Factors Enhancing Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus-Infected Italian People Who Use Drugs: The CLEO-GRECAS Experience.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the performance of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected people who use drugs (PWUDs) in terms of sustained virological response (SVR) and adherence rates in comparison to a location-matched cohort of non-PWUD HCV patients. METHODS: All consecutive HCV RNA-positive PWUDs were enrolled between 2015 and 2019. All subjects underwent DAA treatment according to international guidelines and then followed, at least, up to 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12). The SVR and adherence to treatment was compared with that of non-PWUD HCV patients observed at hepatological units of the CLEO platform. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 1,786 PWUDs who were followed up were available for assessment. Most PWUDs (85.4%) were managed inside the specialized outpatient addiction clinics (SerDs). The overall SVR rate was 95.4%. The SerDs group achieved an SVR rate of 96.2% compared with 91.6% of the non-SerDs group (P < 0.001). Comparison with the non-SerDs group and the control HCV group showed a significant difference in the dropout rate (0.6% in the SerDs group versus 2.8% in the non-SerDs group and 1.2% in the control group; P < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, factors independently associated with SVR were use of the most recent regimens (elbasvir/grazoprevir, glecaprevir/pibrentasvir, and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir; odds ratio: 3.126; P = 0.000) and belonging to the SerDs group (odds ratio: 2.356; P = 0.002). DISCUSSION: The performance of DAAs in PWUD is excellent, if 2 conditions are met: (i) that the latest generation drugs are used and (ii) that the patients are managed within the SerDs.

Virological patterns of HCV patients with failure to interferon-free regimens.

The study characterized the virological patterns and the resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) in patients with failure to IFN-free regimens enrolled in the real-life setting. All 87 consecutive HCV patients with failed IFN-free regimens, observed at the laboratory of the University of Campania, were enrolled. All patients had been treated with DAA regimens according to the HCV genotype, international guidelines, and local availability. Sanger sequencing of NS3, NS5A, and NS5B regions was performed at failure by home-made protocols. Of the 87 patients enrolled, 13 (14.9%) showed a misclassified HCV genotype, probably causing DAA failure, 16 had been treated with a sub-optimal DAA regimen, 19 with a simeprevir-based regimen and 39 with an optimal DAA regimen. A major RAS was identified more frequently in the simeprevir regimen group (68.4%) and in the optimal regimen group (74.4%) than in the sub-optimal regimen group (56.3%). The prevalence of RASs in NS3 was similar in the three groups (30.8-57.9%), that in NS5A higher in the optimal regimen group (71.8%) than in the sub-optimal regimen group (12.5%, P < 0.0001) and in the simeprevir regimen group (31.6%, P < 0.0005), and that in NS5B low in all groups (0-25%). RASs in two or more HCV regions were more frequently identified in the optimal regimen group (46.6%) than in the simeprevir-based regimen group (31.6%) and sub-optimal regimen group (18.7%). In our real-life population the prevalence of RASs was high, especially in NS3 and NS5A and in those treated with suitable DAA regimens.

Could Anti-Hypertensive Drug Therapy Affect the Clinical Prognosis of Hypertensive Patients With COVID-19 Infection? Data From Centers of Southern Italy.

BACKGROUND Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the cause of a pandemic disease, with severe acute respiratory syndrome by binding target epithelial lung cells through angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 in humans. Thus, patients with hypertension with COVID-19 could have worse prognosis. Indeed, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or angiotensin receptor blockers may interfere with angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 expression/activity. Thus, patients with hypertension undergoing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and/or angiotensin receptor blockers drug therapy may be at a higher risk of contracting a serious COVID-19 infection and should be monitored. Moreover, in the present study we investigated the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor versus angiotensin receptor blockers versus calcium channel blockers on clinical outcomes as mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admissions, heart injury, and death in 62 patients with hypertension hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. METHODS AND RESULTS The multicenter study was prospectively conducted at Department of Infectious Diseases of Sant'Anna Hospital of Caserta, and of University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" of Naples, at Department of Advanced Surgical and Medical Sciences of University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli," Naples, and at General Medical Assistance Unit "FIMG," Naples, Italy. Lowest values of left ventricle ejection fraction predicted deaths (1.142, 1.008-1.294, P<0.05), while highest values of interleukin-6 predicted the admission to intensive care unit (1.617, 1.094-2.389), mechanical ventilation (1.149, 1.082-1.219), heart injuries (1.367, 1.054-1.772), and deaths (4.742, 1.788-8.524). CONCLUSIONS Anti-hypertensive drugs didn't affect the prognosis in patients with COVID-19. Consequently, tailored anti-inflammatory and immune therapies in addition to chronic antihypertensive therapy, could prevent a worse prognosis, as well as improve the clinical outcomes in patients with hypertension with COVID-19 infection.

Directly Acting Antiviral-Based Treatment for HCV-Infected Persons Who Inject Drugs: A Multicenter Real-Life Study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the factors associated with a virological response in a cohort of Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected people who inject drugs (PWID) treated with direct acting antivirals (DAAs). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study enrolling HCV-infected PWID treated with DAAs. The primary outcome evaluated was the sustained virological response (SVR12) rate. RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty HCV-infected PWID treated with all-oral DAA-based regimens were enrolled; a total of 168 (32.3%) patients presented genotype 1a, 109 (21.0%) genotype 1b, and 174 (33.5%) genotype 3; a total 152 of the 520 subjects (29.2%) were cirrhotics; a total 118 (22.7%) and 373 (71.7%) were treated with DAA regimens of second and third generation, respectively; a total 169 (33.6%) patients were receiving an opioid agonist at the start of antiviral therapy. Only 11 subjects (2.1%) did not show an SVR12. A significant correlation was found between treatment with opioid substitution therapy (p < 0.001), Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) coinfection (p = 0.002), and treatment with first- or second-generation regimens (p = 0.0015) and HCV failure. Upon multivariate analysis, treatment with a first- or second-generation DAA was the only factor independently associated with failure (OR 10.4, 95% CI: 1.43 to 76.1, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with DAAs led to a high SVR12 rate (97.9%) in a large cohort of HCV-infected PWID. The only predictor of viral failure found in our analysis was treatment with first- and second-generation DAA.

Sustained virological response in patients with HCV treated with daclatasvir plus sofosbuvir, with or without ribavirin: a large, field-practice study.

BACKGROUND: The once-daily oral combination of daclatasvir (DCV) and sofosbuvir (SOF), with or without ribavirin (RBV), is effective and well tolerated in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV). However, further field-practice studies are necessary to investigate the effectiveness and safety of the DCV+SOF combination in diverse subpopulations of patients with HCV, including those who are more challenging to treat such as patients with a genotype 3 (G3) infection. The aim of this retrospective, multicenter, field-practice study was to investigate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of the oral combination of DCV and SOF, with or without RBV (DCV+SOF±RBV), in a large unselected cohort of patients with chronic HCV infection (CHC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients received DCV+SOF±RBV for 12 or 24 weeks. The efficacy endpoint was sustained virological response at 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12). Safety factors were also considered. RESULTS: A total of 620 patients were included in this study; the predominant genotype was G3 (55.3%). Of the total sample, 248 (40%) patients were treated with DCV+SOF+RBV and 372 (60%) did not receive RBV. The majority of patients assessed at week 12 (98%, 596/608) achieved SVR12. Among G3 patients, 98.8% (335/339) achieved SVR12. The most common adverse event was elevated bilirubin (30.6%), recorded in 4.9% of cases as a grade 3-4 adverse event. CONCLUSION: This study shows the high pan-genotypic effectiveness and safety of the DCV+SOF±RBV combination in a large, unselected sample of CHC patients with G1-4, including a wide proportion of G3 CHC patients.

High Efficacy and Safety of Flat-Dose Ribavirin Plus Sofosbuvir/Daclatasvir in Genotype 3 Cirrhotic Patients.

Background/Aims: Patients with genotype 3 hepatitis C virus (G3-HCV) cirrhosis are very difficult to treat compared to patients with other HCV genotypes. The optimal treatment duration and drug regimen associated with ribavirin (RBV) remain unclear. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of daclatasvir (DCV)/sofosbuvir (SOF) plus a flat dose of 800 mg RBV (flat dose) compared to DCV/SOF without RBV or DCV/SOF plus an RBV dose based on body weight (weight-based) in G3-HCV patients with compensated or decompensated cirrhosis. Methods: We analyzed data for 233 G3 cirrhotic patients. Of these, 70 (30%), 87(37%) and 76 (33%) received SOF/DCV, SOF/DCV/RBV flat dose, and SOF/DCV/RBV weight-based dose, respectively. Treatment duration was 24 weeks. Sustained virological response (SVR) was evaluated at week 12 posttreatment (SVR12). Results: Overall, SVR12 was achieved in 220 out of 233 patients (94.4%). The SVR12 rate was lower in the DCV/SOF group than in the DCV/SOF/RBV flat-dose group and the DCV/SOF/RBV weight-based group (87.1% vs 97.7% and 97.4%, respectively, p=0.007). A higher incidence of anemia occurred in the DCV/SOF/RBV weight-based group compared to those in the other two groups (p<0.007). Conclusions: We found that the DCV/SOF/RBV flat-dose regimen is an effective treatment in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with G3-HCV compensated or decompensated cirrhosis. Therefore, antiviral regimens without RBV should be restricted only to naïve patients with G3-HCV compensated cirrhosis who have a clear contraindication for RBV.

HCV genotype-3h, a difficult-to-diagnose sub-genotype in the DAA era.

BACKGROUND: No data are available on the clinical presentation and virological pattern in the case of failure of interferon (IFN)-free regimens in patients with genotype-3h. In this paper authors identified the virological and clinical characteristics of patients with genotype-3h treated with suboptimal or not indicated IFN-free regimens for the misclassification of HCV genotype. METHODS: A total of 87 consecutive patients with failure to an IFN-free regimen were re-tested for HCV genotype by HCV NS5B sequencing; the 26 patients identified as harbouring HCV-3 were enrolled. RESULTS: Of the 26 patients enrolled, 4 (15.4%) harboured sub-genotype-3h and 22 (84.6%) 3a. All patients were Italian. Patients with genotype-3a infection were younger (median age 56 years, range 47-78) compared to those with genotype-3h infection (median 74 years, range 65-79; P<0.006). With regard to the failed direct-acting antiviral (DAA)-regimens, three of the four patients with genotype-3h (75%) had been treated with an ineffective​ DAA regimen (paritaprevir, ombitasvir, dasabuvir ± ribavirin for 3 months) more frequently than those with genotype-3a (13.6%; P=0.02), because of previous erroneous identification of HCV-1 genotype. NS5A resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) were observed in 10 (45.4%) genotype-3a-infected patients and in 2 (50%) with genotype-3h. NS5B RASs were observed in only two genotype-3a-infected patients and in none of the 3h-infected patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first time genotype-3h has been identified in Italian patients failing an IFN-free regimen, in the majority of cases because of a misclassification of the HCV genotype.

Boceprevir or telaprevir in hepatitis C virus chronic infection: The Italian real life experience.

AIM: To check the safety and efficacy of boceprevir/telaprevir with peginterferon/ribavirin for hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 in the real-world settings. METHODS: This study was a non-randomized, observational, prospective, multicenter. This study involved 47 centers in Italy. A database was prepared for the homogenous collection of the data, was used by all of the centers for data collection, and was updated continuously. All of the patients enrolled in this study were older than 18 years of age and were diagnosed with chronic infection due to HCV genotype 1. The HCV RNA testing was performed using COBAS-TaqMan2.0 (Roche, LLQ 25 IU/mL). RESULTS: All consecutively treated patients were included. Forty-seven centers enrolled 834 patients as follows: Male 64%; median age 57 (range 18-78), of whom 18.3% were over 65; mean body mass index 25.6 (range 16-39); genotype 1b (79.4%); diagnosis of cirrhosis (38.2%); and fibrosis F3/4 (71.2%). The following drugs were used: Telaprevir (66.2%) and PEG-IFN-alpha2a (67.6%). Patients were naïve (24.4%), relapsers (30.5%), partial responders (14.8%) and null responders (30.3%). Overall, adverse events (AEs) occurred in 617 patients (73.9%) during the treatment. Anemia was the most frequent AE (52.9% of cases), especially in cirrhotic. The therapy was stopped for 14.6% of the patients because of adverse events or virological failure (15%). Sustained virological response was achieved in 62.7% of the cases, but was 43.8% in cirrhotic patients over 65 years of age. CONCLUSION: In everyday practice, triple therapy is safe but has moderate efficacy, especially for patients over 65 years of age, with advanced fibrosis, non-responders to peginterferon + ribavirin.