From the Journals

Young patients suffer most from PBC


 

FROM ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY AND THERAPEUTICS

Youth is no ally when it comes to primary biliary cholangitis, according to a review of 1,990 patients in the United Kingdom–PBC cohort, the largest primary biliary cholangitis cohort in the world.

The investigators previously found that younger patients are less likely to respond to the mainstay treatment, ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), and more likely to eventually need a liver transplant and die from the chronic autoimmune disease. Their new study found that they also suffer most from symptoms and have the lowest quality of life.


There was a linear relationship between age and quality of life (QoL) in this study of 1,990 primary biliary cholangitis patients; people who presented at age 20 had more than a 50% chance of reporting a poor QoL, while those presenting at age 70 had less than a 30% chance.

Overall perception of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC)-related QoL and individual severity of all symptoms, as is true with UDCA response, were strongly related to the age of onset of disease, with younger presenting patients experiencing the greatest impact. Each 10-year increase in presentation age was associated with a 14% decrease in the risk of poor QoL (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75–0.98; P less than .05), after adjustment for gender, disease severity, UDCA response, and disease duration. Presentations before the age of, perhaps, 50 years signal the need for greater vigilance (Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2016 Nov;44[10]:1039-50).

The findings challenge “the view that PBC is a relatively benign condition of typically older people with limited clinical impact.” The biology “or natural history of PBC may differ between different patient groups, with younger-presenting patients having a more aggressive or materially different form of the disease.” Alternatively, the “enhanced symptom impact in younger patients may be [due to] age-related differences in [the expectation] of chronic disease, personal coping skills, and support networks,” said Jessica Dyson, MBBS, of Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne (England), and her associates.

QoL was most affected by social isolation. “Addressing and treating this single aspect could improve global quality of life significantly... Approaches could range from simple counseling to alert patients to the potential for social isolation, to the development of support groups, to the development of newer digital approaches to social networking through social media,” Dr. Dyson and her colleagues said.

Fatigue, anxiety, and depression also were especially vexing for younger patients, and could “be related to fear of the future and ability to cope, uncertainty as to disease prognosis, and frustration at limitations to life quality,” they said.

“Specifically targeting fatigue is likely to pay dividends,” but “there are currently no therapies able to do that.” However, “a more sociological approach targeting social isolation and the depression and anxiety which may accompany it are very viable approaches.” The findings should help guide future intervention trials, the team said.

QoL was assessed by the PBC-40, a 40 item questionnaire about fatigue; itch; and emotional, social, cognitive, and general symptoms. Each item is scored from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity.

The team used the results to assign patients a global QoL score from 1-5 points; scores of 1-3 indicated neutral or good QoL, while 4-5 signaled poor QoL. Overall, two-thirds of patients reported neutral/good scores, and a third had poor scores.

Meanwhile, patients doing well had a median of 18 of 50 possible points on the PBC-40 social score, while those not doing well had a median score of 34 points.

Patients in the study, 91% of whom were women, presented at a median age of 55 years, but 493 presented before the age of 50.

This research was supported by the British Medical Research Council and the National Institute for Health Research, among others. Dr. Dyson had no disclosures, but other authors reported relationships with a range of pharmaceutical companies, including Abbvie, GSK, Intercept, Novartis, and Pfizer.

Next Article: