OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of ursodiol in preventing biliary complications after transplant of livers from donors after cardiac death.
METHODS: This was a single-center, nonrandomized, retrospective study that evaluated biliary complication rates in patients who received ursodiol (13-15 mg/kg/day) for 30 days (n = 32; post-ursodiol group) compared with patients who did not receive ursodiol after liver transplant from a cardiac death donor (n = 36; pre-ursodiol group [before introduction of ursodiol in the prophylaxis regimen]). Data were collected from September 2012 to September 2021. Patients were included if they were at least 19 years old and received a liver transplant from a donor after cardiac death. The primary endpoint of this study was to determine whether ursodiol decreased biliary complications within 30 days posttransplant. Secondary endpoints included change in biochemical serum liver tests (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine amino-transferase, total bilirubin, and alkaline phosphatase) and time to identification of hepatobiliary complications at posttransplant days 7, 14, and 28, acute graft loss, biopsy-proven acute rejection, and patient survival at 1 and 6 months.
RESULTS: Biliary complications were similar between groups. Four patients (12.5%) experienced biliary complications in the post-ursodiol group versus 1 patient (2.9%) in the pre-ursodiol group (not significant, P = .19). Biochemical liver enzymes at days 7, 14, and 28 were also not significant different between groups. Acute graft loss, biopsy-proven acute rejection, and patient survival at 1 and 6 months were similar between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Ursodiol prophylaxis did not show a diffrence in preventing biliary complications for recipients of liver transplant from donors after cardiac death.

Suboptimal response to ursodeoxycholic acid occurs in 40% of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) patients, affecting survival. Achieving a deep response (normalisation of alkaline phosphatase [ALP] and bilirubin ≤0.6 upper limit of normal) improves survival. Yet, the long-term effectiveness of second-line treatments remains uncertain.
To evaluate the long-term effectiveness of obeticholic acid (OCA) ± fibrates. Focusing on biochemical response (ALP ≤1.67 times the upper limit of normal, with a decrease of at least 15% from baseline and normal bilirubin levels), normalisation of ALP, deep response and biochemical remission (deep response plus aminotransferase normalisation).
We conducted a longitudinal, observational, multicentre study involving ursodeoxyccholic acid non-responsive PBC patients (Paris-II criteria) from Spain and Portugal who received OCA ± fibrates.
Of 255 patients, median follow-up was 35.1 months (IQR: 20.2-53). The biochemical response in the whole cohort was 47.2%, 61.4% and 68.6% at 12, 24 and 36 months. GLOBE-PBC and 5-year UK-PBC scores improved (p < 0.001). Triple therapy (ursodeoxycholic acid plus OCA plus fibrates) had significantly higher response rates than dual therapy (p = 0.001), including ALP normalisation, deep response and biochemical remission (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, triple therapy remained independently associated with biochemical response (p = 0.024), alkaline phosphatase normalisation, deep response and biochemical remission (p < 0.001). Adverse effects occurred in 41.2% of cases, leading to 18.8% discontinuing OCA. Out of 55 patients with cirrhosis, 12 developed decompensation. All with baseline portal hypertension.
Triple therapy was superior in achieving therapeutic goals in UDCA-nonresponsive PBC. Decompensation was linked to pre-existing portal hypertension.

UNASSIGNED: Up to 40% of Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) patients have a suboptimal response to Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). Close to half of such patients show a remarkable improvement when additionally treated with Obeticholic acid (OCA) but have a dose-dependent increase of pruritus. This relative success of OCA, a first-in-class Farnesoid receptor (FXR) agonist, has positioned FXR as an attractive target for drug development. Novel candidates have since emerged, providing hope for this subgroup of patients who lack effective and safe treatments.
UNASSIGNED: We discussed the role of bile acids in PBC pathogenesis and how the FXR agonists provide therapeutic value by affecting bile acid synthesis and transport. Novel FXR agonists undergoing pre-clinical and clinical trials for PBC were enlisted via literature search by including the terms \'FXR agonists,\' \'FXR PBC,\' \'PBC clinical trials\' on PubMed, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Clinicaltrials.gov.
UNASSIGNED: Novel FXR agonists currently under investigation for PBC improve the disease surrogate markers in early trials. However, as with OCA, pruritus remains a concern with the newer drugs despite targeted chemical modifications to increase FXR specificity. Directing future resources toward studying the molecular mechanisms behind pruritus may lead to better drug design and efficacious yet safer drugs.

BACKGROUND: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the standard treatment for primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), but a significant proportion of patients do not respond adequately, leading to increased risk of adverse outcomes. This study aims to develop a new and straightforward predictive score to identify PBC patients likely to achieve a complete response to UDCA.
METHODS: A logistic regression analysis was conducted using a derivation cohort of PBC patients to identify pre-treatment variables associated with response to UDCA. This analysis led to the development of the ALP-A score, calculated as: Age at diagnosis divided by (alkaline phosphatase at diagnosis/upper limit of normal). ALP-A score accuracy was evaluated using the area under the ROC curve, validated with a large external cohort from Brazil. Additionally, the correlation between the ALP-A score and the previously validated UDCA response score (URS) was assessed.
RESULTS: ALP-A score had good predictive power for adequate (AUC 0.794; 95% CI, 0.737-0.852) and deep (0.76; 95% CI, 0.69-0.83) UDCA response at 1 year of treatment. A cutoff score of 17 and 23 points was determined to be the optimal threshold for distinguishing adequate and deep responders, respectively, from non-responders. ALP-A score demonstrated a sensitivity of 73%, specificity of 71%, positive predictive value of 65%, negative predictive value of 78%, and overall accuracy of 72% for biochemical response. The URS displayed similar discriminative ability (AUC 0.798; 95% CI, 0.741-0.855).
CONCLUSIONS: ALP-A score performs comparably to URS but offers the great advantage of simplicity for routine clinical use. It serves as a valuable tool to identify PBC patients less likely to respond to UDCA treatment, facilitating early consideration of alternative therapeutic approaches.

Aetiological therapy improves liver function and may enable hepatic recompensation in decompensated cirrhosis.
We explored the potential for recompensation in patients with decompensated primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) - considering a biochemical response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) according to Paris-II criteria as a surrogate for successful aetiological treatment.
Patients with PBC were retrospectively included at the time of first decompensation. Recompensation was defined as (i) resolution of ascites and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) despite discontinuation of diuretic/HE therapy, (ii) absence of variceal bleeding and (iii) sustained liver function improvement.
In total, 42 patients with PBC with decompensated cirrhosis (age: 63.5 [IQR: 51.9-69.2] years; 88.1% female; MELD-Na: 13.5 [IQR: 11.0-15.0]) were included and followed for 41.9 (IQR: 11.0-70.9) months after decompensation. Seven patients (16.7%) achieved recompensation. Lower MELD-Na (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 0.90; p = 0.047), bilirubin (SHR per mg/dL: 0.44; p = 0.005) and alkaline phosphatase (SHR per 10 U/L: 0.67; p = 0.001) at decompensation, as well as variceal bleeding as decompensating event (SHR: 4.37; p = 0.069), were linked to a higher probability of recompensation. Overall, 33 patients were treated with UDCA for ≥1 year and 12 (36%) achieved Paris-II response criteria. Recompensation occurred in 5/12 (41.7%) and in 2/21 (9.5%) patients with vs. without UDCA response at 1 year, respectively. Recompensation was linked to a numerically improved transplant-free survival (HR: 0.46; p = 0.335). Nonetheless, 4/7 recompensated patients presented with liver-related complications after developing hepatic malignancy and/or portal vein thrombosis and 2 eventually died.
Patients with PBC and decompensated cirrhosis may achieve hepatic recompensation under UDCA therapy. However, since liver-related complications still occur after recompensation, patients should remain under close follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) is often accompanied by fetal and maternal complications.
METHODS: Retrospective review of the clinical course of women with ICP and their neonates treated at our medical center over a 10-year period. Special attention was paid to the maternal and neonatal response to 2 different modes of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) administration.
RESULTS: Neonates of mothers with high total bile acid levels had a poorer composite neonatal outcome. Twenty-seven women who presented at an advanced stage of their pregnancies did not receive UDCA. UDCA was administered in 2 modes: either a full dose at admission (76 women) or a gradually increasing dose until the desired dosage was reached (25 women). The mean gestational age at delivery for the 94 neonates that were exposed to full UDCA dose was the lowest (36±2.3 weeks for the full dose, 37±1.4 weeks for the 30 neonates from the gradually increasing dose, 38±1.6 weeks for the 29 neonates from the no treatment group, p<0.001). The group of neonates that were exposed to full UDCA dose had the highest rate of unfavorable composite neonatal outcome (53% for full dose, 30% for gradually increasing dose, 24% for the no treatment group, p=0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the administration of a full UDCA dose, the administration of a gradually increasing dose of UDCA may be associated with a greater gestational age at delivery and fewer events of unfavorable composite neonatal outcomes. These novel findings should be retested prospectively in a large cohort of patients.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Effective treatments for patients with primary biliary cholangitis are limited. Seladelpar, a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor delta agonist, has potential benefits.
METHODS: In this phase 3, 12-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) patients who had had an inadequate response to or who had a history of unacceptable side effects with ursodeoxycholic acid to receive oral seladelpar at a dose of 10 mg daily or placebo. The primary end point was a biochemical response, which was defined as an alkaline phosphatase level less than 1.67 times the upper limit of the normal range, with a decrease of 15% or more from baseline, and a normal total bilirubin level at month 12. Key secondary end points were normalization of the alkaline phosphatase level at month 12 and a change in the score on the pruritus numerical rating scale (range, 0 [no itch] to 10 [worst itch imaginable]) from baseline to month 6 among patients with a baseline score of at least 4 (indicating moderate-to-severe pruritus).
RESULTS: Of the 193 patients who underwent randomization and treatment, 93.8% received ursodeoxycholic acid as standard-of-care background therapy. A greater percentage of the patients in the seladelpar group than in the placebo group had a biochemical response (61.7% vs. 20.0%; difference, 41.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 27.7 to 53.4, P<0.001). Normalization of the alkaline phosphatase level also occurred in a greater percentage of patients who received seladelpar than of those who received placebo (25.0% vs. 0%; difference, 25.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 18.3 to 33.2, P<0.001). Seladelpar resulted in a greater reduction in the score on the pruritus numerical rating scale than placebo (least-squares mean change from baseline, -3.2 vs. -1.7; least-squares mean difference, -1.5; 95% CI, -2.5 to -0.5, P = 0.005). Adverse events were reported in 86.7% of the patients in the seladelpar group and in 84.6% in the placebo group, and serious adverse events in 7.0% and 6.2%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with primary biliary cholangitis, the percentage of patients who had a biochemical response and alkaline phosphatase normalization was significantly greater with seladelpar than with placebo. Seladelpar also significantly reduced pruritus among patients who had moderate-to-severe pruritus at baseline. The incidence and severity of adverse events were similar in the two groups. (Funded by CymaBay Therapeutics; RESPONSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04620733; EudraCT number, 2020-004348-27.).

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: While ursodeoxycholic acid is used in treating parenteral nutrition-associated cholestasis (PNAC) in neonates, its role in prevention is unclear.
OBJECTIVE: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we attempted to determine the role of ursodeoxycholic acid in preventing PNAC in neonates.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and CINAHL databases were searched on September 16, 2023, for interventional studies comparing ursodeoxycholic acid with placebo.
RESULTS: Of the 6180 unique records identified, five studies were eligible for inclusion (three randomised and two nonrandomised). Evidence from randomised trials showed that ursodeoxycholic acid prophylaxis did not reduce cholestasis, mortality, sepsis, and necrotising enterocolitis. Ursodeoxycholic acid prophylaxis reduced feed intolerance (RR 0.23 (0.09, 0.64); 1 RCT, 102 neonates), peak conjugated bilirubin levels (MD -0.13 (-0.22, -0.04) mg/dL; 1 RCT, 102 neonates), and time to full enteral feeds (MD -2.7 (-5.09, -0.31) days; 2 RCTs, 76 neonates). There was no decrease in hospital stay and parenteral nutrition duration. Data from nonrandomised studies did not show benefit in any of the outcomes. The certainty of the evidence was low to very low.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of the very low-quality evidence and lack of evidence on critical outcomes, definitive conclusions could not be made on using ursodeoxycholic acid to prevent parenteral nutrition-associated cholestasis in neonates.