Literature DB >> 26159261

How to Diagnose and Exclude Drug-Induced Liver Injury.

Paul B Watkins1.   

Abstract

The diagnosis of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is largely a diagnosis of exclusion because, with the possible exception of protein:drug adducts in paracetamol overdose, there are no laboratory, biopsy or imaging tests that alone are capable of establishing an unequivocal diagnosis of DILI. However, it is increasingly appreciated that drugs that cause DILI typically have characteristic clinical presentations or 'signatures' that can be very useful in the diagnosis of DILI. Indeed, knowing a drug's DILI signature (or sometimes signatures) and the incidence rate of DILI during treatment with that drug are perhaps the most useful pieces of historical information in arriving at the diagnosis of DILI. Components of the signature include the typical latency from the onset of treatment, whether there are extrahepatic manifestations, whether the injury is hepatocellular, cholestatic or mixed, and sometimes characteristic features on biopsy or serological testing (e.g. liver autoantibodies). A major advance has been the establishment of the LiverTox website (http://livertox.nih.gov/) which provides open access to standardized entries for over 600 different drugs, including the characteristic clinical presentations of DILI when known. LiverTox will also calculate the causality score for individual cases using the RUCAM instrument and case-specific data entered by the site user. However, the problem with standard diagnostic instruments such as the RUCAM is that DILI signatures are not incorporated into the scoring system. The person entering data must therefore subjectively weigh the RUCAM score with the characteristic DILI signature(s) of the drug to arrive at a diagnosis. In the future, it should be possible to construct improved diagnostic instruments that objectively incorporate DILI signatures, data-based estimates of the incidence rates of DILI from each implicated drug, and perhaps genetic variants associated with the risk of DILI.
© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26159261     DOI: 10.1159/000374091

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis        ISSN: 0257-2753            Impact factor:   2.404


  6 in total

Review 1.  Drug-induced liver injury: Advances in mechanistic understanding that will inform risk management.

Authors:  M Mosedale; P B Watkins
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 6.875

Review 2.  The Honolulu Liver Disease Cluster at the Medical Center: Its Mysteries and Challenges.

Authors:  Rolf Teschke; Axel Eickhoff
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 3.  Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method for Drug-Induced Liver Injury: Present and Future.

Authors:  Gaby Danan; Rolf Teschke
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 5.810

Review 4.  Idiosyncratic DILI: Analysis of 46,266 Cases Assessed for Causality by RUCAM and Published From 2014 to Early 2019.

Authors:  Rolf Teschke
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2019-07-23       Impact factor: 5.810

5.  The genetic variants in calcium signaling related genes influence anti-tuberculosis drug induced liver injury: A prospective study.

Authors:  Mengyuan Lyu; Jian Zhou; Hao Chen; Hao Bai; Jiajia Song; Tangyuheng Liu; Yuhui Cheng; Binwu Ying
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 6.  Overview of Causality Assessment for Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI) in Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Juliana Hey-Hadavi; Daniel Seekins; Melissa Palmer; Denise Coffey; John Caminis; Sandzhar Abdullaev; Meenal Patwardhan; Haifa Tyler; Ritu Raheja; Ann Marie Stanley; Liliam Pineda-Salgado; David L Bourdet; Raul J Andrade; Paul H Hayashi; Lara Dimick-Santos; Don C Rockey; Alvin Estilo
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 5.606

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.