IntroductionThe presence of liver cirrhosis can have a major impact on pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics, but guidance for prescribing is lacking.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to provide an overview of evidence-based recommendations developed for the safe use of drugs in liver cirrhosis.MethodsRecommendations were based on a systematic literature search combined with expert opinion from a panel of 10 experts. The safety of each drug was classified as safe, no additional risks known, additional risks known, unsafe, unknown or the safety class was dependent on the severity of liver cirrhosis (Child–Pugh classification). If applicable, drug-specific dosing advice was provided. All recommendations were implemented in clinical decision support systems and on a website.ResultsWe formulated 218 recommendations for a total of 209 drugs. For nine drugs, two recommendations were formulated for different administration routes or indications. Drugs were classified as ‘safe’ in 29 recommendations (13.3%), ‘no additional risks known’ in 60 (27.5%), ‘additional risks known’ in 3 (1.4%), and ‘unsafe’ in 30 (13.8%). In 57 (26.1%) of the recommendations, safety depended on the severity of liver cirrhosis and was ‘unknown’ in 39 (17.9%) recommendations. Large alterations in pharmacodynamics were the main reason for classifying a drug as ‘unsafe’. For 67 drugs (31%), a dose adjustment was needed.ConclusionsOver 200 recommendations were developed for the safe use of drugs in patients with liver cirrhosis. Implementing these recommendations into clinical practice can possibly enhance medication safety in this vulnerable patient group.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-017-0635-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction Patients with cirrhosis are at risk for adverse drug reactions (ADRs) due to altered pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. We aimed to determine the prevalence of drug prescriptions and the potential safety of these prescriptions in a real-world cohort of patients with cirrhosis. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study based on linked real-world data from the Out-patient Pharmacy Database and the Hospitalisation Database of the PHARMO Database Network. Patients with a diagnosis of cirrhosis between January 1998 and December 2015 were included. Follow-up ended when the patient underwent a liver transplant, died, transferred out of the database, or on 31 December 2015. Prescription data were derived from a community pharmacy database and were compared with our previously developed safety recommendations for 209 drugs. Results In total, 5618 patients were included and followed for a median of 3 years (interquartile range [IQR] 1–7). In the first year after the diagnosis, patients used a median of nine drugs (IQR 5–14), with proton pump inhibitors (prevalence 53.9%), aldosterone antagonists (43.6%), and sulfonamide diuretics (41.3%) being the most commonly used drug groups. Almost half (48.3%) of 102,927 prescriptions consisted of drugs with a safety recommendation. The prevalence of potentially unsafe drug use was 60.0% during the total follow-up. Three nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were among the five most commonly used potentially unsafe drugs. Conclusions Patients with cirrhosis use a large number of drugs. Almost two-thirds of patients in our cohort used potentially unsafe drugs. To prevent ADRs in these frail patients, personalised pharmacotherapy is necessary. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-018-0744-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IntroductionLiver cirrhosis can have a major impact on drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Patients with cirrhosis often suffer from potentially preventable adverse drug reactions. Guidelines on safe prescribing for these patients are lacking. The aim of this study is to develop a systematic method for evaluating the safety and optimal dosage of drugs in patients with liver cirrhosis.Methods and analysisFor each drug, a six-step evaluation process will be followed. (1) Available evidence on the pharmacokinetics and safety of a drug in patients with liver cirrhosis will be collected from the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) and a systematic literature review will be performed. (2) Data regarding two outcomes, namely pharmacokinetics and safety, will be extracted and presented in a standardised assessment report. (3) A safety classification and dosage suggestion will be proposed for each drug. (4) An expert panel will discuss the validity and clinical relevance of this suggested advice. (5) Advices will be implemented in all relevant Clinical Decision Support Systems in the Netherlands and published on a website for patients and healthcare professionals. (6) The continuity of the advices will be guaranteed by a yearly check of new literature and comments on the advices. This protocol will be applied in the evaluation of a selection of drugs: (A) drugs used to treat (complications of) liver cirrhosis, and (B) drugs frequently prescribed to the general population.Ethics and disseminationSince this study does not directly involve human participants, it does not require ethical clearance. Besides implementation on a website and in clinical decision support systems, we aim to publish the generated advices of one or two drug classes in a peer-reviewed journal and at conference meetings.

AimsProton pump inhibitors (PPIs) belong to the most frequently used drugs, also in patients with cirrhosis. PPIs are extensively metabolized by the liver, but practice guidance on prescribing in cirrhosis is lacking. We aim to develop practical guidance on the safe use of PPIs in patients with cirrhosis.MethodsA systematic literature search identified studies on the safety (i.e. adverse events) and pharmacokinetics of PPIs in cirrhotic patients. This evidence and data from the product information was reviewed by an expert panel who classified drugs as safe; no additional risks known; additional risks known; unsafe; or unknown. Guidance was aimed at the oral use of PPIs and categorized by the severity of cirrhosis, using the Child–Turcotte–Pugh (CTP) classification.ResultsA total of 69 studies were included. Esomeprazole, omeprazole and rabeprazole were classified as having ‘no additional risks known’. A reduction in maximum dose of omeprazole and rabeprazole is recommended for CTP A and B patients. For patients with CTP C cirrhosis, the only PPI advised is esomeprazole at a maximum dosage of 20 mg per day. Pantoprazole and lansoprazole were classified as unsafe because of 4‐ to 8‐fold increased exposure. The use of PPIs in cirrhotic patients has been associated with the development of infections and hepatic encephalopathy and should be carefully considered.ConclusionsWe suggest using esomeprazole, omeprazole or rabeprazole in patients with CTP A or B cirrhosis and only esomeprazole in patients with CTP C. Pharmacokinetic changes are also important to consider when prescribing PPIs to vulnerable, cirrhotic patients.

Introduction: The global burden of cirrhosis is rising, and clinicians increasingly face the challenge of safely prescribing medicines for complications of hepatic disease and comorbidities. Prescribing in patients with cirrhosis is complicated by alterations that can occur in the pharmacology of medicines. Areas covered: This paper provides an overview of current knowledge on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medicines in patients with cirrhosis. We describe the pathophysiological changes that occur and their consequences on pharmacokinetic parameters. We explain that the influence of cirrhosis on the pharmacokinetics depends on several drug and patient characteristics. Patients with cirrhosis also have an increased susceptibility to some toxicological effects of medicines, such as renal impairment and hematological toxicity, which we describe in detail. In addition, we discuss approaches to apply this knowledge in practice and improve safe medication use in patients with cirrhosis. Expert opinion: Tailored pharmacotherapy is needed to ensure safe and appropriate use of medicines in patients with cirrhosis. Clinicians are supported by freely available recommendations on safe drug use in cirrhosis published on a website. In addition, a regular evaluation of medication use in patients with cirrhosis could resolve and prevent medication-related problems.

Background: In 2005, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) released guidance on pharmacokinetic studies in patients with hepatic impairment. This guidance describes the design of these studies and what information should be presented in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC). We aim to evaluate the availability and clinical applicability of information on medicine use in patients with hepatic impairment in SmPCs and registrational dossiers of recently approved medicines. Methods: We reviewed SmPC information on use in patients with hepatic impairment of 51 new medicines authorized between 2015 and 2017. Per medicine, we assessed the availability of nine information items derived from the EMA guidance, i.e. type of hepatic disease studied; stratification by severity of hepatic impairment; influence of hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics; safety advice in mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairments; and dosing recommendation in mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairments. If unavailable, the European Public Assessment Report (EPAR) and study report were consulted consecutively. Of available items, clinical applicability was assessed by labeling information as “clear” or “ambiguous”. Results: Of 51 medicines, 15 had no pharmacokinetic study in patients with hepatic impairment described in their SmPC. The other 36 SmPCs contained on average seven of the nine information items (range 4–9). One SmPC contained all 9 items, and after consulting, the study reports, 11 SmPCs were complete. The item “type of hepatic disease studied” was available in one SmPC, though it could be retrieved in 21 study reports. Regarding clinical applicability, there was no medicine with all information items available and clearly formulated in the SmPC. A total of 12 medicines (33%) contained only clearly formulated information, while 24 (67%) contained at least one ambiguously formulated information item (range 0–4). Items often ambiguously formulated were: “definition of mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairment” (15 ambiguous SmPCs) and “safety advice in severe hepatic impairment” (17 ambiguous SmPCs). Conclusion: While SmPCs contain a large part of information requested by the EMA, clinical applicability seems low, as it is often unclear to which specific type of hepatic disease patient the advice applies. This can negatively influence the practical use by healthcare professionals.

Patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) are becoming increasingly complex due to the rising prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Medications are often essential to manage the underlying liver disease, complications of cirrhosis and portal hypertension, and comorbidities. However, medication‐related problems (MRPs) have been associated with adverse patient outcomes, including hospitalization and mortality. Factors that can contribute to MRPs in people with CLD are variable and often entwined. This narrative literature review discusses key barriers and opportunities to modify risk factors and improve medication‐related outcomes for people with CLD.

Older patients with hepatotoxicity have been scarcely studied in idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury (DILI) cohorts. We sought the distinctive characteristics of DILI in older patients across age groups. A total of 882 DILI patients included in the Spanish DILI Registry (33% ≥ 65 years) were categorized according to age: "young" (< 65 years); "young-old" (65-74 years); "middle-old" (75-84 years); and "oldest-old" (≥ 85 years). All elderly groups had an increasingly higher comorbidity burden (P < 0.001) and polypharmacy (P < 0.001). There was a relationship between jaundice and hospitalization (P < 0.001), and both were more prevalent in the older age groups, especially in the oldest-old (88% and 69%, respectively), and the DILI episode was more severe (P = 0.029). The proportion of females decreased across age groups from the young to the middle-old, yet in the oldest-old there was a distinct female predominance. Pattern of liver injury shifted towards cholestatic with increasing age among top culprit drugs amoxicillin-clavulanate, atorvastatin, levofloxacin, ibuprofen, and ticlopidine. The best cutoff point for increased odds of cholestatic DILI was 65 years. Older patients had increased non-liver-related mortality (P = 0.030) as shown by the predictive capacity of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (odds ratio (OR) = 1.116; P < 0.001), and comorbidity burden (OR = 4.188; P = 0.001) in the 6-month mortality. Older patients with DILI exhibited an increasingly predominant cholestatic phenotype across a range of culprit drugs, other than amoxicillin-clavulanate, with increased non-liver-related mortality and require a different approach to predict outcome. The oldest DILI patients exhibited a particular phenotype with more severe DILI episodes and need to be considered when stratifying older DILI populations.