Bulevirtide Combined with Pegylated Interferon for Chronic Hepatitis D.

BACKGROUND: In a phase 3 trial, bulevirtide monotherapy led to a virologic response in patients with chronic hepatitis D. Pegylated interferon (peginterferon) alfa-2a is recommended by guidelines as an off-label treatment for this disease. The role of combination therapy with bulevirtide and peginterferon alfa-2a, particularly with regard to finite treatment, is unclear. METHODS: In this phase 2b, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive peginterferon alfa-2a alone (180 µg per week) for 48 weeks; bulevirtide at a daily dose of 2 mg or 10 mg plus peginterferon alfa-2a (180 µg per week) for 48 weeks, followed by the same daily dose of bulevirtide for 48 weeks; or bulevirtide at a daily dose of 10 mg alone for 96 weeks. All the patients were followed for 48 weeks after the end of treatment. The primary end point was an undetectable level of hepatitis D virus (HDV) RNA at 24 weeks after the end of treatment. The primary comparison was between the 10-mg bulevirtide plus peginterferon alfa-2a group and the 10-mg bulevirtide monotherapy group. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients received peginterferon alfa-2a alone, 50 received 2 mg and 50 received 10 mg of bulevirtide plus peginterferon alfa-2a, and 50 received 10 mg of bulevirtide monotherapy. At 24 weeks after the end of treatment, HDV RNA was undetectable in 17% of the patients in the peginterferon alfa-2a group, in 32% of those in the 2-mg bulevirtide plus peginterferon alfa-2a group, in 46% of those in the 10-mg bulevirtide plus peginterferon alfa-2a group, and in 12% of those in the 10-mg bulevirtide group. For the primary comparison, the between-group difference was 34 percentage points (95% confidence interval, 15 to 50; P<0.001). At 48 weeks after the end of treatment, HDV RNA was undetectable in 25% of the patients in the peginterferon alfa-2a group, in 26% of those in the 2-mg bulevirtide plus peginterferon alfa-2a group, in 46% of those in the 10-mg bulevirtide plus peginterferon alfa-2a group, and in 12% of those in the 10-mg bulevirtide group. The most frequent adverse events were leukopenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. The majority of adverse events were of grade 1 or 2 in severity. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of 10-mg bulevirtide plus peginterferon alfa-2a was superior to bulevirtide monotherapy with regard to an undetectable HDV RNA level at 24 weeks after the end of treatment. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; MYR 204 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03852433.).

A Phase 3, Randomized Trial of Bulevirtide in Chronic Hepatitis D.

BACKGROUND: Coinfection with hepatitis D virus (HDV) accelerates the progression of liver disease associated with chronic hepatitis B. Bulevirtide inhibits the entry of HDV into hepatocytes. METHODS: In this ongoing phase 3 trial, patients with chronic hepatitis D, with or without compensated cirrhosis, were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive bulevirtide subcutaneously at 2 mg per day (2-mg group) or 10 mg per day (10-mg group) for 144 weeks or to receive no treatment for 48 weeks followed by bulevirtide subcutaneously at 10 mg per day for 96 weeks (control group). Patients will complete 96 weeks of additional follow-up after the end of treatment. The primary end point was a combined response at week 48 of an undetectable HDV RNA level, or a level that decreased by at least 2 log10 IU per milliliter from baseline, and normalization of the alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level. The key secondary end point was an undetectable HDV RNA level at week 48, in a comparison between the 2-mg group and the 10-mg group. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were assigned to the 2-mg group, 50 to the 10-mg group, and 51 to the control group. A primary end-point response occurred in 45% of patients in the 2-mg group, 48% in the 10-mg group, and 2% in the control group (P<0.001 for the comparison of each dose group with the control group). The HDV RNA level at week 48 was undetectable in 12% of patients in the 2-mg group and in 20% in the 10-mg group (P = 0.41). The ALT level normalized in 12% of patients in the control group, 51% in the 2-mg group (difference from control, 39 percentage points [95% confidence interval {CI}, 20 to 56]), and 56% in the 10-mg group (difference from control, 44 percentage points [95% CI, 26 to 60]). Loss of hepatitis B virus surface antigen (HBsAg) or an HBsAg level that decreased by at least 1 log10 IU per milliliter did not occur in the bulevirtide groups by week 48. Headache, pruritus, fatigue, eosinophilia, injection-site reactions, upper abdominal pain, arthralgia, and asthenia were more common in the 2-mg and 10-mg groups combined than in the control group. No treatment-related serious adverse events occurred. Dose-dependent increases in bile acid levels were noted in the 2-mg and 10-mg groups. CONCLUSIONS: After 48 weeks of bulevirtide treatment, HDV RNA and ALT levels were reduced in patients with chronic hepatitis D. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; MYR 301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03852719.).

Early Remdesivir to Prevent Progression to Severe Covid-19 in Outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir improves clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with moderate-to-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Whether the use of remdesivir in symptomatic, nonhospitalized patients with Covid-19 who are at high risk for disease progression prevents hospitalization is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving nonhospitalized patients with Covid-19 who had symptom onset within the previous 7 days and who had at least one risk factor for disease progression (age ≥60 years, obesity, or certain coexisting medical conditions). Patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 and 100 mg on days 2 and 3) or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of Covid-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause by day 28. The primary safety end point was any adverse event. A secondary end point was a composite of a Covid-19-related medically attended visit or death from any cause by day 28. RESULTS: A total of 562 patients who underwent randomization and received at least one dose of remdesivir or placebo were included in the analyses: 279 patients in the remdesivir group and 283 in the placebo group. The mean age was 50 years, 47.9% of the patients were women, and 41.8% were Hispanic or Latinx. The most common coexisting conditions were diabetes mellitus (61.6%), obesity (55.2%), and hypertension (47.7%). Covid-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause occurred in 2 patients (0.7%) in the remdesivir group and in 15 (5.3%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 0.59; P = 0.008). A total of 4 of 246 patients (1.6%) in the remdesivir group and 21 of 252 (8.3%) in the placebo group had a Covid-19-related medically attended visit by day 28 (hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.56). No patients had died by day 28. Adverse events occurred in 42.3% of the patients in the remdesivir group and in 46.3% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among nonhospitalized patients who were at high risk for Covid-19 progression, a 3-day course of remdesivir had an acceptable safety profile and resulted in an 87% lower risk of hospitalization or death than placebo. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; PINETREE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04501952; EudraCT number, 2020-003510-12.).

Remdesivir for Treatment of COVID-19 Requiring Oxygen Support: A Cross-Study Comparison from Two Large, Open-Label Studies.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir, an RNA-polymerase prodrug inhibitor approved for treatment of COVID-19, shortens recovery time and improves clinical outcomes. This prespecified analysis compared remdesivir plus standard-of-care (SOC) with SOC alone in adults hospitalized with COVID-19 requiring oxygen support in the early stage of the pandemic. METHODS: Data for 10-day remdesivir treatment plus SOC from the extension phase of an open-label study (NCT04292899) were compared with real-world, retrospective data on SOC alone (EUPAS34303). Both studies included patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 up to 30 May 2020, with oxygen saturation ≤94%, on room air or supplemental oxygen (all forms), and with pulmonary infiltrates. Propensity score weighting was used to balance patient demographics and clinical characteristics across treatment groups. The primary endpoint was time to all-cause mortality or end of study (day 28). Time-to-discharge, with a 10-day landmark to account for duration of remdesivir treatment, was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: 1974 patients treated with remdesivir plus SOC, and 1426 with SOC alone, were included after weighting. Remdesivir significantly reduced mortality versus SOC (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.46, 95% confidence interval: 0.39-0.54). This association was observed at each oxygen support level, with the lowest HR for patients on low-flow oxygen. Remdesivir significantly increased the likelihood of discharge at day 28 versus SOC in the 10-day landmark analysis (HR: 1.64; 95% confidence interval: 1.43-1.87). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir plus early-2020 SOC was associated with a 54% lower mortality risk and shorter hospital stays compared with SOC alone in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 requiring oxygen support. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04292899 and EUPAS34303.

Efficacy and Safety of Remdesivir in People With Impaired Kidney Function Hospitalized for COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Few antiviral therapies have been studied in patients with COVID-19 and kidney impairment. Herein, efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of remdesivir, its metabolites, and sulfobutylether-beta-cyclodextrin excipient were evaluated in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and severe kidney impairment. METHODS: In REDPINE, a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, participants aged ≥12 years hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia with acute kidney injury (AKI), chronic kidney disease (CKD), or kidney failure were randomized 2:1 to receive intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on Day 1; 100 mg daily up to Day 5) or placebo (enrollment: March 2021-March 2022). The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) through Day 29. Safety was evaluated through Day 60. RESULTS: Although enrollment concluded early, 243 participants were enrolled and treated (remdesivir, n = 163; placebo, n = 80). At baseline, 90 (37.0%) participants had AKI (remdesivir, 60; placebo, 30), 64 (26.3%) had CKD (remdesivir, 44; placebo, 20), and 89 (36.6%) had kidney failure (remdesivir, 59; placebo, 30); 31 (12.8%) were COVID-19 vaccinated. Composite all-cause mortality or IMV through Day 29 was 29.4% and 32.5% in the remdesivir and placebo group, respectively (P = 0.61). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 80.4% versus 77.5% and serious adverse events in 50.3% versus 50.0% of participants who received remdesivir versus placebo, respectively. Pharmacokinetic plasma exposure to remdesivir was not affected by kidney function. CONCLUSIONS: Although underpowered, no significant difference in efficacy was observed between treatment groups. REDPINE demonstrated that remdesivir is safe in those with COVID-19 and severe kidney impairment. (EudraCT number: 2020-005416-22; Clinical Trials.gov number: NCT04745351). TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2020-005416-22; Clinical Trials.gov number: NCT04745351.

Bulevirtide monotherapy in patients with chronic HDV: Efficacy and safety results through week 96 from a phase 3 randomized trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bulevirtide (BLV), a first-in-class entry inhibitor, is approved in Europe for the treatment of chronic hepatitis delta (CHD). BLV monotherapy was superior to delayed treatment at week (W) 48, the primary efficacy endpoint, in the MYR301 study (NCT03852719). Here, we assessed if continued BLV therapy until W96 would improve virologic and biochemical response rates, particularly among patients who did not achieve virologic response at W24. METHODS: In this ongoing, open-label, randomized phase 3 study, patients with CHD (N = 150) were randomized (1:1:1) to treatment with BLV 2 (n = 49) or 10 mg/day (n = 50), each for 144 weeks, or to delayed treatment for 48 weeks followed by BLV 10 mg/day for 96 weeks (n = 51). Combined response was defined as undetectable hepatitis delta virus (HDV) RNA or a decrease in HDV RNA by ≥2 log10 IU/mL from baseline and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization. Other endpoints included virologic response, ALT normalization, and change in HDV RNA. RESULTS: Of 150 patients, 143 (95%) completed 96 weeks of the study. Efficacy responses were maintained and/or improved between W48 and W96, with similar combined, virologic, and biochemical response rates between BLV 2 and 10 mg. Of the patients with a suboptimal early virologic response at W24, 43% of non-responders and 82% of partial responders achieved virologic response at W96. Biochemical improvement often occurred independent of virologic response. Adverse events (AEs) were mostly mild, with no serious AEs related to BLV. CONCLUSIONS: Virologic and biochemical responses were maintained and/or increased with longer-term BLV therapy, including in those with suboptimal early virologic response. BLV monotherapy for CHD was safe and well tolerated through W96. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: In July 2023, bulevirtide was fully approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis delta (CHD) in Europe based on clinical study results from up to 48 weeks of treatment. Understanding the efficacy and safety of bulevirtide over the longer term is important for healthcare providers. In this analysis, we demonstrate that bulevirtide monotherapy for 96 weeks in patients with CHD was associated with continued improvements in combined, virologic, and biochemical responses as well as liver stiffness from week 48 at both the 2-mg and 10-mg doses. Patients with suboptimal virologic responses to bulevirtide at week 24 also benefited from continued therapy, with the majority achieving virologic response or biochemical improvement by week 96. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03852719.

Sofosbuvir-velpatasvir in children 3-17 years old with hepatitis C virus infection.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir in children aged 3-17 years with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection of any genotype were evaluated. METHODS: In this Phase 2, multicenter, open-label study, patients received once daily for 12 weeks either sofosbuvir-velpatasvir 400/100 mg tablet (12-17 years), 200/50 mg low dose tablet or oral granules (3-11 years and ≥17 kg), or 150/37.5 mg oral granules (3-5 years and <17 kg). The efficacy endpoint was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after therapy (SVR12). Dose appropriateness was confirmed by intensive pharmacokinetics in each age group. FINDINGS: Among 216 patients treated, 76% had HCV genotype 1% and 12% had genotype 3. Rates of SVR12 were 83% (34/41) among 3-5-year-olds, 93% (68/73) among 6-11-year-olds, and 95% (97/102) among 12-17-year-olds. Only two patients experienced virologic failure. The most common adverse events were headache, fatigue, and nausea in 12-17-year-olds; vomiting, cough, and headache in 6-11-year-olds; and vomiting in 3-5-year-olds. Three patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. Four patients had serious adverse events; all except auditory hallucination (n = 1) were considered unrelated to study drug. Exposures of sofosbuvir, its metabolite GS-331007, and velpatasvir were comparable to those in adults in prior Phase 2/3 studies. Population pharmacokinetic simulations supported weight-based dosing for children in this age range. INTERPRETATION: The pangenotypic regimen of sofosbuvir-velpatasvir is highly effective and safe in treating children 3-17 years with chronic HCV infection.

Remdesivir for 5 or 10 Days in Patients with Severe Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is an RNA polymerase inhibitor with potent antiviral activity in vitro and efficacy in animal models of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial involving hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air, and radiologic evidence of pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous remdesivir for either 5 days or 10 days. All patients received 200 mg of remdesivir on day 1 and 100 mg once daily on subsequent days. The primary end point was clinical status on day 14, assessed on a 7-point ordinal scale. RESULTS: In total, 397 patients underwent randomization and began treatment (200 patients for 5 days and 197 for 10 days). The median duration of treatment was 5 days (interquartile range, 5 to 5) in the 5-day group and 9 days (interquartile range, 5 to 10) in the 10-day group. At baseline, patients randomly assigned to the 10-day group had significantly worse clinical status than those assigned to the 5-day group (P = 0.02). By day 14, a clinical improvement of 2 points or more on the ordinal scale occurred in 64% of patients in the 5-day group and in 54% in the 10-day group. After adjustment for baseline clinical status, patients in the 10-day group had a distribution in clinical status at day 14 that was similar to that among patients in the 5-day group (P = 0.14). The most common adverse events were nausea (9% of patients), worsening respiratory failure (8%), elevated alanine aminotransferase level (7%), and constipation (7%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe Covid-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation, our trial did not show a significant difference between a 5-day course and a 10-day course of remdesivir. With no placebo control, however, the magnitude of benefit cannot be determined. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; GS-US-540-5773 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04292899.).

Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Final Report.

BACKGROUND: Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), no antiviral agents have yet been shown to be efficacious. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. RESULTS: A total of 1062 patients underwent randomization (with 541 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo). Those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 10 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 11), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 18) among those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.49; P<0.001, by a log-rank test). In an analysis that used a proportional-odds model with an eight-category ordinal scale, the patients who received remdesivir were found to be more likely than those who received placebo to have clinical improvement at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9, after adjustment for actual disease severity). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality were 6.7% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo by day 15 and 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo by day 29 (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03). Serious adverse events were reported in 131 of the 532 patients who received remdesivir (24.6%) and in 163 of the 516 patients who received placebo (31.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.).

Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir, a nucleotide analogue prodrug that inhibits viral RNA polymerases, has shown in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We provided remdesivir on a compassionate-use basis to patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the illness caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2. Patients were those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who had an oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or who were receiving oxygen support. Patients received a 10-day course of remdesivir, consisting of 200 mg administered intravenously on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for the remaining 9 days of treatment. This report is based on data from patients who received remdesivir during the period from January 25, 2020, through March 7, 2020, and have clinical data for at least 1 subsequent day. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients who received at least one dose of remdesivir, data from 8 could not be analyzed (including 7 patients with no post-treatment data and 1 with a dosing error). Of the 53 patients whose data were analyzed, 22 were in the United States, 22 in Europe or Canada, and 9 in Japan. At baseline, 30 patients (57%) were receiving mechanical ventilation and 4 (8%) were receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. During a median follow-up of 18 days, 36 patients (68%) had an improvement in oxygen-support class, including 17 of 30 patients (57%) receiving mechanical ventilation who were extubated. A total of 25 patients (47%) were discharged, and 7 patients (13%) died; mortality was 18% (6 of 34) among patients receiving invasive ventilation and 5% (1 of 19) among those not receiving invasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients hospitalized for severe Covid-19 who were treated with compassionate-use remdesivir, clinical improvement was observed in 36 of 53 patients (68%). Measurement of efficacy will require ongoing randomized, placebo-controlled trials of remdesivir therapy. (Funded by Gilead Sciences.).

Long-term Treatment With Tenofovir Alafenamide for Chronic Hepatitis B Results in High Rates of Viral Suppression and Favorable Renal and Bone Safety.

OBJECTIVES: Results from two Phase 3 studies, through 2 years, in chronic hepatitis B infection (CHB) showed tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) had similar efficacy to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) with superior renal and bone safety. Here, we report updated results through 5 years. METHODS: Patients with HBeAg-negative or -positive CHB with or without compensated cirrhosis were randomized (2:1) to TAF 25 mg or TDF 300 mg once daily in double-blind (DB) fashion for up to 3 years, followed by open-label (OL) TAF up to 8 years. Efficacy (antiviral, biochemical, serologic), resistance (deep sequencing of polymerase/reverse transcriptase and phenotyping), and safety, including renal and bone parameters, were evaluated by pooled analyses. RESULTS: Of 1298 randomized and treated patients, 866 receiving TAF (DB and OL) and 432 receiving TDF with rollover to OL TAF at year 2 (n = 180; TDF→TAF3y) or year 3 (n = 202; TDF→TAF2y) were included. Fifty (4%) TDF patients who discontinued during DB were excluded. At year 5, 85%, 83%, and 90% achieved HBV DNA < 29 IU/mL (missing = failure) in the TAF, TDF→TAF3y, and TDF→TAF2y groups, respectively; no patient developed TAF or TDF resistance. Median eGFR (by Cockcroft-Gault) declined < 2.5 mL/min, and mean declines of < 1% in hip and spine bone mineral density were seen at year 5 in the TAF group; patients in the TDF→TAF groups had improvements in these parameters at year 5 after switching to OL TAF. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term TAF treatment resulted in high rates of viral suppression, no resistance, and favorable renal and bone safety.

The tolerability of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for 12 weeks in patients treated in the ASTRAL 1, 2 and 3 studies: A pooled safety analysis.

To evaluate the safety and tolerability of the fixed-dose, single-tablet regimen sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in three Phase 3 studies in patients with and without compensated cirrhosis. Data from three registrational trials (ASTRAL-1, NCT02201940; ASTRAL-2, NCT02220998; ASTRAL-3, NCT02201953) were pooled by treatment regimen. Researchers assessed treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and laboratory abnormalities in patients randomized to SOF/VEL or placebo for 12 weeks in ASTRAL-1 and SOF/VEL for 12 weeks in ASTRAL-2 and ASTRAL-3. Overall, 1035 patients were treated with SOF/VEL, and 116 patients received placebo. Rates of any TEAE were generally similar between patients receiving SOF/VEL (79.4%) and those receiving placebo (76.7%). The majority of TEAEs were mild to moderate, with 23 (2.2%) treatment-emergent serious AEs in patients treated with SOF/VEL. Of these treatment-emergent serious AEs, none led to premature study discontinuation, nor were they considered related to treatment. Presence of compensated cirrhosis, greater age and mild renal impairment did not impact incidence or severity of TEAEs with SOF/VEL treatment. The most common TEAEs (incidence ≥10%) were headache, fatigue, nausea and nasopharyngitis in patients receiving SOF/VEL; similar rates were observed in placebo-treated patients. Three deaths (<1%) were reported in patients treated with SOF/VEL, all posttreatment and none assessed as related to study treatment. Similar to that of placebo, SOF/VEL treatment of HCV infection had a safety/tolerability profile that was not affected by baseline factors, such as the presence of compensated cirrhosis, mild renal impairment or advanced age.

International multicenter validation of GES score for HCC risk stratification in chronic hepatitis C patients.

We have recently demonstrated the ability of a simple predictive model (GES) score to determine the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after using direct-acting antivirals. However, our results were restricted to Egyptian patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 4. Therefore, we studied a large, independent cohort of multiethnic populations through our international collaborative activity. Depending on their GES scores, patients are stratified into low risk (≤ 6/12.5), intermediate risk (> 6-7.5/12.5), and high risk (> 7.5/12.5) for HCC. A total of 12,038 patients with chronic HCV were analyzed in this study, of whom 11,202 were recruited from 54 centers in France, Japan, India, the U.S., and Spain, and the remaining 836 were selected from the Gilead-sponsored randomized controlled trial conducted across the U.S., Europe, Canada, and Australia. Descriptive statistics and log-rank tests. The performance of the GES score was evaluated using Harrell's C-index (HCI). The GES score proved successful at stratifying all patients into 3 risk groups, namely low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk. It also displayed significant predictive value for HCC development in all participants (p < .0001), with HCI ranging from 0.55 to 0.76 among all cohorts after adjusting for HCV genotypes and patient ethnicities. The GES score can be used to stratify HCV patients into 3 categories of risk for HCC, namely low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk, irrespective of their ethnicities or HCV genotypes. This international multicenter validation may allow the use of GES score in individualized HCC risk-based surveillance programs.

Compassionate Use of Remdesivir in Pregnant Women With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is efficacious for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in adults, but data in pregnant women are limited. We describe outcomes in the first 86 pregnant women with severe COVID-19 who were treated with remdesivir. METHODS: The reported data span 21 March to 16 June 2020 for hospitalized pregnant women with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and room air oxygen saturation ≤94% whose clinicians requested remdesivir through the compassionate use program. The intended remdesivir treatment course was 10 days (200 mg on day 1, followed by 100 mg for days 2-10, given intravenously). RESULTS: Nineteen of 86 women delivered before their first dose and were reclassified as immediate "postpartum" (median postpartum day 1 [range, 0-3]). At baseline, 40% of pregnant women (median gestational age, 28 weeks) required invasive ventilation, in contrast to 95% of postpartum women (median gestational age at delivery 30 weeks). By day 28 of follow-up, the level of oxygen requirement decreased in 96% and 89% of pregnant and postpartum women, respectively. Among pregnant women, 93% of those on mechanical ventilation were extubated, 93% recovered, and 90% were discharged. Among postpartum women, 89% were extubated, 89% recovered, and 84% were discharged. Remdesivir was well tolerated, with a low incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) (16%). Most AEs were related to pregnancy and underlying disease; most laboratory abnormalities were grade 1 or 2. There was 1 maternal death attributed to underlying disease and no neonatal deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Among 86 pregnant and postpartum women with severe COVID-19 who received compassionate-use remdesivir, recovery rates were high, with a low rate of serious AEs.

Remdesivir for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Versus a Cohort Receiving Standard of Care.

BACKGROUND: We compared the efficacy of the antiviral agent, remdesivir, versus standard-of-care treatment in adults with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using data from a phase 3 remdesivir trial and a retrospective cohort of patients with severe COVID-19 treated with standard of care. METHODS: GS-US-540-5773 is an ongoing phase 3, randomized, open-label trial comparing two courses of remdesivir (remdesivir-cohort). GS-US-540-5807 is an ongoing real-world, retrospective cohort study of clinical outcomes in patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (non-remdesivir-cohort). Inclusion criteria were similar between studies: patients had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, were hospitalized, had oxygen saturation ≤94% on room air or required supplemental oxygen, and had pulmonary infiltrates. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the treatment effect of remdesivir versus standard of care. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with recovery on day 14, dichotomized from a 7-point clinical status ordinal scale. A key secondary endpoint was mortality. RESULTS: After the inverse probability of treatment weighting procedure, 312 and 818 patients were counted in the remdesivir- and non-remdesivir-cohorts, respectively. At day 14, 74.4% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had recovered versus 59.0% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.03: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-3.08, P < .001). At day 14, 7.6% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had died versus 12.5% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (aOR 0.38, 95% CI: .22-.68, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative analysis, by day 14, remdesivir was associated with significantly greater recovery and 62% reduced odds of death versus standard-of-care treatment in patients with severe COVID-19. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04292899 and EUPAS34303.

Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir for 8, 12, or 24 Weeks in Hepatitis C Patients Undergoing Dialysis for End-Stage Renal Disease.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated 8, 12, or 24 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in patients with hepatitis C virus and end-stage renal disease undergoing dialysis. METHODS: Primary efficacy end point was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment. Primary safety end point was treatment discontinuation because of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Ninety-four percent (89/95) achieved sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment. Six patients died during treatment (n = 4) or before study completion (n = 2); no deaths were related to treatment. No patients discontinued treatment because of AEs. Thirteen percent had serious AEs; none were related to treatment. DISCUSSION: Treatment with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir was safe and effective in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing dialysis.

Effect of Remdesivir vs Standard Care on Clinical Status at 11 Days in Patients With Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Remdesivir demonstrated clinical benefit in a placebo-controlled trial in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but its effect in patients with moderate disease is unknown. Objective: To determine the efficacy of 5 or 10 days of remdesivir treatment compared with standard care on clinical status on day 11 after initiation of treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, open-label trial of hospitalized patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and moderate COVID-19 pneumonia (pulmonary infiltrates and room-air oxygen saturation >94%) enrolled from March 15 through April 18, 2020, at 105 hospitals in the United States, Europe, and Asia. The date of final follow-up was May 20, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive a 10-day course of remdesivir (n = 197), a 5-day course of remdesivir (n = 199), or standard care (n = 200). Remdesivir was dosed intravenously at 200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg/d. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was clinical status on day 11 on a 7-point ordinal scale ranging from death (category 1) to discharged (category 7). Differences between remdesivir treatment groups and standard care were calculated using proportional odds models and expressed as odds ratios. An odds ratio greater than 1 indicates difference in clinical status distribution toward category 7 for the remdesivir group vs the standard care group. Results: Among 596 patients who were randomized, 584 began the study and received remdesivir or continued standard care (median age, 57 [interquartile range, 46-66] years; 227 [39%] women; 56% had cardiovascular disease, 42% hypertension, and 40% diabetes), and 533 (91%) completed the trial. Median length of treatment was 5 days for patients in the 5-day remdesivir group and 6 days for patients in the 10-day remdesivir group. On day 11, patients in the 5-day remdesivir group had statistically significantly higher odds of a better clinical status distribution than those receiving standard care (odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.09-2.48; P = .02). The clinical status distribution on day 11 between the 10-day remdesivir and standard care groups was not significantly different (P = .18 by Wilcoxon rank sum test). By day 28, 9 patients had died: 2 (1%) in the 5-day remdesivir group, 3 (2%) in the 10-day remdesivir group, and 4 (2%) in the standard care group. Nausea (10% vs 3%), hypokalemia (6% vs 2%), and headache (5% vs 3%) were more frequent among remdesivir-treated patients compared with standard care. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with moderate COVID-19, those randomized to a 10-day course of remdesivir did not have a statistically significant difference in clinical status compared with standard care at 11 days after initiation of treatment. Patients randomized to a 5-day course of remdesivir had a statistically significant difference in clinical status compared with standard care, but the difference was of uncertain clinical importance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04292730.

Ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with or without ribavirin for 8 or 12 weeks for the treatment of HCV genotype 4 infection: results from a randomised phase III study in Egypt.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir alone and with ribavirin for 8 and 12 weeks in Egyptian patients with and without cirrhosis, who were infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 4, including those who had failed previous treatment with sofosbuvir regimens. DESIGN: In this open-label, multicentre, phase III study, treatment-naive patients were randomised to receive 8 or 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir±ribavirin. Interferon treatment-experienced patients were randomised to receive 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir±ribavirin, while sofosbuvir-experienced or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir-experienced patients received 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir+ribavirin. Randomisation was stratified by cirrhosis status. The primary endpoint was sustained virological response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12). RESULTS: We enrolled 255 patients from four centres in Egypt. Among treatment-naive patients, SVR12 rates were 95% and 90% for those receiving 8 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir alone and with ribavirin, respectively, and 98% for those receiving 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir both alone and with ribavirin. Among interferon-experienced patients, SVR rates were 94% for those receiving 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir and 100% for those receiving 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir plus ribavirin. All patients previously treated with sofosbuvir regimens who received ledipasvir/sofosbuvir plus ribavirin achieved SVR12. The most common adverse events, headache and fatigue, were more common among patients receiving ribavirin. CONCLUSION: Among non-cirrhotic treatment-naive patients with HCV genotype 4, 8 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir±ribavirin was highly effective. Twelve weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir±ribavirin was highly effective regardless of presence of cirrhosis or prior treatment experience, including previous treatment with sofosbuvir or ledipasvir/sofosbuvir. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02487030.

Sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for 12 weeks in hepatitis C virus-infected patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing dialysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Although off-label use of sofosbuvir-containing regimens occurs regularly in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection undergoing dialysis for severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease (ESRD), these regimens are not licensed for this indication, and there is an absence of dosing recommendations in this population. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir in patients with HCV infection with ESRD undergoing dialysis. METHODS: In this phase II, single-arm study, 59 patients with genotype 1-6 HCV infection with ESRD undergoing hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis received open-label sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (400 mg/100 mg) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients were HCV treatment naive or treatment experienced without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis. Patients previously treated with any HCV NS5A inhibitor were not eligible. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving sustained virologic response (SVR) 12 weeks after discontinuation of treatment (SVR12). The primary safety endpoint was the proportion of patients who discontinued study drug due to adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 56 of 59 patients achieved SVR12 (95%; 95% CI 86-99%). Of the 3 patients who did not achieve SVR12, 2 patients had virologic relapse determined at post-treatment Week 4 (including 1 who prematurely discontinued study treatment), and 1 patient died from suicide after achieving SVR through post-treatment Week 4. The most common adverse events were headache (17%), fatigue (14%), nausea (14%), and vomiting (14%). Serious adverse events were reported for 11 patients (19%), and all were deemed to be unrelated to sofosbuvir/velpatasvir. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for 12 weeks was safe and effective in patients with ESRD undergoing dialysis. LAY SUMMARY: Sofosbuvir/velpatasvir is a combination direct-acting antiviral that is approved for treatment of patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Despite the lack of dosing recommendations, sofosbuvir-containing regimens (including sofosbuvir/velpatasvir) are frequently used for HCV-infected patients undergoing dialysis. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for 12 weeks in patients with HCV infection who were undergoing dialysis. Treatment with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir was safe and well tolerated, resulting in a cure rate of 95% in patients with HCV infection and end-stage renal disease. Clinical Trial Number: NCT03036852.

Baseline Factors Associated With Improvements in Decompensated Cirrhosis After Direct-Acting Antiviral Therapy for Hepatitis C Virus Infection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Treatment with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents can reduce Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and Child-Pugh-Turcotte (CPT) scores in patients with decompensated cirrhosis caused by hepatitis C virus. However, many of these patients still die or require liver transplantation. We collected data on baseline features of patients and aimed to develop a scoring system to predict response to DAA therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 4 trials on the effects of sofosbuvir-based therapy in patients with hepatitis C virus-associated decompensated cirrhosis (502 of CPT class B and 120 of CPT class C). In these trials, patients were given 12 or 24 weeks of treatment with ledipasvir, sofosbuvir, and ribavirin or velpatasvir, sofosbuvir, and/or ribavirin, or 48 weeks of treatment with sofosbuvir and ribavirin. We collected demographic, clinical, treatment response, and laboratory data from patients and tested their associations with patient outcomes at 36 weeks. The primary outcome was factors associated with reduction of CPT score to class A. RESULTS: The presence of ascites or encephalopathy, serum level of albumin <3.5 g/dL or alanine aminotransferase <60 U/L, and body mass index >25 kg/m2 were associated with an increased risk of not achieving a reduction in CPT to class A, independent of sustained viral response to therapy. Serum level of albumin <2.8 g/dL and abnormal level of bilirubin were associated with an increased risk of liver transplantation or death. We developed a scoring system based on 5 baseline factors (body mass index, encephalopathy, ascites, and serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and albumin) associated significantly with patient outcomes, which we called the "BE3A score." For patients with scores of 4-5, the hazard ratio for reduction of CPT score to class A was 52.3 (95% confidence interval, 15.2-179.7). CONCLUSIONS: We identified 5 baseline factors (body mass index, encephalopathy, ascites, and serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and albumin) associated with a reduction of CPT score to class A in patients with hepatitis C virus-associated decompensated cirrhosis receiving DAA therapy. We developed a predictive score using these factors, called the BE3A score, which can be used as a shared decision-making tool, quantifying the potential benefits of DAA therapy for patients with decompensated cirrhosis.