Summary: Background: Anti‐viral therapy is not indicated for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in the immune‐tolerant phase.Aims: To investigate the cumulative incidence of phase change and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and independent predictors for phase change in patients with CHB in immune‐tolerant phase.Methods: In total, 946 patients in immune‐tolerant phase, defined as hepatitis B e antigen positivity, HBV‐DNA >20 000 IU/mL and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≤40 IU/L, between 1989 and 2017 were enrolled from eight institutes.Results: The mean age of study population (429 men and 517 women) was 36.7 years. The mean ALT and HBV‐DNA levels were 24.6 IU/L and 8.50 log₁₀ IU/mL, respectively. Of the study population, 476 (50.3%) patients remained in immune‐tolerant phase throughout the study period (median: 63.6 months). The cumulative incidence rates of phase change and HCC at 10 years were 70.7% and 1.7%, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that HBV‐DNA level >10⁷ IU/mL was associated independently with a reduced risk of phase change (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.734, P = 0.008), whereas a high ALT level, above the cut‐off recommended in the Korean Association for the Study of the Liver guidelines (34 IU/L for men and 30 IU/L for women), was associated independently with a greater risk of phase change (HR = 1.885, P < 0.001).Conclusions: The criterion of HBV‐DNA level > 10⁷ IU/mL may be useful to define immune‐tolerant phase. In addition, an extremely low risk of HCC development was observed in patients with CHB in immune‐tolerant phase.

Sorafenib is the first approved systemic treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, its clinical utility is limited, especially in Asian countries. Several reports have suggested the survival benefits of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) for advanced HCC with main portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT). This study aimed to compare the efficacy of sorafenib-based therapy with that of HAIC-based therapy for advanced HCC with main PVTT. Advanced HCC patients with main PVTT treated with sorafenib or HAIC between 2008 and 2016 at Korea University Medical Center were included. We evaluated overall survival (OS), time-to-progression (TTP), and the disease control rate (DCR). Seventy-three patients were treated with sorafenib (n=35) or HAIC (n=38). Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between groups, except the presence of solid organ metastasis (46% vs 5.3%, p<0.001). The median OS time was not significantly different between the groups (6.4 months vs 10.0 months, p=0.139). TTP was longer in the HAIC group than in the sorafenib group (2.1 months vs 6.2 months, p=0.006). The DCR was also better in the HAIC group than in the sorafenib group (37% vs 76%, p=0.001). Subgroup analysis, which excluded patients with extrahepatic solid organ metastasis, showed the same trends for the median OS time (8.8 months vs 11.1 months, p=0.097), TTP (1.9 months vs 6.0 months, p<0.001), and DCR (53% vs 81%, p=0.030). HAIC-based therapy may be an alternative to sorafenib for advanced HCC with main PVTT by providing longer TTP and a better DCR.

Yoon EL, et al. J Korean Med Sci. 2017 Feb;32(2):212-220. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2017.32.2.212

Background: Transient elastography is now an indispensable tool for estimating liver fibrosis. Although many clinical factors other than fibrosis itself are known to affect liver stiffness (LS) values, it is still not yet clear what factors are related to improving LS values. The aim of this study was to find out how baseline histologic inflammation influences LS values and how much this inflammation affects improvement in LS values over time, regardless of actual fibrosis content. Methods: This retrospective study included 678 consecutive patients who underwent liver biopsy and sequential LS assessment from 2006 to 2015 at six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Linear regression analysis was used to evaluate how improvement of LS value can be associated with other factors besides fibrosis content. Results: Basal LS values increased with increasing inflammation in the same fibrosis stage. Degree of inflammation influenced the baseline LS value in a proportional manner (beta coefficient (BE), 6.476; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.24–10.72; p = 0.003). Moreover, histologic inflammation affected the change in LS value significantly. Higher inflammation grade at baseline was a significant predictor for an improvement in LS value, regardless of the fibrosis stage (BE, −8.581; 95% CI, −15.715–−1.447; p = 0.019). In a subgroup analysis of patients who received repeated liver biopsies, the results showed a similar tendency. Conclusions: The LS value is affected by the degree of inflammation even at a low ALT level. Furthermore, baseline histologic inflammation has a significant impact on the improvement of LS values over time. Therefore, baseline inflammation should be taken into consideration when interpreting an improvement in LS value.

Seung Kak Shin, Hyung Joon Yim, Jeong Han Kim, Chan Uk Lee, Jong Eun Yeon, Sang Jun Suh, Young Kul Jung, Yun Soo Kim, Ju Hyun Kim, and Oh Sang Kwon. Gut and Liver 2021;15:430-9. https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl20074