Related - 2013
EASL: Liver Imaging Tests Vie to Replace Biopsy
FDA Approves FibroScan for Noninvasive Liver Diagnosis
A painless alternative to liver biopsy for evaluating the stage of liver fibrosis.
The Age-Old Debate of Whether to Biopsy in HCV: My Answer for 2013
Also includes information on about Magnetic Resonance Elastography, or MRE which is an non-invastive test for liver
Is there still a role for liver biopsy in managing hepatitis C virus infections?
Clinical Liver Disease Volume 1, Issue 2, pages 32–35, April 2012
- Syed-Mohammed R. Jafri M.D.*,
- Stuart C. Gordon M.D.
Article first published online: 26 APR 2012
Watch the interview with the authors
Watch the video presentation of this article
Get PDF (915K)
A2M, alpha-2-macroglobulin; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; BOC44, boceprevir for 44 weeks; BOC RGT, boceprevir and response-guided therapy; CDS, cirrhosis discriminant score; DAA, direct-acting antiviral; GGT, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase; HA, hyaluronic acid; INR, international normalized ratio; ITT, intention to treat; Pbo, placebo; PIIINP, amino-terminal propeptide of type III collagen; PR48, peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks; SVR, sustained virological response; T12PR, telaprevir for 12 weeks and peginterferon/ribavirin; T12/PR48, telaprevir for 12 weeks and peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks; TIMP1, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1.
Current guidelines emphasize the importance of liver biopsy in the management of patients with hepatitis C because liver histology provides patients and their physicians with important prognostic information and helps to guide therapy decisions and treatment regimens.1,2 Recent improvements in antiviral therapy along with the development of alternate modes of evaluating fibrosis have led to a global reassessment of the risks and benefits and the overall wisdom of performing liver biopsy in these patients.
The presence of advanced or worsening fibrosis has traditionally served as an unequivocal indication for therapy,3 and clinicians still use the degree of fibrosis as a means for justifying therapy sooner rather than later. The availability of
direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents, which bring the promise of rapid viral negativity with therapy, intuitively appears to lessen the need for biopsy in therapeutic decision making; this is analogous to previously held perceptions about genotype 2/3 patients, who had higher sustained virological response (SVR) rates. Because of the increased efficacy of the newer regimens and even better regimens around the corner, clinicians and patients may choose to forgo biopsy with the compelling argument that the benefits of such effective therapy justify its use, even in those with minimal disease.
On the basis of the results of pivotal registration trials, the US Food and Drug Administration has suggested that therapy with DAA agents mandates an assessment of the degree of fibrosis because of the vastly different therapeutic regimens for patients with more advanced fibrosis. The recommended treatment with peginterferon/ribavirin and either telaprevir or boceprevir must be longer (48 weeks) because of the consistently lower efficacy of the therapy in patients with cirrhosis2 (Figs. 1–3).
Accordingly, an assessment of the degree of fibrosis is crucial before the initiation of therapy. Treatment with interferon and ribavirin has led to higher rates of adverse events, including anemia, in the face of cirrhosis,8,9 and this information must be discussed with patients with cirrhosis before the initiation of current DAA-based therapies that include peginterferon and
Figure 1. SVR rates by the degree of fibrosis in the ADVANCE and ILLUMINATE studies. Abbreviations: ITT, intention to treat; PR48, peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks; T12PR, telaprevir for 12 weeks and peginterferon/ribavirin.
Adapted with permission from New England Journal
of Medicine.4, 5
Figure 2. SVR rates for patients with bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis in the Serine Protease Inhibitor Therapy 2 trial.
Abbreviations: BOC44, boceprevir for 44 weeks; BOC RGT, boceprevir and response-guided therapy; PR48, peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks. Adapted with permission from Journal of Hepatology.6
Figure 3. SVR rates by the degree of fibrosis in the REALIZE trial. Abbreviations: Pbo, placebo; PR48, peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks; T12/PR48, telaprevir for 12 weeks and peginterferon/ribavirin for 48 weeks. Adapted with permission from the European Association for the Study of the Liver.7
In comparison with peginterferon/ribavirin dual therapy, the telaprevir- and boceprevir-based regimens have superior
efficacy,4,10-14 but the field is moving forward quite rapidly, and we are currently learning about (1) far more potent DAA agents with better pharmacokinetic profiles, (2) interferon-sparing regiments, and (3) SVR rates approaching 100%. Thus, there is the likelihood that superior regimens will become available over the next few years. As physicians and patients with hepatitis C virus ponder their options, information obtained from liver biopsy samples may greatly assist in the decision to wait yet longer for future regimens with improved efficacy, shorter durations, and lower side-effect profiles.
The establishment of the fibrosis stage remains a key parameter that guides the management of patients with chronic hepatitis C. The presence of advanced fibrosis requires future lifelong screening for the development of varices and hepatocellular carcinoma, regardless of future responses to antiviral therapy.
Unfortunately, an all-too-common scenario in clinical practice is the patient with known or unknown hepatitis C who learns of his cirrhosis only after the discovery of liver cancer or a large variceal bleed. Advanced fibrosis may exist in patients with normal liver enzyme levels and synthetic parameters.15
The identification of fibrosis at biopsy can be used as a realistic justification for encouraging reduced alcohol intake and weight reduction, which are factors that would otherwise accelerate the progression to cirrhosis.16-21
For the post–liver transplant patient with chronic hepatitis C, liver biopsy information is essential not only for assessing patients for fibrosis but also for differentiating between recurrent hepatitis C–induced inflammation and acute cellular rejection. Accelerated fibrosis progression in the posttransplant patient with chronic hepatitis C leads to graft loss in up to 30% of infected patients.22-24
Preemptive antiviral therapy without the guidance of biopsy information is often precluded by cytopenias, renal insufficiency, increased side effects, and the possibility of rejection.25,26 Current guidelines suggest the initiation of therapy only after the demonstration of significant cholestasis or fibrosis on liver biopsy.1,27 Accordingly, the information gained from liver biopsy, including the demonstration of either fibrosis progression or a lack of rejection, before the institution of antiviral therapy is vital to the posttransplant care of the hepatitis C patient.
The risks of liver biopsy include severe pain, organ perforation, and bleeding.28,29 This potential for complications has generated an increasing acceptance of alternative assessments of hepatic fibrosis, especially in patients with hepatitis C (Table 1).
Unfortunately, for many such panels, availability, third-party payment, or widespread clinical consensus is lacking. Fibrosis related to chronic hepatitis C progresses slowly (on average 0.15 stages per year30), and a feasible alternative to liver biopsy must be able to measure this progression over time. Evaluations using standard laboratory tests, including the aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio, the cirrhosis discriminant score, the age-platelet index, the Pohl score, the aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index, and platelet counts, lack either the sensitivity or the specificity needed to be useful in clinical practice.31,34,35 In addition, these noninvasive fibrosis markers may have reduced performance in
hepatitis C patients with normal alanine aminotransferase levels.36 Larger test panels, including Hepascore, Liverscore, and FibroTest, have high potential for false-positive results and are not readily available in clinical practice.32,37-39 These laboratory tests and panels have not reliably detected intermediate stages of fibrosis or the progression of fibrosis, and this is valuable information for clinical decision making.30,40 Transient elastography produces suboptimal results in obese patients and in tracking changes in fibrosis.41-43 The reproducibility of transient elastography is significantly reduced (P < 0.05) in patients with steatosis, an increased body mass index, or lower degrees of hepatic fibrosis.
The data for this table were taken from Rockey and Bissell,30 Lackner et al.,31 Adams et al.,32 Sanai and Keeffe,33 and Sebastiani et al.36 Abbreviations: A2M, alpha-2-macroglobulin; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase; HA, hyaluronic acid; INR, international normalized ratio; PIIINP, amino-terminal propeptide of type III collagen; TIMP1, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1.
Percutaneous liver biopsy
Percutaneous liver biopsy is considered the gold standard for histology assessment, yet it has a widely recognized sampling error rate as high as 20% for the detection of encircling fibrotic nodules with the evaluation of just 1/50,000 of the total organ.44 Such samples can be useful only if there are an adequate number of complete portal tracts, and with a length of 2 cm and a width of 1.4 mm, this goal is often not achieved in clinical practice. Moreover, the discordance between biopsy samples taken from right and left lobes further demonstrates the inherent limitations of this time-honored diagnostic test.44,47 Despite these challenges, a liver biopsy sample from a patient with hepatitis C in the new antiviral era remains a source of invaluable information. This information can be combined with available clinical and laboratory evidence (often surrogate markers with their own inherent limitations) to best serve the patient. A physician's or patient's reluctance to undertake the risks of biopsy should not represent a contraindication to antiviral therapy but rather should serve as the basis for a discussion of our limitations in assessing liver function and disease severity.
Get PDF (915K)
Ghany MG, Strader DB, Thomas DL, Seeff LB. Diagnosis,
management, and treatment of hepatitis C: an update. Hepatology
2009; 49: 1335-1374.
Ghany MG, Nelson DR, Strader DB, Thomas DL, Seeff LB. An update on treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C
virus infection: 2011 practice guidelines by the American Association for the
Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology
2011; 54: 1433-1444.
National Institutes of
Health. National Institutes of Health
consensus development conference statement: management of hepatitis C:
2002—June 10-12, 2002. Hepatology
2002; 36( suppl
Jacobson IM, McHutchison JG, Dusheiko G,
Di Bisceglie AM, Reddy
KR, Bzowej NH, et al.; for ADVANCE
Study Team. Telaprevir for previously
untreated chronic hepatitis C virus infection. N
Engl J Med 2011; 364: 2405-2416.
Sherman KE, Flamm SL, Afdhal NH, Nelson DR, Sulkowski MS, Everson GT, et al.; for ILLUMINATE
Study Team. Response-guided telaprevir
combination treatment for hepatitis C virus infection. N
Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1014-1024.
Bruno S, Vierling JM, Esteban R, Nyberg LM, et al. Boceprevir in
addition to standard of care enhanced SVR in hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype-1
with advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis: subgroup analysis of SPRINT-2 and RESPOND-2
studies. J Hepatol 2011;
Zeuzem S, Andreone P, Pol S, Lawitz EJ, Diago M, Roberts S, et al. REALIZE trial
final results: telaprevir-based regimen for genotype 1 hepatitis C virus
infection in patients with prior null response, partial response or relapse to
peginterferon/ribavirin. Paper presented at: EASL 46th Annual Meeting; March
30-April 3, 2011; Berlin,
Shiffman ML, Cooksley
WG, Dusheiko GM, Lee
SS, Balart L, et al. Peginterferon
alfa-2a in patients with chronic hepatitis C and cirrhosis. N
Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1673-1680.
Helbling B, Jochum W, Stamenic I, Knopfli M, Cerny A, Borovicka J, et al. HCV-related
advanced fibrosis/cirrhosis: randomized controlled trial of pegylated
interferon alpha-2a and ribavirin. J Viral
Kwo PY, Lawitz EJ, McCone J, Schiff ER, Vierling JM, Pound D, et al. Efficacy of
boceprevir, an NS3 protease inhibitor, in combination with peginterferon
alfa-2b and ribavirin in treatment-naive patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C
infection (SPRINT-1): an open-label, randomised, multicentre phase 2
trial. Lancet 2010; 376: 705-716.
Poordad F, McCone J, Bacon BR, Bruno S, Manns MP, Sulkowski MS, et al. Boceprevir
for untreated chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. N
Engl J Med 2011; 364: 1195-1206.
Bacon BR, Gordon SC, Lawitz E, Marcellin P, Vierling JM,
Zeuzem S, et al. Boceprevir for previously treated chronic HCV genotype 1
infection. N Engl J Med 2011;
Everson GT, Gordon SC,
Jacobson IM, Sulkowski
M, Kauffman R, et al. Telaprevir
with peginterferon and ribavirin for chronic HCV genotype 1 infection.
N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1827-1838.
Hézode C, Forestier N, Dusheiko G, Ferenci P, Pol S, Goeser
T, et al. Telaprevir and peginterferon with
or without ribavirin for chronic HCV infection. N
Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1839-1850.
Diago M, Tran A, Pockros P, Reindollar R, Prati D, et al. Chronic
hepatitis C in patients with persistently normal alanine transaminase
levels. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
2006; 4: 645-652.
Powell EE, Jonsson JR, Clouston AD. Steatosis: co-factor in other liver diseases. Hepatology 2005; 42: 5-13.
Macdonald GA, Purdie D,
Whitehall VH, Shorthouse
C, Clouston A, et al. Fibrosis
in chronic hepatitis C correlates significantly with body mass index and
steatosis. Hepatology 1999;
Gambardella M, Andreana
A, Tripodi MF, Utili
R, Ruggiero G. Steatosis accelerates the progression of liver damage of
chronic hepatitis C patients and correlates with specific HCV genotype and
visceral obesity. Hepatology 2001; 33: 1358-1364.
Westin J, Nordlinder H, Lagging M, Norkrans G, Wejstal R. Steatosis accelerates fibrosis development over time in
hepatitis C virus genotype 3 infected patients. J
Hepatol 2002; 37:
McCullough AJ, Ong JP,
Barnes DS, Post A, Tavill A, et al. Obesity and
non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in chronic hepatitis C. J
Clin Gastroenterol 2004; 38: 705-709.
Lok AS, Kim HY, Morgan TR, Lindsay KL, Chung RT, et al.; for HALT-C Trial
Group. Weight-related effects on disease
progression in the hepatitis C antiviral long-term treatment against cirrhosis
trial. Gastroenterology 2009;
Steadman R, Gornbein J,
Lassman C, Holt CD,
Chen P, et al. A 10-year
experience of liver transplantation for hepatitis C: analysis of factors
determining outcome in over 500 patients. Ann
Neumann UP, Berg T, Bahra M, Puhl
G, Guckelberger O, Langrehr JM, et al. Long-term
outcome of liver transplants for chronic hepatitis C: a 10-year
follow-up. Transplantation 2004; 77: 226-231.
Neumann UP, Berg T, Bahra M, Seehofer
D, Langrehr JM, Neuhaus
R, et al. Fibrosis progression after liver
transplantation in patients with recurrent hepatitis C. J
Hepatol 2004; 41:
Yilmaz N, Shiffman ML, Stravitz RT,
Sterling RK, Luketic VA,
Sanyal AJ, et al. A
prospective evaluation of fibrosis progression in patients with recurrent
hepatitis C virus following liver transplantation. Liver
Transpl 2007; 13:
Tagger A, Schiavo M,
Regalia E, Pulvirenti A,
Ribero ML, et al. Prevention of recurrent hepatitis C after liver
transplantation with early interferon and ribavirin treatment. Transplant Proc2001;
Sugawara Y, Makuuchi M, Matsui Y, Kishi Y, Akamatsu N, Kaneko J, et al. Preemptive
therapy for hepatitis C virus after living-donor liver transplantation.
Transplantation 2004; 78: 1308-1311.
Sagnelli E, Pasquale G,
Giusti G. Complications
following percutaneous liver biopsy. A
multicentre retrospective study on 68,276 biopsies. J Hepatol 1986; 2: 165-173.
Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD. Liver biopsy. Hepatology 2009; 49: 1017-1044.
Rockey DC, Bissell MD. Noninvasive
measures of liver fibrosis. Hepatology
2006; 43: S113-S120.
Lackner C, Struber G, Liegl B, Leibl S, Ofner P, Bankuti
C, et al. Comparison and validation of simple
noninvasive tests for prediction of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C.
Adams LA, Bulsara M, Rossi E, DeBoer B, Speers D, George J, et al. Hepascore: an
accurate validated predictor of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C
infection. Clin Chem 2005;
Sanai FM, Keeffe EB. Liver biopsy for
histological assessment—the case against. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 124-132.
Forns X, Ampurdanes S, Llovet JM, Aponte J, Quinto L, Martinez-Bauer E, et al. Identification of chronic hepatitis C patients without
hepatic fibrosis by a simple predictive model. Hepatology
2002; 36: 986-992.
Sud A, Hui JM, Farrell GC, Bandara P, Kench JG, Fung C, et al. Improved
prediction of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C using measures of insulin
resistance in a probability index. Hepatology 2004; 39: 1239-1247.
Castera L, Halfon P,
Pol S, Mangia A, Di Marco V, et al. The impact
of liver disease aetiology and the stages of hepatic fibrosis on the
performance of non-invasive fibrosis biomarkers: an international study of 2411
cases. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2011; 34: 1202-1216.
Ratziu V, Pieroni L,
Charlotte F, Benhamou Y,
Poynard T. Biochemical
markers of liver fibrosis in patients with hepatitis C virus infection: a
prospective study. Lancet 2001;
Arain SA, Jamal Q, Omair A. “Liverscore”
is predictive of both liver fibrosis and activity in chronic hepatitis
C. World J Gastroenterol 2011;
Shaheen AA, Wan AF, Myers RP. FibroTest
and FibroScan for the prediction of hepatitis C-related fibrosis: a systematic
review of diagnostic test accuracy. Am J
Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 2589-2600.
Poynard T, McHutchison J, Manns M, Myers RP, Albrecht J. Biochemical surrogate markers of liver fibrosis and
activity in a randomized trial of peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin.
Ziol M, Handra-Luca A, Kettaneh A,
Christidis C, Mal F,
Kazemi F, et al. Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis by measurement of
stiffness in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology
2005; 41: 48-54.
Castera L, Vergniol J, Foucher J, Le Bail B, Chanteloup E, Haaser M, et al. Prospective
comparison of transient elastography, FibroTest, APRI, and liver biopsy for the
assessment of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Gastroenterology
2005; 128: 343-350.
Rigamonti C, Casazza G,
Conte D, Donato MF,
Ronchi G, et al. Reproducibility of transient elastography in the
evaluation of liver fibrosis in patients with chronic liver disease.
Gut 2007; 56: 968-973.
Regev A, Berho M, Jeffers LJ, Milikowski C, Molina EG, Pyrsopoulos NT, et al. Sampling
error and intraobserver variation in liver biopsy in patients with chronic HCV
infection. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 2614-2618.
Hølund B, Poulsen H.
Liver biopsy in chronic aggressive hepatitis.
Diagnostic reproducibility in relation to size of specimen. Scand
J Gastroenterol 1983; 18: 27-32.
Guido M, Sonzogni A,
Leandro G. Impact of
liver biopsy size on histological evaluation of chronic viral hepatitis: the
smaller the sample, the milder the disease. J
Siddique I, El-Naga HA, Madda JP, Memon A, Hasan F. Sampling
variability on percutaneous liver biopsy in patients with chronic hepatitis C
virus infection. Scand J Gastroenterol
2003; 38: 427-432.