Loomba, Rohit

We performed a Bayesian network meta‐analysis combining direct and indirect treatment comparisons to assess the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological agents for the treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). Through systematic literature review, we identified nine randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) including 964 patients with biopsy‐proven NASH, comparing vitamin E, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), pentoxifylline, or obeticholic acid to one another or placebo. The primary outcome was improvement in fibrosis stage; secondary outcomes were improvement in ballooning degeneration, lobular inflammation, and steatosis. We reported relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from direct meta‐analysis and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) from Bayesian network meta‐analysis, and used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria to appraise quality of evidence. Moderate‐quality evidence supports the use of pentoxifylline (RR, 0.26; 95% CrI: 0.05‐1.00) and obeticholic acid (RR, 0.81; 95% CI: 0.70‐0.95) over placebo in improving fibrosis. High‐quality evidence supports the effect of vitamin E, TZDs, and obeticholic acid over placebo in improving ballooning degeneration. All four interventions seemed to have at least moderate‐quality evidence over placebo to improve steatosis. Moderate‐quality evidence supports that TZDs, pentoxifylline, and obeticholic acid decrease lobular inflammation. All the head‐to‐head comparisons were supported by very‐low‐quality evidence except for superiority of TZDs over vitamin E on improving steatosis and lobular inflammation, which had moderate‐quality evidence. Conclusions : Based on direct and network meta‐analysis, pentoxifylline and obeticholic acid improve fibrosis, and vitamin E, TZDs, and obeticholic acid improve ballooning degeneration in patients with NASH. Future comparative trials of combination therapies targeting distinct histological features are warranted. (H epatology 2015;62:1417–1432)

BACKGROUNDEfficacy trials have shown that antiviral therapy improves the outcomes of patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. However, prospective data regarding the effect of antiviral therapy on the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), especially among patients without cirrhosis, are limited. The authors examined the impact of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) on the incidence of HCC using a validated prediction model.METHODSThe incidence of HCC in patients treated with TDF was obtained in the pivotal TDF registration studies after 384 weeks of follow‐up. The predicted risk of HCC in individual patients was calculated using the Risk Estimation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Chronic Hepatitis B (REACH‐B) model, which estimates HCC incidence for up to 10 years based on age, sex, alanine aminotransferase level, hepatitis B e antigen status, and HBV‐DNA. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated comparing the observed and predicted numbers of HCC cases in the study cohort.RESULTSAmong 634 patients with evaluable baseline biopsies, 152 had cirrhosis (Ishak fibrosis score of 5 or 6) and 482 did not. During the 384 weeks of study, 14 cases of HCC were reported, with 4 occurring within the first year. The incidence of HCC was 0.37% per year in the study as a whole (0.28% among patients without cirrhosis and 0.65% among patients with cirrhosis). Among patients without cirrhosis, the observed incidence of HCC was significantly lower than predicted (SIR, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.199‐0.795). The last HCC case in a patient with cirrhosis occurred around week 192 with an SIR of 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.231‐1.144) reported at week 384.CONCLUSIONSBased on the REACH‐B risk calculator, long‐term therapy with TDF was associated with a reduced incidence of HCC among patients without cirrhosis who met treatment criteria. Cancer 2015;121:3631–3638. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Ezetimibe inhibits intestinal cholesterol absorption and lowers low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol. Uncontrolled studies have suggested that it reduces liver fat as estimated by ultrasound in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). Therefore, we aimed to examine the efficacy of ezetimibe versus placebo in reducing liver fat by the magnetic resonance imaging‐derived proton density‐fat fraction (MRI‐PDFF) and liver histology in patients with biopsy‐proven NASH. In this randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial, 50 patients with biopsy‐proven NASH were randomized to either ezetimibe 10 mg orally daily or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in liver fat as measured by MRI‐PDFF in colocalized regions of interest within each of the nine liver segments. Novel assessment by two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional magnetic resonance elastography was also performed. Ezetimibe was not significantly better than placebo at reducing liver fat as measured by MRI‐PDFF (mean difference between the ezetimibe and placebo arms ‐1.3%, P = 0.4). Compared to baseline, however, end‐of‐treatment MRI‐PDFF was significantly lower in the ezetimibe arm (15%‐11.6%, P < 0.016) but not in the placebo arm (18.5%‐16.4%, P = 0.15). There were no significant differences in histologic response rates, serum alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels, or longitudinal changes in two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional magnetic resonance elastography‐derived liver stiffness between the ezetimibe and placebo arms. Compared to histologic nonresponders (25/35), histologic responders (10/35) had a significantly greater reduction in MRI‐PDFF (‐4.35 ± 4.9% versus ‐0.30 ± 4.1%, P < 0.019). Conclusions : Ezetimibe did not significantly reduce liver fat in NASH. This trial demonstrates the application of colocalization of MRI‐PDFF‐derived fat maps and magnetic resonance elastography‐derived stiffness maps of the liver before and after treatment to noninvasively assess treatment response in NASH. (H epatology 2015;61:1239–1250)