Upload
lamnguyet
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NASH in 2017 and beyond
Raluca Pais,
Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Hôpital Pitié Salpêtrière, Paris, France
Cohen et al, science 2011; Sanyal et al, Hepatol 2011
NAFLD = macrovesicular steatosis > 5% of hepatocytes.
NASH= steatosis+ ballooning + lobular inflammatory infiltration
NAFLD 90%
NASH 24-98%
NAFLD-NASH definition
Epidémiologie
Prevalence of NAFLD
00
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
5 10 15 20 25 30 35Prevalence of obesity
China
Italy
JapanMexico
Taiwan
Israel USA
Korea
India
Prev
alen
ce o
f N
AFLD
25% to 35% worldwide
Lazo et al. Semin. Liver Dis. 2008
Prevalence of NASH within NAFLD
Ekstedt N=129 Tertiary 45 55
% steatosis % NASH
CYTOL 2002 N=248 Tertiary,multicentric 45 55
Soderbergh N=118 Tertiary care 57 43
NASH CRN N=679 Tertiary,multicentric 20 59
Campos N=125 Bariatric surgery 45 55
VA Corporate Data
Warehouse
Structured Chart Review
� Persistently increased ALT
� No viral hepatitis
� No excessive alcohol
(2 yrs prior)
� Metabolic Sd
� BMI >30 kg/m²
NAFLD case definition
Recognition of ALT increase
Diagnosis of NAFLD/NASH
Lifestyle modifications
Referral specialist evaluation
RECEIPT
OF
NAFLD
CARE
Blais, Am J Gastroenterol 2014
NAFLD : an underrecognized disease
39.4% recognition of ALT increase
21.5% diagnosis of NAFLD/NASH
15% lifestyle modifications
10.5% referral specialist evaluation
60.6%
Only the magnitude and proportion of ALT
elevation were predictive of receiving NAFLD care
NO NAFLD CARE
Blais, Am J Gastroenterol 2014
Pathogenèse
Lip
oly
se d
u t
issu
ad
ipe
ux
Fructose
+
Glucose
Acetyl CoA
Lip
og
en
èse
de
no
vo
Acides
gras
libres
ACC
FAS
SCD
SREBP-1c
ChREBP
Dysfonction du tissue adipeux:
- Hypertrophie des adipocytes
- Infiltration macrophagique
- Hypoxie
- Fibrose
- � sensibilité à l’insuline
- � adiponectine
- � cytokines proinflammatoires
Carnitine
CPT1
CPT2
Triglycérides VLDLAminoacides
Choline/PC
Hypertriglycéridémie
MOGAT2
DGAT2Stéatose
PNPLA3
Necroinflammation
NASH
Fibrose
CHC
Beta oxydation
mitochondriale
Lipides lipotoxiques- Acide palmitique
- Lysophosphatidil choline
- Céramides
- Cholestérol libre
Diagnostic
Usual diagnostic circumstances for NAFLD
LFTs +
Ultrasound
LFTs +
Metabolic RF
Increased
ferritin
Cirrhosis X
Metabolic RF
+ Normal ALT
NASH
Key points : presence of steatosis (ultrasound, markers)
presence of metabolic risk factors
Marqueurs sériques non-invasifs
disponibles
• FibroTest
• ELF Panel
• Fibromètre
• Angulo
FIBROSE
� SteatoTest
� Kotronen
� FLI
STEATOSE
� NASHTest
� CK 18 ?
� NASH Dg (CK18,
adiponectin, resistin)
STEATOHEPATITE
Wieckowska, Hepatology 2006Cales, Hepatology 2005
Angulo, Hepatology 2007
Guha, Hepatology 2008
Ratziu, BioMedCentral Gastro 2006
Poynard, BMC Gastro 2006
Rosenberg, Gastroenterology 2004
Poynard, Comp Hepatol 2005
NAFLD fibrosis score
Angulo, Hepatology 2007; Boursier, Current Opin Med Diag 2012; Shah, Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009
NAFLD fibrosis score
0,037 * age
+ 0,094 * BMI
+ 1,13 * IFG/diabetes
+ 0,99 * AST/ALT
– 0,013 * platelets
– 0.66 * albumin
+ 1,675
NAFLD fibrosis score
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-1.455 < Grey zone 0.676 <
F0-2 F3/4
≈30%
91.8% 66.9%66.9%
Xiao, Hepatology 2017
0,720,78
0,83
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1,0
F ≥2 F ≥3 F4
AU
RO
C
NFS: a good fibrosis test in diabetics?
1693 US diabetics
(code ICD-9 from 09/11 to 11/15)675 probable NASH
(AST or ALT ≥30 (M) ou 19 (W), T2DM, no
other cause, no alcohol)
1018 without NASH
Joshi, ILC2016-RS-4095
Negative
Intermediate
Positive
0,037*age
+ 0,094*BMI
+ 1,13*IFG/diabete
+ 0,99*AST/ALT
– 0,013*platelets
– 0.66*albumin
+ 1,675
Tests sanguins de fibrose – FIB4 : attention à
l’âge !
Boursier, J Hepatol 2017
Chez les patients
≥60 ans, le taux de
faux positifs était de
82.0%
3754 patients,
hépatopathie chronique
prouvée histologiquement
Transient Elastography
Factors influencing liver stiffness
De Ledinghen, Expert Med Rev Devices 2010
Boursier, J Gastroenterol 2014
Steatosis
CAP pour interpréter le Fibroscan
Petta, Hepatology 2016
Fibroscan manufacturer recommendations
M probe if skin – liver distance capsula <25mm, XL probe if ≥ 25mm
Boursier, AASLD 2017
Manufacturer
recommendations
Adjustment
Combination blood tests + Fibroscan
Petta, Liver Int 2015
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
FS < 7,9 kPa
NFS < -1,455
Biopsy FS ≥ 9,6 kPa
NFS > 0,676
F0-2 F3/4
Fibroscan +
NAFLD fibrosis score
FS < 7,9 kPa
NFS < -1,455
FS ≥ 9,6 kPa
NFS > 0,676Autres
F0/2 Biopsy F3/4
45%
96% 100%100%
When to perform liver biopsy on an
individual basis ?
• Metabolically stable ?
• Attempt diet and lifestyle change
Failure (s)
previous attempts ?Never tried
Improvement weight,
IR, ALT NNo change
Fibrosis
risk
Comorbidities
Patient
motivationTrials
FT/FS (or clinical)
+/+ +/- -/-
MONITORING
LB
Liver Biopsy
� prone to sampling error: ≥ 1 stage: 41%; ≥ 2 stages: 12%
� interobserver variability: 1 stage discordance 24%
NAS Score = Steatosis (0-3) + Inflammation (0-3) + Ballooning (0-2)
SAF Classification:
Diagnos( c**
No*NAFLD*
NAFLD*
NAFLD*
NAFLD*
NAFLD*
NASH*
NASH*
NAFLD*
NASH*
NASH*
Ratziu, Gastroenterology 2005
Bedossa, Hepatology 2012
Histoire Naturelle
Fibrosis progression
HCC
ESLD
Liver Transplantation
EXTRAHEPATIC COMPLICATIONS
NASH CRN
N = 396 pts
Sanyal, AASLD 2016
• Age > 45-50 yrs
• Diabetes
• BMI > 27 kg/m²
• Arterial HTN
• Hypertriglyceridemia (TG > 1.7 mmol/L)
• ALT>2N
• AST/ALT > 1
Ratziu, Gastroenterology 2000
Angulo, Hepatology 1999
Dixon, Gastroenterology 2001
Bedside risk factors for severe fibrosis in NASH
Fibrosis progression in patients with NAFLD
Singh et al., Clin Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2015
Metaanalysis of 11 studies of patients with NAFLD and paired liver
biopsies (N = 411 pts)
Fibrosis progression rate:
NAFL: 1 stage over 14 years
NASH: 1 stage over 7 years
Causes of death in NASH cirrhosis
• Same as in any other cause of cirrhosis
• Same prognostic value of MELD, Child-Pugh, …
N=152 NASH-cirrhosis
8 yrs f/u
29 Deaths
Liver failure
N=19
Cardio-
vascular
N=8
Other
N=2 • Sepsis
• Variceal
hemorrhage
• HCC
+++
++
+
Sanyal, Hepatology 2006
Competitive Competitive
risk
Progression to liver-related death
• N=152 NASH-cirrhosis & 150 HCV-cirrhosis
Sanyal, Hepatology 2006
Child A
Child B
Child C
NAFLD and HCC … In Europe …
Dyson, J Hepatol 2013
Over the past decade • ALD: 28%• NAFLD: 22%• No CLD: 20%
NAFLD and HCC … GHPS experience…
N = 323 patients undergoing liver resection Pais et al, unpublished
HCC distribu on according to the e ology
of chronic liver disease and fibrosis stages
Recurrence-free survival according to the
e ology of chronic liver disease.
Pais et al, unpublished
NAFLD and HCC … GHPS experience…
Characteristics of NAFLD and HCC
Mittal, CGH 2015
Bellentani, Hepatology 2015 in press
US, retrospective: 1500
HCC VA Hospital (2005 –
2010)
8% NAFLD related HCC
Particularities of patients with NAFLD-related HCC :
- Older
- Higher prevalence of metabolic comorbidities
- Absence of cirrhosis (42%)
- No HCC screening (57%)
- Less eligible for HCC specific therapy (comorbidities, advanced
tumors)
Europe (Italy), prospective :
145 NAFLD-HCC and 611
HCV-HCC
NAFLD – liver transplantation
NAFLD – 2nd etiology of liver transplantation in US
Wong, Gatroenterology 2015
NAFLD – Center stage of the metabolic
syndrome ?
NAFLD
Hypertension
Diabetes
Cardiovascular
• Endothelial & coronary
dysfunction
• Carotid plaques
• Impaired ventricular fct and
metabolism
• CV events
Incident
diabetes
Insulin
requirements
Prevalence
essential HTN
OSA
NAFLD and early ATS – transversal studies
Sookoian, J Hepatol 2008
Jaruvongvanich, Dig Liv Dis, 2016
NAFLD and C-IMT
NAFLD and CAC > 100
NAFLD is an independent predictor for the occurrence
of early ATS - Longitudinal studies
C-IMT
1872 subjects
FU = 8 ±4 years
Coronary Calcium Score
4731 subjects
FU = 4 years
Pais, J Hepatol 2016 Sinn, Gut 2016
NAFLD is additive to established MRF in increasing the risk
of incidentT2DM
Risk factors OR, 95% CI
IR alone 3.66 (1.89 – 7.08)
Overweight/obesity 1.29 (0.62 – 2.71)
NAFLD 2.73 (1.38 – 5.41)
IR + overweight/obesity 6.16 (3.38 – 11.22)
IR + NAFLD 6.73 (3.49 – 12.97)
Overweight/obesity + NAFLD 3.23 (1.78 – 5.89)
IR + overweight/obesity + NAFLD 14.13 (8.99 – 22.2)
N = 12 853 subjects from a South Korean occupational cohort
Sung, Diabetes Care 2012
Adjusted for age, sex, alcohol, smoking status, exercise, educational status, TG, and ALT
Severity of NAFLD and incidentT2DM
Chang, Am J Gastroenterol 2013
NAFLD and type 2 diabetes – bidirectional relationship
Type 2 diabetes NAFLD
Worsening of histological features and fibrosis progression
In persons with NAFLD, screening for diabetes is
mandatory, by fasting or random blood glucose
or HbA1c (A1)
In patients with T2DM, the presence of NAFLD
should be looked for irrespective of liver
enzyme levels, since T2DM patients are at high
risk of disease progression (A2)
Increased risk of incident type 2 diabetes
NAFLD and chronic kidney disease
Cumulative incidence of CKD
Sinn, J Hepatol 2017
N = 40 000 pts
Combinded kidney-liver
transplantation
NASH + CC
Alcohol + biliary CLD
Viral hepatitis
Singal, Transplantation 2016
>>>> Hypoxia severity is significantly associated with NAS score even after adjustment for confounding metabolic factors
>>>> Hypoxia severity is an independent factor of more severe liver fibrosis
Aron-wisnewsky , C Minville et al, J Hepatol 2012;
ODI=3Normal liver
ODI=20Steatosis
and fibrosis
N= 101Obese patients
NASH fibrose et SAS
Work-up in patients with NAFLD: a
multiorgan approach
NAFLD
Extrahepatic
comorbidities
Liver
condition
•Type 2 diabetes
•Sleep apnea
•Evaluate CV risk
•Dyslipidemia
•Cofactors of fibrosis
•Pathological form
•Stage
•Prognosis
?
NAFLD – Non pharmacological treatment
Life style modifications
1. Histological improvement
Vilar Gomez, Gastroenterology 2015
293 patients; 89% with paired liver biopsy
F/u: 52 weeks
Low-fat hypocaloric diet (- 750 kcal)
Vilar Gomez, Gastroenterology 2015
N = 73 N = 16 N = 8 N = 16
Pa
tie
nts
, %
Life style modifications
2. Fibrosis
Life style modifications – physical activity
� Higher energy consumption
� Reduces body weight
� Fatigue, discomfort =>poor
long-term compliance.
� Increase muscular strength, mass
and bone density; less weight loss
� Improves dyslipidemia, HBP, IR
� Less energy consumption
Improvement in 50% of cases without weight loss
Hashida, J Hepatol 2017
Weight loss correlates with the frequency of
medical visits
Dudekula, PlosOne 2014 9(11)
� 3% - 5% weight loss to improve steatosis
� 7% - 10% for NASH resolution
� > 10% for fibrosis regression
Negative predictors of response:
- Older age
- Type 2 diabetes
- More severe NASH activity
Weight loss is difficult to maintain in real-
life settings :
- Maximum at 6 month
- 6% of initial body weight at 1 year
- 50% of initial weight loss is regained in
3 years Dansinger, Ann Int Med, 2007
BARIATRIC SURGERY
N = 381 patients
95.7% of patients had a fibrosis score ≤ F1.
80.2% of patients regressed or remained at the same stage of
fibrosis. 94/381 (24%) patients had T2DM in this cohort
Mathurin, Gastroenterology 2009
BARIATRIC SURGERY
Distribution of NAS Distribution of Fibrosis
� NASH disappeared in 85.4% of cases
� Fibrosis improved in 46%.
� The rate of disappearance of NASH was higher in patients with mild NASH than in
those with moderate or severe NASH
� 14.6% of patients had persistent NASH 1 year after bariatric surgery. These
patients had significantly lower weight loss, higher NAS and refractory IR profile
Bariatric surgery in cirrhosis
0,310,9
2,2
16,3
21,1
0
5
10
15
20
25
Mortality Adjuted Odd ratio
No cirrhosis
(n=670 950)
Compensated cirrhosis
(n=3 888)
Decompensated
cirrhosis (n=62)
Nationwide Inpatient
Sample, 1998-2007
Mosk, Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011
In-h
osp
ita
lm
ort
ali
ty(%
)
• When should drug treatment be implemented?
– Naive :
• 4-6 mo of diet/lifestyle
• Treat if no effect and metabolically stable
– Counseling experienced :
• (Reinforce counseling prefessionally ?)
• Treat if metabolically stable
STEATOSIS
INFLAMMATION
FIBROSIS
A requiem for Metformin
Musso, Hepatology 2010
Glitazones - Biochemical Response
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
pALTM4 pALTM8p100ALTMp100ALTM pALTM20 pALTM24 pALTM28 pALTM32 pALTM36 pALTM40
M0 M16 M40
PLB - RSG
)
31
32
31/28*
32/25*
23
21
RSG - RSG
RSG - RSG
PLB - RSG
RCT OPEN-LABEL EXTENSION TRIAL
ALT
(fo
ld b
ase
lin
e)
Ratziu, Hepatology 2010
Trial Drug (mg/d)
Type
Belfort2006
FLIRT2008
Tetri2003
Promrat2004
Sanyal2004
Glitazones - Histological Improvement
Aithal2008
Pio/45 RCT/PLB
Rosi/8 RCT/PLB
Rosi/8 Open label
Pio/30 Open label
Pio/30
+Vit ERCT/Vit E
Pio/30 RCT/PLB
Sanyal2010
Pio/30 RCT/PLB
STEATOSIS
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
BALLOONING
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO*
YES
INFLAMMATION
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO*
YES YES
Trial Drug (duration)
Type
Belfort2006
Pio/6mo RCT/PLB
FLIRT2008
Rosi/12mo RCT/PLB
Tetri2003
Rosi/12mo Open label
Promrat2004
Pio/12mo Open label YES
Sanyal2004
Pio/6mo
+Vit ERCT/Vit E
NO
NO
NO
NO
Glitazones - Histological Improvement
IMPROVEMENTIN FIBROSIS
Drug A Drug B
∆ A vs. ∆ B
Aithal2008
Pio/30 RCT/PLB YES
Sanyal2010
Pio/30 RCT/PLB NO
Histological improvement in Vit E RCTs
Steatosis BallooningNASH
resolutionFibrosisInflammation
Harrison/1yr - - - - -
PIVENS/2yrs + + + + -
TONIC/2yrs - - + + -
Nobili/2yrs - - - - -
+ denotes improvement;
vs. placebo
Results of large UDCA RCTs
Lindor 2 yrs Low
Leuschner 2 yrs Medium No
URSONASH 1 yr High
Lindor, Hepatology 2004; Leuschner, Hepatology 2010; Ratziu, J Hepatol 2011
Study Duration DoseHistological
improvementALT
vs PLB
No No
No*
Yes
NAFLDNAFLD
NASHNASH
Liver
related
events
Liver
related
events
FIBROSIS
Proinflammatory
Pathways
SIMTUZUMAB
GR-MD-02
IMM – 124E
OCA
ARAMCHOL
LIRAGLUTIDE
NGM282
BMS 986036
Insulin
resistance
Obesity
Dyslipidemia
Oxidative
stress
ELAFIBRANOR
GS - 4997
CENICRIVIROC
ELAFIBRANOR – Phase IIb GOLDEN trial
Dual PPAR α/δ
274 adult patients with histological evidence of NASH ;
International RCT (Europe, US)
Elafibranor 80 mg Elafibranor 80 mg Elafibranor 120 mg Elafibranor 120 mg Placebo Placebo
1 year1 year
1 Endpoint:
Resolution of NASH with no
worsening of fibrosis
1 Endpoint:
Resolution of NASH with no
worsening of fibrosis
2nd Endpoint: Change in NAS, fibrosis, liver
enzymes, lipids, metabolic markers,
safety
2nd Endpoint: Change in NAS, fibrosis, liver
enzymes, lipids, metabolic markers,
safety
Ratziu, Gastroenterology 2016
GOLDEN 505 Primary Endpoint in ITT PopulationResolution of NASH without worsening of fibrosis
Protocol defined (resolution of any
of: steatosis or ballooning or
lobular inflammation)
17
2321
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Placebo ELF 80 ELF 120
P = 0.28
1213
19
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Placebo ELF 80 ELF 120
P = 0.28
Ratziu, Gastroenterology 2016
Modified definition (no
ballooning, none or mild
lobular inflammation)
31
2023
20 20
28
14
27
40
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Mild (3) Moderate (4-5) Severe (6-8)
Placebo Elafibranor 80 mg Elafibranor 120 mg
NAS 2-point reduction according to Baseline NAS severity in
the ITT Population (n 274)
Ratziu, Gastroenterology 2016
-7,96
-25,45
5%
-3
-2,5
-2
-1,5
-1
-0,5
0
0,5
NAS Steatosis Ballooning Inflammation Fibrosis
GFT505 120 mg Responders GFT505 120 mg Non responders
***
p=0.06
***
**
***
NASH components
Ch
an
ge
in S
core
** : p<0.01
*** : p<0.001
Beneficial on NASH components and fibrosis improvement in
Responders to Elafibranor 120 mg
���� steatosis (���� lipid utilization)
���� Oxidative stress (CAT, SOD)
���� ALT, GGT, ALP
���� Hepatic hemodynamics
���� Atherogenic lipid profile
���� Endothelial dysf. (ET-1, RGS5, Nox)
���� Vessel Ox stress (CAT, GPx1, HO1)
���� Vessel inflam (ICAM1, MCP1)
���� Triglyceride clearance (APOC3)
���� VLDL-APOB & ����LDL-APOB
���� sd-LDL cholesterol level
���� HDL cholesterol level (APOA1/A2)
���� NEFA utilization (ACOX, CPT1, EHHADH)
���� NEFA level (lipolysis, β-oxidation)
���� NF-κB, ���� TLRs
���� TNFα, IL-1β
���� IL-6, CRP, SAA, HG, fibrinogen
���� Kupffer cell activation (BCL6)
���� Insulin sensitivity (Fgf21)
���� Hepatic glucose output (PEPCK, FAS, ACC, PDG, G6PDH)
���� insulin
���� Fibrogenesis (TGFβ1, αSMA, Col1α1)
���� Oxidative stress (CAT, SOD)
���� Inflammation(MCP-1, IL-6, TNFα)
FIBROSIS
LIVER
DYSFUNCTION
INFLAMMATION
CVD RISK
LIPID
METABOLISM
GLUCOSE
HOMEOSTASIS
PPARα/δ
ELAFIBRANOR – Pleiotropic effects
Relative Change (%) * : p<0.05
** : p<0.01
-16,03
-26,8
-10,11
-26,34
-31,3
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
FPG Fasting Insulin Fructosamin C-peptide FFA
Glycemic parameters in diabetics
Effect size GFT505 120mg vs placebo (relative change %)
*
**
*
**
p=0,06
Re
lati
ve
Ch
an
ge
(%
)
-0,55
-0,43
0,11
-0,24
-0,17
TG CHOL HDL-C LDL-C VLDL-C
Effect size GFT505 120mg vs placebo (Absolute change - mmol/L)
***
**
***
***
***
** : p<0.01
*** : p<0.001
ELAFIBRANOR –effects on
glucose homeostasis and
lipids metabolism
FLINT Phase 2 Trial DesignThe Farnesoid X Receptor Ligand Obeticholic Acid (OCA) in NASH Treatment
N=283
Patients w/
Histological Evidence
of NASH
Placebo QD
Screening (Biopsy)
Follow up
OCA 25 mg QD Follow up
72 week Treatment Period 24 week off-drug
Primary endpoint: Histological improvement defined as:
• No worsening in fibrosis; and
• Decrease in NAS of ≥ 2 points
Interim Analysis when 50% of patients
completed treatment and had an end-
of-treatment liver biopsy
NASH CRN
Tetri, Lancet 2014
Top-line results of the FLINT trial
Tetri, Lancet 2014
NAS 2 pt reduction 46% (N:110) 21% (N:109) <0.001
Resolution of NASH 22% 13% 0.09
Improvement in fibrosis(>1 stage)
35% 13% 0.01
Change in fibrosis 0.011.9 -0.2 1.8 +0.1
All individual components of NAS improved
OCA Placebo
3538
31
19
53
61
46
35
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Lobular
inflammation
Steatosis Hepatocellular
ballooning
Fibrosis
Pa
tie
nts
wit
h I
mp
rov
em
en
t (%
)
P <.01
FLINT—Improved Secondary
Histologic Outcomes at Week 72
P =.001
Abbreviation: OCA, obeticholic acid.
Neuschwander-Tetri BA, et al. Lancet. 2015;385:956-965.
P <.05
P <.01
Placebo (n = 109)
OCA 25 mg (n = 110)
72
Lipid Concentrations
1: Data from Tetri et al. The Lancet. Published online November 7, 2014. 2: All p-values compared to placebo. *p<0.05
3: Converted mean values using factor of 38.6 for cholesterol and 88.5 for triglycerides.
mg
/dl
+18
-27
mg
/dl
+29
-19
mg
/dl
+4
-6
mg
/dl
+19
-19
Tetri, Lancet 2014
Experimental Group
n=25
Liraglutide 0.6mg OD
(Days 1 – 7)
Liraglutide 1.2mg OD
(Days 8 – 14)
Liraglutide 1.8mg OD
(Days 15 – 336)
Control Group
n = 25
Placebo 1.2mg OD
(Days 8-14)
Placebo 1.8mg OD
(Days 15-336)
Placebo 0.6mg OD
(Days 1-7)
50 patientsRandomised, Double-blinded
(stratified: site, diabetes)
Liver Biopsy
Week 48 (visit 7)
LEAN ‘Liraglutide’s Efficacy & Action in NASH’
Inclusion criteria:
Normal BMI at inclusion
NASH Biopsy < 6mths
Age 18-70
T2DM or non-T2DM
(HbA1c <9.0%; no insulin)
Primary End-point:
Resolution of NASH
(disappearance of ballooning)
without worsening of fibrosis
Secondary End-points:
Changes in NAS
Safety; liver biomarkers;
metabolic
Armstrong, The Lancet, 2015
Liraglutide : primary end-point and
evolution of histological lesions
Liraglutide
(n = 23)
Placebo
(n = 22)p
Disparition de NASH et absence
d’aggravation de fibrose9 (39,1 %) 2 (9,1 %) < 0,05
Score de fibrose Kleiner
Amélioration, n (%)
Aggravation, n (%)
-0,2
6 (26,1 %)
2 (8,7 %)
0,2
3 (13,6 %)
8 (36,4 %)
ns
ns
< 0,05
Score NAS total -1,3 -0,8 ns
Ballonnisation
Amélioration, n (%)
-0,5
14 (60,9 %)
-0,2
7 (31,8 %)
Ns
0.05
Stéatose
Amélioration, n (%)
-0,7
19 (82,6 %)
-0,4
10 (45,5 %)
ns
< 0,05
Inflammation lobulaire
Amélioration, n (%)
-0,1
11 (47,8 %)
-0,2
12 (54,5 %)
ns
ns
Armstrong, The Lancet, 2015
Liraglutide
(n = 26)
Placebo
(n = 26)p
Métabolique
IMC (kg/m2)
Poids (kg)
TA systolique (mmHg)
HbA1c (%)
Glycémie (mmol/l)
HDL cholestérol (mmol/l)
-1,84
-5,25
-5,0
-0,49
-1,04
0,07
-0,27
-0,58
-3,0
0,04
0,73
-0,04
0,005
0,003
ns
0,074
0,006
0,014
Tests hépatiques
ALAT (UI/ml)
ASAT (UI/ml)
GGT (UI/ml)
Cytokératine 18 (UI/ml)
ELF test
-26,6
-15,8
-33,7
-185
-0,25
-10,2
-8,6
-7,2
-92
0,09
ns
ns
0,013
0,097
0,052
Liraglutide :effect on metabolic parameters and LFTs
Armstrong, The Lancet, 2015
Liraglutide : histological benefit independent of weight loss,
glycemic control or the presence of T2DM
Why is the response rate stuck between Why is the response rate stuck between
40 – 50%
Clinical
PhenotypesHistological
Phenotypes
Multiple
pathogenetic
pathways
COMPLEXITY OF
NAFLD
Potential approach to solve the problem
Therapeutic choice
Individual approaches to
Individual patient
Combination therapy
Nodal target of
strategic importance
NAFLD : treatment options
Lifestyle
modification
Bariatric
surgery
« specific » pharmacological treatment
Endoscopic treatement
« non specific » pharmacological treatment
Anti-inflammatory (pentoxyfylline)
Endoscopic bypass Intragastric balloon
FXR Agonist PPAR α/δ Agonist Cenicriviroc
Probiotics Others (ARA2, PUFA…)
Hepato-protective (UDCA)Antioxidant (vit E)
ASK-1 inhibitors Others…
Endoscopic sleeve Others…
Antidiabetics : Glitazones, GLP1 agonist