Cited by 212

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Drug-induced liver injury: Pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical features, and practical management

Björnsson, HK, Björnsson, ES·2022·European Journal of Internal Medicine

Abstract

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is an important but rare adverse event which can range from mild liver enzyme elevations to liver failure, transplantation or death. A large proportion of commonly used medications, in addition to herbal and dietary supplements, can cause liver injury. DILI has been categorized as direct or idiosyncratic but indirect liver injury has emerged as a third type of drug-induced liver injury. These types of liver injury may warrant different clinical approach and treatment. Associations of HLA genotypes and risk of DILI have highlighted the importance of the immune system in the pathogenesis of DILI. Furthermore, novel agents affecting the immune response can lead to liver injury, often associated with autoimmune features in serologic tests and liver biopsies. Overall, the diagnosis of DILI remains a challenge as it is requires detailed case evaluation in addition to reviewing the hepatotoxic potentials and clinical signatures of the implicated agents. Biochemical profiles vary between agents and although individual drugs tend to portray a consistent clinicopathologic signature, many drugs have multiple signatures. Thanks to multicenter prospective studies on DILI and websites in the public domain such as LiverTox, physicians are provided with tools to investigate suspected DILI cases to increase the likelihood of establishing adiagnosis. The pathogenesis of DILI, epidemiology and current challenges in the diagnosis and management of the disease are…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejim.2021.10.035

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Idiosyncratic DILI is unpredictable, largely dose-independent, and symptoms may appear after a long latency period.

    “They are unpredictable, largely dose-independent, and symptoms may appear after a long latency period [7, 8].”
  • Direct hepatotoxicity symptoms appear quickly, within hours or days after exposure, and their severity depends on the drug dose taken.

    “Symptoms appear quickly, within hours or days after exposure, and their severity depends on the drug dose taken.”
  • Most DILIs are idiosyncratic.

    “Most DILIs are idiosyncratic.”
  • Indirect DILI reactions are generally independent of the dose of drug administered and have a latency of weeks to months with varying clinical manifestations.

    “Like idiosyncratic DILI, indirect reactions are generally independent of the dose of drug administered and have a latency of weeks to months with varying clinical manifestations [7-9].”
  • Some cases of DILI are due to direct reaction, which is predictable, dose-dependent and occurs in nearly all exposed individuals if a threshold dose or duration is exceeded.

    “Some cases of DILI are due to direct reaction, which is predictable, dose-dependent and occurs in nearly all exposed individuals if a threshold dose or duration is exceeded.”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Ostapowicz, 2002, Results of a prospective study of acute liver failure at 17 tertiary care centers in the United States, Ann Intern Med, 137, 947, 10.7326/0003-4819-137-12-200212170-00007 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Lammert, 2008, Relationship between daily dose of oral medications and idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury: search for signals, Hepatology, 47, 2003, 10.1002/hep.22272 · DOI
  3. Carrascosa, 2015, Acute liver failure following atorvastatin dose escalation: is there a threshold dose for idiosyncratic hepatotoxicity?, J Hepatol, 62, 751, 10.1016/j.jhep.2014.11.019 · DOI
  4. Miller, 2020, Clinical characteristics and adverse impact of hepatotoxicity due to immune checkpoint inhibitors, Am J Gastroenterol, 115, 251, 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000398 · DOI
  5. Bjornsson, 2016, Categorization of drugs implicated in causing liver injury: critical assessment based on published case reports, Hepatology, 63, 590, 10.1002/hep.28323 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Sgro, 2002, Incidence of drug-induced hepatic injuries: a French population-based study, Hepatology, 36, 451, 10.1053/jhep.2002.34857 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Danan, 1993, Causality assessment of adverse reactions to drugs–I. A novel method based on the conclusions of international consensus meetings: application to drug-induced liver injuries, J Clin Epidemiol, 46, 1323, 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90101-6 · DOI · Paper page
  8. de Boer, 2017, Features of autoimmune hepatitis in patients with drug-induced liver injury, Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 15, 103, 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.05.043 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Björnsson, 2021, Infliximab-induced liver injury: clinical phenotypes, autoimmunity and the role of corticosteroid treatment, J Hepatol
  10. Aithal, 2011, Case definition and phenotype standardization in drug-induced liver injury, Clin Pharmacol Ther, 89, 806, 10.1038/clpt.2011.58 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Stephens, 2021, Comprehensive analysis and insights gained from long-term experience of the Spanish DILI registry, J Hepatol, 10.1016/j.jhep.2021.01.029 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Bessone, 2016, The Latin American DILI Registry Experience: a Successful Ongoing Collaborative Strategic Initiative, Int J Mol Sci, 17, 313, 10.3390/ijms17030313 · DOI
  13. Chalasani, 2015, Features and Outcomes of 899 Patients With Drug-Induced Liver Injury: the DILIN Prospective Study, Gastroenterology, 148, 1340, 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.03.006 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Chalasani, 2008, Causes, clinical features, and outcomes from a prospective study of drug-induced liver injury in the United States, Gastroenterology, 135, 1924, 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.09.011 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Navarro, 2017, Liver Injury From Herbal and Dietary Supplements, Hepatology, 65, 363, 10.1002/hep.28813 · DOI
  16. Lucena, 2008, Liver injury induced by" natural remedies": an analysis of cases submitted to the Spanish Liver Toxicity Registry, Rev Esp Enferm Dig, 100, 688
  17. Navarro, 2013, Catechins in dietary supplements and hepatotoxicity, Dig Dis Sci, 58, 2682, 10.1007/s10620-013-2687-9 · DOI
  18. Krishnan, 2009, Prolonged intrahepatic cholestasis and renal failure secondary to anabolic androgenic steroid-enriched dietary supplements, J Clin Gastroenterol, 43, 672, 10.1097/MCG.0b013e318188be6d · DOI
  19. Andrade, 2005, Drug-induced liver injury: an analysis of 461 incidences submitted to the Spanish registry over a 10-year period, Gastroenterology, 129, 512, 10.1016/j.gastro.2005.05.006 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Breu, 2019, A Multicenter Study Into Causes of Severe Acute Liver Injury, Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 17, 1201, 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.08.016 · DOI
  21. Bjornsson, 2016, Bjornsson ES. A prospective study on the causes of notably raised alanine aminotransferase (ALT), Scand J Gastroenterol, 51, 594, 10.3109/00365521.2015.1121516 · DOI
  22. Bjornsson, 2005, Outcome and prognostic markers in severe drug-induced liver disease, Hepatology, 42, 481, 10.1002/hep.20800 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Lucena, 2006, Determinants of the clinical expression of amoxicillin-clavulanate hepatotoxicity: a prospective series from Spain, Hepatology, 44, 850, 10.1002/hep.21324 · DOI
  24. DeLeve, 2002, Toxic injury to hepatic sinusoids: sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (veno-occlusive disease). Seminars in liver disease, Thieme Medical Publishers, 27
  25. Wanless, 1990, Micronodular transpormation (nodular regenerative hyperplasia) of the liver: a report of 64 cases among 2,500 autopsies and a new classification of benign hepatocellular nodules, Hepatology, 11, 787, 10.1002/hep.1840110512 · DOI
  26. de Abajo, 2004, Acute and clinically relevant drug-induced liver injury: a population based case-control study, Br J Clin Pharmacol, 58, 71, 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2004.02133.x · DOI
  27. Bjornsson, 2010, Drug-induced autoimmune hepatitis: clinical characteristics and prognosis, Hepatology, 51, 2040, 10.1002/hep.23588 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Suzuki, 2011, The use of liver biopsy evaluation in discrimination of idiopathic autoimmune hepatitis versus drug-induced liver injury, Hepatology, 54, 931, 10.1002/hep.24481 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Friedman, 2016, Treatment of the immune-related adverse effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors: a review, JAMA Oncol, 2, 1346, 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.1051 · DOI
  30. Hayashi, 2017, Death and liver transplantation within 2 years of onset of drug-induced liver injury, Hepatology, 66, 1275, 10.1002/hep.29283 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Brahmer, 2018, Management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: american Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline, J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol, 36, 1714, 10.1200/JCO.2017.77.6385 · DOI · Paper page
  32. van Gerven, 2013, Relapse is almost universal after withdrawal of immunosuppressive medication in patients with autoimmune hepatitis in remission, J Hepatol, 58, 141, 10.1016/j.jhep.2012.09.009 · DOI
  33. Bjornsson, 2017, Drug-Induced Autoimmune Hepatitis: response to Corticosteroids and Lack of Relapse After Cessation of Steroids, Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 15, 1635, 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.05.027 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Björnsson, H., & Björnsson, E.
Venue
European Journal of Internal Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-03
Volume
97
Pages
26-31
ISSN
0953-6205
Cited by
212
References
4
Language
en
Funders
National Institutes of Health

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review