Thus, there is a significant unmet need in terms of effective available treatments and this unmet need may be overcome by adopting alternate therapeutic strategies such as (1) employing different agents to improve insulin resistance (e.g., GLP-1 agonists) and oxidative stress (betaine, SAMe); (2) exploring agents affecting different targets such as apoptosis (e.g., GS 9450) and FXR (e.g., obeticholic acid), or stellate cell activation (losartan); or (3) investigating a combination buy PD-0332991 of agents affecting different targets/pathways. In this issue of HEPATOLOGY, Harrison’s
group6 report the results of their randomized controlled trial that investigated two different combination therapies to treat NASH. Angiotensin II receptors have been identified on hepatic stellate cells (HSC) and their activation leads Alisertib cell line to HSC proliferation. Angiotensin II receptor knockout
mice when challenged with carbon-tetrachloride had significantly reduced hepatic fibrosis when compared to wildtype mice, suggesting angiotensin receptor II is a novel target to improve hepatic fibrosis.7 Losartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), has been shown in mice models to have beneficial effects on liver fibrosis,8, 9 and in a small study consisting of seven patients with NASH, Yokohama et al.10 suggested that losartan may improve necroinflammation and fibrosis. Torres et al.6 randomized 137 subjects with biopsy-proven NASH to a 48-week course of rosiglitazone
4 mg twice daily alone, or in combination with either metformin 500 mg twice daily or losartan 50 mg daily. The primary endpoint was change in hepatic histology as evidenced by at least one point improvement in steatosis, inflammation, and fibrosis. Steatosis, inflammation, and oxyclozanide fibrosis improved between baseline and the end of treatment within each treatment arm, but the changes in liver histology were statistically not different between the three treatment groups.6 Randomized controlled trials of NASH with histological endpoints are expensive and difficult to conduct, and thus Harrison’s group must be applauded for undertaking this study and for their other important contributions to the field. However, we suggest caution in interpreting the results of this study because of some of its limitations. This study was prematurely stopped due to severe restrictions imposed by the Food and Drug Administration on rosiglitazone use in the United States, leading to an underpowered sample size. The presence of fibrosis was not a prerequisite at baseline and yet its improvement was required to achieve the primary outcome.