Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) following 12 weeks of treatment with the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir combined with the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir. We assessed the efficacy of 8 weeks of treatment with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir plus the pangenotypic NS3/4A protease inhibitor voxilaprevir (sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir). METHODS: In 2 phase 3, open-label trials, patients with HCV infection who had not previously been treated with a direct-acting antiviral agent were randomly assigned to groups given sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 8 weeks or sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks. POLARIS-2, which enrolled patients infected with all HCV genotypes with or without cirrhosis, except patients with genotype 3 and cirrhosis, was designed to test the non-inferiority of 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir to 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir using a non-inferiority margin of 5%. POLARIS-3, which enrolled patients infected with HCV genotype 3 who had cirrhosis, compared rates of SVR in both groups to a performance goal of 83%. RESULTS: In POLARIS-2, 95% (95% CI, 93%-97%) of patients had an SVR to 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir; this did not meet the criterion to establish non-inferiority to 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, which produced an SVR in 98% of patients (95% CI, 96%-99%; difference in the stratum-adjusted Mantel-Haenszel proportions of 3.4%; 95% CI, -6.2% to -0.6%). The difference in the efficacy was primarily due to a lower rate of SVR (92%) among patients with HCV genotype 1a infection receiving 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir. In POLARIS-3, 96% of patients (95% CI, 91%-99%) achieved an SVR in both treatment groups, which was significantly superior to the performance goal. Overall, the most common adverse events were headache, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea; diarrhea and nausea were reported more frequently by patients receiving voxilaprevir. In both trials, the proportions of patients who discontinued treatment owing to adverse events were low (0-1%). CONCLUSIONS: In phase 3 trials of patients with HCV infection, we did not establish that sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 8 weeks was non-inferior to sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks, but the 2 regimens had similar rates of SVR in patients with HCV genotype 3 and cirrhosis. Mild gastrointestinal adverse events were associated with treatment regimens that included voxilaprevir. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers: POLARIS-2, NCT02607800 and POLARIS-3, NCT02639338.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Persons with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are at risk of progressive liver disease, cirrhosis, and decompensation. We analyzed the effects of the direct-acting antiviral agents elbasvir and grazoprevir in patients with HCV infection and compensated cirrhosis, combining data from 6 clinical trials. METHODS: We performed an integrated analysis of 402 patients with HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection and Child-Pugh A compensated cirrhosis enrolled in 6 clinical trials. All patients received elbasvir/grazoprevir 50 mg/100 mg once daily, with or without ribavirin, for 12-18 weeks. The primary end point was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after completion of therapy (SVR12), defined as a level of HCV RNA <15 IU/mL. RESULTS: Among treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks, 97.8% (135 of 138) and 88.9% (48 of 54) achieved SVR12, respectively. Among patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks, addition of ribavirin did not increase the proportion of treatment-naive patients (90.3%, 28 of 31) or treatment-experienced patients who achieved an SVR12 (91.4%, 74 of 81). All (49 of 49) treatment-experienced patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir with ribavirin for 16 or 18 weeks, and 93.9% (46 of 49) of patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir without ribavirin for 16 or 18 weeks achieved SVR12. Virologic failure was higher among patients with HCV genotype 1a infections compared with patients with genotype 1b or 4 infections, particularly in patients who had not responded to previous interferon therapy. Baseline tests for resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) led to an individualized approach for selecting treatment duration and established a need for ribavirin for patients with HCV genotype 1a infection and RASs, regardless of treatment history. Among patients with HCV genotype 1a infection with and without baseline RASs in HCV nonstructural protein 5A who received elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks, 73% (8 of 11) and 98% (96 of 98) achieved SVR12, respectively. Both patients with HCV genotype 1a infection with baseline RASs who received 16 or 18 weeks of elbasvir/grazoprevir and ribavirin achieved SVR12. Grade 3 or 4 increases in levels of alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase, which did not cause symptoms, were reported in 2.3% (6 of 264) of patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir. Serious adverse events were reported in 3% (8 of 264) patients and no patient had a decompensation-related event. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from 6 clinical trials, rates of SVR12 ranged from 89% to 100% in patients with HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infections and compensated cirrhosis treated with elbasvir/grazoprevir, with or without ribavirin. Addition of ribavirin to a 12-week regimen of elbasvir/grazoprevir had little effect on the proportion of treatment-naive or treatment-experienced patients who achieved an SVR12. However, virologic failure did not occur in any treatment-experienced patients when the duration of elbasvir/grazoprevir and ribavirin therapy was extended to 16 or 18 weeks. Baseline analysis of RASs (or in the absence of this test, a history of nonresponse to interferon) can be used to determine treatment duration and the need for ribavirin in patients with HCV genotype 1a infection. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT02092350, NCT02105662, NCT02105467, NCT02105701, NCT01717326, and NCT02105454.

Over the past two decades, ribavirin has been an integral component of treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, where it has been shown to improve the efficacy of (pegylated) interferon. However, because of treatment-limiting side effects and its additive toxicity with interferon, the search for interferon- and ribavirin-free regimens has been underway. The recent approvals of all-oral direct acting antivirals (DAAs) have revolutionized the HCV therapeutic landscape, and initially it was expected that the role of ribavirin with DAA regimens would be eliminated. On the contrary, what we have witnessed is that ribavirin retains an important role in the optimal treatment of some subgroups of patients, particularly those that historically have been considered the most difficult to cure. Fortunately, it has also been recognized that the safety profile of ribavirin is improved when co-administered with all-oral DAA combinations in the absence of interferon. Despite the antiviral mechanism of action of ribavirin being poorly understood, we now have a range of novel insights into the potential role of ribavirin in all-oral DAA HCV treatment and greater insight into the antiviral mechanism by which it continues to provide clinical benefit for defined patient groups.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: HCV genotype, subtype, and presence of resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) are key determinants for the selection of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment regimens. However, current HCV genotyping assays have limitations in differentiating between HCV subtypes, and RAS prevalence is largely undefined. The aim of this study was to investigate HCV epidemiology in 12,615 patient samples from 28 different countries across five geographic regions. METHODS: We compared HCV genotype and subtypes using INNO-LiPA 2.0 vs. amplicon sequencing among 8,945 patients from phase II/III clinical trials of DAAs. Global HCV molecular epidemiology in 12,615 patients was investigated. Subtype RAS prevalence was determined by population or deep sequencing, and phylogenetic analyses investigating subtype diversity were performed. RESULTS: Although there was high concordance between INNO-LiPA and sequencing for genotype determination, INNO-LiPA was insufficient for subtype determination for genotype 2, 3, 4, and 6. Sequencing provided subtype refinement for 42%, 10%, 81%, and 78% of genotype 2, 3, 4, and six patients, respectively. Genotype discordance (genotype 2-genotype 1) was observed in 28 of 950 (3%) genotype 2 patients, consistent with inter-genotype recombinants. Sequencing-based analyses demonstrated variations in regional subtype prevalence, notably within genotype 2, 4 and 6. RAS prevalence varied by subtype, with the clinically relevant NS3 RAS Q80K found in genotype 1a, 5a and 6a and the NS5A RAS Y93H in genotype 1b, 3a, 4b, 4r and 7. CONCLUSIONS: Together, these analyses provide an understanding of subtyping accuracy and RAS distribution that are crucial for the implementation of global HCV treatment strategies. LAY SUMMARY: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is highly variable, with seven genotypes and 67 subtypes characterized to date. The aim of this study was to i) compare two different methods of discriminating between genotypes; ii) investigate the prevalence of HCV subtypes for each genotype around the world; iii) find the prevalence of resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) in different subtypes. We found that both methods showed high concordance in genotype discrimination, but specific subtypes were not always identified accurately. Sequencing-based analyses demonstrated variations in regional subtype prevalence for some genotypes, notably within GT2, 4 and 6. RAS prevalence also varied by subtype. These variations could determine how successful different drugs are for treating HCV.

BACKGROUND & AIM: Despite complete suppression of viral DNA with antiviral agents, in some patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), serum levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) do not normalize. We investigated factors associated with persistent increases in level of ALT in patients with CHB given long-term tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. METHODS: We analyzed data from 471 hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and HBeAg-negative patients with CHB participating in 2 phase 3 trials. We identified patients with an increased level of ALT (above the upper limit of normal range) after 5 years (240 weeks) of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate therapy. We analyzed findings from liver biopsies collected from 467 patients (99%) at baseline and 339 patients (72%) at year 5 of treatment; biopsies were evaluated by an independent pathologist. We performed stepwise, forward, multivariate regression analyses of specified baseline characteristics and on-treatment response parameters to identify factors associated with persistent increases in level of ALT. RESULTS: Of the 471 patients, 87 (18%) still had an increased level of ALT at year 5 of treatment. Factors independently associated with persistent increase in level of ALT were steatosis score of 5% or more (grade 1 or more) at baseline (odds ratio [OR], 2.224; 95% CI, 1.031-4.852; P=.042) and at year 5 (OR, 3.39; 95% CI 1.560>/=7.375; P=.002), HBeAg seropositivity at baseline (OR, 3.30; 95% CI, 1.653-6.576; P<.001), and age of 40 years or more (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.014-4.342; P=.046). Of the 42 HBeAg-positive patients with steatosis at baseline, 21 (50%) had an increased level of ALT at year 5 of treatment. Patients with persistent increases in ALT were more likely to have an increase in steatosis at year 5 than those with a normal level of ALT. CONCLUSION: HBeAg seropositivity and hepatic steatosis contribute to persistent increases in level of ALT in patients with CHB receiving suppressive antiviral treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT00116805.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as quality of life and work productivity are important for measuring patient's experience. We assessed PROs during and after treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients.Data were obtained from a phase 3 open label study of sofosbuvir and ribavirin (SOF + RBV) with and without interferon (IFN). Patients completed 4 PRO assessment instruments (SF-36, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire- HCV, Work Productivity and Activity-Specific Health Problem) before, during, and after treatment.A total of 533 patients with chronic HCV were enrolled; 28.9% treatment-naive, 23.1% cirrhotic, 219 received IFN + SOF + RBV and 314 received IFN-free SOF + RBV. At baseline, there were no differences in PROs between the IFN-free and IFN-containing treatment arms (all P > 0.05). During treatment, patients receiving IFN + SOF + RBV had a substantial impairment in their PROs (up to -24.4% by treatment week 12, up to -8.3% at week 4 post-treatment). The PRO decrements seen in the SOF + RBV arm were smaller in magnitude (up to -7.1% by treatment week 12), and all returned to baseline or improved by post-treatment week 4. By 12 weeks after treatment cessation, patients who achieved sustained viral response-12 showed some improvement of PRO scores regardless of the regimen (up to +7.1%, P < 0.0001) or previous treatment experience. In multivariate analysis, the use of IFN was independently associated with lower PROs.IFN-based regimens have a profoundly negative impact to PROs. By contrast, the impact of RBV on these PROs is relatively modest. Achieving HCV cure is associated with improvement of most of the PRO scores.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: HCV Council 2014, like its predecessor HCV Council 2011, assembled leading clinicians and researchers in the field of hepatitis C to critically evaluate current data regarding best practices for managing patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV). METHODS: Clinical practice statements were developed that reflect the areas of potential controversy with high clinical impact. Faculty members were responsible for reviewing the literature to support or reject these statements. After a review and comprehensive discussion of the data, the HCV Council faculty voted on the nature of the evidence and the level of support for each statement. RESULTS: The results of the detailed analysis with expert opinion are summarized in this article. CONCLUSION: Numerous questions regarding optimal management of certain populations and clinical scenarios remain unanswered. The discussion in the article provides a summary of evidenced-based expert opinion that may help guide clinicians as additional information is developed.

The US Food and Drug Administration has now approved 10 direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for the management of hepatitis C virus (HCV). These therapies are combined into 6 regimens that are given for varying durations, with or without ribavirin, depending on the viral genotype, the presence or absence of baseline resistance-associated variants (RAVs), and the patient type. RAVs may be present before exposure to a drug or may become detectable de novo during exposure to a drug. Emerging resistant strains are the most common cause of failure of HCV DAA regimens. Second-generation DAAs provide superior coverage of resistant variants compared with first-generation members of that class. They may also cover a broader range of viral genotypes. Numerous clinical trials have evaluated the safety and efficacy of DAAs in a variety of patient populations, including those with cirrhosis, HIV, and end-stage renal disease. This article evaluates the data from these studies, and discusses recommendations from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidance document.