Stolz, Andrew

INTRODUCTION: One of the primary goals of the Liver Cirrhosis Network (LCN) is to develop a cohort study to better understand and predict the risk of hepatic decompensation and other clinical and patient-reported outcomes among patients with Child A cirrhosis. METHODS: The LCN consists of a Scientific Data Coordinating Center and 10 clinical centers whose investigators populate multiple committees. The LCN Definitions and Measurements Committee developed preliminary definitions of cirrhosis and its complications by literature review, expert opinion, and reviewing definition documents developed by other organizations. The Cohort Committee developed the study protocol with the input of the steering committee. RESULTS: The LCN developed a prospective cohort study to describe and predict the rates of incident clinical events pertaining to first decompensation and patient-reported outcomes. The LCN developed a pragmatic definition of compensated cirrhosis incorporating clinical, laboratory, imaging, and histological criteria. Definitions of incident and recompensated ascites, overt hepatic encephalopathy, variceal hemorrhage, bleeding because of portal gastropathy, and hepatocellular carcinoma were also codified. DISCUSSION: The LCN Cohort Study design will inform the natural history of cirrhosis in contemporary patients with compensated cirrhosis. The LCN Definitions and Measures Committee developed criteria for the definition of cirrhosis to standardize entry into this multicenter cohort study and standardized criteria for liver-related outcome measures. This effort has produced definitions intended to be both sensitive and specific as well as easily operationalized by study staff such that outcomes critical to the LCN cohort are identified and reported in an accurate and generalizable fashion. REGISTRATION: NCT05740358.

Summary Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is often caused by innate and adaptive host immune responses. Characterization of inflammatory infiltrates in the liver may improve understanding of the underlying pathogenesis of DILI. This study aimed to enumerate and characterize leucocytes infiltrating liver tissue from subjects with acute DILI (n = 32) versus non-DILI causes of acute liver injury (n = 25). Immunostains for CD11b/CD4 (Kupffer and T helper cells), CD3/CD20 (T and B cells) and CD8/CD56 [T cytotoxic and natural killer (NK) cells] were evaluated in biopsies from subjects with acute DILI, either immunoallergic (IAD) or autoimmune (AID) and idiopathic autoimmune (AIH) and viral hepatitis (VH) and correlated with clinical and pathological features. All biopsies showed numerous CD8+ T cells and macrophages. DILI cases had significantly fewer B lymphocytes than AIH and VH and significantly fewer NK cells than VH. Prominent plasma cells were unusual in IAD (three of 10 cases), but were associated strongly with AIH (eight of nine) and also observed in most with AID (six of nine). They were also found in five of 10 cases with VH. Liver biopsies from subjects with DILI were characterized by low counts of mature B cells and NK cells in portal triads in contrast to VH. NK cells were found only in cases of VH, whereas AIH and VH both showed higher counts of B cells than DILI. Plasma cells were associated most strongly with AIH and less so with AID, but were uncommon in IAD.

AbstractBackground & AimsBecause of the lack of objective tests to diagnose drug‐induced liver injury (DILI), causality assessment is a matter of debate. Expert opinion is often used in research and industry, but its test–retest reliability is unknown. To determine the test–retest reliability of the expert opinion process used by the Drug‐Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN).MethodsThree DILIN hepatologists adjudicate suspected hepatotoxicity cases to one of five categories representing levels of likelihood of DILI. Adjudication is based on retrospective assessment of gathered case data that include prospective follow‐up information. One hundred randomly selected DILIN cases were re‐assessed using the same processes for initial assessment but by three different reviewers in 92% of cases.ResultsThe median time between assessments was 938 days (range 140–2352). Thirty‐one cases involved >1 agent. Weighted kappa statistics for overall case and individual agent category agreement were 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50–0.71) and 0.60 (0.52–0.68) respectively. Overall case adjudications were within one category of each other 93% of the time, while 5% differed by two categories and 2% differed by three categories. Fourteen per cent crossed the 50% threshold of likelihood owing to competing diagnoses or atypical timing between drug exposure and injury.ConclusionsThe DILIN expert opinion causality assessment method has moderate interobserver reliability but very good agreement within one category. A small but important proportion of cases could not be reliably diagnosed as ≥50% likely to be DILI.