Search

Background: Patients who are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and who do not have a sustained virologic response after treatment with regimens containing direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have limited retreatment options.Methods: We conducted two phase 3 trials involving patients who had been previously treated with a DAA-containing regimen. In POLARIS-1, patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had previously received a regimen containing an NS5A inhibitor were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir, and the protease inhibitor voxilaprevir (150 patients) or matching placebo (150 patients) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients who were infected with HCV of other genotypes (114 patients) were enrolled in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir group. In POLARIS-4, patients with HCV genotype 1, 2, or 3 infection who had previously received a DAA regimen but not an NS5A inhibitor were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir (163 patients) or sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (151 patients) for 12 weeks. An additional 19 patients with HCV genotype 4 infection were enrolled in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir group.Results: In the three active-treatment groups, 46% of the patients had compensated cirrhosis. In POLARIS-1, the rate of sustained virologic response was 96% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir, as compared with 0% with placebo. In POLARIS-4, the rate of response was 98% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir and 90% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir. The most common adverse events were headache, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. In the active-treatment groups in both trials, the percentage of patients who discontinued treatment owing to adverse events was 1% or lower.Conclusions: Sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir taken for 12 weeks provided high rates of sustained virologic response among patients across HCV genotypes in whom treatment with a DAA regimen had previously failed. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; POLARIS-1 and POLARIS-4 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02607735 and NCT02639247 .). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Peginterferon plus ribavirin achieves sustained virological response (SVR) in fewer than half of patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C virus infection treated for 48 weeks. We tested the efficacy of boceprevir, an NS3 hepatitis C virus oral protease inhibitor, when added to peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin.Methods: In part 1 of this trial, undertaken in 67 sites in the USA, Canada, and Europe, 520 treatment-naive patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus infection were randomly assigned to receive peginterferon alfa-2b 1.5 mug/kg plus ribavirin 800-1400 mg daily for 48 weeks (PR48; n=104); peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin daily for 4 weeks, followed by peginterferon alfa-2b, ribavirin, and boceprevir 800 mg three times a day for 24 weeks (PR4/PRB24; n=103) or 44 weeks (PR4/PRB44; n=103); or peginterferon alfa-2b, ribavirin, and boceprevir three times a day for 28 weeks (PRB28; n=107) or 48 weeks (PRB48; n=103). In part 2, 75 patients were randomly assigned to receive either PRB48 (n=16) or low-dose ribavirin (400-1000 mg) plus peginterferon alfa-2b and boceprevir three times a day for 48 weeks (low-dose PRB48; n=59). Randomisation was by computer-generated code, and study personnel and patients were not masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was SVR 24 weeks after treatment. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00423670.Findings: Patients in all four boceprevir groups had higher rates of SVR than did the control group (58/107 [54%, 95% CI 44-64], p=0.013 for PRB28; 58/103 [56%, 44-66], p=0.005 for PR4/PRB24; 69/103 [67%, 57-76], p<0.0001 for PRB48; and 77/103 [75%, 65-83], p<0.0001 for PR4/PRB44; vs 39/104 [38%, 28-48] for PR48 control). Low-dose ribavirin was associated with a high rate of viral breakthrough (16/59 [27%]), and a rate of relapse (six of 27 [22%]) similar to control (12/51 [24%]). Boceprevir-based groups had higher rates of anaemia (227/416 [55%] vs 35/104 [34%]) and dysgeusia (111/416 [27%] vs nine of 104 [9%]) than did the control group.Interpretation: In patients with untreated genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C infection, the addition of the direct-acting antiviral agent boceprevir to standard treatment with peginterferon and ribavirin after a 4-week lead-in seems to have the potential to double the sustained response rate compared with that recorded with standard treatment alone.Funding: Merck. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) lack significant fibrosis and are considered low-risk. Surveillance strategy for low-risk MASLD remains uncertain., Aim: Identify which low-risk subjects can avoid follow-up vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) within 1 year., Methods: Retrospective analysis of two independent low-risk MASLD cohorts (baseline liver stiffness [LS] < 8kPa) with routine 6-12 months follow-up VCTE. The primary outcome was LS ≥ 8kPa on follow-up, requiring referral and further work-up according to current guidance. Predictors of the primary outcome on univariate and multivariate logistic regression were incorporated into a decision algorithm, and validated in an independent cohort., Results: Of 206 subjects in the derivation cohort, 96 were low-risk. After a median of 10 months, 24 (25%) low-risk subjects had LS ≥ 8kPa. Baseline LS ( P  < 0.01) and ALT change from baseline ( P  = 0.02) (multivariate AUROC = 0.84 [0.74-0.94]) predicted the primary outcome, and were incorporated to a two-step decision algorithm. Low-risk subjects with baseline LS < 5.5 kPa can avoid repeating VCTE in a year, while those with LS > 6.8 kPa require one. For intermediate baseline LS (5.5-6.8kPa), repeat VCTE is only indicated when ALT increase > 6 U/L. The algorithm had 92% negative predictive value, 78% specificity, and 78% accuracy in the derivation cohort. In the validation cohort (n = 64), it had 91% NPV, 72% specificity, and 71% accuracy., Conclusion: In low-risk MASLD, a simple algorithm combining baseline LS and ALT change can be used to safely avoid a repeat VCTE in a year., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: The investigational first-generation core inhibitor vebicorvir (VBR) demonstrated safety and antiviral activity over 24 weeks in two phase IIa studies in patients with chronic HBV infection. In this long-term extension study, patients received open-label VBR with nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NrtIs)., Methods: Patients in this study (NCT03780543) previously received VBR + NrtI or placebo + NrtI in parent studies 201 (NCT03576066) or 202 (NCT03577171). After receiving VBR + NrtI for ≥52 weeks, stopping criteria (based on the treatment history and hepatitis B e antigen status in the parent studies) were applied, and patients either discontinued both VBR + NrtI, discontinued VBR only, or continued both VBR + NrtI. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with HBV DNA <20 IU/ml at 24 weeks off treatment., Results: Ninety-two patients entered the extension study and received VBR + NrtI. Long-term VBR + NrtI treatment led to continued suppression of HBV nucleic acids and, to a lesser extent, HBV antigens. Forty-three patients met criteria to discontinue VBR + NrtI, with no patients achieving the primary endpoint; the majority of virologic rebound occurred ≥4 weeks off treatment. Treatment was generally well tolerated, with few discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs). There were no deaths. Most AEs and laboratory abnormalities were related to elevations in alanine aminotransferase and occurred during the off-treatment or NrtI-restart phases. No drug-drug interactions between VBR + NrtI and no cases of treatment-emergent resistance among patients who adhered to treatment were observed., Conclusions: Long-term VBR + NrtI was safe and resulted in continued reductions in HBV nucleic acids following completion of the 24-week parent studies. Following treatment discontinuation, virologic relapse was observed in all patients. This first-generation core inhibitor administered with NrtI for at least 52 weeks was not sufficient for HBV cure., Clinical Trial Number: NCT03780543., Impact and Implications: Approved treatments for chronic hepatitis B virus infection (cHBV) suppress viral replication, but viral rebound is almost always observed after treatment discontinuation, highlighting an unmet need for improved therapies with finite treatment duration producing greater therapeutic responses that can be sustained off treatment. First-generation core inhibitors, such as vebicorvir, have mechanisms of action orthogonal to standard-of-care therapies that deeply suppress HBV viral replication during treatment; however, to date, durable virologic responses have not been observed after treatment discontinuation. The results reported here will help researchers with the design and interpretation of future studies investigating core inhibitors as possible components of finite treatment regimens for patients with cHBV. It is possible that next-generation core inhibitors with enhanced potency may produce deeper and more durable antiviral activity than first-generation agents, including vebicorvir., Competing Interests: M-FY reports being an advisor/consultant for AbbVie, AiCuris, Aligos Therapeutics, Antios Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Assembly Biosciences, Clear B Therapeutics, Dicerna Pharmaceuticals, Finch Therapeutics, Fujirebio Incorporation, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Immunocore, Janssen, Roche, Sysmex Corporation, Tune Therapeutics, Vir Biotechnology, and Visirna Therapeutics and receiving grant/research support from AbbVie, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Assembly Biosciences, Fujirebio Incorporation, Gilead Sciences, Immunocore, Roche, and Sysmex Corporation. SF reports receiving fees for speaking and teaching and/or serving on advisory committees for AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Lupin, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Springbank Pharma. XM reports being a consultant and being on the speakers' bureau for Gilead Sciences. TTN reports receiving research grant support from Assembly Biosciences and Gilead Sciences. TH reports being on the advisory committee, review panel, or consulting for AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Merck, and Organovo and receiving research support from AbbVie, Allergan, Assembly Biosciences, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CARA, Cytodyn, DURECT Corporation, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Galectin Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Grifols, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Merck, Mirum, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Nucorion Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Sonic Incytes, Terns Pharmaceuticals, and Valeant. H-WH reports serving on the National Advisory Board and receives research grant support from Gilead Sciences. ME reports receiving grants from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Gilead Sciences, and Roche and serving on advisory boards for AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, and Merck. RGN reports having served on advisory boards and as a speaker for Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and Merck and having conducted research for AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and Merck. JSP reports receiving research grants from Assembly Biosciences and GlaxoSmithKline and consulting fees from Gilead Sciences. IMJ reports being a consultant or on advisory boards for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Gilead Sciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, and Roche; having conducted research (all payments to institution) for Assembly Biosciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cymabay, Eli Lilly, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Genfit, Gilead Sciences, Intercept, Janssen, Merck, and Novo Nordisk; receiving payment from the Chronic Liver Disease Foundation for manuscript preparation; and participating on a Data Monitoring Committee for Altimmune, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Galmed, GlaxoSmithKline, and Takeda. WSA reports being a member of the speaking bureau for Gilead Sciences and Intercept Pharmaceuticals and has received research grants from Genfit, GlaxoSmithKline, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Ipsen, Madrigal, Mirum, Pfizer, and Zydus. S-HH reports being a consultant and being on the speakers' bureau for Gilead Sciences. EJG reports serving on advisory boards for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Assembly Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Intellia, Janssen, Roche, Vir Biotechnology, and Virion and having served as a speaker for Abbott Diagnostics, AbbVie, and Gilead Sciences. KZ, RY, and SJK report being employees of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. JM and LMS report being former employees of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. MBo reports being a member of the speaking bureau for AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, and Intercept Pharmaceuticals and has received research support from Assembly Biosciences, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead Sciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inventiva, and Viking Therapeutics. FW reports being a study investigator for AbbVie. AR reports receiving grant support, lecture fees, and advisory board fees from AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Merck, and Novartis. MBe reports having no conflicts of interest. NR reports advising, being on the speakers’ bureau for, and receiving grants from AbbVie and Gilead Sciences; being on the speakers’ bureau for Onyx and Salix; and having received grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck. SC reports receiving clinical trial–related payments from Assembly Biosciences. DTD reports being a consultant for Gilead Sciences and Intercept Pharmaceuticals. PYK reports being an advisor/consultant for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Antios Therapeutics, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, and Janssen and receives grant/research supports from Altimmune, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Assembly Biosciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, and Target Registries. ERS reports receiving research and grant support from Assembly Biosciences, Celgene, the University of Florida (TARGET), and Vir Biotechnology and receives royalties from the Schiff Diseases of the Liver, 12th edition. HSB reports having consultancy agreements with and receiving research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Gilead Sciences. JL reports having no conflicts of interest. KA reports being on the advisory board, a consultant, and a speaker for AbbVie, Aligos, Arbutus Biopharma, Assembly Biosciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Immunocore, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Shinogi, Sobi, and Vir Biotechnology and receiving grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, and Roche. MSS reports receiving grants from AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, the National Institutes of Health, and Vir Biotechnology and receiving personal fees from AbbVie, Antios Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Atea Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, F2G, Immunocore, Precision Biosciences, and Virion Therapeutics. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background & Aims: Pegbelfermin is a polyethlene glycol-conjugated analog of human fibroblast growth factor 21, a nonmitogenic hormone that regulates energy metabolism. This phase 2b study evaluated 48-week pegbelfermin treatment in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and stage 3 (bridging) fibrosis., Methods: The FALCON 1 study (NCT03486899) was a multicenter, randomized (1:1:1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH and stage 3 fibrosis (N = 197) received weekly subcutaneous pegbelfermin (10, 20, or 40 mg) or placebo injections for 48 weeks. The week 24 primary endpoint was a ≥1-point decrease in fibrosis score without NASH worsening or NASH improvement without fibrosis worsening; pegbelfermin dose response was assessed using a Cochran-Armitage trend test across proportions (1-sided α = 0.05). Secondary/exploratory endpoints included histological and noninvasive measures of steatosis, fibrosis, and liver injury/inflammation., Results: At week 24, the primary endpoint was met by 14% (placebo) vs 24%-31% (pegbelfermin arms); statistical significance was not reached due to lack of pegbelfermin dose response (P = .134). At weeks 24 and 48, more patients who received pegbelfermin had ≥30% relative reductions in hepatic fat fraction (magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction) vs placebo, although no differences reached statistical significance. In the pegbelfermin arms, improvements in liver fibrosis (magnetic resonance elastography and N-terminal type III collagen propeptide) and liver injury/inflammation (alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase) were observed vs placebo. Adverse events occurred at similar frequencies across arms. No treatment-related serious adverse events were observed., Conclusions: The FALCON 1 study did not meet its primary endpoint; a ≥1-point decrease in fibrosis score without NASH worsening or NASH improvement without fibrosis worsening assessed via biopsy. Pegbelfermin was generally well tolerated during 48 weeks of treatment., (Copyright © 2024 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A fixed-dose combination of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) plus weight-based ribavirin (RBV) for 12 weeks is recommended for the treatment of patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-associated decompensated cirrhosis. However, large global studies, while confirming the effectiveness of SOF/VEL in a broad range of patients, often exclude these patients. This Phase 2, single-arm, open-label study in adult patients with HCV-associated decompensated cirrhosis in France and the USA aimed to provide further data on the safety and efficacy of SOF/VEL plus RBV for 12 weeks in this population. Patients were treated with a fixed-dose combination of SOF 400 mg/VEL 100 mg plus weight-based RBV once daily for 12 weeks. The inclusion criteria were chronic HCV infection (≥6 months), quantifiable HCV RNA at screening, Child-Turcotte-Pugh class B or C cirrhosis, and liver imaging within 6 months of Day 1 to exclude hepatocellular carcinoma. Among 32 patients who initiated treatment, 78.1% achieved sustained virologic response 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12). Failure to achieve SVR12 was due to non-virologic reasons (investigator discretion, n = 1; death, n = 6). All 25 patients in the per-protocol population achieved SVR12 and all but one achieved sustained virologic response 24 weeks after the end of treatment. Adverse events (AEs) were as expected for a patient population with advanced liver disease. All Grade 3-4 and serious AEs and deaths were deemed unrelated to treatment. In patients with HCV-associated decompensated cirrhosis, SOF/VEL plus RBV achieved high SVR12 rates and was generally well tolerated.

Background: Patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) with type 2 diabetes (T2D) or other components of metabolic syndrome are at high risk for disease progression. We proposed an algorithm to identify high-risk NAFLD patients in clinical practice using noninvasive tests (NITs)., Methods: Evidence about risk stratification of NAFLD using validated NITs was reviewed by a panel of NASH Experts. Using the most recent evidence regarding the performance of NITs and their application in clinical practice were used to develop an easy-to-use algorithm for risk stratification of NAFLD patients seen in primary care, endocrinology and gastroenterology practices., Results: The proposed algorithm uses a three-step process to identify NAFLD patients who are potentially at high risk for adverse outcomes. The first step is to use clinical data to identify most patients who are at risk for having potentially progressive NAFLD (e.g. having T2D or multiple components of metabolic syndrome). The second step is to calculate the FIB-4 score as a NIT that can further risk stratifying individuals who are at low risk for progressive liver disease and can be managed by their primary healthcare providers to manage their cardiometabolic comorbidities. The third step is to use second-line NITs (transient elastography or enhanced liver fibrosis tests) to identify those who at high risk for progressive liver disease and should be considered for specially care by providers with NASH expertise., Conclusions: The use of this simple clinical algorithm can identify and assist in managing patients with NAFLD at high risk for adverse outcomes., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Transient elastography (TE) is an FDA approved, non-invasive tool to estimate liver stiffness measurement (LSM) in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Our aim was to analyze if body mass index (BMI) would predict the severity of liver stiffness using TE scores., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of patients with NAFLD who presented to the hepatology clinic between January 2019 through January 2021. Fibrosis severity was divided into the following categories: F0 to F1 (2-7 kPa), F2 (>7 to 10 kPa), F3 (>10 to 14 kPa) and F4 (>14 kPa). We used ordered logistic regression models to determine the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of having a higher LSM severity compared to lower associated with BMI. Models were adjusted for patient demographics and comorbidities., Results: Among 284 patients, 56.7% were females, and the median (interquartile range, IQR) age was 62 [51-68] years and BMI 31.9 (28.1, 36.2) kg/m 2 ; 47% of patients were in the F0 to F1 stage, 24% F2, 16% F3, and 13% F4. The correlation between BMI and TE score was 0.31 (P<0.001). With 1 kg/m 2 increase in BMI there was 1.10 times higher odds of having a higher LSM severity (adjusted OR, 1.10; 95% CI: 1.05-1.14). Compared to patients with BMI <25 kg/m 2 , the adjusted OR (95% CI) of having a higher fibrosis stage was 1.82 (0.61-5.44), 5.93 (2.05-17.13), and 8.56 (2.51-29.17) for patients with BMI of 25 to <30, 30 to <40, and ≥40 respectively., Conclusions: BMI correlates with the severity of LSM using TE scores in NAFLD patients even after adjusting for potential confounding variables. This suggests TE as an appreciable study for liver stiffness even in obese individuals., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tgh.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tgh-22-1/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2023 Translational Gastroenterology and Hepatology. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors do not completely suppress HBV DNA in chronic HBV infection (cHBV). Vebicorvir (VBR) is an investigational core inhibitor that interferes with multiple aspects of HBV replication. This phase II trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of VBR in combination with entecavir (ETV) in treatment-naïve patients with cHBV., Methods: HBeAg-positive, treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis were randomised 1:1 in a double-blind manner to once-daily VBR 300 mg+ETV 0.5 mg or placebo (PBO)+ETV 0.5 mg for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in mean log 10 HBV DNA from Baseline to Week 12 and 24., Results: All patients in both treatment groups (PBO+ETV: 12/12; VBR+ETV: 13/13) completed the study. At Week 12, VBR+ETV led to a greater mean (SD) reduction from Baseline in log 10 IU/ml HBV DNA (-4.45 [1.03]) vs. PBO+ETV (-3.30 [1.18]; p = 0.0077). At Week 24, VBR+ETV led to a greater reduction from Baseline in log 10 IU/ml HBV DNA (-5.33 [1.59]) vs. PBO+ETV (-4.20 [0.98]; p = 0.0084). Greater mean reductions in pregenomic RNA were observed at Week 12 and 24 in patients receiving VBR+ETV vs. PBO+ETV (p <0.0001 and p <0.0001). Changes in viral antigens were similar in both groups. No drug interaction between VBR and ETV was observed. Two patients experienced HBV DNA rebound during treatment, with no resistance breakthrough detected. The safety of VBR+ETV was similar to PBO+ETV. All treatment-emergent adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were Grade 1/2. There were no deaths, serious adverse events, or evidence of drug-induced liver injury., Conclusions: In this 24-week study, VBR+ETV provided additive antiviral activity over PBO+ETV in treatment-naïve patients with cHBV, with a favourable safety and tolerability profile., Clinical Trial Number: NCT03577171 LAY SUMMARY: Hepatitis B is a long-lasting viral infection of the liver. Current treatments can suppress hepatitis B virus but do not offer the opportunity of cure, hence, new treatment approaches are required. Herein, we show that the combination of the novel core inhibitor vebicorvir with an existing antiviral (entecavir) in treatment-naïve patients chronically infected with hepatitis B virus demonstrated greater antiviral activity than entecavir alone. Additionally, vebicorvir was safe and well tolerated. Thus, further studies evaluating its potential role in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B are warranted., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest Mark S. Sulkowski reports receiving grants from AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and the National Institutes of Health; and receiving personal fees from AbbVie, Antios Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Atea Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, FH360, and Immunocore. Kosh Agarwal reports being on the advisory board, a consultant, and a speaker for AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, Aligos, Arbutus, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Immunocore, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sobi, Shinoigi, and Vir; and receiving grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, and Roche. Xiaoli Ma reports being a consultant and being on the speakers bureau for Gilead Sciences. Tuan T. Nguyen reports receiving research grant support from Gilead Sciences and Assembly Biosciences. Eugene R. Schiff reports receiving research and grant support from Assembly Biosciences, Celgene, and the University of Florida (TARGET) and receives royalties from the Schiff Diseases of the Liver, 12th edition. Hie-Won L. Hann reports serving on the National Advisory Board and receives research grant support from Gilead Sciences. Douglas T. Dieterich reports being a consultant for Gilead Sciences and Intercept Pharmaceuticals. Ronald G. Nahass reports having served on advisory boards and as a speaker for Gilead Sciences, Merck, and Janssen; and having conducted research for Gilead Sciences, Merck, Janssen, and AbbVie. James S. Park reports receiving research grants from Assembly Biosciences and GlaxoSmithKline and consulting fees from Gilead Sciences. Sing Chan reports receiving clinical trial–related payments from Assembly Biosciences. Steven-Huy Han reports being a consultant and being on the speakers bureau for Gilead Sciences. Edward J. Gane reports serving on advisory boards for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Assembly Biosciences, Avilia Therapeutics, Clear B Therapeutics, Dicerna, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Finch Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Immunocore, Janssen, Roche, Silverback, and Vir Bio; and having served as a speaker for Gilead Sciences, AbbVie, and Roche. Michael Bennett reports having no conflicts of interest. Katia Alves reports being a former employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Marc Evanchik reports having been an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences and is currently an employee of Edgewise Therapeutics. Ran Yan reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Qi Huang reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Uri Lopatin reports being a former employee and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Richard Colonno reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Julie Ma reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Steven J. Knox reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Luisa M. Stamm reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Maurizio Bonacini reports being a member of the speaking bureau for Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, and AbbVie and has received research support from Assembly Biosciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Viking Therapeutics, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Ira M. Jacobson reports being a consultant or on advisory boards for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Madrigal and Virion; having conducted research (all payments to institution) for Assembly Biosciences, Bristol-Myers Squib, Eli Lilly, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merck, and Novo Nordisk; receiving payment from the Chronic Liver Disease Foundation for manuscript preparation; and reports participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board for GSK, Redhill, Galmed, NeuroBo, and Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals. Walid S. Ayoub reports being a member of the speaking bureau for both Gilead Sciences and Intercept Pharmaceuticals and has conducted research for Assembly Biosciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, and Gilead Sciences. Frank Weilert reports being a study investigator for AbbVie. Natarajan Ravendhran reports advising, being on the speakers’ bureau for, and receiving grants from Gilead Sciences and AbbVie; being on the speakers' bureau for Salix and Onyx; and having received grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck. Alnoor Ramji reports receiving grant support, lecture fees, and advisory board fees from AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Merck. Paul Yien Kwo reports being an advisor/consultant for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Antios Therapeutics, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and receives grant/research supports from Assembly Biosciences, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Altimmune, and Target Registries. Magdy Elkhashab reports receiving grants from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Gilead Sciences, and Roche; and serving on advisory boards for AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, and Merck. Tarek Hassanein reports being on the advisory committee, review panel, or consulting for AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Merck, and Organovo and receiving research support from AbbVie, Allergan, Cytodyn, Assembly Biosciences, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CARA, DURECT Corporation, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Galectin Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Grifols, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Merck, Mirum, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Nucorion Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Sonic Incytes, Terns Pharmaceuticals, and Valeant. Ho S. Bae reports having consultancy agreements with and receiving research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Gilead Sciences. Jacob P. Lalezari reports having no conflicts of interest. Scott K. Fung reports receiving fees for speaking and teaching and/or serving on advisory committees for AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and Springbank Pharma. Man-Fung Yuen reports being an advisor/consultant for and/or having received grant/research support from AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Antios Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Assembly Biosciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clear B Therapeutics, Dicerna Pharmaceuticals, Finch Therapeutics, Fujirebio Incorporation, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Immunocore, Janssen, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Roche, Springbank Pharmaceuticals, Silverback Therapeutics, Sysmex Corporation and Vir Biotechnology. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: HBV nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NrtIs) do not completely suppress HBV replication. Previous reports indicate persistent viremia during NrtI treatment despite HBV DNA being undetectable. HBV core inhibitors may enhance viral suppression when combined with NrtIs. This phase II trial (NCT03576066) evaluated the efficacy and safety of the investigational core inhibitor, vebicorvir (VBR), in virologically- suppressed patients on NrtIs., Methods: Non-cirrhotic, NrtI-suppressed patients with chronic HBV were randomised to VBR 300 mg once daily or matching placebo (PBO) for 24 weeks. Treatment was stratified by hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) status. The primary endpoint was change from Baseline in serum HBeAg or hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) after 24 weeks., Results: Of 73 patients enrolled, 47 were HBeAg positive and 26 were HBeAg negative. In HBeAg-positive and -negative patients, there were no differences in the change from Baseline at Week 24 for HBsAg or HBeAg. Using a novel, high-sensitivity assay to detect HBV DNA, a greater proportion of patients with detectable HBV DNA at Baseline achieved undetectable HBV DNA at Week 24 in the VBR+NrtI vs. PBO+NrtI group. In HBeAg-positive patients, a greater change from Baseline in HBV pregenomic (pg)RNA was observed at Week 24 with VBR+NrtI vs. PBO+NrtI. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in VBR+NrtI patients included upper respiratory tract infection, nausea, and pruritus. No serious adverse events, Grade 4 TEAEs, or deaths were reported., Conclusions: In this 24-week study, VBR+NrtI demonstrated a favourable safety and tolerability profile. While there were no significant changes in viral antigen levels, enhanced viral suppression was demonstrated by greater changes in DNA and pgRNA with the addition of VBR compared to NrtI alone., Clinical Trials Number: NCT03576066., Lay Summary: Core inhibitors represent a novel approach for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, with mechanisms of action distinct from existing treatments. In this study, vebicorvir added to existing therapy reduced HBV replication to a greater extent than existing treatment and was generally safe and well tolerated., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest Man-Fung Yuen reports being an advisor/consultant for and/or having received grant/research support from AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Antios Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Assembly Biosciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clear B Therapeutics, Dicerna Pharmaceuticals, Finch Therapeutics, Fujirebio Incorporation, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Immunocore, Janssen, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Roche, Springbank Pharmaceuticals, Silverback Therapeutics, Sysmex Corporation, and Vir Biotechnology. Kosh Agarwal reports being on the advisory board, a consultant, and a speaker for AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, Aligos, Arbutus, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Immunocore, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sobi, Shinoigi, and Vir; and receiving grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, and Roche. Xiaoli Ma reports being a consultant and being on the speakers bureau for Gilead Sciences. Tuan T. Nguyen reports receiving research grant support from Gilead Sciences and Assembly Biosciences. Eugene R. Schiff reports receiving research and grant support from Assembly Biosciences, Celgene, and the University of Florida (TARGET) and receives royalties from the Schiff Diseases of the Liver, 12th edition. Hie-Won L. Hann reports serving on the National Advisory Board and receives research grant support from Gilead Sciences. Douglas T. Dieterich reports being a consultant for Gilead Sciences and Intercept Pharmaceuticals. Ronald G. Nahass reports having served on advisory boards and as a speaker for Gilead Sciences, Merck, and Janssen; and having conducted research for Gilead Sciences, Merck, Janssen, and AbbVie. James S. Park reports receiving research grants from Assembly Biosciences and GlaxoSmithKline and consulting fees from Gilead Sciences. Sing Chan reports receiving clinical trial-related payments from Assembly Biosciences. Steven-Huy Han reports being a consultant and being on the speakers bureau for Gilead Sciences. Edward J. Gane reports serving on advisory boards for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Assembly Biosciences, Avilia Therapeutics, Clear B Therapeutics, Dicerna, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Finch Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Immunocore, Janssen, Roche, Silverback, and Vir Bio. and having served as a speaker for Gilead Sciences, AbbVie, and Roche. Michael Bennett reports having no conflicts of interest. Katia Alves reports being a former employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Marc Evanchik reports having been an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences and is currently an employee of Edgewise Therapeutics. Ran Yan reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Qi Huang reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Uri Lopatin reports being a former employee and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Richard Colonno reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Julie Ma reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Steven J. Knox reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Luisa M. Stamm reports being an employee of and holding stock interest in Assembly Biosciences. Maurizio Bonacini reports being a member of the speaking bureau for Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, and AbbVie and has received research support from Assembly Biosciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Viking Therapeutics, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Ira M. Jacobson reports being a consultant or on advisory boards for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Madrigal and Virion; having conducted research (all payments to institution) for Assembly Biosciences, Bristol-Myers Squib, Eli Lilly, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merck, and Novo Nordisk; receiving payment from the Chronic Liver Disease Foundation for manuscript preparation; and reports participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board for GSK, Redhill, Galmed, NeuroBo, and Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals. Walid S. Ayoub reports being a member of the speaking bureau for both Gilead Sciences and Intercept Pharmaceuticals and has conducted research for Assembly Biosciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, and Gilead Sciences. Frank Weilert reports being a study investigator for AbbVie. Natarajan Ravendhran reports advising, being on the speakers’ bureau for, and receiving grants from Gilead Sciences and AbbVie; being on the speakers' bureau for Salix and Onyx; and having received grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck. Alnoor Ramji reports receiving grant support, lecture fees, and advisory board fees from AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Merck. Paul Yien Kwo reports being an advisor/consultant for AbbVie, Aligos Therapeutics, Antios Therapeutics, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and receives grant/research support from Assembly Biosciences, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, Bristol Myer Squibb, Altimmune, and Target Registries. Magdy Elkhashab reports receiving grants from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Gilead Sciences, and Roche; and serving on advisory boards for AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, and Merck. Tarek Hassanein reports being on the advisory committee, review panel, or consulting for AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Merck, and Organovo and receiving research support from AbbVie, Allergan, Cytodyn, Assembly Biosciences, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CARA, DURECT Corporation, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Galectin Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Grifols, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Merck, Mirum, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Nucorion Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Sonic Incytes, Terns Pharmaceuticals, and Valeant. Ho S. Bae reports having consultancy agreements with and receiving research support from Bristol-Myers-Squibb and Gilead Sciences. Jacob P. Lalezari reports having no conflicts of interest. Scott K. Fung reports receiving fees for speaking & teaching and/or serving on advisory committees for AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and Springbank Pharma. Mark S. Sulkowski reports receiving grants from AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and the National Institutes of Health; and receiving personal fees from AbbVie, Antios Therapeutics, Arbutus Biopharma, Atea Pharmaceuticals, Gilead Sciences, FH360, and Immunocore. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) treated with interferon-free direct-acting antivirals may still require ribavirin. However, ribavirin is associated with adverse events that can limit its use. This open-label, multicentre, Phase 3 study evaluated the safety and efficacy of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + dasabuvir (OBV/PTV/r + DSV) with low-dose ribavirin for 12 weeks in genotype 1a-infected patients without cirrhosis. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained virologic response at post-treatment Week 12 (SVR12). The primary safety endpoint was haemoglobin <10 g/dL during treatment and decreased from baseline. Overall, 105 patients enrolled. The SVR12 rate was 89.5% (n/N = 94/105; 95% CI, 83.7-95.4). The study did not achieve noninferiority versus the historic SVR12 rate for OBV/PTV/r + DSV plus weight-based ribavirin. Five patients experienced virologic failure, four discontinued, and two had missing SVR12 data. Excluding nonvirologic failures, the SVR12 rate was 94.9% (n/N = 94/99). One patient met the primary safety endpoint. OBV/PTV/r + DSV plus low-dose ribavirin offers an alternative option for patients in whom full-dose ribavirin may compromise tolerability, although noninferiority to the weight-based ribavirin regimen was not met., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Viral Hepatitis Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Several governmental agencies and private organizations monitor data on relative value units (RVUs) and salary earned by various medical specialists. There are currently no data that define the RVU production and salary earned by hepatologists. A web-based survey that queried the number of patients that a hepatologist cares for, RVU production, and salary support was sent to 2,587 members of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. A total of 391 members completed the survey, 229 of whom reported spending more than 75% of their time in clinical practice/direct patient care and served as the basis for this analysis. The mean age of the cohort was 48 years, 77% were male, and all regions of country were represented. Their mean duration in clinical practice was 11.4 years. Hepatologists worked in four practice settings: university hospital with a liver transplant (LT) program (UHLT, n = 148), non-university hospital with LT (nonUHLT, n = 35), university hospital with no LT (UHnoLT, n = 29), and community practice (CP, n = 17). The average number of patients seen monthly was lowest for hepatologists at a UHLT (154) and highest for those in CP (293). Hepatologists at LT programs saw the highest percentage of patients with liver disease (91% of encounters), performed the fewest endoscopic procedures (12%-17%), but received the highest compensation/RVU ($68-$85) compared with hepatologists at UHnoLT and CP ($44-$63/RVU). The mean base salary for all hepatologists with fewer than 5 years of experience was $273,507, and this increased to $347,656 for those with more than 5 years of experience. We concluded that hepatologists at LT centers are compensated at much higher rates per encounter than in other practice settings. This may be due to salary subsidies provided by the UHLT and nonUHLT to their hepatologists., (© 2018 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: Direct-acting antiviral regimens containing NS5A inhibitors are highly effective treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, but are not always successful. In the POLARIS-1 phase 3 study, sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 12 weeks was highly effective in the treatment of chronic HCV infection in patients previously treated with a direct-acting antiviral regimen containing an NS5A inhibitor. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir in patients from the deferred treatment group of POLARIS-1, who were initially assigned to masked placebo treatment., Methods: This open-label, deferred treatment substudy was done at 73 clinical sites (hospitals and clinics) in the USA, France, Canada, the UK, Germany, Australia, and New Zealand. Patients who received placebo in the primary study and who did not have a new clinically significant illness at the post-treatment week 4 assessment were eligible to enter this substudy. Participants received a combination tablet of sofosbuvir (400 mg), velpatasvir (100 mg), and voxilaprevir (100 mg) once daily for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome was achievement of sustained virological response (defined as HCV RNA concentration below the lower limit of quantification) 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12). The primary safety outcome was the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment due to adverse events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02607735, and the EU Clinical Trials Register, number 2015-003455-21., Findings: 152 patients received placebo in the primary study and were potentially eligible for participation in the open-label substudy, of whom 147 were enrolled from March 30, 2016, to Oct 12, 2016. All 147 patients completed treatment, and 143 (97%; 95% CI 93-99) achieved SVR12. Four (3%) patients had virological relapse; all had HCV genotype 1a infection and one also had compensated cirrhosis. The most common adverse events were fatigue (31 [21%]), headache (29 [20%]), diarrhoea (28 [19%]), and nausea (21 [14%]). No deaths, treatment discontinuations, or treatment-related serious adverse events occurred., Interpretation: Supporting the results from the blinded portion of the phase 3 primary study, the single-tablet regimen of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 12 weeks was safe, well tolerated, and highly effective in patients with chronic HCV infection who had previous treatment failure with NS5A inhibitor-containing regimens. A salvage regimen for this population represents an important advance for patients with limited retreatment options., Funding: Gilead Sciences., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Although direct-acting antiviral regimens have dramatically improved the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, there is some evidence that black race may be an independent predictor of treatment failure. We report a retrospective analysis of black participants receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) in nine phase 2/3 clinical trials., Methods: Black participants with chronic HCV genotype 1 or 4 (GT1 or GT4) infection who received EBR 50 mg/GZR 100 mg once daily for 12 weeks, or in combination with ribavirin for 16 weeks, were included. The primary end point was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after completion of therapy (SVR12, HCV RNA < 15 IU/mL)., Results: Compared with nonblack participants (n = 1310), black participants (n = 332) were more likely to have chronic kidney disease stage 4/5 (9.2% vs. 31.0%, respectively), while other comorbidities were similar between the groups. In black and nonblack participants receiving EBR/GZR for 12 weeks, SVR12 rates were 93.7% (282/301) and 94.2% (1072/1138) in those with GT1 infection, and 93.8% (15/16) and 94.6% (88/93) in those with GT4 infection. SVR12 was 100.0% (15/15) in black participants and 97.5% (77/79) in nonblack participants with GT1 infection receiving EBR/GZR plus ribavirin for 16 weeks. Rates of drug-related adverse events (AEs) were 30% vs. 36.6%, and serious AEs were 7.6% vs. 3.4% in black and nonblack participants, respectively., Conclusion: EBR/GZR showed high efficacy in black participants with HCV GT1 or GT4 infection and was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that reported overall in phase 2/3 clinical trials.

Background and Aims: Many currently available direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens are less effective against HCV genotype 3 than against other HCV genotypes. The all-oral, pangenotypic DAA combination of daclatasvir (NS5A inhibitor) + sofosbuvir (nucleotide NS5B inhibitor) was studied in genotype 3-infected treatment-naive and -experienced patients (ALLY-3) who achieved rates of sustained virological response at post-treatment Week 12 (SVR12) of 90 and 86% respectively. In this analysis, we assessed whether on-treatment responses to daclatasvir + sofosbuvir in genotype 3-infected patients could predict treatment outcome., Methods: In ALLY-3, treatment-naive and -experienced patients, with or without cirrhosis, were treated with daclatasvir + sofosbuvir for 12 weeks. HCV RNA kinetics and categorical virological responses on treatment were assessed. The proportions of responders and nonresponders by study week, and time to first undetectable HCV RNA, were analysed for utility in predicting treatment outcome., Results: Overall, HCV RNA levels declined rapidly during Week 1 of treatment in both treatment-naive and -experienced cohorts. Although patients with cirrhosis had a slower initial virological response as measured by the proportion of patients with HCV RNA below the lower limit of quantification at Week 1, responses converged thereafter. Positive and negative predictive values calculated for on-treatment responses were generally comparable with the overall SVR12 rate and were therefore limited indicators of outcome. SVR12 rates were not impacted by time to first undetectable HCV RNA., Conclusions: On-treatment responses are not useful predictors of ultimate virological response to the daclatasvir + sofosbuvir regimen., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background. Patient race and ethnicity have historically impacted HCV treatment response. This phase 3 study evaluated daclatasvir with peginterferon-alfa-2a/ribavirin (pegIFN alfa-2a/RBV) in treatment-naive black/African American (AA), Latino, and white non-Latino patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection., Material and Methods: In this single-arm, open-label study, 246 patients received daclatasvir plus pegIFN alfa-2a and weight-based RBV. Patients with an extended rapid virologic response (eRVR; undetectable HCV-RNA at treatment weeks 4 and 12) received 24 weeks of treatment; those without eRVR received an additional 24 weeks of treatment with pegIFN alfa-2a/RBV. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response at post-treatment week 12 (SVR12; HCV-RNA < 25 IU/mL) compared with the cohort historical rate., Results: Most patients were IL28B non-CC (84.4% black/AA; 77.6% Latino) genotype 1a-infected (72.7%; 81.3%), with HCV-RNA ≥ 800,000 IU/mL (81.3%; 64.5%). SVR12 rates were 50.8% (65/128; 95% confidence interval [CI], 42.1-59.4) for black/AA and 58.9% (63/107; 95% CI, 49.6-68.2) for Latino patients. The majority (55.5%; 58.9%) received 24 weeks treatment; rapid reductions (> 4-log10) in HCV-RNA levels were observed. Only 60.9% (78/128) of black/AA and 63.6% (68/107) of Latino patients completed treatment. On-treatment serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 21 patients. Discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs) occurred in 9 black/AA and 6 Latino patients., Conclusion: SVR12 rates for black/AA (50.8%) and Latino (58.9%) cohorts treated with daclatasvir plus pegIFN alfa-2a/RBV and the lower bound of the 95% CIs were higher than the estimated historical control (black/AA, 26% SVR; Latino, 36% SVR) treated with pegIFN alfa-2a/RBV. These data support daclatasvir use in all-oral direct-acting antiviral combinations.

Background: Estimates suggest that only 20 % of HCV-infected patients have been identified and <10 % treated. However, baby boomers (1945-1965) are identified as having a higher prevalence of HCV which has led the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to make screening recommendations. The aim of this study was to implement the CDC's screening recommendations in the unique setting of gastroenterology practices in patients previously unscreened for HCV., Methods: After obtaining patient informed consent, demographics, clinical and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) data were collected. A blood sample was screened for HCV antibody (HCV AB) using the OraQuick HCV Rapid Antibody Test. HCV AB-positive patients were tested for presence of HCV RNA and, if HCV RNA positive, patients underwent treatment discussions., Results: We screened 2,000 individuals in 5 gastroenterology centers located close to large metropolitan areas on the East Coast (3 Northeast, 1 Mid-Atlantic and 1 Southeast). Of the screened population, 10 individuals (0.5 %) were HCV AB-positive. HCV RNA testing was performed in 90 % (9/10) of HCV AB-positive individuals. Of those, 44.4 % (4/9) were HCV RNA-positive, and all 4 (100 %) were linked to caregiver. Compared to HCV AB negative subjects, HCV AB-positive individuals tended to be black (20.0 vs. 5.2 %, p = 0.09) and reported significantly higher rates of depression: 60.0 vs. 21.5 %, p = 0.009. These individuals also reported a significantly lower HRQOL citing having more fatigue, poorer concentration, and a decreased level of energy (p < 0.05)., Discussion: Although the prevalence of HCV AB-positive was low in previously unscreened subjects screened in the gastroenterology centers, the linkage to care was very high. The sample of patients used in this study may be biased, so further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of the CDC screening recommendations., Conclusion: Implementation of the Baby Boomer Screening for HCV requires identifying screening environement with high prevalence of HCV+ individuals as well as an efficient process of linking them to care.

Unlabelled: Black patients chronically infected with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus (HCV) have historically had lower rates of response to interferon-based treatment than patients of other races. In the phase 3 ION program, the single-tablet regimen of the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir and NS5B nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir was shown to be safe and highly effective in the general population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in black patients using data from the three open-label ION clinical trials, which evaluated the safety and efficacy of 8, 12, and 24 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with or without ribavirin for the treatment of treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients with genotype 1 HCV, including those with compensated cirrhosis. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy (SVR12). For our analysis, rates of SVR12, treatment-emergent adverse events, and graded laboratory abnormalities were analyzed in black versus non-black patients. Of the 1949 patients evaluated, 308 (16%) were black. On average, black patients were older, had higher body mass index, were more likely to be IL28B non-CC, and had a lower serum alanine aminotransferase at baseline than non-black patients. Overall, 95% of black and 97% of non-black patients achieved SVR12. The rate of relapse was 3% in black patients as compared with 2% in non-black patients. The most common adverse events included fatigue, headache, nausea, and insomnia. The majority of adverse events occurred more frequently in the ribavirin-containing arms of the studies. No differences were observed in overall safety by race., Conclusion: A once-daily dosage of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir was similarly effective in black and non-black patients with genotype 1 HCV infection. The addition of ribavirin did not appear to increase SVR12 but was associated with higher rates of adverse events., (© 2015 The Authors. HEPATOLOGY published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., on behalf of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Unlabelled: Treatment options for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 3 infection are limited, with the currently approved all-oral regimens requiring 24-week treatment and the addition of ribavirin (RBV). This phase III study (ALLY-3; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02032901) evaluated the 12-week regimen of daclatasvir (DCV; pangenotypic nonstructural protein [NS]5A inhibitor) plus sofosbuvir (SOF; pangenotypic NS5B inhibitor) in patients infected with genotype 3. Patients were either treatment naïve (n = 101) or treatment experienced (n = 51) and received DCV 60 mg plus SOF 400 mg once-daily for 12 weeks. Coprimary endpoints were the proportions of treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients achieving a sustained virological response (SVR) at post-treatment week 12 (SVR12). SVR12 rates were 90% (91 of 101) and 86% (44 of 51) in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients, respectively; no virological breakthrough was observed, and ≥99% of patients had a virological response (VR) at the end of treatment. SVR12 rates were higher in patients without cirrhosis (96%; 105 of 109) than in those with cirrhosis (63%; 20 of 32). Five of seven patients who previously failed treatment with an SOF-containing regimen and 2 of 2 who previously failed treatment with an alisporivir-containing regimen achieved SVR12. Baseline characteristics, including gender, age, HCV-RNA levels, and interleukin-28B genotype, did not impact virological outcome. DCV plus SOF was well tolerated; there were no adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation and only 1 serious AE on-treatment, which was unrelated to study medications. The few treatment-emergent grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities that were observed were transient., Conclusion: A 12-week regimen of DCV plus SOF achieved SVR12 in 96% of patients with genotype 3 infection without cirrhosis and was well tolerated. Additional evaluation to optimize efficacy in genotype 3-infected patients with cirrhosis is underway., (© 2015 The Authors. Hepatology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., on behalf of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: Resistance to direct-acting antivirals represents a new challenge in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C., Methods: SPRINT-1 was a randomized study of treatment-naive patients with genotype (G) 1 hepatitis C infection (n=595) that evaluated the safety and efficacy of boceprevir (BOC) when added to pegylated interferon-α2b plus ribavirin (PR). Plasma samples collected at protocol-specified visits were analysed by population sequencing for detection of BOC-associated resistance-associated variants (RAVs)., Results: A total of 17/24 (71%) patients randomized to BOC with baseline RAVs achieved sustained virological response (SVR). V55A/I (n=14), Q41H (n=11) and T54S (n=9) were the most frequently detected polymorphisms at baseline. Seven non-SVR patients with baseline RAVs had V55A (relapse, n=3; breakthrough, n=1; and non-response, n=1) and/or R155K (non-response, n=2). In total, 63/144 (44%) patients with sequenced post-baseline samples (2 SVR, 61 non-SVR) had detectable RAVs after BOC treatment (G1a: R155K [39/49; 80%], V36M [37/49; 76%] and T54S [24/49; 49%]; G1b: T54S [3/11; 27%], T54A [4/11; 35%], A156S [2/11; 18%] and V170A [2/11; 18%]). RAV frequency varied according to the virological response: 90%, 67%, 27% and 37% of breakthrough, incomplete virological response, relapse and non-responder patients, respectively, had post-baseline RAVs present. Similar RAVs were identified in both the PR lead-in and no-lead-in arms and the frequency of post-baseline RAVs was highest in the low-dose ribavirin arm., Conclusions: SVR rates were not compromised among patients with RAVs at baseline; however, a lower starting mg/kg dose of ribavirin was associated with a higher frequency of post-baseline RAVs.

Unlabelled: Black Americans are disproportionally infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and are less likely than whites to respond to treatment with peginterferon (PEG-IFN) plus ribavirin (RBV). The impact of race on HCV treatment eligibility is unknown. We therefore performed a retrospective analysis of a phase 3B multicenter clinical trial conducted at 118 United States community and academic medical centers to evaluate the rates of and reasons for HCV treatment ineligibility according to self-reported race. In all, 4,469 patients were screened, of whom 1,038 (23.2%) were treatment ineligible. Although blacks represented 19% of treated patients, they were more likely not to be treated due to ineligibility and/or failure to complete required evaluations (40.2%) than were nonblack patients (28.5%; P < 0.001). After the exclusion of persons not treated due to undetectable HCV RNA or nongenotype 1 infection, blacks were 65% less likely than nonblacks to be eligible for treatment (28.1% > 17.0%; relative risk, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.46-1.87; P < 0.001). Blacks were more likely to be ineligible due to neutropenia (14% versus 3%, P < 0.001), anemia (7% versus 4%, P = 0.02), elevated glucose (8% versus 3%, P < 0.001), and elevated creatinine (5% versus 1%, P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Largely due to a higher prevalence of neutropenia and uncontrolled medical conditions, blacks were significantly less likely to be eligible for HCV treatment. Increased access to treatment may be facilitated by less conservative neutrophil requirements and more effective care for chronic diseases, namely, diabetes and renal insufficiency., (Copyright © 2011 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)