Treatment of Hepatitis C in HIV-Infected Patients: Moving Towards an Era of All Oral Regimens

Direct-Acting Antiviral Hepatitis C Treatment Cascade and Barriers to Treatment Initiation Among US Men and Women With and Without HIV

BACKGROUND

People with HIV are disproportionately coinfected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and experience accelerated liver-related mortality. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) yield high sustained virologic response (SVR) rates, but uptake is suboptimal. This study characterizes the DAA-era HCV treatment cascade and barriers among US men and women with or at risk for HIV.

METHODS

We constructed HCV treatment cascades using the Women's Interagency HIV Study (women, 6 visits, 2015-2018, n = 2447) and Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (men, 1 visit, 2015-2018, n = 2221). Cascades included treatment-eligible individuals (ie, HCV RNA-positive or reported DAAs). Surveys captured self-reported clinical (eg, CD4), patient (eg, missed visits), system (eg, appointment access), and financial/insurance barriers.

RESULTS

Of 323/92 (women/men) treatment eligible, most had HIV (77%/70%); 69%/63% were black. HIV-positive women were more likely to attain cascade outcomes than HIV-negative women (39% vs 23% initiated, 21% vs 12% SVR); similar discrepancies were noted for men. Black men and substance users were treated less often. Women initiating treatment (vs not) reported fewer patient barriers (14%/33%). Among men not treated, clinical barriers were prevalent (53%).

CONCLUSIONS

HIV care may facilitate HCV treatment linkage and barrier navigation. HIV-negative individuals, black men, and substance users may need additional support.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT00000797 (Women's Interagency HIV Study); NCT00046280 (Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study).

Outcome of hepatitis C patients in a community with predominant genotype 3 with standard-of-care treatment before and after advent of direct-acting antivirals: A retrospective-cum-prospective study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma are mainly caused by hepatitis C infection. It is a worldwide predominant pathogen and is one of the main causes of healthcare problem in Asia. In the last few decades, there has been a considerable change in the treatment regimen for hepatitis C virus. The objective of this research was to relate the treatment response with sustained viral response in various therapies which have been the standard of care from time to time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This hospital-based, retrospective-cum-prospective research span over a period of 2 years; we enrolled hepatitis C patients who attended the Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Government Medical College, Srinagar, since June 2015 till May 2017. Subsequently, the database was prepared, containing all the relevant information about these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

(i) In retrospective group: The overall efficacy (sustained viral response at 24 weeks [SVR-24]) of pegylated interferon a2a and ribavirin regimen was 90.96%. (ii) In prospective group: The efficacy (SVR) of different regimens was found to be as: sofosbuvir + ribavirin + daclatasvir (SVR-24, 83.33%); sofosbuvir + ribavirin (SVR-12, 94.57%); and sofosbuvir + daclatasvir (SVR-12, 98.00%).

Effectiveness and security of chronic hepatitis C treatment in coinfected patients in real-world

Background HIV-HCV coinfection produces high morbi-mortality. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have shown high efficacy, although special attention should be paid to the risk of drug interactions. However, due to the lack of representativeness of coinfected patients in clinical trials, it is important to know real-world results. Objective To evaluate DAA treatment effectiveness in coinfected patients. We also analyse safety profile of DAA treatment and drug interactions between HCV and HIV therapy. Setting Descriptive study carried in a tertiary hospital of Spain Method HIV-HCV coinfected patients treated with DAAs between November 2014 and June 2016 were included. Main outcome measure Efficacy was measured in terms of sustained virologic response at week 12 after the end of therapy. Adverse events that led to treatment discontinuation were registered to evaluate the safety profile, and also drug interactions between DAAs and antiretroviral treatment were evaluated. Results Main HCV genotypes were 1a (34.9%) and 4 (24.5%). 51.9% were HCV previously treated, 54.7% had grade 4 liver fibrosis. SVR12 was reported in 90.6%. HCV treatment was well tolerated and there were no discontinuations because of adverse events. 30.2% of HIV treatments had to be modified before DAA treatment was started due to interactions, HIV suppression was not compromised. Conclusion DAA treatment in coinfected patients seems to be highly effective and secure. Evaluation of drug interactions must be a priority in order to maximize effectiveness and avoid toxicity.

Attitudes and potential barriers towards hepatitis C treatment in patients with and without HIV coinfection

This study aimed to assess attitudes and potential barriers towards treatment in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, comparing those with and without HIV coinfection. A cross-sectional survey of 82 HCV-infected adults with and without HIV was conducted in greater Los Angeles between November 2013 and July 2015. Overall, there were 53 (64.6%) with HIV coinfection, 20 (25.0%) with self-reported cirrhosis, and 22 (26.8%) with a history of prior HCV treatment. Of all, 93.2% wanted HCV treatment, but 45.9% were unwilling/unable to spend anything out of pocket, 29.4% were waiting for new therapies, and 23.5% were recommended to defer HCV treatment. HIV/HCV-coinfected patients were more likely to want treatment within one year (90.2% versus 68.2%, p = 0.02), more willing to join a clinical trial (74.5% versus 8.0%, p < 0.01), more willing to take medications twice daily (86.3% versus 61.5%, p = 0.01), and more likely to prefer hepatitis C treatment by an infectious diseases/HIV physician (36.7% versus 4.0%, p < 0.01). Of all, 77.1% of coinfected patients were willing to change antiretroviral therapy if necessary to treat HCV, but only 48.0% of patients were willing to take a medication if it had not been studied in HIV-positive patients. Treatment preferences differ between HIV/HCV-coinfected and HCV-monoinfected patients. Despite a strong willingness among the study cohort to start HCV treatment, other factors such as cost, access to medications, and provider reluctance may be delaying treatment initiation.

Depression in HIV and HCV co-infected patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review and meta-analysis of the differences in the prevalence of depression and presence of depressive symptoms between HIV/HCV co-infection, HIV mono-infection, and hepatitis C virus (HCV) mono-infection. A systematic electronic search of bibliographic databases was performed to locate articles published from the earliest available online until December 2014. Outcomes of depression were based on clinical interviews and validated self-reported measures of depression/depressive symptoms. Of the 188 records initially screened, 29 articles were included in the descriptive systematic review and six were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analytic results indicated that, as measured by self-reported measures of depression, HIV/HCV co-infected patients were significantly more likely to report depressive symptoms than either HIV (SMD = .24, 95% CI: .03-.46, p = .02) or HCV mono-infected (SMD = .55, 95% CI: .17-.94, p = .005) patients. The variability of the results of the reviewed studies, largely dependent on the samples' characteristics and the methods of assessment of depression, suggests that a clear interpretation of how depression outcomes are affected by the presence of HIV/HCV co-infection is still needed. Failing to diagnose depression or to early screen depressive symptoms may have a significant impact on patients' overall functioning and compromise treatments' outcomes.

Treating Hepatitis C in a Ryan White-Funded HIV Clinic: Has the Treatment Uptake Improved in the Interferon-Free Directly Active Antiviral Era?

Now that highly efficacious, interferon-free (IFN-free), direct acting antivirals (DAA) for the treatment of hepatitis C (HCV) have closed the gap between treatment and cure, identifying barriers that prevent initiation of treatment is more crucial than ever. This is a retrospective study utilizing Electronic Medical Records and Prior Authorization Records to identify HCV treatment gaps, including predictors for intention-to-treat and treatment initiation in the first 15 months of a Ryan White funded human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/HCV co-infection clinic. This study included 128 adults ≥ 18 years old with HIV and chronic HCV infection who had visited the treatment center at least once since January 2013. Provider intent-to-treat was used to differentiate patients actively considered for treatment based on documentation kept by a multidisciplinary HCV team. Members of this group who had gone on to initiate treatment were identified. Baseline characteristics were compared. Rates of active treatment consideration and treatment initiation were 30% and 14%, respectively. HCV treatment-naïve individuals were less likely to be considered for treatment [risk ratio (RR) 1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.32] and initiate therapy (RR 2.33, 95% CI 0.97-5.60). Advanced liver disease had no significant association. Black race (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.90-4.25) and Medicaid insurance holders (RR 1.90, 95% CI 0.95-3.82) tended to be less likely to initiate therapy. The availability of IFN-free DAA regimens has yet to increase HCV treatment uptake in our HIV/HCV co-infected population. Barriers to HCV treatment initiation have shifted from medical contraindications to socioeconomic variables.

How Generalizable Are the Results From Trials of Direct Antiviral Agents to People Coinfected With HIV/HCV in the Real World?

BACKGROUND

Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) against hepatitis C virus (HCV) have been described as revolutionary. However, it remains uncertain how effective these drugs will be for individuals coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-HCV. Bridging this gap between efficacy and effectiveness requires a focus on the generalizability of clinical trials.

METHODS

Generalizability of DAA trials was assessed by applying the eligibility criteria from 5 efficacy trials: NCT01479868, PHOTON-1 (NCT01667731), TURQUOISE-I (NCT01939197), ION-4 (NCT02073656), and ALLY-2 (NCT02032888) that evaluated simeprevir; sofosbuvir; ombitasvir, paritaprevir/ritonavir/dasabuvir; sofosbuvir/ledipasvir; and daclatasvir/sofosbuvir, respectively, to the Canadian Coinfection Cohort, representing approximately 23% of the total coinfected population in care in Canada.

RESULTS

Of 874 active participants, 70% had chronic HCV, of whom 410, 26, 94, and 11 had genotypes 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. After applying trial eligibility criteria, only 5.9% (24/410) would have been eligible for enrollment in the simeprevir trial, 9.8% (52/530) in PHOTON-1, 6.3% (26/410) in TURQUOISE-I, and 8.1% (34/421) in ION-4. The ALLY-2 study was more inclusive; 43% (233/541) of the cohort would have been eligible. The most exclusive eligibility criteria across all trials with the exception of ALLY-2 were restriction to specific antiretroviral therapies (63%-79%) and active illicit drug use (53%-55%).

CONCLUSIONS

DAA trial results may have limited generalizability, since the majority of coinfected individuals were not eligible to participate. Exclusions appeared to be related to improving treatment outcomes by not including those at higher risk of poor adherence and reinfection--individuals for whom real-world data are urgently needed.