High success rates for the use of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir containing regimens in treatment of naïve and experienced chronic hepatitis C genotype 4: Real world results.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 4 patient with fixed dose combination of ombitasvir-paritaprevir-ritonavir plus ribavirin (OBV/rPTV/RBV) has been proven efficacy and safety in many clinical trials. The current study reports the efficacy and safety of OBV/rPTV/RBV (for treatment-naïve), and OBV/rPTV/RBV/sofosbuvir (SOF) (for treatment-experienced), in chronic HCV genotype 4 patients in real life settings. METHODS: Prospective cohort study including all adult chronic HCV genotype 4 patients who were scheduled to receive OBV/rPTV/RBV ± SOF for 12 or 24 weeks in New Cairo Viral Hepatitis Treatment Center. The primary efficacy endpoint was a virologic response at posttreatment week 12 (SVR12). Changes in hematological parameters, liver biochemical profile and fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4), as well as clinical and laboratory adverse events (AEs) across follow up visits (week 4, end of treatment [EOT], and SVR12), were recorded. RESULTS: Our study included 325 patients (age; 47.63 ± 12.63 years, 55.38% [n = 180] men). Most of the included patients (89.85%, n = 292) were treatment naïve and only 7% (n = 23) had liver cirrhosis. Overall, SVR12 was attained by 98.44% (316 of 321) of the patients; 97.15% (307 of 316) of patients who received 12 weeks of OBV/rPTV/RBV ± SOF and 100% (9 of 9) of patients who received 24 weeks of OBV/rPTV/RBV as assessed by modified intention to treat analysis. There was a significant improvement of baseline alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, hemoglobin, FIB-4 at SVR12 (P < 0.05). The most common reported AEs were anemia (n = 106), fatigue (n = 41) and elevated indirect bilirubin (n = 37). CONCLUSION: OBV/rPTV/RBV (±SOF) is a highly effective therapy for chronic HCV patients in real life settings.

Pregnancy outcome of anti-HCV direct-acting antivirals: Real-life data from an Egyptian cohort.

We aimed to assess the pregnancy outcome in women with chronic HCV who had negative pregnancy test prior to the anti-HCV course and had unintended pregnancy while on HCV treatment. Hundred patients with a mean age of 30 ± 6.7 y were included and advised to withhold antivirals and continue follow-up in viral hepatitis and obstetrics centres till delivery. All patients received a 12-weeks regimen of anti-HCV [sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir (SOF/DCV): n = 95, SOF/DCV plus ribavirin: n = 3, and paritaprevir/ritonavir/ombitasvir plus ribavirin: n = 2]. Only nine patients completed the full antiviral course against medical advice, and 91 stopped between on-treatment weeks 4 and 8. Eighty-eight patients delivered full-term babies, eight had preterm babies and two had abortions. Of the nine patients who completed the full course of DAAs, seven (77.8%) delivered normal babies, attended their post-treatment week 12 visit, and all (100%) achieved sustained virological response. No major antiviral-related adverse events were reported.

Prevention, Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Chronic Kidney Disease: Synopsis of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes 2018 Clinical Practice Guideline.

This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement. Description: The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2018 clinical practice guideline for the prevention, diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an extensive update of KDIGO's 2008 guideline on HCV infection in CKD. This update reflects the major advances since the introduction of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) in the management of HCV infection in the CKD population. Methods: The KDIGO work group tasked with developing the HCV and CKD guideline defined the scope of the guideline, gathered evidence, determined topics for systematic review, and graded the quality of evidence previously summarized by the evidence review team. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to appraise the quality of evidence and rate the strength of the recommendations. Searches of the English-language literature were conducted through May 2017 and were supplemented with targeted searches for studies of DAA treatment and with abstracts from nephrology, hepatology, and transplantation conferences. A review process involving many stakeholders, subject matter experts, and industry and national organizations informed the guideline's final modification. Recommendation: The updated guideline comprises 66 recommendations. This synopsis focuses on 32 key recommendations pertinent to the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and management of HCV infection in adult CKD populations.

Ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with or without ribavirin for 8 or 12 weeks for the treatment of HCV genotype 4 infection: results from a randomised phase III study in Egypt.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir alone and with ribavirin for 8 and 12 weeks in Egyptian patients with and without cirrhosis, who were infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 4, including those who had failed previous treatment with sofosbuvir regimens. DESIGN: In this open-label, multicentre, phase III study, treatment-naive patients were randomised to receive 8 or 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir±ribavirin. Interferon treatment-experienced patients were randomised to receive 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir±ribavirin, while sofosbuvir-experienced or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir-experienced patients received 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir+ribavirin. Randomisation was stratified by cirrhosis status. The primary endpoint was sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12). RESULTS: We enrolled 255 patients from four centres in Egypt. Among treatment-naive patients, SVR12 rates were 95% and 90% for those receiving 8 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir alone and with ribavirin, respectively, and 98% for those receiving 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir both alone and with ribavirin. Among interferon-experienced patients, SVR rates were 94% for those receiving 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir and 100% for those receiving 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir plus ribavirin. All patients previously treated with sofosbuvir regimens who received ledipasvir/sofosbuvir plus ribavirin achieved SVR12. The most common adverse events, headache and fatigue, were more common among patients receiving ribavirin. CONCLUSION: Among non-cirrhotic treatment-naive patients with HCV genotype 4, 8 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir±ribavirin was highly effective. Twelve weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir±ribavirin was highly effective regardless of presence of cirrhosis or prior treatment experience, including previous treatment with sofosbuvir or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02487030.

Efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir-based therapy in hepatitis C virus recurrence post living donor liver transplant: A real life egyptian experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Direct acting antiviral has offered treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence post liver transplantation (LT) with an all-oral regimen for short duration, excellent safety profile, and high sustained virological response (SVR). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir (SOF)-based regimens in the real world among a cohort of Egyptian patients with recurrent HCV post living donor LT (LDLT). METHODS: Patients with HCV-G4 recurrence post-LDLT were recruited from National Committee of Control of Viral Hepatitis, Egypt, from November 2014 to May 2017. They received different SOF-based regimens according to the treatment protocols available during this period. Patients' outcome and Adverse effects (AE) were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred ninety patients (170 males, mean age 56.8 ± 7.9 years) were included. Calcineurin inhibitors were the main immunosuppression used (173 patients). Out of 190, 119 (62.6%) received SOF/ribavirin (RBV), 38 (20%) SOF/simeprevir (SMV), 22 (11.6%) SOF/daclatasvir (DSV)/ ± RBV, and 11 (5.8%) received SOF/LDV/ ± RBV. Overall SVR12 was 89.5%, 84.9% in SOF/RBV group, 94.7% in SOF/SMV, 100% in SOF/DCV, and 100% in SOF/LDV with no statistically significant difference ( P = 0.104). The AE reported were as follows: anemia (n = 65, 34.4%) mainly in SOF/RBV group, transient hyperbilirubinemia during SOF/SMV in 13 patients (34%), mild Acute cellular rejection in eight patients (4.2%), and hepatocellular carcinoma in two patients (1%) mainly driven by underlying liver condition. Two deaths were unlikely related to HCV therapy. CONCLUSION: Different SOF-based regimens were effective with high SVR12 rates in a difficult-to-treat population, recurrent HCV post LDLT.

Executive summary of the 2018 KDIGO Hepatitis C in CKD Guideline: welcoming advances in evaluation and management.

Infection with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) has adverse liver, kidney, and cardiovascular consequences in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), including those on dialysis therapy and in those with a kidney transplant. Since the publication of the original Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) HCV Guideline in 2008, major advances in HCV management, particularly with the advent of direct-acting antiviral therapies, have now made the cure of HCV possible in CKD patients. In addition, diagnostic techniques have evolved to enable the noninvasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis. Therefore, the Work Group undertook a comprehensive review and update of the KDIGO HCV in CKD Guideline. This Executive Summary highlights key aspects of the guideline recommendations.

Planning and prioritizing direct-acting antivirals treatment for HCV patients in countries with limited resources: Lessons from the Egyptian experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The introduction of direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus (HCV) in Egypt led to massive treatment uptake, with Egypt's national HCV treatment program becoming the largest in the world. The aim of this paper is to present the Egyptian experience in planning and prioritizing mass treatment for patients with HCV, highlighting the difficulties and limitations of the program, as a guide for other countries of similarly limited resources. METHODS: Baseline data of 337,042 patients, treated between October 2014 to March 2016 in specialized viral hepatitis treatment centers, were grouped into three equal time intervals of six months each. Patients were treated with different combinations of direct-acting antivirals, with or without ribavirin and pegylated interferon. Baseline data, percentage of patients with known outcome, and sustained virological response at week 12 (SVR12) were analyzed for the three cohorts. The outcomes of 94,258 patients treated in the subsequent two months are also included. RESULTS: For cohort-1, treatment was prioritized for patients with advanced fibrosis (F3-F4 fibrosis, liver stiffness ≥9.5 kPa, or Fibrosis-4 ≥3.25). Starting cohort-2, all stages of fibrosis were included (F0-F4). The prioritization strategy in the initial phase caused delays in enrollment and massive backlogs. Cohort-1 patients were significantly older, and more had advanced fibrosis compared to subsequent cohorts. The percentage of patients with known SVR12 results were low initially, and increased with each cohort, as several methods to capture patient results were adopted. Sofosbuvir-ribavirin therapy for 24 weeks had the lowest SVR12 rate (82.7%); while other therapies were associated with SVR12 rates between 94% and 98%. CONCLUSION: Prioritization based on fibrosis stage was not effective and enrollment increased greatly only after including all stages of fibrosis. The availability of generic drugs reduced costs, and helped massively increase uptake of the program. Post-treatment follow-up was initially very low, and although this has increased, further improvement is still needed. LAY SUMMARY: We are presenting the largest national program for HCV treatment in the world. We clearly demonstrate that hepatitis C can be cured efficiently in large scale real-life programs. This is a clear statement that global HCV eradication is foreseeable, providing a model for other countries with limited resources and prevalent HCV. Moreover, the availability of generic products has influenced the success of this program.

Towards a hepatitis-free Egypt: is this achievable? (Editorial).

Over the past few years, we have seen remarkable developments in the global commitment to address viral hepatitis. In May 2006, 194 countries of the World Health Assembly unanimously adopted the first-ever Global Health Sector Strategy on viral hepatitis, 2016-2021. Through these high-level strategies, countries made a commitment to eliminate viral hepatitis as a public health threat by 2030. Unfortunately, Egypt has one of the highest global burdens of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections; it is estimated that prevalence of HCV is around 4.5% to 6.7%.

Real life Egyptian experience of efficacy and safety of Simeprevir/Sofosbuvir therapy in 6211 chronic HCV genotype IV infected patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Major changes have emerged during the last few years in the therapy of chronic HCV. Several direct acting antiviral agents have been developed showing potent activity with higher rates of sustained virological response, even in difficult-to-treat patients. This study explores real life experience concerning efficacy, safety and possible predictors of response for the first cohort of Egyptian patients with chronic HCV genotype IV treated with Sofosbuvir/Simprevir combination therapy. METHODS: This real life study recruited the first (6211) chronic HCV genotype IV Egyptian patients, who received antiviral therapy in viral hepatitis specialized treatment centres affiliated to the National committee for control of viral hepatitis. All enrolled patients received 12 weeks course of daily combination of sofosbuvir (400 mg) and simeprevir (150 mg). Patients were closely monitored for treatment safety and efficacy. RESULTS: Overall sustained virological response 12 rate was 94.0% while the end of treatment response rate was 97.6%. sustained virological response 12 rates in easy and difficult-to-treat groups were 96% and 93% respectively. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed significant association of low albumin (<3.5), cirrhosis and Fib-4 score (>3.25) with treatment failure. Fatal adverse events occurred in 23/6211 cases (0.37%) due to liver cell failure adverse events or SAEs leading to treatment discontinuation occurred in 97 patients (1.6%). CONCLUSION: Sofosbuvir/Simeprevir combination is an effective and well tolerated regimen for patients with chronic HCV genotype IV.

How to optimize hepatitis C virus treatment impact on life years saved in resource-constrained countries.

UNLABELLED: In resource-constrained countries where the prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) disease is usually high, it is important to know which population should be treated first in order to increase treatment effectiveness. The aim was to estimate the effectiveness of different HCV treatment eligibility scenarios in three different countries. Using a Markov model, we estimated the number of life-years saved (LYS) with different treatment eligibility scenarios according to fibrosis stage (F1-F4 or F3-4), compared to base case (F2-F4), at a constant treatment rate, of patients between 18 and 60 years of age, at stages F0/F1 to F4, without liver complications or coinfections, chronically infected by HCV, and treated with pegylated interferon (IFN)/ribavirin or more-efficacious therapies (i.e. IFN free). We conducted the analysis in Egypt (prevalence = 14.7%; 45,000 patients treated/year), Thailand (prevalence = 2.2%; 1,000 patients treated/year), and Côte d'Ivoire (prevalence = 3%; 150 patients treated/year). In Egypt, treating F1 patients in addition to ≥F2 patients (SE1 vs. SE0) decreased LYS by 3.9%. Focusing treatment only on F3-F4 patients increased LYS by 6.7% (SE2 vs. SE0). In Thailand and Côte d'Ivoire, focusing treatment only on F3-F4 patients increased LYS by 15.3% and 11.0%, respectively, compared to treating patients ≥F2 (ST0 and SC0, respectively). Treatment only for patients at stages F3-F4 with IFN-free therapies would increase LYS by 16.7% versus SE0 in Egypt, 22.0% versus ST0 in Thailand, and 13.1% versus SC0 in Côte d'Ivoire. In this study, we did not take into account the yearly new infections and the impact of treatment on HCV transmission. CONCLUSION: Our model-based analysis demonstrates that prioritizing treatment in F3-F4 patients in resource-constrained countries is the most effective scenario in terms of LYS, regardless of treatment considered.

Sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for treating Egyptian patients with hepatitis C genotype 4.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Egypt has the highest prevalence of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the world, and more than 90% of patients are infected with genotype 4 virus. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of the HCV polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir in combination with ribavirin in HCV genotype 4 patients in Egypt. METHODS: Treatment-naïve or treatment-experienced patients with genotype 4 HCV infection (n=103) were randomly assigned to receive either 12 or 24 weeks of sofosbuvir 400 mg and ribavirin 1000-1200 mg daily. Randomization was stratified by prior treatment experience and by presence or absence of cirrhosis. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with HCV RNA <25 IU/ml 12 weeks after therapy (SVR12). RESULTS: Among all patients, 52% had received prior HCV treatment and 17% had cirrhosis at baseline. SVR12 rates were 90% (46/51) with 24 weeks and 77% (40/52) with 12 weeks of sofosbuvir and ribavirin therapy. Patients with cirrhosis at baseline had lower rates of SVR12 (63% 12 weeks, 78% 24 weeks) than those without cirrhosis (80% 12 weeks, 93% 24 weeks). The most common adverse events were fatigue, headache, insomnia, and anemia. Two patients experienced serious adverse events (cerebral ischemia, dyspnea). No adverse events resulted in treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks is effective in treating both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced Egyptian patients with genotype 4 HCV.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of immediate versus delayed treatment of hepatitis C virus-infected patients in a country with limited resources: the case of Egypt.

BACKGROUND: Because of logistical and economic issues, in Egypt, as in other resource-limited settings, decision makers should determine for which patients hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment should be prioritized. We assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different treatment initiation strategies. METHODS: Using a Markov model, we simulated HCV disease in chronically infected patients in Egypt, to compare lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of different treatment initiation strategies. RESULTS: Immediate treatment of patients at stages F1/F2/F3 was less expensive and more effective than delaying treatment until more severe stages or not providing treatment (in patients diagnosed at F1: QALE = 18.32 years if treatment at F1 vs 18.22 if treatment at F2). Treatment of F4 patients was more effective than no treatment at all (QALE = 10.33 years vs 8.77 years) and was cost-effective (ICER = $1915/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]). When considering that affordable triple therapies, including new direct-acting antivirals, will be available starting in 2016, delaying treatment until stage F2, then treating all patients regardless of their disease stage after 2016, was found to be cost-effective (ICER = $33/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: In Egypt, immediate treatment of patients with fibrosis stage F1-F3 who present to care is less expensive and more effective than delaying treatment. However, immediate treatment at stage F1 is only slightly more effective than waiting for disease to progress to stage F2 before starting treatment and is sensitive to the forthcoming availability of new treatments. Treating patients at stage F4 is highly effective and cost-effective. In Egypt, decision makers should prioritize treatment for F4 patients and delay treatment for F1 patients who present to care.

Diabetic patients with chronic hepatitis C virus response compared to non diabetics when treated with directly acting antiviral therapy.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) impairs glucose homoestasis, thus influences its clinical picture and prognosis. This study aimed at evaluating Diabetes mellitus (DM) on Egyptian patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC), and its impact on their virologic response when treated with directly acting antiviral (DAA) medications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with CHC were divided into 2 groups; Diabetic patients, and Non diabetic patients serving as control group. All patients were subjected to thorough clinical evaluation, basic biochemical laboratory tests including fasting blood glucose/glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1C), and virologic assay. They were treated with various combined DAAs, and were monitored during, at and after end of treatment. RESULTS: Diabetic patients constituted 9.85 % of CHC, and had generally worse laboratory tests (significantly higher transaminases, platelet count, Fib4 and hepatic steatosis) than non diabetic patients, and a less sustained virologic response (SVR) (significantly in Sofosbuvir (SOF) + pegylated interferon (PegIFN) + ribavirin (RBV), SOF + RBV, SOF + daclatasvir (DAC)). Although DM did not play a significant influence on SVR, yet Fib4 and SOF + RBV + PEG-IFN were significant factors affecting SVR among diabetics, while female gender and viraemia were significant factors affecting SVR among non diabetics. Hepatic fibrosis and SOF/RBV significantly influenced SVR in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic patients with CHC have worse liver biochemical profile, yet DM per se did not influence the virologic response to DAAs, however, some factors played roles in affecting SVR among them.

Efficacy and safety of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir-based therapy in HCV patients with chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) prevalence inchronic kidney disease (CKD) patients is significantly higher than in the general population. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of combined ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir-based therapy in HCV patients with renal impairment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Our study included 829 patients with normal kidney functions (group 1) and 829 patients with CKD (group 2),which were subdivided into patients not requiring dialysis (group 2a) and those on hemodialysis (group2b). Patients received regimens of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir with or without ribavirin or sofosbuvir/ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir with or without ribavirin for 12 weeks. Clinical and laboratory assessment was done before treatment, and patients were followed up for12 weeks after treatment. RESULTS: The sustained virological response (SVR) at week 12 was significantly higher in group 1 than in the other three groups/subgroups, being 94.2% vs 90.2%, 90%, and 90.7%, respectively. The regimen with the highest SVR was ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir with ribavirin. The most common adverse event was anemia, which was more common in group 2. CONCLUSION: Ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir-based therapy in chronic HCV patients with CKD is highly effective, with minimal side effects despite ribavirin-induced anemia.

Health-related quality of life in Egyptian patients after liver transplantation.

UNLABELLED: INTRODUCTION-AIM: Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) has become an important focus of patient care and clinical outcomes research with the improvement in patient and graft survival after liver transplantation (LT). The current study was designed to evaluate the post-transplant HRQOL profiles using the Liver Disease Quality of Life 1.0 (LDQOL 1.0) Questionnaire and demonstrate the possible effect of peri-transplant clinical covariates on these profiles. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Participants included pre-transplant group (waiting-list patients n = 50) and post-transplant group (mean 5 ± 4 years after deceased or living donor LT n = 103) who were recruited from 3 specialized centers in Egypt. We applied the LDQOL 1.0 questionnaire; a 111-item containing the Short Form-36 version 2.0 (SF-36v2) as a generic component supplemented by 75 disease-specific items. The etiology of cirrhosis, co-morbidities, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), Child-Pugh class and post-operative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: All recipients had significant higher HRQOL scores than patients in waiting-list using both questionnaire components. Recipients with pre-LT MELD ≥ 15, Child-Pugh class C, history of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) demonstrated low HRQOL scores. Recipients without post-operative surgical complications had a statistically better HRQOL using the disease-specific, but not the SF-36v2 component. On the other hand, both components demonstrated non-significant lower scores in recipients with rejection episodes, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and hepatitis C recurrence had compared to those without medical complications. CONCLUSION: Generally HRQOL improves dramatically after LT as assessed by LDQOL questionnaire. Moreover, combined questionnaires can provide accurate information about the possible impaired HRQOL post-LT due to pre-transplant disease severity and post-operative complications.

Egyptian revalidation of non-invasive parameters for predicting esophageal varices in cirrhotic patients: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: In resource-limited countries, non-invasive tests for assessing liver fibrosis are a potential alternative to costly endoscopic screening for esophageal varices. We aimed to validate several non-invasive parameters for predicting the presence of varices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between September 2006 and August 2017, a total of 46,014 patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy as one of the perquisites for receiving hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy were enrolled and divided into group I (without varices) and group II (with varices). Non-invasive parameters of fibrosis, namely Lok index, Bonacini score, liver stiffness, FIB-4, Baveno, and extended Baveno criteria, were validated. RESULTS: Lok index, Bonacini score, liver stiffness, and FIB-4 had areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of >0.6 (all P < 0.01 for the null hypothesis that the AUC was 0.5) for determination of the presence/absence of varices, with cutoff values of 0.80, 6.5, 21.9 kPa, and 2.94, and sensitivities of 74%, 74%, 66%, and 83%, respectively. The expanded Baveno VI criteria performed better than the Baveno VI criteria (spared endoscopy rate 81% versus 63%). CONCLUSION: The use of non-invasive methods is of limited value in predicting esophageal varices. The limited accuracy of ≤60% may delay the use of appropriate primary prophylaxis against variceal bleeding in a large proportion of cirrhotic patients.

Seroprevalence of HBV/HCV coinfection among patients with HCV screened during the national campaign for HCV eradication in Egypt.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Little is known about the true prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) coinfection in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV). This multicenter nationwide study aimed to assess the seroprevalence of HBV among Egyptian patients with HCV and its possible risk factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, multicenter, nationwide study. Data were extracted from the National Network of Viral Hepatitis Treatment Centers database. Baseline data of patients proved to be viremic during the national campaign for HCV eradication (October 2018-April 2019) were retrieved. Data included demographics, laboratory tests (HBsAg, CBC, liver biochemical profile, creatinine, AFP, HbA1c, and viral load), FIB-4 score calculation, and abdominal ultrasound results. RESULTS: Results of 297,965 patients showed that HBsAg was positive in 2,347 (0.8%) patients. Patients with HBV/HCV were 57% females and had a mean age of 51 ± 13 years. Patients with positive HBsAg showed significantly more tobacco consumption, intravenous drug abuse, hypertension, and diabetes. No significant difference was noted in HCV viremia between patients with HCV and those with HBV/HCV. Only 14% of patients with HBV/HCV had cirrhosis compared with the 9% of those with HCV; two of them had HCC. CONCLUSION: Although Egypt has a heavy HCV burden, the overall prevalence of HBV is low among patients with HCV infection. Comorbid conditions seem to favor coinfection.

Real-life experience of treating HCV co-infection among HIV-infected population in Egypt: single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Liver disease has emerged as a leading cause of death among PLHIV coinfected with HCV. METHODS: A retrospective study involving all HCV viremic patients coinfected with HIV who presented to HCV/HIV multidisciplinary clinics located at Embaba fever hospital. Patients were assigned to receive DAAs according to the national treatment guidelines. The primary endpoint was SVR12. RESULTS: Of the 519 patients enrolled, 38.73% LTFU; either not initiated (n = 170) or did not complete the treatment (n = 31). The main identified reasons behind LTFU were schedule conflict (19%) or hospitalization (13%). Among 318 patients who completed their DAAs course, nine patients had a relapse after the end of treatment and 97% had attained SVR12. There were significant differences among different virological response groups in baseline factors including smoking (p = 0.005), history of dental procedure (p = 0.007), CD4 count (p = 0.007), and HIV viral load (p = <0.001). Among responders (n = 309), there was a significant reduction of baseline hemoglobin and significant improvement of baseline platelets (p = 0.005) at on-treatment week 8. Baseline necro-inflammatory markers showed significant improvement across follow-up time points (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: DAAs are an effective and safe choice to treat HCV in PLHIV. Social stigma could be a major cause for lacking adherence to follow-up visits.Abbreviations: ALT: Alanine Aminotransferase; ARV: Antiretroviral treatment; AST: Aspartate Aminotransferase; DAAs: Direct acting antivirals; ARVs: antiretroviral therapy; EMR: Eastern Mediterranean region; HCV: Hepatitis C virus; kPa: Kilopascal; LTFU: Patient lost to follow up; NCCVH: The National Committee for Control of Viral Hepatitis; PWID: People who inject drugs; SVR: Sustained virological response;UNAIDS: The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS.