Hepatitis C virus treatment with glecaprevir and pibrentasvir in patients co-prescribed carbamazepine: Three case reports.

BACKGROUND: Highly effective and well-tolerated direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies have revolutionised the management of hepatitis C virus (HCV); however, niche populations face treatment barriers. DAAs co-prescribed with several first-generation anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) are contraindicated due to drug-drug interactions. A common example is carbamazepine whereby steady-state carbamazepine reduces the maximum concentration and area under the curve of velpatasvir, glecaprevir and pibrentasvir due to potent cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 induction. Carbamazepine also induces P-glycoprotein which reduces glecaprevir and pibrentasvir's area under curve to infinite time. Sofosbuvir-velpatasvir and glecaprevir-pibrentasvir are contraindicated in patients who are co-prescribed carbamazepine due to the risk of reduced DAA therapeutic effect and consequently, virological treatment failure. This presents a challenge for patients in whom carbamazepine substitution is medically unfeasible, impractical or unacceptable. However, the properties of current generation DAA therapies, including high-potency non-structural protein 5A inhibitory effect, may be sufficient to overcome reduced bioavailability arising from carbamazepine related CYP 3A4 and P-glycoprotein induction. CASE SUMMARY: We present a case series of three patients with non-cirrhotic, treatment-naïve, genotype 1a, 1b, and 3a HCV who were treated with a 12 wk course of glecaprevir-pibrentasvir, while co-prescribed carbamazepine for seizure disorders. Glecaprevir-pibrentasvir combination therapy was chosen due to its potent in vitro activity and low barrier to pan-genotypic resistance associated variants. DAA therapy was dose-separated from carbamazepine to maximise time to peak concentration, and taken with meals to improve absorption. Sustained virological response at 12 wk was achieved in each patient with no adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: DAA therapies, including glecaprevir-pibrentasvir, warrant consideration as a therapeutic agent in people with HCV who are co-prescribed carbamazepine, particularly if AED substitution is not feasible.

Clinical outcomes of patients with two small hepatocellular carcinomas.

BACKGROUND: Management of single small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is straightforward with curative outcomes achieved by locoregional therapy or resection. Liver transplantation is often considered for multiple small or single large HCC. Management of two small HCC whether presenting synchronously or sequentially is less clear. AIM: To define the outcomes of patients presenting with two small HCC. METHODS: Retrospective review of HCC databases from multiple institutions of patients with either two synchronous or sequential HCC ≤ 3 cm between January 2000 and March 2018. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and transplant-free survival (TFS). RESULTS: 104 patients were identified (male n = 89). Median age was 63 years (interquartile range 58-67.75) and the most common aetiology of liver disease was hepatitis C (40.4%). 59 (56.7%) had synchronous HCC and 45 (43.3%) had sequential. 36 patients died (34.6%) and 25 were transplanted (24.0%). 1, 3 and 5-year OS was 93.0%, 66.1% and 62.3% and 5-year post-transplant survival was 95.8%. 1, 3 and 5-year TFS was 82.1%, 45.85% and 37.8%. When synchronous and sequential groups were compared, OS (1,3 and 5 year synchronous 91.3%, 63.8%, 61.1%, sequential 95.3%, 69.5%, 64.6%, P = 0.41) was similar but TFS was higher in the sequential group (1,3 and 5 year synchronous 68.5%, 37.3% and 29.7%, sequential 93.2%, 56.6%, 48.5%, P = 0.02) though this difference did not remain during multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: TFS in patients presenting with two HCC ≤ 3 cm is poor regardless of the timing of the second tumor. All patients presenting with two small HCC should be considered for transplantation.

Antenatal maternal hepatitis B care is a predictor of timely perinatal administration of hepatitis B immunoglobulin.

BACKGROUND: Mother-to-child transmission of hepatitis B virus continues to occur despite universal recommendations for neonatal immune prophylaxis therapy (IPT) and infant vaccination. AIM: To characterise the risk factors for failure to provide timely IPT and completion of the infant hepatitis B vaccination schedule for children born to mothers with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to assess compliance with universal guidelines for neonatal IPT for children born to CHB mothers at Monash Health, Australia from 2008 to 2013. These mothers were invited to participate in a telephone interview regarding post-partum hepatitis B virus (HBV) care and infant vaccination status. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was utilised to identify the predictors for engagement with specialist HBV care, timely administration of IPT, completion of HBV vaccination schedule and serological testing of the baby. RESULTS: A total of 451 CHB mothers delivered 454 live births. HBV immunoglobulin (HBIg) was dispensed within 12 h in 79.52% of births. HBIg was not administered to eight neonates. Of the 451 women, 125 were interviewed: 88.8% of babies completed the vaccine schedule, and 19.2% of infants had post-vaccination testing. Antenatal HBV care was independently associated with a greater likelihood of timely HBIg administration (odds ratio 1.64, P = 0.04, 95% CI: 1.03-2.61). There were no significant predictors for engagement with specialist HBV care, vaccine coverage or serological testing of the baby. CONCLUSION: Targeted interventions to improve timely HBIg and completion of the vaccine schedule are recommended. All pregnant women with CHB should be referred for HBV-specific antenatal care regardless of viral replicative status.

Factors influencing the participation of gastroenterologists and hepatologists in clinical research.

BACKGROUND: Although clinical research is integral to the advancement of medical knowledge, physicians face a variety of obstacles to their participation as investigators in clinical trials. We examined factors that influence the participation of gastroenterologists and hepatologists in clinical research. METHODS: We surveyed 1050 members of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases regarding their participation in clinical research. We compared the survey responses by specialty and level of clinical trial experience. RESULTS: A majority of the respondents (71.6%) reported involvement in research activities. Factors most influential in clinical trial participation included funding and compensation (88.3%) and intellectual pursuit (87.8%). Barriers to participation were similar between gastroenterologists (n = 160) and hepatologists (n = 189) and between highly experienced (n = 62) and less experienced (n = 159) clinical researchers. These barriers included uncompensated research costs and lack of specialized support. Industry marketing was a greater influence among respondents with less trial experience, compared to those with extensive experience (15.7% vs 1.6%; P < .01). Hepatologists and respondents with extensive clinical trial experience tended to be more interested in phase 1 and 2 studies, whereas gastroenterologists and less experienced investigators were more interested in phase 4 studies. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the greatest barrier to participation in clinical research is lack of adequate resources. Respondents also favored industry-sponsored research with less complex trial protocols and studies of relatively short duration.

Future trends in managing hepatitis C.

Despite recent improvements in the treatment of patients who have chronic hepatitis C, a large proportion of patients do not achieve viral clearance. Treatment regimens are also costly, associated with significant morbidity, require substantial patient commitment, and are not appropriate for all patients. Therefore, it is important to maximize and enhance current therapeutic approaches and to investigate new approaches and therapies. Because the ability to maintain adherence to current treatment is associated with higher sustained virologic response rates (particularly in patients infected with genotype 1), strategies directed at patients and support staff to promote treatment adherence are important. Other strategies to enhance current therapy include alternative interferons (IFNs)/cytokines and new IFN delivery systems. Current therapy may also be enhanced by new ribavirin (RBV) analogs with an improved safety profile or by the addition of other immunomodulatory agents such as inosine 5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase inhibitors, histamine dihydrochloride, thymosin alfa 1, and amantadine. Some of these agents have demonstrated promising results, although further evaluation is required. Greater knowledge of the molecular biology of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) holds promise for the development of targeted therapies such as specific inhibitors of HCV polymerase, protease, or helicase, as well as therapeutic vaccines. Other potential molecular-based therapies include antisense oligonucleotides, ribozymes, and short interfering ribonucleic acid (RNA) molecules. Therapies aimed at reducing or preventing the development of fibrosis are also under investigation. Multiple-drug regimens will likely be required to enhance viral clearance and reduce viral resistance, while providing greater tolerability.

Southeast Asian patients with chronic hepatitis C: the impact of novel genotypes and race on treatment outcome.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype and other host and viral factors influence treatment outcome in chronic HCV infection. We evaluated the effect of race and genotype on interferon and ribavirin treatment outcome in 70 Southeast Asian (SEA) and 50 white patients. Genotype was based on the 5' untranslated region (5'UTR) with a commonly used line probe assay (INNO-LiPA HCV II) that may mistype genotype 7, 8, or 9 as 1b. HCV core region sequencing resulted in reclassification of 8 genotype 1 and 25 genotype 1b SEA subjects as genotype 7, 8, or 9. Twenty-six SEA genotype 7, 8, and 9 (79%) and 10 SEA true genotype 1b (59%) patients achieved a sustained virologic response (SVR) compared with 15 (34%) white genotype 1b patients. Logistic regression analysis showed that SEA patients with genotype 7, 8, or 9 were more likely to achieve a SVR than white genotype 1b patients (OR 16.56; 95%CI 4.16, 65.91) as were SEA true genotype 1b patients compared with white genotype 1b patients (OR 4.63; 95%CI 1.19, 18.04). In conclusion, a proportion of SEA patients classified by INNO-LiPA as genotype 1b were in reality genotype 7, 8, or 9. In comparison with white genotype 1b patients, both SEA genotype 1b and SEA genotype 7, 8, and 9 patients showed a significantly greater SVR. HCV core sequencing was necessary to determine genotype accurately in persons potentially exposed to HCV genotypes 7, 8, or 9. This study also supports the concept that race and ethnicity are important determinants of treatment outcome in HCV infected patients.