Efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir or ravidasvir in patients with COVID-19: A randomized controlled trial.

Only a few treatments are approved for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infections, with continuous debate about their clinical impact. Repurposing antiviral treatments might prove the fastest way to identify effective therapy. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir (SOF) plus daclatasvir (DCV) or ravidasvir (RDV) added to standard care (SOC) for patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 infection. Multicentre parallel randomized controlled open-label trial. One hundred and twenty eligible patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 infection were randomized to one of the study arms. Ten days of treatment with SOF plus DCV or RDV in addition to the standard of care compared to SOC. Follow up in 7 days. Sum of the counted symptoms at 7 and 10 days, mean change in oxygen saturation level, viral negativity, and rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Compared to SOC, the SOF-DCV group experienced a significantly lower sum of the counted symptoms (fever, headache, generalized aches, or respiratory distress) combined with no evidence of deterioration (ICU admission and mechanical ventilation) on Days 7 and 10 of treatment. Oxygen saturation also significantly improved among the SOF-DCV group compared to SOC starting from Day 4. The study also showed positive trends regarding the efficacy of SOF-DCV with a lower incidence of mortality. On the other hand, adding SOF-RDV to SOC did not show significant improvements in endpoints. The results support the efficacy and safety of SOF-DCV as an add-on to SOC for the treatment of moderate to severe COVID-19 infections.

Role of Ribavirin in the Era of Direct-Acting Antiviral Therapies of Chronic Hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of adding ribavirin (RBV) to direct antivirals (DAAs) in HCV treatment is still debatable, with allegations of insecure profiles. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety and efficacy of RBV in the era of DAAs in chronic HCV Egyptian patients. METHODS: In this cohort retrospective study, data of 847 HCV patients treated with different regimens of DAAs with or without RBV were recruited between June 2017 and September 2018. Cases were categorized into five groups: non-cirrhotic (318), compensated (196), decompensated liver cirrhosis (53), post liver transplantation (30), and 250 treatment experienced patients. All patients' demographics and laboratory characteristics were evaluated at baseline, week4, 12, 24 of treatment. Ribavirin was prescribed or banned outside international guideline recommendations of HCV treatment in cases assembled from the private sector.Results: No statistically significant difference between RBV and non-RBV treated patients was documented regarding SVR12 (97.2%, 97.8%) respectively in the whole cohort (p 0.509). On grouping, adding RBV was only significant in the treatment experienced patients (96.8%, 85% in RBV and non-RBV regimens respectively) (p 0.001). Adding RBV to DAA regimens was generally associated with modest adverse events particularly anemia (8.5%), and hepatic decompensation (jaundice and ascites) (0.3%). Bilirubin, INR, and platelet counts all were found to be the most independent predictors of SVR achievement by multivariate analysis (p ≤ 0.05).Conclusion: RBV may still have an augmenting role in treatment experienced patients; permitting effectual shortening of therapy particularly in patients with cirrhosis, with modest side and adverse consequences.

High efficacy of generic and brand direct acting antivirals in treatment of chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Direct acting antivirals (DAAs) are highly effective for treatment of hepatitis C (HCV) but brand products are priced beyond the means of most low and middle income countries (LMICs). Although a few DAAs are offered at reduced prices in access programs, they are still beyond affordability in limited resource settings with a large HCV infected population. Cheap generics might fill this economic need, but studies comparing their clinical efficacy to that of original products are limited. AIM: To compare efficacy of brand and generic DAAs used in the national treatment program in Egypt. METHODS: HCV treatment eligible patients (n=971) were enrolled. They were treated with 12 weeks of either sofosbuvir-daclatasvir (SOF-DCV) or SOF-ledipasvir (SOF-LDV). Ribavirin (RBV) was added to patients with cirrhosis and to SOF experienced patients. Patients with cirrhosis who were RBV intolerant were treated for 24 weeks without RBV. RESULTS: Most patients were males (61.4%), treatment naïve (88.6%), without cirrhosis (61.7%), and the mean age was 51.3±11.31 years. Baseline characteristics were not different in patients treated with brand or generic medications regarding age, liver tests, creatinine, platelets, MELD score, baseline HCV-RNA and transient elastography. Overall sustained virologic response (SVR) rate was 98.1%, which was similar for generic and brand drugs (98.2% vs. 98.1%; p=1), and similar with both regimens used (SOF-DCV±RBV: brand: 98.1%, generic 97.8%; p=0.729, SOF-LDV±RBV: brand 98.2%, generic 100%; p=0.729). AST and ALT decreased significantly with initiation of therapy with both generic and original drugs. CONCLUSION: Generic and brand DAAs are equally effective for achieving SVR and improving aminotransferases.