All-oral therapy with nucleotide inhibitors sofosbuvir and GS-0938 for 14 days in treatment-naive genotype 1 hepatitis C (nuclear)

Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of AL-335 in healthy volunteers and hepatitis C virus-infected subjects

BACKGROUND

The nucleotide analog AL-335 is a pangenotypic hepatitis C virus (HCV) nonstructural protein (NS)5B inhibitor being evaluated as treatment for chronic HCV infection.

METHODS

This three-part randomized, double-blind study evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics of single and multiple ascending oral doses of AL-335. Healthy volunteers (HVs) received single doses of AL-335 (100-1,200 mg) or placebo in a fasted or fed (400 mg) state. Non-cirrhotic subjects (HCV genotype [GT]1-4) and GT1-infected subjects with Child Pugh A cirrhosis received multiple doses of AL-335 (400, 800, 1,200 mg) or placebo once daily (QD) for 7 days.

RESULTS

Forty-eight HVs and 64 subjects with HCV GT1-4 were randomized and received treatment. AL-335 was well tolerated in HVs and HCV-infected subjects with/without cirrhosis. AL-335 was rapidly absorbed and converted to the metabolites ALS-022399 and ALS-022227. ALS-022227 exposure increased less than dose-proportionally and was unaffected by food, while AL-335 and ALS-022399 exposure increased with food by 85% and 50%, respectively, in HVs. Rapid and dose-dependent reductions in HCV-RNA were observed in GT1-infected subjects. In non-cirrhotic, GT1-4-infected subjects receiving AL-335 800 mg QD, potent antiviral activity was observed, regardless of genotype (mean maximum reductions in HCV-RNA of 4.0-4.8 log10 IU/mL). The same dose in GT1-infected cirrhotic subjects resulted in a 3.5 log10 IU/mL mean maximum reduction in HCV-RNA.

CONCLUSIONS

AL-335 was well tolerated when administered as single and multiple doses, with an acceptable pharmacokinetic profile. The drug also demonstrated potent antiviral activity in HCV GT1-4-infected subjects, including GT1-infected subjects with cirrhosis.

Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes Reveal Bradycardiac Effects Caused by Co-Administration of Sofosbuvir and Amiodarone

Co-administration of sofosbuvir, an anti-hepatitis C virus medication, and antiarrhythmic amiodarone causes symptomatic severe bradycardia in patients and animal models. However, in a few in vitro studies, the combination of sofosbuvir and amiodarone resulted in tachycardiac effects in human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hiPSC-CMs). This discrepancy may be attributable to the use of immature hiPSC-CMs in the in vitro studies. To address this, we evaluated the ability of our in-house hiPSC-CMs to assess the interactions between sofosbuvir and amiodarone in vitro. We performed whole-cell patch recordings on hiPSC-CMs to examine the cardiac effect of sofosbuvir and amiodarone, alone or in combination. We found that sofosbuvir and amiodarone caused bradycardiac effects (the beating rate decreased to 75% of the vehicle control, P < 0.001) on our hiPSC-CMs when applied in combination, but they had no significant effect when applied alone. Furthermore, the bradycardiac effect was membrane potential dependent: it increased with depolarization. This raised the possibility that the bradycardiac effects in vivo may originate in nodal cells, which have a more depolarized resting membrane potential compared with ventricular cells. The bradycardiac effects of sofosbuvir plus amiodarone in vitro are consistent with the clinical phenotype and suggest that our hiPSC-CMs may serve as a useful tool in assessing cardiac safety during drug discovery and development process.

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.

Resistance Mechanisms in Hepatitis C Virus: implications for Direct-Acting Antiviral Use

Multiple direct-acting antiviral (DAA)-based regimens are currently approved that provide one or more interferon-free treatment options for hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes (G) 1-6. The choice of a DAA regimen, duration of therapy, and use of ribavirin depends on multiple viral and host factors, including HCV genotype, the detection of resistance-associated amino acid (aa) substitutions (RASs), prior treatment experience, and presence of cirrhosis. In regard to viral factors that may guide the treatment choice, the most important is the infecting genotype because a number of DAAs are genotype-designed. The potency and the genetic barrier may also impact the choice of treatment. One important and debated possible virologic factor that may negatively influence the response to DAAs is the presence of baseline RASs. Baseline resistance testing is currently not routinely considered or recommended for initiating HCV treatment, due to the overall high response rates (sustained virological response >90%) obtained. Exceptions are patients infected by HCV G1a when initiating treatment with simeprevir and elbasvir/grazoprevir or in those with cirrhosis prior to daclatasvir/sofosbuvir treatment because of natural polymorphisms demonstrated in sites of resistance. On the basis of these observations, first-line strategies should be optimized to overcome treatment failure due to HCV resistance.

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) 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). However, it is still questionable if eradication of hepatitis C virus in the blood eliminates hepatitis C in the body, and improves survival and leads to fewer complications.

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 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 sustained virological response. We systematically assessed risks of bias, performed Trial Sequential Analysis, and followed an eight-step procedure to assess thresholds for statistical and clinical significance. The overall quality of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 138 trials randomising a total of 25,232 participants. The 138 trials assessed the effects of 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 withdrawn or discontinued DAAs. Trial participants were treatment-naive (95 trials), treatment-experienced (17 trials), or both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced (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.Meta-analysis of the effects of all DAAs on the market or under development showed no evidence of a difference when assessing hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality (OR 3.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 26.18, P = 0.19, I² = 0%, 2,996 participants, 11 trials, very low-quality evidence). As there were no data on hepatitis C-related morbidity and very few data on mortality (DAA 15/2377 (0.63%) versus control 1/617 (0.16%)), it was not possible to perform Trial Sequential Analysis on hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality.Meta-analysis of all DAAs on the market or under development showed no evidence of a difference when assessing serious adverse events (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15, P = 0.52, I² = 0%, 15,817 participants, 43 trials, very low-quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis showed that the cumulative Z-score crossed the trial sequential boundary for futility, showing that there was sufficient information to rule out that DAAs compared with placebo reduced the relative risk of a serious adverse event by 20%. The only DAA that showed a significant difference on 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, then the meta-analysis result showed no evidence of a difference.DAAs on the market or under development seemed to reduce the risk of no sustained virological response (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52, P < 0.00001, I² = 77%, 6886 participants, 32 trials, very low-quality evidence) and 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).Withdrawn or discontinued DAAs had no evidence of a difference when assessing hepatitis C-related morbidity and all-cause mortality (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79, P = 0.40, I² = 0%; 5 trials, very low-quality evidence). However, withdrawn DAAs seemed to increase the risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.73, P = 0.001, I² = 0%, 29 trials, very low-quality evidence), and Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Most of all outcome results were short-term results; therefore, we could neither confirm nor reject any long-term effects of DAAs. 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

Overall, DAAs on the market or under development do not seem to have any effects on risk of serious adverse events. 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 seemed to reduce the risk of no sustained virological response. The clinical relevance of the effects of DAAs on no sustained virological response is questionable, as it is a non-validated surrogate outcome. All trials and outcome results were at high risk of bias, so our results presumably overestimate benefit and underestimate harm. The quality of the evidence was very low.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of sofosbuvir and ledipasvir for the treatment of hepatitis C

INTRODUCTION

The sofosbuvir (SOF) plus ledipasvir (LDV) fixed dose combination is the first direct action antiviral (DAA) single-treatment regimen (STR) to be commercialized. It is approved for the treatment of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes 1,3,4,5 and 6. Following approval in 2014, new pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics data were reported, which led to important clinical applications. Areas covered: This article reviews the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the SOF/LDV fixed dose combination for the treatment of HCV. The topics covered include data regarding the drug´s absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion and antiviral activity strategies such as the clinical dose selection and treatment duration. Expert opinion: The SOF/LDV fixed dose combination has good pharmacological properties that lead to a high sustained virological response after 12 or 24 weeks of treatment; there is minimal interference with other drugs or associated renal or hepatic impairment, such that dose adjustment is not necessary.

Identification of Drug-Drug Interactions In Vitro: A Case Study Evaluating the Effects of Sofosbuvir and Amiodarone on hiPSC-Derived Cardiomyocytes

Drug-drug interactions pose a difficult drug safety problem, given the increasing number of individuals taking multiple medications and the relative complexity of assessing the potential for interactions. For example, sofosbuvir-based drug treatments have significantly advanced care for hepatitis C virus-infected patients, yet recent reports suggest interactions with amiodarone may cause severe symptomatic bradycardia and thus limit an otherwise extremely effective treatment. Here, we evaluated the ability of human induced pluripotent stem cell derived cardiomyocytes (hiPSC-CMs) to recapitulate the interaction between sofosbuvir and amiodarone in vitro, and more generally assessed the feasibility of hiPSC-CMs as a model system for drug-drug interactions. Sofosbuvir alone had negligible effects on cardiomyocyte electrophysiology, whereas the sofosbuvir-amiodarone combination produced dose-dependent effects beyond that of amiodarone alone. By comparison, GS-331007, the primary circulating metabolite of sofosbuvir, had no effect alone or in combination with amiodarone. Further mechanistic studies revealed that the sofosbuvir-amiodarone combination disrupted intracellular calcium (Ca²⁺) handling and cellular electrophysiology at pharmacologically relevant concentrations, and mechanical activity at supra-pharmacological (30x C_max) concentrations. These effects were independent of the common mechanisms of direct ion channel block and P-glycoprotein activity. These results support hiPSC-CMs as a comprehensive, yet scalable model system for the identification and evaluation of cardioactive pharmacodynamic drug-drug interactions.

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C with direct-acting antivirals: The role of resistance

The use of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) to treat chronic hepatitis C has resulted in a significant increase in rates of sustained viral response (around 90%-95%) as compared with the standard treatment of peginterferon/ribavirin. Despite this, however, the rates of therapeutic failure in daily clinical practice range from 10%-15%. Most of these cases are due to the presence of resistant viral variants, resulting from mutations produced by substitutions of amino acids in the viral target protein that reduce viral sensitivity to DAAs, thus limiting the efficacy of these drugs. The high genetic diversity of hepatitis C virus has resulted in the existence of resistance-associated variants (RAVs), sometimes even before starting treatment with DAAs, though generally at low levels. These pre-existing RAVs do not appear to impact on the sustained viral response, whereas those that appear after DAA therapy could well be determinant in virological failure with future treatments. As well as the presence of RAVs, virological failure to treatment with DAAs is generally associated with other factors related with a poor response, such as the degree of fibrosis, the response to previous therapy, the viral load or the viral genotype. Nonetheless, viral breakthrough and relapse can still occur in the absence of detectable RAVs and after the use of highly effective DAAs, so that the true clinical impact of the presence of RAVs in therapeutic failure remains to be determined.

The importance of resistance to direct antiviral drugs in HCV infection in clinical practice

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) is associated with high rates of sustained virologic response. Remaining factors associated with treatment failure include advanced stages of liver fibrosis, response to previous antiviral therapy and viral factors such as baseline viral load and suboptimal interaction of the DAA with the target based on viral variants. Heterogeneity within NS3, NS5A, and NS5B areas interacting with DAAs exist between HCV geno- and subtypes as well as HCV isolates of the same geno- and subtype and amino acid polymorphisms associated with suboptimal efficacy of DAAs are termed resistance-associated variants (RAVs). RAVs may be associated with virologic treatment failure. However, virologic treatment failure typically occurs only if other negative predictive host or viral factors are present at the same time, susceptibility to additional antiviral agents is reduced or duration of treatment is suboptimal. In this review geno- and phenotypic resistance testing as well as clinical data on the importance of RAVs for conventional triple therapies with sofosbuvir, simeprevir, and daclatasvir and available interferon-free DAA combinations are discussed.

A model-based meta-analysis of sofosbuvir-based treatments in chronic hepatitis C patients

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of sofosbuvir-based treatments in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection using a model-based meta-analysis (MBMA). A bibliographic search was performed to identify clinical trials involving sofosbuvir as a unique direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agent or together with daclatasvir, ledipasvir or simeprevir for the treatment of diagnosed HCV infection. The time course of the virological response (VR) was modelled to estimate the effect of treatment and the influence of population characteristics on the longitudinal efficacy profile. The model was validated and simulations of 10 different treatment schedules were performed. Data from 19 clinical trials were included in the analysis. According to the developed model, therapy with sofosbuvir+ledipasvir is the most effective therapy in all scenarios, but it does not differ greatly in terms of sustained VR with respect to other combinations of DAA treatments. In conclusion, this MBMA generates knowledge regarding hypothetical head-to-head trials that have not been conducted previously. Therapies with sofosbuvir+ledipasvir are probably the most effective sofosbuvir-based treatments.

Validation and Application of a Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method To Determine the Concentrations of Sofosbuvir Anabolites in Cells

Sofosbuvir (SOF) is a highly efficacious and well-tolerated uridine nucleotide analog that inhibits the hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS5B polymerase enzyme. SOF is administered as a prodrug, which undergoes intracellular phosphorylation by host enzymes to a monophosphate, diphosphate, and finally a pharmacologically active triphosphate. In order to fully understand the clinical pharmacology of SOF, there is a great need to determine the intracellular phosphate concentrations of the drug. We describe the validation and utilization of a method to characterize SOF's disposition into various in vivo cell types, including hepatocytes, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), and red blood cells (RBC). Standard bioanalytical validation criteria were applied to lysed cellular matrices, with a validated linear range of 50 to 50,000 fmol/sample for each phosphate moiety. The assay was utilized to collect the first data demonstrating concentrations of phosphorylated anabolites formed in PBMC, hepatocytes, and RBC in vivo during SOF therapy. Median concentrations in PBMC were 220 (range, 51.5 to 846), 70.2 (range, 25.8 to 275), and 859 (range, 54.5 to 6,756) fmol/10(6) cells in the monophosphate, diphosphate, and triphosphate fractions, respectively. In contrast, RBC triphosphate concentrations were much lower than those of PBMC, as the median concentration was 2.91 (range, 1.14 to 10.4) fmol/10(6) cells. The PBMC triphosphate half-life was estimated at 26 h using noncompartmental approaches, while nonlinear mixed-effect modeling was used to estimate a 69 h half-life for this moiety in RBC. The validated method and the data it generates provide novel insight into the cellular disposition of SOF and its phosphorylated anabolites in vivo.

Development of sofosbuvir for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection

The nucleotide analog NS5B polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2013 for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in combination with ribavirin or peginterferon and ribavirin. Sofosbuvir was developed to meet an urgent medical need for shorter, safer, simplified, more effective HCV treatment regimens and to reduce or eliminate the need for peginterferon. New treatment regimens were especially required for patient populations with limited treatment options, including patients who had failed prior HCV therapy, those with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis, and those who were either intolerant of or had contraindications to interferon. Sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for patients with genotype 2 or 3 HCV infection was the first approved all-oral treatment option. Sofosbuvir is also the backbone of the first regimen available for patients awaiting liver transplantation to prevent HCV recurrence, as well as the first oral interferon-free regimen for patients coinfected with HCV and HIV. This paper describes the development of sofosbuvir up to its original FDA approval.

Most Patients of Hepatitis C Virus Infection in India Present Late for Interferon-Based Antiviral Treatment: An Epidemiological Study of 777 Patients from a North Indian Tertiary Care Center

BACKGROUND

Interferon-based antiviral therapy is offered only to those HCV patients who have either chronic hepatitis or early cirrhosis. Advanced cirrhotics do not tolerate interferon-based therapy. Since HCV is asymptomatic in early stages and usually presents late, the eligibility for interferon-based therapy is thus limited. There are scarce studies from India, which looked specifically the eligibility of interferon-based therapy in HCV patients.

AIM

To study the spectrum of presentation of HCV infection, determine their eligibility for interferon-based therapy, and follow for SVR.

METHODS

The records of all consecutive patients of HCV, >14 years age, who presented to our department between 2008 and 2014, were analyzed for categorization into chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Patients with detectable HCV RNA who have chronic hepatitis or Child A cirrhosis were considered eligible for Peg-interferon and ribavirin. Patients who received treatment were followed for SVR.

RESULTS

777 patients (median age 49 [range 15-95] years, males 69%) were included. Cirrhosis was the most common presentation (56%, 439/777) followed by chronic hepatitis (37%, 287/777) and HCC (7%, 51/777). Of patients who had cirrhosis (including those with HCC), 36% (174/490) were Child A; 51% (250/490) were Child B and 14% (66/490) were Child C. Only 347/777 (45%) were eligible for Peg-interferon-alpha and Ribavirin. Among the remaining 430 patients, in 326 (76%) the disease was far too advanced. Of eligible patients only 54% actually received Peg-interferon-alpha and Ribavirin and 81% patients could complete the course. Of them only 70% could achieve SVR.

CONCLUSIONS

Most HCV patients in India present late and only about 45% are eligible for Interferon-based antiviral treatment. At presentation 56% patients already have cirrhosis and 7% have HCC. Since HCV is usually asymptomatic in early stages, awareness about screening should be increased so that more patients are diagnosed early before they develop cirrhosis or HCC.

Sofosbuvir for chronic hepatitis C virus infection genotype 1-4 in patients coinfected with HIV

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among HIV-infected patients. Sofosbuvir is a first-in-class HCV NS5B inhibitor with potent pan-genotypic antiviral activity. We report a 2-part study that assessed the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir in HCV/HIV-coinfected patients. Part A examined potential drug interactions between sofosbuvir and antiretrovirals (efavirenz, emtricitabine, tenofovir, zidovudine, lamivudine, atazanavir, ritonavir, darunavir, and raltegravir). Part B was a pilot study of sofosbuvir plus peginterferon-ribavirin administered for 12 weeks.

METHODS

We enrolled noncirrhotic patients with chronic HCV infection (genotype, 1-6) and stable HIV. Part A followed a 5-cohort, open-label, multiple-dose, single-sequence design; part B followed an open-label, single-arm design. The primary end point of part B was sustained virologic response (defined as undetectable HCV RNA) 12 weeks after end of treatment (SVR12). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01565889.

FINDINGS

Thirty-eight patients were enrolled in part A and 23 in part B. In part A, no clinically significant drug interactions were observed between sofosbuvir and any of the antiretrovirals evaluated. In part B, 21 (91.3%) patients achieved SVR12. Two patients relapsed but none experienced on-treatment HCV virologic failure. Two patients discontinued study treatment because of adverse events (altered mood and anemia). No serious adverse events, HIV viral breakthrough, or decreases in CD4 percentage were reported in either part A or part B.

INTERPRETATION

Sofosbuvir may be coadministered safely with many commonly used antiretrovirals. The addition of sofosbuvir to peginterferon-ribavirin was highly effective as assessed by SVR in HCV/HIV-coinfected patients.

Sofosbuvir

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service receive 5 to 6 well-documented monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late phase 3 trials. The monographs are targeted to Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committees. Subscribers also receive monthly 1-page summary monographs on agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing in-services. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation/medication use evaluation (DUE/MUE) is also provided each month. With a subscription, the monographs are sent in print and are also available on-line. Monographs can be customized to meet the needs of a facility. A drug class review is now published monthly with The Formulary Monograph Service. Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. For more information about The Formulary Monograph Service, call The Formulary at 800-322-4349. The May 2014 monograph topics are droxidopa, elosulfase alfa, vorapaxar, ramucirumab, and pimavanserin. The DUE/MUE is on droxidopa.

Efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir-based therapy for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients

Sofosbuvir, a hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS5B polymerase inhibitor, is a new direct-acting antiviral for chronic HCV infection. This systematic review and proportional meta-analysis examined the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir-based therapy for chronic HCV infection in treatment-naïve and -experienced patients. Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were searched. Clinical trials examining sofosbuvir plus ribavirin (RBV) and pegylated interferon-α (peg-IFN) or sofosbuvir plus RBV among adults with chronic HCV infection were included. Data were extracted on virological responses including sustained virological response at post-treatment Week 12 (SVR12), relapse, treatment discontinuation due to an adverse event (AE), virological breakthrough during treatment, and AEs. One trial and 13 treatment arms/cohorts from seven studies met the criteria for analysis in treatment-naïve patients who were treated with sofosbuvir, RBV and peg-IFN; the SVR12 was 89% (95% CI 85-92%), relapse was 5% and the serious adverse event (SAE) rate was 4%. Six treatment arms/cohorts met the criteria for analysis in treatment-naïve patients who were treated with sofosbuvir and RBV; the SVR12 was 72% (95% CI 60-81%), relapse was 27% and the SAE rate was 3%. Three treatment arms/cohorts met the criteria for analysis in treatment-experienced patients who were treated with sofosbuvir and RBV; the SVR12 was 51% (95% CI 27-75%), relapse was 46% and the SAE rate was 4%. In conclusion, sofosbuvir-based treatment is effective and safe in treating chronic HCV infection, although the SVR12 of its combination with RBV, especially in treatment-experienced patients, requires improvement.

Different interaction profiles of direct-acting anti-hepatitis C virus agents with human organic anion transporting polypeptides

Simeprevir (SMV), asunaprevir (ASV), daclatasvir (DCV), and sofosbuvir (SFV), which are newly developed direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) against hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, are among the key components of anti-HCV regimens. Preclinical studies have identified inhibitory properties for some of these DAAs against organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B (OATP1B) functions. However, their details remain mostly uncharacterized. Because OATP1B1 and OATP1B3 play determinant roles in the pharmacokinetics of various drugs via their uptake into human hepatocytes, it is plausible that the inhibition of these OATP1Bs by a DAA would create a potential risk of drug-drug interaction, which has been an emerging concern in anti-HCV therapy. Accordingly, in the present study, we intended to clarify the inhibitory characteristics of newly developed DAAs toward OATP1B1 and -1B3 functions. The results of our coincubation inhibition assays have shown that all tested DAAs could inhibit OATP1B1 functions and that SMV, ASV, and DCV (to a lesser extent), but not SFV, exhibited long-lasting preincubation inhibitory effects on OATP1B1 functions. It was also found that the preincubation inhibitory effects of SMV and ASV could augment their coincubation inhibition potency. Furthermore, significant, but differential, inhibitory effects of the DAAs on the OATP1B3 function were identified. To summarize, our results clearly show that the newly developed DAAs are newly identified OATP1B1 and OATP1B3 inhibitors with distinctive interaction properties. It is believed that these inhibition profiles will provide essential information to all concerned parties with respect to the clinical significance of DAA-mediated inhibition of OATP1Bs in anti-HCV therapy.

Investigational nucleoside and nucleotide polymerase inhibitors and their use in treating hepatitis C virus

INTRODUCTION

About 150 million people worldwide are estimated to be chronically infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV). Successful antiviral treatment can stop the progression of the disease toward liver cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and death. IFN has been the drug of choice and the backbone of all combinations in the past two decades. However, an IFN-free combination (sofosbuvir and ribavirin) has been recently approved for genotypes 2 and 3 patients with many other drugs in preclinical and clinical development.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on investigational nucleoside or nucleotide inhibitors of viral polymerase that are potential treatments of HCV. The article reviews drugs that are currently under investigational status.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently, mericitabine has the most robust data but its efficacy appears to be less than optimal. Other drugs such as ALS-2200 (and its diastereomer VX-135) and BMS-986094 are promising but the data in humans are too scanty to draw conclusions about their future role at this current point in time. Other promising molecules are LG-7501, ACH-3422 and EP-NI266, although no clinical studies have been performed thus far, so this must be rectified. Another drug of promise GS-6620 has displayed a high degree of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability, which makes further development unlikely.

Analysis of hepatitis C viral kinetics during administration of two nucleotide analogues: sofosbuvir (GS-7977) and GS-0938

BACKGROUND

Sofosbuvir (GS-7977) and GS-0938 are nucleotide analogue HCV polymerase inhibitors, with sofosbuvir being a pyrimidine and GS-0938 being a purine. Mathematical modelling has provided important insights for characterizing HCV RNA decline and for estimating the in vivo effectiveness of single direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs); however it has not been used to characterize viral kinetics with combination DAA therapy.

METHODS

We evaluated the antiviral activity of sofosbuvir and GS-0938 given alone and in combination for 14 days in 32 HCV genotype 1 treatment-naive patients (P2938-0212; NUCLEAR study).

RESULTS

Viral load declined rapidly in a biphasic manner in all subjects and could be well fitted by assuming that both drugs had a similar and additive level of effectiveness in reducing viral production equal to 99.96%, on average. The model predicted that this level of effectiveness was not reached until 0.6 and 2 days for GS-0938 and sofosbuvir, respectively, and likely represents the time needed to accumulate intracellular triphosphates. Subsequently, both drugs led to a rapid second phase of viral decline with a mean rate of 0.35 d(-1). No effect of IL28B-polymorphism was found on viral kinetic parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Both sofosbuvir and GS-0938 are highly effective at blocking viral production from HCV-infected cells. Both drugs led to a rapid and consistent second phase viral decline and exhibited no breakthroughs or other signs of resistance. From a kinetics perspective, because both drugs were of the same class there was little benefit in combining them, suggesting that future DAA combinations should consider utilizing drugs with different modes of action.