MASLD after hepatitis C virus eradication: Do not overlook the cardiometabolic risk factors: Editorial on “Dynamic change of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease in chronic hepatitis C patients after viral eradication: A nationwide registry study in Taiwan”

Article information

Clin Mol Hepatol. 2025;31(1):290-292
Publication date (electronic) : 2024 August 7
doi : https://doi.org/10.3350/cmh.2024.0630
1Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong
2State Key Laboratory of Liver Research, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Corresponding author : Lung-Yi Mak Department of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong Tel: +852-22554477, Fax: +852-28175115, E-mail: loeymak@gmail.com
Editor: Han Ah Lee, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Korea
Received 2024 August 4; Accepted 2024 August 7.

Oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) can effectively induce sustained virological response (SVR) in over 95% of patients, revolutionizing the care of chronic hepatitis C (CHC). As we stand in the midst of the DAA era, the focus on CHC care has gradually shifted from attaining SVR to post-treatment follow-up and management of co-morbid conditions [1]. One major co-morbid condition in CHC is steatotic liver disease (SLD). Unlike the interaction between hepatitis B and steatosis—which involves interaction of distinct disease entities [2,3], the hepatitis C virus (HCV) is known to have steatogenic properties [4]. HCV can induce steatosis through alteration of lipid metabolism by the HCV core protein [5], or through induction of insulin resistance (in HCV genotype 3) [6]. HCV eradication may reverse cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRFs) and SLD, potentially reducing risks of long-term cardiovascular adverse events [7-9]. Conversely, pre-SVR or post-SVR SLD can increase risks of both liver-related and cardiovascular adverse outcomes [10-12]. The impact of HCV eradication on SLD evolution has important implications on patient management, yet the data in this area remains limited.

In this issue, Huang et al. presented data from a large Taiwan cohort of 5,840 CHC patients (mean age 62.7, 33.7% cirrhotic at baseline) who achieved SVR with DAAs [13]. The patients received comprehensive SLD and CMRF workup at baseline (pre-treatment) and at six months after HCV cure. The proportion of patients with CMRFs, SLD, and metabolic-associated SLD (MASLD) at baseline were 87.8%, 36.8%, and 34.0% respectively, and these numbers were 87.4%, 37.5%, and 34.8% at six months after SVR respectively. The proportion of patients with CMRFs, SLD and MASLD remained comparable at baseline and at follow-up. Nonetheless, a dynamic shift in CMRF and SLD status was noted. Among patients with CMRFs at baseline, 3.4% had resolved CMRFs after SVR; whereas among patients without CMRFs at baseline, 20.6% had de-novo CMRF development after SVR. Among baseline MASLD patients, 27.6% became MASLD-free at follow-up; whereas 15.4% of baseline non-MASLD patients developed MASLD after SVR. Importantly, resolution of SLD after achieving SVR was more common in those without baseline CMRF than those with baseline CMRF (41.6% vs. 26.4%), with the cardiometabolic profile maintained even with resolution of SLD. These results remained robust after stratifying patients by HCV genotype (genotype 3 or other genotypes), diabetes status, body mass index (BMI) and cirrhosis status. In multivariate analysis, higher baseline BMI, glycated hemoglobin and low-density lipoprotein were the independent predictors of MASLD development respectively. In contrast, lower baseline BMI was the only factor independently associated with MASLD resolution. Other patient factors including age, sex, cirrhosis status, liver function, HCV viral load and HCV genotype were not associated with MASLD evolution after HCV cure. Overall, Huang’s study provided important data on the dynamic metabolic alterations after HCV cure.

The European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) published a position paper in 2024 describing post-HCV treatment care [14]. EASL recommends that patients without advanced fibrosis at baseline can be discharged to primary care, and patients with liver stiffness ≥10 kPa or FIB-4 >3.25 should continue follow-up by hepatologists. For patients with liver stiffness between 8–10 kPa or FIB-4 between 1.45–3.25, assessment of MASLD or alcohol status is required, with subsequent recommendations of lifestyle changes and reassessment by non-invasive tests. Nonetheless, the position paper highlighted that post-HCV follow-up protocols for MASLD has not been well-established. The prognostic implications of fibrosis evolution after SVR, as measured by serial non-invasive testing, is also unclear [14].

The 2024 EASL MASLD guidelines suggest that MASLD screening in the general population is not recommended, yet screening in specific high-risk populations can be considered [15]. As Huang’s study demonstrated high prevalence of CMRFs (87.8% at baseline, 87.4% at follow-up) and MASLD (34.0% at baseline, 34.8% at follow-up) in CHC patients [14], solely assessing MASLD status in CHC patients with borderline fibrosis at baseline may not suffice, and universal MASLD screening in HCV patients may be warranted. We hence propose an updated algorithm with comprehensive metabolic assessment before and after HCV cure in all CHC patients (Fig. 1).

Figure 1.

Proposed algorithm to incorporate metabolic assessment in hepatitis C care. HCV, hepatitis C virus; MASLD, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease; CMRF, cardiometabolic risk factor.

With our proposed algorithm of metabolic assessment, we will be able to assess the dynamic shifts of CMRFs and MASLD status with HCV eradication. More importantly, we can document post-treatment CMRF and MASLD in all patients, ensuring that patients will be appropriately managed and not lost to follow-up. For patients with MASLD, smooth transition to MASLD care pathways can also be initiated. With fibrosis assessment already performed in HCV man-agement, the transition to MASLD care should be streamlined and would require minimal additional resources. While the cost-effectiveness and long-term benefits of our proposed algorithm remains to be determined, our integrated algorithm will likely improve risk stratification and enable personalization of follow-up after HCV cure.

With enhanced efforts in HCV eradication and the growing obesity pandemic, the number of patients with MASLD after HCV eradication is anticipated to increase. The paper by Huang et al. provided important data on the dynamic shift of MASLD status after HCV cure. Furthermore, the paper highlighted that CMRFs remain as the key drivers of MASLD resolution and development respectively. CMRFs and MASLD should not be overlooked in CHC, and actions must be taken to improve patient care pathways after HCV cure.

Notes

Authors’ contribution

RWH Hui conceptualized and wrote the article. LY Mak conceptualized and supervised the writing. All authors have approved the final version of this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts to disclose.

Abbreviations

BMI

body mass index

CHC

chronic hepatitis C

CMRF

cardiometabolic risk factor

DAA

direct-acting antiviral

EASL

European Association for the Study of the Liver

HCV

hepatitis C virus

MASLD

metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease

SLD

steatotic liver disease

SVR

sustained virological response

References

1. Hui RW, Fung J. World hepatitis day 2023: Are we close to the target? Indian J Med Res 2023;158:1–4.
2. Mak LY, Hui RW, Fung J, Liu F, Wong DK, Cheung KS, et al. Diverse effects of hepatic steatosis on fibrosis progression and functional cure in virologically quiescent chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol 2020;73:800–806.
3. Hui RWH, Seto WK, Cheung KS, Mak LY, Liu KSH, Fung J, et al. Inverse relationship between hepatic steatosis and hepatitis B viremia: Results of a large case-control study. J Viral Hepat 2018;25:97–104.
4. Asselah T, Rubbia-Brandt L, Marcellin P, Negro F. Steatosis in chronic hepatitis C: why does it really matter? Gut 2006;55:123–130.
5. Moriya K, Yotsuyanagi H, Shintani Y, Fujie H, Ishibashi K, Matsuura Y, et al. Hepatitis C virus core protein induces hepatic steatosis in transgenic mice. J Gen Virol 1997;78:1527–1531.
6. Abenavoli L, Masarone M, Peta V, Milic N, Kobyliak N, Rouab hia S, et al. Insulin resistance and liver steatosis in chronic hepatitis C infection genotype 3. World J Gastroenterol 2014;20:15233–15240.
7. Yuan M, Zhou J, Du L, Yan L, Tang H. Hepatitis C virus clearance with glucose improvement and factors affecting the glucose control in chronic hepatitis C patients. Sci Rep 2020;10:1976.
8. Su X, Zhao X, Deng JL, Li SN, Du X, Dong JZ, et al. Antiviral treatment for hepatitis C is associated with a reduced risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Viral Hepat 2021;28:664–671.
9. Casas-Deza D, Martínez-Sapiña A, Espina S, Garcia-Rodriguez B, Fernandez-Bonilla EM, Sanz-Paris A, et al. Evaluation of cardiovascular risk factors after hepatitis C virus eradication with direct-acting antivirals in a cohort of treatment-naïve patients without history of cardiovascular disease. J Clin Med 2022;11:4049.
10. Yen YH, Lin MT, Kuo FY, Chang KC, Tsai MC, Tseng PL, et al. The association between steatosis and diabetes with hepatocellular carcinoma in non-genotype 3 chronic hepatitis C patients. Liver Int 2018;38:1064–1073.
11. Sano T, Amano K, Ide T, Isoda H, Honma Y, Morita Y, et al. Metabolic management after sustained virologic response in elderly patients with hepatitis C virus: A multicenter study. Hepatol Res 2024;54:326–335.
12. Tsai PS, Cheng YM, Wang CC, Kao JH. The impact of concomitant hepatitis C virus infection on liver and cardiovascular risks in patients with metabolic-associated fatty liver disease. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023;35:1278–1283.
13. Huang CF, Dai CY, Lin YH, et al. Dynamic change of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease in chronic hepatitis C patients after viral eradication: A nationwide registry study in Taiwan. Clin Mol Hepatol 2024;30:883–894.
14. Reiberger T, Lens S, Cabibbo G, Nahon P, Zignego AL, Deterding K, et al. EASL position paper on clinical follow-up after HCV cure. J Hepatol 2024;81:326–344.
15. European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), ; European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), ; European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO). EASL-EASD-EASO Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). J Hepatol 2024;81:492–542.

Article information Continued

Figure 1.

Proposed algorithm to incorporate metabolic assessment in hepatitis C care. HCV, hepatitis C virus; MASLD, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease; CMRF, cardiometabolic risk factor.