Tenofovir alafenamide prophylaxis post-liver transplantation: a real-world study in patients with chronic kidney disease.

Background & aims: Tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) was shown equally efficacious in suppressing hepatitis B virus (HBV) but with less renal toxicity than tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). The aim of this real-world study was to evaluate renal function in post-liver transplantation (LT) patients that changed TDF with TAF. Methods: The TAF group (n=17) included patients who switched to TAF due to low (<60 ml/min/1.73m2) Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR). The control group included patients that remained on TDF (n=30), although some (n= 14) had chronic kidney disease (CKD) (TDF-CKD group). GFR was assessed using: i) MDRD-6 variable; ii) CKD-EPI formula; iii) radionuclide technique (rGFR). Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups except for the presence of diabetes and follow-up period, which were more common and shorter, respectively, in the TAF group (35% vs. 10%, p=0.03; 13.7 vs. 35.5 months, p<0.001). At the end of follow-up there were no significant changes in renal function between the TAF and the TDF group or TDF-CKD group, although the numerical change in rGFR in the latter comparison was greater in the TAF group (ΔrGFR 3 vs. -2.14 ml/min, p=0.26). The use of everolimus was associated with improvement in renal function (ΔrGFR 2 vs. -7.75 ml/min, p=0.06 [TAF vs. TDF group]; 2 vs. -12 ml/min, p=0.01 [TAF vs. TDF-CKD group]). There were no TAF- related side effects or cases of HBV recurrence. Conclusion: Conversion to TAF in post-LT patients who develop CKD does not lead to improvement of kidney function after a period of one year.

Prevalence of hepatitis E in liver transplant recipients in Greece.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a well-known cause of acute hepatitis. Immunocompromised subjects, including liver transplant recipients, are considered to be at risk for HEV infection, which occasionally follows a chronic course. The diagnosis of HEV infection in these patients must be based on HEV RNA testing, as serology has variable performance. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of HEV infection in liver transplant recipients in Greece by means of HEV RNA testing. Liver transplant recipients followed in the sole transplant centre in Greece were prospectively included. HEV RNA was detected by real-time RT-PCR. Positive samples were further analysed using a nested reverse transcription RT-PCR kit, which amplifies a 137-nucleotide sequence within the ORF2/ORF3 overlapping region to detect the HEV genotype and perform phylogenetic analysis. The mean age of the included patients (n = 76) was 54 years. The most common indication for liver transplantation was viral hepatitis (57%). The majority of the patients (75%) received a calcineurin inhibitor as part of their immunosuppressive regimen and had normal liver enzymes. HEV RNA was found positive in only 1/76 (1.3%) patient. Phylogenetic analysis showed that the sequence clustered into the HEV genotype 3 clade. This patient experienced an acute hepatitis flare, which nonetheless did not become chronic. The prevalence of HEV infection in liver transplant recipients in Greece is similar (1.3%) to that reported previously in other countries. Transplant physicians should be aware of this condition and its associated consequences.

Cost-effectiveness of losartan in diabetic nephropathy: a Greek perspective.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic nephropathy is the primary cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), which involves substantial economic burden. The primary objective of this study was to estimate the potential effect of losartan on the costs associated with ESRD in patients with diabetic nephropathy in a Greek setting. A secondary aim was to approximate the direct health care cost of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in Greece. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to compare losartan with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Clinical data were derived from the RENAAL study. All costs were calculated from the perspective of the Greek social insurance system, in 2003 euros. Future costs were discounted at 3%. The time horizon was 3.5 years. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The reduction in the number of ESRD days over 3.5 years in patients treated with losartan reduced ESRD-related costs by 3,056.54 euros, resulting in net cost savings of 1,665.43 euros per patient. Net cost savings increase thereafter, increasing to 2,686.48 euros per patient over a period of 4.0 years. The results were robust under a wide range of plausible assumptions. The weighted mean daily cost of RRT was estimated at 90.97 euros per patient. The total economic burden of RRT for the year 2003 has been estimated at 304.773 million euros. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that treatment of patients with diabetic nephropathy in Greece with losartan is cost-effective, as it leads to important savings for the social insurance system by slowing the progression to ESRD.