Virology analyses of HCV isolates from genotype 1-infected patients treated with simeprevir plus peginterferon/ribavirin in Phase IIb/III studies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Simeprevir is an oral hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor approved for treatment of chronic HCV infection. Baseline NS3 polymorphisms in all patients and emerging mutations in patients who failed to achieve sustained virologic response (SVR) with simeprevir plus peginterferon/ribavirin (PR) in Phase IIb/III studies are described. METHODS: Baseline sequencing data were available for 2007 genotype 1 (GT1)-infected patients. Post-baseline data were available for 197/245 simeprevir-treated patients who did not achieve SVR. In vitro simeprevir susceptibility was assessed in a transient replicon assay as site-directed mutants or in chimeric replicons with patient-derived NS3 protease sequences. RESULTS: Baseline NS3 polymorphisms at positions associated with reduced in vitro susceptibility to simeprevir (43, 80, 122, 155, 156, and/or 168; EC50 fold change >2.0) were uncommon (1.3% [26/2007]), with the exception of Q80K, which confers ∼10-fold reduction in simeprevir activity in vitro (13.7% [274/2007]; GT1a 29.5% [269/911], GT1b 0.5% [5/1096]). Baseline Q80K had minor effect on initial response to simeprevir/PR, but resulted in lower SVR rates. Overall, 91.4% of simeprevir-treated patients [180/197] without SVR had emerging mutations at NS3 positions 80, 122, 155, and/or 168 at failure (mainly R155K in GT1a with and without Q80K, and D168V in GT1b), conferring high-level resistance in vitro (EC50 fold change >50). Emerging mutations were no longer detectable by population sequencing at study end in 50% [90/180] of patients (median follow-up 28.4weeks). CONCLUSIONS: Simeprevir treatment failure was usually associated with emerging high-level resistance mutations, which became undetectable over time in half of the patients.

Telaprevir twice daily is noninferior to telaprevir every 8 hours for patients with chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We performed an open-label, multicenter, phase 3 study of the safety and efficacy of twice-daily telaprevir in treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection, including those with cirrhosis. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to groups treated with telaprevir 1125 mg twice daily or 750 mg every 8 hours plus peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin for 12 weeks; patients were then treated with peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin alone for 12 weeks if their level of HCV RNA at week 4 was <25 IU/mL or for 36 weeks if their level was higher. The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of telaprevir twice daily versus every 8 hours in producing a sustained virological response 12 weeks after the end of therapy (SVR12) (based on a -11% lower limit of the 95% lower confidence interval for the difference between groups). RESULTS: At baseline, of 740 patients, 85% had levels of HCV RNA ≥800,000 IU/mL, 28% had fibrosis (F3-F4), 14% had cirrhosis (F4), 57% were infected with HCV genotype 1a, and 71% had the non-CC IL28B genotype. Of patients who were treated with telaprevir twice daily, 74.3% achieved SVR12 compared with 72.8% of patients who were treated with telaprevir every 8 hours (difference in response, 1.5%; 95% confidence interval, -4.9% to 12.0%), so telaprevir twice daily is noninferior to telaprevir every 8 hours. All subgroups of patients who were treated with telaprevir twice daily versus those who were treated every 8 hours had similar rates of SVR12. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) in the telaprevir phase were fatigue (47%), pruritus (43%), anemia (42%), nausea (37%), rash (35%), and headache (26%); serious AEs were reported in 9% of patients. Rates of AEs and serious AEs were similar or slightly higher among patients treated with telaprevir every 8 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a phase 3 trial, telaprevir twice daily is noninferior to every 8 hours in producing SVR12, with similar levels of safety and tolerability. These results support use of telaprevir twice daily in patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection, including those with cirrhosis. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT01241760.

Low-density lipoprotein and other predictors of response with telaprevir-based therapy in treatment-experienced HCV genotype 1 patients: REALIZE study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Predictors of response to treatment with peginterferon plus ribavirin are well established. In these post-hoc analyses of the REALIZE study, we sought to identify predictors of response for telaprevir-based triple therapy. METHODS: Patients from the REALIZE study with baseline data for all predictors evaluated (including baseline disease characteristics and demographics, prior treatment response and baseline laboratory assessments) were included in the post-hoc analyses (n = 465). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate factors predicting treatment outcomes. RESULTS: Sustained viral response (SVR) rates were 86% in prior relapsers, 63% in prior partial responders and 32% in prior null-responders. In the final multivariate analysis, baseline factors predicting SVR were prior response to treatment [Odds ratio (OR) = 2.80; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.13-3.69], low-density lipoprotein (LDL) (≥2.6 mmol/L) (OR = 2.11; 95% CI, 1.52-2.93), HCV genotype (OR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.93), and maximum alanine amino transferase and aspartate amino transferase (OR = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Prior response to peginterferon plus ribavirin treatment and LDL levels are the main independent predictive markers of response with telaprevir-based triple therapy.

Telaprevir for retreatment of HCV infection.

BACKGROUND: Up to 60% of patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection do not have a sustained virologic response to therapy with peginterferon alfa plus ribavirin. METHODS: In this randomized, phase 3 trial, we evaluated the addition of telaprevir to peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had no response or a partial response to previous therapy or who had a relapse after an initial response. A total of 663 patients were assigned to one of three groups: the T12PR48 group, which received telaprevir for 12 weeks and peginterferon plus ribavirin for a total of 48 weeks; the lead-in T12PR48 group, which received 4 weeks of peginterferon plus ribavirin followed by 12 weeks of telaprevir and peginterferon plus ribavirin for a total of 48 weeks; and the control group (PR48), which received peginterferon plus ribavirin for 48 weeks. The primary end point was the rate of sustained virologic response, which was defined as undetectable HCV RNA 24 weeks after the last planned dose of a study drug. RESULTS: Rates of sustained virologic response were significantly higher in the two telaprevir groups than in the control group among patients who had a previous relapse (83% in the T12PR48 group, 88% in the lead-in T12PR48 group, and 24% in the PR48 group), a partial response (59%, 54%, and 15%, respectively), and no response (29%, 33%, and 5%, respectively) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Grade 3 adverse events (mainly anemia, neutropenia, and leukopenia) were more frequent in the telaprevir groups than in the control group (37% vs. 22%). CONCLUSIONS: Telaprevir combined with peginterferon plus ribavirin significantly improved rates of sustained virologic response in patients with previously treated HCV infection, regardless of whether there was a lead-in phase. (Funded by Tibotec and Vertex Pharmaceuticals; REALIZE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00703118.).

Telaprevir activity in treatment-naive patients infected hepatitis C virus genotype 4: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This partially blinded, randomized, phase 2a C210 study evaluated the antiviral activity of telaprevir-based regimens in treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 4 infection. METHODS: Twenty-four patients received telaprevir 750 mg every 8 hours for 15 days (T; n = 8), telaprevir in combination with pegylated interferon alfa-2a and ribavirin (Peg-IFN/RBV) for 15 days (TPR; n = 8), or Peg-IFN/RBV plus placebo for 15 days (PR; n = 8), followed by Peg-IFN/RBV for 46 or 48 weeks. The primary objective was to assess the effect of telaprevir on HCV RNA levels. RESULTS: HCV RNA levels decreased slightly with T and PR; TPR produced substantial, rapid declines. On day 15, median reductions in the HCV RNA load from baseline were -0.77, -4.32, and -1.58 log10 IU/mL for T, TPR, and PR, respectively, and 0 patients in the T group, 1 in the TPR group, and 0 in the PR group had undetectable HCV RNA. Five of 8 patients who received telaprevir monotherapy had viral breakthrough within 15 days of treatment. Adverse event incidence was similar across treatments and comparable with the incidences from previous clinical trials. One patient (in T group) had a serious adverse event (considered unrelated to telaprevir) that led to treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Telaprevir with Peg-IFN/RBV had greater activity than Peg-IFN/RBV treatment or telaprevir monotherapy against HCV genotype 4. Telaprevir was generally safe and well tolerated. Further investigation of telaprevir combination therapy in patients with HCV genotype 4 infection is warranted.

Sustained virologic response rates with telaprevir by response after 4 weeks of lead-in therapy in patients with prior treatment failure.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: For hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients who have not responded to previous PegIFN/ribavirin treatment, it is unclear whether subsequent direct-acting antiviral therapy outcomes are better predicted by prior treatment response or by on-treatment response to a PegIFN/ribavirin lead-in. METHODS: In REALIZE, treatment-experienced patients randomized to the lead-in telaprevir arm received 4 weeks of PegIFN-α-2a (180 µg/week) and ribavirin (1000-1200 mg/day), then 12 weeks of telaprevir (750 mg every 8h) plus PegIFN-α-2a/ribavirin, followed by 32 weeks of PegIFN-α-2a/ribavirin. This subanalysis only included patients in the lead-in telaprevir arm with available week 4 on-treatment response data (n=240). RESULTS: After 4weeks of PegIFN/ribavirin, 90% of relapsers, 60% of partial responders, and 41% of null responders in the lead-in telaprevir arm had ⩾1 log(10) HCV RNA reduction. Sustained virologic response (SVR) rates for telaprevir-treated patients with ≥1 versus <1 log(10) HCV RNA reduction after the PegIFN/ribavirin lead-in were 94% versus 62% in relapsers, 59% versus 56% in partial responders and 54% versus 15% in null responders. CONCLUSIONS: In prior relapsers and partial responders there is no apparent benefit of assessing response after a PegIFN/ribavirin lead-in with the aim of guiding telaprevir-based treatment. For patients known to be prior null responders, on-treatment response after a 4-week PegIFN/ribavirin lead-in may provide clinically useful prognostic information. However, withholding telaprevir-containing therapy in uncategorised treatment-experienced patient populations (i.e., that could include prior relapsers or partial responders), using response after a PegIFN/ribavirin lead-in could potentially exclude some patients with a high chance of SVR.

Limited impact of IL28B genotype on response rates in telaprevir-treated patients with prior treatment failure.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Nucleotide polymorphisms upstream of the interleukin 28B (IL28B) gene are strongly associated with hepatitis C virus (HCV) clearance in treatment-naïve patients treated with peginterferon/ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV). This subanalysis of the REALIZE study evaluated the impact of IL28B polymorphisms on sustained virologic response (SVR) in telaprevir-treated, HCV genotype 1-infected patients with prior PegIFN/RBV treatment failure. METHODS: Treatment-experienced patients were randomized to 12 weeks of telaprevir (750 mg every 8h) with/without a 4-week PegIFN/RBV lead-in, or placebo, each with PegIFN-α-2a (180 µg/week) and ribavirin (1000-1200 mg/day) for 48 weeks overall. Data from telaprevir arms were pooled. RESULTS: Eighty percent (527/662) of patients consented to genetic testing and were included. Similar proportions of patients had IL28B CC, CT and TT genotypes across treatment arms; baseline characteristics were generally well balanced. SVR rates were higher in the pooled telaprevir versus placebo group for all IL28B genotypes; CC: 79% versus 29%, respectively; CT: 60% versus 16%, respectively; TT: 61% versus 13%, respectively. Within each prior response category (relapse, partial or null response), SVR and viral breakthrough rates with telaprevir-based treatment were comparable across IL28B genotypes. IL28B genotype did not significantly affect SVR (2-step multivariate analyses; p >0.16 in pairwise comparison among CC, TT, and CT). Variations in rapid virologic response and relapse rates were noted in certain patient subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that IL28B genotype has a limited impact on SVR rates with telaprevir-based therapy in treatment-experienced patients. IL28B genotyping may have limited utility in the baseline evaluation of similar patients considered for telaprevir-based therapy.

Characterization of telaprevir treatment outcomes and resistance in patients with prior treatment failure: results from the REALIZE trial.

UNLABELLED: In the Phase 3 REALIZE study, 662 genotype 1 hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients with prior peginterferon/ribavirin treatment failure (including relapsers, partial, and null responders) were randomized to 12 weeks of telaprevir given immediately (T12/PR48) or following 4 weeks of peginterferon/ribavirin (lead-in T12/PR48), or 12 weeks of placebo (PR48), combined with a total of 48 weeks of peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin. Sustained virologic response (SVR) rates were 64% (T12/PR48), 66% (lead-in T12/PR48), and 17% (PR48). This analysis aimed to characterize treatment outcomes and viral variants emerging in telaprevir-treated patients not achieving SVR. HCV NS3·4A population sequencing was performed at baseline, during treatment, and follow-up. Telaprevir-resistant variants were classified into lower-level (3- to 25-fold 50% inhibitory concentration [IC(50) ] increase: V36A/M, T54A/S, R155I/K/M/T, and A156S) and higher-level (>25-fold IC(50) increase: V36M+R155K and A156T/V) resistance. Resistant variants were uncommon at baseline. Overall, 18% (52%, 19%, and 1% of prior null and partial responders and relapsers, respectively) of telaprevir-treated patients had on-treatment virologic failure, with no significant difference with or without a lead-in. Virologic failure during the telaprevir-treatment phase was predominantly associated with higher-level resistance; virologic failure during the peginterferon/ribavirin-treatment phase was associated with higher- or lower-level, or wildtype variants, depending on genotype. Relapse occurred in 9% of patients completing assigned treatment and was generally associated with lower-level resistant variants or wildtype. Resistant variants were no longer detectable by study end (median follow-up of 11 months) in 58% of non-SVR patients. CONCLUSION: In REALIZE, variants emerging in non-SVR, telaprevir-treated patients were similar irrespective of the use of a lead-in and were consistent with those previously reported. In most patients, resistant variants became undetectable over time.

Hepatitis C viral evolution in genotype 1 treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients receiving telaprevir-based therapy in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: In patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C infection, telaprevir (TVR) in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin (PR) significantly increased sustained virologic response (SVR) rates compared with PR alone. However, genotypic changes could be observed in TVR-treated patients who did not achieve an SVR. METHODS: Population sequence analysis of the NS3•4A region was performed in patients who did not achieve SVR with TVR-based treatment. RESULTS: Resistant variants were observed after treatment with a telaprevir-based regimen in 12% of treatment-naïve patients (ADVANCE; T12PR arm), 6% of prior relapsers, 24% of prior partial responders, and 51% of prior null responder patients (REALIZE, T12PR48 arms). NS3 protease variants V36M, R155K, and V36M+R155K emerged frequently in patients with genotype 1a and V36A, T54A, and A156S/T in patients with genotype 1b. Lower-level resistance to telaprevir was conferred by V36A/M, T54A/S, R155K/T, and A156S variants; and higher-level resistance to telaprevir was conferred by A156T and V36M+R155K variants. Virologic failure during telaprevir treatment was more common in patients with genotype 1a and in prior PR nonresponder patients and was associated with higher-level telaprevir-resistant variants. Relapse was usually associated with wild-type or lower-level resistant variants. After treatment, viral populations were wild-type with a median time of 10 months for genotype 1a and 3 weeks for genotype 1b patients. CONCLUSIONS: A consistent, subtype-dependent resistance profile was observed in patients who did not achieve an SVR with telaprevir-based treatment. The primary role of TVR is to inhibit wild-type virus and variants with lower-levels of resistance to telaprevir. The complementary role of PR is to clear any remaining telaprevir-resistant variants, especially higher-level telaprevir-resistant variants. Resistant variants are detectable in most patients who fail to achieve SVR, but their levels decline over time after treatment.

Inulin solid dispersion technology to improve the absorption of the BCS Class IV drug TMC240.

TMC240 is a very poorly soluble and poorly permeating HIV protease inhibitor. In order to enhance its oral bioavailability, a fast dissolving inulin-based solid dispersion tablet was developed. During the dissolution test in water (0.5% or 1.0% SLS), this tablet released at least 80% of TMC240 within 30min, while a tablet with the same composition, but manufactured as physical mixture, released only 6% after 2h. In a subsequent single-dose study in dogs (200mg of TMC240), plasma concentrations of TMC240 remained below the lower limit of quantification (<1.00ng/mL) in all animals (n=3 per tested formulation), except in one dog receiving the inulin solid dispersion tablet (C(max)=1.8ng/mL, AUC(0-7 h)=3.0ngh/mL). In the latter treatment group, ritonavir co-administration (10mg/kg b.i.d.) increased TMC240 exposure more than 30-fold (mean AUC(0-7 h)=108ngh/mL; F(rel)=3588%). Exposure was also 16-fold higher than after TMC240 administration as PEG400 suspension in the presence of ritonavir (AUC(0-7 h)=6.7ngh/mL). The current data demonstrate that a solid dispersion of TMC240 in an inulin matrix allows considerable improvement in the release of poorly water-soluble TMC240, both in vitro in the presence of a surfactant and in vivo upon oral administration.