Antiviral activity of narlaprevir combined with ritonavir and pegylated interferon in chronic hepatitis C patients

Asymmetric Synthesis of US-FDA Approved Drugs over Five Years (2016–2020): A Recapitulation of Chirality

Chirality is a major theme in the design, discovery, and development of new drugs. Historically, pharmaceuticals have been synthesized as racemic mixtures. However, the enantiomeric forms of drug molecules have distinct biological properties. One enantiomer may be responsible for the desired therapeutic effect (eutomer), whereas the other may be inactive, interfere with the therapeutic form, or exhibit toxicity (distomer). Classical chemical synthesis usually leads to a racemic mixture unless stereospecific synthesis is employed. To meet the requirements of single-enantiomeric drugs, asymmetric synthesis has evolved at the forefront of drug discovery. Asymmetric synthesis involves the conversion of an achiral starting material into a chiral product. This review emphasizes the methods used for synthesizing FDA-approved chiral drugs during 2016–2020, with a special focus on asymmetric synthesis by means of chiral induction, resolution, or chiral pool.

Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of narlaprevir in the composition of interferon and interferon-free treatment regimens for patients with chronic hepatitis C

Aim. Our aim was to give a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of using narlaprevir in combination with pegylated interferon-alpha-2a (Peg-IFN-alpha-2a) and interferon-free mode in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC). Materials and methods. The prospective cohort study included 187 patients infected with genotype 1b of hepatitis C virus. Of these, 107 (the 1st group of patients) received narlaprevir 200 mg once a day, ritonavir 100 mg once a day, Peg-IFN-alpha-2a 180 mkg subcutaneously once a week and ribavirin at a dose depending on body weight (10001200 mg per day) for 12 weeks, and then the standart "dual" therapy (Peg-IFN-alpha-2a + ribavirin) was continued until 24 weeks. Patients of the 2nd group (n=80) received antiviral therapy in an interferon-free mode. They received narlaprevir 200 mg once daily, ritonavir 100 mg once daily, and daclatasvir 60 mg once daily for 12 weeks. Results. With the use of an interferon-containing treatment regimen, a sustained virological response was achieved in 92.4% of previousle untreated patients with CH and in 66.7% patients with "unsuccessful" experience of the previous course of treatment. In 5.6% of cases, there was an early termination of treatment due to the development of adverse events. 80 (100%) patients completed the course of treatment with narlaprevir in the interferon-free mode. Sustained virological response was reached by 75 (90%) patients. Conclusion. Real clinical practice indicates that the use of narlaprevir in the non-interferon mode is not inferior in efficiency to the interferon-containing treatment regimen and demonstrates a more favorable safety profile.

A drug repurposing screen identifies hepatitis C antivirals as inhibitors of the SARS-CoV2 main protease

Effective SARS-CoV-2 antiviral drugs are desperately needed. The SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro) appears as an attractive target for drug development. We show that the existing pharmacopeia contains many drugs with potential for therapeutic repurposing as selective and potent inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro. We screened a collection of ~6,070 drugs with a previous history of use in humans for compounds that inhibit the activity of Mpro in vitro and found ~50 compounds with activity against Mpro. Subsequent dose validation studies demonstrated 8 dose responsive hits with an IC50 ≤ 50 μM. Hits from our screen are enriched with hepatitis C NS3/4A protease targeting drugs including boceprevir, ciluprevir. narlaprevir, and telaprevir. This work suggests previous large-scale commercial drug development initiatives targeting hepatitis C NS3/4A viral protease should be revisited because some previous lead compounds may be more potent against SARS-CoV-2 Mpro than boceprevir and suitable for rapid repurposing.

Potency, Safety, and Pharmacokinetic Profiles of Potential Inhibitors Targeting SARS-CoV-2 Main Protease

Effective, safe, and pharmacokinetically suitable drugs are urgently needed to curb the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The main protease or 3C-like protease (Mpro or 3CLpro) of SARS-CoV-2 is considered an important target to formulate potent drugs corresponding to its crucial role in virus replication and maturation in addition to its relatively conserved active site. Promising baseline data on the potency and safety of drugs targeting SARS-CoV-2 Mpro are currently available. However, preclinical and clinical data on the pharmacokinetic profiles of these drugs are very limited. This review discusses the potency, safety, and pharmacokinetic profiles of potential inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro and forward directions on the development of future studies focusing on COVID-19 therapeutics.

Malleability of the SARS-CoV-2 3CL Mpro Active-Site Cavity Facilitates Binding of Clinical Antivirals

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 requires rapid development of specific therapeutics and vaccines. The main protease of SARS-CoV-2, 3CL Mpro, is an established drug target for the design of inhibitors to stop the virus replication. Repurposing existing clinical drugs can offer a faster route to treatments. Here, we report on the binding mode and inhibition properties of several inhibitors using room temperature X-ray crystallography and in vitro enzyme kinetics. The enzyme active-site cavity reveals a high degree of malleability, allowing aldehyde leupeptin and hepatitis C clinical protease inhibitors (telaprevir, narlaprevir, and boceprevir) to bind and inhibit SARS-CoV-2 3CL Mpro. Narlaprevir, boceprevir, and telaprevir are low-micromolar inhibitors, whereas the binding affinity of leupeptin is substantially weaker. Repurposing hepatitis C clinical drugs as COVID-19 treatments may be a useful option to pursue. The observed malleability of the enzyme active-site cavity should be considered for the successful design of specific protease inhibitors.

[Efficacy and safety of narlaprevir/ritonavir and daclatasvir non interferon combination in population of Russian patients with chronic hepatitis C]

AIM

Evaluate efficacy and safety of a combination of direct - acting antivirals narlaprevir/ritonavir with daclatasvir in patients with viral hepatitis C.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study enrolled adult patients with HCV genotype 1b infection without demonstrated NS5A resistance - associated substitutions Y93C/H/N/S and/or L31F/M/V/I. Patients were treated with narlaprevir 200 mg QD, ritonavir 100 mg QD and daclatasvir 60 mg QD. Treatment duration was 12 weeks. Proportion of patients achieving sustained virological response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12) was the primary efficacy endpoint.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In total, 105 (75.0%) patients were treatment with the study combination. Patients' age varied from 21 to 69 years, the mean age being 43.2±10.9 years. There were slightly more women (55.2%), and 69 patients (65.7%) had comorbidities. SVR 12 was 89.5% (95% CI 82.0-94.7%). In 10 of 11 patients with treatment failures NS5A resistance - associated substitutions in residues 31 and/or 93 were found, as well as less clinically relevant substitutions L28M, P58S, R30Q, Q62K. Adverse events (AEs) were found in less than one half of patients (45 patients, or 42.9% in the safety population). Almost all recorded AEs were mild to moderate.

CONCLUSION

Efficacy of treatment with a combination of narlaprevir/ritonavir and daclatasvir in treatment - naïve patients with HCV genotype 1b was close to 90%. This combination was found to be safe and well - tolerated.

Global elimination of hepatitis C virus infection: Progresses and the remaining challenges

Today, with the introduction of interferon-free direct-acting antivirals and outstanding progresses in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, the elimination of HCV infection seems more achievable. A further challenge is continued transmission of HCV infection in high-risk population specially injecting drug users (IDUs) as the major reservoir of HCV infection. Considering the fact that most of these infections remain undiagnosed, unidentified HCV-infected IDUs are potential sources for the rapid spread of HCV in the community. The continuous increase in the number of IDUs along with the rising prevalence of HCV infection among young IDUs is harbinger of a forthcoming public health dilemma, presenting a serious challenge to control transmission of HCV infection. Even the changes in HCV genotype distribution attributed to injecting drug use confirm this issue. These circumstances create a strong demand for timely diagnosis and proper treatment of HCV-infected patients through risk-based screening to mitigate the risk of HCV transmission in the IDUs community and, consequently, in the society. Meanwhile, raising general awareness of HCV infection, diagnosis and treatment through public education should be the core activity of any harm reduction intervention, as the root cause of failure in control of HCV infection has been lack of awareness among young drug takers. In addition, effective prevention, comprehensive screening programs with a specific focus on high-risk population, accessibility to the new anti-HCV treatment regimens and public education should be considered as the top priorities of any health policy decision to eliminate HCV infection.

Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Millions of people worldwide suffer from hepatitis C, which can lead to severe liver disease, liver cancer, and death. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), e.g. sofosbuvir, are relatively new and expensive interventions for chronic hepatitis C, and preliminary results suggest that DAAs may eradicate hepatitis C virus (HCV) from the blood (sustained virological response). Sustained virological response (SVR) is used by investigators and regulatory agencies as a surrogate outcome for morbidity and mortality, based solely on observational evidence. However, there have been no randomised trials that have validated that usage.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of DAAs in people with chronic HCV.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for all published and unpublished trials in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, and BIOSIS; the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China Network Knowledge Information (CNKI), the Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP), Google Scholar, The Turning Research into Practice (TRIP) Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, European Medicines Agency (EMA) (www.ema.europa.eu/ema/), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (www.fda.gov), and pharmaceutical company sources for ongoing or unpublished trials. Searches were last run in October 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing DAAs versus no intervention or placebo, alone or with co-interventions, in adults with chronic HCV. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were hepatitis C-related morbidity, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatocellular carcinoma, non-serious adverse events (each reported separately), and SVR. We systematically assessed risks of bias, performed Trial Sequential Analysis, and followed an eight-step procedure to assess thresholds for statistical and clinical significance. We evaluated the overall quality of the evidence, using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 138 trials randomising a total of 25,232 participants. The trials were generally short-term trials and designed primarily to assess the effect of treatment on SVR. The trials evaluated 51 different DAAs. Of these, 128 trials employed matching placebo in the control group. All included trials were at high risk of bias. Eighty-four trials involved DAAs on the market or under development (13,466 participants). Fifty-seven trials administered DAAs that were discontinued or withdrawn from the market. Study populations were treatment-naive in 95 trials, had been exposed to treatment in 17 trials, and comprised both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced individuals in 24 trials. The HCV genotypes were genotype 1 (119 trials), genotype 2 (eight trials), genotype 3 (six trials), genotype 4 (nine trials), and genotype 6 (one trial). We identified two ongoing trials.We could not reliably determine the effect of DAAs on the market or under development on our primary outcome of hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality. There were no data on hepatitis C-related morbidity and only limited data on mortality from 11 trials (DAA 15/2377 (0.63%) versus control 1/617 (0.16%); OR 3.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 26.18, very low-quality evidence). We did not perform Trial Sequential Analysis on this outcome.There is very low quality evidence that DAAs on the market or under development do not influence serious adverse events (DAA 5.2% versus control 5.6%; OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15 , 15,817 participants, 43 trials). The Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was sufficient information to rule out that DAAs reduce the relative risk of a serious adverse event by 20% when compared with placebo. The only DAA that showed a lower risk of serious adverse events when meta-analysed separately was simeprevir (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86). However, Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was not enough information to confirm or reject a relative risk reduction of 20%, and when one trial with an extreme result was excluded, the meta-analysis result showed no evidence of a difference.DAAs on the market or under development may reduce the risk of no SVR from 54.1% in untreated people to 23.8% in people treated with DAA (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52, 6886 participants, 32 trials, low quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Only 1/84 trials on the market or under development assessed the effects of DAAs on health-related quality of life (SF-36 mental score and SF-36 physical score).There was insufficient evidence from trials on withdrawn or discontinued DAAs to determine their effect on hepatitis C-related morbidity and all-cause mortality (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79; 5 trials, very low-quality evidence). However, these DAAs seemed to increase the risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.73; 29 trials, very low-quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.None of the 138 trials provided useful data to assess the effects of DAAs on the remaining secondary outcomes (ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, and hepatocellular carcinoma).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for our main outcomes of interest come from short-term trials, and we are unable to determine the effect of long-term treatment with DAAs. The rates of hepatitis C morbidity and mortality observed in the trials are relatively low and we are uncertain as to how DAAs affect this outcome. Overall, there is very low quality evidence that DAAs on the market or under development do not influence serious adverse events. There is insufficient evidence to judge if DAAs have beneficial or harmful effects on other clinical outcomes for chronic HCV. Simeprevir may have beneficial effects on risk of serious adverse event. In all remaining analyses, we could neither confirm nor reject that DAAs had any clinical effects. DAAs may reduce the number of people with detectable virus in their blood, but we do not have sufficient evidence from randomised trials that enables us to understand how SVR affects long-term clinical outcomes. SVR is still an outcome that needs proper validation in randomised clinical trials.

Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Millions of people worldwide suffer from hepatitis C, which can lead to severe liver disease, liver cancer, and death. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), e.g. sofosbuvir, are relatively new and expensive interventions for chronic hepatitis C, and preliminary results suggest that DAAs may eradicate hepatitis C virus (HCV) from the blood (sustained virological response). Sustained virological response (SVR) is used by investigators and regulatory agencies as a surrogate outcome for morbidity and mortality, based solely on observational evidence. However, there have been no randomised trials that have validated that usage.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of DAAs in people with chronic HCV.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for all published and unpublished trials in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, and BIOSIS; the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China Network Knowledge Information (CNKI), the Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP), Google Scholar, The Turning Research into Practice (TRIP) Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, European Medicines Agency (EMA) (www.ema.europa.eu/ema/), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (www.fda.gov), and pharmaceutical company sources for ongoing or unpublished trials. Searches were last run in October 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing DAAs versus no intervention or placebo, alone or with co-interventions, in adults with chronic HCV. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were hepatitis C-related morbidity, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatocellular carcinoma, non-serious adverse events (each reported separately), and SVR. We systematically assessed risks of bias, performed Trial Sequential Analysis, and followed an eight-step procedure to assess thresholds for statistical and clinical significance. We evaluated the overall quality of the evidence, using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 138 trials randomising a total of 25,232 participants. The trials were generally short-term trials and designed primarily to assess the effect of treatment on SVR. The trials evaluated 51 different DAAs. Of these, 128 trials employed matching placebo in the control group. All included trials were at high risk of bias. Eighty-four trials involved DAAs on the market or under development (13,466 participants). Fifty-seven trials administered DAAs that were discontinued or withdrawn from the market. Study populations were treatment-naive in 95 trials, had been exposed to treatment in 17 trials, and comprised both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced individuals in 24 trials. The HCV genotypes were genotype 1 (119 trials), genotype 2 (eight trials), genotype 3 (six trials), genotype 4 (nine trials), and genotype 6 (one trial). We identified two ongoing trials.We could not reliably determine the effect of DAAs on the market or under development on our primary outcome of hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality. There were no data on hepatitis C-related morbidity and only limited data on mortality from 11 trials (DAA 15/2377 (0.63%) versus control 1/617 (0.16%); OR 3.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 26.18, very low-quality evidence). We did not perform Trial Sequential Analysis on this outcome.There is very low quality evidence that DAAs on the market or under development do not influence serious adverse events (DAA 5.2% versus control 5.6%; OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15 , 15,817 participants, 43 trials). The Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was sufficient information to rule out that DAAs reduce the relative risk of a serious adverse event by 20% when compared with placebo. The only DAA that showed a lower risk of serious adverse events when meta-analysed separately was simeprevir (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86). However, Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was not enough information to confirm or reject a relative risk reduction of 20%, and when one trial with an extreme result was excluded, the meta-analysis result showed no evidence of a difference.DAAs on the market or under development may reduce the risk of no SVR from 54.1% in untreated people to 23.8% in people treated with DAA (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52, 6886 participants, 32 trials, low quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Only 1/84 trials on the market or under development assessed the effects of DAAs on health-related quality of life (SF-36 mental score and SF-36 physical score).There was insufficient evidence from trials on withdrawn or discontinued DAAs to determine their effect on hepatitis C-related morbidity and all-cause mortality (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79; 5 trials, very low-quality evidence). However, these DAAs seemed to increase the risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.73; 29 trials, very low-quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.None of the 138 trials provided useful data to assess the effects of DAAs on the remaining secondary outcomes (ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, and hepatocellular carcinoma).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for our main outcomes of interest come from short-term trials, and we are unable to determine the effect of long-term treatment with DAAs. The rates of hepatitis C morbidity and mortality observed in the trials are relatively low and we are uncertain as to how DAAs affect this outcome. Overall, there is very low quality evidence that DAAs on the market or under development do not influence serious adverse events. There is insufficient evidence to judge if DAAs have beneficial or harmful effects on other clinical outcomes for chronic HCV. Simeprevir may have beneficial effects on risk of serious adverse event. In all remaining analyses, we could neither confirm nor reject that DAAs had any clinical effects. DAAs may reduce the number of people with detectable virus in their blood, but we do not have sufficient evidence from randomised trials that enables us to understand how SVR affects long-term clinical outcomes. SVR is still an outcome that needs proper validation in randomised clinical trials.

Current therapy for chronic hepatitis C: The role of direct-acting antivirals

One of the most exciting developments in antiviral research has been the discovery of the direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) that effectively cure chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections. Based on more than 100 clinical trials and real-world studies, we provide a comprehensive overview of FDA-approved therapies and newly discovered anti-HCV agents with a special focus on drug efficacy, mechanisms of action, and safety. We show that HCV drug development has advanced in multiple aspects: (i) interferon-based regimens were replaced by interferon-free regimens; (ii) genotype-specific drugs evolved to drugs for all HCV genotypes; (iii) therapies based upon multiple pills per day were simplified to a single pill per day; (iv) drug potency increased from moderate (∼60%) to high (>90%) levels of sustained virologic responses; (v) treatment durations were shortened from 48 to 12 or 8 weeks; and (vi) therapies could be administered orally regardless of prior treatment history and cirrhotic status. However, despite these remarkable achievements made in HCV drug discovery, challenges remain in the management of difficult-to-treat patients.

•

HCV genotype-specific drugs evolve to pan-genotypic drugs.

•

Drug potency increases from moderate (∼60%) to high (>90%) levels of sustained virologic response.

•

Treatment durations are shortened from a 48-week to 12-week or 8-week period.

•

HCV therapies based upon multiple pills per day are simplified to a single pill per day.

•

HCV therapies are administered orally regardless of prior treatment history and cirrhotic status.

Treatment of HCV infection with the novel NS3/4A protease inhibitors

HCV NS3/4A serine protease inhibitors are the first class of direct acting antivirals (DAA) introduced in clinical practice. The first generation agents, selective against HCV genotype 1, are used in association with pegylated interferons and ribavirin allowing increased cure rates at the price of increased toxicity, significant drug interactions and high risk of selecting mutants conferring cross-resistance to the entire class. A large number of second-wave HCV protease inhibitors are currently in clinical development. Advancements include higher potency, activity against a wider number of genotypes, improved tolerability, easier dosing schedules, although their genetic barrier to resistance remains low, especially for subtype 1a, except for the most recent grazoprevir and ACH-2684. The most relevant progress regards the combination with other classes of DAA allowing construction of interferon-free regimens of short duration, good tolerability with exceptionally high cure rates.

Evolutionary dynamics of hepatitis C virus NS3 protease domain during and following treatment with narlaprevir, a potent NS3 protease inhibitor

Narlaprevir, a hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A serine protease inhibitor, has demonstrated robust antiviral activity in a placebo-controlled phase 1 study. To study evolutionary dynamics of resistant variants, the NS3 protease sequence was clonally analysed in thirty-two HCV genotype 1-infected patients following treatment with narlaprevir. Narlaprevir monotherapy was administered for one week (period 1) followed by narlaprevir/pegylated interferon-alpha-2b combination therapy with or without ritonavir (period 2) during two weeks, interrupted by a washout period of one month. Thereafter, all patients initiated pegylated interferon-alpha-2b/ribavirin combination therapy. Longitudinal clonal analysis was performed in those patients with NS3 mutations. After narlaprevir re-exposure, resistance-associated mutations at position V36, T54, R155 and A156 were detected in five patients in >95% of the clones. Narlaprevir retreatment resulted in a 2.58 and 5.06 log10 IU/mL viral load decline in patients with and without mutations, respectively (P=<0.01). After treatment, resistant variants were replaced with wild-type virus within 2-24 weeks in three patients. However, the R155K mutation was still observed 3.1 years after narlaprevir dosing in two patients in 5% and 45% of the viral population. Resistant variants could be detected early during treatment with narlaprevir. A slower viral load decline was observed in those patients with resistance-associated mutations detectable by direct population sequencing. These mutations disappeared within six months following treatment with the exception of R155K mutation, which persisted in two patients.

Antiviral activity of boceprevir monotherapy in treatment-naive subjects with chronic hepatitis C genotype 2/3

BACKGROUND & AIMS

To examine the antiviral activity of boceprevir, a hepatitis C virus (HCV) protease inhibitor, in HCV genotype (G) 2/3-infected patients.

METHODS

We assessed boceprevir and telaprevir activity against an HCV G2 and G3 isolates enzyme panel, in replicon, and in phenotypic cell-based assays. Additionally, a phase I study evaluated the antiviral activity of boceprevir monotherapy (200mg BID, 400mg BID, or 400mg TID) vs. placebo for 14 days in HCV G2/3 treatment-naive patients.

RESULTS

Boceprevir and telaprevir similarly inhibited G1 and G2 NS3/4A enzymes and replication in G1 and G2 replicon and cell-based assays. However, telaprevir demonstrated lower potency than boceprevir against HCV G3a enzyme (Ki=75 nM vs. 17 nM), in the G3a replicon assay (EC₅₀=953 nM vs. 159 nM), and against HCV G3a NS3 isolates (IC₅₀=3312 nM vs. 803 nM) in the cell-based assay. In HCV G2/3-infected patients, boceprevir (400 mg TID) resulted in a maximum mean decrease in HCV RNA of -1.60 log vs. -0.21 log with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In vitro, boceprevir is more active than telaprevir against the HCV G3 NS3/4A enzyme in cell-based and biochemical assays and against G3 isolates in replicon assays. In HCV G2/3-infected treatment-naive patients, decreases in HCV RNA levels with boceprevir (400 mg TID) were comparable to those observed with the same dose in HCV treatment-experienced G1-infected patients.

HCV NS3/4a Protease Inhibitors: Simeprevir (TMC‐435350), Vaniprevir (MK‐7009) and MK‐5172

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection continues to represent a major health issue, with estimates of 130–170 million people infected worldwide. Recent developments in the HCV NS3/4a protease inhibitor area have significantly improved treatment options for patients. However, a more dramatic paradigm shift in the treatment of HCV infection appears all but certain in coming years, with a move to all oral combination therapy with direct‐acting antivirals (DAAs). HCV protease inhibitors have the potential to play a significant role in these DAA combination therapies. This chapter discusses in detail the design and discovery of three HCV NS3/4a protease inhibitors in clinical development: simeprevir (TMC‐435350), vaniprevir (MK‐7009) and MK‐5172.

Sustained virologic response after therapy with the HCV protease inhibitor narlaprevir in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin is durable through long-term follow-up

Achievement of a sustained virologic response (SVR) after peginterferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) treatment is considered to be a marker for the cure of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Long-term follow-up of patients with SVR after treatment with a direct acting antiviral has not yet been described. We used a randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind, two-period phase 1b trial that was conducted in 40 HCV genotype 1 (treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced)-infected patients. Nineteen patients achieved SVR after treatment with the HCV protease inhibitor narlaprevir followed by PEG-IFN/RBV. In these patients, HCV-RNA tests were scheduled at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after end of treatment. Patients were followed for a median of 27 months (range 15-32) after end of treatment with a median number of follow-up visits of 4 (range 3-8). All patients remained HCV-RNA negative over time. SVR achieved following narlaprevir and PEG-IFN/RBV-therapy was durable up to 32 months after the end of treatment.

Role of oxidative stress in infectious diseases. A review

Oxidative stress plays a dual role in infections. Free radicals protect against invading microorganisms, and they can also cause tissue damage during the resulting inflammation. In the process of infection, there is generation of reactive species by myeloperoxidase, NADPH oxidase, and nitric oxide synthase. On the other hand, reactive species can be generated among others, by cytochrome P450, some metals, and xanthine oxidase. Some pathologies arising during infection can be attributed to oxidative stress and generation of reactive species in infection can even have fatal consequences. This article reviews the basic pathways in which reactive species can accumulate during infectious diseases and discusses the related health consequences.

New Antiviral Therapies in the Management of HCV Infection

Improved knowledge of the HCV life cycle and of structural features of HCV proteins have led to the discovery of numerous potential targets for antiviral therapy. Viral replication and polyprotein processing have been tagged as promising viral targets. Clathrin-mediated endocytosis, fusion of HCV with cellular membranes, translation of viral RNA, virus production and release as well as several host cell factors may provide alternative targets for future anti-HCV therapies. Several compounds are currently under investigation in clinical trials and showed high antiviral activity in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Recently, Phase III studies for two protease inhibitors, telaprevir and boceprevir, each given in combination with pegylated interferon (standard of care [SOC]), were completed. In HCV-genotype-1-infected patients, the addition of telaprevir or boceprevir to SOC increased sustained virological response rates from <50% to >70%. Nucleoside/nucleotide inhibitors of the HCV NS5B polymerase have shown antiviral activity against different HCV genotypes, and have a higher barrier to resistance than protease inhibitors. In addition, several allosteric binding sites have been identified for non-nucleoside inhibitors of the NS5B polymerase. Inhibitors of NS5A are potentially active against all HCV genotypes. Among the different host cell-targeting compounds, cyclophilin inhibitors have shown promising results. Future hope lies in the combination of direct-acting antiviral agents with the possibility of interferon-free treatment regimens.

New therapies for chronic hepatitis C infection: a systematic review of evidence from clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) affects approximately 3% of the world population. The current standard of care for treatment of HCV is a combination of pegylated interferon and ribavirin. Approximately 10% of patients will stop treatment and 30% of patients require dose reduction because of side effects. For genotype 1 HCV-infected patients, only 40% of patients will achieve undetectable viral load 26 weeks posttreatment.

AIMS

The objectives of this review were to identify new treatments that are in clinical trials. These include boceprevir and telaprevir which are in routine clinical use and form part of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) 2011 guidelines as well as drugs based on observational studies, improving/modifying ribavirin or interferon-based therapies, modifying the host response and finally the use of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 2008 to 2011 for treatments for hepatitis C. Furthermore, abstracts and poster presentations for the annual European Association Study of the Liver, AASLD, Digestive Disease Week and Asian Pacific Association for the study of the Liver were searched for relevant material.

RESULTS

All four classes of DAA; NS3/NS4a serine protease inhibitors, cyclophilin inhibitors, NS5b polymerase inhibitors and NS5a inhibitors, show good success rates. Trials have been performed without ribavirin or interferon and demonstrate good antiviral activity with a decreased side effect profile. Combinations of DAA are a promising area of research with a high success rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical trials show that future HCV therapy could be personalised, achieve higher success rates with decreased adverse incidents.

Antiviral activity, safety, and pharmacokinetics of danoprevir/ritonavir plus PEG-IFN α-2a/RBV in hepatitis C patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Danoprevir (RG7227; ITMN-191) is a potent inhibitor of the HCV NS3/4A serine protease. The aims of this double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-ascending dose phase Ib study were to evaluate safety, tolerability, antiviral activity, resistance, and pharmacokinetics of once- and twice-daily danoprevir in the presence of low-dose ritonavir (danoprevir/r) and in combination with peginterferon alfa-2a (40KD)/ribavirin in treatment-naive HCV genotype 1 patients.

METHODS

Thirty eligible patients were enrolled into three cohorts and treated with danoprevir/r or placebo/r all in combination with peginterferon alfa-2a (40KD)/ribavirin for 15 days. Cohort 1 received danoprevir/r at 100/100mg twice daily; Cohort 2 200/100mg once daily; and Cohort 3 200/100mg twice daily.

RESULTS

The median reductions in HCV RNA from baseline after 14 days of treatment (day 15) were -5.1, -4.8, and -4.6 log(10)IU/ml in Cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and -2.7 log(10) in placebo/r and peginterferon alfa-2a (40KD)/ribavirin recipients. Viral breakthrough was not observed in any patient. On day 15, HCV RNA was undetectable (<15IU/ml) in 6/9 (67%), 4/8 (50%), and 8/8 (100%) patients in Cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively. When co-administered with low dose ritonavir, danoprevir concentrations reached a steady state between 6 to 10 days of dosing. Danoprevir exposures increased more than dose proportionally between 100/100mg and 200/100mg. Danoprevir/r plus peginterferon alfa-2a (40KD)/ribavirin was well-tolerated with no safety-related discontinuations.

CONCLUSIONS

Danoprevir/r plus peginterferon alfa-2a (40KD)/ribavirin provides profound and robust reductions in serum HCV RNA, at substantially lower systemic exposures compared to those observed with higher doses of danoprevir in the absence of ritonavir. These results support further studies of danoprevir/r.

Second-wave protease inhibitors: choosing an heir

Infection with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major cause of chronic liver disease and a leading indication of liver transplantations worldwide. The current standard of care for chronic hepatitis C is a combination of pegylated interferon-α and ribavirin that is effective in slightly more than half of cases and is associated with significant side effects. The first directly acting antivirals recently reached the US market, but will have shortcomings that should in part be overcome by the second-wave PIs that are in development. This article gives an overview of the compounds that will soon be available.

New hepatitis C therapies in clinical development

With the current standard of care for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C, a combination of pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin, sustained virologic response rates can be achieved in approximately 50% of patients only. - Improved understanding of the viral life cycle has led to the identification of numerous potential targets for novel, direct-acting antiviral compounds. Inhibitors of the NS3/4A protease are currently the most advanced in clinical development. Recently completed phase 3 studies of the two protease inhibitors telaprevir and boceprevir, each given in combination with standard of care, yielded sustained virologic response rates in the range of 66-75% in treatment-naive patients and 59-66% in treatment-experienced patients with HCV genotype 1 infection. Studies of second-generation protease inhibitors, with the potential advantage of improved potency, drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics profile, are already underway. - Inhibitors of the HCV NS5A protein and NS5B polymerase are potentially active across different HCV genotypes and have shown promising antiviral efficacy in early clinical studies. Other emerging mechanisms include silymarin components and inhibitors of cell proteins required for HCV replication. - While improved formulations of current HCV therapies are also being developed, future hopes lie on the combination of direct-acting antivirals with the eventual possibility of interferon-free treatment regimens.

Mechanisms of non-response to antiviral treatment in chronic hepatitis C

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has substantially evolved over the past decade after the Consensus Conference organized by the European Association for the Study of the Liver in 1999. Since then, the standard of care (SOC) for patients with chronic hepatitis C has been the combination of pegylated interferon (pegIFN) alpha-2a or -2b and ribavirin. In patients infected with HCV genotype 1, by far the most frequent HCV genotype worldwide, such treatment leads to a cure of infection in only 40% to 50% of cases. Several factors have been identified to play a role in the outcome of therapy, including the treatment schedule, disease characteristics, viral, and host factors. Human genetic factors have been identified by a recent landmark discovery. However, these factors only partly explain the ability of IFN and ribavirin therapy to cure HCV infection. Several studies have demonstrated that, in non-responders, interferon-stimulated genes were up-regulated prior to therapy through unclear mechanisms. These findings, together with clinical, biochemical and histological data, may help better identify responders before starting therapy. This becomes particularly important as the standard treatment is physically and economically demanding. The future treatment of patients infected with HCV genotype 1 will be based on the combination of pegIFN and ribavirin with a protease inhibitor, telaprevir or boceprevir. Promising results of this triple combination in phase III clinical trials have been recently reported at the Liver Meeting 2010. With this therapy, higher cure rates will be achieved, but specific issues will be raised, such as the emergence of resistance to the protease inhibitors. The goal of this review is to discuss mechanisms involved in the non-response to current and future standard treatments.

New HCV therapies on the horizon

Improved understanding of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) life cycle has led to the discovery of numerous potential targets for antiviral therapy. HCV polyprotein processing and replication have been identified as the most promising viral targets. However, viral entry and fusion, RNA translation, virus assembly and release and several host cell factors may provide alternative attractive targets for future anti-HCV therapies. Inhibitors of the HCV NS3/4A protease are currently the most advanced in clinical development. Monotherapy with protease inhibitors has shown high antiviral activity, but is associated with frequent selection of resistant HCV variants, often resulting in viral breakthrough. However, there is encouraging evidence from phase 2/3 trials indicating that the addition of a protease inhibitor (e.g. telaprevir and boceprevir) to pegylated interferon-α/ribavirin substantially improves sustained virological response rates in both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients with HCV genotype 1. Nucleos(t)ide inhibitors of the HCV NS5B polymerase have shown variable antiviral activity against different HCV genotypes, but seem to have a higher genetic barrier to resistance than protease inhibitors. In addition, several allosteric binding sites have been identified for non-nucleoside inhibitors of the NS5B polymerase. However, the development of a substance with high antiviral activity and a high genetic barrier to resistance seems to be difficult. Among the different host cell-targeting compounds in early clinical development, cyclophilin inhibitors have shown the most promising results. Although advances have also been made in improving interferons, combinations of antiviral agents with different mechanisms of action may lead to the eventual possibility of interferon-free regimens.