The pattern of response to interferon alpha (alpha-IFN) predicts sustained response to a 6-month alpha-IFN and ribavirin retreatment for chronic hepatitis C. TVVH Study Group

Hepatitis C Virus: Insights Into Its History, Treatment, Challenges, and Future Directions

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a global public health concern with significant impacts. It primarily spreads through blood-to-blood contact, such as sharing needles among drug users. Given the wide prevalence of risk factors, HCV continues to pose a major threat. Hence, it is crucial to understand its characteristics, structure, and genotypes to prevent, treat, and potentially eradicate it. This narrative review aims to explore the history of HCV treatment, highlight the breakthroughs achieved with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, address potential barriers to HCV eradication, and discuss future treatment possibilities. For this article, relevant studies were identified using various databases, including PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Journal Storage. The literature search revealed that after identifying HCV and studying its characteristics, interferon alfa and ribavirin became primary treatment options. However, due to their limited coverage against different HCV genotypes, ethnic variations, and suboptimal sustained virological response, the development of DAAs became essential. Combining various DAAs, such as sofosbuvir and velpatasvir, for a duration of 12 weeks has become the standard HCV treatment, with effectiveness against most genotypes. Additionally, ongoing clinical trials have shown promising results for other drugs such as CDI31244/sofosbuvir/velpatasvir, sofosbuvir/coblopasvir, and daclatasvir/asunaprevir. Despite the success of DAAs and ongoing efforts to discover more effective treatments, the high costs of DAAs pose a significant challenge to eradicating HCV, as not all patients can afford these expensive therapies. Furthermore, the ability of HCV to mutate limits the potential for vaccine development. Therefore, it is crucial to focus on developing more cost-effective strategies to control the spread of HCV and create novel, highly effective, and affordable DAAs.

Interferon for interferon nonresponding and relapsing patients with chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

The widely-accepted treatment outcome for chronic hepatitis C is the sustained viral response (that is, no measurable viral RNA in blood six months after treatment). However, this surrogate outcome (as well as the previously employed biochemical and histologic ones) has never been validated. This situation exists because there are very few randomized clinical trials that have used clinical events (mortality or manifestations of decompensated cirrhosis) as outcomes, because those clinical events only occur after many years of infection. Patients in whom initial therapy fails to produce sustained viral responses do become potential candidates for retreatment; some of these individuals are not candidates for ribavirin or protease inhibitors and consideration could be given to retreatment with interferon alone.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of interferon monotherapy retreatment in chronic hepatitis C patients and to validate the currently employed surrogate outcomes in this group of patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 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 until 16 August 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials comparing interferon versus placebo or no treatment in chronic hepatitis C nonresponders and relapsers to previous interferon.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcomes were mortality (all-cause and hepatic), quality of life, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were liver-related morbidity, sustained viral responses, biochemical responses, histologic improvements, and costs. We used both fixed-effect and random-effects model meta-analyses, reporting only the former if no difference existed.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven trials were identified. Two of them were at low risk of bias (the HALT-C and EPIC3 trials) and included 1676 patients. Both of these trials addressed the role of long-term low-dose pegylated interferon therapy in patients with severe fibrosis (demonstrated on liver biopsy) and were designed to assess the clinical outcomes. The remaining five trials included 300 patients and were at high risk of bias. Based on all trials reporting the outcomes, no significant difference was observed in either all-cause mortality (78/843 (9.3%) versus 62/867 (7.2%); risk ratio (RR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.79; 3 trials) or hepatic mortality (41/532 (7.7%) versus 40/552 (7.2%); RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.63; 2 trials); however, when only the two trials at low risk of bias were combined, all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the recipients of the pegylated interferon (78/828 (9.4%) versus 57/848 (6.7%); RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.96) although trial sequential analysis could not exclude the possibility of random error. There was less variceal bleeding in the recipients of the interferon (4/843 (0.5%) versus 18/867 (2.1%); RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.67; 3 trials), although again trial sequential analysis could not exclude the presence of a type I error and the effect could not be confirmed in a random-effects model meta-analysis. No significant differences were seen with regard to the development of ascites, encephalopathy, hepatocellular carcinoma, or the need for liver transplantation. One trial reported quality of life data; the pain score was significantly worse in the recipients of the pegylated interferon. Adverse effects tended to be more common in the interferon recipients; the ones that were significantly more common included hematologic complications, infections, flu-like symptoms, and rash. The recipients of interferon had significantly more sustained viral responses (20/557 (3.6%) versus 1/579 (0.2%); RR 15.38, 95% CI 2.93 to 80.71; 4 trials) and a type I error was excluded by trial sequential analysis. The METAVIR activity score also improved (36/55 (65%) versus 20/46 (43.5%); RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.18; 2 trials). No significant differences were seen with regard to histologic fibrosis assessments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The clinical data were limited to patients with histologic evidence of severe fibrosis who were retreated with pegylated interferon. In this scenario, retreatment with interferon did not appear to provide significant clinical benefit and, when only the trials at low risk of bias were considered, retreatment for several years may even have increased all-cause mortality. Such treatment also produced adverse events. On the other hand, the treatment did result in improvement in some surrogate outcomes, namely sustained viral responses and histologic evidence of inflammation. Interferon monotherapy retreatment cannot be recommended for these patients. No clinical data are available for patients with less severe fibrosis. The sustained viral response cannot be used as a surrogate marker for hepatitis C treatment in this clinical setting with low sustained viral response rates and needs to be validated in others in which higher sustained viral response rates are reported.

Ribavirin plus interferon versus interferon for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. Standard therapy is ribavirin plus pegylated interferon to achieve undetectable level of virus in the blood, but the effect on clinical outcomes is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of ribavirin and interferon combination therapy versus interferon monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through electronic databases, manual searches of bibliographies and journals, approaching authors of trials, and pharmaceutical companies until March 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, comparing ribavirin plus interferon versus interferon for treatment of chronic hepatitis C.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measures were serum sustained loss of hepatitis C virus, liver-related morbidity plus all-cause mortality, and adverse events. We performed subgroup analyses of patients who were naive, relapsers, or non-responders to previous antiviral treatment. All outcomes were analysed with the random-effects model. We used Peto odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for analysis of morbidity plus mortality. The remaining outcomes were presented as relative risks (RR). We used trial sequential analyses to examine the robustness of our findings.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 83 randomised trials with 12,707 patients. Most trials had unclear or high risk of bias. We did not find any significant influence of bias on our results but cannot exclude outcome measure reporting bias as many trials did not report on the primary outcomes of this review. Compared with interferon, ribavirin plus interferon had a significant beneficial effect on sustained virological response in subgroups of naive patients (RR 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 0.75), relapsers (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.70), non-responders (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.93), and in all patients (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.79). Combination therapy significantly reduced morbidity plus mortality in all patients (Peto OR, 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.79), but not in naive, relapsers, or non-responders individually. Combination therapy significantly increased the risk of haematological, dermatological, gastrointestinal, infectious, and miscellaneous (cough, dyspnoea, fatigue) adverse reactions. Accordingly, combination therapy significantly increased the risk of treatment discontinuation and dose reductions. Trial sequential analyses confirmed our findings regarding virological effects, but not regarding liver-related morbidity and all-cause mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with interferon alone, ribavirin plus interferon is more effective in clearing hepatitis C virus from the blood. Combination therapy may reduce liver-related morbidity and all-cause mortality, but we need more evidence. The number needed to treat to obtain a beneficial effect is considerable considering the increased risk of several severe adverse reactions and costs.

Ribavirin monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. A high proportion of patients never experience symptoms. Peginterferon plus ribavirin is the recommended treatment for chronic hepatitis C. However, ribavirin monotherapy may be considered for some patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of ribavirin monotherapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through electronic databases, manual searches of bibliographies and journals, authors of trials, and pharmaceutical companies until March 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status comparing ribavirin versus no intervention, placebo, or interferon for chronic hepatitis C.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measures were serum sustained virological response (loss of hepatitis C virus RNA at least six months after treatment), liver-related morbidity plus all-cause mortality, and adverse events. Secondary outcome measures were end of treatment virological response, biochemical response (transaminase activity), and histological response. Randomisation methods, blinding, data handling, and funding were extracted as measures of bias control. Random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses were performed for all outcomes. We only present the results of the fixed-effect model if both models provide the same result regarding statistical significance. We present data as risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 randomised trials with 657 patients. The majority of trials had unclear control of bias. Compared with placebo or no intervention, ribavirin had no significant effect on the sustained virological response (RD 0%, 95% CI -2% to 3%, five trials) or end of treatment virological response (RD 0% 95% CI -3% to 3%, ten trials). Ribavirin had no significant effect on liver-related morbidity plus mortality (RD 0%, 95% CI -2% to 3%, 11 trials). Ribavirin significantly increased the risk of adverse reactions, including anaemia. Ribavirin significantly improved end of treatment biochemical and histological response but not the sustained biochemical response. Ribavirin was significantly inferior to interferon regarding virological and biochemical responses (five trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ribavirin seems without beneficial effects on serum virological response and liver-related morbidity or mortality, and significantly increased the risk of adverse reactions. Ribavirin monotherapy seems significantly inferior to interferon monotherapy. The total number of included patients is small, and more trials are perhaps needed. The use of ribavirin monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C cannot be recommended outside randomised trials.

WITHDRAWN: Ribavirin with or without alpha interferon for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. Ribavirin plus interferon combination therapy is presently considered the optimal treatment of interferon naive patients with chronic hepatitis C, but its role in relapsers and non-responders to previous interferon therapy is not established.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of ribavirin alone or in combination with alpha interferon in interferon naive patients, relapsers, and non-responders with chronic hepatitis C.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Eligible trials were identified through searches on electronic databases: The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (August 2001), The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register on The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2001, MEDLINE (1966 - August 2001), and EMBASE (1985 - August 2001). Manual searches of bibliographies and journals were done as well as authors of trials and pharmaceutical companies producing ribavirin or interferon were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials comparing ribavirin with or without alpha interferon versus no intervention, placebo, or alpha interferon for chronic hepatitis C.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measures were the 'sustained' (six months after treatment) virological response, and morbidity plus mortality. The secondary outcome measures were the 'end of treatment' and 'sustained' biochemical response, the 'end of treatment' virologic response, histology, quality of life, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials in which 271 patients were randomised to ribavirin versus placebo or no intervention and 48 trials in which 6585 patients were randomised to interferon with or without ribavirin. Compared with placebo or no intervention, ribavirin monotherapy had no significant effect on the virological response or histology and only a transient effect on the biochemical response. Compared with interferon, combination therapy reduced the risk of not having a sustained virological response by 26% in naive patients (relative risk (RR) 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.78), 33% in relapsers (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.57-0.78), and 11% in non-responders (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.83-0.96). There was no significant effect on morbidity plus mortality (Peto odds ratio 0.45; 95% CI 0.19-1.06). Irrespective of previous therapy, combination therapy significantly reduced the risk of not having a sustained biochemical response (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.59-0.84) or improved histology (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.56-0.81). Combination therapy also significantly increased the risk of treatment discontinuation (RR 1.28; 95% CI 1.07-1.52) and several types of adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy increased the number of naive patients, relapsers, and non-responders with a sustained virological, biochemical, or histological response, but also the occurrence of adverse events.

Intrahepatic mRNA Levels of Type I Interferon Receptor and Interferon-Stimulated Genes in Genotype 1b Chronic Hepatitis C

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the association between pretreatment intrahepatic mRNA levels of interferon receptor and interferon-stimulated genes and response to interferon therapy for genotype 1b chronic hepatitis C.

METHODS

Forty-four patients with genotype 1b chronic hepatitis C who underwent liver biopsy and then received interferon therapy participated in this study. Pretreatment intrahepatic mRNA levels of interferon receptor genes (IFNAR1, IFNAR2b, and IFNAR2c) and interferon-stimulated genes (OAS1 and PKR) were quantified by competitive polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

In the genes examined, only IFNAR1 mRNA level was significantly higher in patients with sustained virological and biochemical response to interferon therapy versus those with nonsustained response (p < 0.01). Moreover, mRNA expression ratios of IFNAR1 to IFNAR2 were also significantly higher in patients with sustained virological and biochemical response to IFN therapy (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05, respectively). On the other hand, mRNA levels of IFNAR2b, IFNAR2c, and PKR were significantly higher in patients with histologically active or advanced liver rather than patients with mild or less advanced liver.

CONCLUSIONS

High intrahepatic mRNA levels of IFNAR1 and mRNA ratio of IFNAR1 to IFNAR2 before treatment may be associated with a favorable response to interferon therapy.

Treatment of Relapsers after Combination Therapy for Chronic Hepatitis C

Sustained virologic response rates are significantly higher in patients who have relapsed after a previous course of therapy compared with patients who did not respond. A meta-analysis of combination therapy in patients who failed IFN monotherapy reported SVR rates of 52% in relapsers to prior therapy and 16% in nonresponders. Similarly, relapsers after combination standard IFN and RBV therapy have higher SVR rates than combination of therapy nonresponders when treated with pegylated interferon and ribavirin. For this reason, patients who relapse after a previous course of therapy should be considered potential candidates for retreatment. Factors that have been associated with SVR in these patients include genotype non-I, low viral loads, and lesser degrees of fibrosis. The course of treatment in all patients who have relapsed after prior therapy should be reviewed to identify possible reasons for failure to achieve an SVR. In particular, optimal dosing of PEG IFN and RBV and the occurrence and timing of treatment dose reductions during prior therapy should be reviewed. The reasons for dose reduction should be addressed before initiating another course of therapy in an effort to optimize the chance for a SVR. Patients who had dose reduction for depression, anemia, or neutropenia, should be considered for antidepressants, erythropoietin, or, if neutropenia is severe, granulocyte colony stimulating factor therapy, respectively, during retreatment. Prolongation of therapy beyond 48 weeks in patients with relapse after a standard course of PEG IFN and RBV may offer a chance of SVR. Novel agents currently in development, including protease and polymerase inhibitors, may prove to be therapeutic options for these patients in the future.

Viral etiology of hepatocellular carcinoma and HCV genotypes in Taiwan

Etiologic variations of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exist in different geographic areas of the world. Hepatitis B virus infection is associated with HCC. However, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection plays an increasingly more important role in the development of HCC and is associated with more than 30% of HCC in Taiwan. The prevalence of HCV infection and HCV genotypes vary in different geographic areas. The prevalence of HCV genotype 1b (HCV-1b) was around 50-70% in Taiwan and even varied in different townships. In addition to host factors, HCV genotypes may be associated with the development of HCC. In our study, the prevalence of HCV-1b in patients with HCC was significantly higher than in those with liver cirrhosis and chronic hepatitis; multivariate analysis revealed that the disease severity was significantly correlated with age and HCV-1b. Furthermore, HCV-1b was associated with a lower response rate to interferon (IFN) therapy than HCV-2. Our study has demonstrated that mutations in the IFN sensitivity-determining region, spanning nucleotides 2,209-2,248 in the NS5A region, correlate with the sustained virological response to combination therapy with IFN and ribavirin in patients with chronic HCV-1b infection in Taiwan. A third-generation enzyme immunoassay for antibody to HCV can be used to predict viremia and monitor the virological response.

Ribavirin monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. The disease progresses without symptoms for several decades. Ribavirin monotherapy may represent a treatment for some patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effect of ribavirin monotherapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through electronic databases, manual searches of bibliographies and journals, authors of trials, and pharmaceutical companies until May 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status comparing ribavirin versus no intervention, placebo, or interferon for chronic hepatitis C.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measures were the six months sustained loss of hepatitis C virus RNA in blood after end of treatment and liver-related morbidity plus all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome measures were end of treatment virological response, biochemical response, histological response, and adverse events. Random- and fixed-effects meta-analyses with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were performed for all outcomes. We used Peto odds ratios (OR) for analysis of morbidity plus mortality and relative risks (RR) for the remaining outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 13 randomised trials including 594 patients with chronic hepatitis C. Most trials had low methodological quality. Compared with placebo/no intervention, ribavirin had no significant effect on sustained (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.07, five trials) or end of treatment virological response (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.07, ten trials). Ribavirin had no significant effect on liver-related morbidity plus mortality (Peto OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.20 to 19.0, eleven trials). Ribavirin significantly improved end of treatment biochemical and histological response but not sustained biochemical response. Further, ribavirin significantly increased the risk of anaemia. Ribavirin was significantly inferior to interferon regarding virological and biochemical response (four trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that ribavirin versus placebo/no intervention had no significant beneficial effect on virological response and liver morbidity, but may improve biochemical and histological response transiently. Ribavirin increased the risk of anaemia. Therefore, we cannot recommend ribavirin monotherapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C outside randomised trials.

Ribavirin plus interferon versus interferon for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C is a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. The disease progresses without symptoms for several decades and most patients are diagnosed based on the presence of hepatitis C virus ribonucleic acid and elevated transaminases.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of ribavirin and interferon combination therapy versus interferon monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through electronic databases, manual searches of bibliographies and journals, approaching authors of trials and pharmaceutical companies, until May 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, comparing ribavirin plus interferon versus interferon alone for treatment of chronic hepatitis C.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measures were the sustained loss of hepatitis C virus and liver-related morbidity plus all-cause mortality. We separately analysed patients who were naive, relapsers, or non-responders to previous antiviral treatment. Random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analyses were performed for all outcomes. We used Peto odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for analysis of morbidity plus mortality. The remaining outcomes were presented as relative risks (RR).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 72 randomised trials with 9991 patients. Most trials had low methodological quality but we did not find any significant influence of quality on our results. Compared with interferon, combination therapy had a significant beneficial effect on sustained virological response (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.75) and in subgroups of naive patients (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.76), relapsers (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.73), and non-responders (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.94) individually. Combination therapy significantly reduced morbidity plus mortality (Peto OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.96), but not in naive, relapsers, or non-responders individually. Combination therapy also had a significant beneficial effect on the histological response. Combination therapy significantly increased the risk of anaemia (RR 10.48, 95% CI 5.34 to 20.55), which occurred in 22% of patients on combination therapy. Combination therapy also significantly increased the risk of dermatological, gastrointestinal, infectious, and miscellaneous (cough, dyspnea, fatigue) adverse events. Accordingly, combination therapy significantly increased the risk of treatment discontinuation (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.39).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with interferon alone, ribavirin plus interferon is more effective in clearing hepatitis C virus and improving liver histology. This may lead to reduced morbidity and mortality. However, combination therapy significantly increased the risk of several adverse events.

N/A

N/A

Treatment of relapsers after combination therapy for chronic hepatitis C

A significant number of patients with chronic hepatitis C relapse after treatment. As therapy for CHC has improved over the last decade, the issue of retreating patients who did not achieve a sustained virologic response with previous treatment regimens frequently arises. Several studies have assessed the efficacy of pegylated interferon (IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) combination therapy in IFN and RBV therapy relapsers. Patients who have relapsed after therapy have significantly higher SVR rates than those who are nonresponders to therapy and should be considered candidates for retreatment. Predictors of a favorable response to therapy in naïve patients appear to also predict response to therapy in patients who have relapsed previously.

Mutations in the NS5A and E2-PePHD regions of hepatitis C virus genotype 1b and response to combination therapy of interferon plus ribavirin

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Combination therapy with interferon (IFN) and ribavirin is the current standard treatment for chronic hepatitis C, but the efficacy is still not satisfactory, especially for genotype 1b. NS5A and E2 proteins of hepatitis C virus (HCV) may repress the IFN-induced RNA-dependent protein kinase (PKR), and thus have the potential to influence the response of HCV to IFN therapy; however, this issue remains controversial.

METHODS

Nucleotide sequences of the PKR-eIF2alpha phosphorylation homology domain (E2-PePHD) and PKR-binding domain (NS5A-PKR bd) of the HCV genome were analyzed by amplification and direct sequencing in 30 HCV genotype 1b patients who had been treated with IFN and ribavirin.

RESULTS

Nine (30%) patients achieved a sustained virological response (SVR) to combination therapy. Pretreatment variables and amino acid substitutions were compared between responders and non-responders. The responders were younger than non-responders (37.2 +/- 10.4 vs. 45.4 +/- 9.5 years, P = 0.017), whereas no significant statistical differences were found in the number of amino acid substitutions in NS5A and E2-PePHD regions between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic heterogeneity in NS5A and E2-PePHD regions of the HCV genome may not serve as a predictor for treatment outcome with combination therapy in Taiwanese patients with chronic HCV genotype 1b infection.

Impact of high-dose interferon induction and ribavirin therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis C relapsing after or not responding to interferon monotherapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Initial high-dose interferon-alpha induction therapy in combination with ribavirin improves sustained response rates in treatment-naïve patients. This prospective, randomized, controlled study tested whether non-responders or relapsers to interferon monotherapy also benefit from induction therapy.

METHODS

Patients with chronic hepatitis C who had not responded to (n=75) or relapsed (n=80) after previous interferon therapy were randomized to receive three different interferon doses during the first 14 weeks of therapy (A: 10 MU IntronA/day for 2 weeks, followed by 10 MU/2 days for 12 weeks; B:5 MU/d for 14 weeks; C: 5 MU/2 days for 14 weeks) followed in all by 5 MU/2 days for 24 weeks. All patients received 1-1.2 g ribavirin/day throughout the whole study.

RESULTS

The rates of viral clearance at any time on treatment were similar in all groups. Sustained response rates were also not different among the groups in interferon nonresponders (A 32%, B 29%, C 31%) and relapsers (A 64%, B 68%, C 71%), respectively, as well as in patients with different genotypes. As expected, sustained response rates were higher in patients with genotype non-1 than in those with genotype 1.

CONCLUSION

High-dose induction therapy does not improve the outcome of interferon/ribavirin therapy in interferon nonresponders or relapsers.

Mutations in the NS5A and E2-PePHD region of hepatitis C virus type 1b and correlation with the response to combination therapy with interferon and ribavirin

Nonstructural 5A (NS5A) and the second envelope (E2) proteins of hepatitis C virus (HCV) have the potential to block interferon (IFN)-induced RNA-dependent protein kinase (PKR) and may therefore interfere with the response to IFN therapy, but controversy still exists regarding the relevance of this. This study aimed to assess whether mutations in these regions correlated with the response to combination therapy, IFN and ribavirin. Pretreatment parameters were analysed in 57 HCV-1b patients who had received IFN-alpha2b (3 or 5 MU three times weekly) and ribavirin (800-1200 mg per day) for 24 weeks. The amino acid sequences of the NS5A and PKR-eIF2alpha phosphorylation homology domain (E2-PePHD) were deduced from the corresponding coding sequence, which were determinated by direct sequencing of the HCV genome amplified by the polymerase chain reaction. Twenty (36%) patients achieved a sustained virological response (SVR). The mean number of amino acid substitutions in the NS5A-PKR binding domain (2209-2274), interferon sensitivity-determining region (ISDR) (2209-2248), and E2-PePHD sequence (659-670) in patients with and without SVR were 4.53 +/- 3.31 vs 2.83 +/- 1.78 (P = 0.094), 2.45 +/- 2.74 vs 1.03 +/- 1.32 (P = 0.042) and 0.25 +/- 0.70 vs 0.03 +/- 0.17 (P = 0.109), respectively. Patients with a mutant-type (>/= 4) NS5A-ISDR had a higher rate of SVR (six of nine, 67%) than those with wild-type (five of 22, 23%) (P = 0.038). Stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis of the factors (age, gender, viral load, cirrhosis rate, IFN dosage and amino acid substitutions) revealed that the mutation in NS5A-ISDR (>/= 4 vs < 4) was the only independent variable of treatment outcome. Our study showed that NS5A-ISDR mutations were correlated with the SVR to combination therapy in chronic HCV-1b patients in Taiwan.

Management of viral hepatitis C

The hepatitis C virus was first identified in 1989. It causes chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Global anti-HCV prevalence is 1-3%. Contaminated blood product, dirty needles and instruments, and injection drug use are the main parenteral routes of transmission. Cultural practices, such as acupuncture, tattoo, body piercing and scarring, also play a role. Universal precaution is the mainstay for prevention before vaccine is developed. Therapy for chronic hepatitis C (CHC) with interferon (IFN) is not satisfactory. Non-response and early relapse reduce sustained response (SR). In 1997, National Institute of Health consensus recommended IFN therapy only for selected patients with compensated CHC, raised ALT and moderate to severe histologic disease activity; 15-20% SR is expected. Major advances in CHC therapy is combination therapy. Ribavirin in combination with IFN significantly increases SR to 30-40%. Even patients with high viral load, genotype 1, significant fibrosis or cirrhosis respond better. EASL and APASL Consensus in 1999 recommended IFN-ribavirin combination as the first line therapy. Recent data on pegylated IFN showed very encouraging results. Combined with ribavirin, 60% SR was achieved. It benefits patients with severe bridging necrosis and also cirrhosis. However, 23-27% of patients receiving combination therapy with either IFN type, experienced adverse events and required therapy discontinuation. Many important issues remained unsolved. Therapy for children, the elderly, patients with comorbidity and extra-hepatic syndromes need to be addressed. Therapy is too expensive and not affordable to the majority of patients in developing countries.

Interferon for interferon nonresponding and relapsing patients with chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Interferon monotherapy leads to sustained virologic clearance in a minority of patients with chronic hepatitis C. Studies have yielded conflicting results regarding retreatment with interferon in nonresponders and relapsers.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of retreatment with interferon in chronic hepatitis C nonresponders and relapsers to previous interferon treatment.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified through electronic databases, manual searches, authors, and pharmaceutical companies (August 2001).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing interferon versus control or different interferon regimens in chronic hepatitis C patients being nonresponders and relapsers to previous interferon were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was failure to achieve a sustained virologic response defined as positive serum hepatitis C virus RNA at least six months following treatment. Secondary outcomes included liver-related morbidity, mortality, biochemical responses, adverse events, and histology.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten randomised trials involving 686 nonresponders and eight trials involving 484 relapsers were included; their methodological quality was poor. In nonresponders, interferon reduced the risk of not achieving an end of treatment biochemical response compared with no treatment (relative risk [RR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66 to 0.91); however, virologic responses were not reported. In a post hoc subgroup analysis, doses greater than 3 million units (MU) three times weekly offered no advantage compared with 3 MU three times weekly for biochemical sustained response. Failure to obtain a virologic sustained response was less likely with 48 than 24 weeks of therapy (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96). Adverse events did not differ significantly regardless of treatment dose or duration. In relapsers, none of the trials compared interferon with no treatment. In a post hoc analysis, doses greater than 3 MU three times weekly were no more effective in achieving a virologic sustained response than 3 MU three times weekly. Compared with 24 weeks, treatment durations of 48 weeks were less likely to fail to achieve a virologic sustained response (RR 0.69, 95% CI Random 0.51 to 0.95), but associated with more frequent dosage reduction (RR 9.07, 95% CI 1.20 to 68.63). No data regarding clinical outcomes or histology was available in either patient group.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Retreatment with interferon leads to sustained virologic clearance in a minority of chronic hepatitis C patients with nonresponse or relapse following interferon monotherapy. Treatment durations of 48 weeks are superior to 24 weeks, but doses greater than 3 MU three times weekly are no more effective. No data exists regarding the effect on clinical outcomes.

High-dose prolonged combination therapy in non-responders to interferon monotherapy for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Therapy of chronic hepatitis C non- responders to interferon monotherapy with standard doses of interferon plus ribavirin is usually ineffective.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of high-dose prolonged combination retreatment in non- responder patients.

METHODS

Patients were retreated for 6 months with 6 MU alphaIFN on alternate days and 1000 or 1200 mg/day ribavirin. HCV-RNA negative patients continued therapy for an additional 6 months.

RESULTS

Forty patients (29 males, mean age 49.7 years, 34 genotype 1b, 11 with F3 fibrosis) were treated. At 6 months, 20 (50%) patients were HCV-RNA negative but six of them discontinued therapy because of adverse events. A sustained response was achieved in 28% of patients (11/40). A sustained response was more frequent among patients with genotype non-1b than in those with genotype 1b (67 vs. 21%, P=0.005) and clearance of HCV-RNA in the first 3 months had a high predictive value for sustained response (100% of sustained responders vs. 24% of non-responders, P=0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose prolonged combination therapy in non-responders to IFN monotherapy leads to a higher rate of sustained response than the standard combination regimen. Tolerability may be a rate-limiting factor. Maximal effectiveness can be predicted in patients with non-1b genotype and in those who clear HCV-RNA soon after starting retreatment.

Two PKR inhibitor HCV proteins correlate with early but not sustained response to interferon

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The NS5A and the E2 proteins of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-1b can bind and inhibit in vitro the interferon (IFN)-induced cellular kinase PKR. The role of such interaction in modulating the antiviral effect of IFN is still controversial. We have analyzed the E2 and the NS5A sequences in HCV-1b-infected patients treated with IFN to assess whether and how different combinations of wild-type and mutant proteins correlated with early and long-term virological response.

METHODS

In 30 patients, sequences of pretreatment and on-treatment E2-PePHD and NS5A-PKR binding domain (including the putative ISDR) were analyzed in parallel by sequencing cDNA-polymerase chain reaction products and up to 25 independent clones.

RESULTS

The E2-PePHD sequence was highly conserved with a homogeneous quasispecies and was identical in 29 of 30 cases with no association with the pattern of response and no evidence of evolution during therapy. Patients with a mutated NS5A-ISDR had a higher rate of early virological response (67%) than cases with wild-type ISDR (17%). This association was lost in long-term responders (33% vs. 17%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the highly conserved E2-PePHD motif might contribute to reduce IFN responsiveness, variations within this region do not seem to play a role in modulating IFN sensitivity. The NS5A-ISDR sequence influenced the early, but not the sustained response, to IFN, suggesting that other factors may be more important for the long-term outcome of therapy.