Xavier Adhoute

Chronic hepatitis C: future treatment

The launch of first-generation protease inhibitors (PIs) is a major step forward in HCV treatment. However, the major advance is up to now restricted to genotype 1 (GT-1) patients. The development of second-wave and second-generation PIs yields higher antiviral potency through plurigenotypic activity, more convenient daily administration, fewer side effects and, for the second-generation PIs, potential activity against resistance-associated variants. NS5B inhibitors include nucleoside/nucleotide inhibitors (NIs) and non-nucleotide inhibitors (NNIs). NIs have high efficacy across all genotypes. Sofosbuvir has highly potent antiviral activity across all genotypes in association with pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PR), thus allowing shortened treatment duration. NS5A inhibitors (NS5A.I) have highly potent antiviral activity. It has recently been shown for the first time that NS5A.I in combination with protease inhibitors can cure GT-1b null responders in an interferon-free regimen. Besides, several studies demonstrate that interferon (IFN)-free regimens with direct-acting antiviral agent combinations are able to cure a large number of either naïve or treatment-experienced GT-1 patients. Moreover, quadruple regimen with PR is able to cure almost all GT-1 null responders. The development of pan-genotypic direct-acting antiviral agents (NIs or NS5A.I) allows new combinations with or without PR that increase the rate of sustained virological response for all patients, even for those with cirrhosis and independently of the genotype. Therefore, the near future of HCV treatment looks promising. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the clinical results recently reported for HCV treatment.

Usefulness of the HKLC vs. the BCLC staging system in a European HCC cohort

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers. L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés. Usefulness of the HKLC vs. the BCLC staging system in a European HCC cohort Xavier Adhoute, Guillaume Penaranda, Jean-Pierre Bronowicki, Jean-Luc Raoul

Future treatment of patients with HCV cirrhosis.

Of all hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients, those with cirrhosis are most in need of treatment because of increased morbidity and mortality. Treatment with pegylated‐interferon (PEG‐IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) (PR) has definitely shown the benefits of successful treatment by improving fibrosis, causing the regression of cirrhosis and reducing and preventing cirrhosis‐related complications. However, the sustained virological response (SVR) is lower in patients with cirrhosis. First generation protease inhibitors (boceprevir and telaprevir) in combination with PR are a major advancement in the treatment of both naïve and treatment‐experienced genotype 1 patients. In naïve patients, the SVR rate with the triple regimen with boceprevir was increased by 14% in patients with severe fibrosis or cirrhosis compared with PR. This benefit was lower than that observed in patients with mild or moderate fibrosis (30%). The SVR rate of the triple regimen with telaprevir was increased by 10–30% compared with PR in patients with severe fibrosis or cirrhosis compared with nearly 30% in patients with mild or moderate fibrosis. In treatment‐experienced patients, previous relapsers have the highest increase in SVR with the triple regimen compared with PR, whatever the status of fibrosis. Previous partial or non‐responder patients with cirrhosis had lower SVR rates than those without cirrhosis. However, the benefits of telaprevir and boceprevir vs PR was maintained. Previous non‐responder patients with cirrhosis benefited the least from treatment. The relapse rate was always higher and side effects were more frequent in patients with cirrhosis compared with those without. First generation protease inhibitors plus PR appear to be a new step forward in the management of HCV genotype 1 patients with cirrhosis.

Chronic hepatitis C: treatments of the future.

The launch of first-generation protease inhibitors (PIs) was a major step forward in hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. However, this major advance has, up to now, only been applicable to genotype-1 patients. Second-wave and second-generation PIs appear to achieve higher antiviral potency, with pan-genotype activities, fewer side-effects and potential activity against PI-resistant mutation by second-generation PIs, through more convenient daily administration. Other direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) include NS5B inhibitors such as nucleoside/nucleotide inhibitors (NIs) and non-nucleoside inhibitors (NNIs). NIs have similar efficacy across all genotypes and present with the highest barrier to resistance of all DAAs to date. PSI-7977, a pyrimidine nucleotide analogue, also has highly potent antiviral activity across all HCV genotypes. In combination with ribavirin in an interferon-free regimen, it can achieve a 100% sustained viral response (SVR) rate in genotype 2/3 treatment-naïve patients. In association with pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PR), it achieves an SVR of 91% in genotype-1 naïve patients. NNIs in association with PR appear to be less potent, but they may nonetheless play a key role in many of the combination trials including either PIs or NIs. NS5A inhibitors also exhibit highly potent antiviral activity. Evaluation of their activity in combination with PIs demonstrated for the first time that an interferon-free regimen can cure genotype-1b null-responder patients. Furthermore, quadruple therapy with PR can achieve a 100% SVR in genotype-1 null-responder patients. Other players in the field, such as cyclophilin inhibitors and therapeutic vaccines, may have a role in combination with DAAs. The near future of HCV treatment looks promising. However, whether or not DAA combinations will lead to an interferon-free regimen for all patients remains an open question.

Prognosis of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a new stratification of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C: results from a French multicenter study.

Background Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) includes a wide spectrum of tumors and patients’ prognosis after treatment is highly variable. Moreover, therapeutic options based on the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system algorithm are restricted to one systemic therapy. Aim of the study To refine the stratification among BCLC C HCC patients by establishing a new simple prognostic score. Patients and methods A regression model based on a BCLC stage C population and validated with an external cohort of BCLC C HCC patients defined the score. It was therefore validated among three external cohorts of BCLC C HCC patients treated with sorafenib. Results Five variables had independent prognostic values: the number of nodules, the infiltrating nature of the HCC, &agr;-fetoprotein serum level, Child–Pugh score, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status grade. They were integrated into a new score named NIACE ranging from 0 to 7, well correlated with survival. With the use of one threshold value, this score enables defining of two populations with different survivals among BCLC C patients and specifically among those treated with sorafenib. Conclusion The NIACE score defines different prognostic subgroups after palliative treatment of HCC. It could be an additional tool for BCLC C HCC before inclusion in clinical trials or for the management of patients. These results must be validated in a prospective study.

Sofosbuvir as backbone of interferon free treatments

Sofosbuvir is the first-in-class NS5B nucleotide analogues to be launched for hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. Its viral potency, pangenotypic activity and high barrier to resistance make it the ideal candidate to become a backbone for several IFN-free regimens. Recent data demonstrated that sofosbuvir either with ribavirin alone or in combination with other direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) as daclatasvir, ledipasvir or simeprevir are able to cure HCV in at least 90% or over of patients. Treatment experienced genotype 3 population may remain the most difficult to treat population, but ongoing DAA combination studies will help to fill this gap. Safety profile of sofosbuvir or combination with other DAAs is good. Resistance to sofosbuvir did not appear as a significant issue. The rationale for using this class of drug and the available clinical data are reviewed.

Combining non-invasive methods for assessment of liver fibrosis.

Non-invasive markers of liver fibrosis, including biochemical scores using simple biochemical parameters and transient elastography (TE), have been developed over the past decade to either replace or reduce the need for liver biopsy (LB) in the assessment of liver fibrosis. Although their diagnostic accuracy in liver fibrosis is promising, around 20% of patients are likely to be misclassified if these tests or LB are used alone. However, using a combination of several biochemical scores (Fibropaca algorithm, Leroy algorithm) or one biochemical score with TE (Bordeaux algorithm) will increase diagnostic accuracy for fibrosis and reduce the need for LB. Stepwise combination algorithms of non-invasive scores (SAFE biopsy) also improve the diagnostic performance in chronic hepatitis C (CHC) compared with the use of a single non-invasive score. Other sequential stepwise algorithms have been developed in CHC with similar performance results. Comparisons of different combinations of non-invasive methods indicate that the SAFE biopsy, Fibropaca algorithm and Bordeaux algorithm are excellent and comparable in the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis in HCV patients, and will markedly reduce the need for LB. They may also be useful in clinical practice and particularly for large-scale screening of HCV patients.

Nomogram of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer System: external validation in European patients.

To the Editor: We have read with interest the paper from Hsu et al. (1) who evaluate a new Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) nomogram. BCLC classification is the reference classification for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis in Europe and USA at least and more widely to the Western countries (2). BCLC classification is a simple tool linked to a treatment algorithm based on randomized clinical trials. HCC classification is a matter of debate worldwide. Asian countries in which HBV is the main cause of liver disease and HCC, have their own classifications and scoring systems (3). Moreover, stages B and C of the BCLC classification includes a large spectrum of tumours with different overall survival (4, 5) and only a single treatment option. Therefore, several complementary scoring systems to BCLC classification such as NIACE (5) have been proposed and validated in the recent years. Hsu et al. have proposed a simple nomogram based on a large Asian cohort of 3179 HCC patients. This nomogram includes three parameters, tumour burden, Child–Pugh score (CPT) and performance status (PS). We have evaluated this nomogram among a large cohort of 1102 HCC patients treated in France in five reference centres. Median age was 68 [60–74], 81% of our population was cirrhotic related mainly to alcohol (41%) or HCV (27%). Most of our patients were CPT A (73%) and a total of 17, 14, 63 and 6% were classified as BCLC stages A, B, C and D, respectively, at the time of diagnosis. The primary HCC treatment was curative in 22%, palliative in 61% (chemoembolization or sorafenib), and best supportive care in 17% of our population. The median overall survival for the entire

NIACE score for hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated by surgery or transarterial chemoembolization

Background and aims Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognostic scores could be useful in addition to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) system to clarify patient prognosis and guide treatment decision. The NIACE (tumor Nodularity, Infiltrative nature of the tumor, serum Alpha-fetoprotein level, Child–Pugh stage, ECOG performance status) score distinguishes different prognosis groups among BCLC A, B, and C HCC patients. Our aims are to evaluate the NIACE score and its additive value in two HCC cohorts treated either by surgery or by chemoembolization, and then according to the BCLC recommendations. Patients and methods This was a retrospective multicenter study with two BCLC A, B, and C HCC cohorts treated either by surgery (n=207) or by chemoembolization (n=168) carried out between 2008 and 2013. We studied survival time according to the baseline NIACE score and compared it with the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program score and the BCLC system. Results The NIACE score differentiates between subgroups of patients with different prognosis within each BCLC class. Among BCLC A patients treated by surgery and BCLC B patients treated by chemoembolization, the NIACE score differentiates between two subgroups with a significant difference in survival time: 68 (55–81) months versus 35 (21–56) months (P=0.0004) and 20 (17–24) months versus 13 (7–17) months (P=0.0008), respectively. Among those subgroups, the NIACE score has a significantly better prognostic value than the BCLC system or the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program score. Conclusion In this study, among HCC patients treated according to the BCLC recommendations, the NIACE score predicts more accurately than any other system the survival time.

How to assess the efficacy or failure of targeted therapy: Deciding when to stop sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma

Sorafenib is thus far the only systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) based on the results of two randomized controlled trials performed in Western and in Eastern countries, despite a poor response rate (from 2% to 3.3%) following conventional evaluation criteria. It is now recognized that the criteria (European Association of the Study of the Liver criteria, modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) based on contrast enhanced techniques (computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging) aimed to assess the evolution of the viable part of the tumor (hypervascularized on arterial phase) are of major interest to determine the efficacy of sorafenib and of most antiangiogenic drugs in patients with HCC. The role of alpha-fetoprotein serum levels remains unclear. In 2016, in accordance with the SHARP and the Asia-Pacific trials, sorafenib must be stopped when tolerance is poor despite dose adaptation or in cases of radiological and symptomatic progression. This approach will be different in cases of available second-line therapy trials. Some recent data (in renal cell carcinoma) revealed that despite progression in patients who received sorafenib, this drug can still decrease tumor progression compared to drug cessation. Then, before deciding to continue sorafenib post-progression or shift to another drug, knowing other parameters of post-progression survival (Child-Pugh class, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer, alpha-fetoprotein, post-progression patterns in particular, the development of extrahepatic metastases and of portal vein thrombosis) will be of major importance.