Triple therapy in treatment-experienced patients with HCV-cirrhosis in a multicentre cohort of the French Early Access Programme (ANRS CO20-CUPIC) - NCT01514890

Early virological assessment during telaprevir- or boceprevir-based triple therapy in hepatitis C cirrhotic patients who failed a previous interferon based regimen - The ANRS CO20-CUPIC study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To assess within the ANRS CO20-CUPIC cohort whether the viral load (VL) at week 2/week 6 for telaprevir/boceprevir-based triple therapy, respectively, was predictive of sustained virological response (SVR) in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and to study the relevance of this measurement to early diagnose drug resistance.

METHODS

Observational study of HCV genotype 1 patients with compensated cirrhosis (Child-Pugh A), non-responders to a prior course of interferon (IFN)-based therapy and who started triple therapy. Patients received either 12 weeks of telaprevir in combination with PEG-IFN/ribavirin (RBV), then 36 weeks of PEG-IFN/RBV, or 4 weeks of PEG-IFN/RBV, then 44 weeks of PEG-IFN/RBV and boceprevir.

RESULTS

A total of 262 patients were analyzed. For telaprevir-treated patients, 28% had undetectable VL at W2 of whom 81% achieved SVR12 whereas 67% had undetectable VL at W4 of whom 67% achieved SVR12. For boceprevir-treated patients 20% had undetectable VL at W6 and 86% of them achieved SVR12 whereas 36% had undetectable VL at W8 among whom 73% achieved SVR12. Five telaprevir-treated patients had a VL increase between W2 and W4 after a decrease between D0 and W2. Four of them did not achieve SVR12. Similarly, six boceprevir-treated patients had a VL increase between W6 and W8 after a decrease between D0 and W6. Five did not reach SVR12.

CONCLUSIONS

The assessment of HCV RNA level after two weeks of triple therapy in cirrhotic non-responder patients is a good predictor of SVR. This assessment was useful to do an early diagnosis of viral breakthrough.

Virological response and resistance mutations to NS3/4A inhibitors in hepatitis C virus-human immunodeficiency virus coinfection

AIM: To evaluate virological response to telaprevir or boceprevir in combination with pegylated interferon and ribavirin and resistance mutations to NS3/4A inhibitors in hepatitis C virus-human immunodeficiency virus (HCV-HIV) coinfected patients in a real life setting.

METHODS: Patients with HCV genotype 1-HIV coinfection followed in Nice University Hospital internal medicine and infectious diseases departments who initiated treatment including pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV) + telaprevir or boceprevir, according to standard treatment protocols, between August 2011 and October 2013 entered this observational study. Patient data were extracted from an electronic database (Nadis^®). Liver fibrosis was measured by elastometry (Fibroscan^®) with the following cut-off values: F0-F1: < 7.1 kPa, F2: 7.1-9.5 kPa, F3: 9.5-14.5 kPa, F4: ≥ 14.5 kPa. The proportion of patients with sustained virological response (SVR) twelve weeks after completing treatment, frequency and type of adverse events, and NS3/4A protease inhibitor mutations were described.

RESULTS: Forty-one patients were included: 13 (31.7%) patients were HCV-treatment naïve, 22 (53.7%) had advanced liver fibrosis or cirrhosis (Fibroscan stage F3 and F4); none had decompensated cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma; all were receiving antiretroviral treatment, consisting for most them (83%) in either a nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor/protease inhibitor or/integrase inhibitor combination; all patients had undetectable HIV-RNA. One patient was lost to follow-up. SVR was achieved by 52.5% of patients. Five patients experienced virological failure during treatment and four relapsed. Seven discontinued treatment due to adverse events. Main adverse events included severe anemia (88%) and rash (25%). NS3/4A protease mutations were analyzed at baseline and at the time of virological failure in the 9 patients experiencing non-response, breakthrough or relapse. No baseline resistance mutation could predict resistance to HCV protease inhibitor-based treatment.

CONCLUSION: Telaprevir and boceprevir retain their place among potential treatment strategies in HIV-HCV coinfected patients including those with advanced compensated liver disease and who failed previous PegIFN/RBV therapy.

Hepatitis C treatment in patients on the liver transplant waiting list

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains the leading indication for liver transplant, and viral eradication prior to liver transplant to prevent disease recurrence has traditionally been challenging because of the poor tolerability and efficacy of available therapies. However, with the recent introduction of potent interferon (IFN)-free direct acting antiviral regimens, viral eradication prior to liver transplant is now possible.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although data are limited, several proof of concept studies have now shown high rates of safety and efficacy in patients with compensated as well as mild-to-moderately decompensated cirrhosis. Although, treatment on the liver transplant waiting list can safely prevent postliver transplant recurrence in selected patients, the ideal regimen and treatment duration have yet to be determined.

SUMMARY

Although IFN-free therapies represent a tremendous advance in our ability to cure this previously difficult to treat population, additional data on the safety of these regimens, particularly in patients with severely decompensated cirrhosis, the consequences of virologic failure and the impact of viral eradication on short- and long-term liver function are urgently needed.

Effectiveness and safety of first-generation protease inhibitors in clinical practice: Hepatitis C virus patients with advanced fibrosis

AIM

To evaluates the effectiveness and safety of the first generation, NS3/4A protease inhibitors (PIs) in clinical practice against chronic C virus, especially in patients with advanced fibrosis.

METHODS

Prospective study and non-experimental analysis of a multicentre cohort of 38 Spanish hospitals that includes patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1, treatment-naïve (TN) or treatment-experienced (TE), who underwent triple therapy with the first generation NS3/4A protease inhibitors, boceprevir (BOC) and telaprevir (TVR), in combination with pegylated interferon and ribavirin. The patients were treatment in routine practice settings. Data on the study population and on adverse clinical and virologic effects were compiled during the treatment period and during follow up.

RESULTS

One thousand and fifty seven patients were included, 405 (38%) were treated with BOC and 652 (62%) with TVR. Of this total, 30% (n = 319) were TN and the remaining were TE: 28% (n = 298) relapsers, 12% (n = 123) partial responders (PR), 25% (n = 260) null-responders (NR) and for 5% (n = 57) with prior response unknown. The rate of sustained virologic response (SVR) by intention-to-treatment (ITT) was greater in those treated with TVR (65%) than in those treated with BOC (52%) (P < 0.0001), whereas by modified intention-to-treatment (mITT) no were found significant differences. By degree of fibrosis, 56% of patients were F4 and the highest SVR rates were recorded in the non-F4 patients, both TN and TE. In the analysis by groups, the TN patients treated with TVR by ITT showed a higher SVR (P = 0.005). However, by mITT there were no significant differences between BOC and TVR. In the multivariate analysis by mITT, the significant SVR factors were relapsers, IL28B CC and non-F4; the type of treatment (BOC or TVR) was not significant. The lowest SVR values were presented by the F4-NR patients, treated with BOC (46%) or with TVR (45%). 28% of the patients interrupted the treatment, mainly by non-viral response (51%): this outcome was more frequent in the TE than in the TN patients (57% vs 40%, P = 0.01). With respect to severe haematological disorders, neutropaenia was more likely to affect the patients treated with BOC (33% vs 20%, P ≤ 0.0001), and thrombocytopaenia and anaemia, the F4 patients (P = 0.000, P = 0.025, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In a real clinical practice setting with a high proportion of patients with advanced fibrosis, effectiveness of first-generation PIs was high except for NR patients, with similar SVR rates being achieved by BOC and TVR.

Sorting out cirrhosis: mechanisms of non-response to hepatitis C therapy

Although cirrhosis has long been recognized as an important negative predictor of treatment response for hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy, the mechanisms underlying this association remain relatively poorly understood. Treatment has progressed rapidly with the introduction of highly effective all-oral therapies, with promising outcomes even in patients with advanced cirrhosis. However, even with the new therapies, it is clear that patients with cirrhosis require special attention. Efficacy continues to be somewhat reduced compared to non-cirrhotic patients and safety is an important concern. In this review, we explore the reasons for treatment non-response in patients with cirrhosis. We focus on how cirrhosis impacts on four important areas including drug delivery, drug uptake and metabolism, immune responses and drug toxicity with examples from the clinical and basic literature. Fortunately, as treatment continues to progress, many of the challenges of treating patients with cirrhosis will become less and less problematic.

Telaprevir- and Boceprevir-based Triple Therapy for Hepatitis C in Liver Transplant Recipients With Advanced Recurrent Disease: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Antiviral treatment with sustained virologic response (SVR) improves survival in liver transplant (LT) recipients, and is especially relevant to patients with advanced recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV). We assessed the safety and efficacy of protease inhibitor-based triple therapy in patients with recurrent advanced fibrosis and cholestatic hepatitis.

METHODS

The LT recipients with genotype 1 HCV and advanced fibrosis (F3-4/4) or cholestatic hepatitis treated with telaprevir- or boceprevir-based triple therapy at 6 centers (CRUSH-C consortium) were retrospectively assessed. The primary endpoints were SVR at 12 weeks (SVR12) and safety.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients with advanced fibrosis and 9 with cholestatic hepatitis (74% men, 57% genotype 1a, 63% previous nonresponders) were included. SVR12 occurred in 51% with advanced fibrosis and 44% with cholestatic hepatitis. Extended rapid virologic response was highly predictive of SVR12. Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio, 0.16; P = 0.03), previous null/partial response (0.24; P = 0.02), IL28B genotype CC (7.0; P = 0.02), albumin (3.87; P = 0.03), platelet count (1.01; P = 0.02), and steroid use (0.21; P = 0.03) were associated with SVR12. Six (11%) patients died, and hepatic decompensation occurred in 22% with advanced fibrosis and 33% with cholestatic hepatitis. Albumin (0.02; P = 0.001), encephalopathy (12.0; P = 0.04) and Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio, 6.17; P = 0.01) were associated with death or decompensation.

CONCLUSIONS

For LT recipients with recurrent advanced HCV and at greatest need of cure, protease inhibitor-based triple therapy achieved approximately 50% SVR12. However, there is significant risk of serious adverse events, arguing for earlier intervention. The availability of treatments with better efficacy and safety is of particular importance for posttransplant patients with advanced disease.

Boceprevir early-access for advanced-fibrosis/cirrhosis in Asia-pacific hepatitis C virus genotype 1 non-responders/relapsers

AIM: To examined the efficacy and safety of treatment with boceprevir, PEGylated-interferon and ribavirin (PR) in hepatitis C virus genotype 1 (HCVGT1) PR treatment-failures in Asia.

METHODS: The Boceprevir Named-Patient Program provided boceprevir to HCVGT1 PR treatment-failures. Participating physicians were invited to contribute data from their patients: baseline characteristics, on-treatment responses, sustained virological response at week 12 (SVR12), and safety were collected and analysed. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine predictors of response.

RESULTS: 150 patients were enrolled from Australia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand (Asians = 86, Caucasians = 63). Overall SVR12 was 61% (Asians = 59.3%, Caucasians = 63.5%). SVR12 was higher in relapsers (78%) compared with non-responders (34%). On-treatment responses predicted SVR, with undetectable HCVRNA at week 4, 8 and 12 leading to SVR12s of 100%, 87%, and 82% respectively, and detectable HCVRNA at week 4, 8 and 12, leading to SVR12s of 58%, 22% and 6% respectively. Asian patients were similar to Caucasian patients with regards to on-treatment responses. Patients with cirrhosis (n = 69) also behaved in the same manner with regards to on-treatment responses. Those with the IL28B CC genotype (80%) had higher SVRs than those with the CT/TT (56%) genotype (P = 0.010). Multivariate analysis showed that TW8 and TW12 responses were independent predictors of SVR. Serious adverse events occurred in 18.6%: sepsis (2%), decompensation (2.7%) and blood transfusion (14%). Discontinuations occurred in 30.7%, with 18.6% fulfilling stopping rules.

CONCLUSION: Boceprevir can be used successfully in PR treatment failures with a SVR12 > 80% if they have good on-treatment responses; however, discontinuations occurred in 30% because of virological failure or adverse events.

Hepatitis C cirrhosis: New perspectives for diagnosis and treatment

Chronic hepatitis C infection is the leading cause of chronic liver disease, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma as well as the primary indication for liver transplantation in the United States. Despite recent advances in drugs for the treatment of hepatitis C, predictive models estimate the incidence of cirrhosis due to hepatitis C infection will to continue to rise for the next two decades. There is currently an immense interest in the treatment of patients with fibrosis and early-stage cirrhosis as treatment can lead to decrease in the rates of decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and need for liver transplantation in these patients. The goal of this paper is to provide clinicians and health care professionals further information about the treatment of patients with hepatitis C infection and cirrhosis. Additionally, the paper focuses on the disease burden, epidemiology, diagnosis and the disease course from infection to treatment. We provide an overview of multiple studies for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C infection that have included patients with cirrhosis. We also discuss the advantages and disadvantages of treatment in cirrhotic patients and focus on the most up to date guidelines available for treatment.

Enhancing the detection and management of acute hepatitis C virus infection

Acute HCV infection refers to the 6-month period following infection acquisition, although this definition is somewhat arbitrary. While spontaneous clearance occurs in approximately 25%, the majority will develop chronic HCV infection with the potential for development of cirrhosis, end stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma. Detection of acute HCV infection has been hampered by its asymptomatic or non-specific presentation, lack of specific diagnostic tests and the inherent difficulties in identifying and following individuals at highest risk of transmitting and acquiring HCV infection, such as people who inject drugs (PWID). However, recognition of those with acute infection may have individual and population level benefits and could represent an ideal opportunity for intervention. Despite demonstration that HCV treatment is feasible and successful in PWID, treatment uptake remains low with multiple barriers to care at an individual and systems level. Given the burden of HCV-related disease among PWID, strategies to enhance HCV assessment, treatment and prevention in this group are urgently needed. As the therapeutic landscape of chronic HCV management is revolutionised by the advent of simple, highly effective directly-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, similar opportunities may exist in acute infection. This review will discuss issues surrounding improving the detection and management of acute HCV infection, particularly in PWID.

Antiviral Therapy in Patients with Hepatitis C Virus-Induced Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Opportunities to treat infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) are evolving rapidly. From the introduction of interferon (IFN)-α monotherapy in the early 1990s to the approval of telaprevir- and boceprevir-based triple therapies with pegylated (PEG)-IFN-α and ribavirin (RBV) in 2011, the chances of curing patients infected with HCV genotype 1 have improved dramatically to reach approximately 70%. Significant further improvements that may cure virtually all HCV patients with an all-oral, IFN-free regimen are becoming progressively available. Key Messages: Historically, a PEG-IFN/RBV combination therapy of patients with liver cirrhosis was associated with lower virological rates and a worse safety profile. The advent of the first protease inhibitor-based triple therapy was long expected, but the promise fell rapidly because of the numerous side effects and the requirement for intensive clinical management in cirrhotic patients. The newer direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) target the viral polymerase with either nucleos(t)ide analogues or nonnucleosidic inhibitors, the viral protease and the viral NS5A protein. Several clinical trials have now shown that a combination of sofosbuvir (nucleosidic polymerase inhibitor) with daclatasvir or ledipasvir (NS5A inhibitors), or sofosbuvir with simeprevir (protease inhibitor), or a combination of ABT-450 (protease inhibitor) with ritonavir (ABT-450/r), the nonnucleosidic polymerase inhibitor ABT-333 and the NS5A inhibitor ABT-267, can achieve a sustained virological response in up to 95% of naive patients or previously treated patients, even in those who failed prior treatment with first-generation protease inhibitors. The best treatment regimens enable the achievement of comparable results even in cirrhotics, while other regimens still require RBV or a longer treatment duration to achieve optimal results. This improved risk/benefit ratio justifies early access programs of IFN-free regimens for cirrhotic patients. The remaining difficult-to-treat patients are cirrhotics infected with HCV genotype 3 and those with decompensated cirrhosis, for whom novel DAA combinations should be evaluated in clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

As new DAAs are becoming available in early access treatment programs, treatment strategy studies are being performed to optimize treatment regimens with respect to the choice of DAAs and treatment duration, based on viral genotypes, prior treatment response and the presence of liver cirrhosis. In the near future, this should allow: (i) a decrease in the complications of HCV-induced cirrhosis, (ii) liver transplantations to be performed in virally cured patients, and (iii) the rescue of patients in the worst clinical situation (decompensated cirrhosis and HCV recurrence on liver graft).

Eligibility and safety of the first interferon-free therapy against hepatitis C in a real-world setting

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several real world data demonstrated that eligibility for and tolerability of triple therapy against hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with a first-wave protease inhibitor is limited. With the approval of sofosbuvir (SOF) effective treatment with and without pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) has become available for most genotypes. However, no data are available regarding the added benefit of an interferon-free treatment concerning eligibility and tolerability in a real-world scenario. We aimed to assess the eligibility and safety of SOF based therapies in patients with primarily advanced cirrhosis, including decompensated cirrhosis, in a real-world setting.

RESULTS

In total, 207 patients were evaluated for a SOF based treatment with and without PEG-IFN. Twenty-six patients did not receive treatment because of safety reasons. Common causes were severe concomitant cardiac disease and advanced renal disease. Autoimmune disease, thrombopaenia, anaemia or hepatic dysfunction did not preclude treatment. Eighty-four patients started treatment, 15 with decompensated cirrhosis. During the first 12 weeks hospitalization occurred in 11 patients most frequently because of typical complications of advanced liver disease. Risk factors for hospitalization were low platelet count and deteriorated liver function. Overall, 982 of 1008 planned treatment weeks (97%) were successfully completed within the first 12 weeks of therapy.

CONCLUSION

With the better safety profile of interferon-free therapies, eligibility for HCV treatment will expand broadly, including patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Current limitations are renal failure and concomitant cardiac disease. Patients with advanced cirrhosis still have a high risk for hospitalization even with interferon-free therapies, but can continue HCV treatment in most cases.

Combined Analysis of the Prevalence of Drug-Resistant Hepatitis B Virus in Antiviral Therapy-Experienced Patients in Europe (CAPRE)

BACKGROUND

European guidelines recommend treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection (CHB) with the nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) entecavir or tenofovir. However, many European CHB patients have been exposed to other NAs, which are associated with therapy failure and resistance. The CAPRE study was performed to gain insight in prevalence and characteristics of NA resistance in Europe.

METHODS

A survey was performed on genotypic resistance testing results acquired during routine monitoring of CHB patients with detectable serum hepatitis B virus DNA in European tertiary referral centers.

RESULTS

Data from 1568 patients were included. The majority (73.8%) were exposed to lamivudine monotherapy. Drug-resistant strains were detected in 52.7%. The most frequently encountered primary mutation was M204V/I (48.7%), followed by A181T/V (3.8%) and N236T (2.6%). In patients exposed to entecavir (n = 102), full resistance was present in 35.3%. Independent risk factors for resistance were age, viral load, and lamivudine exposure (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support resistance testing in cases of apparent NA therapy failure. This survey highlights the impact of exposure to lamivudine and adefovir on development of drug resistance and cross-resistance. Continued use of these NAs needs to be reconsidered at a pan-European level.

High efficacy and safety of triple therapy in HCV genotype 1 and moderate fibrosis: a multicenter study of clinical practice in Spain

BACKGROUND AND RATIONAL

Telaprevir-based therapy (TBT) has been extensively evaluated in clinical trials. So we designed a study to compare the efficacy and safety of TBT between patients with moderate fibrosis and those suffering from advanced fibrosis in clinical practice. A multicenter observational and ambispective study was conducted. It included 582 patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1, 214 with fibrosis F2, and 368 with F3/F4 (F3: 148; F4: 220).

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 55 years, 67% male. Type of prior response was 22% naïve, 57% relapsers, and 21% partial/null responders, 69% had high viral load (> 800,000 IU/mL). HCV genotypes were 1a (19%), 1b (69%), and 1 (12%), respectively. Sixty-five percent were non-CC IL28B genotype. Week-12 sustained virologic response (SVR12) was significantly higher among F2-naïve patients (78%) compared with F3/F4-naïve patients (60%; p = 0.039) and among F2 non-responders (67%) compared with F3/F4 non-responders (42%; p = 0.014). SVR12 among relapsers was remarkably high in both groups (F2:89% vs. F3/F4:78%). Severe anemia and thrombocytopenia were more frequent among patients with F3/F4 than those with F2 (p < 0.01). Overall, 132 patients (22%) discontinued treatment: 58 due to adverse effects, 42 due to the stopping-rule, and 32 due to breakthrough. Premature discontinuation was more frequent among patients with F3/F4 (p = 0.028), especially due to breakthrough (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter study demonstrates high efficacy and an acceptable safety profile with regard to TBT in F2-patients in clinical practice.

Ledipasvir and sofosbuvir in patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus infection and compensated cirrhosis: An integrated safety and efficacy analysis

Patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and cirrhosis are underrepresented in clinical trials of interferon-free regimens of direct-acting antiviral agents, making it difficult to optimize therapy. We performed a post-hoc analysis of data from seven clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the fixed-dose combination of ledipasvir (LDV) and sofosbuvir (SOF), with and without ribavirin (RBV), in 513 treatment-naïve and previously treated patients with genotype 1 HCV and compensated cirrhosis. All patients received LDV-SOF for 12 or 24 weeks with or without RBV. We determined the rates of sustained virological response (SVR) 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12) overall and for subgroups. Of the 513 patients analyzed, 69% were previously treated and 47% had failed previous treatment with a protease-inhibitor regimen. Overall, 493 patients (96%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 94%-98%) achieved SVR12, 98% of treatment-naïve and 95% of previously treated patients. SVR12 rates did not vary greatly by treatment duration (95% of patients receiving 12 weeks and 98% of patients receiving 24 weeks of treatment), nor by addition of RBV (95% of patients receiving LDV-SOF alone and 97% of those who received LDV-SOF plus RBV), although previously treated patients receiving 12 weeks of LDV-SOF without RBV had an SVR12 rate of 90%. One patient discontinued LDV-SOF because of an adverse event (AE). The most common AEs were headache (23%), fatigue (16%-19%), and asthenia (14%-16%). One patient (<1%) of those receiving LDV-SOF alone, and 4 (2%) of those receiving LDV-SOF plus RBV had treatment-related serious AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that 12 weeks of LDV-SOF is safe and effective for treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype 1 and compensated cirrhosis. The relatively lower SVR in treatment-experienced patients treated with 12 weeks of LDV-SOF raises the question of whether these patients would benefit from adding RBV or extending treatment duration to 24 weeks.

Hepatitis C treatment in the elderly: New possibilities and controversies towards interferon-free regimens

Due to the progressive aging of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) population which have acquired the infection during its maximum spread after the Second World War, the management of the elderly HCV-infected patient is emerging as a hot topic. Unfortunately, although it is recognized that the progression of HCV-related liver disease gets faster with aging, and that even extra-hepatic manifestations of HCV infection are probably worse in the elderly, till now, treatment attempts in this population have been significantly limited by the well-known contraindications and side effects of interferon (IFN). The arrival of several new anti-HCV drugs, and the possibility to combine them in safe and effective anti-viral regimens, is relighting the hope of a cure for many elderly patients who had been cut out of IFN-based treatments. However, although these new regimens will be certainly more manageable, it should be underscored that IFN-free doesn't mean free from any contraindication or side-effect. Moreover, one issue which promises to become central is that of the possible interactions between antiviral therapy and the multiple drugs frequently assumed by elderly patients because of comorbidities. In this review, we will revise the epidemiology pointing to HCV as an infection of the elderly, the evidences that HCV harms the health of the aged patient more than that of the young one, and the available experiences of HCV treatment in the elderly with the "old" IFN-based regimens and with the newer drugs. We will conclude that the availability of IFN-free regimens should prompt us to change our mind and consider a significantly larger number of possible candidates among elderly patients, who would take significant advantage from viral eradication. Rather than the anagraphic age, drug-drug interactions and, mainly in case of economic restrictions, an evaluation of life expectancy dependent on liver disease with respect to that dependent on comorbidities, are likely to be the key issues guiding treatment indication in the next future. The sooner we will change our mind with respect to an a priori obstacle for anti-HCV treatment in the elderly, the sooner we will begin to spare many aged HCV patients from avoidable liver-related complications.

[In Process Citation]

Approximately 70,000 people are infected with hepatitis C virus in Hungary, and more than half of them are not aware of their infection. From the point of infected individuals early recognition and effective treatment of related liver injury may prevent consequent advanced liver diseases and complications (liver cirrhosis, liver failure and liver cancer) and can increase work productivity and life expectancy. From a socioeconomic aspect, this could also prevent further spread of the virus as well as reduce substantially long term financial burden of related morbidity. Pegylated interferon + ribavirin dual therapy, which is available in Hungary since 2003, can clear the virus in 40-45% of previously not treated (naïve), and in 5-21% of previous treatment-failure patients. Addition of a direct acting first generation protease inhibitor drug (boceprevir or telaprevir) to the dual therapy increases the chance of sustained viral response to 63-75% and 59-66%, respectively. These two protease inhibitors are available and financed for a segment of Hungarian patients since May 2013. Between 2013 and February 2015, other direct acting antiviral interferon-free combination therapies have been registered for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C, with a potential efficacy over 90% and typical short duration of 8-12 weeks. Indication of therapy includes exclusion of contraindications to the drugs and demonstration of viral replication with consequent liver injury, i.e., inflammation and / or fibrosis in the liver. Non-invasive methods (elastography and biochemical methods) are accepted and preferred for staging liver damage (fibrosis). For initiation of treatment as well as for on-treatment decisions, accurate and timely molecular biology tests are mandatory. Eligibility for treatment is a subject of individual central medical review. Due to budget limitations therapy is covered only for a proportion of patients by the National Health Insurance Fund. Priority is given to those with urgent need based on a Hungarian Priority Index system reflecting primarily the stage of liver disease, and considering also additional factors, i.e., activity and progression of liver disease, predictive factors of treatment and other special issues. Approved treatments are restricted to the most cost-effective combinations based on the cost per sustained viral response value in different patient categories with consensus between professional organizations, National Health Insurance Fund and patient organizations. More expensive therapies might be available upon co-financing by the patient or a third party. Interferon-free treatments and shorter therapy durations preferred as much as financially feasible. A separate budget is allocated to cover interferon-free treatments for the most-in-need interferon ineligible/intolerant patients, and for those who have no more interferon-based therapy option. Orv. Hetil., 2015, 156(Suppl. 1), 3-23.

STARTVerso1: A randomized trial of faldaprevir plus pegylated interferon/ribavirin for chronic HCV genotype-1 infection

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The efficacy and tolerability of faldaprevir, a potent hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor, plus peginterferon (PegIFN) and ribavirin (RBV) was assessed in a double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study of treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype-1 infection.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned (1:2:2) to PegIFN/RBV plus: placebo (arm 1, n = 132) for 24 weeks; faldaprevir (120 mg, once daily) for 12 or 24 weeks (arm 2, n = 259); or faldaprevir (240 mg, once daily) for 12 weeks (arm 3, n = 261). In arms 2 and 3, patients with early treatment success (HCV-RNA <25 IU/ml at week 4 and undetectable at week 8) stopped all treatment at week 24. Other patients received PegIFN/RBV until week 48 unless they met futility criteria. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12).

RESULTS

SVR12 was achieved by 52%, 79%, and 80% of patients in arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively (estimated difference for arms 2 and 3 vs. arm 1: 27%, 95% confidence interval 17%-36%; and 29%, 95% confidence interval, 19%-38%, respectively; p < 0.0001 for both). Early treatment success was achieved by 87% (arm 2) and 89% (arm 3) of patients, of whom 86% and 89% achieved SVR12. Adverse event rates were similar among groups; few adverse events led to discontinuation of all regimen components.

CONCLUSIONS

Faldaprevir plus PegIFN/RBV significantly increased SVR12, compared with PegIFN/RBV, in treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype-1 infection. No differences were seen in responses of patients given faldaprevir once daily at 120 or 240 mg.

Hepatitis C in HIV-infected patients: impact of direct-acting antivirals

Approximately 30% of HIV-infected patients are co-infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). After the release of highly active antiretroviral therapy, liver disease has become the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in HIV patients. Prior to 2011, HCV treatment with pegylated-interferon and ribavirin in HCV/HIV co-infected patients only allowed 14-38% of patients with HCV genotype 1 to achieve a sustained virologic response (SVR). Additionally, treatment was commonly discontinued as a result of adverse events. Recently, simeprevir and sofosbuvir have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for HCV mono-infection. Sofosbuvir has been given FDA approval in co-infected patients offering unprecedented SVR rates and the potential for interferon-free therapy. HCV therapies that are in the pipeline offer improved treatment times, safety profiles, and rates of SVR. Despite these improvements, several new issues including adherence, drug-drug interactions with antiretroviral therapies, adverse events, resistance, and patient selection may complicate therapy. This article reviews the current status of direct-acting antivirals (DAA)-containing regimens for HIV/HCV co-infected patients in the USA. New results investigating telaprevir and boceprevir are also discussed as they are relevant for locations where new DAAs are not available. The impact future interferon-free therapies may have on co-infected patients is also discussed.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of telaprevir for the treatment of hepatitis C

INTRODUCTION

Telaprevir is one of the first direct-acting antiviral drugs approved for the treatment of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1. Following its approval in 2011, new data regarding the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were reported, leading to important clinical applications.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of telaprevir for the treatment of the HCV. The areas covered include data regarding the drug's absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion, in addition to the antiviral activity strategy such as the clinical dose selection and treatment duration.

EXPERT OPINION

Telaprevir presents several pharmacological properties that could limit its administration such a high-fat, high-calorie meal; the need to be administrated with pegylated IFN plus ribavirin; and the drug-drug interaction profile. As a consequence and considering the new therapeutic arsenal against the HCV, the use of telaprevir as part of HCV therapy will be limited.

Hepatitis C: New challenges in liver transplantation

In an era of great achievements in liver transplantation, hepatitis C viral infection (HCV) remains an unsolved problem. As a leading indication for liver transplantation in Western countries, HCV poses a significant burden both before and after transplantation. Post-transplant disease recurrence occurs in nearly all patients with detectable pretransplant viremia, compromising the lifesaving significance of transplantation. Many factors involving the donor, recipient and virus have been evaluated throughout the literature, although few have been fully elucidated and implemented in actual clinical practice. Antiviral therapy has been recognized as a cornerstone of HCV infection control; however, experience and success are diminished following transplantation in a challenging cohort of patients with liver cirrhosis. Current therapeutic protocols surpass those used previously, both in sustained viral response and side-effect profile. In this article we review the most relevant and contemporary scientific evidence regarding hepatitis C infection and liver transplantation, with special attention dedicated to novel, more efficient and safer antiviral regimens.

Antiviral therapies for chronic hepatitis C virus infection with cirrhosis

Patients who are infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and also have advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis have been recognized as "difficult-to-treat" patients during an era when peginterferon and ribavirin combination therapy is the standard of care. Recent guidelines have clearly stated that treatment should be prioritized in this population to prevent complications such as decompensation and hepatocellular carcinoma. Recent advances in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C have been achieved through the development of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs). Boceprevir and telaprevir are first-generation DAAs that inhibit the HCV NS3/4A protease. Boceprevir or telaprevir, in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin, improved the sustained virological response rates compared with peginterferon and ribavirin alone and were tolerated in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection without cirrhosis or compensated cirrhosis. However, the efficacy is lower especially in prior non-responders with or without cirrhosis. Furthermore, a high incidence of adverse events was observed in patients with advanced liver disease, including cirrhosis, in real-life settings. Current guidelines in the United States and in some European countries no longer recommend these regimens for the treatment of HCV. Next-generation DAAs include second-generation HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitors, HCV NS5A inhibitors and HCV NS5B inhibitors, which have a high efficacy and a lower toxicity. These drugs are used in interferon-free or in interferon-based regimens with or without ribavirin in combination with different classes of DAAs. Interferon-based regimens, such as simeprevir in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin, are well tolerated and are highly effective especially in treatment-naïve patients and in patients who received treatment but who relapsed. The efficacy is less pronounced in null-responders and in patients with cirrhosis. Interferon-free regimens in combination with ribavirin and/or two or more DAAs could be used for treatment-naïve, treatment-experienced and even for interferon-ineligible or interferon-intolerant patients. Some clinical trials have demonstrated promising results, and have shown that the efficacy and safety were not different between patients with and without cirrhosis. There are also promising regimens for genotypes other than genotype 1. Interferon is contraindicated in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, and further studies are needed to establish the optimal treatment regimen for this population. In the future, interferon-free and ribavirin-free regimens with high efficacy and improved safety are expected for HCV-infected patients with advanced liver diseases.

Vitamin D in addition to peg-interferon-alpha/ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C virus infection: ANRS-HC25-VITAVIC study

AIM: To investigate if correction of hypovitaminosis D before initiation of Peg-interferon-alpha/ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV) therapy could improve the efficacy of PegIFN/RBV in previously null-responder patients with chronic genotype 1 or 4 hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

METHODS: Genotype 1 or 4 HCV-infected patients with null response to previous PegIFN/RBV treatment and with hypovitaminosis D (< 30 ng/mL) prospectively received cholecalciferol 100000 IU per week for 4 wk [from week -4 (W-4) to W0], followed by 100000 IU per month in combination with PegIFN/RBV for 12 mo (from W0 to W48). The primary outcome was the rate of early virological response defined by an HCV RNA < 12 IU/mL after 12 wk PegIFN/RBV treatment.

RESULTS: A total of 32 patients were included, 19 (59%) and 13 (41%) patients were HCV genotype 1 and 4, respectively. The median baseline vitamin D level was 15 ng/mL (range: 7-28). In modified intention-to-treat analysis, 29 patients who received at least one dose of PegIFN/RBV were included in the analysis. All patients except one normalized their vitamin D serum levels. The rate of early virologic response was 0/29 (0%). The rate of HCV RNA < 12 IU/mL after 24 wk of PegIFN/RBV was 1/27 (4%). The safety profile was favorable.

CONCLUSION: Addition of vitamin D to PegIFN/RBV does not improve the rate of early virologic response in previously null-responders with chronic genotype 1 or 4 HCV infection.

Aplastic anemia and severe pancytopenia during treatment with peg-interferon, ribavirin and telaprevir for chronic hepatitis C

Telaprevir and Boceprevir are the first direct acting antivirals approved for chronic hepatitis C in combination with peg-interferon alfa and ribavirin. Pancytopenia due to myelotoxicity caused by these drugs may occur, but severe hematological abnormalities or aplastic anemia (AA) have not been described. We collected all cases of severe pancytopenia observed during triple therapy with telaprevir in four Spanish centers since approval of the drug in 2011. Among 142 cirrhotic patients receiving treatment, 7 cases of severe pancytopenia (5%) were identified and three were consistent with the diagnosis of AA. Mean age was 59 years, five patients had compensated cirrhosis and two patients had severe hepatitis C recurrence after liver transplantation. Severe pancytopenia was diagnosed a median of 10 wk after the initiation of therapy. Three patients had pre-treatment hematological abnormalities related to splenomegaly. In six patients, antiviral treatment was interrupted at the onset of hematological abnormalities. Two patients died due to septic complications and one patient due to acute alveolar hemorrhage. The remaining patients recovered. Severe pancytopenia and especially AA, are not rare during triple therapy with telaprevir in patients with advanced liver disease. Close monitoring is imperative in this setting to promptly detect serious hematological disorders and to prevent further complications.

Treatment of hepatitis C in difficult-to-treat patients

Interferon-free regimes are now the treatment of choice for patients with chronic hepatitis C; previously patients who were 'difficult-to-treat' using interferon-containing treatments can now safely be treated with such therapies. More than 90% of patients infected with HCV genotype 1 or 4, compensated cirrhosis, or who have had liver transplantation, can be cured with the use of sofosbuvir combined with simeprevir, daclatasvir or ledipasvir, or by the combination of paritaprevir with ritonavir, ombitasvir and with or without dasabuvir. Addition of ribavirin seems to shorten treatment duration. However, the safety of these drugs is not fully explored in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (that is, those with Child-Pugh class C disease), and protease inhibitors should not be used in this group. The optimal use of interferon-free regimes in patients with renal failure or after kidney transplantation is currently being studied. However, new and improved drugs are needed to treat patients infected with HCV genotype 3. Unfortunately, the broad application of new HCV treatments is limited by their high costs. In this Review, I discuss the treatment of patients with hepatitis C with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis, before and after orthotopic liver transplantation and in patients with impaired kidney function.

Low risk of liver decompensation among human immunodeficiency virus/hepatitis C virus-coinfected patients with mild fibrosis in the short term

Liver fibrosis is used to make decisions about the timing of therapy against hepatitis C virus (HCV) in routine clinical practice, which should be based on the short-term likelihood of liver decompensations. Thus, we aimed at evaluating the risk of decompensations and death among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/HCV-coinfected individuals according to their baseline fibrosis classified by either liver biopsy or liver stiffness measurement (LSM). Patients coinfected with HIV/HCV, naive or without sustained virological response to HCV therapy, were included in this cohort. Fibrosis was classified by biopsy in 683 patients and by LSM in 1046 individuals. Reference categories were fibrosis stage 0 and LSM <6 kPa. For patients with biopsy, the adjusted subhazard ratio for decompensations and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) by fibrosis stage were as follows: stage 1, 2.3 (0.27-20.3), P = 0.443; stage 2, 2.8 (0.33-24), P = 0.345; stage 3, 4.91 (0.60-41), P = 0.137; stage 4, 9.89 (1.25-79.5), P = 0.030. For patients with LSM, the adjusted subhazard ratio and 95% CI by LSM category were as follows: 6-9.4 kPa, 1.89 (0.18-20.3), P = 0.599; 9.5-14.5 kPa, 6.59 (0.73-59.2), P = 0.092; ≥14.6 kPa, 59.5 (8.3-427), P < 0.0001. Regarding the risk of death, the adjusted hazard ratio and 95% CI for death by fibrosis stage were as follows: stage 1, 1.3 (0.4-4.11), P = 0.677; stage 2, 2.68 (0.86-8.36), P = 0.090; stage 3, 2.58 (0.82-8.15), P = 0.106; stage 4, 4.35 (1.43-13.3), P = 0.010. For patients with LSM, the adjusted hazard ratio and 95% CI for death by LSM were as follows: 6-9.4 kPa, 1.7 (0.63-4.79), P = 0.288; 9.5-14.5 kPa, 3.38 (1.2-9.5), P = 0.021; ≥14.6 kPa, 12.7 (4.9-33.6), P < 0.0001.

CONCLUSION

Patients coinfected with HIV/HCV without advanced fibrosis are at very low risk of decompensations in the short term; deferral of HCV therapy for a few years and monitoring fibrosis progression is a safe option until cheaper, more effective, and more convenient HCV treatment becomes widely available.

Undetectable HCV-RNA at treatment-week 8 results in high-sustained virological response in HCV G1 treatment-experienced patients with advanced liver disease: the International Italian/Spanish Boceprevir/Peginterferon/Ribavirin Name Patients Program

In many countries, first-generation protease inhibitors (PIs)/peginterferon/ribavirin (P/R) still represent the only treatment option for HCV-infected patients. Subjects with advanced disease and previous failure to P/R urgently need therapy, but they are under-represented in clinical trials. All treatment-experienced F3/4 Metavir patients who received boceprevir (BOC)+P/R in the Italian-Spanish Name Patient Program have been included in this study. Multivariate logistic regression analysis (MLR) was used to identify baseline and on-treatment predictors of SVR and adverse events (AEs). Four hundred and sixteen patients, mean age 57.7 (range 25-78 years), 70% males, 69.5% (289/416) F4, 14% (41/289) Child-Pugh class A6, 24% (70/289) with varices and 42% (173/416) prior null responders to P/R, were analysed. Overall, SVR rate (all 381 patients who received one dose of BOC) was 49%, (58% in F3, 45% in F4, 61% in relapsers, 51% in partial, 38% in null responders, and 72% in subjects with undetectable HCV-RNA at treatment-week (TW)8. Among patients with TW8 HCV-RNA ≥ 1000 IU/L, SVR was 8% (negative predictive value = 92%). Death occurred in 3 (0.8%) patients, while decompensation and infections were observed in 2.9% and 11%, respectively. At MLR, SVR predictors were TW4 HCV-RNA ≥ 1log10 -decline from baseline, undetectable TW8 HCV-RNA, prior relapse, albumin levels ≥3.5 g/dL and platelet counts ≥100 000/μL. Metavir F4, Child-Pugh A6, albumin, platelets, age and female gender were associated with serious and haematological AEs. Among treatment-experienced patients with advanced liver disease eligible for IFN-based therapy, TW8 HCV-RNA characterised the subset with either high or poor likelihood of achieving SVR. Using TW8 HCV-RNA as a futility rule, BOC/P/R appears to have a favourable benefit-risk profile.

Naturally Occurring Resistance-Associated Variants of Hepatitis C Virus Protease Inhibitors in Poor Responders to Pegylated Interferon-Ribavirin

The pretherapeutic presence of protease inhibitor (PI) resistance-associated variants (RAVs) has not been shown to be predictive of triple-therapy outcomes in treatment-naive patients. However, they may influence the outcome in patients with less effective pegylated interferon (pegIFN)-ribavirin (RBV) backbones. Using hepatitis C virus (HCV) population sequence analysis, we retrospectively investigated the prevalence of baseline nonstructural 3 (NS3) RAVs in a multicenter cohort of poor IFN-RBV responders (i.e., prior null responders or patients with a viral load decrease of <1 log IU/ml during the pegIFN-RBV lead-in phase). The impact of the presence of these RAVs on the outcome of triple therapy was studied. Among 282 patients, the prevalances (95% confidence intervals) of baseline RAVs ranged from 5.7% (3.3% to 9.0%) to 22.0% (17.3% to 27.3%), depending to the algorithm used. Among mutations conferring a >3-fold shift in 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) for telaprevir or boceprevir, T54S was the most frequently detected mutation (3.9%), followed by A156T, R155K (0.7%), V36M, and V55A (0.35%). Mutations were more frequently found in patients infected with genotype 1a (7.5 to 23.6%) than 1b (3.3 to 19.8%) (P = 0.03). No other sociodemographic or viroclinical characteristic was significantly associated with a higher prevalence of RAVs. No obvious effect of baseline RAVs on viral load was observed. In this cohort of poor responders to IFN-RBV, no link was found with a sustained virological response to triple therapy, regardless of the algorithm used for the detection of mutations. Based on a cross-study comparison, baseline RAVs are not more frequent in poor IFN-RBV responders than in treatment-naive patients and, even in these difficult-to-treat patients, this study demonstrates no impact on treatment outcome, arguing against resistance analysis prior to treatment.

Management of hepatitis C infection before and after liver transplantation

Chronic hepatitis C (CHC) is the most common indication for liver transplantation (LT). Aggressive treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection before cirrhosis development or decompensation may reduce LT need and risk of HCV recurrence post-LT. Factors associated with increased HCV risk or severity of recurrence include older age, immunosuppression, HCV genotype 1 and high viral load at LT. HCV recurrence post-LT leads to accelerated liver disease and cirrhosis development with reduced graft and patient survival. Currently, interferon (IFN)-based regimens can be used in dual-agent regimens with ribavirin, in triple-agent antiviral strategies with direct-acting antivirals (e.g., protease inhibitors telaprevir or boceprevir), or before transplant in compensated patients to reduce HCV viral load to prevent or reduce the risk of post-LT recurrence and complications; they cannot be used in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. IFN-based regimens are used in less than half of HCV-infected patients waiting for LT due to extremely low efficacy and poor tolerability. However, antiviral therapy is indicated after LT in patients with histologically confirmed CHC despite tolerability issues. Improvements in side effect management have increased survival in patients achieving therapeutic targets. HCV treatment pre- and post-LT results in significant health care costs especially when lack of efficacy leads to disease worsening, although studies have shown sofosbuvir treatment before LT vs conventional post-LT dual antiviral is cost effective. The suboptimal efficacy and tolerability of IFN-based therapies, plus the significant economic burden, means the need for effective and well tolerated IFN-free anti-HCV therapy for pre- and post-LT remains high.

From non-A, non-B hepatitis to hepatitis C virus cure

The hepatitis C virus (HCV) was discovered in the late 1980s. Interferon (IFN)-α was proposed as an antiviral treatment for chronic hepatitis C at about the same time. Successive improvements in IFN-α-based therapy (dose finding, pegylation, addition of ribavirin) increased the rates of sustained virologic response, i.e. the rates of curing HCV infection. These rates were further improved by adding the first available direct-acting antiviral (DAA) drugs to the combination of pegylated IFN-α and ribavirin. An IFN-free era finally started in 2014, yielding rates of sustained virologic response over 90% in patients treated for 8 to 24 weeks with all-oral regimens. Major challenges however remain in implementation of these new treatment strategies, not only in low- to middle-income countries, but also in high-income countries where the price of these therapies is still prohibitive. Elimination of HCV infection through treatment in certain areas is possible but raises major public health issues.

Simeprevir with peginterferon/ribavirin for treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection: pooled safety analysis from Phase IIb and III studies

This pooled analysis of five Phase IIb and III studies evaluated the safety and tolerability of simeprevir, a once daily, oral hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor. Data were summarised for patients who received simeprevir 150 mg once daily (n = 924) or placebo (n = 540) plus pegylated interferon-α/ribavirin for 12 weeks. During the first 12 weeks of treatment, few patients discontinued simeprevir or placebo due to adverse events (AEs) (both 2.2%). Pruritus (23.8% vs 17.4%), rash (any; 22.9% vs 16.7%) and photosensitivity (3.2% vs 0.6%) [Correction added on 16 January 2015, after first online publication: In the above sentence, the values in 'Photosensitivity' were previously incorrect and have now been changed to 3.2% vs 0.6%.] were more prevalent in the simeprevir vs the placebo groups. Most AEs were grade 1/2 (72.4% for simeprevir vs 71.3% for placebo). All grade 3/4 AEs occurred in <5.0% of patients, except neutropenia (9.8% vs 7.6%). Overall incidence of neutropenia was similar (17.3% vs 15.7%). Incidence of anaemia was 13.2% for simeprevir vs 10.9% for placebo, and incidence of increased bilirubin was 8.4% vs 2.8%. Bilirubin increases were mild-to-moderate and transient without concurrent transaminase increases or association with hepatic injury. Safety and tolerability did not vary with METAVIR score, although increased bilirubin and anaemia were more frequent in simeprevir-treated patients with METAVIR F4 (increased bilirubin, 13.0% vs 3.3%; anaemia, 19.0% vs 14.8%). Serious AEs were infrequent (2.1% for simeprevir vs 3.0% for placebo). No deaths were reported during the first 12 weeks of treatment. Patient-reported fatigue and other outcomes were comparable for both groups, but were of shorter duration for simeprevir due to the use of response-guided therapy. Simeprevir is well tolerated in HCV genotype 1-infected patients.

Virological outcomes and treatment algorithms utilisation in observational study of patients with chronic hepatitis C treated with boceprevir or telaprevir

BACKGROUND

HCV-TARGET is a longitudinal observational study of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients treated with direct-acting anti-viral agents (DAAs) in a US consortium of 90 academic and community medical centres.

AIM

To assess utilisation of response-guided therapy (RGT) and sustained virological response (SVR) of a large cohort of patients.

METHODS

Patients received peginterferon (PEG-IFN), ribavirin and either telaprevir or boceprevir. Demographical, clinical and virological data were collected during treatment and follow-up. RGT and treatment futility stopping rules was assessed at key time points.

RESULTS

Of 2084 patients, 38% had cirrhosis and 56% had received prior treatment for HCV. SVR rates were 31% (95% CI: 24-40) and 50% (95% CI: 44-56) in boceprevir patients with and without cirrhosis, respectively. SVR rates were 46% (95% CI: 42-50) and 60% (95% CI: 57-64) in telaprevir patients with and without cirrhosis, respectively. Early clearance of virus, IL28B genotype, platelet counts and diabetes were identified as predictors of SVR among boceprevir patients, while early clearance of virus, IL28B, cirrhosis, HCV subtype, age, haemoglobin, bilirubin and albumin levels were identified as predictors of SVR for telaprevir patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In academic and community centres, triple therapy including boceprevir or telaprevir led to SVR rates somewhat lower than those noted in large phase 3 clinical trials. Response rates were consistently higher among patients without cirrhosis compared to those with cirrhosis regardless of DAA used and prior treatment response. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov NCT01474811.

Treatment of hepatitis C in liver transplant patients: interferon out, direct antiviral combos in

Although chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the leading indication for liver transplantation in the United States, graft and patient survival rates are reduced because of HCV recurrence after transplant. Interferon-based antiviral treatment administered either before or after transplant to prevent or treat HCV recurrence, respectively, is limited because of poor tolerability and low efficacy. However, the treatment of HCV in the transplant setting is changing considerably with the availability of newer direct-acting antivirals and interferon-free regimens. This article will review the experience to date with treating HCV in the setting of cirrhosis and liver transplantation and will discuss the unique challenges encountered when this population is being treated.

Cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir in the treatment of patients with hepatitis C

In France, 190,306 patients were suffering from chronic hepatitis C in 2012. These patients have a decreased life expectancy and are susceptible to complications associated with chronic hepatitis. Current treatments are poorly tolerated and their effectiveness varies depending on the genotype of the virus. Sofosbuvir, a new class of treatment, has demonstrated in five phase III trials sustained viral response (SVR) rates of over 90% across genotypes, higher than current treatments and has a tolerance profile similar to placebo. The objective was to determine the cost-effectiveness of using sofosbuvir in the treatment of chronic HCV infection. A Markov model was used to compare treatment strategies with and without sofosbuvir. The model simulated the natural history of HCV infection. SVR rates were based on data from clinical trials. Utilities associated with different stages of disease were based on data from the literature. French direct medical costs were used. Price for sofosbuvir was the price used in the early access program for severe fibrosis stages. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for sofosbuvir versus current reference treatments was € 16,278/QALY and varied from 40,000 €/QALY for F0 stages to 12,080 €/QALY for F4 stages. The sensitivity analyses carried out confirmed the robustness of this result. Sofosbuvir is a cost-effective treatment option for patients with hepatitis C.

Evidence-based consensus on the diagnosis, prevention and management of hepatitis C virus disease

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a potent human pathogen and is one of the main causes of chronic hepatitis round the world. The present review describes the evidence-based consensus on the diagnosis, prevention and management of HCV disease. Various techniques, for the detection of anti-HCV immunoglobulin G immunoassays, detection of HCV RNA by identifying virus-specific molecules nucleic acid testings, recognition of core antigen for diagnosis of HCV, quantitative antigen assay, have been used to detect HCV RNA and core antigen. Advanced technologies such as nanoparticle-based diagnostic assays, loop-mediated isothermal amplification and aptamers and Ortho trak-C assay have also come to the front that provides best detection results with greater ease and specificity for detection of HCV. It is of immense importance to prevent this infection especially among the sexual partners, injecting drug users, mother-to-infant transmission of HCV, household contact, healthcare workers and people who get tattoos and piercing on their skin. Management of this infection is intended to eradicate it out of the body of patients. Management includes examining the treatment (efficacy and protection), assessment of hepatic condition before commencing therapy, controlling the parameters upon which dual and triple therapies work, monitoring the body after treatment and adjusting the co-factors. Examining the treatment in some special groups of people (HIV/HCV co-infected, hemodialysis patients, renal transplanted patients).

Telaprevir and ribavirin interaction: higher ribavirin levels are not only due to renal dysfunction during triple therapy

A higher incidence of anemia has been observed during the treatment of hepatitis C virus genotype 1 (HCV-1) infection with pegylated alpha interferon (pegIFN-α), ribavirin, and telaprevir. We assessed the impacts that concomitant administration of telaprevir and changes in the glomerular filtration rate have on ribavirin plasma levels. The minimum concentrations of ribavirin in plasma (ribavirin Cmin) determined during triple therapy including telaprevir were compared with those observed after telaprevir withdrawal and those observed in the same subjects and in a large cohort during a previous course of pegIFN-α plus ribavirin. Intensive pharmacokinetic sampling for ribavirin was performed at steady state during the triple-therapy phase. Ribavirin levels were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Twenty-seven HCV-1/HIV-coinfected patients were enrolled. The median ribavirin Cmin for triple therapy (4.08 μg/ml; range, 2.14 to 5.56 μg/ml) was higher than that observed after telaprevir withdrawal (1.96 μg/ml; range, 0.41 to 3.45 μg/ml) (P < 0.001) and that observed for 125 HCV-1/HIV-coinfected patients treated only with pegIFN-α plus ribavirin (1.65 μg/ml; range, 0.41 to 5.56 μg/ml) (P < 0.001). The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decreased >20% from the baseline value in 11 of 27 patients and became normal after telaprevir removal in almost all cases. There was a negative correlation between eGFR and ribavirin clearance (r(2) = 0.257; P = 0.064) but not the ribavirin area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC0-12) (r(2) = 0.001; P = 0.455). Thus, there is a significant pharmacokinetic interaction between telaprevir and ribavirin that results in very high ribavirin levels, which explains the excess of toxicity observed with this drug combination. A blockade of the proximal tubular transporters might be implicated in both the increase in plasma creatinine and the high ribavirin levels. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01818856.).

Drug Interactions With Direct-Acting Antivirals for Hepatitis C: Implications for HIV and Transplant Patients

OBJECTIVE

Review pharmacokinetics of new direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for hepatitis C (HCV) infection and interactions with concomitant immunosuppressant and antiretroviral therapies (ART).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (1948-January 2015), EMBASE (1964-January 2015), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-January 2015), Google, and Google Scholar were searched combining the terms simeprevir, sofosbuvir, ledipasvir, daclatasvir, paritaprevir, ABT-450, ombitasvir, dasabuvir, pharmacokinetics, drug interaction, drug metabolism, HIV, antiretroviral, immunosuppressant, transplant. Articles, conference proceedings, abstracts, and product monographs were reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Literature on pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interactions with DAAs and immunosuppressants or ART was considered for inclusion. Pertinent information was extracted and summarized in the review. In the absence of data, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles were used to predict the likelihood of interactions.

DATA SYNTHESIS

DAA pharmacokinetics are reviewed and drug interaction data are presented with provision of management strategies. Fixed-dose combination paritaprevir/ritonavir/ombitasvir plus dasabuvir is most susceptible to drug interactions with immunosuppressants and ART mainly due to the influence of ritonavir on multiple enzymes. Simeprevir is also prone to drug interactions because of cytochrome P450(CYP) 3A4, CYP1A2, P-glycoprotein, and OATP1 involvement and is not recommended for use in combination with several HIV antiretrovirals (ARVs). Close therapeutic drug monitoring of calcineurin inhibitors is required with concomitant simeprevir. Few clinically significant interactions are expected with sofosbuvir or ledipasvir. Limited data suggest that daclatasvir may be coadministered with immunosuppressants but requires dose adjustments with certain ARVs.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the DAAs are completely free of drug interactions. Awareness and management of drug interactions is critical to optimize outcomes and minimize adverse effects in these patient populations.

Faldaprevir and pegylated interferon α-2a/ribavirin in individuals co-infected with hepatitis C virus genotype-1 and HIV

OBJECTIVE

Faldaprevir is a potent, once-daily hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor. STARTVerso4 assessed the efficacy and safety of faldaprevir and response-guided pegylated interferon α-2a/ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV) in individuals with HCV/HIV co-infection.

DESIGN

A phase 3 open-label study (NCT01399619).

METHODS

Individuals (N = 308) co-infected with HCV genotype 1 (treatment-naive or prior interferon relapsers) and HIV [96% on antiretroviral therapy (ART)] received faldaprevir 120 mg (N = 123) or 240 mg (N = 185) and PegIFN/RBV. Those receiving a protease inhibitor or efavirenz ART were assigned to faldaprevir 120 or 240 mg, respectively. Individuals achieving early treatment success (ETS; HCV RNA <25 IU/ml at week 4 and undetectable at week 8) were randomized to 24 or 48 weeks of PegIFN/RBV. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12).

RESULTS

SVR12 was achieved in 221 (72%) individuals, and the rates were comparable across faldaprevir doses. ETS was achieved in 80%, and of these 86% achieved SVR12, with comparable rates with 24 and 48 weeks of PegIFN/RBV (87 and 94%, respectively). In multivariate analysis, age below 40 years, IL28B CC genotype, and baseline HCV RNA below 800 000 IU/ml were associated with SVR12 (P = 0.027, P < 0.0001, and P = 0.0002, respectively), whereas treatment (ART regimen and faldaprevir dose), liver cirrhosis, and genotype 1 subtype were not. The safety profile was comparable to that of faldaprevir in HCV-monoinfected individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

High SVR12 rates were achieved with faldaprevir and PegIFN/RBV in HIV/HCV co-infected individuals, regardless of faldaprevir dose and background ART, HCV genotype 1 subtype, or cirrhosis status. SVR rates mirrored those obtained with similar regimens in HCV monoinfected individuals.

Ledipasvir-sofosbuvir with or without ribavirin to treat patients with HCV genotype 1 infection and cirrhosis non-responsive to previous protease-inhibitor therapy: a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial (SIRIUS)

BACKGROUND

Patients with cirrhosis resulting from chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are at risk of life-threatening complications, but consistently achieve lower sustained virological response (SVR) than patients without cirrhosis, especially if treatment has previously failed. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir and the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, with and without ribavirin.

METHODS

In this multicentre, double-blind trial, between Oct 21, 2013, and Oct 30, 2014, we enrolled patients with HCV genotype 1 and compensated cirrhosis who had not achieved SVR after successive treatments with pegylated interferon and protease-inhibitor regimens at 20 sites in France. With a computer-generated randomisation sequence, patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive placebo matched in appearance to study drugs for 12 weeks followed by once daily combination fixed-dose tablets of 90 mg ledipasvir and 400 mg sofosbuvir plus weight-based ribavirin for 12 weeks, or ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus placebo once daily for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was SVR 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12), for which 95% CIs were calculated with the Clopper-Pearson method. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01965535.

FINDINGS

Of 172 patients screened, 155 entered randomisation, 77 were assigned to receive ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin and 78 ledipasvir-sofosbuvir. 114 (74%) were men, 151 (97%), were white, 98 (63%) had HCV genotype 1a, and 145 (94%) had non-CC IL28B alleles. SVR12 rates were 96% (95% CI 89-99) for patients in the ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin group and 97% (91-100) in the ledipasvir-sofosbuvir group. One patient discontinued treatment because of adverse events while receiving only placebo. The most frequent adverse events were asthenia and headache, pruritus, and fatigue.

INTERPRETATION

Ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 12 weeks and ledipasvir-sofosbuvir for 24 weeks provided similarly high SVR12 rates in previous non-responders with HCV genotype 1 and compensated cirrhosis. The shorter regimen, when given with ribavirin, might, therefore, be useful to treat treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis if longer-term treatment is not possible.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences.

First-generation protease inhibitor-triple therapy: SVR 24, safety, and predictors of response in a large single center cohort

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Aim of this retrospective study was to analyze the efficacy, safety, and predictors of treatment success for first-generation-PI triple therapies, including either boceprevir or telaprevir, in a mono-centric "real-life" setting with respect to SVR 24.

PATIENTS

131 patients (102 patients telaprevir, 29 patients boceprevir) were treated. Of these, 33/131 patients were treatment naïve, 72/131 patients had been pretreated with PEG-IFN/RBV (PR) (thereof: 36 with non-response, 30 with relapse, 6 unknown), and 26/131 patients previously had received non-pegylated interferon. 96/131 patients were infected with HCV genotype 1b. 41/131 patients had liver cirrhosis.

RESULTS

95/131 (73%) patients achieved SVR 24. SVR rates for subgroups were: 26/33 (79%) for treatment naïve, 25/30 (83%) for PR-relapse, 20/36 (56%) for PR-non-response, 21/26 (81%) for non-PR pretreated patients, (26/41) 63% for patients with liver cirrhosis, 23/35 (66%) genotype 1a, 72/96 (75%) genotype 1b. Predictors of SVR 24 were eRVR and a negative viral load at PI-treatment week 4 (p < 0.0001), negative predictors were quantifiable HCV viral load at PI-treatment week 4 (p < 0.0001), baseline platelet count < 100/nl (p < 0.0001), and previous PR-non-response (p = 0.006). 33/131 (25%) patients discontinued treatment prematurely, of those 14/131 (11%) patients due to virological failure. Side effects were frequent (anemia 59/131 [45%], severe infections 6/131 [5%]).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our SVR 24 results, efficacy of PI-based triple therapy in our "real-life" cohort is comparable to the large multi-centric clinical trials. Pronounced side effects are frequent during therapy and often need complex therapeutic interventions. Since new DAA are available, it is open to discussion, if first-generation PI-triple therapy is no longer indicated at all.

Revolution in hepatitis C antiviral therapy

INTRODUCTION

Management of hepatitis C virus (HCV) is rapidly changing as a result of new direct-acting antivirals (DAA).

SOURCES OF DATA

Several peer-reviewed papers featuring new DAAs are now available. Additionally, as new data are emerging so quickly, we also reviewed recent presentations at international congresses, published in abstract form.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

New DAAs are efficacious and superior to prior treatment regimens, with minimal side effects. Shorter interferon-free regimens will soon be the mainstay of HCV treatment.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Access to new DAAs is variable across global regions. One approach to treating HCV may be to assess early viral kinetics of treatment to identify who may be cured with standard peg-interferon/ribavirin therapy as opposed to using a DAA in all patients.

GROWING POINTS

Newer studies with combination of DAAs are being conducted. The ideal interferon-free regimen has yet to be determined.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

HCV genotype 3 is the new difficult-to-treat genotype. More efficacious regimens for treating HCV genotype 3 are needed. Subgroups of patients who only require even shorter regimens of 6-8 weeks need to be identified. There is still very little data on interferon-free regimens in patients with decompensated cirrhosis and certain other subgroups.

Successful anti-viral treatment improves survival of patients with advanced liver disease due to chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Long-term outcome of chronic hepatitis C patients with successful viral eradication seems to be promising.

AIM

To evaluate mortality, incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), liver failure and liver transplantation in sustained virological responders (SVR) and non-SVR patients with different stages of fibrosis.

METHODS

Seven hundred and fourteen patients with a follow-up of 7.2 (1-21.1) years (age: 51.4 ± 12.0 years, 276 female, IFN-monotherapy: n = 19, IFN/RBV: n = 122, peg-IFN/RBV: n = 573, SVR: 551, non-SVR: 163) were studied. Two hundred and ten of 540 patients with a liver biopsy prior to treatment had advanced stages of fibrosis (Metavir F3/F4).

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients died during follow-up, 15 with SVR and 33 without (P < 0.001). Five- and 10-year mortality rates were 1.8% (10/551) and 2.7% (15/551) in the SVR group and 8.6% (14/163) and 19.1% (31/163) in the non-SVR patients (P < 0.001). In 29 patients, decompensation of liver disease [SVR: 9 (1.6%) vs. non-SVR: 20 (12.3%); P < 0.001] occurred and in 29 patients, HCC developed during follow-up [SVR: 10 (1.8%) vs. non-SVR: 19 (11.7%); P < 0.001]. Non-SVR was an independent predictor for developing (i) HCC [HR: 2.36 (95% CI: 1.07-5.23; P = 0.034], (ii) liver-related complications [HR: 2.62; (95% CI: 1.18-5.81; P = 0.018] and (iii) mortality (HR: 3.46; 95% CI: 1.91-6.29; P < 0.001). For patients with early stages of fibrosis (F0-F2), a survival benefit of SVR patients could not be demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful anti-viral therapy decreases mortality, incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma and liver failure in patients with advanced fibrosis. However, hepatocellular carcinoma development or liver failure are not prevented completely, and further follow-up of patients is advisable.

The prospective randomized study on telaprevir at 1500 or 2250 mg with pegylated interferon plus ribavirin in Japanese patients with HCV genotype 1

BACKGROUND

Triple therapy with telaprevir (TVR), pegylated interferon and ribavirin has improved antiviral efficacy in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CH-C). However, the severe adverse effects caused by TVR are important to resolve. In this prospective, randomized, multicenter, open-label study, the antiviral efficacy and safety in the reduced administration of TVR were examined.

METHODS

A total of 81 CH-C Japanese patients with HCV genotype 1 were randomized into two regimens of TVR 2250 mg (TVR-2250) or 1500 mg (TVR-1500) and treated with triple therapy for 24 weeks.

RESULTS

The mean HCV RNA at start, 2 and 4 weeks of treatment were 6.69 ± 0.70, 1.05 ± 0.74, 0.22 ± 0.48 log10 IU/ml in the TVR-2250 group and 6.70 ± 0.62, 1.02 ± 0.62, 0.13 ± 0.41 log10 IU/ml in the TVR-1500 group. The SVR rates were 85% in both groups (35/41 and 34/40, respectively). There were no patients with viral breakthrough in either group. As for adverse effects, rash more than moderate and severe anemia with <8.5 g/dl of hemoglobin were higher in the TVR-2250 group than in the TVR-1500 group (p = 0.046, p < 0.001, respectively). The increase in serum creatinine levels and decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rates were higher in the TVR-2250 group than in the TVR-1500 group.

CONCLUSIONS

The lower dose of TVR (1500 mg/day) can result in similar SVR rates and lower treatment-related adverse effects compared to the higher dose of TVR (2250 mg/day) in triple therapy (UMIN: 000007313, 000007330).

Chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 treatment roadmap for resource constrained settings

AIM: To use existing hepatitis C virus (HCV) antiviral therapies as access to new treatments is limited.

METHODS: A PubMed search for randomised control trials or meta-analysis related to response-guided therapy of HCV genotype 1 patients was undertaken using pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PR), boceprevir (B) and telaprevir (T) and lead-in where response-guided therapy at TW4(TW4), 8(TW8), 10(TW10), or 12(TW12) based on HCVRNA(+) or HCVRNA(-). Studies presented at major conferences were also used. Where necessary, a post-hoc analysis was performed. A response-guided management roadmap was created based on sustained virological response (SVR).

RESULTS: Starting with PR, those with HCVRNA(-) at TW4 have > 86% SVR, while those are HCVRNA(+) have 34%-41.7% SVR. HCVRNA(-) TW4 patients can have 24 wk PR if HCVRNA < 400000 IU/mL. Alternatively, 28 wk BPR has similar SVR. If HCVRNA(+) at TW4, 72 wk PR leads to 53% SVR, hence BPR is a better option, and if HCVRNA(-) by TW8, 28 wk therapy is sufficient. If HCVRNA(+) at TW8, then HCVRNA should be checked at TW10 and TW12. By TW12, HCVRNA ≥ 100 IU/mL activates the stopping rule. This roadmap is applicable for treatment-naïve, treatment failures and cirrhotic patients. Validation from an Asia Pacific early access boceprevir program confirmed the findings that HCVRNA(-) at TW4, or TW8 conferred > 80% SVR, leading to the “80-80” rule.

CONCLUSION: Using a roadmap based on HCVRNA(-) at TW4 or TW8 (the “80-80” rule), high SVR can be achieved, and guide the best choices for treatment, and also reduces drug exposure in poor responders.

Assessing safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir for the treatment of hepatitis C

INTRODUCTION

IFN-free regimens with direct antiviral agents (DAAs) against hepatitis C virus (HCV) are likely to greatly expand patients' access and response to hepatitis C therapy, while safety and tolerability of treatments seem substantially improved. Sofosbuvir (SOF), a NS5B nucleotide polymerase inhibitor with pan-genotypic activity and a high-barrier to resistance, has been approved by FDA and EMA in an all oral combination therapy for chronic hepatitis C with ribavirin (RBV) alone, or in combination with either pegylated interferon/RBV or other DAAs.

AREAS COVERED

This paper provides an overview of SOF-based therapy in chronic hepatitis C as it emerges from the published clinical trials. Data on special populations are included (i.e., decompensated patients, patients on liver transplant waiting lists, patients with renal impairment). The data has been analyzed according to the different HCV-genotypes and comprehensively covers both safety and efficacy treatment profiles.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical trials have highlighted the safety and efficacy of SOF-based regimens, leading to the rapid approval of this therapy and its incorporation in the recommendations of the international societies on treatment of HCV infection. However, additional data are still needed to optimize both combination therapies' efficacy and duration in some categories of patients who have been under-represented in the registration trials.

Safety profile of boceprevir and telaprevir in chronic hepatitis C: real world experience from HCV-TARGET

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The safety profiles of boceprevir and telaprevir in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C, administered in academic and community centres across the United States, were evaluated.

METHODS

In 90 medical centres, patients with chronic HCV received pegylated interferon, ribavirin, and either telaprevir or boceprevir per local standard of care. Demographic, adverse event, clinical, and virological data were collected during treatment and follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 2084 patients (97% HCV genotype 1) received at least one dose of a protease inhibitor. At baseline, 38% of patients had cirrhosis, and 57% had received at least one prior treatment for hepatitis C. Serious adverse events occurred in 12% of patients receiving protease inhibitor therapy. Overall, 66% of patients experienced anaemia, leading to frequent ribavirin dose reductions (42%) and erythropoietin use (37%); 11% received blood transfusion. More than 90% of patients had adverse events that led to a prescription, treatment, or dosage change, and 39% of patients discontinued treatment early, most commonly because of adverse events (18%) or lack of efficacy (16%). Hepatic decompensation events occurred in 3% of all patients. Age, female gender, cirrhosis, HCV genotype 1 subtype, creatinine clearance, platelet levels, albumin levels and haemoglobin levels were independent predictors of anaemia. Five deaths occurred. Overall, 52% of all patients achieved a sustained virologic response.

CONCLUSIONS

In academic and community centres, where chronic hepatitis C patients commonly have advanced liver disease, triple therapy was associated with a high rate of adverse events and involved frequent treatment modifications and adverse event management.

Ribavirin dose reduction during telaprevir/ribavirin/peg-interferon therapy overcomes the effect of the ITPA gene polymorphism

Treatment success of chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection has improved with the advent of telaprevir plus peg-interferon/ribavirin triple combination therapy. However, the effect of inosine triphosphatase (ITPA) polymorphism on dose reduction during triple therapy, especially during the postmarketing phase, has not been sufficiently evaluated. We analysed 273 patients with genotype 1 infection who were treated with triple therapy and assessed the effect of the ITPA polymorphism on dose reduction. ITPA and IFNL4 SNP genotypes were determined by the Invader assay. A stepwise multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with outcome of the therapy. The overall sustained viral response (SVR) rate 12 weeks after the end of therapy was 80.2% (219/273). Decline of haemoglobin was significantly faster, and ribavirin was more extensively reduced in patients with ITPA SNP rs1127354 genotype CC than CA/AA. Extensive reduction of ribavirin resulted in mild reduction of telaprevir and peg-interferon, but no significant increase in viral breakthrough. Although the amount of telaprevir given was slightly higher in CA/AA patients, the total dose of peg-interferon and the SVR rate did not differ between the two groups. Multivariate analysis showed that IFNL4 but not ITPA SNP genotype, platelet count and peg-interferon adherence were significantly associated with outcome of therapy. Postmarketing-phase triple therapy resulted in a high SVR rate in spite of extensive ribavirin dose reduction in a diverse patient population, indicating the importance of treatment continuation and appropriate management of adverse events.

The addition of a protease inhibitor increases the risk of infections in patients with hepatitis C-related cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Antiviral therapy with interferon and ribavirin (double therapy) is associated with a significant risk of developing bacterial infections in patients with hepatitis C-related cirrhosis. The addition of telaprevir or boceprevir seems to increase this risk but there are no studies yet to compare the infection rate between both treatments. We aimed to assess rate, type and predictive factors of infection in cirrhotic patients undergoing triple or double antiviral therapy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. 167 patients with hepatitis C-related cirrhosis undergoing triple therapy (cohort A) and 81 receiving double therapy (cohort B) were enrolled in the study. Only Child-Pugh A patients were included.

RESULTS

The infection rate was significantly higher for patients in cohort A as compared to those in cohort B (25% vs. 9%, p=0.001). Interestingly, respiratory tract infections were significantly more frequent in patients in cohort A (12% vs. 1%; p=0.049). The use of triple antiviral therapy was the only predictive factor of infection. Severe infections were also more frequent in patients in cohort A, but the difference did not reach the level of significance (13% vs. 6%, p=0.123).

CONCLUSIONS

Triple therapy carries a higher risk of infections in patients with cirrhosis and changes the pattern of infection in this subpopulation. Further studies are needed in order to establish the underlying mechanism of this event.

High post-transplant virological response in hepatitis C virus infected patients treated with pretransplant protease inhibitor-based triple therapy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Prevention of recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) following liver transplant (LT) with pre-LT antiviral therapy is limited by poor tolerability and efficacy. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of NS3/4A protease inhibitor (PI)-based triple therapy in patients awaiting LT.

METHODS

Consecutive patients treated with triple therapy pre-LT from two centers were prospectively enrolled in an observational cohort. Overall 12 week sustained virological response (SVR12) was the primary outcome. Pre- and post-LT (pTVR) virological response rates and safety were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients (mean age 57.9, 79% male, 66% prior non-responders) were treated with telaprevir (93%) or boceprevir-based (7%) triple therapy for a median (range) of 27 (3-50) weeks, including a pegylated-interferon and ribavirin lead-in in 18%. Median (range) MELD at treatment was 8 (6-16), 39% had hepatocellular carcinoma and all patients were Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A (62%) or B (38%). Twelve patients underwent LT, 75% with undetectable viral load. The overall SVR12 rate was 52%, including pre-LT SVR12 of 41% in patients who completed treatment and follow-up on the wait list and pTVR12 of 67% among transplanted patients. The pTVR12 rate was 89% among those patients with undetectable viral load at LT. Serious adverse events occurred in nine (31%) patients including one (3%) on-treatment death and eight (28%) hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall SVR12 and pTVR12 rates are high among patients treated with PI-based triple therapy while awaiting LT, even in this difficult to treat population. However, caution is needed as early discontinuation and serious adverse events are common.