Multicentre, prospective, randomised study comparing the diagnostic yield of colon capsule endoscopy versus CT colonography in a screening population (the TOPAZ study).

OBJECTIVE: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has shown promise for colorectal neoplasia detection compared with optical colonoscopy (OC), but has not been compared with other screening tests in average risk screening patients. DESIGN: Patients 50 to 75 years of age (African Americans, 45-75 years) were randomised to CCE or CT colonography (CTC) and subsequent blinded OC. The primary endpoint was diagnostic yield of polyps ≥6 mm with CCE or CTC. Secondary endpoints included accuracy for size and histology, examination completeness, number/proportion of subjects with polyps and adenomas ≥6 mm and ≥10 mm, subject satisfaction and safety. RESULTS: From 320 enrolled subjects, data from 286 (89.4%) were evaluable. The proportion of subjects with any polyp ≥6 mm confirmed by OC was 31.6% for CCE versus 8.6% for CTC (pPr non-inferiority and superiority=0.999). The diagnostic yield of polyps ≥10 mm was 13.5% with CCE versus 6.3% with CTC (pPr non-inferiority=0.9954). The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥6 mm was 79.2% and 96.3% while that of CTC was 26.8% and 98.9%. The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥10 mm was 85.7% and 98.2% compared with 50% and 99.1% for CTC. Both tests were well tolerated/safe. CONCLUSION: CCE was superior to CTC for detection of polyps ≥6 mm and non-inferior for identification of polyps ≥10 mm. CCE should be considered comparable or superior to CTC as a colorectal neoplasia screening test, although neither test is as effective as OC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02754661.

Multicenter, randomized study to optimize bowel preparation for colon capsule endoscopy.

AIM: To assess the cleansing efficacy and safety of a new Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) bowel preparation regimen. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing two CCE regimens. Subjects were asymptomatic and average risk for colorectal cancer. The second generation CCE system (PillCam® COLON 2; Medtronic, Yoqneam, Israel) was utilized. Preparation regimens differed in the 1st and 2nd boosts with the Study regimen using oral sulfate solution (89 mL) with diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium solution ("diatrizoate solution") (boost 1 = 60 mL, boost 2 = 30 mL) and the Control regimen oral sulfate solution (89 mL) alone. The primary outcome was overall and segmental colon cleansing. Secondary outcomes included safety, polyp detection, colonic transit, CCE completion and capsule excretion ≤ 12 h. RESULTS: Both regimens had similar cleansing efficacy for the whole colon (Adequate: Study = 75.9%, Control = 77.3%; P = 0.88) and individual segments. In the Study group, CCE completion was superior (Study = 90.9%, Control = 76.9%; P = 0.048) and colonic transit was more often < 40 min (Study = 21.8%, Control = 4%; P = 0.0073). More Study regimen subjects experienced adverse events (Study = 19.4%, Control = 3.4%; P = 0.0061), and this difference did not appear related to diatrizoate solution. Adverse events were primarily gastrointestinal in nature and no serious adverse events related either to the bowel preparation regimen or the capsule were observed. There was a trend toward higher polyp detection with the Study regimen, but this did not achieve statistical significance for any size category. Mean transit time through the entire gastrointestinal tract, from ingestion to excretion, was shorter with the Study regimen while mean colonic transit times were similar for both study groups. CONCLUSION: A CCE bowel preparation regimen using oral sulfate solution and diatrizoate solution as a boost agent is effective, safe, and achieved superior CCE completion.

Efficacy of Sofosbuvir, Velpatasvir, and GS-9857 in Patients With Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 2, 3, 4, or 6 Infections in an Open-Label, Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Studies are needed to determine the optimal regimen for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 2, 3, 4, or 6 infections whose prior course of antiviral therapy has failed, and the feasibility of shortening treatment duration. We performed a phase 2 study to determine 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 these patients. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, open-label trial at 32 sites in the United States and 2 sites in New Zealand from March 3, 2015 to April 27, 2015. Our study included 128 treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients (1 with HCV genotype 1b; 33 with HCV genotype 2; 74 with HCV genotype 3; 17 with genotype HCV 4; and 3 with HCV genotype 6), with or without compensated cirrhosis. All patients received sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (400 mg/100 mg fixed-dose combination tablet) and GS-9857 (100 mg) once daily for 6-12 weeks. The primary end point was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12). RESULTS: After 6 weeks of treatment, SVR12s were achieved by 88% of treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis (29 of 33; 95% confidence interval, 72%-97%). After 8 weeks of treatment, SVR12s were achieved by 93% of treatment-naïve patients with cirrhosis (28 of 30; 95% CI, 78%-99%). After 12 weeks of treatment, SVR12s were achieved by all treatment-experienced patients without cirrhosis (36 of 36; 95% CI, 90%-100%) and 97% of treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis (28 of 29; 95% CI, 82%-100%). The most common adverse events were headache, diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea. Three patients (1%) discontinued treatment due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 open-label trial, we found sofosbuvir-velpatasvir plus GS-9857 (8 weeks in treatment-naïve patients or 12 weeks in treatment-experienced patients) to be safe and effective for patients with HCV genotype 2, 3, 4, or 6 infections, with or without compensated cirrhosis. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02378961.

Safety and tolerability of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with and without ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection: Analysis of phase III ION trials.

UNLABELLED: In phase III studies, treatment with the once-daily fixed-dose combination tablet of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) with and without ribavirin (RBV) resulted in high rates of sustained virological response (SVR) in patients chronically infected with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus, including those with compensated cirrhosis. We conducted an analysis of data from these trials to compare the safety and tolerability profile of LDV-SOF with and without RBV. We analyzed treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and laboratory abnormalities in patients who were randomized to 8, 12, and 24 weeks of LDV/SOF with or without RBV. In total, data from 1,952 patients (of whom 872 received LDV/SOF with RBV and 1,080 received LDV/SOF alone) were analyzed. Overall, 308 patients (16%) were African American, 224 (11%) had compensated cirrhosis, 501 (26%) had a body mass index ≥30 kg/m(2) , and 440 (23%) were treatment experienced. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 71% and 45% of patients treated with and without RBV, respectively, including fatigue, insomnia, irritability, and rash/pruritus. Patients receiving RBV with LDV/SOF were more likely to require dose modification, interruptions of treatment resulting from AEs, or require the use of concomitant medications than those receiving LDV/SOF alone. Rates of treatment-related serious AEs and discontinuations resulting from AEs were similarly low (<1%) in both groups. The rate of SVR in those receiving RBV and those not receiving RBV was the same (97%). CONCLUSION: LDV/SOF plus RBV was associated with a greater incidence of AEs as well as concomitant medication use than LDV/SOF alone. Use of RBV did not impact the efficacy of LDV/SOF regimens in the ION phase III studies.

Ledipasvir and sofosbuvir for 8 or 12 weeks for chronic HCV without cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: High rates of sustained virologic response were observed among patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection who received 12 weeks of treatment with the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir combined with the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir. This study examined 8 weeks of treatment with this regimen. METHODS: In this phase 3, open-label study, we randomly assigned 647 previously untreated patients with HCV genotype 1 infection without cirrhosis to receive ledipasvir and sofosbuvir (ledipasvir-sofosbuvir) for 8 weeks, ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 8 weeks, or ledipasvir-sofosbuvir for 12 weeks. The primary end point was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy. RESULTS: The rate of sustained virologic response was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90 to 97) with 8 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir, 93% (95% CI, 89 to 96) with 8 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin, and 95% (95% CI, 92 to 98) with 12 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir. As compared with the rate of sustained virologic response in the group that received 8 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir, the rate in the 12-week group was 1 percentage point higher (97.5% CI, -4 to 6) and the rate in the group that received 8 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir with ribavirin was 1 percentage point lower (95% CI, -6 to 4); these results indicated noninferiority of the 8-week ledipasvir-sofosbuvir regimen, on the basis of a noninferiority margin of 12 percentage points. Adverse events were more common in the group that received ribavirin than in the other two groups. No patient who received 8 weeks of only ledipasvir-sofosbuvir discontinued treatment owing to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Ledipasvir-sofosbuvir for 8 weeks was associated with a high rate of sustained virologic response among previously untreated patients with HCV genotype 1 infection without cirrhosis. No additional benefit was associated with the inclusion of ribavirin in the regimen or with extension of the duration of treatment to 12 weeks. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ION-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01851330.).

Resistance-associated amino acid variants associated with boceprevir plus pegylated interferon-α2b and ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C in the SPRINT-1 trial.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to direct-acting antivirals represents a new challenge in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. METHODS: SPRINT-1 was a randomized study of treatment-naive patients with genotype (G) 1 hepatitis C infection (n=595) that evaluated the safety and efficacy of boceprevir (BOC) when added to pegylated interferon-α2b plus ribavirin (PR). Plasma samples collected at protocol-specified visits were analysed by population sequencing for detection of BOC-associated resistance-associated variants (RAVs). RESULTS: A total of 17/24 (71%) patients randomized to BOC with baseline RAVs achieved sustained virological response (SVR). V55A/I (n=14), Q41H (n=11) and T54S (n=9) were the most frequently detected polymorphisms at baseline. Seven non-SVR patients with baseline RAVs had V55A (relapse, n=3; breakthrough, n=1; and non-response, n=1) and/or R155K (non-response, n=2). In total, 63/144 (44%) patients with sequenced post-baseline samples (2 SVR, 61 non-SVR) had detectable RAVs after BOC treatment (G1a: R155K [39/49; 80%], V36M [37/49; 76%] and T54S [24/49; 49%]; G1b: T54S [3/11; 27%], T54A [4/11; 35%], A156S [2/11; 18%] and V170A [2/11; 18%]). RAV frequency varied according to the virological response: 90%, 67%, 27% and 37% of breakthrough, incomplete virological response, relapse and non-responder patients, respectively, had post-baseline RAVs present. Similar RAVs were identified in both the PR lead-in and no-lead-in arms and the frequency of post-baseline RAVs was highest in the low-dose ribavirin arm. CONCLUSIONS: SVR rates were not compromised among patients with RAVs at baseline; however, a lower starting mg/kg dose of ribavirin was associated with a higher frequency of post-baseline RAVs.

Efficacy of boceprevir, an NS3 protease inhibitor, in combination with peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin in treatment-naive patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C infection (SPRINT-1): an open-label, randomised, multicentre phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Peginterferon plus ribavirin achieves sustained virological response (SVR) in fewer than half of patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C virus infection treated for 48 weeks. We tested the efficacy of boceprevir, an NS3 hepatitis C virus oral protease inhibitor, when added to peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin. METHODS: In part 1 of this trial, undertaken in 67 sites in the USA, Canada, and Europe, 520 treatment-naive patients with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus infection were randomly assigned to receive peginterferon alfa-2b 1.5 mug/kg plus ribavirin 800-1400 mg daily for 48 weeks (PR48; n=104); peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin daily for 4 weeks, followed by peginterferon alfa-2b, ribavirin, and boceprevir 800 mg three times a day for 24 weeks (PR4/PRB24; n=103) or 44 weeks (PR4/PRB44; n=103); or peginterferon alfa-2b, ribavirin, and boceprevir three times a day for 28 weeks (PRB28; n=107) or 48 weeks (PRB48; n=103). In part 2, 75 patients were randomly assigned to receive either PRB48 (n=16) or low-dose ribavirin (400-1000 mg) plus peginterferon alfa-2b and boceprevir three times a day for 48 weeks (low-dose PRB48; n=59). Randomisation was by computer-generated code, and study personnel and patients were not masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was SVR 24 weeks after treatment. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00423670. FINDINGS: Patients in all four boceprevir groups had higher rates of SVR than did the control group (58/107 [54%, 95% CI 44-64], p=0.013 for PRB28; 58/103 [56%, 44-66], p=0.005 for PR4/PRB24; 69/103 [67%, 57-76], p<0.0001 for PRB48; and 77/103 [75%, 65-83], p<0.0001 for PR4/PRB44; vs 39/104 [38%, 28-48] for PR48 control). Low-dose ribavirin was associated with a high rate of viral breakthrough (16/59 [27%]), and a rate of relapse (six of 27 [22%]) similar to control (12/51 [24%]). Boceprevir-based groups had higher rates of anaemia (227/416 [55%] vs 35/104 [34%]) and dysgeusia (111/416 [27%] vs nine of 104 [9%]) than did the control group. INTERPRETATION: In patients with untreated genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C infection, the addition of the direct-acting antiviral agent boceprevir to standard treatment with peginterferon and ribavirin after a 4-week lead-in seems to have the potential to double the sustained response rate compared with that recorded with standard treatment alone. FUNDING: Merck.

Peginterferon alfa-2b and weight-based or flat-dose ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C patients: a randomized trial.

UNLABELLED: This prospective, multicenter, community-based and academic-based, open-label, investigator-initiated, U.S. study evaluated efficacy and safety of pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) alfa-2b plus a flat or weight-based dose of ribavirin (RBV) in adults with chronic hepatitis C. Patients (n = 5027) were randomly assigned to receive PEG-IFN alfa-2b 1.5 microg/kg/week plus flat-dose (800 mg/day) or weight-based (800-1400 mg/day) RBV for 48 weeks (patients with genotype 1, 4, 5, or 6) and for 24 or 48 weeks (genotype 2/3 patients). Primary end point was sustained virologic response (undetectable [<125 IU/mL] serum hepatitis C virus RNA at 24-week follow-up). Sustained virologic response, but not end-of-treatment, rates were significantly higher with weight-based than with flat-dose RBV (44.2% versus 40.5%; P = 0.008). Sustained virologic response rates by intention-to-treat analysis were 34.0% and 28.9%, respectively, in genotype 1 patients (P = 0.005) and 31.2% and 26.7%, respectively, in genotype 1 patients with high baseline viral load (P = 0.056). In genotype 2/3 patients, rates were not significantly different (61.8% and 59.5%, respectively) regardless of treatment duration. Besides greater hemoglobin reductions with weight-based RBV, safety profiles were similar across RBV dosing groups, including the 1400-mg/day group. CONCLUSION: PEG-IFN alfa-2b plus weight-based RBV is more effective than flat-dose RBV, particularly in genotype 1 patients, providing equivalent efficacy across all weight groups. RBV 1400 mg/day is appropriate for patients 105 to 125 kg. For genotype 2/3 patients, 24 weeks of treatment with flat-dose RBV is adequate; no evidence of additional benefit of extending treatment to 48 weeks was demonstrated.

Diagnóstico serológico de la hepatitis viral / Serologic diagnosis of viral hepatitis

Las pruebas serológicas son el método más preciso para identificar la causa viral de una hepatopatía y para distinguir entre las diferentes formas de hepatitis viral. Aunque algunas características de la hepatitis viral tales como la vía de transmisión y el período de incubación pueden ayudar en el diagnóstico diferencial, rara vez son suficientes para establecer el diagnóstico definitivo. Los exámenes de laboratorio o la biopsia hepática a veces permite diferenciar entre las formas de hepatopatía, pero por lo general tampoco identifican la forma de hepatitis viral presente. No obstante, en pacientes con hepatitis crónica, la biopsia de hígado a menudo sirve para determinar la severidad de la enfermedad, establecer el pronóstico y, en algunos casos, orientar la terapia entiviral.