Adherence in Hepatitis C Virus Treatment: What We Know.

Although therapy with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents achieves high hepatitis C virus (HCV) cure rates and is forgiving of missed doses, certain patient populations, such as people who inject drugs (PWID), are often denied therapy because of a perceived high risk of nonadherence. However, a relationship between adherence to DAAs for various patient populations and efficacy has not been well defined. The lack of a standardized method for evaluating adherence complicates making comparisons between studies, making it difficult to develop and implement novel measures that may improve adherent behavior. Traditional methods for assessing adherence may overestimate medication adherence, while newer, technology-based methods may assist with accurately assessing and maintaining patient adherence to therapy. Data demonstrate that special populations of patients with HCV, such as PWID, can be successfully treated, with relatively high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) despite less-than-optimal adherence. While rates of adherence, and subsequently SVR, can be improved, antiviral therapy should not be withheld because of fear of nonadherence. This article addresses medication adherence and forgiveness of DAA regimens, such as sofosbuvir/velpatasvir and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir, in different patient populations with HCV. Considerations in evaluating adherence in HCV therapy and available methods for assessing adherence are detailed.

Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Efficacy Signals of Larsucosterol (DUR-928) in Alcohol-Associated Hepatitis.

INTRODUCTION: This study is to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of larsucosterol (DUR-928 or 25HC3S) in subjects with alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH), a devastating acute illness without US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies. METHODS: This phase 2a, multicenter, open-label, dose escalation study evaluated the safety, PK, and efficacy signals of larsucosterol in 19 clinically diagnosed subjects with AH. Based on the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, 7 subjects were considered to have moderate AH and 12 to have severe AH. All subjects received 1 or 2 intravenous infusions (72 hours apart) of larsucosterol at a dose of 30, 90, or 150 mg and were followed up for 28 days. Efficacy signals from a subgroup of subjects with severe AH were compared with those from 2 matched arms of those with severe AH treated with standard of care (SOC), including corticosteroids, from a contemporaneous study. RESULTS: All 19 larsucosterol-treated subjects survived the 28-day study. Fourteen (74%) of all subjects including 8 (67%) of the subjects with severe AH were discharged ≤72 hours after receiving a single infusion. There were no drug-related serious adverse events nor early terminations due to the treatment. PK profiles were not affected by disease severity. Biochemical parameters improved in most subjects. Serum bilirubin levels declined notably from baseline to day 7 and day 28, and MELD scores were reduced at day 28. The efficacy signals compared favorably with those from 2 matched groups treated with SOC. Lille scores at day 7 were <0.45 in 16 of the 18 (89%) subjects with day 7 samples. Lille scores from 8 subjects with severe AH who received 30 or 90 mg larsucosterol (doses used in phase 2b trial) were statistically significantly lower ( P < 0.01) than those from subjects with severe AH treated with SOC from the contemporaneous study. DISCUSSION: Larsucosterol was well tolerated at all 3 doses in subjects with AH without safety concerns. Data from this pilot study showed promising efficacy signals in subjects with AH. Larsucosterol is being evaluated in a phase 2b multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled (AHFIRM) trial.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Evaluation and Management of Acute Kidney Injury in Patients With Cirrhosis: Expert Review.

DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update is to review the available published evidence and expert advice regarding the clinical management of patients with suspected acute kidney injury in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: This article provides practical advice for the management of patients with cirrhosis and acute kidney injury based on the best available published evidence. This best practice document is not based on a formal systematic review. This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through the standard procedures of Clinical Gastroenterology & Hepatology. These Best Practice Advice (BPA) statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Since systematic reviews were not performed, these BPA statements do not carry formal ratings of the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Acute kidney injury (AKI) should be diagnosed when the serum creatinine increases by ≥0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours or is ≥50% from baseline or when the urine output is reduced below 0.5 mL/kg/h for >6 hours. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Preventive measures against the development of AKI in cirrhosis include (1) avoidance of potentially nephrotoxic medications like nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), (2) avoidance of excessive or unmonitored diuretics or nonselective beta-blockade, (3) avoidance of large-volume paracentesis without albumin replacement, and (4) counseling patients to avoid alcohol use. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: (A) Investigation is directed to determining the cause of AKI, which can be due to hypovolemic causes (volume responsive, and the most common cause of AKI in patients with cirrhosis); acute tubular necrosis; hepatorenal syndrome with AKI (HRS-AKI) (a functional renal failure that persists despite volume repletion); HRS with acute kidney disease, a type of functional renal failure of <3 months- duration in which criteria for HRS-AKI are not met; or postrenal, which occurs only rarely. (B) The specific type of AKI should be identified through a careful history, physical examination, blood biochemistry, urine microscopic examination, urine chemistry (Na+ and urea) and selected urinary biomarkers, and renal ultrasound. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: A rigorous search for infection is required in all patients with AKI. A diagnostic paracentesis should be carried out to evaluate for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis; blood and urine cultures and chest radiograph are also required. There is no role for routine prophylactic antibiotics in patients with AKI, but broad-spectrum antibiotics should be started whenever infection is strongly suspected. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: When AKI is diagnosed, diuretics and nonselective beta-blockers should be held, NSAIDs discontinued, the precipitating cause of AKI treated, and fluid losses replaced, administering albumin 1 g/kg/d for 2 days if the serum creatinine shows doubling from baseline. Urine output, vital signs, and when indicated, echocardiography or CVP (if there is a pre-existing central line) should be used to monitor fluid status. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: When the serum creatinine remains higher than twice the baseline value despite these measures, treatment of HRS-AKI should be initiated with albumin at a dose of 1 g/kg intravenously on day 1 followed by 20-40 g daily along with vasoactive agents (terlipressin; if terlipressin is not available, either a combination of octreotide and midodrine; or norepinephrine, depending on institutional preferences) and continued either until 24 hours following the return of the serum creatinine level to within ≤0.3 mg/dL of baseline for 2 consecutive days or for a total of 14 days of therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Terlipressin should be initiated as a bolus dose of 1 mg every 4-6 hours (total 4-6 mg/d). The dose should be increased to a maximum of 2 mg every 4-6 hours (total 8-12 mg/d) if there is no reduction in serum creatinine at day 3 of therapy by at least 25% compared to the baseline value. Alternatively, clinicians can administer terlipressin by continuous intravenous infusion at a lower starting dose of 2 mg/d, which may reduce ischemic side effects and increase the dose gradually every 24-48 hours up to a maximum dose of 12 mg/d, or reversal of HRS. As per Food and Drug Administration restrictions, terlipressin should not be used in patients with a serum creatinine ≥5 mg/dL, or oxygen saturation of <90%. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Oral midodrine when used should be initiated at doses of 7.5 mg and titrated upward to 12.5 mg 3 times daily with octreotide (starting with 100 µg and titrating upward to 200 µg subcutaneously 3 times daily). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Norepinephrine should be used as a continuous intravenous infusion at a starting dose of 0.5 mg/h and the dose increased every 4 hours by 0.5 mg/h to a maximum of 3 mg/h with the goal of increasing the mean arterial pressure by ≥10 mm Hg and/or the urine output to >50 mL/h for at least 4 hours. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: The risks of ischemic side effects of terlipressin and norepinephrine include angina and ischemia of fingers, skin, and intestine. These side effects may be lowered by starting at the lowest dose and gradually titrating upward. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Fluid status should be closely monitored because of the risk of pulmonary edema with excessive use of albumin. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Renal replacement therapy (RRT) may be used in the management of (A) AKI secondary to acute tubular necrosis; (B) HRS-AKI in potential candidates for liver transplantation (that is, RRT should not be used in patients with HRS-AKI who are not candidates for liver transplantation); and (C) AKI of uncertain etiology in which the need for RRT may be considered on an individual basis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts should not be used as a specific treatment of HRS-AKI. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Liver transplantation is the most effective treatment for HRS-AKI. Pharmacotherapy for HRS-AKI before proceeding with liver transplantation may be associated with better post-liver transplantation outcomes. Selected patients with HRS-AKI may require simultaneous liver kidney transplantation based on updated Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network listing criteria.

Liver Transplantation Following Yttrium-90 Radioembolization: 15-Year Experience in 207-Patient Cohort.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Radioembolization (yttrium-90 [Y90]) is used in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as a bridging as well as downstaging liver-directed therapy to curative liver transplantation (LT). In this study, we report long-term outcomes of LT for patients with HCC who were bridged/downstaged by Y90. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Patients undergoing LT following Y90 between 2004 and 2018 were included, with staging by United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) tumor-node-metastasis criteria at baseline pre-Y90 and pre-LT. Post-Y90 toxicities were recorded. Histopathological data of HCC at explant were recorded. Long-term outcomes, including overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), disease-specific mortality (DSM), and time-to-recurrence, were reported. Time-to-endpoint analyses were estimated using Kaplan-Meier. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using a log-rank test and Cox proportional-hazards model, respectively. During the 15-year period, 207 patients underwent LT after Y90. OS from LT was 12.5 years, with a median time to LT of 7.5 months [interquartile range, 4.4-10.3]. A total of 169 patients were bridged, whereas 38 were downstaged to LT. Respectively, 94 (45%), 60 (29%), and 53 (26%) patients showed complete, extensive, and partial tumor necrosis on histopathology. Three-year, 5-year, and 10-year OS rates were 84%, 77%, and 60%, respectively. Twenty-four patients developed recurrence, with a median RFS of 120 (95% confidence interval, 69-150) months. DSM at 3, 5, and 10 years was 6%, 11%, and 16%, respectively. There were no differences in OS/RFS for patients who were bridged or downstaged. RFS was higher in patients with complete/extensive versus partial tumor necrosis (P < 0.0001). For patients with UNOS T2 treated during the study period, 5.2% dropped out because of disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: Y90 is an effective treatment for HCC in the setting of bridging/downstaging to LT. Patients who achieved extensive or complete necrosis had better RFS, supporting the practice of neoadjuvant treatment before LT.

Glecaprevir-Pibrentasvir for 8 or 12 Weeks in HCV Genotype 1 or 3 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Glecaprevir and pibrentasvir are direct-acting antiviral agents with pangenotypic activity and a high barrier to resistance. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of 8-week and 12-week courses of treatment with 300 mg of glecaprevir plus 120 mg of pibrentasvir in patients without cirrhosis who had hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 or 3 infection. METHODS: We conducted two phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter trials. Patients with genotype 1 infection were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive once-daily glecaprevir-pibrentasvir for either 8 or 12 weeks. Patients with genotype 3 infection were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive 12 weeks of treatment with either glecaprevir-pibrentasvir or sofosbuvir-daclatasvir. Additional patients with genotype 3 infection were subsequently enrolled and nonrandomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of treatment with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir. The primary end point was the rate of sustained virologic response 12 weeks after the end of treatment. RESULTS: In total, 1208 patients were treated. The rate of sustained virologic response at 12 weeks among genotype 1-infected patients was 99.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 98 to 100) in the 8-week group and 99.7% (95% CI, 99 to 100) in the 12-week group. Genotype 3-infected patients who were treated for 12 weeks had a rate of sustained virologic response at 12 weeks of 95% (95% CI, 93 to 98; 222 of 233 patients) with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir and 97% (95% CI, 93 to 99.9; 111 of 115) with sofosbuvir-daclatasvir; 8 weeks of treatment with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir yielded a rate of 95% (95% CI, 91 to 98; 149 of 157 patients). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in no more than 1% of patients in any treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily treatment with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir for either 8 weeks or 12 weeks achieved high rates of sustained virologic response among patients with HCV genotype 1 or 3 infection who did not have cirrhosis. (Funded by AbbVie; ENDURANCE-1 and ENDURANCE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02604017 and NCT02640157 .).

The Current Management of Hepatorenal Syndrome-Acute Kidney Injury in the United States and the Potential of Terlipressin.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) in the setting of cirrhosis (hepatorenal syndrome [HRS]-AKI) is a severe and often fatal complication of end-stage liver disease. The goals of treatment are to reverse renal failure and prolong survival in patients who are critically ill. However, interventions have limited efficacy, and mortality rates remain high. In the United States, the mainstay of pharmacologic therapy consists of the off-label use of vasoconstrictive agents in combination with plasma expanders, a strategy that produces modest effects. Liver transplantation is the ultimate solution but is only an option in a minority of patients because contraindications to transplantation are common and organ availability is limited. Renal replacement therapy is a temporary option but is known to confer an extremely poor short-term prognosis in patients with HRS-AKI and at best serves as a bridge to liver transplantation for the minority of patients who are transplantation candidates. The high mortality rate associated with HRS-AKI in the United States is a reflection of the suboptimal standard of care. Improved therapeutic options to treat HRS-AKI are sought. Terlipressin is a drug approved in Europe for treatment of HRS-AKI and supported by recommendations for first-line therapy by some liver societies and experts around the world. This review article will discuss the substantial unmet medical need associated with HRS-AKI and the potential benefits if terlipressin was approved in the United States.

Safety and Efficacy of Segmental Yttrium-90 Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of segmental yttrium-90 (Y90) radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement. The hypothesis was liver sparing segmental Y90 for HCC after TIPS would provide high antitumor response with a tolerable safety profile. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-arm retrospective study included 39 patients (16 women, 23 men) with ages 49-81 years old who were treated with Y90. Child-Pugh A/B liver dysfunction was present in 72% (28/39) with a median Model for End-stage Liver Disease score of 18 (95% confidence interval, 16.4-19.4). Primary outcomes were clinical and biochemical toxicities and antitumor imaging response by World Health Organization (WHO) and European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) criteria. Secondary outcomes were orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS) estimates by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: The 30-day mortality was 0%. Grade 3+ clinical adverse events and grade 3+ hyperbilirubinemia occurred in 5% (2/39) and 0% (0/39), respectively. Imaging response was achieved in 58% (22/38, WHO criteria) and 74% (28/38, EASL criteria), respectively. Median TTP was 16.1 months for any cause and 27.5 months for primary index lesions. OLT was completed in 88% (21/24) of listed patients at a median time of 6.1 months (range, 0.9-11.7 months). Median OS was 31.6 months and 62.9 months censored and uncensored to OLT, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Segmental Y90 for HCC appears safe and efficacious in patients after TIPS. Preserved transplant eligibility suggests that Y90 is a useful tool for bridging these patients to liver transplantation.

Sofosbuvir, Velpatasvir, and Voxilaprevir for Previously Treated HCV Infection.

BACKGROUND: Patients who are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and who do not have a sustained virologic response after treatment with regimens containing direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have limited retreatment options. METHODS: We conducted two phase 3 trials involving patients who had been previously treated with a DAA-containing regimen. In POLARIS-1, patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had previously received a regimen containing an NS5A inhibitor were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir, and the protease inhibitor voxilaprevir (150 patients) or matching placebo (150 patients) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients who were infected with HCV of other genotypes (114 patients) were enrolled in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir group. In POLARIS-4, patients with HCV genotype 1, 2, or 3 infection who had previously received a DAA regimen but not an NS5A inhibitor were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir (163 patients) or sofosbuvir-velpatasvir (151 patients) for 12 weeks. An additional 19 patients with HCV genotype 4 infection were enrolled in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir group. RESULTS: In the three active-treatment groups, 46% of the patients had compensated cirrhosis. In POLARIS-1, the rate of sustained virologic response was 96% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir, as compared with 0% with placebo. In POLARIS-4, the rate of response was 98% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir and 90% with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir. The most common adverse events were headache, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. In the active-treatment groups in both trials, the percentage of patients who discontinued treatment owing to adverse events was 1% or lower. CONCLUSIONS: Sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir taken for 12 weeks provided high rates of sustained virologic response among patients across HCV genotypes in whom treatment with a DAA regimen had previously failed. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; POLARIS-1 and POLARIS-4 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02607735 and NCT02639247 .).

Efficacy and Pharmacokinetics of Glecaprevir and Pibrentasvir With Concurrent Use of Acid-Reducing Agents in Patients With Chronic HCV Infection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly prescribed to treat acid-related disorders. Some direct-acting antiviral regimens for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have reduced efficacy in patients taking concomitant acid-reducing agents, including PPIs, due to interactions between drugs. We analyzed data from 9 multicenter, phase 2 and 3 trials to determine the efficacy and pharmacokinetics of an HCV therapeutic regimen comprising glecaprevir and pibrentasvir (glecaprevir/pibrentasvir) in patients taking concomitant acid-reducing agents. METHODS: We analyzed data from 2369 patients infected with HCV genotypes 1-6 and compensated liver disease treated with an all-oral regimen of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for 8-16 weeks. We compared efficacy and pharmacokinetics among patients receiving at least 1 dose of an acid-reducing agent (a PPI, an H2 blocker, or antacid). High-dose PPI was defined as daily dose greater than 20 mg omeprazole dose equivalent. The objectives were to evaluate rate of sustained virologic response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12) and to assess steady-state glecaprevir and pibrentasvir exposures in patients on acid-reducing agents. RESULTS: Of the 401 patients (17%) who reported use of acid-reducing agents, 263 took PPIs (11%; 109 patients took a high-dose PPI and 154 patients took a low-dose PPI). Rates of SVR12 were 97.0% among patients who used acid-reducing agents and 97.5% among those not using acid-reducing agents (P = .6). An SVR12 was achieved in 96.3% taking a high-dose PPI and 97.4% taking a low-dose PPI, with no virologic failures in those receiving a high-dose PPI (P = .7). Glecaprevir, but not pibrentasvir, bioavailability was affected; its exposure decreased by 41% in patients taking a high-dose PPI. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from 9 clinical trials, we observed a high rate of SVR12 (approximately 97%) among patients treated with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for HCV infection-even among patients taking concomitant ARA or high-dose PPI. This was despite decreased glecaprevir exposures in patients when on high-dose PPIs. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02243280 (SURVEYOR-I), NCT02243293 (SURVEYOR-II), NCT02604017 (ENDURANCE-1), NCT02640482 (ENDURANCE-2), NCT02640157 (ENDURANCE-3), NCT02636595 (ENDURANCE-4), NCT02642432 (EXPEDITION-1), NCT02651194 (EXPEDITION-4), NCT02446717 (MAGELLAN-I).

Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir in patients with chronic HCV genotype 3 infection: An integrated phase 2/3 analysis.

Glecaprevir coformulated with pibrentasvir (G/P) is approved to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and was highly efficacious in phase 2 and 3 studies. Treating HCV genotype (GT) 3 infection remains a priority, as these patients are harder to cure and at a greater risk for liver steatosis, fibrosis progression and hepatocellular carcinoma. Data were pooled from five phase 2 or 3 trials that evaluated 8-, 12- and 16-week G/P in patients with chronic HCV GT3 infection. Patients without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis were either treatment-naïve or experienced with interferon- or sofosbuvir-based regimens. Safety and sustained virologic response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12) were assessed. The analysis included 693 patients with GT3 infection. SVR12 was achieved by 95% of treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis receiving 8-week (198/208) and 12-week (280/294) G/P. Treatment-naïve patients with cirrhosis had a 97% (67/69) SVR12 rate with 12-week G/P. Treatment-experienced, noncirrhotic patients had SVR12 rates of 90% (44/49) and 95% (21/22) with 12- and 16-week G/P, respectively; 94% (48/51) of treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis treated for 16 weeks achieved SVR12. No serious adverse events (AEs) were attributed to G/P; AEs leading to study drug discontinuation were rare (<1%). G/P was well-tolerated and efficacious for patients with chronic HCV GT3 infection, regardless of cirrhosis status or prior treatment experience. Eight- and 12-week durations were efficacious for treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis and with compensated cirrhosis, respectively; 16-week G/P was efficacious in patients with prior treatment experience irrespective of cirrhosis status.

Institutional decision to adopt Y90 as primary treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma informed by a 1,000-patient 15-year experience.

Yttrium-90 transarterial radioembolization (TARE) is a locoregional therapy (LRT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this study, we present overall survival (OS) outcomes in a 1,000-patient cohort acquired over a 15-year period. Between December 1, 2003 and March 31, 2017, 1,000 patients with HCC were treated with TARE as part of a prospective cohort study. A comprehensive review of toxicity and survival outcomes was performed. Outcomes were stratified by baseline Child-Pugh (CP) class, United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging systems. Albumin and bilirubin laboratory toxicities were compared to baseline. OS outcomes were reported using censoring and intention-to-treat methodologies. All treatments were outpatient, with a median one treatment per patient. Five hundred six (51%) were CP A, 450 (45%) CP B, and 44 (4%) CP C. Two hundred sixty-three (26%) patients were BCLC A, 152 (15%) B, 541 (54%) C, and 44 (4%) D. Three hundred sixty-eight (37%) were UNOS T1/T2, 169 (17%) T3, 147 (15%) T4a, 223 (22%) T4b, and 93 (9%) N/M. In CP A patients, censored OS for BCLC A was 47.3 (confidence interval [CI], 39.5-80.3) months, BCLC B 25.0 (CI, 17.3-30.5) months, and BCLC C 15.0 (CI, 13.8-17.7) months. In CP B patients, censored OS for BCLC A was 27 (CI, 21-30.2) months, BCLC B 15.0 (CI, 12.3-19.0) months, and BCLC C 8.0 (CI, 6.8-9.5) months. Forty-nine (5%) and 110 (11%) patients developed grade 3/4 albumin and bilirubin toxicities, respectively. CONCLUSION: Based on our experience with 1,000 patients over 15 years, we have made a decision to adopt TARE as the first-line transarterial LRT for patients with HCC. Our decision was informed by prospective data and incrementally reported demonstrating outcomes stratified by BCLC, applied as either neoadjuvant or definitive treatment. (Hepatology 2017).

No impact of resistance-associated substitutions on the efficacy of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir for 12 weeks in HCV DAA-experienced patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In phase III studies, the fixed dose combination of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX) administered for 12 weeks led to a sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12) in 96% of NS5A inhibitor-experienced patients, and an SVR12 rate of 98% in DAA-experienced patients who had not previously received an NS5A inhibitor. Herein, we evaluate the relationship between the presence of detectable resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) at baseline and treatment outcome, and whether RASs were selected for in cases of virologic failure. METHODS: NS3, NS5A, and NS5B deep sequencing analyses were performed at baseline for all patients and at the time of virologic failure. Results are reported using a 15% cut-off. RESULTS: A total of 82.7% of NS5A inhibitor-experienced patients (205/248) had baseline NS3 and/or NS5A RASs; 79% had baseline NS5A RASs. SVR12 rates were similar in patients with or without NS3 and/or NS5A RASs, and with or without VOX- or VEL-specific RASs. RASs at NS5A position Y93 were present in 37.3% of patients and 95% achieved SVR12. All patients with ≥2 NS5A RASs achieved SVR12. Baseline NS3 and/or NS5A RASs were present in 46.6% (83/178) of non-NS5A inhibitor DAA-experienced patients, all of whom achieved SVR12. All patients with baseline NS5B nucleoside inhibitor RASs, including two patients with S282T, achieved SVR12. Treatment-selected resistance was seen in one of seven patients who relapsed. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline RASs had no impact on virologic response in DAA-experienced patients following treatment with SOF/VEL/VOX for 12 weeks. Selection of viral resistance with virologic relapse was uncommon. LAY SUMMARY: In phase III studies, 12 weeks of treatment with the combination of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir and voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX) cured 97% of patients with hepatitis C virus who failed prior treatment with direct-acting antiviral drugs. Herein, we show that the presence of pretreatment drug resistance did not affect treatment outcome in these patients who had previously received direct-acting antivirals. We also showed that new drug resistance was rare in patients who failed treatment with SOF/VEL/VOX for 12 weeks. This has important implications for the selection of best retreatment strategies for these patients.

Sofosbuvir and Velpatasvir for HCV in Patients with Decompensated Cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: As the population that is infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) ages, the number of patients with decompensated cirrhosis is expected to increase. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, open-label study involving both previously treated and previously untreated patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 through 6 who had decompensated cirrhosis (classified as Child-Pugh-Turcotte class B). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir and the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir once daily for 12 weeks, sofosbuvir-velpatasvir plus ribavirin for 12 weeks, or sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 24 weeks. The primary end point was a sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy. RESULTS: Of the 267 patients who received treatment, 78% had HCV genotype 1, 4% genotype 2, 15% genotype 3, 3% genotype 4, and less than 1% genotype 6; no patients had genotype 5. Overall rates of sustained virologic response were 83% (95% confidence interval [CI], 74 to 90) among patients who received 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, 94% (95% CI, 87 to 98) among those who received 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir plus ribavirin, and 86% (95% CI, 77 to 92) among those who received 24 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir. Post hoc analysis did not detect any significant differences in rates of sustained virologic response among the three study groups. Serious adverse events occurred in 19% of patients who received 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, 16% of those who received 12 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir plus ribavirin, and 18% of those who received 24 weeks of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir. The most common adverse events were fatigue (29%), nausea (23%), and headache (22%) in all patients and anemia (31%) in the patients receiving ribavirin. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir with or without ribavirin for 12 weeks and with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 24 weeks resulted in high rates of sustained virologic response in patients with HCV infection and decompensated cirrhosis. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ASTRAL-4 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02201901.).

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection With Sofosbuvir and Velpatasvir, With or Without Voxilaprevir.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) has many hepatic and extrahepatic manifestations, measured by patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We measured changes in PROs during HCV treatment with recently developed pangenotypic regimens and from a sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment ended (SVR12). METHODS: We collected PRO data from 2 multi-center, blinded, international phase 3 trials of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir, from 748 patients previously treated with direct-acting antivirals for chronic infection with HCV of any genotype (59% HCV genotype 1, 43% with compensated cirrhosis) (POLARIS-1 and POLARIS-4). The combination of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir was given to 445 patients, the combination of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir to 151 patients, and placebo to 152 patients. Patients completed the SF-36, FACIT-F, CLDQ-HCV, and WPAI:SHP questionnaires at baseline, during treatment, and during the follow-up period. RESULTS: There was no difference in baseline clinical or demographic features or PRO scores among the groups (all P > .05). The group that received the combination of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir had more gastrointestinal symptoms than the groups that received sofosbuvir and velpatasvir or placebo (P = .0001). An SVR12 was achieved by 90.1% of patients who received sofosbuvir and velpatasvir vs 96.9% of patients who received sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir (P = .0008). After 12 weeks of treatment, some PRO scores improved in both treatment groups (by 2.5 or by 9.1 points, on a 0-100 scale; P < .05) but not in the placebo group. All increases in PRO scores were sustained or increased after treatment ended (an increase of up to 11.1 points at 12 weeks after treatment and an increase of up to 16.6 points at 24 weeks after treatment ended) (P < .05 for all but 2 PROs). There were no differences in PROs between the sofosbuvir and velpatasvir group vs the sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir group (all P > .05). In multivariate analysis, after adjustment for clinical and demographic factors and baseline PRO scores, receiving treatment was associated with higher PROs scores than receiving placebo (beta as high as 5.1) (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from 2 phase 3 clinical trials of patients with chronic HCV infection of any genotype, we found the combination of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, with or without voxilaprevir, to increase PRO scores compared with placebo. These findings indicate the comprehensive benefit of these regimens during treatment and after SVR.

Glecaprevir and pibrentasvir for 12 weeks for hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection and prior direct-acting antiviral treatment.

Although direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have demonstrated high rates of sustained virologic response, virologic failure may still occur, potentially leading to the emergence of viral resistance, which can decrease the effectiveness of subsequent treatment. Treatment options for patients who failed previous DAA-containing regimens, particularly those with nonstructural protein 5A inhibitors, are limited and remain an area of unmet medical need. This phase 2, open-label study (MAGELLAN-1) evaluated the efficacy and safety of glecaprevir (GLE) + pibrentasvir (PIB) ± ribavirin (RBV) in HCV genotype 1-infected patients with prior virologic failure to HCV DAA-containing therapy. A total of 50 patients without cirrhosis were randomized to three arms: 200 mg GLE + 80 mg PIB (arm A), 300 mg GLE + 120 mg PIB with 800 mg once-daily RBV (arm B), or 300 mg GLE + 120 mg PIB without RBV (arm C). By intent-to-treat analysis, sustained virologic response at posttreatment week 12 was achieved in 100% (6/6, 95% confidence interval 61-100), 95% (21/22, 95% confidence interval 78-99), and 86% (19/22, 95% confidence interval 67-95) of patients in arms A, B, and C, respectively. Virologic failure occurred in no patients in arm A and in 1 patient each in arms B and C (two patients were lost to follow-up in arm C). The majority of adverse events were mild in severity; no serious adverse events related to study drug and no relevant laboratory abnormalities in alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, or hemoglobin were observed. CONCLUSION: The combination of GLE and PIB was highly efficacious and well tolerated in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection and prior failure of DAA-containing therapy; RBV coadministration did not improve efficacy. (Hepatology 2017;66:389-397).

Hepatocellular carcinoma decreases the chance of successful hepatitis C virus therapy with direct-acting antivirals.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The approval of all-oral direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) has led to the expansion of therapy to include patients with cirrhosis who have hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Data on the use of DAAs in HCV+ patients with HCC is limited. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of all-oral-DAA regimens in HCV+ cirrhotic patients who have or had HCC compared to those without HCC. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all cirrhotic patients who were treated for HCV with DAAs at our institution between January 2014 and November 2015. RESULTS: A total of 421 HCV+ patients with cirrhosis were identified, of whom 33% had active or a history of HCC. Failure to achieve sustained virologic response (SVR) occurred in 21% of patients with HCC compared to 12% of patients without HCC (p=0.009). Of the 29 patients with HCC who did not achieve SVR, 27 (93%) occurred when an active tumor was present. DAA therapy in the presence of an inactive tumor or after removal of tumor (resection/transplant) resulted in excellent SVR rates, similar to those without HCC (p<0.0001). In multivariable analysis, the primary predictor of DAA treatment failure was the presence of active HCC at the time of HCV treatment initiation (adjusted odds ratio=8.5, 95% confidence interval=3.90-18.49). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of active HCC tumor at the initiation of HCV therapy is significantly associated with all-oral DAA treatment failure. HCV treatment after curative therapies for HCC resulted in excellent SVR. LAY SUMMARY: The new medications for hepatitis C have excellent cure rates. However, our study shows that in patients with both liver cancer and hepatitis C, they do not achieve these cure rates. Patients with liver cancer are almost 8 times more likely to fail hepatitis C treatment than patients without liver cancer.

Evaluation of proton pump inhibitor use on treatment outcomes with ledipasvir and sofosbuvir in a real-world cohort study.

Many patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) are on prolonged proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and wish to remain on PPI therapy once treatment for HCV starts. A preliminary report recently suggested decrease rates of sustained virological response (SVR) for patients taking concomitant PPI and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF). We sought to determine the effect of PPI use on the rate of SVR in a real-world cohort of 1,979 patients with chronic HCV treated with LDV/SOF. We collected clinical data and pharmacy dispensing records on patients taking 8, 12, or 24 weeks of LDV/SOF ± ribavirin (RBV). The primary outcome was sustained virological response at 12 weeks after treatment completion (SVR12) in a per-protocol analysis in order to determine the effect of PPI use adjusted for confounders. Statistical adjustment was performed in propensity-matched analysis. Among treatment completers, SVR12 was achieved in 441 (97.1%) of PPI recipients compared with 1,497 (98.2%) in PPI nonrecipients (P = 0.19). Neither low- nor high-dose PPI was associated with decreased SVR, although patients taking twice-daily PPI achieved a lower SVR12 rate (91.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 77.0-97.0; P = 0.046). After propensity matching for PPI use, there were no significant associations between SVR12 and any dose or frequency of PPI use. However, in a sensitivity analysis focusing on patients with cirrhosis, twice-daily PPI use was associated with lower odds ratio for SVR12 (0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.59). CONCLUSION: These data from a cohort of real-world patients receiving hepatitis C antibody therapy with LDF/SOF ± RBV support the prescription labeling suggesting that patients take no more than low-dose (20-mg omeprazole equivalents) PPI daily. (Hepatology 2016;64:1893-1899).

Ledipasvir and Sofosbuvir Plus Ribavirin for Treatment of HCV Infection in Patients With Advanced Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There are no effective and safe treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection of patients who have advanced liver disease. METHODS: In this phase 2, open-label study, we assessed treatment with the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir, the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, and ribavirin in patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 or 4. Cohort A enrolled patients with cirrhosis and moderate or severe hepatic impairment who had not undergone liver transplantation. Cohort B enrolled patients who had undergone liver transplantation: those without cirrhosis; those with cirrhosis and mild, moderate, or severe hepatic impairment; and those with fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Patients were assigned randomly (1:1) to receive 12 or 24 weeks of a fixed-dose combination tablet containing ledipasvir and sofosbuvir, once daily, plus ribavirin. The primary end point was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12). RESULTS: We enrolled 337 patients, 332 (99%) with HCV genotype 1 infection and 5 (1%) with HCV genotype 4 infection. In cohort A (nontransplant), SVR12 was achieved by 86%-89% of patients. In cohort B (transplant recipients), SVR12 was achieved by 96%-98% of patients without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis, by 85%-88% of patients with moderate hepatic impairment, by 60%-75% of patients with severe hepatic impairment, and by all 6 patients with fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Response rates in the 12- and 24-week groups were similar. Thirteen patients (4%) discontinued the ledipasvir and sofosbuvir combination prematurely because of adverse events; 10 patients died, mainly from complications related to hepatic decompensation. CONCLUSION: The combination of ledipasvir, sofosbuvir, and ribavirin for 12 weeks produced high rates of SVR12 in patients with advanced liver disease, including those with decompensated cirrhosis before and after liver transplantation. ClinTrials.gov: NCT01938430.