Hepatitis C virus recurrence after liver transplantation: influence of immunosuppressive regimens on viral load and liver histology.

Cyclosporine has recently been reported to produce in vitro suppression of hepatitis C virus replication driven by blockade of cyclophilins, an effect not shown for tacrolimus. However, the clinical consequence of this in vitro finding have not been well studied in vivo. We compared viral load and fibrosis in transplanted patients receiving monotherapy with tacrolimus or cyclosporine. Patients with recurrent hepatitis C after transplantation were selected from two tertiary centers with the following inclusion criteria: monotherapy with tacrolimus or cyclosporine for more than 12 months before viral load measurement, no antiviral treatment, corticosteroids stopped within 12 months after transplantation. HIV, hepatitis B, and active infection by cytomegalovirus were excluded. Patient characteristics, viral load, and fibrosis were compared by univariate analysis between the cyclosporine and tacrolimus groups. Significant variables, viral load, and fibrosis were included in a multivariate model. Sixty-six patients were included, 46 on tacrolimus and 20 on cyclosporine. Fifty-six were male, and the mean age was 55.3 +/- 10.1 years. Fibrosis (Ishak score) was 3.9 +/- 1.9 in the cyclosporine group and 2.7 +/- 1.9 in the tacrolimus group (P = .019). Viral load (log(10)IU/mL) was 5.8 +/- 0.5 and 5.9 +/- 0.5, respectively (P = .7) and time since liver transplantation was 95.3 +/- 47.7 and 41.1 +/- 16.8 months (P = .0001). In the multivariate model, viral load (P = .65) and fibrosis (P = .24) were not significantly different and only time since transplantation remained significant (P = .0001). In conclusion, viral load was not different in patients with tacrolimus as compared with cyclosporine, and the lower fibrosis observed in the cyclosporine group lacked significance when considered together with time since liver transplantation.

Study on the efficacy and safety of adefovir dipivoxil treatment in post-liver transplant patients with hepatitis B virus infection and lamivudine-resistant hepatitis B virus.

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence and de novo HBV infection are frequent events in liver transplantation recipients. Treatment with lamivudine is initially efficient in both infections but the incidence of lamivudine-resistant HBV emergence increases over time. Adefovir appears to be promising in post-liver transplantation patients with recurrent HBV infection and lamivudine-resistant HBV. This study analyzed adefovir treatment in 42 post-liver transplantation patients who developed recurrent HBV or de novo HBV infection with lamivudine-resistant HBV (54.8% HCV-coinfected). Patients received 10 mg of oral adefovir once daily for a mean period of time of 21.5 months (range from 12 to 31 months). In 62.9% of patients, ALT levels decreased significantly. Serum HBV-DNA was undetectable in 64% of the cases. Twenty percent of patients lost HBeAg marker and 13.3% of them developed anti-HBe. In 9.5% of recipients, HBsAg became negative. There was no significant change in serum creatinine levels. In only one patient was worsening of the renal function detected, making dose adjustment necessary. No other side effects were reported. Our results confirm the efficacy and safety of adefovir treatment in post-liver transplantation patients with lamivudine-resistant HBV, neither were adefovir-resistant mutations identified in patients after 21 months of therapy, nor were there adverse events, especially renal toxicity.