ITPA genotype protects against anemia during peginterferon and ribavirin therapy but does not influence virological response.

UNLABELLED: On-treatment anemia is associated with higher sustained virological response (SVR) rates during peginterferon plus ribavirin (RBV) therapy. Inosine triphosphatase (ITPA) variants causing ITPase deficiency have been shown to protect against RBV-induced anemia. However, ITPase activity has not been associated with SVR. To study this discrepancy, we examined the relationships between ITPase activity, on-treatment anemia, SVR, and RBV levels in hepatitis C virus genotype 1 (HCV-1) patients from the CHARIOT study. ITPA genotype (rs7270101, rs1127354) was used to define ITPase activity in 546 patients. Plasma RBV levels were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Relationships between ITPase activity, on-treatment hemoglobin (Hb) levels, RBV levels, and SVR were tested using regression modeling, survival analysis, and locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LOWESS) plot analysis. Hb decline was independently associated with SVR (P<0.0001). ITPase deficiency was present in 35%. ITPase deficiency strongly protected against Hb decline (P<0.0001), but was not associated with SVR (P=0.28). The probability of SVR increased with lower nadir Hb for both wild-type and deficient ITPase activity, but the association curve shifted to describe a parallel relationship at higher Hb levels in patients with ITPase deficiency. In a subset (n=203), we tested the hypothesis that the association between Hb decline and SVR reflected RBV levels rather than actual Hb level. RBV levels were associated with on-treatment Hb decline and SVR, but not ITPase activity. In regression models, adjustment for RBV levels attenuated the association between Hb decline and SVR. CONCLUSION: ITPase deficiency protects against RBV-induced anemia, but is not associated with SVR. Our data suggest that the relationship between Hb decline and SVR is not mechanistic, but is linked to RBV levels.

Randomized trial of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion and NRT plus bupropion for smoking cessation: effectiveness in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Bupropion was introduced for smoking cessation following a pivotal trial showing that it gave improved efficacy over the nicotine patch and also suggesting combination treatment was beneficial. We tested in clinical practice for an effectiveness difference between bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), whether the combination improves effectiveness and whether either treatment might be more beneficial for certain subgroups of smokers. DESIGN: Open-label randomized controlled trial with 6-month follow-up. SETTING: Four UK National Health Service (NHS) smoking cessation clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Smokers (n = 1071) received seven weekly behavioural support sessions and were randomized to an NRT product of their choice (n = 418), bupropion (n = 409) or NRT plus bupropion (n = 244). MEASURES: The primary outcome was self-reported cessation over 6 months, with biochemical verification at 1 and 6 months. Also measured were baseline demographics, health history, smoking characteristics and unwanted events during treatment. FINDINGS: Abstinence rates for bupropion (27.9%) and NRT (24.2%) were not significantly different (odds ratio = 1.21, 95% confidence interval = 0.883-1.67), and the combination rate (24.2%) was similar to that for either treatment alone. There was some evidence that the relative effectiveness of bupropion and NRT differed according to depression (χ(2) = 2.86, P = 0.091), with bupropion appearing more beneficial than NRT in those with a history of depression (29.8 versus 18.5%). Several unwanted symptoms were more common with bupropion. CONCLUSION: There is no difference in smoking cessation effectiveness among bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy and their combination when used with behavioural support in clinical practice. There is some evidence that bupropion is more beneficial than nicotine replacement therapy for smokers with a history of depression.

Quantitative HBsAg and HBeAg predict hepatitis B seroconversion after initiation of HAART in HIV-HBV coinfected individuals.

OBJECTIVE: Anti-HBe seroconversion and HBsAg loss are important therapeutic endpoints in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Quantitative measures of hepatitis B surface antigen (qHBsAg) and e antigen (qHBeAg) have been identified as potentially useful indicators of therapeutic response in HBV monoinfection. The aim of this study was to examine serological change including quantitative biomarkers in HIV-HBV coinfected patients initiating HBV active antiretroviral therapy (ART). METHODS: HIV-HBV coinfected individuals from Thailand were followed for up to 168 weeks post ART. Rates and associations of qualitative serological change were determined. Longitudinal changes in qHBsAg and qHBeAg were measured and their utility as predictors of response examined. RESULTS: Forty seven patients were included of whom 27 (57%) were HBeAg positive at baseline. Median CD4 count was 48 cells/mm(3). Over a median follow-up of 108 weeks 48% (13/27) lost HBeAg, 12/27 (44%) achieved anti-HBe seroconversion and 13% (6/47) HBsAg loss. Anti-HBe seroconversion was associated with higher baseline ALT (p = 0.034), lower qHBsAg (p = 0.015), lower qHBeAg (p = 0.031) and greater HBV DNA decline to week 24 (p = 0.045). Sensitivity and specificity for qHBsAg and qHBeAg decline of >0.5 log at week 12 and >1.0 log at week 24 were high for both anti-HBe seroconversion and HBsAg loss. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of serological change in these HIV-HBV coinfected individuals with advanced immunodeficiency initiating HBV-active ART were high. Baseline and on treatment factors were identified that were associated with a greater likelihood of subsequent anti-HBe seroconversion, including both quantitative HBsAg and HBeAg, suggesting these biomarkers may have utility in this clinical setting.

Host risk factors and autochthonous hepatitis E infection.

INTRODUCTION: In developed countries autochthonous hepatitis E infection is caused by hepatitis E virus (HEV) genotype 3 or 4 and mainly affects middle aged/elderly men. Host factors might explain why older men develop clinically overt disease. METHODS: Retrospective review of 53 patients with symptomatic autochthonous hepatitis E infection to determine putative host risk factors. Patients were compared with 564 controls with adjustment for age and sex. Anti-HEV seroprevalence was determined in controls and 189 patients with chronic liver disease. RESULTS: Mean age of the patients was 62.4 years, 73.6% were men. Compared with controls, patients with hepatitis E were more likely to drink at least 22 U alcohol/week (OR=9.4; 95% confidence interval=3.8-25.0; P<0.001). The seroprevalence of anti-HEV IgG in controls increased with age (P<0.001) but was similar in men and women. There was no association between alcohol consumption and anti-HEV IgG seroprevalence in the control group. There was no difference in the anti-HEV IgG seroprevalence between the controls and patients with chronic liver disease of all aetiologies, but seroprevalence was higher in controls (13.8%) than patients with alcoholic liver disease (4.8%, P=0.04). CONCLUSION: Clinically apparent hepatitis E infection is more common in individuals who consume at least 22 U alcohol/week. Patients with established chronic alcoholic liver disease have a low seroprevalence compared with controls. The reason for this observation is uncertain, but patients with alcoholic liver disease have clinically severe disease with a high mortality when exposed to HEV. The low seroprevalence in this group may represent a 'culled' population.

A comparison of two commercially available anti-HEV IgG kits and a re-evaluation of anti-HEV IgG seroprevalence data in developed countries.

In developed countries, the incidence of hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection and the resulting seroprevalence are uncertain. Published estimates of seroprevalnce in these populations range from 0.26% to 31%, which may in part reflect the variety of assays used by different studies. This study compared the performance of two commercial assays (Genelabs [Singapore] and Wantai 'Beijing, China' HEV IgG EIA kits) and reviewed published estimates of anti-HEV seroprevalence in developed countries. The assays were compared using the WHO anti-HEV reference serum, sera from UK-acquired cases of genotype 3 HEV infections and 500 UK blood donor sera. The PE2 assay was found to be more sensitive than the GL assay (lower limit of detection for HEV IgG 0.25 vs. 2.5 WHO units/ml); it was positive in more sera from proven cases (98% vs. 56%), remained positive for longer post infection and resulted in a substantially higher estimate of seroprevalence in blood donors (16.2% vs. 3.6%). these results suggest that published studies of HEV seroprevalence using the GL assay have underestimated the true figure and that a properly validated method is required to make meaningful comparisons of HEV seroprevalence between populations.