Search

Background: For treatment of genotype 1a (GT1a) infection with elbasvir/grazoprevir, the German guidelines recommend a differentiated approach depending on baseline viral load (BVL). For low BVL ≤800 000 IU/mL, treatment with 12 weeks elbasvir/grazoprevir should be considered, whereas for high BVL >800 000 IU/mL, this regimen is only recommended in nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A) resistance-associated substitutions (RAS) absence. With present NS5A RAS or when RAS-testing is not available, 16 weeks elbasvir/grazoprevir + ribavirin is preferred. Here, we investigated the adherence to these recommendations and the effectiveness of elbasvir/grazoprevir in a large German Hepatitis C-Registry GT1a cohort., Methods: From September 2016 until July 2018, 195 GT1a-infected patients were treated with elbasvir/grazoprevir ± ribavirin for 12-16 weeks. The primary outcome was per protocol SVR12 or SVR24., Results: Mean age was 50 years, 89% were male, 19% had cirrhosis, 72% were treatment-naïve. Forty-five percent had low BVL ≤800 000 IU/mL, 55% high BVL >800 000 IU/mL, of whom 49 vs. 42% were baseline RAS-tested. Four patients with high (7.7%) and two with low BVL (5%) had NS5A RAS of whom 50% received elbasvir/grazoprevir+ribavirin, respectively. Ninety-four percent of patients with low and 65% with high BVL received elbasvir/grazoprevir without ribavirin. Thirty-five percent of patients with high BVL received ribavirin, mostly without prior RAS-testing. Per protocol sustained virologic response (SVR) by low vs. high BVL was 98.8 and 95.1%. All patients with NS5A RAS achieved SVR., Conclusions: In German, real-world most patients received elbasvir/grazoprevir without ribavirin. Ribavirin was mainly added in GT1a patients >800 000 IU/mL, who were not NS5A RAS tested. SVR rates were consistently high and comparable to clinical trial results., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Micro-elimination of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) includes treatment in populations at risk of ongoing HCV transmission, such as men who have sex with men (MSM) or people who inject drugs (PWID). We analyzed the HCV reinfection incidence rates of participants in the German hepatitis C cohort (GECCO) and compared our data to previous findings from the interferon era., Methods: Patients with HCV reinfections in the multi-centric GECCO cohort were compared to patients in whom no reinfection occurred. The HCV reinfection incidence rate in MSM was also compared to the incidence rate in the interferon era (using data from the European Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Treatment Network [NEAT])., Results: Between January 2014 and April 2018, 48 HCV reinfections occurred in 2298 individuals (2%), with 2346 cured HCV episodes. The median time to reinfection was 500 days (range 16-1160) and the overall HCV reinfection incidence rate was 1.89 per 100 person-years (py; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-2.48). In a multivariate analysis, the transmission risk in MSM was the only independent risk factor of HCV reinfection (odds ratio, 39.3; 95% CI, 4.57-334.40; P = .001). The incidence rate in MSM was 9.02 (95% CI, 6.48-12.26) per 100 py, compared to 1.14 per 100 py in PWID (95% CI, .56-2.09). The incidence rate for a first HCV reinfection in MSM was similar in the direct-acting antiviral era, compared to the interferon era, with a hazard ratio of 1.05 (95% CI, .64-1.74; P = .831)., Conclusions: HCV reinfection remains a frequent finding among MSM in Germany. In addition to behavioral interventions, early HCV treatment and retreatment should be implemented for this subgroup to prevent HCV transmission., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background:  Virologic failure to approved combinations of direct antiviral agents (DAA) in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is rare. Mostly it involves difficult to treat patients with advanced liver disease and prior interferon-experience. Before approval of VOX/VEL/SOF, a restricted number of patients received rescue treatment, and the choice of DAA combinations for re-treatment were selected on an individual basis. In the present analysis, patient characteristics and rescue-regimens after virologic failure mainly based on first generation DAAs are described., Patients and Methods:  Data were obtained from the German Hepatitis C-Registry (DHC-R), which is a national multicenter real-world cohort currently including about 16 500 patients recruited by more than 250 centers. The present analysis is based on 6683 patients who initiated a DAA therapy and for whom follow-up data (per-protocol analysis) were available., Results:  Among the patients, 188 (2.8 %) experienced a virologic relapse. Compared to SVR-patients, relapse patients were significantly more often male (77.7 % versus 56.9 %, respectively, p < 0.001), showed cirrhosis significantly more (48.4 % versus 28.1 %, respectively, p < 0.001) and a prior interferon-containing therapy (46.3 % versus 39.0 %, respectively, p = 0.049). The majority of patients who relapsed were infected with genotype 1 (47.4 %) followed by genotype 3 (29.8 %), and 95 relapse patients started DAA re-treatment. Characteristics of patients with rescue-treatment are similar to these of patients with relapse after initial DAA treatment. Thirty-one of 39 patients with complete follow-up data achieved SVR (79.5 %), and 8 patients had a relapse again (20.5 %). Patients who received rescue treatment including a new DAA class according to guidelines, except patients who received VOX/VEL/SOF, showed higher SVR rates than the entire group (21/25, 84 %). All patients who received VOX/VEL/SOF achieved SVR (n = 4, 100 %)., Conclusions:  Patients with failure with DAA combination therapies are a difficult but urgent to treat population with the frequent presence of cirrhosis and prior treatment failure with interferon-based therapies. Rescue therapy with inclusion of a new DAA class leads to high SVR rates, but multiple targeted therapy with VOX/VEL/SOF seems to be most effective., Competing Interests: Annika Schmitt: consulting: AbbVieRainer Günther: has nothing to discloseStefan Mauss: sponsored lectures (national or international): Gilead, AbbVie, MSD; advisory committee or review panel: Gilead, AbbVie, MSDKlaus H.W. Boeker: speaking and teaching: AbbVie, Gilead, MSDPeter Buggisch: advisory committee or review panel: AbbVie, Gilead, MSD, Intercept; speaking and teaching: AbbVie, Gilead, Falk, Merz, MSD, NorgineHeribert Hillenbrand: has nothing to discloseChristine John: has nothing to discloseHartwig Klinker: advisory committee or review panel: AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, Hexal, Janssen, MSD, Shionogi; grant/research support: AbbVie, Arrowhead, BMS, Janssen, Gilead, MSD, Novartis; speaking and teaching: AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, Janssen, MSDAnita Pathil: consultant: AbbVie; sponsored lectures (National or International): AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, JanssenKarl-Georg Simon: advisory committee or review panel: AbbVie, Gilead, MSD; speaking and teaching: AbbVie, FALK, Gilead, MSDYvonne Serfert: has nothing to discloseClaus Niederau: grants: AbbVie, Falk, Genzyme, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Shire; consultant: AbbVie, Alexion, Genzyme, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Shire; sponsored lectures: (National or International): AbbVie, Alexion, Biogen, BMS, Falk, Genzyme, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, ShireJohannes Vermehren: sponsored lectures (national or international): AbbVie, Gilead, Intercept, Merck.Heiner Wedemeyer: personal fees from Transgene, MSD, Roche, Gilead, Abbott, BMS, Falk, AbbVie, Novartis, GSK, Roche Diagnostics, Eiger, ITF, and MyrGmbH; grants/research support from MSD, Novartis, Gilead, Roche, Abbott, and Roche Diagnostics.Christoph Sarrazin: speaker and consultation for AbbVie, Gilead, MSD/Merck, (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Goals and Background: International guidelines recommend prioritized treatment initiation in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients with advanced liver disease. We aimed to evaluate whether the widespread usage of direct acting antivirals (DAAs) has led to a decrease in late presentation for care., Study: Data derived from the multicenter German Hepatitis C Cohort (GECCO) was analyzed. Treatment naive HCV-infected patients initiating DAA-based treatment between January 2014 and September 2017 were included. Advanced liver disease was defined by aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index score ≥1.5, METAVIR≥F3, or FibroScan ≥9.5 kPa. Period prevalence and risk factors for late presentation were evaluated., Results: Six hundred fifty-three HCV-monoinfected and 210 HIV/HCV-coinfected patients (mean age, 48.6±12.7 y; 65.5% male) were included. Overall 32.5% of patients had advanced liver disease. In 2014 39.4% of patients presented with advanced liver disease, decreasing to 30.1%, 34.4%, and 26.4% in the years 2015, 2016, and 2017 (P=0.057), respectively. Patients with and without advanced liver disease differed in age (P<0.0001), CD4 ≤350/µL (P=0.027), genotype (P=0.005), transmission route (P=0.047), body mass index (P<0.001), and time since diagnosis (P=0.007). In the multivariable binary logistic regression analysis GT3, age above 45 years and being diagnosed >2 years ago were positively and HCV transmission through men who have sex with men was negatively associated with advanced liver disease., Conclusions: Overall 32.5% of patients presented with advanced liver disease. We observed a trend toward a lower proportion of patients starting treatment late.GT3, age, years since HCV diagnosis and HCV transmission route were identified as risk factors for presentation with advanced liver disease.

Background:  The urgent need in HCV-infected patients with liver disease mandated the rapid implementation of IFN-free DAA combination therapies following their regulatory approval in 2014 and 2015 without full knowledge of the optimal combinations and regimens. Investigating the evolution of the DAA utilization patterns and treatment outcomes could provide learnings for future situations., Methods:  This was an analysis of a prospective observational database from the German Hepatitis C Registry (DHC-R) covering a period from May 2014 to September 2015. Adult patients had evidence of chronic HCV GT1 or GT4 infection and were treated with an IFN-free combination regimen of simeprevir (SMV) + sofosbuvir (SOF) or other IFN-free regimens: daclatasvir + sofosbuvir (DCV + SOF), ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (SOF/LDV), paritaprevir/r + ombitasvir ± dasabuvir (PrOD), with or without ribavirine (R)., Results:  A total of 5496 subjects were followed during the period. During this period, clinical recommendations and treatment patterns evolved rapidly in response to new evidence from clinical trials and clinical routine and regulatory approval of additional regimens. High SVR12 rates were seen in this cohort, even in hard-to-treat patient subgroups. In the multivariate analysis, gender, age, advanced cirrhosis, and intensified treatment for cirrhotics were associated with treatment outcome., Conclusion:  Despite limited knowledge of the optimal utilization of the newly approved DAA combinations and treatment durations as well as their comparative efficacy and safety profiles, high SVR rates were achieved regardless of the DAA combination. These outcomes were facilitated by the rapid adaptation of clinical recommendations. Future situations with high unmet medical need may follow a similar approach., Competing Interests: CS has received speaker and consultancy fees from Abbvie, Abbott, BMS, Gilead, Janssen, Merck and Siemens.PB has received speaker and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Falk, Gilead, Merz Pharma and MSD.SM has received speaker and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen and MSD.TM has received speaker and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Falk, Intercept, Gilead, MSD, Novartis and Roche.TZ has received speaker and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Astellas, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, and Roche.HK has received speaker and consultancy fees from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, Hexal, Janssen and MSD.AP has received speaker and consultancy fees from Janssen, Gilead, AbbVie und BMS.MS is an employee of Janssen.CN is an employee of Janssen.ILD is an employee of Janssen.KGS has received speaker and consultancy fees from AbbVie, BMS, Janssen, Falk, Gilead, Norgine, Merz, MSD., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Background: Twelve weeks of the pangenotypic direct-acting antiviral (DAA) combination sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) was highly efficient in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 3 (GT3) infection in the ASTRAL-3 approval study. However, presence of resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) in the HCV nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A) was associated with lower treatment response., Aim: To assess the efficacy and safety of SOF/VEL ± ribavirin (RBV) and the impact of NS5A RASs and RBV use on treatment outcome in HCV GT3 infection in a real-world setting., Methods: In this multicentre cohort study, GT3 patients from ten treatment centres across Germany were included. Sustained virological response was assessed 12 weeks after end-of-treatment (SVR12) in modified intention-to-treat (mITT) and per-protocol analysis (PP). NS5A RASs were tested by population-based sequencing., Results: A total of 293 GT3 patients were included. The median age was 48 years, 70% were male, 25.3% were cirrhotic, 9.2% were HCV/HIV co-infected and 21.8% were treatment-experienced, including 4.1% with DAA experience. Baseline NS5A RASs (Y93H, A30K, L31M) were detected in 11.2%. RBV was added in 5% of noncirrhotic and 58.9% of cirrhotic patients, respectively. SVR12 rates for SOF/VEL±RBV were 95.9% (mITT) and 99.5% (PP), respectively. Only 1 virological relapse occurred in a cirrhotic patient previously treated with SOF/RBV. No treatment-related major adverse events occurred., Conclusion: Twelve weeks of SOL/VEL±RBV was safe and highly efficient in HCV GT3 across a diverse patient population. Baseline NS5A RASs were rarely observed and presence did not seem to impact SVR, regardless of the use of RBV., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: HCV has complex interactions with human lipid metabolism leading to down regulation of cholesterol levels. Interferon (IFN) therapy has been shown to decrease cholesterol even further. With the availability of second-generation direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) the effect of suppressing and eliminating HCV on lipid metabolism warrants reevaluation., Methods: Prospective German multicentre cohort on HCV- and HIV-HCV-infected patients treated with direct-antiviral agents (GECCO). Lipids were assessed at baseline, during and after therapy. Wilcoxon test corrected for multiple testing was used., Results: For the analysis, 520 patients with chronic hepatitis C were available. Patients with chronic hepatitis C were treated as follows: sofosbuvir (SOF)/pegylated IFN (PEG-IFN)/ribavirin (RBV; HCV=34, HIV-HCV=36), SOF/RBV (HCV=47, HIV-HCV=16), SOF/simeprevir (HCV=9, HCV-HIV=2), SOF/daclatasvir +/- RBV (HCV=27, HIV-HCV=47), SOF/ledipasvir +/- RBV (HCV=147, HCV-HIV=100) and ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir +/- dasabuvir +/- RBV (2D, HCV=2, HCV-HIV=6; 3D, HCV=39, HCV-HIV=8). On treatment there was a statistically significant increase in total cholesterol for any IFN-free DAA regimen, which was maintained after end of therapy. Changes of total cholesterol were driven by changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, whereas high-density lipoprotein cholesterol remained unchanged. In contrast, total cholesterol decreased on SOF/PEG-IFN/RBV and increased after end of therapy above baseline levels. Triglycerides increased during treatment with SOF/PEG-IFN/RBV, but not on DAA-only regimens., Conclusions: Suppressing and eliminating HCV with IFN-free DAA regimens increased cholesterol levels, but had no effect on triglycerides. In contrast IFN-based therapy decreased cholesterol and increased triglycerides during treatment and led to increases in cholesterol after achieving sustained virological response.