Evolving role of obeticholic acid in primary biliary cholangitis.

Abstract

Potential conflict of interest: Dr. Levy consults for and received grants from Intercept and Novartis. She consults for Target Pharma Solutions and Cara Therapeutics. She received grants from GlaxoSmithKline, Tobira, NGM, Enanta, HighTide, Genfit, Gilead and Genkyotek. SEE ARTICLE ON PAGE 1890 Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is an immune‐mediated cholestatic liver disease characterized by destruction of the small intrahepatic bile ducts; if left untreated, persistent inflammation and cholestasis lead to biliary cirrhosis and end‐stage liver disease. Although treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) definitely alters the course of PBC and improves transplant‐free survival, a considerable subset of patients continues to progress toward liver failure despite treatment.1 More recently, a better understanding of the role of bile acids (BAs) as enterohepatic hormones has led to development of new therapeutic options for patients with PBC. Through activation of nuclear receptors and G‐protein‐coupled receptor‐1 (TGR5), BAs regulate a number of physiological functions, including nutrient absorption, glucose and BA homeostasis, lipid metabolism, and inflammation pathways. Whereas BAs are the most efficacious ligands for farnesoid X receptor (FXR), BAs can also directly activate two other nuclear receptors, pregnane X receptor (PXR) and the vitamin D receptor, and impact several metabolic processes through a complex network of cell‐signaling pathways.2 FXR activation modulates BA homeostasis through a variety of mechanisms (Fig. 1), with a net effect of decreased synthesis of BAs, increased sinusoidal secretion, decreased hepatic uptake, and increased biliary secretion of BAs.2 The down‐regulation of inflammatory pathways and inhibition of atherosclerosis result predominantly from activation of TGR5 in brown adipocytes, hepatic Kupffer cells, gallbladder epithelium, and intestine. FXR agonists are currently under investigation for several liver diseases, including PBC, primary sclerosing cholangitis, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, alcoholic hepatitis, and portal hypertension.Figure 1: Impact of FXR activation on enterohepatic circulation of BA. FXR activation induces a negative nuclear receptor small heterodimer partner that inhibits transactivators of CYP7A1, thereby decreasing synthesis of BA, and induces the bile salt export pump and MDR 2/3, thus promoting secretion of conjugated BA and phosphatidylcholine in the bile canaliculi. FXR activation also down‐regulates ASBT, up‐regulates organic solute transporters α and β (OST‐α and OST‐β), and up‐regulates the Na+‐taurocholate co‐transporting polypeptide (NTCP), thus decreasing BA absorption in the enterocyte, increasing secretion into the portal circulation, and decreasing uptake into the hepatocyte. Another FXR‐dependent mechanism to down‐regulate BA synthesis is the induction of FGF19, an enteral hormone that travels to the liver and activates FGF receptor 4 to inhibit CYP7A1 mRNA expression. Abbreviations: ASBT, apical sodium‐dependent bile acid transporter; BSEP, bile salt export pump; CA, cholic acid; CDCA, chenodeoxycholic acid; CYP7A1, cytochrome P450 7A1; FGFR4, FGF receptor 4; MDR, multidrug resistance; OATP, organic anion transporting polypeptide.Obeticholic acid (OCA) is a synthetic BA with very strong FXR agonist activity. Following completion of a large international phase 3 study (The PBC OCA International Study of Efficacy; POISE), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted conditional approval for OCA as second‐line therapy in PBC, indicated in combination to UDCA for patients who had inadequate response after at least 1 year of treatment with UDCA or as monotherapy for those who were intolerant to UDCA.3 In the POISE trial, only 7% of enrolled patients were not taking UDCA and questions remain about the use of OCA as monotherapy. In this issue of Hepatology, Kowdley et al. report results of a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial investigating the use of OCA as monotherapy for PBC.4 The study aimed to enroll 40 patients in each of the three arms (placebo, OCA 10 mg/day, and OCA 50 mg/day), but enrollment was slow and the final sample size was of approximately 20 patients each. This was not surprising given the rarity of PBC and the widespread use of UDCA. Despite the reduced power, significant changes were noted in serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP), with a 53.9% reduction in the 10‐mg arm and 39.2% reduction in the 50‐mg arm, but no change in the placebo arm. Serum levels of conjugated bilirubin, another important prognostic marker in PBC, improved in OCA‐treated patients. The effect of OCA on ALP in the extended treatment phase was a lasting one. As observed in the POISE trial, pruritus was the most common adverse event, leading to a 35% discontinuation rate in the high‐dose group. Among the secondary endpoints, investigators observed a dose‐dependent increase in fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19), consistent with FXR activation. However, reductions in BA levels were not detected, possibly attributed to the small sample size. This may also have limited the investigators' ability to evaluate the impact of OCA on the enhanced liver fibrosis scores and inflammatory markers. Finally, patient‐reported outcomes were used as secondary endpoints and patients on OCA showed worsening in the itching domain and improvement in the fatigue domain of the PBC‐40. A few points deserve note. First, at the time of the design and conduct of this trial, OCA was not yet approved for the treatment of PBC. The goal of clarifying the role of OCA as monotherapy was a worthy one, but we now know patients' tolerance is substantially improved by using a lower dose, 5 mg/day, and titrating up to 10 mg/day as tolerated. Furthermore, the FDA issued a drug safety communication on September 21, 2017 describing cases of severe liver injury occurring in patients taking OCA. While the causation is still being investigated, it served as a clear reminder that doses must be adjusted in patients with moderate‐to‐severe liver impairment (Child B and C): In these patients, starting dose is 5 mg/week, and this can be increased to a maximal dose 10 mg/twice a week depending on response to therapy and tolerability. A dose of 50 mg/day should never be used even in patients with preserved synthetic function. Second, a beneficial effect on survival has not been demonstrated with OCA monotherapy. Highly accurate models are used to risk stratify patients with PBC and guide our decision‐making process with respect to treatment options.5 These models were applied to patients participating in POISE, and results indicate a significant decrease in 15‐year cumulative incidence of decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplant, or liver‐related death,7 suggesting a potential survival benefit with combination of UDCA and OCA. Kowdley et al. performed post‐hoc analyses implying a benefit of OCA monotherapy in survival based on these same models. However, the models were designed for patients who have been treated with UDCA for at least 1 year and do not apply to the study population enrolled in this monotherapy trial. Thus, results of this post‐hoc assessment should be interpreted with caution. Third, as observed in POISE, use of OCA led to decrease in total cholesterol levels largely attributed to decrease in high‐density lipoproteins (HDLs), with increase in low‐density lipoproteins (LDLs) and no change in triglycerides. Although the lipid profile may be adversely affected by OCA, it is remarkable that even with this decrease in HDL, the median values remained within normal range. HDL is typically elevated in patients with PBC and early/intermediate disease stage. In fact, LDL is also elevated and enriched with lipoprotein X, which has antiatherogenic properties. A better understanding of cholesterol composition in patients with PBC treated with OCA is needed; a study evaluating the effect of OCA on lipoprotein metabolism is complete and results are awaited (NCT01865812). Last, in the OCA monotherapy study, 50% of treated patients reached a serum ALP below 1.67 × the upper limit of normal and only 25% patients on 10 mg/day of OCA normalized ALP. This response represents a major advance for patients who are intolerant to UDCA. However, it also highlights a persistent unmet need in PBC. In this regard, novel therapies are being developed including other FXR agonists and drugs targeting a different nuclear receptor also involved in BA homeostasis: the peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor (PPAR‐α and PPAR‐δ).8 Use of fibrates, which are PPAR‐α agonists, has been examined in patients with PBC and incomplete response to UDCA with beneficial effects on all serum liver biochemistries, fibrosis scores, and itching severity.9 Similarly, a selective PPAR‐δ also led to improvement in ALP and is undergoing further evaluation.10 It is a promising time for patients with PBC! The first therapy approved for PBC in 20 years, OCA may not be the final answer, but it certainly advanced our knowledge and opened the doors to new developments in the field.