I was interested to read the findings of Durelli et. al.[1] regarding
raised liver enzymes associated with beta-interferon-1b treatment. I find
their conclusion that ‘there is no need for repeated assessment of (liver
function) in MS patients treated with IFN-beta’ disturbingly hasty given
the evidence. Firstly their study only focuses on one of the beta-
interferons – Betaferon (IFNB-1b). The incidence of raised liver enzymes
found during the clinical trials of Betaferon, Avonex (beta interferon-1a)
and Rebif (beta-interferon-1a) varies considerably. Their conclusion
therefore is only applicable to Betaferon and cannot automatically be
extended to the other interferons without further studies. Secondly their
study followed only 156 RRMS patients over 2 years, totaling 312 patient
years. Assuming no background incidence of the adverse event in this
population, at best they have a 95% chance of finding an adverse event
with an incidence of 1 in 104. [2] To put this into perspective, the FDA
has stated that withdrawal of a drug should occur if the incidence of
severe liver injury is 1 in 10,000 or greater, unless the drug treats a
‘lethal disease.’ [3] To detect such an incidence, at least 30,000 treated
patient-years are required in order to have a 95% chance of detection. [2]
Drug-induced liver hepatotoxicty is the single most common reason for
withdrawal or limited clinical use of a drug. [3] The reaction is
typically idiosyncratic and only noted after the drug is licensed and
utilized in a larger population than clinical trials allow. One example
is Troglitazone, licensed in 1997 for type II diabetes mellitus. Despite
2510 patients being treated and raised liver enzymes reported in pre-
marketing clinical trials, the drug was not withdrawn until 13 years later
when it was found to cause life-threatening acute liver failure. [4]
There is one published report of fulminant liver failure requiring
liver transplant associated with beta-interferon-1a for MS. [5] Until more
experience is gained with the interferons in MS it appears unwise to
advocate the cessation of repeated assessment of liver function tests.
Further post-marketing studies such as the one carried out by Durelli
et al are vital to elucidate such information which otherwise could take
considerably longer to surface through the spontaneous adverse-drug
reaction reporting schemes established in most countries world-wide.
As an aside issue, I was somewhat surprised to find no reference to a
paper [6] by the same authors, containing largely the same dataset from
the same group of MS patients published only a few months earlier in a
different journal.
References
1. Durelli L, Ferrero B, Oggero A, et al: Liver and thyroid function
and autoimmunity during interferon-beta 1b treatment for Multiple
Sclerosis. Neurology 2001; 57: 1363-1370.
2. Lewis JA: Post-marketing surveillance - how many patients? Trends
in Pharmacological Sciences 1981; 2: 93-94.
3. PHRMA/FDA/AASLD: Drug-induced hepatotoxicity White Paper Post
marketing Considerations 2000.
http:www//fda.gov/cder/livertox/postmarket.pdf.
4. Liver Enzyme Monitoring in Patients Treated With Troglitazone;
David J. Graham, MD, MPH; Carol R. Drinkard, MPH, PhD; Deborah Shatin,
PhD; Yi Tsong, PhD; Margaret J. Burgess; Jama; Vol. 286 No. 7,August 15,
2001)
5.Yoshida EM, Rasmussen SL, Steinbrecher UP, et al: Fulminant liver
failure during interferon beta treatment of Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology
2001; 56: 1416.
6.Durelli L, Ferrero B, Oggero A, et al: Thyroid Function and
Autoimmunity during Interferon beta-1b Treatment: A Multi-center
Prospective Study. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2001;
86: 3525-3532.