No abstract

Herb induced liver injury (HILI) and drug induced liver injury (DILI) share the common characteristic of chemical compounds as their causative agents, which were either produced by the plant or synthetic processes. Both, natural and synthetic chemicals are foreign products to the body and need metabolic degradation to be eliminated. During this process, hepatotoxic metabolites may be generated causing liver injury in susceptible patients. There is uncertainty, whether risk factors such as high lipophilicity or high daily and cumulative doses play a pathogenetic role for HILI, as these are under discussion for DILI. It is also often unclear, whether a HILI case has an idiosyncratic or an intrinsic background. Treatment with herbs of Western medicine or traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) rarely causes elevated liver tests (LT). However, HILI can develop to acute liver failure requiring liver transplantation in single cases. HILI is a diagnosis of exclusion, because clinical features of HILI are not specific as they are also found in many other liver diseases unrelated to herbal use. In strikingly increased liver tests signifying severe liver injury, herbal use has to be stopped. To establish HILI as the cause of liver damage, RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) is a useful tool. Diagnostic problems may emerge when alternative causes were not carefully excluded and the correct therapy is withheld. Future strategies should focus on RUCAM based causality assessment in suspected HILI cases and more regulatory efforts to provide all herbal medicines and herbal dietary supplements used as medicine with strict regulatory surveillance, considering them as herbal drugs and ascertaining an appropriate risk benefit balance.

totoxicity cases, compared to numerous other causality assessment methods, which are inferior on various grounds. Among these disputed methods are the Maria and Victorino scale, an insufficiently qualified, shortened version of the CIOMS scale, as well as various liver unspecific methods such as the ad hoc causality approach, the Naranjo scale, the World Health Organization (WHO) method, and the Karch and Lasagna method. An expert panel is required for the Drug Induced Liver Injury Network method, the WHO method, and other approaches based on expert opinion, which provide retrospective analyses with a long delay and thereby prevent a timely assessment of the illness in question by the physician. In conclusion, HILI causality assessment is challenging and is best achieved by the liver specific CIOMS scale, avoiding pitfalls commonly observed with other approaches.© 2013 Baishideng. All rights reserved.Key words: Herbal hepatotoxicity; Herb induced liver injury; Herbs; Drug hepatotoxicity; Drug induced liver injury; Causality assessment Core tip: This review focuses on diagnostic causality assessment algorithms that have been used so far in herb induced liver injury (HILI) cases. Detailed information of the various methods with their strengths and weaknesses is provided including their challenges and pitfalls that emerged during the assessing course. For the physician caring for a patient with suspected HILI, the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) scale is the preferred tool for assessing causality compared to numerous other causality assessment methods, which are inferior on various grounds. CIOMS based assessment should start at the day HILI is suspected to ensure completeness of clinical data. AbstractThe diagnosis of herbal hepatotoxicity or herb induced liver injury (HILI) represents a particular clinical and regulatory challenge with major pitfalls for the causality evaluation. At the day HILI is suspected in a patient, physicians should start assessing the quality of the used herbal product, optimizing the clinical data for completeness, and applying the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) scale for initial causality assessment. This scale is structured, quantitative, liver specific, and validated for hepatotoxicity cases. Its items provide individual scores, which together yield causality levels of highly probable, probable, possible, unlikely, and excluded. After completion by additional information including raw data, this scale with all items should be reported to regulatory agencies and manufacturers for further evaluation. The CIOMS scale is preferred as tool for assessing causality in hepa-

The authors call for substantial improvements in data quality of herbal products and case characteristics and strongly recommend using the CIOMS scale to assess causality in suspected herbal hepatotoxicity.