Z Gastroenterol 2024; 62(11): 1931-1942
DOI: 10.1055/a-2382-7720
Originalarbeit

Sub-optimal therapy of patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) in the real-life stetting of the German PBC cohort

Sub-optimale Behandlung von Patienten mit Primär Biliärer Cholangitis (PBC) im klinischen Alltag der deutschen PBC Kohorte
1   Division of Hepatology, Department of Medicine II, University Medical Centre, Leipzig, Germany
,
Annegret Franke
2   Clinical Trial Centre of Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
,
Tobias Müller
3   Department of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum (CVK) and Campus Charité Mitte (CCM), Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany (Ringgold ID: RIN14903)
,
Kerstin Stein
4   Practice of Hepatology Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
Heike Bantel
5   Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Infectious Diseases and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
,
Rainer Günther
6   Division of Hepatology, Department of Medicine I, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
,
Gerald Denk
7   Department of Medicine II and Transplantation Center, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany (Ringgold ID: RIN54187)
,
8   Department of Internal Medicine IV (Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Infectious diseases), Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany (Ringgold ID: RIN39065)
,
Jörn M. Schattenberg
9   I. Department of Medicine, Metabolic Liver Research Program, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany
,
Uwe Naumann
10   UBN Private Practice, Berlin, Germany
,
Tobias Böttler
11   Department of Medicine II, University Hospital Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
,
Andreas Weber
12   Department of Internal Medicine 6 Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Endocrinology, Hospital Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany (Ringgold ID: RIN9211)
,
Stefan Zeuzem
13   Department of Medicine, Goethe University, University Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
,
Matthias Hinz
14   Private Practice for Gastroenterology Herne, Herne, Germany
,
15   Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Halle, Halle, Germany (Ringgold ID: RIN14942)
,
Christoph Berg
16   Department of Internal Medicine I, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
,
Thaddäus Till Wissniowski
17   Zentrum Innere Medizin II, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Chemnitz, Germany (Ringgold ID: RIN14902)
,
Karl-Georg Simon
18   Practice for Gastroenterology, Leverkusen, Germany
,
19   Department of Internal Medicine B, University of Münster, Münster, Germany (Ringgold ID: RIN9173)
,
Rüdiger Behrens
20   Private Practice Halle, Halle, Germany
,
Harald Grümmer
21   Practice of Internal Medicine/Gastroenterology, Potsdam, Germany
,
Wolf Peter Hofmann
22   Gastroenterology at Bayerischer Platz, Berlin, Germany
,
Nektarios Dikopoulos
23   Practice for Gastroenterology & Internal Medicine Ludwig & Dikopoulos, Dornstadt, Germany
,
Christoph Sarrazin
24   Medizinische Klinik 2, St. Josef Hospital, Wiesbaden, Germany
,
Elke Roeb
25   Gastroenterology, University of Gießen, Gießen, Germany
,
Andreas E. Kremer
26   Department of Medicine 1, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany
27   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland (Ringgold ID: RIN27217)
,
Marion Muche
28   Department of Gastroenterology, Infectious Diseases, and Rheumatology (Campus Benjamin Franklin), Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
,
Marc Ringelhan
29   Second Medical Department, University Hospital rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany
,
Andreas Teufel
30   Department of Medicine II, Division of Hepatology, Division of Bioinformatics, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
,
Patrick Michl
31   University Hospital Heidelberg, Dept. of Internal Medicine IV, Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
,
Verena Keitel
32   University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
33   Campus Lübeck, First Department of Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
,
Achim Kautz
34   Kautz5 gUG, Köln, Germany
,
Frank Tacke
3   Department of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Campus Virchow-Klinikum (CVK) and Campus Charité Mitte (CCM), Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany (Ringgold ID: RIN14903)
,
Katja Piotrowski
2   Clinical Trial Centre of Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
,
Nicole Köppe-Bauernfeind
2   Clinical Trial Centre of Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
,
Christian Trautwein
35   Leibniz-Institut für Arbeitsforschung an der TU Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
,
Thomas Berg
1   Division of Hepatology, Department of Medicine II, University Medical Centre, Leipzig, Germany
› Author Affiliations

The German PBC Cohort was supported by an unrestricted research grant from Intercept/Advanz Pharma to T.B.
Preview

Abstract

Background

Real-world data on the management of patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) are so far scarce in Germany. Therefore, we aimed to establish a nationwide registry and describe the clinical characteristics and therapy of PBC patients.

Methods

Three different cohorts defined as ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) responders, as inadequate responders according to Paris II criteria, and as newly diagnosed patients were prospectively recruited.

This manuscript includes the baseline data of the project.

Results

In total, 33/77 (43%) contacted centres (58% of university hospitals, 38% of non-university hospitals, and 24% of private practices) recruited 515 patients including 204 UDCA responders, 221 inadequate responders to UDCA, and 90 newly diagnosed patients.

All patients were treated with UDCA; however, a UDCA dosage below the recommended dosage of 13 mg/kg/d was observed in 38.5% of individuals after 12 months of treatment. UDCA dosages were lower in nonacademic compared to academic centres.

Only 75/219 (38.5%) of inadequate responders to UDCA received a second-line therapy with obeticholic acid (OCA) and/or bezafibrate (BZF). OCA (13% vs. 4.5%) and BZF (14% vs. 6.5%) were significantly more often prescribed by academic vs. nonacademic centres.

Pruritus (27% vs. 15.5%), fatigue (23% vs. 4.5%), and sicca syndrome (14% vs. 1%) were significantly more often reported by academic centres.

Conclusion

The German PBC registry could be established, which indicates suboptimal therapy in a relevant proportion of patients and shows significant differences between academic and nonacademic centres. Results are fundamental to improving clinical management at different levels of care.

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Es gibt bislang wenige Real-World-Daten zur Primär Biliären Cholangitis (PBC) in Deutschland. Es war daher das Ziel, ein nationales Register zu gründen, um klinische Charakteristika von Patienten mit PBC und deren medikamentöse Therapie zu beschreiben.

Methoden

Es wurden drei Subgruppen innerhalb des Registers definiert: Patienten mit adäquatem Ansprechen auf Ursodeoxycholsäure (UDCA) nach den Paris-II-Kriterien, Patienten mit inadäquatem Therapieansprechen und neu diagnostizierte Patienten. Im vorliegenden Manuskript werden die Patientencharakteristika zum Rekrutierungszeitpunkt in das Register beschrieben.

Ergebnisse

33/77 (43%) kontaktierten Zentren (58% der Universitätskrankenhäuser, 38% der nicht-universitären Krankenhäuser, 24% der Praxen) rekrutierten 515 Patienten (204 UDCA Responder, 221 inadäquate UDCA-Responder, 90 neu diagnostizierte Patienten).

Alle Patienten wurden mit UDCA behandelt, allerdings wurde bei 38,5% der Fälle eine Dosis niedriger als die empfohlene Dosierung von 13 mg/kg/d nach 12 Monaten Therapie beobachtet. Die UDCA-Dosis war an nicht-akademischen Zentren niedriger als an akademischen Zentren.

Nur 75/219 (38.5%) Patienten mit inadäquatem UDCA-Therapieansprechen erhielten eine Behandlung mit Obeticholsäure (OCA) oder Bezafibrat (BZF). OCA (13% vs. 4,5%) und BZF (14% vs. 6,5%) wurden signifikant häufiger von akademischen Zentren verordnet.

Pruritus (27% vs. 15,5%), Müdigkeit (23% vs. 4,5%) und ein Sicca-Syndrom (14% vs. 1%) wurden signifikant häufiger an akademischen Zentren beschrieben.

Zusammenfassung

Das Deutsche PBC-Register konnte erfolgreich gegründet werden, weist auf eine sub-optimale Therapie bei vielen Patienten hin und zeigt signifikante Unterschiede zwischen akademischen und nicht-akademischen Zentren. Die Ergebnisse sind wichtig, um die Versorgung von PBC-Patienten zu verbessern.

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 16 April 2024

Accepted after revision: 02 August 2024

Article published online:
03 September 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany