Randomised phase 2 study (JADE) of the HBV capsid assembly modulator JNJ-56136379 with or without a nucleos(t)ide analogue in patients with chronic hepatitis B infection.

OBJECTIVE: We present the final analysis results of the phase 2 JADE study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03361956). DESIGN: 232 patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) not currently treated at study start (NCT) at study start or virologically suppressed were randomised to receive 75 mg (part 1) or 250 mg (part 2) JNJ-56136379, a hepatitis B virus (HBV)-capsid assembly modulator, one time per day or placebo with nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA) (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/entecavir) or JNJ-56136379 alone (NCT-only) for ≥24 and ≤48 weeks. RESULTS: In patients who are NCT hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg) positive, JNJ-56136379 75 mg+NA and 250 mg+NA showed limited mean (SE) hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) declines (0.14 (0.10) and 0.41 (0.15), respectively) from baseline at Week 24 (primary endpoint; placebo+NA: 0.25 (0.11) log10 international unit (IU)/mL).In patients who are NCT HBeAg positive, mean (SE) HBV DNA declines at Week 24 were 5.53 (0.23) and 5.88 (0.34) for JNJ-56136379 75 mg+NA and 250 mg+NA, respectively, versus 5.21 (0.42) log10 IU/mL for placebo+NA. In NCT patients, mean (SE) HBV RNA declines were 2.96 (0.23) and 3.15 (0.33) versus 1.33 (0.32) log10 copies/mL, respectively.Patients with HBsAg declines had HBeAg and hepatitis B core-related antigen (HBcrAg) declines and some early on-treatment isolated alanine aminotransferase flares. Viral breakthrough occurred with JNJ-56136379 monotherapy with the emerging resistant-variant T33N, but not with JNJ-56136379+NA. JNJ-56136379 treatment beyond Week 24 had a generally small additional effect on viral markers.No study treatment-related serious adverse events or clinically significant changes in laboratory parameters occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with non-cirrhotic CHB, JNJ-56136379+NA showed pronounced reductions in HBV DNA and HBV RNA, limited HBsAg or HBeAg declines in patients who are NCT HBeAg positive, and was well tolerated, but no clear benefit with regards to efficacy of JNJ-56136379 over NA was observed.

Remdesivir for 5 or 10 Days in Patients with Severe Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is an RNA polymerase inhibitor with potent antiviral activity in vitro and efficacy in animal models of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial involving hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air, and radiologic evidence of pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous remdesivir for either 5 days or 10 days. All patients received 200 mg of remdesivir on day 1 and 100 mg once daily on subsequent days. The primary end point was clinical status on day 14, assessed on a 7-point ordinal scale. RESULTS: In total, 397 patients underwent randomization and began treatment (200 patients for 5 days and 197 for 10 days). The median duration of treatment was 5 days (interquartile range, 5 to 5) in the 5-day group and 9 days (interquartile range, 5 to 10) in the 10-day group. At baseline, patients randomly assigned to the 10-day group had significantly worse clinical status than those assigned to the 5-day group (P = 0.02). By day 14, a clinical improvement of 2 points or more on the ordinal scale occurred in 64% of patients in the 5-day group and in 54% in the 10-day group. After adjustment for baseline clinical status, patients in the 10-day group had a distribution in clinical status at day 14 that was similar to that among patients in the 5-day group (P = 0.14). The most common adverse events were nausea (9% of patients), worsening respiratory failure (8%), elevated alanine aminotransferase level (7%), and constipation (7%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe Covid-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation, our trial did not show a significant difference between a 5-day course and a 10-day course of remdesivir. With no placebo control, however, the magnitude of benefit cannot be determined. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; GS-US-540-5773 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04292899.).

Reinfection and Risk Behaviors After Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Persons Receiving Opioid Agonist Therapy : A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) reinfection after successful treatment may reduce the benefits of cure among people who inject drugs. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of HCV reinfection for 3 years after successful treatment among people receiving opioid agonist therapy (OAT). DESIGN: A 3-year, long-term, extension study of persons enrolled in the CO-STAR (Hepatitis C Patients on Opioid Substitution Therapy Antiviral Response) study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02105688). SETTING: 55 clinical trial sites in 13 countries. PATIENTS: Aged 18 years and older with chronic HCV infection with genotypes 1, 4, or 6 receiving stable OAT. INTERVENTION: No treatments were administered. MEASUREMENTS: Serum samples were assessed for HCV reinfection. Urine drug screening was performed. RESULTS: Among 296 participants who received treatment, 286 were evaluable for reinfection and 199 were enrolled in the long-term extension study. The rate of HCV reinfection was 1.7 [95% CI, 0.8 to 3.0] per 100 person-years; 604 person-years of follow-up). A higher rate of reinfection was seen among people with recent injecting drug use (1.9 [95% CI, 0.5 to 4.8] per 100 person-years; 212 person-years). Ongoing drug use and injecting drug use were reported by 59% and 21% of participants, respectively, at the 6-month follow-up visit and remained stable during 3 years of follow-up. LIMITATIONS: Participants were required to be 80% adherent to OAT at baseline and may represent a population with higher stability and lower risk for HCV reinfection. Rate of reinfection may be underestimated because all participants did not continue in the long-term extension study; whether participants who discontinued were at higher risk for reinfection is unknown. CONCLUSION: Reinfection with HCV was low but was highest in the first 24 weeks after treatment completion and among people with ongoing injecting drug use and needle-syringe sharing. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.

Safety and efficacy of vebicorvir administered with entecavir in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection.

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 log10 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 log10 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 log10 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.

Safety and efficacy of vebicorvir in virologically suppressed patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection.

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.

Acid Suppression Medications During Hospitalization as a Risk Factor for Recurrence of Clostridioides difficile Infection: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have had conflicting results regarding the influence of acid-suppression medications (ASMs) during hospitalization on the recurrence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the association between recurrent CDI and ASM use in inpatients was performed. Relevant literature was identified using Medline, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. All human studies were considered regardless of publication date. Case-control and cohort studies and clinical trials were included if they contained the necessary information to calculate appropriate statistics related to the objective of this study. Review articles, meta-analyses, and commentaries were excluded; however, their references were searched to identify any studies missed. The random-effects model was selected since significant heterogeneity in study design was identified. To evaluate the sensitivity of the analysis various subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: Our search identified 9 studies involving 5668 patients of whom 1003 (17.7%) developed recurrent CDI. Patients on ASM were 64% more likely to develop recurrent CDI than patients not on ASM (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.13-2.38; P = .009; I2 = 79.54%). Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use was associated with an 84% increased risk of recurrent CDI versus no ASM (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.18-2.85; P = .007; I2 = 83.4%). CONCLUSIONS: ASM use during hospitalization was associated with a 64% increase in recurrent CDI. The association was greater with PPI use. Due to significant heterogeneity in the analyses, additional studies are essential to further elucidate iatrogenic effects of ASM. Unnecessary PPI use should be discontinued.

Risk Factors and Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and Secondary Bloodstream Infections: A Multicenter Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic. Clinical characteristics regarding secondary infections in patients with COVID-19 have been reported, but detailed microbiology, risk factors, and outcomes of secondary bloodstream infections (sBSIs) in patients with severe COVID-19 have not been well described. METHODS: We performed a multicenter case-control study including all hospitalized patients diagnosed with severe COVID-19 and blood cultures drawn from 1 March 2020 to 7 May 2020 at 3 academic medical centers in New Jersey. Data collection included demographics, clinical and microbiologic variables, and patient outcomes. Risk factors and outcomes were compared between cases (sBSI) and controls (no sBSI). RESULTS: A total of 375 hospitalized patients were included. There were 128 sBSIs during the hospitalization. For the first set of positive blood cultures, 117 (91.4%) were bacterial and 7 (5.5%) were fungal. Those with sBSI were more likely to have altered mental status, lower mean percentage oxygen saturation on room air, have septic shock, and be admitted to the intensive care unit compared with controls. In-hospital mortality was higher in those with an sBSI versus controls (53.1% vs 32.8%, P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: We observed that hospitalized adult patients with severe COVID-19 and sBSI had a more severe initial presentation, prolonged hospital course, and worse clinical outcomes. To maintain antimicrobial stewardship principles, further prospective studies are necessary to better characterize risk factors and prediction modeling to better understand when to suspect and empirically treat for sBSIs in severe COVID-19.

How Do You Measure Up: Quality Measurement for Improving Patient Care and Establishing the Value of Infectious Diseases Specialists.

The shift from volume-based to value-based reimbursement has created a need for quantifying clinical performance of infectious diseases (ID) physicians. Nationally recognized ID specialty-specific quality measures will allow stakeholders, such as patients and payers, to determine the value of care provided by ID physicians and will promote clinical quality improvement. Few ID-specific measures have been developed; herein, we provide an overview of the importance of quality measurement for ID, discuss issues in quality measurement specific to ID, and describe standards by which candidate quality measures can be evaluated. If ID specialists recognize the need for quality measurement, then ID specialists can direct ID-related quality improvement, quantify the impact of ID physicians on patient outcomes, compare their performance to that of peers, and convey to stakeholders the value of the specialty.

Efficacy of 8 Weeks of Sofosbuvir, Velpatasvir, and Voxilaprevir in Patients With Chronic HCV Infection: 2 Phase 3 Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) after 12 weeks of treatment with the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir combined with the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir. We assessed the efficacy of 8 weeks of treatment with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir plus the pangenotypic NS3/4A protease inhibitor voxilaprevir (sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir). METHODS: In 2 phase 3, open-label trials, patients with HCV infection who had not been treated previously with a direct-acting antiviral agent were assigned randomly to groups given sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 8 weeks or sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks. POLARIS-2, which enrolled patients infected with all HCV genotypes with or without cirrhosis, except patients with genotype 3 and cirrhosis, was designed to test the noninferiority of 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir to 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir using a noninferiority margin of 5%. POLARIS-3, which enrolled patients infected with HCV genotype 3 who had cirrhosis, compared rates of SVR in both groups with a performance goal of 83%. RESULTS: In POLARIS-2, 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-97%) of patients had an SVR to 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir; this did not meet the criterion to establish noninferiority to 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, which produced an SVR in 98% of patients (95% CI, 96%-99%; difference in the stratum-adjusted Mantel-Haenszel proportions of -3.2%; 95% CI, -6.0% to -0.4%). The difference in the efficacy was owing primarily to a lower rate of SVR (92%) among patients with HCV genotype 1a infection receiving 8 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir. In POLARIS-3, 96% of patients (95% CI, 91%-99%) achieved an SVR in both treatment groups, which was significantly superior to the performance goal. Overall, the most common adverse events were headache, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea; diarrhea and nausea were reported more frequently by patients receiving voxilaprevir. In both trials, the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse events was low (range, 0%-1%). CONCLUSIONS: In phase 3 trials of patients with HCV infection, we did not establish that sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 8 weeks was noninferior to sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks, but the 2 regimens had similar rates of SVR in patients with HCV genotype 3 and cirrhosis. Mild gastrointestinal adverse events were associated with treatment regimens that included voxilaprevir. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers: POLARIS-2, NCT02607800; and POLARIS-3, NCT02639338.

Grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir for hepatitis C virus after NS5A treatment failure.

People with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection who have failed treatment with an all-oral regimen represent a challenging treatment population. The present studies evaluated the safety and efficacy of grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir, with or without ribavirin, in participants who had failed an NS5A inhibitor-containing regimen. C-SURGE (PN-3682-021) and C-CREST Part C (PN-3682-011 and -012) were open-label, multicenter studies. Participants who had previously relapsed following an NS5A inhibitor-containing all-oral regimen were retreated with grazoprevir 100 mg, ruzasvir 60 mg, and uprifosbuvir 450 mg alone for 24 weeks or with ribavirin for 16 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained virologic response (HCV RNA below the limit of quantitation [<15 IU/mL]) 12 weeks after treatment completion (SVR12). In C-SURGE, SVR12 was achieved by 49/49 (100%) and 43/44 (98%) genotype (GT)1 participants in the 24-week no ribavirin arm and the 16-week plus ribavirin arm (lost to follow-up, n = 1), respectively. In C-CREST Part C, SVR12 was achieved by 23/24 (96%) participants treated for 16 weeks with ribavirin (GT1, 2/2 [100%]; GT2, 13/14 [93%]; GT3, 8/8 [100%]). One participant with GT2 infection discontinued study medication after a single dose of grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir plus ribavirin due to serious adverse events of vomiting and tachycardia. The presence of baseline resistance-associated substitutions had no impact on SVR12. No participant who completed treatment in either study experienced virologic failure. CONCLUSION: Grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir, with or without ribavirin, for 16 or 24 weeks was safe and highly effective in participants with HCV infection who had previously failed NS5A inhibitor-containing therapy. (Hepatology 2017;66:1794-1804).

Ledipasvir and sofosbuvir for previously treated HCV genotype 1 infection.

BACKGROUND: Effective treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection in patients who have not had a sustained virologic response to prior interferon-based therapy represents an unmet medical need. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized, open-label study involving patients infected with HCV genotype 1 who had not had a sustained virologic response after treatment with peginterferon and ribavirin, with or without a protease inhibitor. Patients were randomly assigned to receive the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir and the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir in a once-daily, fixed-dose combination tablet for 12 weeks, ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 12 weeks, ledipasvir-sofosbuvir for 24 weeks, or ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 24 weeks. The primary end point was a sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy. RESULTS: Among the 440 patients who underwent randomization and were treated, 20% had cirrhosis and 79% had HCV genotype 1a infection. The rates of sustained virologic response were high in all treatment groups: 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87 to 97) in the group that received 12 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir; 96% (95% CI, 91 to 99) in the group that received 12 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir and ribavirin; 99% (95% CI, 95 to 100) in the group that received 24 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir; and 99% (95% CI, 95 to 100) in the group that received 24 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir and ribavirin. No patient discontinued treatment owing to an adverse event. The most common adverse events were fatigue, headache, and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with a once-daily, single-tablet regimen of ledipasvir and sofosbuvir resulted in high rates of sustained virologic response among patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had not had a sustained virologic response to prior interferon-based treatment. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ION-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01768286.).

Efficacy of Sofosbuvir, Velpatasvir, and GS-9857 in Patients With Genotype 1 Hepatitis C Virus Infection in an Open-Label, Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The best regimen to re-treat patients who do not respond to direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) and the feasibility of further shortening regimens is unclear. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the combination of the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir, and the NS3/4A protease inhibitor GS-9857 in patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection. METHODS: We performed an open-label trial at 32 sites in the United States and at 2 sites in New Zealand of 197 patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus infection, with or without compensated cirrhosis, who were treatment-naive or were treated previously with a DAA. Between March 2, 2015, and September 1, 2015, patients received sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (400 mg/100 mg in a fixed-dose combination) plus GS-9857 (100 mg) once daily for 6-12 weeks, plus ribavirin for 1 treatment group consisting of treatment-naive patients with cirrhosis. The primary end point was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12). RESULTS: Among treatment-naive patients without cirrhosis, 71% (24 of 34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 53-85) achieved SVR12 after 6 weeks of treatment and 100% (36 of 36; 95% CI, 90%-100%) achieved SVR12 after 8 weeks of treatment. Among treatment-naive patients with cirrhosis, 94% (31 of 33; 95% CI, 80-99) achieved SVR12 after 8 weeks of treatment and 81% (25 of 31; 95% CI, 63-93) achieved SVR12 after 8 weeks of treatment with ribavirin. Among DAA-experienced patients treated for 12 weeks, 100% without cirrhosis (31 of 31; 95% CI, 89-100) and 100% with cirrhosis (32 of 32; 95% CI, 89-100) achieved SVR12. The most common adverse events were headache, diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea. One patient (<1%) discontinued treatment because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 open-label trial, we found 8 weeks of treatment with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir plus GS-9857 to be safe and effective in treatment-naive patients; 12 weeks was safe and effective in patients previously treated with DAAs. The combination was safe and effective in patients with or without compensated cirrhosis. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT02378935.

Simeprevir plus sofosbuvir (12 and 8 weeks) in hepatitis C virus genotype 1-infected patients without cirrhosis: OPTIMIST-1, a phase 3, randomized study.

UNLABELLED: Effective antiviral therapy is essential for achieving sustained virological response (SVR) in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients. The phase 2 COSMOS study reported high SVR rates in treatment-naive and prior null-responder HCV genotype (GT) 1-infected patients receiving simeprevir+sofosbuvir±ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks. OPTIMIST-1 (NCT02114177) was a multicenter, randomized, open-label study assessing the efficacy and safety of 12 and 8 weeks of simeprevir+sofosbuvir in HCV GT1-infected treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients without cirrhosis. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1; stratified by HCV GT/subtype and presence or absence of NS3 Q80K polymorphism [GT1b, GT1a with Q80K, GT1a without Q80K]), prior HCV treatment history, and IL28B GT [CC, non-CC]) to simeprevir 150 mg once daily+sofosbuvir 400 mg once daily for 12 or 8 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was SVR rate 12 weeks after end of treatment (SVR12). Superiority in SVR12 was assessed for simeprevir+sofosbuvir at 12 and 8 weeks versus a composite historical control SVR rate. Enrolled were 310 patients, who were randomized and received treatment (n = 155 in each arm). SVR12 with simeprevir+sofosbuvir for 12 weeks (97% [150/155; 95% confidence interval 94%-100%]) was superior to the historical control (87%). SVR12 with simeprevir+sofosbuvir for 8 weeks (83% [128/155; 95% confidence interval 76-89%]) was not superior to the historical control (83%). The most frequent adverse events were nausea, headache, and fatigue (12-week arm: 15% [23/155], 14% [22/155], and 12% [19/155]; 8-week arm: 9% [14/155], 17% [26/155], and 15% [23/155], respectively). No patients discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. One (1%, 12-week arm) and three (2%, 8-week arm) patients experienced a serious adverse event (all unrelated to study treatment). CONCLUSION: Simeprevir+sofosbuvir for 12 weeks is highly effective in the treatment of HCV GT1-infected patients without cirrhosis, including those with Q80K. (Hepatology 2016;64:370-380).

Elbasvir-Grazoprevir to Treat Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Persons Receiving Opioid Agonist Therapy: A Randomized Trial.

Background: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is common in persons who inject drugs (PWID). Objective: To evaluate elbasvir-grazoprevir in treating HCV infection in PWID. Design: Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02105688). Setting: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Patients: 301 treatment-naive patients with chronic HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection who were at least 80% adherent to visits for opioid agonist therapy (OAT). Intervention: The immediate-treatment group (ITG) received elbasvir-grazoprevir for 12 weeks; the deferred-treatment group (DTG) received placebo for 12 weeks, no treatment for 4 weeks, then open-label elbasvir-grazoprevir for 12 weeks. Measurements: The primary outcome was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12), evaluated separately in the ITG and DTG. Other outcomes included SVR24, viral recurrence or reinfection, and adverse events. Results: The SVR12 was 91.5% (95% CI, 86.8% to 95.0%) in the ITG and 89.5% (95% CI, 81.5% to 94.8%) in the active phase of the DTG. Drug use at baseline and during treatment did not affect SVR12 or adherence to HCV therapy. Among 18 patients with posttreatment viral recurrence through 24-week follow-up, 6 had probable reinfection. If the probable reinfections were assumed to be responses, SVR12 was 94.0% (CI, 89.8% to 96.9%) in the ITG. One patient in the ITG (1 of 201) and 1 in the placebo-phase DTG (1 of 100) discontinued treatment because of an adverse event. Limitation: These findings may not be generalizable to PWID who are not receiving OAT, nor do they apply to persons with genotype 3 infection, a common strain in PWID. Conclusion: Patients with HCV infection who were receiving OAT and treated with elbasvir-grazoprevir had high rates of SVR12, regardless of ongoing drug use. These results support the removal of drug use as a barrier to interferon-free HCV treatment for patients receiving OAT. Primary Funding Source: Merck & Co.

Linkage to Care for Suburban Heroin Users with Hepatitis C Virus Infection, New Jersey, USA.

We identified a 41.4% prevalence of hepatitis C virus, absence of HIV, and unexpectedly high frequency of hepatitis C virus genotype 3 among suburban New Jersey heroin users 17-35 years of age during 2014-2015. Despite 2 clinicians prepared to engage these users, few were successfully linked to care and treated.

Efficacy and safety of 8 weeks versus 12 weeks of treatment with grazoprevir (MK-5172) and elbasvir (MK-8742) with or without ribavirin in patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 mono-infection and HIV/hepatitis C virus co-infection (C-WORTHY): a randomised, open-label phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Both hepatitis C virus (HCV) mono-infected and HIV/HCV co-infected patients are in need of safe, effective, all-oral HCV regimens. In a phase 2 study we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of grazoprevir (MK-5172; HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor) and two doses of elbasvir (MK-8742; HCV NS5A inhibitor) in patients with HCV mono-infection and HIV/HCV co-infection. METHODS: The C-WORTHY study is a phase 2, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of grazoprevir plus elbasvir with or without ribavirin in patients with HCV; here, we report findings for previously untreated (genotype 1) patients without cirrhosis who were HCV mono-infected or HIV/HCV co-infected. Eligible patients were previously untreated adults aged 18 years or older with chronic HCV genoype 1 infection and HCV RNA at least 10 000 IU/mL in peripheral blood without evidence of cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, or decompensated liver disease. In part A of the study we randomly assigned HCV-mono-infected patients to receive 12 weeks of grazoprevir (100 mg) plus elbasvir (20 mg or 50 mg) with or without ribavirin (arms A1-3); in part B we assigned HCV-mono-infected patients to 8 or 12 weeks of grazoprevir (100 mg) plus elbasvir (50 mg) with or without ribavirin (arms B1-3) and HIV/HCV co-infected patients to 12 weeks of therapy with or without ribavirin. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving HCV RNA less than 25 IU/mL 12 weeks after end of treatment (SVR12). Randomisation was by presence or absence of ribavirin, 8 or 12 weeks of treatment, and dosage of elbasvir. Patients were stratified by gentoype 1a versus 1b. The patients, investigators, and study site personnel were masked to treatment group assignements but the funder was not. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01717326. FINDINGS: 218 patients with HCV mono-infection (n=159) and HIV/HCV co-infection (n=59) were enrolled. SVR12 for patients treated for 12 weeks with or without ribavirin ranged from 93-98% in mono-infected and 87-97% in co-infected patients. SVR12 rates in mono-infected and co-infected patients treated for 12 weeks without ribavirin were 98% (95% CI 88-100; 43/44) and 87% (95% CI 69-96; 26/30), respectively, and with ribavirin were 93% (95% CI 85-97; 79/85) and 97% (95% CI 82-100; 28/29), respectively. Among mono-infected patients with genotype 1a infection treated for 8 weeks, SVR12 was 80% (95% CI 61-92; 24/30). Five of six patients who discontinued early for reasons other than virological failure had HCV RNA less than 25 IU/mL at their last study visit. Virological failure among patients treated for 12 weeks occurred in seven patients (7/188, 4%) and was associated with emergence of resistance-associated variants to one or both drugs. The safety profile of grazoprevir plus elbasvir with or without ribavirin was similar in mono-infected and co-infected patients. No patient discontinued due to an adverse event or laboratory abnormality. The most common adverse events were fatigue (51 patients, 23%), headache (44, 20%), nausea (32, 15%), and diarrhoea (21, 10%). INTERPRETATION: Once-daily grazoprevir plus elbasvir with or without ribavirin for 12 weeks in previously untreated HCV-mono-infected and HIV/HCV-co-infected patients without cirrhosis achieved SVR12 rates of 87-98%. These results support the ongoing phase 3 development of grazoprevir plus elbasvir. FUNDING: Merck & Co, Inc.

Efficacy of sofosbuvir plus ribavirin with or without peginterferon-alfa in patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 3 infection and treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis and hepatitis C virus genotype 2 infection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We conducted an open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial to determine the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir and ribavirin, with and without peginterferon-alfa, in treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis and hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 2 infection and treatment-naïve or treatment-experienced patients with HCV genotype 3 infection. METHODS: The study was conducted at 80 sites in Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to groups given sofosbuvir and ribavirin for 16 weeks (n = 196); sofosbuvir and ribavirin for 24 weeks (n = 199); or sofosbuvir, peginterferon-alfa, and ribavirin for 12 weeks (n = 197). The primary end point was the percentage of patients with HCV RNA <15 IU/mL 12 weeks after stopping therapy (sustained virologic response [SVR12]). From October 2013 until April 2014, we enrolled and treated 592 patients-48 with genotype 2 HCV and compensated cirrhosis who had not achieved SVR with previous treatments and 544 with genotype 3 HCV (279 treatment-naïve and 265 previously treated). Overall, 219 patients (37%) had compensated cirrhosis. The last post-treatment week 12 patient visit was in January 2015. RESULTS: Rates of SVR12 among patients with genotype 2 HCV were 87% and 100%, for those receiving 16 and 24 weeks of sofosbuvir and ribavirin, respectively, and 94% for those receiving sofosbuvir, peginterferon, and ribavirin for 12 weeks. Rates of SVR12 among patients with genotype 3 HCV were 71% and 84% in those receiving 16 and 24 weeks of sofosbuvir and ribavirin, respectively, and 93% in those receiving sofosbuvir, peginterferon, and ribavirin. On-treatment virologic failure occurred in 3 patients with HCV genotype 3a receiving sofosbuvir and ribavirin for 24 weeks. The most common adverse events were fatigue, headache, insomnia, and nausea. Overall, 1% of patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with genotype 3 HCV infection, including a large proportion of treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis, the combination of sofosbuvir, peginterferon, and ribavirin for 12 weeks produces high rates of SVR. Treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis and genotype 2 HCV infection had high rates of SVR in all groups. EudraCT ID 2013-002641-11.

Sofosbuvir plus pegylated interferon and ribavirin in patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus in whom previous therapy with direct-acting antivirals has failed.

UNLABELLED: Retreatment of patients who have not achieved sustained virological response (SVR) after treatment with investigational direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) has not been extensively studied. We conducted an open-label trial to assess the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir (SOF) plus pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) in patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus (HCV) who participated in previous studies of one or more Gilead investigational DAAs in combination with RBV with or without Peg-IFN. We enrolled 80 patients at 40 sites. All patients received SOF 400 mg once daily plus Peg-IFN-α 180 µg/week and weight-based ribavirin (1,000 or 1,200 mg/day) for 12 weeks. The efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with SVR 12 weeks after discontinuation of therapy (SVR12). Of the 80 patients enrolled, 36 (45%) had received two or more courses of earlier treatment for HCV and 74 (93%) had at least one resistance-associated variant (RAV) at baseline. SVR12 was achieved by 63 of the 80 patients (79%) treated. Rates of SVR12 were similar across patient subgroups. Presence of RAVs at baseline did not appear to be associated with treatment failure. Seventy-one of eighty patients (89%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE), but most events were mild to moderate in severity. The most common AEs were fatigue, headache, and nausea. No patients discontinued all treatment because of AEs. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that SOF plus Peg-IFN and RBV for 12 weeks is effective and safe in patients who have not achieved SVR with earlier regimens of one or more DAAs plus Peg-IFN and RBV.

Sofosbuvir With Velpatasvir in Treatment-Naive Noncirrhotic Patients With Genotype 1 to 6 Hepatitis C Virus Infection: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective, pangenotypic treatments for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are needed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir with velpatasvir in patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 to 6. DESIGN: Randomized, phase 2, open-label study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01858766). SETTING: 48 U.S. sites. PATIENTS: 377 treatment-naive noncirrhotic patients. In part A, patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 to 6 were randomly assigned to sofosbuvir, 400 mg, with velpatasvir, 25 or 100 mg, for 12 weeks. In part B, patients with genotype 1 or 2 HCV infection were randomly assigned to sofosbuvir, 400 mg, and velpatasvir, 25 or 100 mg, with or without ribavirin for 8 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: Sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12). RESULTS: In part A, SVR12 rates were 96% (26 of 27) with velpatasvir, 25 mg, and 100% (28 of 28) with velpatasvir, 100 mg, for genotype 1; 93% (25 of 27) in both groups for genotype 3; and 96% (22 of 23) with velpatasvir, 25 mg, and 95% (21 of 22) with velpatasvir, 100 mg, for genotypes 2, 4, 5, and 6. In part B, for genotype 1, SVR12 rates were 87% (26 of 30) with velpatasvir, 25 mg; 83% (25 of 30) with velpatasvir, 25 mg, plus ribavirin; 90% (26 of 29) with velpatasvir, 100 mg; and 81% (25 of 31) with velpatasvir, 100 mg, plus ribavirin. For genotype 2, SVR12 rates were 77% (20 of 26) with velpatasvir, 25 mg; 88% (22 of 25) with velpatasvir, 25 mg, plus ribavirin; 88% (23 of 26) with velpatasvir, 100 mg; and 88% (23 of 26) with velpatasvir, 100 mg, plus ribavirin. Adverse events included fatigue (21%), headache (20%), and nausea (12%). One patient committed suicide. LIMITATION: The study was open-label, no inferential statistics were planned, and sample sizes were small. CONCLUSION: Twelve weeks of sofosbuvir, 400 mg, and velpatasvir, 100 mg, was well-tolerated and resulted in high SVR in patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 to 6. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Gilead Sciences.

The infectious diseases physician in the future of healthcare: not only about antibiotic prescribing.

The uncertainties of healthcare payment and delivery reform on income and care process have created a sense of foreboding, concern, and fear that a career in medicine is not what it used to be and that a career in infectious diseases in particular may no longer be viable. Fears have been raised that the need for infectious diseases consultation and management will be curtailed because we provide cognitive services that are not perceived as being needed in a health system filled with intensivists, hospitalists, and skilled nursing facility physicians. Now is the time for us to reframe our role in the health system that is evolving to a process of care focused on population health and patient safety that pays providers for value they bring to achieve those goals. Specific suggestions are made to enhance the infectious diseases physician's profile with the intent of encouraging debate, discussion, and action.