In two trials involving patients with hepatitis C in whom previous treatment with direct-acting antiviral agents failed, treatment for 12 weeks with sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir achieved ...high rates of sustained virologic response.
The majority of patients who are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) can now be successfully treated with drugs that directly target viral replication.
1
,
2
Combination regimens of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) provide rates of sustained virologic response exceeding 90%, regardless of HCV genotype, disease stage, or treatment history.
3
The proportion of patients who do not have a sustained virologic response to treatment with approved regimens is small, but given the size of the infected population — estimates range up to 150 million people worldwide
4
— the absolute number of such patients is substantial and will increase as more . . .
Newer direct-acting antiviral therapies are increasingly becoming the therapy of choice in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Here, we report the safety and effectiveness of ...sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) in real-world cohorts in Germany.
Patients initiated on SOF/VEL 12 weeks or LDV/SOF 8, 12 or 24 weeks regimens in a single German centre were included in this study. Data on treatment outcomes and adverse events (AE) were analysed in patients with available sustained virologic response 12 weeks after cessation of treatment (SVR12) information overall and by subgroups.
This study included 115 patients who received SOF/VEL from July-2016 to July-2017, and 249 patients who received LDV/SOF from November-2014 to September-2015. Overall, SVR12 was achieved in 99% of patients on SOF/VEL ± ribavirin 12 weeks independent of HCV genotype, treatment history, or cirrhosis status, and in 96% of patients treated with LDV/SOF 8 weeks or LDV/SOF ± ribavirin 12 or 24 weeks. In genotype 1 treatment-naïve, non-cirrhotic patients, ≥99% achieved SVR12 across SOF/VEL and LDV/SOF regimens. Likewise, 100% of genotype 3-cirrhotic patients on SOF/VEL ± ribavirin regimens achieved SVR12. Grade 3/4 AE were reported in 13 (5.2%) patients on LDV/SOF and in 1 (<1%) patient on SOF/VEL.
Overall, SOF/VEL and LDV/SOF achieved high SVR rates in a broad patient population. We showed the effectiveness of SOF/VEL as a pan-genotypic regimen, and regardless of treatment history or cirrhosis status. Use of such therapies improves outcomes and contributes towards the global efforts to eradicate HCV.
Full text
Available for:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
In this randomized comparison of treatment with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or adefovir dipivoxil for 48 weeks in patients with chronic hepatitis B, tenofovir was more likely to result in viral ...suppression. The follow-up period was not long enough to assess the resistance patterns, risks, and benefits of long-term treatment.
In this randomized comparison of treatment with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or adefovir dipivoxil for 48 weeks in patients with chronic hepatitis B, tenofovir was more likely to result in viral suppression.
Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a major health problem.
1
–
3
Since most patients with chronic HBV infection require long-term therapy,
4
–
6
there is a need for new drugs with potent antiviral activity and established long-term safety, as well as a proven low rate of HBV antiviral resistance, a high genetic barrier (i.e., requiring more than one amino acid substitution to confer resistance to HBV treatment), or both.
The ultimate goal of treatment of chronic HBV infection is to prevent liver complications. This goal is seldom achieved through hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) loss and seroconversion, which are associated . . .
Background & Aims Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), a nucleotide analogue and potent inhibitor of hepatitis B virus (HBV) polymerase, showed superior efficacy to adefovir dipivoxil in treatment of ...chronic hepatitis B through 48 weeks. We evaluated long-term efficacy and safety of TDF monotherapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B who were positive or negative for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg+ or HBeAg− ). Methods After 48 weeks of double-blind comparison of TDF to adefovir dipivoxil, patients who underwent liver biopsy were eligible to continue the study on open-label TDF for 7 additional years; data presented were collected up to 3 years (week 144) from 85% of participants. Primary efficacy end points at week 144 included levels of HBV DNA and alanine aminotransferase, development of resistance mutations, and presence of HBeAg or hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). Results At week 144, 87% of HBeAg− and 72% of HBeAg+ patients treated with TDF had levels of HBV DNA <400 copies/mL. Among patients who had previously received adefovir dipivoxil and then received TDF, 88% of the HBeAg− and 71% of the HBeAg+ patients had levels of HBV DNA <400 copies/mL; overall, 81% and 74%, respectively, maintained normalized levels of alanine aminotransferase and 34% had lost HBeAg. Amino acid substitutions in HBV DNA polymerase that are associated with resistance to tenofovir were not detected in any patient. Cumulatively, 8% of HBeAg+ patients lost HBsAg. TDF maintained a favorable safety profile for up to 3 years. Conclusions TDF was safe and effective in the long-term management of HBeAg+ and HBeAg− patients with chronic hepatitis B.
Background & Aims: The treatment of patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) type 1 remains a challenge necessitating innovative strategies to improve treatment outcome. The extension of ...treatment duration beyond 48 weeks is one possible strategy to address this problem. Methods: The efficacy and safety of 48 weeks (group A, N = 230) vs 72 weeks (group B, N = 225) of treatment with pegylated–interferon-alfa-2a (180 μg/wk) plus ribavirin (800 mg/day) were studied in treatment-naive patients with HCV type 1 infection. On-treatment and sustained virologic response (SVR) 24 weeks after stopping treatment was assessed by qualitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (sensitivity 50 IU/mL). Results: Overall, no significant differences could be observed in the treatment outcome between both groups. End-of-treatment and SVR rates in groups A and B were 71% vs 63% and 53% vs 54%, respectively. Patients with undetectable HCV-RNA levels already at weeks 4 and 12 had excellent SVR rates ranging from 76% to 84% regardless of treatment group, whereas patients shown to be still HCV-RNA positive at week 12 achieved significantly higher SVR rates when treated for 72 instead of 48 weeks (29% vs 17%, P = .040). A particular benefit from extended treatment duration was seen in patients with low-level viremia (<6000 IU/mL) at week 12. The frequency and intensity of adverse events was similar between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Extended treatment duration generally is not recommended in HCV type 1 infection and should be reserved only for patients with slow virologic response defined as HCV-RNA positive at week 12 but negative at week 24.
Summary Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infected patients often take multiple co-medications to treat adverse events related to HCV therapy, or to manage other co-morbidities. Drug–drug interactions ...associated with this polypharmacy are relatively new to the field of HCV pharmacotherapy. With the advent of the direct-acting antivirals telaprevir and boceprevir, which are both substrates and inhibitors of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A iso-enzyme, knowledge and awareness of drug–drug interactions have become a cornerstone in the evaluation of patients starting and continuing HCV combination therapy. In our opinion, an overview of conducted drug–drug interaction studies and a list of contraindicated medications is not enough for the clinical management of these drug–drug interactions. Knowledge of pharmacokinetic profiles and concentration–effect relationships is key for the interpretation of these data, and insight into how to manage these interactions (e.g., dose adjustments, safe alternatives and therapeutic drug monitoring) is of equal importance. This review provides a practical overview of the safe and effective management of these clinical challenges.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Summary Dermatological adverse events (AEs) are an existing concern during hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and peginterferon/ribavirin treatment. HCV infection leads to dermatological and ...muco-cutaneous manifestations including small-vessel vasculitis as part of the mixed cryoglobulinemic syndrome. Peginterferon/ribavirin treatment is associated with well-characterized dermatological AEs tending towards a uniform entity of dermatitis. New direct-acting antivirals have led to significant improvements in sustained virologic response rates, but several have led to an increase in dermatological AEs versus peginterferon/ribavirin alone. In telaprevir trials, approximately half of treated patients had rash. More than 90% of these events were Grade 1 or 2 (mild/moderate) and in the majority (92%) of cases, progression to a more severe grade did not occur. In a small number of cases (6%), rash led to telaprevir discontinuation, whereupon symptoms commonly resolved. Dermatological AEs with telaprevir-based triple therapy were generally similar to those observed with peginterferon/ribavirin (xerosis, pruritus, and eczema). A few cases were classified as severe cutaneous adverse reaction (SCAR), also referred to as serious skin reactions, a group of rare conditions that are potentially life-threatening. It is therefore important to distinguish between telaprevir-related dermatitis and SCAR. The telaprevir prescribing information does not require telaprevir discontinuation for Grade 1 or 2 (mild/moderate) rash, which can be treated using emollients/moisturizers and topical corticosteroids. For Grade 3 rash, the prescribing information mandates immediate telaprevir discontinuation, with ribavirin interruption (with or without peginterferon) within 7 days of stopping telaprevir if there is no improvement, or sooner if it worsens. In case of suspicion or confirmed diagnosis of SCAR, all study medication must be discontinued.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Liver steatosis is often observed in chronic HCV infection and associated to genotype or comorbidities. NAFLD is an important risk factor for end-stage liver disease. We aimed to analyse the course ...of NAFLD as a concomitant disease in a cohort of HCV patients. The German Hepatitis C-Registry is a national multicenter real-world cohort. In the current analysis, 8789 HCV patients were included and separated based on the presence of steatosis on ultrasound and/or histology. Fibrosis progression was assessed by transient elastography (TE), ultrasound or non-invasive surrogate scores. At the time of study inclusion 12.3% (n = 962) of HCV patients presented with steatosis (+S) (higher rate in GT-3). Diabetes mellitus was more frequent in GT-1 patients. HCV patients without steatosis (-S) had a slightly higher rate of fibrosis progression (FP) over time (30.3%) in contrast to HCV patients +S (26%). This effect was mainly observed in GT-3 patients (34.4% vs. 20.6%). A larger decrease of ALT, AST and GGT from baseline to FU-1 (4-24 weeks after EOT) was found in HCV patients (without FP) +S compared to -S. HCV patients -S and with FP presented more often metabolic comorbidities with a significantly higher BMI (+0.58kg/m.sup.2) compared to patients -S without FP. This was particularly pronounced in patients with abnormal ALT. Clinically diagnosed steatosis in HCV patients does not seem to contribute to significant FP in this unique cohort. The low prevalence of steatosis could reflect a lower awareness of fatty liver in HCV patients, as patients -S and with FP presented more metabolic risk factors.
Full text
Available for:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Background & Aims Long-term viral suppression is a major goal to prevent disease progression in patients with HBV. Aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of entecavir plus ...tenofovir combination in 57 CHB partial responders or multidrug resistant patients. Methods Investigator-initiated open-label cohort study. Quantitative HBV-DNA measurement and resistance testing (line-probe-assays and direct-sequencing) at baseline and every 3 months. Results Fifty seven patients (37 HBeAg+), median age 45 years, previously treated with a median of three lines of antiviral therapy (range 1–6), 24/57 with advanced liver disease, were included. Median ALT at baseline was 1.0 ULN (range 0.3–22) and HBV-DNA 1.5 × 104 IU/ml (range 500–1 × 1011 IU/ml). Median treatment duration of combination therapy was 21 months. HBV-DNA level dropped 3 logs (median, range 0–8 log; p <0.0001), 51/57 patients became HBV-DNA undetectable, median after 6 months (95% CI, 4.6–7). The probability for HBV DNA suppression was not reduced in patients with adefovir or entecavir resistance or in patients with advanced liver disease. Viral suppression led to decline in ALT (median 0.7 ULN; range 0.2–2.4; p = 0.001). Five patients lost HBeAg (after 15, 18, 20, 21, and 27 months, respectively), one patient showed HBs-seroconversion. Patients with advanced disease did not show clinical decompensation, two patients with cirrhosis and undetectable HBV DNA developed HCCs. No death, newly induced renal impairment or lactic acidosis were reported. Conclusions Rescue therapy with entecavir and tenofovir in CHB patients harboring viral resistance patterns or showing only partial antiviral responses to preceding therapies was efficient, safe, and well tolerated in patients with and without advanced liver disease (249).
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Despite the availability of highly effective and well-tolerated direct-acting antivirals, not all patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection receive treatment. This retrospective, ...multi-centre, noninterventional, case-control study identified patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection initiating (control) or not initiating (case) treatment at 43 sites in Germany from September 2017 to June 2018. It aimed to compare characteristics of the two patient populations and to identify factors involved in patient/physician decision to initiate/not initiate chronic hepatitis C virus treatment, with a particular focus on historical barriers. Overall, 793 patients were identified: 573 (72%) who received treatment and 220 (28%) who did not. In 42% of patients, the reason for not initiating treatment was patient wish, particularly due to fear of treatment (17%) or adverse events (13%). Other frequently observed reasons for not initiating treatment were in accordance with known historical barriers for physicians to initiate therapy, including perceived or expected lack of compliance (14.5%), high patient age (10.9%), comorbidities (15.0%), alcohol abuse (9.1%), hard drug use (7.7%), and opioid substitution therapy (4.5%). Patient wish against therapy was also a frequently reported reason for not initiating treatment in the postponed (35.2%) and not planned (47.0%) subgroups; of note, known historical factors were also common reasons for postponing treatment. Real-world and clinical trial evidence is accumulating, which suggests that such historical barriers do not negatively impact treatment effectiveness. Improved education is key to facilitate progress towards the World Health Organization target of eliminating viral hepatitis as a major public health threat by 2030.
Full text
Available for:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
