Bosch, Jaime

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is currently one of most common forms of chronic liver disease globally. NAFLD represents a wide spectrum of liver involvement from nonprogressive isolated steatosis to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), characterized by liver necroinflammation and fibrosis and currently one of the top causes of end‐stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma. At present, there is a lack of effective treatments, and a central barrier to the development of therapies is the requirement for an invasive liver biopsy for diagnosis of NASH. Discovery of reliable, noninvasive biomarkers are urgently needed. In this study, we tested whether circulating extracellular vesicles (EVs), cell‐derived small membrane‐surrounded structures with a rich cargo of bioactive molecules, may serve as reliable noninvasive “liquid biopsies” for NASH diagnosis and assessment of disease severity. Total circulating EVs and hepatocyte‐derived EVs were isolated by differential centrifugation and size‐exclusion chromatography from serum samples of healthy individuals, patients with precirrhotic NASH, and patients with cirrhotic NASH. EVs were further characterized by flow cytometry, electron microscopy, western blotting, and dynamic light scattering assays before performing a proteomics analysis. Our findings suggest that levels of total and hepatocyte‐derived EVs correlate with NASH clinical characteristics and disease severity. Additionally, using proteomics data, we developed understandable, powerful, and unique EV‐based proteomic signatures for potential diagnosis of advanced NASH. Conclusion: Our study shows that the quantity and protein constituents of circulating EVs provide strong evidence for EV protein–based liquid biopsies for NAFLD/NASH diagnosis.

Portal hypertension (PH) is the main driver of cirrhosis decompensation, the main determinant of death in patients with cirrhosis. PH results initially from increased intrahepatic vascular resistance. Subsequently, increased inflow from splanchnic vasodilation and increased cardiac output lead to a further increase in portal pressure (PP). Reducing PP in cirrhosis results in better outcomes. Removing the cause of cirrhosis might improve PP. However, this is a slow process and patients may continue to be at risk of decompensation. Additionally, for some chronic liver diseases, such as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), etiological treatments are not yet available. Therefore, there is a need to develop better therapies specifically aimed at reducing PP. For over 35 years, the mainstay of such therapy has been the use of nonselective beta‐blockers (NSBBs) that act by reducing portal venous inflow. Recently, many drugs (mainly targeting intrahepatic mechanisms) have shown promise in preclinical and early clinical studies and may act alone or synergistically with NSBBs in reducing PP in cirrhosis. The objective of this position paper is to propose a novel framework for the design of clinical trials (phase 1, 2, and 3) in patients with cirrhosis and PH and to prioritize targets and pharmacological therapies in this setting. We have focused the discussion on patients with compensated cirrhosis. The paper summarizes discussions held at The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Industry Colloquium in January 2018, with the participation of clinical and translational investigators, regulatory professionals, and industry partners.

SummaryBackgroundIt remains unclear whether a long‐acting preparation of octreotide (Sandostatin LAR) can be safely used for portal hypertension in patients with compensated cirrhosis.AimTo determine the safety and efficacy of LAR among patients with Child Pugh Class A or B cirrhosis and small oesophageal varices.MethodsA randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study was conducted in 39 patients with cirrhosis and small oesophageal varices. Safety was based on frequency and severity of adverse events. Efficacy was determined by hepatic vein pressure gradient (HVPG) measured at baseline and day 84 following administration of LAR 10 mg (n = 15), 30 mg (n = 10) or saline (n = 14). Fasting and postprandial portal blood flow (PBF), superior mesenteric artery pulsatility index (SMA‐PI), glucagon and octreotide levels were measured. An intention‐to‐treat analysis was performed.ResultsFour patients in the LAR 30 group (40%) withdrew from the study due to serious adverse events. No patient in the LAR 10 or control group had serious adverse events. There was no statistically significant decrease between HVPG at day 84 and baseline with LAR 30 mg (11.8 ± 2.3 mmHg vs. 14.1 ± 3.2), LAR 10 mg (15.3 ± 4.8 mmHg vs. 15.1 ± 3.8), or saline (13.3 ± 3.8 mmHg vs. 15.1 ± 4.3) (P = 0.26). Neither PBF, SMA‐PI nor plasma glucagon levels were significantly decreased from baseline (P = 0.56).ConclusionsThe absence of significant haemodynamic benefit, as well as the high frequency of severe adverse events associated with use of LAR, do not support the use of this agent in the treatment of portal hypertension.