| |
| The summaries are free for public
use. The Chronic Liver Disease
Foundation will continue to add and
archive summaries of articles deemed
relevant to CLDF by the Board of
Trustees and its Advisors. |
| |
|
|
| Abstract Details |
 |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
|
| |
A sustained virological response prevents development of insulin resistance in chronic hepatitis C patients |
|
|
|
|
| |
Aghemo A, Prati GM, Rumi MG, Soffredini R, D'Ambrosio R, Orsi E, De Nicola S, Degasperi E, Grancini V, Colombo M. Hepatology. 2012 May 22. doi: 10.1002/hep.25867. [Epub ahead of print] |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Source
A.M. Migliavacca Center for Liver Disease, 1st Division of Gastroenterology, Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan. alessio.aghemo@policlinico.mi.it.
Abstract
Background and Aims. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is associated with insulin resistance (IR) occurrence, a condition known to influence liver fibrosis progression and response to pegylated interferon (PegIFN)/ribavirin (Rbv) therapy. We aimed to assess whether a sustained virological response (SVR) following antiviral therapy prevents development of IR in the long term. Methods. The MIST study cohort, who received Peg-IFN alfa2a or alfa2b/Rbv, underwent homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) at baseline and 24 months after treatment completion. All patients (n=431) had a liver biopsy scored for grading, staging (Ishak) and steatosis. Results. At baseline, IR (HOMA>2) was detected in 48 (12%) patients, and was associated with body weight (p=0.03), HCV load <0.6 × 10(6) IU/l (p=0.006), Fibrosis staging ≥ 4 (p=0.01), and moderate-severe steatosis (p=0.03). IR did not influence the rates of ETR (75% vs 69%, p=0.4), SVR (63% vs 60%, p=0.8) or relapse (19% vs 24%, p=0.5). Post treatment, IR developed in 49 of 384 (14%) non diabetic patients. While mean baseline and post treatment HOMA values were similar in SVR patients (1.11 ± 0.8 vs 1.18 ± 1.1, p=0.25), treatment failure patients showed a significant increase in mean HOMA at the follow-up visits (1.20 ± 0.85 to 1.49 ± 1.3, p=0.007), with an increased rate of de-novo IR in non-SVR compared to SVR patients (17% vs 7%, p=0.007). By logistic regression analysis, treatment failure (OR 2.81; 95% CI, 1.39-5.67; p=0.004) and 10% BMI increase (OR 6.42; 95% CI, 1.69-24.3; p=0.006) were significantly associated with the development of de-novo IR. Conclusions. In non diabetic patients with chronic hepatitis C, the achievement of an SVR to Peg IFN and Rbv prevents development of de-novo IR.
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|