Efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in NS3/4A protease inhibitor-experienced individuals with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 and HIV coinfection with and without cirrhosis (ANRS HC31 SOFTRIH study).

OBJECTIVES: Studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of the fixed-dose combination ledipasvir (LDV)/sofosbuvir (SOF) in patients coinfected with HIV-1 and hepatitis C virus (HCV) have mainly included treatment-naïve patients without cirrhosis. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this combination in treatment-experienced patients with and without cirrhosis. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, open-label, double-arm, nonrandomized study in patients coinfected with HIV-1 and HCV genotype 1 with and without cirrhosis, who had good viral suppression on their antiretroviral regimens. All patients were pretreated with a first-generation NS3/4A protease inhibitor (PI) plus pegylated interferon/ribavirin. Patients received a fixed-dose combination of LDV/SOF for 12 weeks, or for 24 weeks if cirrhosis was present. The primary endpoint was a sustained virological response (SVR) 12 weeks after the end of therapy. Secondary endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 68 patients enrolled, 39.7% had cirrhosis. Sixty-five patients [95.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 87.6-99.1%; P < 0.0001] achieved an SVR, with similar rates of SVR in those with and without cirrhosis. Tolerance was satisfactory, with mainly grade 1 or 2 adverse events. Among patient-reported outcomes, only fatigue significantly decreased at the end of treatment compared with baseline [odds ratio (OR): 0.36; 95% CI: 0.14-0.96; P = 0.04]. Mean tenofovir area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) at week 4 was high, with mean ± SD AUC variation between baseline and week 4 higher in cirrhotic than in noncirrhotic patients (3261.57 ± 1920.47 ng/mL vs. 1576.15 ± 911.97 ng/mL, respectively; P = 0.03). Mild proteinuria (54.4%), hypophosphataemia (50.0%), blood bicarbonate decrease (29.4%) and hypokalaemia (13.2%) were reported. The serum creatinine level was not modified. CONCLUSIONS: LDV/SOF provided a high SVR rate in PI-experienced subjects coinfected with HCV genotype 1 and HIV-1, including patients with cirrhosis.

Safety of sofosbuvir-based regimens after liver transplantation: longitudinal assessment of renal function in the prospective ANRS CO23 CUPILT study.

BACKGROUND: In liver transplant recipients with hepatitis C virus recurrence, there is concern about renal safety of sofosbuvir-based regimens. Changes in serum creatinine or in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) under treatment are used to look for possible renal toxicity. However, serum creatinine and eGFR are highly variable. AIM: To analyse renal function trajectory with numerous assays of serum creatinine over a long period of time. METHODS: In a multicentre cohort of 139 patients, the eGFR was obtained from serum creatinine using the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation. Slopes of eGFR were defined as a change in eGFR during a period divided by time. Pre-treatment, on-treatment and post-treatment periods were 9 months, 3-9 months and 4.5 months. Interactions between eGFR slopes and the pre-treatment eGFR, use of ribavirin or mycophenolate mofetil, and stage of fibrosis were addressed. On-treatment eGFR slopes were separated in tertiles. Pre- and post-treatment eGFR slopes were compared globally and according to tertiles. RESULTS: The post-treatment eGFR slope was significantly better than pre-treatment eGFR slope (+0.18 (IQR -0.76 to +1.32) vs -0.11 (IQR -1.01 to +0.73) mL/min/1.73 m2 /month, P = 0.03) independently of the pre-treatment eGFR (P = 0.99), ribavirin administration (P = 0.26), mycophenolate mofetil administration (P = 0.51) and stage of fibrosis (F3 and F4 vs lower stages, P = 0.18; F4 vs lower stages, P = 0.08; F4 Child-Pugh B and C vs lower stages, P = 0.38). Tertiles of on-treatment eGFR slopes were -1.71 (IQR -2.54 to -1.48), -0.78 (IQR -1.03 to -0.36) and +0.75 (IQR +0.28 to +1.47) mL/min/1.73 m2 /month. Pre- and post-treatment eGFR slopes were not significantly different according to tertiles (respectively, P = 0.34, 0.08, 0.73). CONCLUSION: The eGFR varies during treatment and gives a confusing picture of the renal safety of sofosbuvir-based regimens. In contrast, longitudinal assessment of the eGFR shows a rising trajectory over longer time, meaning that these therapies are safe for the kidneys in our cohort of liver transplant recipients.