Faculty Bibliography

The treatment paradigm for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is at a critical point in its evolution. The addition of a protease inhibitor to peginterferon plus ribavirin has become the new standard-of-care treatment for most patients. Data from clinical trials of new antivirals have been difficult to interpret and compare, partly because of heterogeneity in trial design, and partly because of inconsistencies in terminology used to define viral responses and the populations evaluated. Present definitions of viral responses for treatment with peginterferon and ribavirin are insufficient for novel treatment paradigms. Further, categorization of prior patient treatment experience in clinical trials, particularly of nonresponders to prior therapy, is inconsistent. Existing terms and definitions must be updated, standardized and/or redefined for easier interpretation of data and effective communication among clinicians. A panel of experts in HCV infection treatment met on 3 December 2009. Goals of the panel were to evaluate terms and definitions used traditionally in treatment with peginterferon and ribavirin, to refine and clarify definitions of existing terms that have varying meanings and to propose new terms and definitions appropriate for novel treatment paradigms emerging with development of new agents. A number of recommendations were accepted unanimously by the panel. Adoption of these terms would improve communication among investigators, enhance comparability among clinical trials, facilitate development of therapeutic guidelines and provide a standardized terminology for use in clinical practice.

Telaprevir is a potent HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor. A completed development program has demonstrated the superior efficacy of a regimen of telaprevir combined with pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin (PR) over PR alone in patients with HCV genotype 1. In the ADVANCE trial in treatment-naive patients, 12 weeks of telaprevir, peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin followed by either 12 or 36 weeks of PR alone (depending upon extended rapid virologic response, or eRVR, i.e. HCV RNA undetectability at weeks 4 and 12), was associated with sustained virological response (SVR) in 75% of patients compared with 46% receiving PR for 48 weeks. The ILLUMINATE trial established the foundation for response-guided therapy in patients with eRVR. The REALIZE trial in treatment-experienced patients showed a gradient of SVR from prior relapsers (86%) to partial responders (57%) to null responders (31%), with rates of virologic failure and emergent resistance highest in the latter group. Incremental adverse effects of telaprevir include rash, anemia, pruritus, diarrhea, and nausea. Treatment naive patients and relapsers are eligible for response-guided therapy. Stopping rules of telaprevir-based treatment include HCV RNA > 1000 IU/ml at weeks 4 and 12.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Interferon-alfa (IFN)-related cytopenias are common and may be dose-limiting. We performed a genome wide association study on a well-characterized genotype 1 HCV cohort to identify genetic determinants of peginterferon-alpha (pegIFN)-related thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and leukopenia. METHODS: 1604/3070 patients in the IDEAL study consented to genetic testing. Trial inclusion criteria included a platelet (Pl) count >/=80x10(9)/L and an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) >/=1500/mm(3). Samples were genotyped using the Illumina Human610-quad BeadChip. The primary analyses focused on the genetic determinants of quantitative change in cell counts (Pl, ANC, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, and basophils) at week 4 in patients >80% adherent to therapy (n=1294). RESULTS: 6 SNPs on chromosome 20 were positively associated with Pl reduction (top SNP rs965469, p=10(-10)). These tag SNPs are in high linkage disequilibrium with 2 functional variants in the ITPA gene, rs1127354 and rs7270101, that cause ITPase deficiency and protect against ribavirin (RBV)-induced hemolytic anemia (HA). rs1127354 and rs7270101 showed strong independent associations with Pl reduction (p=10(-12), p=10(-7)) and entirely explained the genome-wide significant associations. We believe this is an example of an indirect genetic association due to a reactive thrombocytosis to RBV-induced anemia: Hb decline was inversely correlated with Pl reduction (r=-0.28, p=10(-17)) and Hb change largely attenuated the association between the ITPA variants and Pl reduction in regression models. No common genetic variants were associated with pegIFN-induced neutropenia or leucopenia. CONCLUSIONS: Two ITPA variants were associated with thrombocytopenia; this was largely explained by a thrombocytotic response to RBV-induced HA attenuating IFN-related thrombocytopenia. No genetic determinants of pegIFN-induced neutropenia were identified.

Therapy for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with pegylated interferon alpha and ribavirin leads to suboptimal rates of viral eradication in patients with genotype 1 HCV, the most common viral strain in the United States and many other countries. Recent advances in the study of viral kinetics, host factors that predict response to antiviral therapy, and viral protein structure have established the foundation of a new era in the treatment of HCV infection. The HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitors boceprevir and telaprevir, the first 2 agents in a new and promising generation of direct-acting antiviral agents to have completed phase III studies, were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in May 2011. The addition of these HCV protease inhibitors to standard therapy has been demonstrated to dramatically improve sustained virologic response rates, both in treatment-naive patients and in prior relapsers and nonresponders. These novel agents represent only the beginning of a revolution in HCV therapy, which will include additional protease inhibitors as well as other classes of drugs currently under investigation, such as polymerase inhibitors, NS5A inhibitors, and host factor inhibitors such as cyclophilin antagonists. The future of HCV therapy holds promise for significantly higher sustained virologic response rates with shorter treatment durations, as well as the intriguing potential to achieve virologic cure with interferon-free combination therapy regimens.

Direct-acting antiviral agents in combination with pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) significantly improve sustained virologic response rate and reduce duration of therapy among both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C. One of the most important considerations with both boceprevir and telaprevir is the potential development of resistant variants with therapy. Patients with poor intrinsic responsiveness to interferon, and those with incomplete virological suppression on protease inhibitor therapy, appear to be at higher risk for resistance. In this article we will define antiviral resistance and review the data on both in vitro and in vivo resistance to protease inhibitors, concentrating on data on boceprevir and telaprevir. We will also explore the significance of resistant variants present at the baseline, as well as the fate of the resistant variants and the ways to minimize the development of resistance to protease inhibitors.

Boceprevir and telaprevir are peptidomimetic serine protease inhibitors that have been recently approved for the treatment of HCV chronic infection. The addition of these drugs to the prior standard of care, pegylated interferon and ribavirin, improves sustained virological response rates for treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients and shortens the duration of treatment for over half of treatment-naive patients. This review describes the clinical data supporting the approval and use of telaprevir and boceprevir, the algorithm for the use of these drugs, their adverse effects, as well as their important drug-drug interactions.

BACKGROUND: In patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C infection, telaprevir (TVR) in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin (PR) significantly increased sustained virologic response (SVR) rates compared with PR alone. However, genotypic changes could be observed in TVR-treated patients who did not achieve an SVR. METHODS: Population sequence analysis of the NS3*4A region was performed in patients who did not achieve SVR with TVR-based treatment. RESULTS: Resistant variants were observed after treatment with a telaprevir-based regimen in 12% of treatment-naive patients (ADVANCE; T12PR arm), 6% of prior relapsers, 24% of prior partial responders, and 51% of prior null responder patients (REALIZE, T12PR48 arms). NS3 protease variants V36M, R155K, and V36M+R155K emerged frequently in patients with genotype 1a and V36A, T54A, and A156S/T in patients with genotype 1b. Lower-level resistance to telaprevir was conferred by V36A/M, T54A/S, R155K/T, and A156S variants; and higher-level resistance to telaprevir was conferred by A156T and V36M+R155K variants. Virologic failure during telaprevir treatment was more common in patients with genotype 1a and in prior PR nonresponder patients and was associated with higher-level telaprevir-resistant variants. Relapse was usually associated with wild-type or lower-level resistant variants. After treatment, viral populations were wild-type with a median time of 10 months for genotype 1a and 3 weeks for genotype 1b patients. CONCLUSIONS: A consistent, subtype-dependent resistance profile was observed in patients who did not achieve an SVR with telaprevir-based treatment. The primary role of TVR is to inhibit wild-type virus and variants with lower-levels of resistance to telaprevir. The complementary role of PR is to clear any remaining telaprevir-resistant variants, especially higher-level telaprevir-resistant variants. Resistant variants are detectable in most patients who fail to achieve SVR, but their levels decline over time after treatment.