Efficacy of ultra-short, response-guided sofosbuvir and daclatasvir therapy for hepatitis C in a single-arm mechanistic pilot study

Background

World Health Organization has called for research into predictive factors for selecting persons who could be successfully treated with shorter durations of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for hepatitis C. We evaluated early virological response as a means of shortening treatment and explored host, viral and pharmacokinetic contributors to treatment outcome.

Methods

Duration of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) was determined according to day 2 (D2) virologic response for HCV genotype (gt) 1- or 6-infected adults in Vietnam with mild liver disease. Participants received 4- or 8-week treatment according to whether D2 HCV RNA was above or below 500 IU/ml (standard duration is 12 weeks). Primary endpoint was sustained virological response (SVR12). Those failing therapy were retreated with 12 weeks SOF/DCV. Host IFNL4 genotype and viral sequencing was performed at baseline, with repeat viral sequencing if virological rebound was observed. Levels of SOF, its inactive metabolite GS-331007 and DCV were measured on days 0 and 28.

Results

Of 52 adults enrolled, 34 received 4 weeks SOF/DCV, 17 got 8 weeks and 1 withdrew. SVR12 was achieved in 21/34 (62%) treated for 4 weeks, and 17/17 (100%) treated for 8 weeks. Overall, 38/51 (75%) were cured with first-line treatment (mean duration 37 days). Despite a high prevalence of putative NS5A-inhibitor resistance-associated substitutions (RASs), all first-line treatment failures cured after retreatment (13/13). We found no evidence treatment failure was associated with host IFNL4 genotype, viral subtype, baseline RAS, SOF or DCV levels.

Conclusions

Shortened SOF/DCV therapy, with retreatment if needed, reduces DAA use in patients with mild liver disease, while maintaining high cure rates. D2 virologic response alone does not adequately predict SVR12 with 4-week treatment.

Funding

Funded by the Medical Research Council (Grant MR/P025064/1) and The Global Challenges Research 70 Fund (Wellcome Trust Grant 206/296/Z/17/Z).

Azithromycin and cefixime combination versus azithromycin alone for the out-patient treatment of clinically suspected or confirmed uncomplicated typhoid fever in South Asia: a randomised controlled trial protocol

Background: Typhoid and paratyphoid fever (enteric fever) is a common cause of non-specific febrile infection in adults and children presenting to health care facilities in low resource settings such as the South Asia.  A 7-day course of a single oral antimicrobial such as ciprofloxacin, cefixime, or azithromycin is commonly used for its treatment. Increasing antimicrobial resistance threatens the effectiveness of these treatment choices. We hypothesize that combined treatment with azithromycin (active mainly intracellularly) and cefixime (active mainly extracellularly) will be a better option for the treatment of clinically suspected and culture-confirmed typhoid fever in South Asia.

Methods: This is a phase IV, international multi-center, multi-country, comparative participant-and observer-blind, 1:1 randomised clinical trial. Patients with suspected uncomplicated typhoid fever will be randomized to one of the two interventions: Arm A: azithromycin 20mg/kg/day oral dose once daily (maximum 1gm/day) and cefixime 20mg/kg/day oral dose in two divided doses (maximum 400mg bd) for 7 days, Arm B: azithromycin 20mg/kg/day oral dose once daily (max 1gm/day) for 7 days AND cefixime-matched placebo for 7 days. We will recruit 1500 patients across sites in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Pakistan. We will assess whether treatment outcomes are better with the combination after one week of treatment and at one- and three-months follow-up.

Discussion: Combined treatment may limit the emergence of resistance if one of the components is active against resistant sub-populations not covered by the other antimicrobial activity. If the combined treatment is better than the single antimicrobial treatment, this will be an important result for patients across South Asia and other typhoid endemic areas.

Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT04349826 (16/04/2020)

Azithromycin and cefixime combination versus azithromycin alone for the out-patient treatment of clinically suspected or confirmed uncomplicated typhoid fever in South Asia: a randomised controlled trial protocol

Background: Typhoid and paratyphoid fever (enteric fever) is a common cause of non-specific febrile infection in adults and children presenting to health care facilities in low resource settings such as the South Asia.  A 7-day course of a single oral antimicrobial such as ciprofloxacin, cefixime, or azithromycin is commonly used for its treatment. Increasing antimicrobial resistance threatens the effectiveness of these treatment choices. We hypothesize that combined treatment with azithromycin (active mainly intracellularly) and cefixime (active mainly extracellularly) will be a better option for the treatment of clinically suspected and culture-confirmed typhoid fever in South Asia. Methods: This is a phase IV, international multi-center, multi-country, comparative participant-and observer-blind, 1:1 randomised clinical trial. Patients with suspected uncomplicated typhoid fever will be randomized to one of the two interventions: Arm A: azithromycin 20mg/kg/day oral dose once daily (maximum 1gm/day) and cefixime 20mg/kg/day oral dose in two divided doses (maximum 400mg bd) for 7 days, Arm B: azithromycin 20mg/kg/day oral dose once daily (max 1gm/day) for 7 days AND cefixime-matched placebo for 7 days. We will recruit 1500 patients across sites in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Pakistan. We will assess whether treatment outcomes are better with the combination after one week of treatment and at one- and three-months follow-up. Discussion: Combined treatment may limit the emergence of resistance if one of the components is active against resistant sub-populations not covered by the other antimicrobial activity. If the combined treatment is better than the single antimicrobial treatment, this will be an important result for patients across South Asia and other typhoid endemic areas. Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT04349826 (16/04/2020).

Studies on the time and localization of the puberal desensitization to oestrogen in female rats

Immature and postpuberal female rats were ovariectomized at 20 or 27 days of age or on the day of the first vaginal oestrus and chronically implanted with oestradiol benzoate (OB) and cholesterol at the ratios of 1 : 60, 1 : 120 or 1 : 240 on the day following castration. Autopsy was performed on day 6 after implantation and the plasma LH concentration determined by radioimmunoassay. Whereas 1 : 60 and 1 : 120 implants of OB and cholesterol placed into the hypothalamic ventromedial-arcuate region depressed the castration-induced elevation of the LH level before and after puberty, the 1 : 240 mixture was effective only in immature rats, but not after vaginal opening and the first ovulation had occurred. A similar trend was recorded after implantation of OB into the cortical amygdaloid nucleus (CAN). However, the oestrogen dose had to be doubled to get comparable results. Bilateral lesioning of the CAN or deefferentation of the mediocortical amygdala by transection of the stria terminalis did not distinctively influence the LH-suppressing effect of daily s.c. injections of 0.1 or 0.05 microgram OB/100 g b. w. in prepuberal rats. The findings demonstrate a sudden change in the hypothalamic threshold to the gonadotrophin-inhibiting effect of oestrogen over a narrow range of time near the onset of puberty. They furthermore suggest that the mediocortical amygdala is not involved in possible extra-hypothalamic control of the puberal desensitization process.