Real-life effectiveness of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir in hepatitis C patients previously treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir or glecaprevir/pibrentasvir.

BACKGROUND: Sofosbuvir, velpatasvir and voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX) is the recommended rescue therapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C infection who fail direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). Data are limited on the effectiveness of this treatment after the current first-line therapies. Our aim was to analyse the effectiveness and safety of SOF/VEL/VOX among patients failing sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) or glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB). METHODS: Retrospective multicentre study (26 Spanish hospitals), including chronic hepatitis C patients unsuccessfully treated with SOF/VEL or GLE/PIB, and retreated with SOF/VEL/VOX ± ribavirin for 12 weeks between December 2017 and December 2022. RESULTS: In total, 142 patients included: 100 (70.4%) had failed SOF/VEL and 42 (29.6%) GLE/PIB. Patients were mainly men (84.5%), White (93.9%), with hepatitis C virus genotype (GT) 3 (49.6%) and 47.2% had liver cirrhosis. Sustained virological response (SVR) was evaluated in 132 patients who completed SOF/VEL/VOX and were followed 12 weeks after end of treatment; 117 (88.6%) achieved SVR. There were no significant differences in SVR rates according to initial DAA treatment (SOF/VEL 87.9% vs. GLE/PIB 90.2%, p = 0.8), cirrhosis (no cirrhosis 90% vs. cirrhosis 87.1%, p = 0.6) or GT3 infection (non-GT3 91.9% vs. GT3 85.5%, p = 0.3). However, when considering the concurrent presence of SOF/VEL treatment, cirrhosis and GT3 infection, SVR rates dropped to 82.8%. Ribavirin was added in 8 (6%) patients, all achieved SVR. CONCLUSION: SOF/VEL/VOX is an effective rescue therapy for failures to SOF/VEL or GLE/PIB, with an SVR of 88.6%. Factors previously linked to lower SVR rates, such as GT3 infection, cirrhosis and first-line therapy with SOF/VEL were not associated with lower SVRs.

Budesonide as first-line treatment in patients with autoimmune hepatitis seems inferior to standard predniso(lo)ne administration.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In patients with non-severe acute or chronic autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) without cirrhosis, clinical practice guidelines recommend indistinct use of prednisone or budesonide. However, budesonide is infrequently used in clinical practice. We aimed to describe its use and compare its efficacy and safety with prednisone as first-line options. APPROACH AND RESULTS: This was a retrospective, multicenter study of 105 naive AIH patients treated with budesonide as the first-line drug. The control group included 276 patients treated with prednisone. Efficacy was assessed using logistic regression and validated using inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score. The median time to biochemical response (BR) was 3.1 months in patients treated with budesonide and 4.9 months in those with prednisone. The BR rate was significantly higher in patients treated with prednisone (87% vs. 49% of patients with budesonide, p < 0.001). The probability of achieving BR, assessed using the inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score, was significantly lower in the budesonide group (OR = 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.38) at any time during follow-up, and at 6 (OR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.29-0.89) and 12 months after starting treatment (0.41; 95% CI: 0.23-0.73). In patients with transaminases <2 × upper limit of normal, BR was similar in both treatment groups. Prednisone treatment was significantly associated with a higher risk of adverse events (24.2% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: In the real-life setting, the use of budesonide as first-line treatment is low, and it is generally prescribed to patients with perceived less disease activity. Budesonide was inferior to prednisone as a first-line drug but was associated with fewer side effects.

Obeticholic Acid and Fibrates in Primary Biliary Cholangitis: Comparative Effects in a Multicentric Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Obeticholic acid (OCA) and fibrates therapy results in biochemical improvement in placebo-controlled trials in patients with primary biliary cholangitis and insufficient response to ursodeoxycholic acid. There is scarce information outside of clinical trials. Therefore, we have assessed the effectiveness and adverse events of these treatments. METHODS: Data from patients included in the ColHai registry treated with OCA, fibrates, or both were recorded during a year, as well as adverse events and treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were treated with OCA, 250 with fibrates (81% bezafibrate; 19% fenofibrate), and 15 with OCA plus fibrates. OCA group had baseline significantly higher alkaline phosphatase (ALP) (P = 0.01) and lower platelets (P = 0.03) than fibrates. Both treatments significantly decreased ALP, gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), and transaminases and improved Globe score. Albumin and immunoglobulin type M improved in the fibrates group. ALP decrease was higher under fibrates, whereas alanine aminotransferase decline was higher under OCA. Although baseline transaminases and GGT were higher in patients with OCA plus fibrates, significant ALP, GGT, alanine aminotransferase, and Globe score improvement were observed during triple therapy. Adverse events were reported in 14.7% of patients (21.3% OCA; 17.6% fenofibrate; 10.7% bezafibrate), mainly pruritus (10.1% with OCA). Discontinuation was more frequent in fenofibrate treatment mainly because of intolerance or adverse events. DISCUSSION: Second-line therapy with OCA or fibrates improves hepatic biochemistry and the GLOBE score in primary biliary cholangitis patients with suboptimal response to ursodeoxycholic acid. Simultaneous treatment with OCA and fibrates improved ALP as well.

Effectiveness and safety of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir in patients with chronic hepatitis C previously treated with DAAs.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Around 5% of patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection treated with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents do not achieve sustained virological response (SVR). The currently approved retreatment regimen for prior DAA failure is a combination of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX), although there is little data on its use in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to analyse the effectiveness and safety of SOF/VEL/VOX in the real-world setting. METHODS: This was a prospective multicentre study assessing the efficacy of retreatment with SOF/VEL/VOX in patients who had experienced a prior DAA treatment failure. The primary endpoint was SVR 12 weeks after the completion of treatment (SVR12). Data on safety and tolerability were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients were included: 75% men, 35% with liver cirrhosis. Most were infected with HCV genotype (GT) 1 or 3. The most common prior DAA combinations were sofosbuvir plus an NS5A inhibitor or ombitasvir/paritaprevir/r+dasabuvir. A total of 136 (99%) patients achieved undetectable HCV RNA at the end of treatment. Overall SVR12 was 95% in the 135 patients reaching this point. SVR12 was lower in patients with cirrhosis (89%, p = 0.05) and those with GT3 infection (80%, p <0.001). Patients with GT3 infection and cirrhosis had the lowest SVR12 rate (69%). Of the patients who did not achieve SVR12, 1 was reinfected and 7 experienced treatment failure (6 GT3, 1 GT1a). The presence of resistance-associated substitutions did not impact SVR12. Adverse effects were mild and non-specific. CONCLUSION: Real-world data show that SOF/VEL/VOX is an effective, safe rescue therapy for patients with prior DAA treatment failure despite the presence of resistance-associated substitutions. However, patients with liver cirrhosis infected by GT3 remain the most-difficult-to-treat group. LAY SUMMARY: Treatment with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX) for 12 weeks is the current recommendation for the 5% of patients infected with HCV who do not achieve eradication of the virus under treatment with direct-acting antivirals. In a Spanish cohort of 137 patients who failed a previous combination of direct-acting antivirals, a cure rate of 95% was achieved with SOF/VEL/VOX. Genotypic characteristics of the virus (genotype 3) and the presence of cirrhosis were factors that decreased the rate of cure. Treatment with SOF/VEL/VOX is an effective and safe rescue therapy due to its high efficacy and very good safety profile.

High efficacy of Sofosbuvir plus Simeprevir in a large cohort of Spanish cirrhotic patients infected with genotypes 1 and 4.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hepatitis C (HCV) therapy with Sofosbuvir (SOF)/Simeprevir (SMV) in clinical trials and real-world clinical practice, showed high rates of sustained virological response (SVR) in non-cirrhotic genotype (GT)-1 and GT-4 patients. These results were slightly lower in cirrhotic patients. We investigated real-life effectiveness and safety of SOF/SMV with or without ribavirin (RBV) in a large cohort of cirrhotic patients. METHODS: This collaborative multicentre study included data from 968 patients with cirrhosis infected with HCV-GT1 or 4, treated with SOF/SMV±RBV in 30 centres across Spain between January-2014 and December-2015. Demographic, clinical, virological and safety data were analysed. RESULTS: Overall SVR was 92.3%; the majority of patients were treated with RBV (62%) for 12 weeks (92.4%). No significant differences in SVR were observed between genotypes (GT1a:94.3%; GT1b:91.7%; GT4:91.1%). Those patients with more advanced liver disease (Child B/C, MELD≥10) or portal hypertension (platelet count≤100×109 /L, transient elastography≥21 Kpa) showed significantly lower SVR rates (84.4%-91.9%) than patients with less advanced liver disease (93.8%-95.9%, P<.01 in all cases). In the multivariate analysis, the use of RBV, female gender, baseline albumin≥35 g/L, MELD<10 and lack of exposure to a triple therapy regimen were independent predictors of SVR (P<.05). Serious adverse events (SAEs) and SAE-associated discontinuation events occurred in 5.9% and 2.6%. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of cirrhotic patients managed in the real-world setting in Spain, SOF/SMV±RBV yielded to excellent SVR rates, especially in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis. In addition, this combination showed to be safe, with low rates of SAEs and early discontinuations.