Defining the standard of care: randomized controlled trials for the treatment of hepatitis C in the HIV-infected person

HIV research trials versus standard clinics for antiretroviral-naïve patients: the outcomes differ but do the patients?

Exclusion criteria for HIV treatment-naïve drug trials can be stringent and selection bias exists, making it difficult to extrapolate results into the 'real world' clinical situation. We aim to compare the demographics, virological outcomes and psychosocial complexity in adult HIV-infected treatment-naïve patients from our cohort initiating combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) in research trials versus standard clinics. In our unit from 2006 to 2011, 1202 standard clinic and 69 research trial patients initiated cART; every eighth standard clinics patient was included to create a standard clinics:research trials patient ratio of 2:1. Notes were retrospectively reviewed for patient demographics, attendance rates and virological outcomes. Data from 221 antiretroviral-naïve patients starting cART were analysed: 152 standard clinic patients and 69 from research trials. In the research trials group, there was an overrepresentation of men (p = 0.041), men who have sex with men (p < 0.001), patients of white ethnicity (p = 0.01), employed patients (p = 0.01) and patients using excessive alcohol (p = 0.02). There was equal representation of drug use, depression and referral to psychology, psychiatry and social work in both groups. The research trials group at baseline had significantly higher CD4 counts (p < 0.001), lower viral loads (p = 0.01) and more patients achieved undetectable viral loads at three (p < 0.001), six (p < 0.001) and 24 months (p = 0.033). There is a prevailing common preconception that participants in clinical trials are uncomplicated, unlike their 'real-life' counterparts. We demonstrated important similarities in psychosocial complexity as well as differences in demographics and virological outcomes in trial and non-trial patients. Clinicians need to be aware of these discrepancies to ensure the facilitation of a heterogeneous population participating in research trials.

Association of ITPA gene polymorphisms and the risk of ribavirin-induced anemia in HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV)-coinfected patients receiving HCV combination therapy

Polymorphisms of the ITPA gene have been associated with anemia during combination therapy in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-monoinfected patients. Our aim was to confirm this association in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients. In this prospective, observational study, 73 HIV/HCV-coinfected patients treated with pegylated interferon plus ribavirin (RBV) were enrolled. Two single nucleotide polymorphisms within or adjacent to the ITPA gene (rs1127354 and rs7270101) were genotyped. The associations between the ITPA genotype and anemia or treatment outcome were examined. Fifty-nine patients (80.8%) had CC at rs1127354, whereas 14 (19.2%) had a CA/AA ITPA genotype. Percent decreases from baseline hemoglobin level were significantly greater in patients with the CC genotype than in those with the CA/AA genotype at week 4 (P = 0.0003), week 12 (P < 0.0001), and week 36 (P = 0.0102) but not at the end of treatment. RBV dose reduction was more often needed in patients with the CC genotype than in those with the CA/AA genotype (odds ratio [OR] = 11.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.45 to 256.17; P = 0.0039), as was erythropoietin therapy (OR = 8.28; 95% CI = 1.04 to 371.12; P = 0.0057). Risk factors independently associated with percent hemoglobin nadir decrease were RBV dose reduction (OR = 11.72; 95% CI = 6.82 to 16.63; P < 0.001), baseline hemoglobin (OR = 1.69; 95% CI = 0.23 to 3.15; P = 0.024), and body mass index (OR = -0.7; 95% CI = -1.43 to 0.03; P = 0.061). ITPA polymorphism was not an independent predictor of sustained virological response. Polymorphisms at rs1127354 in the ITPA gene influence hemoglobin levels during combination HCV therapy and the need for RBV dose reduction and erythropoietin use in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients.

Antiviral treatment for chronic hepatitis C in patients with human immunodeficiency virus

BACKGROUND

Antiviral treatment for chronic hepatitis C may be less effective if patients are co-infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of antiviral treatment for chronic hepatitis C in patients with HIV.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified through manual and electronic searches in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded. The last search was May 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing at least 12 weeks of any anti-HCV treatment versus another treatment regimen or no treatment. Included patients had chronic hepatitis C and stable HIV irrespective of previous antiviral therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were done in duplicate. Analysis was by intention-to-treat.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen trials were included. None of the included 2269 patients were previously treated for chronic hepatitis C. Peginterferon (either 2a, 180 microgram, or 2b, 1.5 microgram/kg, once weekly) plus ribavirin was more effective in achieving end of treatment and sustained virological response compared with interferon plus ribavirin (5 trials, 1340 patients) or peginterferon (2 trials, 714 patients). The benefit of peginterferon plus ribavirin was seen irrespective of HCV genotype although patients with genotype 1 or 4 had lower response rates (27%) than patients with genotype 2 or 3 (56%). The remaining trials compared different treatment regimens in patients who were treatment naive or had no virological response after three months of treatment, but overall they had not enough power to show any effect of increasing the dose of interferon or adding both amantadine or ribavirin. The overall mortality was 23/2111 patients with no significant differences between treatment regimens. Treatment increased the risk of adverse events including anaemia and flu-like symptoms, and several serious adverse events occurred including fatal lactic acidosis, liver failure, and suicide due to depression.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Peginterferon plus ribavirin may be considered a treatment for patients with chronic hepatitis C and stable HIV who have not received treatment for hepatitis C as the intervention may clear the blood of HCV RNA. Supporting evidence comes mainly from the analysis of this non-validated surrogate outcome assessed in comparisons against other antiviral treatments. There is no evidence on treatment of patients who have relapsed or did not respond to previous therapy. Careful monitoring of adverse events is warranted.

Natural history of anemia associated with interferon/ribavirin therapy for patients with HIV/HCV coinfection

The natural history of anemia related to interferon/ribavirin (IFN/RBV) treatment in patients with human immunodeficiency virus/hepatitis C virus (HIV/HCV) coinfection is not completely understood. The current 8-week, multicenter, observational study characterized anemia over the course of HCV treatment in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection. Eligible HIV/HCV coinfected patients were receiving care in community-based and academic institutions and were on stable antiretroviral therapy and initiating IFN/RBV therapy. Hb, sEPO, reticulocytes, transfusions, laboratory values (e.g., total bilirubin), and IFN and RBV dosages were monitored weekly. Ninety-one patients were analyzed (mean age, 46 years; 71% on HAART) and 53 patients completed the study. Mean Hb decreased significantly (5.0 g/dl) within 1 week of initiating IFN/RBV therapy (p = 0.0002); Hb nadir occurred at a median of 37 days. Maximum Hb decreases of > or =2.0 g/dl occurred in 56 (62%) patients and > or =3.0 g/dl occurred in 45 (49%) patients. Reticulocyte count increased within the first 2 weeks and sEPO peaked at week 3. Mean increase from baseline to week 2 in reticulocyte count and sEPO, respectively, was 1.3% (n = 74) and 45.0 mIU/ml (n = 80) (p < 0.0001 for each parameter), and from baseline to week 8 was 0.9% (n = 48) and 41.0 mIU/ml (n = 52) (p < or = 0.0001 for each parameter). Adverse events (AEs) were the most common reason for study discontinuation (66% of discontinuing patients). Among the 25 patients who discontinued due to AEs, 84% discontinued due to anemia (n = 21). Significant decreases in Hb were observed in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients within 1 week of initiating IFN/RBV therapy. sEPO and reticulocyte increases were blunted in response to anemia; Hb levels did not return to baseline values and anemia was a frequent reason for discontinuing the study.

Eligibility criteria for HIV clinical trials and generalizability of results: the gap between published reports and study protocols

OBJECTIVE

Applicability of randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) results to 'real world' situations is dependent on the comparability of trial participants to general patient populations. A full disclosure of criteria employed for trial enrollment is necessary for clinicians to assess generalizability. We sought to assess both the impact on generalizability and the disclosure rate of enrollment criteria for 32 major HIV RCTs in the AIDS Clinical Trial Group (ACTG) and Community Programs for Clinical Research on AIDS (CPCRA) trial networks.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Eligibility criteria were compared in complete protocols to criteria listed in publications from these 32 NIH-funded HIV RCTs. We then applied these criteria to the Women's Interagency HIV Study (WIHS), the largest cohort study of HIV-infected women in the US.

RESULTS

When applied to WIHS, eligibility criteria from protocols excluded 0-67.6% (median 42%) of WIHS participants (50.6% excluded from ACTG trials). Eligibility criteria in publications excluded 0-62% (median 19.6%) of WIHS (21.2% excluded from ACTG trials). The number of women in WIHS seemingly ineligible for trial participation per enrollment criteria listed in publications averaged only 60% of those actually excluded based on the protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that HIV RCT eligibility criteria excluded a large proportion of a representative cohort of HIV-infected women from trial participation. Furthermore, trial publications are not fully reflective of protocols in terms of disclosing eligibility criteria. Standardization and full disclosure of trial methodology will allow clinicians and researchers to more fully assess the generalizability of findings to their patient populations.