective research trials, case series, and case reports. There are also limited data on recipient and donor selection for HCV viremic liver and kidney allografts. In response to this rapidly changing landscape in the United States, experts in the field of viral hepatitis and liver and kidney transplantation convened a meeting to review current data on liver and kidney recipient selection and developed consensus opinions related specifically to recipient and donor selection of HCV viremic liver and kidney allografts.

The tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib improves hepatopulmonary syndrome (HPS) in an experimental model. However, the efficacy and adverse effect profile in patients with HPS are unknown. We aimed to determine the effect of sorafenib on the alveolar‐arterial oxygen gradient (AaPO2) at 3 months in patients with HPS. We performed a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled parallel trial of sorafenib in patients with HPS at 7 centers. A total of 28 patients with HPS were randomized to sorafenib 400 mg by mouth daily or a matching placebo in a 1:1 ratio. We found no statistically significant difference in the median change in AaPO2 from baseline to 12 weeks between the patients allocated to sorafenib (4.5 mm Hg; IQR, –3.8 to 7.0 mm Hg) and those allocated to placebo (–2.4 mm Hg; IQR, –4.8 to 8.2 mm Hg; P = 0.70). There was also no difference between the groups in terms of degree of intrapulmonary shunting by contrast echocardiography. Sorafenib significantly reduced circulating levels of angiogenic markers, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (P < 0.01) and TIE2‐expressing M2 monocytes (P = 0.03), but it reduced the mental component scores of the Short Form 36 (P = 0.04), indicating a worse quality of life. In conclusion, sorafenib did not change the AaPO2 or other disease markers at 3 months in patients with HPS. Alternative antiangiogenic therapies or treatments targeting other pathways should be investigated.