Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
J Hepatol. 2010 Jul;53(1):191-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2010.01.037. Epub 2010 Mar 30.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Predniso(lo)ne with or without azathioprine is considered the mainstay in the treatment of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), but many therapeutic options are available. The primary objective of this review was to explore the published literature on the optimal induction and subsequent maintenance therapy for AIH.
We performed a systematic search on electronic databases MEDLINE (1950-07.2009), Web of Science, Cochrane, and the website www.clinicaltrials.gov. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on apparent beneficial treatment regimens as induction or maintenance treatment in AIH were included. Pediatric studies were excluded. We calculated relative risks (RR) for comparison of treatment options on the primary outcome measure, which was defined as clinical, biochemical and histological remission.
Eleven RCTs were included, of which 7 studies evaluated the induction therapy in AIH patients: 3 treatment naive (n=253), 2 relapse (n=53), 2 combination of naive and relapse (n=110). The remaining 4 studies (n=162) assessed maintenance therapy. All but one maintenance study (thymostimulin versus no therapy) studied predniso(lo)ne (PRED), azathioprine (AZA) or combination PRED+AZA. We found no differences in primary outcome between induction therapy with PRED and PRED+AZA in treatment naive patients (RR=0.98; 95% CI 0.65-1.47). AZA monotherapy as induction was considered as not viable because of a high mortality rate (30%). This was similar in AIH patients who relapsed: RR for PRED versus PRED+AZA for inducing remission was not different: 0.71 (95% CI 0.37-1.39). PRED+AZA maintained remission more often than PRED (RR=1.40; 95% CI 1.13-1.73). Also AZA maintained a higher remission rate than PRED (RR=1.35; 95% CI 1.07-1.70). Maintenance of remission was not different between PRED+AZA and AZA (RR=1.06; 95% CI 0.94-1.20).
Based on available RCTs, PRED monotherapy and PRED+AZA combination therapy are both viable induction therapies for AIH treatment naives and relapsers, while for maintenance therapy PRED+AZA and AZA therapy are superior to PRED monotherapy.
泼尼松(lo)与或不与硫唑嘌呤联合被认为是治疗自身免疫性肝炎(AIH)的主要方法,但有许多治疗选择。本综述的主要目的是探讨已发表的关于 AIH 的最佳诱导和随后维持治疗的文献。
我们在电子数据库 MEDLINE(1950-07.2009)、Web of Science、Cochrane 和 www.clinicaltrials.gov 上进行了系统检索。纳入了关于 AIH 诱导和维持治疗的明显有益治疗方案的随机对照试验(RCT)。排除儿科研究。我们计算了治疗选择的相对风险(RR),以作为主要结局指标,即定义为临床、生化和组织学缓解。
纳入了 11 项 RCT,其中 7 项研究评估了 AIH 患者的诱导治疗:3 项为初治患者(n=253),2 项为复发患者(n=53),2 项为初治和复发患者联合治疗(n=110)。其余 4 项研究(n=162)评估了维持治疗。除了一项维持治疗研究(胸腺素与无治疗)外,所有研究均研究了泼尼松(PRED)、硫唑嘌呤(AZA)或 PRED+AZA 联合治疗。我们发现初治患者中 PRED 与 PRED+AZA 诱导治疗的主要结局无差异(RR=0.98;95%CI 0.65-1.47)。AZA 单药治疗作为诱导治疗因死亡率高(30%)而不可行。在复发患者中情况相似:诱导缓解时 PRED 与 PRED+AZA 的 RR 无差异:0.71(95%CI 0.37-1.39)。PRED+AZA 比 PRED 更能维持缓解(RR=1.40;95%CI 1.13-1.73)。AZA 也比 PRED 维持更高的缓解率(RR=1.35;95%CI 1.07-1.70)。PRED+AZA 与 AZA 维持缓解的差异无统计学意义(RR=1.06;95%CI 0.94-1.20)。
基于现有 RCT,PRED 单药治疗和 PRED+AZA 联合治疗均为 AIH 初治和复发患者的可行诱导治疗方法,而在维持治疗方面,PRED+AZA 和 AZA 治疗优于 PRED 单药治疗。