Peter Buggisch

Ledipasvir and Sofosbuvir for Untreated HCV Genotype 1 Infection

BACKGROUND In phase 2 studies, treatment with the all-oral combination of the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir and the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir resulted in high rates of sustained virologic response among previously untreated patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection. METHODS We conducted a phase 3, open-label study involving previously untreated patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive ledipasvir and sofosbuvir in a fixed-dose combination tablet once daily for 12 weeks, ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 12 weeks, ledipasvir-sofosbuvir for 24 weeks, or ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 24 weeks. The primary end point was a sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy. RESULTS Of the 865 patients who underwent randomization and were treated, 16% had cirrhosis, 12% were black, and 67% had HCV genotype 1a infection. The rates of sustained virologic response were 99% (95% confidence interval [CI], 96 to 100) in the group that received 12 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir; 97% (95% CI, 94 to 99) in the group that received 12 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin; 98% (95% CI, 95 to 99) in the group that received 24 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir; and 99% (95% CI, 97 to 100) in the group that received 24 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir plus ribavirin. No patient in either 12-week group discontinued ledipasvir-sofosbuvir owing to an adverse event. The most common adverse events were fatigue, headache, insomnia, and nausea. CONCLUSIONS Once-daily ledipasvir-sofosbuvir with or without ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks was highly effective in previously untreated patients with HCV genotype 1 infection. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ION-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01701401.).

Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate versus Adefovir Dipivoxil for Chronic Hepatitis B

BACKGROUND Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF) is a nucleotide analogue and a potent inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 reverse transcriptase and hepatitis B virus (HBV) polymerase. METHODS In two double-blind, phase 3 studies, we randomly assigned patients with hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative or HBeAg-positive chronic HBV infection to receive tenofovir DF or adefovir dipivoxil (ratio, 2:1) once daily for 48 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was a plasma HBV DNA level of less than 400 copies per milliliter (69 IU per milliliter) and histologic improvement (i.e., a reduction in the Knodell necroinflammation score of 2 or more points without worsening fibrosis) at week 48. Secondary end points included viral suppression (i.e., an HBV DNA level of <400 copies per milliliter), histologic improvement, serologic response, normalization of alanine aminotransferase levels, and development of resistance mutations. RESULTS At week 48, in both studies, a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving tenofovir DF than of those receiving adefovir dipivoxil had reached the primary end point (P<0.001). Viral suppression occurred in more HBeAg-negative patients receiving tenofovir DF than patients receiving adefovir dipivoxil (93% vs. 63%, P<0.001) and in more HBeAg-positive patients receiving tenofovir DF than patients receiving adefovir dipivoxil (76% vs. 13%, P<0.001). Significantly more HBeAg-positive patients treated with tenofovir DF than those treated with adefovir dipivoxil had normalized alanine aminotransferase levels (68% vs. 54%, P=0.03) and loss of hepatitis B surface antigen (3% vs. 0%, P=0.02). At week 48, amino acid substitutions within HBV DNA polymerase associated with phenotypic resistance to tenofovir DF or other drugs to treat HBV infection had not developed in any of the patients. Tenofovir DF produced a similar HBV DNA response in patients who had previously received lamivudine and in those who had not. The safety profile was similar for the two treatments in both studies. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with chronic HBV infection, tenofovir DF at a daily dose of 300 mg had superior antiviral efficacy with a similar safety profile as compared with adefovir dipivoxil at a daily dose of 10 mg through week 48. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00116805 and NCT00117676.)

Tivantinib for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2 study

BACKGROUND Tivantinib (ARQ 197), a selective oral inhibitor of MET, has shown promising antitumour activity in hepatocellular carcinoma as monotherapy and in combination with sorafenib. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of tivantinib for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS In this completed, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh A cirrhosis who had progressed on or were unable to tolerate first-line systemic therapy. We randomly allocated patients 2:1 to receive tivantinib (360 mg twice-daily) or placebo until disease progression. The tivantinib dose was amended to 240 mg twice-daily because of high incidence of treatment-emergent grade 3 or worse neutropenia. Randomisation was done centrally by an interactive voice-response system, stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and vascular invasion. The primary endpoint was time to progression, according to independent radiological review in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed tumour samples for MET expression with immunohistochemistry (high expression was regarded as ≥2+ in ≥50% of tumour cells). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00988741. FINDINGS 71 patients were randomly assigned to receive tivantinib (38 at 360 mg twice-daily and 33 at 240 mg twice-daily); 36 patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo. At the time of analysis, 46 (65%) patients in the tivantinib group and 26 (72%) of those in the placebo group had progressive disease. Time to progression was longer for patients treated with tivantinib (1·6 months [95% CI 1·4-2·8]) than placebo (1·4 months [1·4-1·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·64, 90% CI 0·43-0·94; p=0·04). For patients with MET-high tumours, median time to progression was longer with tivantinib than for those on placebo (2·7 months [95% CI 1·4-8·5] for 22 MET-high patients on tivantinib vs 1·4 months [1·4-1·6] for 15 MET-high patients on placebo; HR 0·43, 95% CI 0·19-0·97; p=0·03). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the tivantinib group were neutropenia (ten patients [14%] vs none in the placebo group) and anaemia (eight [11%] vs none in the placebo group). Eight patients (21%) in the tivantinib 360 mg group had grade 3 or worse neutropenia compared with two (6%) patients in the 240 mg group. Four deaths related to tivantinib occurred from severe neutropenia. 24 (34%) patients in the tivantinib group and 14 (39%) patients in the placebo group had serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION Tivantinib could provide an option for second-line treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and well-compensated liver cirrhosis, particularly for patients with MET-high tumours. Confirmation in a phase 3 trial is needed, with a starting dose of tivantinib 240 mg twice-daily. FUNDING ArQule, Daiichi Sankyo (Daiichi Sankyo Group).

Three-Year Efficacy and Safety of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Treatment for Chronic Hepatitis B

BACKGROUND & AIMS Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), a nucleotide analogue and potent inhibitor of hepatitis B virus (HBV) polymerase, showed superior efficacy to adefovir dipivoxil in treatment of chronic hepatitis B through 48 weeks. We evaluated long-term efficacy and safety of TDF monotherapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B who were positive or negative for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg(+) or HBeAg(-)). METHODS After 48 weeks of double-blind comparison of TDF to adefovir dipivoxil, patients who underwent liver biopsy were eligible to continue the study on open-label TDF for 7 additional years; data presented were collected up to 3 years (week 144) from 85% of participants. Primary efficacy end points at week 144 included levels of HBV DNA and alanine aminotransferase, development of resistance mutations, and presence of HBeAg or hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). RESULTS At week 144, 87% of HBeAg(-) and 72% of HBeAg(+) patients treated with TDF had levels of HBV DNA <400 copies/mL. Among patients who had previously received adefovir dipivoxil and then received TDF, 88% of the HBeAg(-) and 71% of the HBeAg(+) patients had levels of HBV DNA <400 copies/mL; overall, 81% and 74%, respectively, maintained normalized levels of alanine aminotransferase and 34% had lost HBeAg. Amino acid substitutions in HBV DNA polymerase that are associated with resistance to tenofovir were not detected in any patient. Cumulatively, 8% of HBeAg(+) patients lost HBsAg. TDF maintained a favorable safety profile for up to 3 years. CONCLUSIONS TDF was safe and effective in the long-term management of HBeAg(+) and HBeAg(-) patients with chronic hepatitis B.

Peginterferon alpha-2b plus adefovir induce strong cccDNA decline and HBsAg reduction in patients with chronic hepatitis B

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) is responsible for persistent infection of hepatocytes. The aim of this study was to determine changes in intrahepatic cccDNA in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CH‐B) during 48 weeks of antiviral therapy and its correlation to virological, biochemical, and histological parameters. Twenty‐six HBsAg‐positive CH‐B patients received combination treatment with pegylated interferon alpha‐2b (peg‐IFN) and adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) for 48 weeks. Paired liver biopsies from before and at the end of treatment were analyzed for intrahepatic HBV‐DNA. Median serum HBV‐DNA had decreased by −4.9 log10 copies/mL at the end of treatment and was undetectable in 13 individuals (54%). Median intrahepatic total HBV‐DNA and cccDNA had decreased by −2.2 and −2.4 log10, respectively. Changes in intracellular HBV‐DNA positively correlated with HBsAg serum reduction and were accompanied by a high number of serological responders. Eight of 15 HBeAg‐positive patients lost HBeAg, and five developed anti‐HBe antibodies during treatment. These eight patients exhibited lower cccDNA levels before and at the end of therapy than did patients without HBeAg loss. Four patients developed anti‐HBs antibodies. ALT normalized in 11 patients. The number of HBs‐antigen‐ and HBc‐antigen‐positive hepatocytes was significantly lower after treatment, suggesting the involvement of cytolytic mechanisms. In conclusion, combination therapy with peg‐IFN and ADV led to marked decreases in serum HBV‐DNA and intrahepatic cccDNA, which was significantly correlated with reduced HBsAg. (HEPATOLOGY 2006;44:675–684.)

Long‐term efficacy of tenofovir monotherapy for hepatitis B virus‐monoinfected patients after failure of nucleoside/nucleotide analogues

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) has demonstrated high antiviral efficacy in treatment‐naive patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection but experience in nucleoside/nucleotide analogue (NA)‐experienced patients is limited. In this retrospective multicenter study we therefore assessed the long‐term efficacy of TDF monotherapy in patients with prior failure or resistance to different NA treatments. Criteria for inclusion were HBV DNA levels >4.0 log10 copies/mL at the start and a minimum period of TDF therapy for at least 6 months. In all, 131 patients (mean age 42 ± 12 years, 95 male, 65% hepatitis B e antigen [HBeAg]‐positive) were eligible. Pretreatment consisted of either monotherapy with lamivudine (LAM; n = 18), adefovir (ADV; n = 8), and sequential LAM‐ADV therapy (n = 73), or add‐on combination therapy with both drugs (n = 29). Three patients had failed entecavir therapy. Resistance analysis in 113 of the 131 patients revealed genotypic LAM and ADV resistance in 62% and 19% of patients, respectively. The mean HBV DNA level at TDF baseline was 7.6 ± 1.5 log10 copies/mL. The overall cumulative proportion of patients achieving HBV DNA levels <400 copies/mL was 79% after a mean treatment duration of 23 months (range, 6–60). Although LAM resistance did not influence the antiviral efficacy of TDF, the presence of ADV resistance impaired TDF efficacy (100% versus 52% probability of HBV DNA <400 copies/mL, respectively). However, virologic breakthrough was not observed in any of the patients during the entire observation period. Loss of HBeAg occurred in 24% of patients and HBsAg loss occurred in 3%. No significant adverse events were noticed during TDF monotherapy. Conclusion: TDF monotherapy induced a potent and long‐lasting antiviral response in NA‐experienced patients with previous treatment failure. Our data may have implications for current add‐on strategies. (HEPATOLOGY 2009.)

Early monotherapy with pegylated interferon alpha-2b for acute hepatitis C infection: the HEP-NET acute-HCV-II study

Early treatment of acute hepatitis C with interferon alpha‐2b for 24 weeks prevents chronic infection in almost all patients. Because pegylated interferons have replaced conventional interferon in the therapy of chronic hepatitis C, the aim of this study was to analyze the efficacy of an early treatment of acute hepatitis C with peginterferon alfa‐ 2b. Between February 2001 and February 2004, 89 individuals with acute HCV infection were recruited at 53 different centers in Germany. Patients received 1.5 μg/kg peginterferon alfa‐2b for 24 weeks; treatment was initiated after a median of 76 days after infection (range 14‐150). End‐of‐treatment response and sustained virological response were defined as undetectable HCV RNA at the end of therapy and after 24 weeks of follow‐up, respectively. In the total study population, virological response was 82% at the end of treatment and 71% at the end of follow‐up. Of 89 individuals, 65 (73%) were adherent to therapy, receiving 80% of the interferon dosage within 80% of the scheduled treatment duration. End‐of‐treatment and sustained virological response rates in this subpopulation were 94% and 89%, respectively. A maximum alanine aminotransferase level of more than 500 U/L prior to therapy was the only factor associated with successful treatment. In conclusion, in acute HCV infection, early treatment with peginterferon α2b leads to high virological response rates in individuals who are adherent to treatment. The high number of dropouts underlines the importance of thorough patient selection and close monitoring during therapy. Thus, future studies should identify factors predicting spontaneous viral clearance to avoid unnecessary therapy. (HEPATOLOGY 2006;43:250–256.)

Dermatological side effects of hepatitis C and its treatment: Patient management in the era of direct-acting antivirals

Dermatological adverse events (AEs) are an existing concern during hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and peginterferon/ribavirin treatment. HCV infection leads to dermatological and muco-cutaneous manifestations including small-vessel vasculitis as part of the mixed cryoglobulinemic syndrome. Peginterferon/ribavirin treatment is associated with well-characterized dermatological AEs tending towards a uniform entity of dermatitis. New direct-acting antivirals have led to significant improvements in sustained virologic response rates, but several have led to an increase in dermatological AEs versus peginterferon/ribavirin alone. In telaprevir trials, approximately half of treated patients had rash. More than 90% of these events were Grade 1 or 2 (mild/moderate) and in the majority (92%) of cases, progression to a more severe grade did not occur. In a small number of cases (6%), rash led to telaprevir discontinuation, whereupon symptoms commonly resolved. Dermatological AEs with telaprevir-based triple therapy were generally similar to those observed with peginterferon/ribavirin (xerosis, pruritus, and eczema). A few cases were classified as severe cutaneous adverse reaction (SCAR), also referred to as serious skin reactions, a group of rare conditions that are potentially life-threatening. It is therefore important to distinguish between telaprevir-related dermatitis and SCAR. The telaprevir prescribing information does not require telaprevir discontinuation for Grade 1 or 2 (mild/moderate) rash, which can be treated using emollients/moisturizers and topical corticosteroids. For Grade 3 rash, the prescribing information mandates immediate telaprevir discontinuation, with ribavirin interruption (with or without peginterferon) within 7 days of stopping telaprevir if there is no improvement, or sooner if it worsens. In case of suspicion or confirmed diagnosis of SCAR, all study medication must be discontinued.

Mycophenolate mofetil as second line therapy in autoimmune hepatitis

INTRODUCTION:In patients with autoimmune hepatitis, efficient immunosuppressive therapy is essential to avoid progression to cirrhosis. There is no established second line therapy for patients failing standard therapy with steroids and azathioprine. The aim of this study was to examine the possible role of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) as second line treatment of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH).PATIENTS AND ETHODS:We were able to identify 37 patients (29 women, 8 men) with AIH proven according to International AIH Group criteria who failed standard therapy. One patient on MMF was excluded due to non-compliance. A total of 28 of 36 patients had experienced side effects necessitating stop of treatment. One patient stopped azathioprine due to pregnancy. A total of nine patients did not respond sufficiently to azathioprine. A total of four patients with a treatment duration of 3 months or less because of severe side effects were considered as intolerant to MMF. Remission was defined as aspartate transaminase (ASP) < twice upper normal limit (UNL).RESULTS:Of 36 patients on MMF included in the analysis, 14 patients (39%) experienced remission. A total of 22 patients (61%) did not respond sufficiently to MMF. The response rate to MMF was dependent on the cause of treatment cessation of azathioprine. Of eight patients with prior nonresponse to azathioprine, six (75%) did not respond to MMF and only two (25%) reached biochemical remission. Of 28 patients with azathioprine intolerance in 16 (57%) patients, the response to MMF was insufficient and in 12 patients (43%) remission was reached. The difference did not reach statistical significance due to the relatively small numbers included.CONCLUSION:In the light of its good tolerability, MMF seems to be an alternative for patients who could not tolerate azathioprine previously. However, our data suggest that a majority of patients fail MMF particularly if they are switched because of an insufficient response to azathioprine.

Sofosbuvir, Velpatasvir, and Voxilaprevir for Previously Treated HCV Infection

BACKGROUND Patients who are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and who do not have a sustained virologic response after treatment with regimens containing direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have limited retreatment options. METHODS We conducted two phase 3 trials involving patients who had been previously treated with a DAA‐containing regimen. In POLARIS‐1, patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had previously received a regimen containing an NS5A inhibitor were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir, and the protease inhibitor voxilaprevir (150 patients) or matching placebo (150 patients) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients who were infected with HCV of other genotypes (114 patients) were enrolled in the sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir‐voxilaprevir group. In POLARIS‐4, patients with HCV genotype 1, 2, or 3 infection who had previously received a DAA regimen but not an NS5A inhibitor were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir‐voxilaprevir (163 patients) or sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir (151 patients) for 12 weeks. An additional 19 patients with HCV genotype 4 infection were enrolled in the sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir‐voxilaprevir group. RESULTS In the three active‐treatment groups, 46% of the patients had compensated cirrhosis. In POLARIS‐1, the rate of sustained virologic response was 96% with sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir‐voxilaprevir, as compared with 0% with placebo. In POLARIS‐4, the rate of response was 98% with sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir‐voxilaprevir and 90% with sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir. The most common adverse events were headache, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. In the active‐treatment groups in both trials, the percentage of patients who discontinued treatment owing to adverse events was 1% or lower. CONCLUSIONS Sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir‐voxilaprevir taken for 12 weeks provided high rates of sustained virologic response among patients across HCV genotypes in whom treatment with a DAA regimen had previously failed. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; POLARIS‐1 and POLARIS‐4 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02607735 and NCT02639247.)