EndoTODAY | EndoATLAS | OPD

Parasite | Eso | Sto | Cancer | ESD

Boxim | DEX | Sono | Schedule

Home | Recent | Blog | Links


[Dr. Sinn's LiverTODAY 022 - HCV Ç×¹ÙÀÌ·¯½º Ä¡·á ÈÄ °£¾Ï °ËÁø]

Previous | Next

CÇü °£¿° Ä¡·á°¡ ¾ÆÁÖ ½±°í È¿°úÀûÀÌ µÇ¸é¼­, CÇü °£¿°¿¡¼­ Ä¡·áµÈ ºÐµéÀÌ ¸¹¾ÆÁö°í ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù. AGA¿¡¼­ ¹ßºü¸£°Ô expert review¸¦ ¹ßÇ¥ÇÏ¿´½À´Ï´Ù.

American Gastroenterological Association Institute Clinical Practice Update-Expert Review: Care of Patients Who Have Achieved a Sustained Virologic Response After Antiviral Therapy for Chronic Hepatitis C Infection Gastroenterology 2017

SVR is associated with a reduced risk of liver cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, need for liver transplantation, and both liver-related and all-cause mortality. However, a subset of patients who achieve SVR will remain at long-term risk for progression to cirrhosis, liver failure, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver-related mortality. Limited evidence is available to guide clinicians on which post-SVR patients should be monitored vs discharged, how to monitor and with which tests, how frequently should monitoring occur, and for how long. In this clinical practice update, available evidence and expert opinion are used to generate best practice recommendations on the care of patients with chronic hepatitis C virus who have achieved SVR.

Èï¹Ì·Î¿î °ÍÀº best practice advice (BPA) ¶ó°í Á¦½ÃÇÑ 11°³ Ç׸ñÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

BPA 1: SVR should be confirmed by undetectable HCV RNA at 12 wk after completion of an all-oral DAA treatment regimen.

BPA 2: Routine confirmation of SVR at 48 wk post end of treatment is recommended. Testing for HCV RNA at 24 wk post treatment should be considered on an individual patient basis.

BPA 3: Routine testing for HCV RNA beyond 48 wk after end of treatment to evaluate for late virologic relapse is not supported by available evidence; periodic testing for HCV RNA is recommended for patients with ongoing risk factors for reinfection.

BPA 4: Surveillance for HCC with liver imaging ¡¾ serum AFP should be pursued twice annually for an indefinite duration in all patients with stage 3 fibrosis or liver cirrhosis post-SVR.

BPA 5: Surveillance for HCC is not recommended for patients with stages 0-2 fibrosis post-SVR.

BPA 6: Intensification of HCC screening frequency in the immediate post-SVR context is not currently recommended.

BPA 7: Initial endoscopic screening for esophagogastric varices is recommended for all patients with liver cirrhosis, independent of SVR.

BPA 8: Repeat endoscopic screening should be pursued for cirrhotic patients post-SVR at 2-3 y if no varices or small varices were identified on initial screening examination.

BPA 9: If no varices are identified on endoscopy 2-3 y post-SVR, cessation of further endoscopic screening can be considered on an individual patient basis if there are no risk factors for progressive cirrhosis.

BPA 10: Fibrosis assessment post-SVR with noninvasive tools, such as liver elastography, can be considered on an individual patient basis to assess for interval fibrosis progression or regression to guide clinical management, although improved fibrosis measurements should not alter the frequency of HCC surveillance at the present time.

BPA 11: Patients who have achieved SVR should be counseled regarding sources of liver injury, which can independently contribute to liver fibrosis progression, including alcohol, fatty liver, and other potential hepatotoxins, and should be evaluated for these and other sources of liver injury if serum levels of liver enzymes are elevated.


[½Åµ¿Çö ±³¼ö´Ô comment]

BPA 1. SVR È®ÀÎÀ» 12ÁÖ° ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ÃæºÐÇÏ´Ù´Â °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù(µ¿ÀÇ)

BPA 2. 1³âµÚ¿¡´Â ÇѹøÁ¤µµ SVRÀÌ À¯ÁöµÇ´ÂÁö È®ÀÎÇØ º¸ÀÚ´Â °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù(µ¿ÀÇ)

BPA 7-9. ¿ì¸®³ª¶ó¿¡¼­ ³»½Ã°æÀº Á¤¸Æ·ù¸¸À» º¸·Á°í ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀº ¾Æ´Ï´Ï, ±×´ë·Î Àû¿ëÇÏ±ä ¾î·Á¿ï °Í °°½À´Ï´Ù(°³ÀÎÀÇ°ß) --> ¿ì¸®³ª¶ó¿¡¼­ ¹«Áõ»ó ¼ºÀÎ, EGD recommendation (for EGC surveillance??) Àº ¾î¶»°Ô µÇ´ÂÁö ¸ð¸£°ÚÁö¸¸, biannual recommendationÀ̶ó¸é BPS 7-9´Â ¹«½ÃÇصµ µÉ °Å °°½À´Ï´Ù.

BPA 11. SVR ÈÄ¿¡µµ ´Ù¸¥ °£Áúȯ À§ÇèÀÎÀÚ°¡ ÀÖ´ÂÁö »ìÆ캸°í °ü¸®ÇØ¾ß ÇÑ´Ù´Â °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù(µ¿ÀÇ).

BPA 4,5. SVR ÀÌÈÄ¿¡µµ HCC ȯÀÚµéÀÌ ÀÖÀ¸´Ï, stage 3 fibrosis or cirrhosis´Â °£¾Ï ¼±º°°Ë»ç¸¦ ÇØ¾ß ÇÑ´Ù´Â °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù (µ¿ÀÇ). --> post-SVR stage 0-2 fibrosis°¡ ÀÖ´Â »ç¶÷Àº °£¾Ï ¼±º°°Ë»ç ¾ÈÇصµ µÈ´Ù´Â °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù(Ãß°¡ ÀÇ°ß)

BPA 10. Biopsy°á°ú°¡ ¾øÀ» ¶§´Â non-invasive ÇÑ fibrosis assessment¸¦ °í·ÁÇØ º¼ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù´Â °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù(Ãß°¡ ÀÇ°ß) Non-invasive tool Áß °¡Àå ³Î¸® »ç¿ëµÇ´Â fibroscan°ü·Ã ReviewÀÇ ³»¿ëÀ» ¿Å±é´Ï´Ù.

Sultanik et al reported that in a cohort of 341 patients with confirmed HCV cirrhosis, 45 (13%) of whom achieved SVR, liver stiffness measurements by TE were <12.5 kPa in three-fourths of those with SVR. Utilizing a threshold of 12.5 kPa, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.66 for HCC in patients with SVR. Of 4 patients with HCC, 2 of 4 had elastography scores <12 kPa post-SVR. Based on their cumulative data, the authors cautioned against performing liver stiffness measurements to follow regression of fibrosis or cirrhosis. A study from Taiwan of 278 patients with SVR with a median follow-up period of 7.6 years, comprised of both non-cirrhotic and cirrhotic patients, showed a significantly greater risk of HCC with TE score >12 kPa. However, HCC also occurred with post-SVR scores <12 kPa, including patients with pretreatment scores either > or <12 kPa. At present, there is no reliable elastography score below which clinicians can confirm an absence of HCC risk with sufficient confidence to warrant discontinuation of surveillance.

The same conclusion can be derived from available studies on noninvasive blood or serum markers that assess fibrosis. Such markers often improve after SVR, and have correlated with risk of HCC in some studies, including a study in which the Forns index, but not FIB-4 index or aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index, at follow-up week 24 correlated with long-term HCC risk. In a particularly long-term follow-up study spanning a 10-year period, FIB-4 index and aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index scores declined substantially in patients with SVR and were significantly lower than in untreated patients or those with treatment failure, but no correlations with HCC were drawn.

Review¿¡ ¼Ò°³ µÇÁö ¾Ê¾ÒÁö¸¸^^, ÀúÈñ groupµµ non-invasive toolÀÎ APRIÀÇ À¯¿ë¼ºÀ» ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿© º¸°íÇÑ ¹Ù ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù (Gut Liver 2016). ÀÌ ¿¬±¸ºÐ¼®¿¡¼­´Â Ä¡·áÀü APRI°¡, Ä¡·áÈÄ APRIº¸´Ù ´õ °¨º°À» ÀßÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î È®ÀεǾú½À´Ï´Ù. Ä¡·áÀü APRI°¡ ³ôÀº »ç¶÷ÀÌ, Ä¡·á ÈÄ APRI°¡ ÁÁ¾ÆÁ®µµ ÀûÁö¸¸ °£¾Ï À§ÇèÀÌ ÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ª¿Ô½À´Ï´Ù. Ä¡·áÀü¿¡ ¾î´ÀÁ¤µµ fibrosis°¡ ÀÖ¾ú´ø »ç¶÷Àº Ä¡·á ÈÄ fibrosis marker°¡ È£ÀüµÇ¾îµµ Á¶½ÉÇØ¾ß ÇÕ´Ï´Ù.

BPA5¹ø, Áï "Surveillance for HCC is not recommended for patients with stages 0-2 fibrosis post-SVR", ¸¦ ÀÓ»ó¿¡¼­ ½ÇÁ¦·Î Àû¿ëÇÏ´Â °ÍÀº ÁÖÀÇÇØ¾ß ÇÒ °Í °°½À´Ï´Ù. ¿ì¸®³ª¶ó¿¡¼­ °£Á¶Á÷°Ë»ç ÈÄ Ä¡·áÇÑ °æ¿ì´Â °ÅÀÇ ¾ø½À´Ï´Ù. µû¶ó¼­ Ä¡·á Àü fibrosis stage¸¦ Á¤È®È÷ ¾Ë ¼ö ÀÖ´Â °æ¿ì´Â ¸Å¿ì µå¹´´Ï´Ù. Non-invasive predictorsµéÀº Á¤È®µµ°¡ ¶³¾îÁý´Ï´Ù. CÇü °£¿° ȯÀÚµéÀº SVRÈÄ¿¡µµ Á¤±âÀûÀ¸·Î monitoringÀ» ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ ¾ÈÀüÇÒ °Í °°½À´Ï´Ù.


[References]

1) EsoTODAY - Esophageal diseases

2) SmallTODAY - Small bowel diseases

3) ColonTODAY - Colorectal diseases

4) Dr. Sinn's LiverTODAY - Liver diseases

© ¼º±Õ°ü´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ »ï¼º¼­¿ïº´¿ø ¼ÒÈ­±â³»°ú ½Åµ¿Çö